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

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 4 May 2021

2.00pm

Albert Eden Local Board Office
135 Dominion Road
Mt Eden

 

Albert-Eden Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Margi Watson

 

Deputy Chairperson

Lee Corrick

 

Members

Graeme Easte

 

 

Rachel Langton

 

 

Julia Maskill

 

 

Christina Robertson

 

 

Kendyl Smith

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Michael Mendoza

Democracy Advisor - Albert - Eden

 

29 April 2021

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 623 6090

Email: MICHAEL.MENDOZA@AUCKLANDCOUNCIL.GOVT.NZ

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Endorsing the expansion of the Dominion Road Business Improvement

            District (BID) programme 2021/2022                                                                            7

5          Local board consultation feedback and input into the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 71

6          Auckland Transport – Regional Land Transport Programme 2021                       89

7          Proposal to vary the Regional Fuel Tax scheme                                                   103

8          Decision-making responsibilities policy                                                                 157

 


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.

 

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

Endorsing the expansion of the Dominion Road Business Improvement District (BID) programme 2021/2022

File No.: CP2021/04225

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To approve the expanded Dominion Road Business Improvement District (BID) programme and boundary map.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Business Improvement Districts (BID) are areas within Auckland where local business and property owners have agreed to work together to improve their business environment and attract new businesses and customers.

3.       Auckland Council supports business associations operating BID programmes by collecting a targeted rate from commercial properties within a defined geographical area. The funds from the targeted rate are then provided by way of a BID grant to the relevant business association.

4.       Under the Auckland Council shared governance arrangements, local boards are allocated several decision-making responsibilities in relation to BIDs. This includes:

·    the establishment of new BID programmes,

·    changes to existing BID programme maps; and

·    recommending the BID programmes targeted rate to the Governing Body

5.       The business associations operating BID programmes are incorporated societies that are independent of council.

6.       Auckland Council Business Improvement District (BID) Policy 2016 (Kaupapa Here ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi), known as the BID Policy, sets out the requirements to expand a BID programme and boundary area, and the governance and reporting requirements of an operational BID programme.

7.       Since 2015 the Dominion Road Business Association (DRBA) have been working closely with the Balmoral Chinese Business Association Inc. (BCBA), collectively advocating on behalf of the Dominion and Balmoral Road business community regarding future transport planning developments and co-hosting the 2019 Moon Festival.

8.       DRBA confirmed the 2021/2022 BID expansion would include properties along both sides of Dominion Road located between Balmoral Road and Landscape Road.  The DRBA presented the proposed BID programme expansion map and project for member approval at their 2020 AGM held on 21 October 2020. BCBA members were invited to a workshop on 27 October 2020 whereby the attendees unanimously approved and agreed to become part of the Dominion Road BID programme expansion.

9.       The Albert-Eden Local Board approved to include the proposed Dominion Road BID programme expansion and map, (Attachment A) its meeting held on 16 February 2021 (resolution number AE/2021/3).

10.     The Albert-Eden Local Board also included the BID expansion proposal in its local priorities for 2021/2022 as part of the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 consultation documents (resolution number AE/2020/164). This gave members of the public the opportunity to provide feedback on the proposal.

11.     If the expansion proceeds the Dominion Road BID programme will represent 519 business ratepayers and owners and continue with a proportional value method mechanism to raise the BID targeted rate grant of $255,000, effective from 1 July 2021.

12.     Staff propose the local board approves the expansion of the Dominion Road BID programme and amended boundary map (Attachment A).  A separate report will be provided which recommends the striking of the targeted rate to the Governing Body  Staff are satisfied the Dominion Road Business Association has complied with the BID Policy to expand the Dominion Road BID programme.

13.     Staff will advise the Governing Body of the local board’s decision as part of the 10‑Year Budget 2021/2031 deliberations in June 2021.

14.     After the 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 is approved, the council collects the targeted rate funds and distributes them in quarterly BID grant payments, effective from 1 July 2021, to allow DRBA to implement programmes that improve the local business environment.

15.     If the expansion of the BID programme is approved, council staff will regularly monitor BID Policy compliance, and provide assistance to DRBA as part of an active risk management programme to minimise the risk of inappropriate use of funds.

16.     DRBA, like all BID-operating business associations, will play an important role in helping local businesses recover from the on-going economic impact created by the COVID-19 lockdowns.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      approve the expansion of the Dominion Business Road Improvement District (BID) programme and boundary as shown in the map Attachment A.

Horopaki

Context

17.     Tāmaki Makaurau is projected to attract another one million people in the next 30 years. This level of growth will present challenges and opportunities for Auckland town centres and commercial precincts.

18.     Business Improvement Districts (BID) are areas within Auckland where local businesses and property owners have agreed to work together, with support from the council, to improve their business environment and attract new businesses and customers.

19.     BID programmes are operated by independent business associations (incorporated societies), their programmes and services are provided according to their members’ stated priorities.  In recognition of their independent status, the BID Policy does not prescribe standards for programme effectiveness. That is a matter for the business association members to determine.   Staff, therefore, have no view on these factors.  Staff assess whether the BID programme meets the BID Policy’s requirements.

20.     BID programmes provide the opportunity for the council family to partner with business associations to seize on the opportunities from Auckland’s growth and respond locally to changing economic conditions.

21.     BID programmes encourage collaboration to achieve greater local outcomes. They provide a mechanism to enable local boards to engage with the business sector in local town centres and business areas in a co-ordinated way.

The BID Policy sets out the process for expanding a BID programme

22.     The BID Policy outlines the principles behind the council’s BID programme; creates the process for establishing new programmes, expanding, amalgamating and disestablishing existing BIDs; determines rating mechanisms; prescribes operating standards and guidelines; and sets accountability requirements.

23.     Included in the BID expansion process the business association must develop and agree:

·   a list of eligible BID voters

·   a BID business plan and operating budget, including the annual BID grant income needed to deliver the BID programme to the expanded BID area and BID members

·   the expanded BID boundary map area

·   the rating mechanism to be used to calculate the targeted rate

·   they must also host at least three public meetings encouraging eligible voters to attend and take part in an information briefing and question-and-answer session.

·   hold an independent postal ballot to determine the level of support for the BID programme and targeted rate.

24.     The BID Policy sets out the mandate for a successful ballot; ballots must achieve a threshold of at least 25% of the total voting forms returned.  Of the returned votes, at least 51% of the voters must support the proposition raised on the voting form.

BIDs are funded by a targeted rate on commercial ratepayers

25.     BID programmes are funded by a targeted rate applied to all commercial rated properties within a designated area around a town centre or commercial precinct.

26.     Auckland Council supports business associations operating BID programmes by collecting the targeted rates and providing these funds, in their entirety, by way of a BID grant to the business association.

27.     This revenue is paid to the business associations every quarter to provide a regular and sustainable income stream to implement an agreed work programme.

28.     Dominion Road Business Association Inc (DRBA) has been a registered incorporated business association and operating a Business Improvement District (BID) programme since September 2000.

The Governing Body sets the targeted rate when it approves the Annual Budget

29.     In accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 and the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, the Governing Body is authorised to make the final decisions on BID programme targeted rates.

Dominion Rd Business Association and Balmoral Chinese Business Association work towards expanding the Dominion Rd BID in 2020/2021

30.     DRBA first attempted a BID expansion south along Dominion Road past the Balmoral intersection into Balmoral in 2012. After this failed ballot, the DRBA identified a number of lessons for any future BID expansion and in 2015 DRBA were successful in expanding the Dominion Road BID programme and boundary from Ewington Avenue to Balmoral Road.

31.     In June 2014 the Balmoral Chinese Business Association Inc. (BCBA) was registered with the Incorporated Societies Office and set about working and representing the Chinese business owners located along Dominion Road on both sides of Balmoral Road.

32.     Since 2015 the DRBA have been working closely with the BCBA collectively advocating on behalf of the Dominion and Balmoral Road business community regarding future transport planning developments.

33.     In 2018 the two associations worked successfully on the first Dominion Road Moon Festival with support from the Albert-Eden Local Board from a $25,000 grant, additional sponsorship and a financial contribution from the Dominion Road BID. The inaugural Dominion Road Moon Festival was held on 13 September 2019.

34.     The festival provided the opportunity for the two associations and their members to work together and demonstrate the advantages of working collaboratively within a BID programme. With the success of the Dominion Road Moon Festival the BCBA committed to investigate implementing a Dominion Road BID expansion project.

Dominion Rd Business Association Inc progress in expanding their BID programme 2020/2021

35.     In May 2020 DBA met with the council’s BID team to discuss revisiting the BID expansion proposal and their plan towards a ballot before 30 March 2021. DBA confirmed this expansion would include properties along both sides of Dominion Road located between Balmoral Road and Landscape Road.

36.     The Community Engagement Unit (CEU) as part of the Albert-Eden Local Board 2020/2021 work programme provided support to the BCBA with a dedicated placemaking coordinator. Dominion Road BID has also provided comprehensive support and communication to the Balmoral business community in the form of a bi-lingual and translation resource.

37.     DRBA presented and received membership approval to progress with the 2020/2021 BID expansion at the 2020 DRBA AGM held on 21 October 2020.

38.     BCBA presented and approved the proposed Dominion Road BID expansion map and to support the expansion of the Dominion Road BID programme at a workshop held with their members on 27 October 2020.

39.     Other workshops open to all have been held (27 October 2020, 24 November 2020 and 2 February 2021) to provide an overview of what the expanded Dominion Road BID programme would look like and to demonstrate the opportunities associated with being part of a BID programme.

40.     The workshops were hosted by BCBA, attended by Auckland Council staff from the CEU and BID teams, the Dominion Road BID Manager and Balmoral business owners.

41.     Each workshop concluded with the attendee’s unanimous support to progress the Dominion Road BID expansion project including holding a postal ballot before 30 March 2021.

Local boards have allocated authority

42.     Under the Auckland Council shared governance arrangements, local boards are allocated several decision-making responsibilities in relation to BIDs.  In the case of the expansion of an existing BID programme the local board:

·        approves the expansion of BID programmes, including BID programme boundary maps

·        recommends the BID programmes targeted rate to the Governing Body.

43.     The Albert-Eden Local Board approved the proposed 2020/2021 Dominion Road BID programme expansion and map at its meeting held on 16 February 2021 (resolution number AE/2021/3).

44.     All BID expansion projects require further local board approval after the BID expansion project, voter engagement and ballot have been completed.  This ensures the local board has the opportunity to see the final outcome of the establishment project, review the ballot results and are satisfied the criteria for a BID establishment has been completed against the BID policy.

45.     This report provides a summary of the completed DRBA 2020/2021 BID expansion process, provides information on any subsequent changes to the BID ballot documents and confirms if all aspects of the BID Policy have been successfully completed.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The Dominion Road Business Association BID expansion project

46.     The DRBA will play a significant role in facilitating and creating local economic development in the Albert-Eden Local Board area and in particular will provide essential support aiding in business recovery to deal with the flow-on effects from the COVID-19 lockdowns.

47.     The decision to progress a BID expansion followed growing interest from businesses located within the proposed expansion area.

48.     The DRBA successfully executed a comprehensive project plan to engage with all eligible voters. The plan included:

·        a communications programme to highlight the opportunities, and benefits of a BID programme to those businesses located within the proposed BID expansion area

·        a detailed database of eligible voters (business owners and property ratepayers) located within the proposed BID programme expansion area 

·        consultation with council staff regarding the approach to the expansion project and ballot; and

·        holding the required number of public meetings, encouraging eligible voters to attend and take part in an information briefing and question-and-answer session

·        full details of the project are outlined in the DRBA report (Attachment B).

The DRBA sets the BID expansion boundary map, BID targeted rate mechanism and the BID grant amount needed to deliver its work programme

49.     The DRBA board (executive committee) in consultation with the BCBA, prepared the BID expansion material based on the feedback collected from the property and business owners located within the BID expansion area and who qualify as eligible BID voters.

50.     Staff worked within the BID Policy to help DRBA to identify the BID expansion boundary map (Attachment A) which defines the BID programme and targeted rate area at the time of expansion. The purpose of the BID map is to capture:

·    the geographical area that defines the collection of the BID targeted rate

·    the ratable properties for striking the BID targeted rate – these are the properties currently zoned business/industrial who will be paying a business rate at the time of the BID ballot.

·    the BID eligible voter – being business/industrial zoned ratepayer and business owner only

·    the delivery area of the BID programme.

51.     Once the expansion map was agreed staff provided DRBA with a rate modelling spreadsheet to help with their budget decision-making and identify the BID grant amount needed to deliver its work programme.  The spreadsheet models the BID targeted rate collection, it includes options for changing the rating mechanism to see how each option influence the BID targeted rate for the BID ratepayer who will pay it.  When considering a BID grant amount and rating mechanism, the DRBA must take into account:

·   a fair and reasonable share of the targeted rate

·   the benefit each BID member will receive from the BID programme spend

·   what the local business and property owners can reasonably afford.

52.     DRBA gathered all BID expansion information together which included the BID expansion boundary map, the BID plan and operating budget for the following financial year. 

53.     The expanded DRBA BID programme will represent about 519 (from 354) business ratepayers and owners, made up of 185 rateable properties and 334 business owners. There will be no change to the rating option used for the collection of the Dominion Road BID targeted rates.  Dominion Road BID programme will continue to use proportional value method and collect a BID grant of $255,000 excluding GST, effective from 1 July 2021.

The voting results achieved the required mandate supporting the expansion the Dominion Road BID programme and targeted rate

54.     The DRBA association was responsible for distributing, sharing all relevant BID information and managing the engagement process with all eligible voters to ensure they have the information to make an informed voting decision. 

55.     Election Services Ltd, the independent polling service provider, was commissioned by the DRBA to undertake the ballot.  The ballot was held between 1 March and 31 March 2021.

56.     A total of 198 envelopes, representing all eligible voters, were lodged with NZ Post on 26  February 2021.

57.     Each envelope contained the following:

·        an DRBA BID programme information booklet (Attachment C) highlighting:  

o   the purpose of the ballot and the benefits of being part of the BID programme

o   BID programme targeted rate information, the rating mechanism (a proportional value method per rateable property) and draft 2021/2022 budget (Attachment E); and

o   map of the Dominion Rd BID expansion (Attachment A).

·        voting form

·        information on voting online and a prepaid envelope for returning the ballot form

·        contact details for eligible voters to seek further information.

58.     The question on the DRBA voting form asked: Do you support the expansion of the Dominion Road Business Improvement District (BID) programme delivered by the Dominion Road Business Association Inc. and accordingly support the paying of a targeted rate?

59.     The result of the BID expansion ballot when voting closed at midday on 31 March 2021 showed that of a total of 198 eligible voters, 55 (27.78 percent) returned their vote.  Thirty-five (63.64 percent) voted yes to the question.  Twenty (36.36 percent) voted no.

60.     Election Services Ltd has provided a report (Attachment D) outlining the ballot process, results and voting documents.

DRBA member approval

61.     Following the close of the ballot, DRBA arranged to hold a Special General Meeting (SGM) on 28 April 2021 to present to the DRBA members, for their approval, the ballot results and any amendments to the BID programme, the BID boundary map (Attachment A) and the amended budget (Attachment E).

62.     The SGM agenda included special resolutions approving:

·        the BID expansion boundary map (Attachment A)

·        the amended 2021/2022 budget (Attachment E)

·        the BID rating mechanism at proportional value method per rateable property

·        the ballot results

·        the BID programme supporting documents.

63.     A copy of the DRBA 28 April SGM minutes will follow and will be available for the Albert-Eden Local Board 4 May 2021 business meeting.

64.     The results of the DRBA BID establishment ballot has identified there is a sufficient level of support from local businesses and property owners to expand the Dominion BID programme and targeted rate.

65.     Staff are satisfied DRBA has sufficiently met the requirements of the BID Policy, including achieving both the required mandate and an overwhelming BID ballot result, and advise the local board to recommend to the Governing Body the setting of the targeted rate.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

66.     There are no impacts on emissions or increase in resilience of communities to climate change resulting from the decision to expand this BID.  

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

67.     Advocacy is a key service provided by business associations and those with BID programme-funded personnel are at an advantage.  DRBA BID programme will ensure the views of its members are provided to council teams, including CCOs, on those plans and programmes that impact them.

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

Local impacts and local board views

68.     The expanded BID programme supports the Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2020 and will contribute, specifically Outcome: A strong local economy with thriving town centres.

69.     The Dominion Road BID expansion information was included in the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 consultation documents.

70.     The Albert-Eden Local Board approved the proposed Dominion Road BID expansion map at its business meeting on 16 February 2021 (resolution number AE/2021/3).

71.     The local board’s views will be expressed by its appointed representative on the board (executive committee) of the DRBA. This liaison board member attends BID board meetings to ensure there is a direct link between the council and the operation of the BID programme.

72.     Albert-Eden Local Board has previously supported BID programmes, as it brings together local businesses to invest collectively in improvements that enhance the local business environment, such as improved security for business centres.  A BID can also advocate to, and collaborate with, the council on behalf of local businesses.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

73.     Approving the new BID programme will have no adverse effects on, or particular benefits to, the Māori population.

74.     Māori make up more than 7.1% of the population living in the Albert-Eden Local Board area, compared to 11.5% of Auckland (SOURCE: 2018 CENSUS)Individual business associations may, through operating their BID programme, identify opportunities for niche support or development of any Māori business sector in their rohe.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

75.     There are no financial implications for the local board.  Targeted rates for BID-operating business associations are raised directly from commercial ratepayers in the district and used by the business association for improvements within that area. The council’s financial role is to collect the BID targeted rates and pass them directly to the association every quarter.

76.     The targeted rate is payable by the owners of the commercial properties within the geographic area of the individual BID programme.  In practice, this cost is often passed on to the business owners who occupy these properties. 

77.     This cost may be harder to meet at a time when businesses continue to be financially impacted by the flow-on effects of the COVID-19 lockdown restrictions. 

78.     The council last year extended its Rates Remission and Postponement Policy to commercial property owners as part of the Annual Budget 2020/2021 to help mitigate the impact of the targeted rate on those who are struggling financially. This policy will continue for the 2021/2022 rating year.

79.     If the Governing Body agrees with the BID targeted rates proposed by the local boards, the cost of grants will be met from the existing operational budget.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

80.     There are no direct financial risks to the local board or council that could result from this recommendation.

81.     The governance and operation of the DRBA BID programme will be subject to the BID Policy. The annual requirements of the BID Policy are intended to help minimise the potential for BIDs to misuse funds, by requiring each BID to plan for the intended use of funds, report on its activities to its members and to have its account audited.

82.     The council staff will regularly monitor compliance with the BID Policy and provide an annual report to the local board as part of an active risk management programme to minimise inappropriate use of funds.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

83.     If the local board supports the expansion of the Dominion Road BID programme and boundary area, they will consider a separate report to endorse that the BID targeted rate be set as part of the 10-year Budget 2021-2031.

84.     After the Annual Budget 10-year Budget 2021-2031 is approved, the council collects the targeted rate funds and distributes them in quarterly BID grant payments, effective from 1 July 2021, to the DRBA. This allows the DRBA to implement programmes that improve the local business environment and support businesses.


 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Attachment A - Dominion Rd BID proposed map

17

b

Attachment B - Dominion Rd BID report

19

c

Attachment C - Dominion Road BID Booklet

53

d

Attachment D - ELS Dominion Rd BID ballot report

59

e

Attachment E - Revised Dominion Rd BID budget 2021/2022

69

      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Justine Yu – Senior Advisor, Financial Policy

Michael Burns – Manager, Financial Strategy

Authorisers

Ross Tucker – General Manager, Financial Strategy and Planning

Louise Mason – General Manager, Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

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

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

Local board consultation feedback and input into the 10-year Budget 2021-2031

File No.: CP2021/04860

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To summarise consultation feedback from the Albert-Eden Local Board area on:

·        proposed priorities, activities and advocacy initiatives for the Albert-Eden local board agreement 2021/2022. 

·        regional topics for the 10-year Budget 2021-2031.

2.       To recommend any local matters to the Governing Body, that they will need to consider or make decisions on in the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 process.

3.       To seek input on the proposed regional topics in the 10-year Budget 2021-2031.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

4.       Local board agreements set out annual funding priorities, activities, budgets, levels of service, performance measures and advocacy initiatives for each local board area. Local board agreements for 2021/2022 will be included in the Council’s 10-year Budget 2021-2031.

5.       Auckland Council publicly consulted from 22 February to 22 March 2021 to seek community views on the proposed 10-year Budget 2021-2031. This included consultation on the Albert-Eden Local Board’s proposed priorities for 2021/2022, and advocacy initiatives for 2021-2031 to be included in their local board agreement.

6.       Auckland Council received 19,965 submissions in total across the region and 1,555 submissions from the Albert-Eden Local Board area.

7.       There were two significant pro forma’s received during consultation: Auckland Ratepayers’ Alliance (ARA) and Generation Zero. The feedback related to the proposed investment package, investment for responding to climate change and the extension and increase of the Water Quality Targeted Rate. ARA provided 3,008 responses, 217 of which were from Albert-Eden Local Board area. Generation Zero provided 166 responses, 37 of which were from Albert-Eden Local Board area.

8.       Feedback from Albert-Eden Local Board area was:

·   Forty-two per cent support for the proposed investment package, 42 per cent do not support. If pro formas are removed, the result was 50 per cent support, 34 per cent per cent do not support.

·   Sixty-seven per cent support for additional investment for responding to climate change, 21 per cent do not support. If pro formas are removed, the result was 70 per cent support, 21 per cent do not support.

·   Fifty-four per cent support for an extension and increase of the Water Quality Targeted Rate, 24 per cent support for an extension only, 13 per cent do not support. If pro formas are removed, the results were 52 per cent support an extension and an increase, 25 per cent support for an extension only, 14% do not support either.

·   Fifty-seven per cent support for the proposed approach to community investment, 28 per cent do not support.

·   Sixty-seven per cent support for an extension of the Natural Environment Targeted Rate, 21 per cent do not support.

·   Twenty-three per cent support for all local priorities for 2021/2022 and key advocacy initiatives for 2021-2031, 38 per support cent for most, 16 per cent do not support most, five per cent to not support any.

9.       In the 10-year Budget process there are matters where local boards provide recommendations to the Governing Body, for consideration or decision-making. This includes: 

·   any new/amended business improvement district targeted rates

·   any new/amended local targeted rate proposals 

·   proposed locally driven initiative capital projects outside local boards’ decision-making responsibility

·   release of local board specific reserve funds

·   any local board advocacy initiatives.

The Governing Body will consider these items as part of the 10-year Budget decision-making process in May/June 2021.

10.     Local boards have a statutory responsibility to provide input into regional strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. This report provides an opportunity for the local board to provide input on council’s proposed 10-year Budget 2021-2031.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      receive consultation feedback on the proposed Albert-Eden Local Board priorities and activities for 2021/2022 and key advocacy initiatives for 2021-2031.

b)      receive consultation feedback on regional topics in the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 from people and organisations based in the Albert-Eden Local Board area.

c)      recommend any new or amended Business Improvement District (BID) targeted rates to the Governing Body.

d)      approve its advocacy initiatives for inclusion (as an appendix) to its 2021/2022 Local Board Agreement.

e)      provide input on regional topics in the proposed 10-year Budget 2021-2031 to the Governing Body.

Horopaki

Context

11.     Each financial year Auckland Council must have a local board agreement (as agreed between the Governing Body and the relevant local board) for each local board area. This local board agreement reflects priorities in the Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2020 through local activities, budgets, levels of service, performance measures and advocacy initiatives.

12.     The local board agreements 2021/2022 will form part of the Auckland Council’s 10-year Budget 2021-2031.

13.     Auckland Council publicly consulted from 22 February to 22 March 2021 to seek community views on the proposed 10-year Budget 2021-2031, as well as local board priorities and proposed advocacy initiatives to be included in the local board agreement 2021/2022.

14.     Due to the impacts of the ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic, significant pressure has been placed upon the council’s financial position. This has created significant flow on effects for the council’s proposed 10-year Budget 2021-2031, in particular in the first three years.

 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

15.     This report includes analysis of consultation feedback, any local matters to be recommended to the Governing Body and seeks input on regional topics in the proposed 10-year Budget 2021-2031.

Consultation feedback overview

16.     As part of the public consultation Auckland Council used a variety of methods and channels to reach and engage a broad cross section of Aucklanders to gain their feedback and input into regional and local topics.  

17.     In total, Auckland Council received feedback from 19,965 people in the consultation period. This feedback was received through:

·   written feedback – 18,975 hard copy and online forms, emails and letters.

·   in person – 607 pieces of feedback through 61 Have Your Say events (38 in person and 23 online webinars), one of which was held in the Albert-Eden Local Board area. Due to the COVID-19 lockdowns 26 events were affected (either cancelled, postponed or moved to an online platform).

·   telephone interviews - two people made submissions via our telephone interview option

·   social media – 78 pieces of feedback through Auckland Council social media channels.

18.     All feedback will be made available on an Auckland Council webpage called “Feedback submissions for the 10-year Budget 2021-2031” and will be accessible from 3 May 2021 through the following link: akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/submissions-budget-2021-2031.

19.     The remainder of the report focusses on the feedback from submitters in the Albert-Eden Local Board area, or submitters commenting on the Albert-Eden Local Board priorities for 2021/2022 and key advocacy initiatives for 2021-2031.

20.     1,555 submissions were received from the Albert-Eden Local Board area. This feedback was received through 103 hard copy forms, 1,198 online forms and 254 pro formas. Individual and organisation submissions are contained in Attachments A and B, pro forma submissions are contained in Attachments C and D.

21.     There were two significant pro formas received during consultation: Auckland Ratepayers’ Alliance (217 responses from Albert-Eden Local Board area) and Generation Zero (37 responses from Albert-Eden Local Board Area).

22.     When respondents submit via the official consultation platform (either the hardcopy feedback form or the online form), they are directed to the consultation document and supporting information which are the statutory basis for the consultation process. When respondents submit via pro forma feedback access to that information is out of the control of Auckland Council and may not be provided, although each pro forma is different.

23.     As with all feedback, pro forma feedback must be given due consideration with an open mind, and it is up to elected members to determine the weight that is given to pro forma feedback.

24.     1,543 submissions were from individuals and 12 from organisations. They are:

·   Newlink Group Limited

·   Totara and Bear

·   Metro Mt Albert Softball Club

·   Kishan co.

·   Friends of Auckland Botanic Gardens Incorporated

·   St Lukes Environmental Protection Society Incorporated (STEPS)[1]

·   Mt Albert Residents Association

·   Western Springs Speedway

·   The Eden Park Trust

·   Auckland Theatre Company

·   Friends Of Oakley Creek Te Auaunga

25.     The graphs below indicate the demographic categories people identified with. This information only relates to those submitters who provided demographic information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Feedback received on the Albert-Eden Local Board’s priorities for 2021/2022 and key advocacy initiatives for 2021-2031

26.     The Albert-Eden Local Board consulted on the following priorities for 2021/2022:

·   Support volunteer groups and initiatives that encourage social connectedness and strong communities, recognising the impacts of COVID-19 and changes brought about by urban development.

·   Protect our natural environment by supporting projects like the Albert-Eden Urban Ngahere (Forest) Project and restoration of the biodiversity of our rock forests, urban streams and coast.

·   Ensure a range of programmes, tailored to serve the needs of our local, diverse population, are delivered at our community facilities, libraries and recreation centres.

·   Consider climate change impacts in our decisions and projects, and support education, awareness raising and action.

·   A boundary expansion of the Dominion Road Business Improvement District.

27.     The Albert-Eden Local Board also consulted on the following key advocacy initiatives for 2021-2031:

·   Advocate to the Governing Body for funding to upgrade our sports fields to address the current and future shortfall in sports capacity. We need an increase in playing and competition hours for the growing numbers of sports teams.

·   Advocate to the Governing Body for funding to realign the Chamberlain Park 18-hole golf course, to develop a new park, walking and cycling connections and stream restoration.

·   Advocate to the Governing Body for the continuing provision of aquatic facilities in the Mt Albert area.

·   Advocate to the Governing Body for a civic square to be funded at 915-919 New North Rd, Mt Albert, to provide a focal point for the town centre and connection to the train station.

28.     1,114 submissions were received on Albert-Eden Local Board’s priorities for 2021/2022 and key advocacy initiatives for 2021-2031. The majority (61 per cent) of local respondents supported all (251 responses) or most (420 responses) of the priorities. 179 submitters did not support most priorities, and 52 did not support any. 158 did not know, and 52 selected other.

 

29.     The key theme from comments which supported all or most priorities was that generally the priorities and advocacy initiatives were sensible, reasonable or well-balanced (52 comments).

30.     The key themes from comments which did not support most or any priorities were:

·   There is too much spending/ funding, too little benefit (45 comments).

·   The priorities are not what the community want (17 comments).

31.     The key themes overall from comments on the local priorities for 2021/2022 were:

·   Support for protecting the natural environment (36 comments). Of those seven requested that environmental protection have a stronger focus or be the top priority, and nine requested additional funding go toward environmental protection.

·   Support for considering climate change impacts (25 comments). Of those 13 requested that climate change response have a stronger focus or be the top priority, and four requested additional funding go toward responding to climate change.

32.     The key themes overall from comments on the key advocacy initiatives for 2021-2031 were:

·   Mixed responses for advocating for funding to upgrade sportsfields (six comments in support, 12 do not support).

·   Mixed responses for advocating for funding to realign the Chamberlain Park 18-hole golf course (13 comments in support, 50 do not support. These are made up of 18 comments requesting wider uses at the park, 14 comments requesting no funding is used for this proposal, 10 comments of do not support golf courses, and 8 requesting no changes are made to the golf course).

·   Mixed responses for advocating for funding for a civic square at 915-919 New North Rd, Mt Albert (six comments in support, 20 comments do not support).

33.     Across all comments, a key theme related to transport (36 comments). These included requesting additional walkways/cycleways (22 comments), requesting traffic/ speed/ safety improvements (eight comments) and footpath improvements/ repairs (six comments).

34.     Consultation feedback on local board priorities will be considered by the local board when approving their local board agreement between the 14-18 June 2021. Local board key advocacy initiatives will be considered in the current report

Overview of feedback received on regional topics in the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 from the Albert-Eden Local Board area

35.     The proposed 10-year Budget 2021-2031 sets out Auckland Council’s priorities and how to pay for them. Consultation on the proposed 10-year Budget asked submitters to respond to five key questions on:

1.       The proposed investment package

2.       Climate change

3.       Water quality

4.       Community investment

5.       Rating policy.

36.     The submissions received from the Albert-Eden Local Board area on these key issues are summarised below, along with an overview of any other areas of feedback on regional proposals with a local impact.

Key Question 1: Proposed investment package

37.     Aucklanders were asked about a proposed $31 billion capital investment programme over the next ten years, allowing the council to deliver key services and renew our aging assets. The proposal includes a one-off 5 per cent average general rates increase for the 2021/2022 financial year, rather than the previously planned 3.5 per cent increase, before returning to 3.5 per cent increases over the remaining years.

38.     The proposal also includes higher borrowings in the short term, a continuation of cost savings and the sale of more surplus property. Without the greater use of rates and debt, around $900 million of investment in Auckland would be delayed from the next three years

39.     1,494 responses were given by people from Albert-Eden Local Board area to this question. Forty-two per cent of responses were in support, 42 per cent did not support, nine per cent made another comment and seven per cent did not know.

 

40.     If pro forma responses are excluded, the results were 50 per cent of responses were in support, 34 per cent did not support, seven per cent made another comment and 9 per cent did not know.

41.     Key themes from comments which supported the proposal were:

·   Increasing rates will improve Auckland’s infrastructure to accommodate the growing population.

·   The propose is reasonable.

·   The essential need to make this effort for the communal benefits, development and upgrades. This will also lead to employment creation.

·   Even after COVID-19 impact, delaying the investment can cost more in the long run.

·   Increased rates are the cost that it takes to live on a ‘world class liveable city’.

·   People being ‘happy’ to pay more than five per cent to be much more effective at addressing the troubled financial position of the Auckland Council.

·   Avoid austerity measures and continue long-term investment.

42.     Key themes from comments which did not support the proposal were:

·   The struggle that Aucklanders are already suffering after COVID-19.

·   Auckland Council need to review their operating model and expenses.

·   Five percent average general rates increase will make first home or low-income family suffer.

·   Focus on core essential services and expenditure.

43.     Key themes from comments which did not know/other were:

·   Uncertainty at this present time that makes the increase a large amount of money in 10 years.

·   Proposing different rates: higher for wealthy homeowners/business.

·   Concerns about increasing the rates because it may results in increase rent and property prices.

·   Supporting the rate so council can focus on rates rebates for those truly in need.

·   Concern about the prudency of borrowing more money.

Key Question 2: Climate Change

44.     Aucklanders were asked about a proposal to provide additional investment to respond to climate change challenges. This includes enabling a quicker transition from diesel to cleaner electric and hydrogen buses, diverting more waste from landfill and enabling significant planting initiatives.

45.     1,296 responses were given by people from Albert-Eden Local Board area to this question. Sixty-seven per cent of responses were in support, 21 per cent did not support, nine per cent made another comment and three per cent did not know.

46.     If pro forma responses are excluded, the results were 70 per cent of responses were in support, 21 per cent did not support, six per cent made another comment and three per cent did not know.

47.     Key themes from comments which supported the proposal were:

·   Climate change is accelerating, responding to it must be kept at the forefront of all council actions.

·   Concerns about the increased investment not being enough to tackle climate change.

·   Concern that saving money by not responding to climate change impacts would cause more future crises.

·   The need of looking to other areas than just those covered by the proposal (for example household regulations, policies on petrol/diesel cars, encouraging people to plant trees for rates rebates).

·   The responsibility to lower emissions drastically and dispose of waste in creative and safe ways that do not negatively impact the environment.

·   Suggesting that the CBD should be car free. Investing on other public transportation services.

·   Concerns from younger submitters about the environment and caring for the long-term sustainability.

48.     Key themes from comments which did not support the proposal were:

·   Supporting the proposal but that these decisions should be made by central government.

·   Concerns about having to funding these proposals via rates.

·   That climate change is not a real threat.

·   No need further investment as current approach is adequate.

·   Requesting that investment be postponed until after COVID-19 pandemic.

49.     Key themes from comments which did not know/other were:

·   Request for information and support on how the community can help to tackle climate change.

·   Concerns about trees are being cut down.

·   Request to support reduced car usage and implementing parking levies.

·   Suggesting all new busses and council cars should be electric.

·   The existing trees and forests in Auckland are enough.

·   Request to charge large companies for this rather than ratepayers.

Key Question 3: Water quality

50.     Aucklanders were asked about a proposal to extend the Water Quality Targeted Rate for another three years – from 2028 until 2031 – as well as increasing the targeted rate annually in line with proposed average increases in general rates. The Water Quality Targeted Rate funds projects to improve water quality in Auckland’s harbours, beaches and streams. 

51.     1,289 responses were given by people from Albert-Eden Local Board area to this question. Fifty-four per cent of responses were in support of an extension and an increase, 25 per cent were in support of an extension only, 13 per cent did not support either, three per cent made another comment and six per cent did not know.

52.     If pro forma responses are excluded, the results were 52 per cent of responses were in support of an extension and an increase, 25 per cent were in support of an extension only, 14 per cent did not support either, three per cent made another comment and six per cent did not know.

53.     Key themes from comments which supported an extension and an increase were:

·   Concern that water is an essential need, recognising it as a taonga.

·   Water quality is fundamental to maintaining healthy eco-systems and the wellbeing of the population and city. Drinking and swimming were markers of success.

·   Acknowledging Auckland harbors as a major asset.

·   The need to improve water infrastructure for the future generations.

·   The importance to show kaitiakitanga and protect species and resources for future generations.

·   The advantage of the targeted rate and user pays (for water) as it will make people aware of usage and encourage savings.

54.     Key themes from comments which supported an extension only were:

·   Support proposal but wish ‘polluters’ (industries, some farmers, car owners) to contribute to cost.

·   Support but request reduction in residential water rate.

·   Postpone the increase as right now there are too many increases.

·   Concern that this cost will result in increased rents.

55.     Key themes from comments which did not support either were:

·   Solve the shortage before increasing the rates.

·   Watercare needs to drastically increase its operational efficiency.

·   Concerns about why it would take so long to improve water quality.

56.     Key themes from comments which did not know/other were:

·   Proposing progressing this at a later stage.

·   Supporting but asking why rates are increasing as infrastructure was needed years ago.

·   Need to address firstly why there are still issues with the water infrastructure and not adequate reserves for water shortage.

Key Question 4: Community investment

57.     Aucklanders were asked to provide feedback on a proposal that would see council adopt a new approach for community services to enable them to reduce building and asset maintenance related expenditure. The proposal involves consolidation of community facilities and services, increased leasing or shared facility arrangements, and an increased focus on providing multi-use facilities and online services in the future.

58.     1,245 responses were given by people from Albert-Eden Local Board area to this question. Fifty-seven per cent of responses were in support, 28 per cent did not support, 5 per cent made another comment and 10 per cent did not know.

59.     Key themes from comments which supported the proposal were:

·   The need to have multi-use facilities. Leasing or sharing facilities will reduce maintenance costs.

·   Support for providing more online services.

·   Supporting but would like more information about local impacts on each facility/ community area.

·   Support for minimising capital input and avoiding the construction of further facilities.

60.     Key themes from comment which did not support the proposal were:

·   Facilities are one of the great assets of Auckland. Council needs to keep maintaining these and build more as people need to be living more locally.

·   These assets are vital to communities. More facilities and green spaces are needed. Concerns about mental health and well-being.

·   Request for better facilities for tamariki and elderly population in less advantaged areas.

61.     Key themes from comments which did not know/other were:

·   Concerns about libraries being closed.

·   Support for leasing and sharing facilities but not to closures.

·   Due to population growth, all those facilities will likely be needed.

Key Question 5: Rating policy

62.     Aucklanders were asked for their feedback on a raft of proposed rating changes impacting different properties across Auckland differently. Proposed changes also included, for example, the extension of the Natural Environment Targeted Rate until June 2031, along with options to extend the Urban Rating Area and reinstatement of the Accommodation Provider Targeted Rate.

63.     The graphs below give an overview of the responses from the Albert-Eden Local Board area.

·   Extending the Natural Environment Targeted Rate until June 2031 to invest further measures such as addressing the spread of kauri dieback, and predator and weed control. 1,1147 responses were given.

·   Extending the Urban Rating Area so land that has been an operative urban zoning or which has resource consent to be developed for urban use now (except for Warkworth), pays the same urban rates as nearby properties that have access to a similar level of service.1,135 responses were given.

·   Charging farm and lifestyle properties in the Urban Rating Area residential rates so they pay the same urban rates as nearby properties that have access to a similar level of service. 1,098 responses were given.

·   Extending the City Centre Targeted Rate until June 2031 to maintain our investment in upgrading the city centre. 1,143 responses were given.

·   Introducing the Rodney Drainage Targeted Rate on the land in Te Arai and Okahukura that benefits from the stormwater services. 1,083 responses were given.

·   Reinstatement of the Accommodation Provider Targeted Rate (APTR). Seventeen responses were given.

o Option 1 – Resume the APTR as planned from 1 April 2021.

o Option 2 – Reinstate the APTR from 1 January 2022.

o Option 3 – Reinstate the APTR from 1 July 2022.

·   Introducing the Electricity Network Resilience Targeted Rate on Vector to fund tree management around Vector overhead powerlines. Forty-nine responses were given.

·   No feedback was received from the Albert-Eden Local Board area on the Waitākere Rural Sewage Targeted Rate or the Clevedon Water Connection Targeted Rate.

Feedback received from the Albert-Eden Local Board Have Your Say event

64.     One Have Your Say event was held in Albert-Eden Local Board area, on 9 March 2021 6:00pm – 7:00pm. Due to COVID-19 alert level restrictions this event was held online.

65.     Nine people attended the event, and they had associations with five local community groups.

66.     The proposals were presented and attendees we able to ask questions of subject matter experts. Attendees were then asked to provide feedback on the key proposals. The feedback was:

·   Key Question 1: Proposed investment package - three support, one do not support.

·   Key Question 2: Climate Change - three support, one do not support.

·   Key Question 3: Water quality - three support the extension and the increase, one do not support either.

·   Key Question 4: Community investment - three support, one do not support.

·   Key Question 5: Rating policy

o Three support extending the Natural Environment Targeted Rate until June 2031.

o Two support APTR - Option 1 resume in 1 April 2021, 1 supports APTR Option 3 reinstate from 1 July 2022.

·   Albert-Eden Local Board priorities – one supports all the priorities, three support most of the priorities.

 

Feedback received from mana whenua and mataawaka organisations

67.     Submissions from mana whenua and mataawaka were received separately, therefore are not reflected in the total number of submissions or theme analysis reported above. Mana whenua and mataawaka feedback provided on the regional proposals has been reported to the Governing Body.

68.     Five mana whenua organisations provided feedback on Albert-Eden Local Board priorities for 2021/2022 and key advocacy initiatives for 2021-2031.

69.     Ngāti Tamaterā Treaty Settlement Trust, Te Whakakitenga o Waikato Incorporated and Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority support all priorities. Ngāti Tamaoho Trust support most priorities. Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei Trust Board responded other.

70.     Two mataawaka organisations provided feedback on Albert-Eden Local Board priorities for 2021/2022 and key advocacy initiatives for 2021-2031.

71.     Te Roopu Waiora Trust support all priorities and Whenua Warrior Charitable Trust support most priorities.

72.     Mana whenua submissions are in Attachment E and mataakawa submissions in Attachment F.

Recommendations on local matters 

73.     This report allows the local board to recommend local matters to the Governing Body for consideration as part of the 10-year Budget process in May 2021, where these matters apply. This includes:

·   any new/amended business improvement district targeted rates

·   any new/amended local targeted rate proposals 

·   proposed locally driven initiative capital projects outside local boards’ decision-making responsibility

·   release of local board specific reserve funds

·   approve its advocacy initiatives for inclusion (as an appendix) to its 2021/2022 Local Board Agreement.

Local targeted rate and business improvement district (BID) targeted rate proposals

74.     Local boards are required to endorse any new or amended locally targeted rate proposals or business improvement district (BID) targeted rate proposals in their local board area. Note that these proposals must have been consulted on before they can be implemented.

75.     Local boards then recommend these proposals to the Governing Body for approval of the targeted rate. 

76.     The Dominion Road Business Association (DRBA) is proposing to expand the boundary of the Dominion Road Business Improvement District (BID) programme.

77.     The community was consulted as part of the local priorities for 2021/2022. 951 responses were received. Thirty-one per cent of responses were in support, 13 per cent did not support, two per cent made another comment and 54 per cent did not know.

78.     The key theme from comments which supported the proposal was that it’s good for businesses and the wider community (23 responses).

79.     The key themes overall from comments were:

·   not enough information was provided (52 comments).

·   concern about the impacts of physical works on traffic and local businesses, or possible light rail/ rapid transport. This indicates the submitters did not understand the proposal (32 responses).

·   did not know what the implications would be (11 responses).

80.     The Dominion Road BID expansion project has met all required criteria.

81.     The DRBA have set out the expansion boundary map, BID targeted rate mechanism and BID grant amount needed to deliver its work programme. There will be no change in the rating option used for collection of the Dominion Road BID targeted rate, it will remain as the proportional value method. The expanded BID programme will represent about 519 (from 354) business ratepayers and owners. The targeted rate will collect a BID grant of $255,000 excluding GST, effective from 1 July 2021.

82.     The DRBA have achieved the required mandate of support through voting results. The result of the BID expansion ballot when voting closed at midday on 31 March 2021 showed that of a total of 198 eligible voters, 55 (27.78 per cent) returned their vote. Thirty-five (63.64 per cent) voted yes to the question. Twenty (36.36 per cent) voted no.

83.     The DRBA have met the Auckland Council BID Policy 2016 (Kaupapa Here ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi), requirements. They held a Special General Meeting on 28 April 2021 to approve the ballot results, BID programme, BID boundary map and amended budget. They have informed the local board of this result.

84.     A separate report will be provided outlining additional detail on the process and results of the BID expansion ballot run by the business association and allow for local board decision-making on whether to approve the BID expansion.

85.     This report allows for the local board to endorse the amended BID targeted rate proposal and recommend it to the Governing Body for approval of the targeted rate. 

Funding for Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI)

86.     Local boards are allocated funding for local driven initiatives (LDI) annually, to spend on local projects or programmes that are important to their communities. Local boards have decision-making over the LDI funds but need approval from the Governing Body where:

·   operational LDI funding is to be converted into capital LDI funding.

·   the release of local board specific reserve funds is requested, which are being held by the council for a specific purpose.

·   a LDI capital project exceeds $1 million.

87.     These conditions do not apply to the Albert-Eden Local Board for the 2021/2022 financial year.

Local board advocacy

88.     Local boards are requested to approve any advocacy initiatives for inclusion (as an appendix) to their 2021/2022 Local Board Agreement, taking into account the consultation feedback above. This allows the Finance and Performance Committee to consider these advocacy items when making decisions on the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 in May/June.

Local board input on regional topics in the 10-year Budget 2021-2031

89.     Local boards have a statutory responsibility for identifying and communicating the interests and preferences of the people in its local board area in relation to Auckland Council’s strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws, and any proposed changes to be made to them. This report provides an opportunity for the local board to provide input on council’s proposed 10-year Budget 2021-2031.

90.     Local board plans reflect community priorities and preferences and are key documents that guide the development of local board agreements (LBAs), local board annual work programmes, and local board input into regional plans such as the 10-year Budget.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

91.     The decisions recommended in this report are part of the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 and local board agreement process to approve funding and expenditure over the next 10 years.

92.     Projects allocated funding through this 10-year Budget process will all have varying levels of potential climate impact associated with them. The climate impacts of projects Auckland Council chooses to progress, are all assessed carefully as part of council’s rigorous reporting requirements.

93.     The local board consulted on a priority for 2021/2022 to consider climate change impacts in our decisions and projects, and support education, awareness raising and action.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

94.     The 10-year Budget 2021-2031 is an Auckland Council Group document and will include budgets at a consolidated group level. Consultation items and updates to budgets to reflect decisions and new information may include items from across the group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

95.     The local board’s decisions and feedback are being sought in this report. The local board has a statutory role in providing its feedback on regional plans.

96.     Local boards play an important role in the development of the council’s 10-year Budget. Local board agreements form part of the 10-year Budget. Local board nominees have also attended Finance and Performance Committee workshops on the 10-year Budget

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

97.     Many local board decisions are of importance to and impact on Māori. Local board agreements and the 10-year Budget are important tools that enable and can demonstrate the council’s responsiveness to Māori.

98.     Local board plans, developed in 2020 through engagement with the community including Māori, form the basis of local board area priorities. There is a need to continue to build relationships between local boards and iwi, and the wider Māori community.

99.     Analysis provided of consultation feedback received on the proposed 10-year Budget includes submissions made by mana whenua and the wider Māori community who have interests in the rohe / local board area.

100.   Ongoing conversations between local boards and Māori will assist to understand each other’s priorities and issues. This in turn can influence and encourage Māori participation in council’s decision-making processes.

101.   Some projects approved for funding could have discernible impacts on Māori. The potential impacts on Māori, as part of any project progressed by Auckland Council, will be assessed appropriately and accordingly as part of relevant reporting requirements.

102.   Twenty mana whenua organisations made submissions to the 10-year Budget. The following five organisations gave feedback on Albert-Eden Local Board priorities for 2021/2022 and key advocacy initiatives for 2021-2031:

·   Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei Trust Board

·   Ngāti Tamaterā Treaty Settlement Trust

·   Te Whakakitenga o Waikato Incorporated

·   Ngāti Tamaoho Trust

·   Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority.

103.   Two mataawaka organisations gave feedback on Albert-Eden Local Board priorities for 2021/2022 and key advocacy initiatives for 2021-2031.

104.   All organisations provided additional comments and feedback regarding their ongoing relationship between the local board and their organisations. Feedback received from these organisations is summarised in the Advice and Analysis section above and in Attachments E and F.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

105.   This report is seeking the local board’s decisions on financial matters in the local board agreement that must then be considered by the Governing Body.

106.   The local board also provides input to regional plans and proposals. There is information in the council’s consultation material for each plan or proposal with the financial implications of each option outlined for consideration.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

107.   The council must adopt its 10-year Budget, which includes local board agreements, by 30 June 2021. The local board is required to make recommendations on these local matters for the 10-year Budget by mid May 2021, to enable and support the Governing Body to make decisions on key items to be included in the 10-year Budget on 25 May 2021.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

108.   The local board will approve its local board agreement and corresponding work programmes in June 2021.

109.   Recommendations and feedback from the local board will be provided to the relevant Governing Body committee for consideration during decision making at the Governing Body meeting.

110.   The final 10-year Budget 2021-2031 (including local board agreements) will be adopted by the Governing Body on 22 June 2021.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Canela Ferrara – Local Board Engagement Advisor

Emma Reed – Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason – General Manger, Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

Auckland Transport – Regional Land Transport Programme 2021

File No.: CP2021/03779

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       The purpose of this report is to outline the outcomes of the proposed Regional Land Transport Programme (RLTP) in the local board area and provide an opportunity for the board to resolve feedback for the attention of the Governing Body and the Regional Transport Committee.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report covers:

·    A summary of what the RLTP is and the process of its development.

·    A summary of what projects and programmes are planned for the local board area.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      receive the Auckland Transport – Regional Land Transport Programme report

b)      provide feedback on the Regional Land Transport Programme as per Attachment A to this report.

 

Horopaki

Context

3.       The RLTP is a 10-year investment programme for transport in Auckland. It includes the activities of Auckland Transport, Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) and KiwiRail.

4.       It is reviewed and publicly consulted on every three years in a process led by the Auckland Regional Transport Committee (RTC).

5.       The RTC is comprised of members of the AT Board and representatives from Waka Kotahi and KiwiRail. During the review process the RTC seeks the views of Auckland’s elected representatives through the Governing Body. The AT Board is responsible for the final approving of the RLTP.

6.       The RLTP is the end product of a number of different local and central government processes and plans:

·        Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP)

·        The Auckland Plan 2050

·        Auckland Council’s Long-Term Plan (LTP)

·        National Land Transport Programme (NLTP)

·        Government Policy Statement on Land Transport (GPS).

7.       It is worth noting that AT is not a party to ATAP discussions but that the direction expressed in this document is a key driver for outcomes in the RLTP. Likewise, the LTP sets funding levels for key programmes in the RLTP, such as the Local Board Transport Capital Fund.

8.       The current transport programme is set out in the 2018 RLTP. This saw the introduction of the Regional Fuel Tax (RFT), that provided an additional $1.5bn of direct revenue over 10 years. Including the RFT, the 2018 RLTP anticipated a $10 billion capital programme over ten years.

9.       While the 2018 RLTP programme provided a sound investment base there have been an increasing number of challenges requiring attention in the 2021 RLTP. These include:

·        The impact of growth and other demands creating a need for increased investment in upgrading existing infrastructure and for new investment to support growth

·        A need for increased investment to ensure transport plays its role in meeting overall greenhouse gas reduction targets

·        Continuing to invest in public transport and to accelerate cycling network completion to support mode change

·        A need to deliver further investment to support vision zero goals to provide reductions in deaths and serious injuries

·        An increasing need for more responsive investment in the transport network at a local level.

10.     Unfortunately, the response to these challenges is tempered by the impact of Council’s Emergency Budget, the effect of Covid-19 on public transport fares (leading to reduced operational funding for AT), and a strong likelihood that Waka Kotahi funding will not reach previously assumed levels.

11.     It has been assessed that about 95% of the available funding from Council and Government is needed to run the transport system, maintain the quality of the system (renewals and maintenance) and deliver committed/contracted /under construction projects. This means that there is very little headroom for new investment and that there will be hard trade-offs, including the deferring of many important projects. 

12.     At its meeting on 11 March the Planning Committee unanimously endorsed the draft RLTP.  ATAP itself was released on Friday 12 March. The RTC formally approved the draft RLTP for public consultation at its meeting on 23 March 2021.

13.     The current timeline for development of the RLTP is as follows:

Date

Action

23 March

RTC considers draft RLTP for public consultation

29 March-2 May

Proposed dates for public consultation

May

Evaluation of public consultation

27 May

RTC review final draft RLTP

3 June

Governing Body review RLTP for endorsement

June

AT Board reviews RLTP for final approval

01 July

RLTP operational

 

14.     As a regional programme it is appropriate that the primary engagement focus sits with the Governing Body through the Planning Committee.

15.     However, as the RLTP has important local impacts AT recognizes the importance of seeking local board views to ensure these are included in the information given to the RTC and Governing Body to inform their decision making. To this end, AT has the following engagement planned:

 

Date

LB Engagement

15 Feb

AT attended the Chairs Forum to give an overview on the RLTP process, to outline how the RLTP is put together and finally what the process is for LB input.

29 March – 2 May

Workshops with all local boards to discuss the RLTP.

4 – 18 May

AT will write reports for local boards to pass resolutions to officially record their feedback on the RLTP.

3 June

Local boards could use their statutory input slot at a Governing Body Meeting (Planning Committee) to give their views on the RLTP.

 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16.     The draft Long Term Plan proposal is to reinstate the Local Board Transport Capital Fund back up to $20M per annum for the next ten years. On this basis the proposed RLTP includes $200M for Local Board initiatives. However, it should be noted that this is contingent on the Mayor’s proposed rates increase of 5%.

17.     The below tables summarises projects that are planned to be delivered in the Local Board area and surrounding areas and could be of benefit to residents from Albert-Eden.

#

AT Projects

Duration

10 Year Capital Expenditure ($M)

19

Northwest Bus Improvements

2021/22 – 2022/23

85.0

63

CRL Road Side Projects

2022/23 – 2023/24

7.3

66

Carrington Road Improvements

2026/27 – 2030/31

54.6

74

Tamaki Drive/ Ngapipi Road safety improvements            

2021/22

6.8

 

18.     The below tables summarises projects within larger programmes, that are planned to be delivered in the Local Board area and surrounding areas and could be of benefit to residents from Albert-Eden.

#

Project from a Programme

Underlying Programme

22

Dominion / Balmoral Road and Dominion / Mount Albert Road Bus Interchanges

Neighbourhood Interchanges (AT)

23

New Lynn to Avondale, Point Chevalier to Westmere, Waitemata Safe Routes, Great North Road and Glen Innes to Tamaki Drive Shared Path

Urban Cycleways (AT)

29

Ponsonby Road, Great North Road, New North Road, Sandringham Road, Mount Eden Road, Manukau Road and Ellerslie-Panmure Highway corridors

Connected Communities (AT)

30

Maioro Street Dynamic Bus Lane

Network Performance (AT)

36

Mount Roskill Spatial Priority Area

Projects Supporting Auckland Housing Programme (AT)

67

Ash Street and Rata Street

Safety (AT)

68

Mount Albert Road

Safety (AT)

78

Residential Speed Management - Sandringham

Safety (AT)

79

Oranga Spatial Priority Area

Projects Supporting Auckland Housing Programme (AT)

 

19.     The below table summarizes projects being delivered by Waka Kotahi that are planned to be delivered in the Local Board area and surrounding areas.

 

Non-AT Projects

Responsible Agency

10 Year Capital Expenditure ($M)

21

Te Whau Pathway

Auckland Council

30

28

Glen Innes to Tamaki Cycleway (joint project with AT)

Waka Kotahi

49.0

63

City Rail Link

City Rail Link Limited

2,600.0

 

20.     The below map corresponds to the above tables and shows the location of the projects:

21.     The below table outlines objectives from the local board plan that are approached in the RLTP.

Objectives

RLTP outcomes

Town centres are attractive destinations

A ten-year investment of $3.93billion has been included in this RLTP to cover the cost of renewing AT’s asset base. This RLTP has $900 million more in AT renewals than the $3.05 billion included in the 2018 RLTP.

This RLTP includes a $200 million Local Board Initiatives Fund to be split between Auckland’s 21 local boards and provide for an ongoing programme of smaller-scale local transport improvements.

Our community has more transport options and we see a shift in transport modes used by the community.

The rapid transit network (RTN) is a key investment priority and forms the largest category of capital investment in this RLTP.

The proposed transport programme in this RLTP will deliver a step-change in the coverage and performance of the RTN over the next 10 years. This RLTP will also see the RTN continue to diversify away from the City Centre.

Over $300 million is allocated to delivering AT’s On-going Cycling Programme, which is intended to follow the completion of the Urban Cycleways Programme early in the RLTP period. This is in addition to the allocation to cycling included in the Connected Communities programme.

$49 million to continue delivering new footpaths in high priority locations.

Operational funding for the ongoing delivery of the Bike Safe programme which teaches primary, intermediate and secondary school children how to ride their bike safely.

It also includes Continued investment in the AT Community Bike Fund which supports communities and groups delivering activities, events and projects that encourage more people to ride bikes more often.

Operational funding to continue delivery of the Travelwise Programme, an innovative schools-based programme that aims to improve road safety and reduce the number of vehicles driving to and from school at peak times to help reduce congestion.

Our transport options increase safety and minimize harm.

Over $650million of AT investment to deliver the AT Safety Programme, which will deliver improvements targeted towards s[peed management, high risk intersections, high risk corridors and vulnerable road users.

$100 million for minor improvements across the network.

$193 million of Waka Kotahi investment to deliver the state highway Safer Networks Programme.

A new $30 million programme for minor improvements for cycling and micro-mobility. A key element of this package will be delivering ‘pop up cycleways’ which will retrofit a range of existing painted cycle lanes with appropriate safety barriers. This programme will also address other issues on the existing cycling network to improve usability and enhance safety.

Ongoing funding for a programme of tactical urbanism initiatives such as those brought to life through Waka Kotahi’s Innovating Streets Programme.

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22.     The approach set out in the RLTP conforms with the direction expressed by Council through the Long-Term Plan. However, AT notes that far more needs to be done to reach the Auckland Council climate change emissions targets.

23.     This investment programme is only one of a comprehensive set of measures needed to reduce transport emissions. The RLTP does not exist to set government policy and additional measures are needed that are beyond its scope to implement. A comprehensive approach to emission reduction will therefore require a range of actions from across government and industry sector.

24.     In the context of this challenge, Auckland needs a Climate Plan for its transport system which sets out the preferred pathway to meeting Auckland Councils emissions targets. This plan, along with a Climate Change Programme Business Case will be developed as part of this RLTP.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25.     The RLTP is the product of several Auckland Council processes and plans including:

·        Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP)

·        The Auckland Plan 2050

·        Auckland Council’s Long-Term Plan (LTP).

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

Local impacts and local board views

26.     Auckland Transport has used local board plans to inform the development of the RLTP.

27.     Opportunities for local boards to engage on the RLTP have included:

·        Chair’s Forum on the 15th February 2021

·        A workshop with the Albert-Eden Local Board on the 30th March 2021

·        Highlighting the opportunities for local board feedback to the Governing Body.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28.     Iwi and mataawaka have been engaged through AT’s Maori engagement team.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

29.     The are no direct financial implications for the local board in receiving this report.

30.     Local board feedback on the RLTP and any changes made as a result of that feedback could have financial implications depending on that feedback. Further information about AT’s priorities for funding and implications of changes to funding levels can be found on page 80 of the RLTP consultation document.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

31.     AT’s capital programme within the RLTP is contingent on the Mayor’s proposed rates increase of 5%. If this is not adopted there will be significant impacts on the plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32.     Once the local boards have resolved their feedback on the RLTP, AT will review all feedback from local boards and the public. This feedback, and any proposed changes, will be compiled into a feedback report for the consideration of the Governing Body and the Regional Transport Committee.

AUTHOR Lorna Stewart – Elected Member Relationship Partner, Auckland Transport

AUTHORISER: Hamish Bunn – General Manager Investment, Planning & Policy, Auckland Transport

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Regional Land Transport Programme (RLTP) Local Board Feedback Template

97

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Lorna Stewart - Elected Member Relationship Partner, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Hamish Bunn – GM Investment, Planning & Policy, Auckland Transport

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

Proposal to vary the Regional Fuel Tax scheme

File No.: CP2021/04061

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek feedback from local boards on the draft proposal to vary the Regional Fuel Tax scheme.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Regional Fuel Tax (RFT) scheme for Auckland, established in 2018, is a key funding source for investment in Auckland’s transport network. The scheme is projected to generate $1.5 billion of revenue and enables over $4 billion of additional investment.

3.       Decisions by central government to invest directly in RFT projects and current reviews of the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP) indicative package and the draft Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) have necessitated a variation to the RFT scheme.

4.       There is no proposal to alter the level of the RFT, the period for which the scheme runs, or the area covered by the tax.

5.       Decisions around the overall investment programme for transport and the funding of this are made through the ATAP and RLTP processes. The allocation of projects within the RLTP to the RFT programme is a key step to support implementation.

6.       The draft proposal to vary the RFT scheme (refer Attachment A) retains the 14 projects identified in the original programme but updates the specific initiatives within these projects, along with cost and timing projections.

7.       The draft proposal went out for public consultation alongside the draft RLTP. Following consideration of feedback from local boards and from the general public, a final proposal will be endorsed by the Governing Body and sent to the relevant ministers for approval and enactment through Order in Council.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      receive the report on proposed variations to the 2018 Regional Fuel Tax scheme.

b)      provide feedback on the proposed variation to the 2018 Regional Fuel Tax scheme.

 

Horopaki

Context

The creation of Auckland’s RFT scheme

8.       Work on an aligned strategic approach to transport in Auckland (ATAP) began in 2016. This work made clear that the level of investment needed was not achievable with the existing funding mechanisms.

9.       A regional fuel tax was proposed as a tool to achieve a higher level of investment for Auckland. With the leverage that this funding could drive from government subsidies and development contributions, the RFT enabled $4 billion of investment that would not otherwise occur.

10.     Without this investment, a number of the positive outcomes of the programme would not be able to be achieved, including improved road safety, increased availability and use of public transport, more active transport options, improved access to employment, and more growth and housing development.

11.     An amendment to the Land Transport Management Act 2003 (LTMA) was passed in 2018 which provided for the introduction of regional fuel taxes by order in council.

12.     Auckland Council consulted with Aucklanders on the introduction of an RFT as part of its 10-year Budget 2018-2028 consultation in February/March 2018. Following this, a detailed proposal for an RFT scheme was prepared, consulted on from 1-14 May 2018, and then approved for submission to the government.

13.     The proposed scheme was approved by the government and become operative from 1 July 2018 (refer Attachment B).

Details of the existing scheme

14.     Auckland’s RFT scheme collects 10c per litre (plus GST) and applies to sales of petrol and diesel by retailers within the boundaries of Auckland Council (excluding Aotea Great Barrier Island) from 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2028.

15.     Revenue from the scheme is projected to be $150 million per annum, a total of $1.5 billion across the 10 years.

16.     The original proposal also details:

·   the key objectives of the scheme

·   the effects of the scheme (positive and negative)

·   how it aligned with the relevant strategic documents

·   why it should be a funding source (including other options considered)

·   reasoning for the exclusion of Aotea Great Barrier Island

·   the information and assumptions that support the forecast revenue calculations.

17.     The programme funded 14 categories of expenditure referred to in the scheme as projects:

·   bus priority improvements

·   city centre bus infrastructure

·   improving airport access

·   Eastern Busway (formerly AMETI)

·   park and rides

·   electric trains and stabling

·   ferry network improvements (was downtown ferry redevelopment)

·   road safety

·   active transport

·   Penlink

·   Mill Road corridor

·   road corridor improvements

·   network capacity and performance improvements

·   growth-related transport infrastructure.

Progress of the scheme to 31 December 2020

18.     Since the RFT was introduced, $376 million of revenue has been received by Auckland Council. Auckland Transport has spent $346 million on designated projects which was funded by $162 million of RFT, $135 million of Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency subsidies, and $49 million of development contributions.

19.     The programme was always planned to ramp up over the 10 years, reflecting the need to complete projects that were already in train in 2018, and to gear up to a much higher level of delivery. Unspent funds at any stage in the programme are held in reserve. This reserve totalled $197 million as at 31 December 2020.

20.     Key achievements of the scheme so far include:

·   improving road safety through the introduction of lower speed limits on 600 Auckland roads to reduce harm and loss of life

·   installing red-light running enforcement and CCTV cameras

·   improving airport access through works on the Puhinui Station with construction now underway on the new interchange

·   improving the Downtown Ferry terminal with the completion of breakwater piling and Pontoon 5 and Landing Pontoon 2 now at the commissioning stage to increase capacity and customer experience.

Subsequent government funding announcements

21.     Two key announcements by central government have reduced the requirement for Regional Fuel Tax funding for some of the projects included in the scheme.

22.     On 29 January 2020, the government announced the New Zealand Upgrade Programme (NZUP). This programme included direct crown investment of $3.48 billion in transport infrastructure for Auckland.

23.     The NZUP provided funding for two projects included in the RFT scheme. The Penlink project was allocated $411 million and the Mill Road project was allocated $1.354 billion. Following this, the responsibility for the delivery of these two projects was transferred to Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency.

24.     As part of its fiscal stimulus package to support the economy in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, the government announced a programme on 1 April 2020 to fund ‘shovel ready’ infrastructure projects.

25.     Following applications by the Auckland Council group, a number of projects were contracted to receive funding. Two of the successful projects constituted part of wider RFT projects.

26.     Funding was received towards the Downtown Ferry Terminal which is a part of the ferry network improvements RFT project.

27.     Funding was also received to support the Puhinui Bus/Rail Interchange project which forms a part of the Improving Airport Access RFT project.

28.     Staff consider that this, along with the current reviews of ATAP and the draft RLTP (summarised below), constitute a change to a material aspect of the programme of capital projects supported by the RFT as enacted in 2018.

ATAP update and draft RLTP preparation

29.     Auckland Council and Auckland Transport have been working with central government partners to update the ATAP. The development of an ATAP indicative package will inform and guide Auckland’s RLTP and the National Land Transport Programme (NLTP).

30.     Despite additional funding available to the programme through direct government investment, the ATAP budget is still highly constrained. This is the result of increased demands for transport investment in Auckland as well as updated costings and information around existing projects. Funding of the ATAP indicative package is reliant on the continuation of the RFT scheme.

31.     Staff consider that this, along with the recent central government funding decisions (summarised above) constitute a change to a material aspect of the capital projects programmes supported by the RFT as enacted in 2018.

32.     Given these material changes, staff have prepared a formal proposal to vary the scheme, as required by section 65G(1) of the LTMA 2003. This draft variation proposal formed the basis for public consultation which is required under section 65H(c) of the LTMA.

33.     Following consultation, the Governing Body will consider feedback (including that from local boards) and then submit the proposal (with any changes made) to the Ministers of Finance and Transport, who will then decide whether to accept it (sections 65I and 65J of the LTMA). If the Ministers do accept the proposal, they will send it on to the Governor-General to enact through an Order in Council (sections 65J and 65K of the LTMA).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Proposed variation to the scheme

34.     Given the changes discussed above (government funding and ATAP update) and the fact that local board views were captured for the original 2018 scheme, the council seeks local board views on the proposed variation. 

35.     The proposed variation of the scheme is led by the work on the updated ATAP indicative package and the draft RLTP.

36.     It is not proposed that there is any change to:

·   the rate of the RFT

·   the period of the scheme

·   the area subject to the scheme.

37.     Despite the fact that the scheme does not run to the end of the new 10-year budget, it is not proposed that the council looks to extend the scheme. This is primarily because work continues on the Congestion Question project which is investigating different road pricing options that could replace the RFT in the future.

38.     It is proposed that the scheme maintains the same 14 projects (with the special consideration of Penlink and Mill Road staying in the scheme without additional allocation of RFT due to a change in delivery and funding management) but that changes are made to:

·   the descriptions of projects, identified initiatives within them, and projected benefits, to reflect any changes in scope

·   the level of projected total expenditure and indicative RFT contribution to each project to reflect where new funding has become available or where project costings have been updated

·   the timing of projects following decisions made through the development of the draft RLTP

·   the naming of one project where it is proposed that Downtown Ferry Redevelopment is renamed Ferry Network Improvements to reflect the incorporation of initiatives to purchase new electric ferries to help decarbonise the public transport fleet.

39.     It has been assessed that these changes constitute a change to a material aspect of the programme of capital projects supported by the RFT scheme and therefore, the council must prepare a proposal to vary the scheme, pursuant to section 65G(1)(a) of the LTMA.

 

Consultation

40.     Public consultation on the draft proposal to vary the RFT scheme is occurring alongside the Auckland Transport consultation on the draft RLTP.

41.     This consultation takes place from 29 March to 2 May 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

42.     The proposal to vary the RFT scheme constitutes a change in an allocation of funding within the overall ATAP indicative package and RLTP.  Transport projects funded include climate change optimisation, such as electric trains and stabling and promoting eco-friendly commuting initiatives like improving congestion through network capacity and performance improvements.

43.     The impacts of the complete RLTP on the climate have been reported to the local board in another report on this agenda.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

44.     Council staff have worked with staff from Auckland Transport representatives in the development of the draft proposal.

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

Local impacts and local board views

45.     Local board views will be captured through this report and reported to the Planning Committee prior to decision-making.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

46.     The proposal to vary the RFT scheme constitutes a change in an allocation of funding within the overall ATAP indicative package and RLTP.  The impacts of the RLTP on Māori have been reported to the local board.

47.     The RFT proposal has been incorporated in the RLTP consultation process, which includes extensive engagement with 19 mana whenua and mataawaka groups.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

48.     The RFT scheme is projected to deliver around $1.5 billion of revenue over the 2018-2028 period. This constitutes a significant portion of the transport investment in Auckland.

49.     Without an RFT, council would need to either:

·   utilise another of the currently available funding mechanisms (general rates or an Interim Transport Levy), or

·   fund transport at the level of renewals and committed projects only.

50.     The rating options would result in ratepayers facing significant increases (10-11 per cent) in addition to the general rates increase and paying according to their property value, rather than based on use. To fund the transport budget at the level of renewals and committed projects only would have significant impacts on the growth and economy of Auckland.

Risks and mitigations

51.     The key risk is a potential misalignment of the RFT scheme from the ATAP programme and the RLTP.  This variation proposal looks to mitigate this risk by updating the scheme and the RLTP in tandem.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

52.     Public consultation on the proposal takes place from 29 March to 2 May 2021.

53.     The Planning Committee will receive public feedback and local board views on the proposal in May 2021.

54.     The Planning Committee and Governing Body will consider the adoption of a proposal for submission to government.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft proposal to vary Regional Fuel Tax scheme project details

109

b

Proposal for a Regional Fuel Tax (2018)

131

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Justine Yu - Senior Advisor - Fin Policy

Michael Burns - Manager Financial Strategy

Authorisers

Ross Tucker - General Manager, Financial Strategy and Planning

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

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


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

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

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

Decision-making responsibilities policy

File No.: CP2021/04987

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To endorse the draft decision-making responsibilities policy for inclusion in the long-term plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Governing Body is required by legislation to allocate decision-making responsibility for the non-regulatory activities of Auckland Council to either itself or local boards. This allocation is outlined in the Decision-Making Responsibilities of Auckland Council’s Governing Body and Local Boards policy that is published in each long-term plan and annual plan.

3.       The policy also records delegations given to date by the Governing Body to local boards and provides a list of statutory responsibilities that are conferred on both governance arms.

4.       An internal review of the policy was undertaken in early 2021 and considered by the Joint Governance Working Party at its meeting on 22 March 2021. The review outlined some proposed changes to the policy as well as some recommendations on how to take forward other issues that do not yet lend themselves to a policy amendment. The recommendations adopted by the Joint Governance Working Party have informed the proposed changes in the draft policy. (Attachment A).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      endorse the draft Decision-making Responsibilities of Auckland Council’s Governing Body and local boards policy.

Horopaki

Context

5.       The Governing Body and local boards obtain their decision-making responsibilities from three sources:

·   statutory responsibilities - functions and powers directly conferred by the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (LGACA) 2009

·   non-regulatory activities that are allocated to local boards and the Governing Body in accordance with a set of principles (section 17(2) LGACA)

·   delegations – these can be regulatory or non-regulatory responsibilities; the Governing Body has delegated some of its responsibilities to local boards.

Allocation of non-regulatory responsibilities

6.       The primary purpose for the policy is to set out the allocation of non-regulatory decision-making responsibilities. However, it incorporates other sources of decision-making authority for completeness and context, including a register of key delegations which have been given by the Governing Body to local boards.

Joint Governance Working Party (JGWP)

7.       To facilitate a review by the JGWP, staff provided an analysis of issues raised, mainly by local boards, and proposed recommendations in relation to those issues. The report containing this advice can be found in the record of the Joint Governance Working Party Meeting, 23 March 2021.

8.       The JGWP carefully considered the issues that were in scope for the review as well as the staff advice and raised some questions and issues that staff are exploring further. These are discussed in the advice below.

9.       This report only covers the discussions relating to the recommended changes to the policy. A memo will be provided to each local board providing a summary of the issues considered in the review and outlining a staff response to specific issues, if any, that individual local boards raised in their feedback.

10.     Following their review, the JGWP agreed as follows:

That the Joint Governance Working Party:

(a)         note the feedback from local boards on the decision-making responsibilities policy

(b)        request the following amendments to the decision-making responsibilities policy:

(i)         request that staff report with urgency that local boards can be delegated approval for developing and approving area plans, provided the Governing Body can make its views known on such plans

(ii)         that the local boards can take responsibilities for decision making over drainage reserves provided such decisions are constrained to those that will not negatively affect the drainage functions and stormwater network operations.

(iii)        provide for local boards to tailor locally delivered projects within regional environmental programmes, subject to advice from staff on the types of projects that can be tailored

(iv)        provide explicit reference to Health and Safety obligations and requirements that local boards and Governing Body must consider in their decisions

(v)        local boards can object to a special liquor licence and this be enabled by an appropriate administrative process.

(c)    note the recommendations that the next phase of the Waiheke pilot should consider some of the issues that have been raised including:

(i)         trialing delegations from Auckland Transport on decision-making relating to street trading for roads and beaches, placemaking and urban design decisions

(ii)         Identifying opportunities and non-regulatory decision-making elements in relation to town centres that the Governing Body can consider when making allocation

(d)   recommend that Auckland Transport consider if there are types of community activities that can take place on road reserves without impacting the roading network.

(e)    request staff scope out a review of the role of the Governing Body in regional governance within the shared governance model of Auckland Council, taking into considerations the recommendation of the CCO Review.

The following members requested that their dissenting votes be recorded as follows:

Cr A Filipaina against e)

Member R Northey against e)

The following members requested that their abstention be recorded as follows

Cr S Henderson against (b)(i)

Cr R Hills against (b)(iii)

 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Request for further advice or implementation support

Area plans

11.     Local boards requested that the responsibility for adoption of area plans, which is currently allocated to the Governing Body, be assigned to them. This can be done through allocating the responsibility to local boards or through the Governing Body delegating this allocated responsibility to local boards to exercise on their behalf.

12.     Staff have considered this request and advised the JGWP as follows.

·   Area plans are an important tool in council’s spatial planning framework. It is used to strategically plan an area usually for the purpose of seeking and/or supporting changes to the Unitary Plan. The responsibility for the Unitary Plan rests with the Governing Body.

·   Area plans, as a stand-alone non-regulatory tool and decision, appear ‘local’ in nature given their focus on local planning which is a responsibility allocated to local boards.

·   However, area plans also meet the exceptions in section 17(2) of the LGACA: specifically that for these decisions to be effective, they require alignment or integration with other decision-making responsibilities that sit with the Governing Body. These include plan changes and amendments to the Unitary Plan, infrastructure prioritisation and regional investment.

·   During the Waiheke pilot, the Waiheke Local Board sought a delegation to sign off the Waiheke Local Area Plan. This delegation was granted with conditions that included a requirement to ensure the involvement of a member of the Independent Maori Statutory Board. This suggests delegations on a case-by-case basis can be possible and provides an alternative route if a standing delegation is not given to local boards.

13.     The JGWP carefully considered the advice of staff but were not all in agreement with it. Members had strong views about the need to empower local boards in their local planning role and have requested staff to reconsider their advice and to explore the risks and possible risk mitigation of enabling local boards to adopt the plans through a delegation from the Governing Body.

14.     Whilst the practice already ensures high involvement of local boards in the development of these plans, it was the view of the JGWP members that delegating the adoption decision with relevant parameters is more empowering for local boards. JGWP members felt that this would enable local boards to make local planning decisions that are aligned with their local board plan aspirations and other community priorities without requiring further approval from the Governing Body, whose members may not be as familiar with these local priorities.

15.     JGWP members agreed that area plans, while local, often require funding and alignment to other plans that are developed by the Governing Body. Keeping the responsibility and accountability allocated to the Governing Body ensures the decision continues to sit at the right level but that this does not necessarily need to be exercised by the Governing Body on all occasions.

16.     The JGWP have requested advice from staff on how to pursue a Governing Body delegation. Staff will seek to provide further advice to the JGWP. If the JGWP considers recommending a delegation from the Governing Body on this issue, staff will present the request to the Governing Body for consideration. A delegation can be given at any time and it will have immediate effect.

Special liquor licence administration process for notifying local boards

17.     One of the issues raised in the local board feedback is special liquor license applications. On this matter, the request was for clarification that local boards can object, as per the delegation from Governing Body granting the ability to make objections under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012. Elected members perceived this is not being enabled as notifications on these licences are not proactively shared with them in the same way that information about other applications (on, off and club licences) are.

18.     The JGWP has recommended that this be clarified in the policy and request that staff enable notifications to be sent to local board where public consultation is required for special licence applications.

Proposed changes to the Allocated decision-making responsibilities (part c)

Local purpose (drainage) reserves

19.     During discussions with local boards on the scope of the review, many local boards raised concerns about the interpretation of the policy.

20.     An example raised by Upper Harbour Local Board demonstrated the need for clarity, especially in areas where decision-making authority allocated to both governance arms overlap. During the development of the board’s local park management plans, staff had advised that those reserves that are primarily dedicated to stormwater drainage should be treated as part of the stormwater network. This advice appeared to suggest that local boards do not hold any decision-making over a subset of local parks since it is the Governing Body that is responsible for management of the stormwater network.

21.     Through discussions with staff as part of this review, the advice has been revised. Staff accept this is an example of where there is clear overlap in activities and decision-making responsibilities. Staff will need to work closely with local boards to develop protocols that enable decision-making by the Governing Body on stormwater issues to be exercised efficiently and effectively.

22.     The JGWP were supportive of the staff recommendation to clarify that the exercise of decision-making in relation to stormwater network and how it functions must be properly enabled on local parks. This is done by acknowledging that these considerations and decisions about the stormwater network constrains local board decision-making over local parks (or parts of local parks) that have a stormwater drainage function. This clarity will also help staff to understand that the local board continues to retain the decision-making responsibility over all other activities of local parks.

Role of local boards in environmental programmes and grants

23.     Some local boards feel the current policy wording and ways of working does not provide a meaningful role for local boards on regional environmental issues, specifically regional environmental programmes. These local boards have also requested that local boards be enabled to monitor the progress of any locally-delivered projects (funded by regional environmental programmes) through the established work programme reporting mechanism.

24.     Local board input into regional environmental programmes is at the policy and/or programme approval stage. The approved programme direction provides sufficient guidance to staff, acting under delegation from the Governing Body, when developing an implementation plan and prioritising projects for delivery.

25.     At the operational level, where identified priorities and project ideas are to be delivered in local parks or other key locations within the local board area, local board input is sought by staff at workshops. This is to ensure locally delivered projects are tailored to local circumstances. While it is possible to capture this current practice in the policy, this needs to be done in a way that continues to enable relevant local boards to add value to projects without too many administrative requirements. A member of the JGWP also expressed concern about signalling all projects can be tailored to local circumstances as this is not the case.

Other changes

Health and Safety – parameters for decision-making

26.     Council decisions need to take account of Health and Safety considerations, as well as reflecting a shared approach to risk.

27.     Staff advise that Health and Safety considerations should be explicit in the policy to protect the council from liability. The JGWP supports this recommendation and a reference to complying with health and safety legislation and plans has been inserted in the policy.

Issues relating to delegations

28.     The review considered requests for new delegations or additional support to implement delegations given to local boards. Some of these were requests for delegation from Auckland Transport.

29.     The review considered that before recommending or agreeing any new delegation, the delegator, whether it be Governing Body or Auckland Transport, must first weigh the benefits of reflecting local circumstances and preferences (through a delegation) against the importance and benefits of using a single approach in the district (through itself retaining the responsibility, duty, or power concerned).

30.     Staff advised the JGWP to recommend that the Waiheke pilot (part of the Governance Framework Review) which is about to enter another phase, expands to include a trial of delegated decision-making on key issues raised in this review. They include several issues that relate to Auckland Transport, namely street trading and town centre/urban design. Piloting these delegations can help Auckland Transport to identify any practical issues that need to be considered before a formal delegation to all local boards can be given on any of the issues identified.

Other issues

JGWP resolution on role of Governing Body

31.     Some members of the JGWP expressed concerns about what they perceived to be a heavy focus on local board responsibilities.

32.     Both sets of governors were invited to identify issues to be examined in the review. The Governing Body, in workshop discussions, did not identify any major issues that it wanted to review but was open to including any issues raised by local boards. As a result, almost all of the issues raised were suggested by local boards and the majority of them relate to their areas of decision-making responsibility. This may have given the impression of a bias towards examining the role of local boards.

33.     To address this concern, the JGWP requested that staff scope a review of the role of the Governing Body. Staff will provide advice to the JGWP in response to this request at an upcoming meeting.

Escalation process for any disputes relating to the Allocation of decision-making responsibilities for non-regulatory activities

34.     The process for resolving disputes relating to allocation of non-regulatory responsibilities (including disputes over interpretation of the allocation table) will vary depending on the issue at hand. The chart below outlines the basic escalation process.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

35.     This report relates to a policy and does not have any quantifiable climate impacts.

36.     Decisions that are taken, in execution of this policy, will likely have significant climate impacts. However, those impacts will be assessed on a case-by-case basis and appropriate responses will be identified as required.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

37.     Council departments support and implement decisions that are authorised by this policy.

38.     Feedback received to date from some departments reinforces the need for guidance notes to aid interpretation of the allocations in the decision-making policy. This work will be done in consultation with departments.

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

Local impacts and local board views

39.     This report canvasses issues that had been raised by local boards and focuses on those issues that warrant an amendment to the policy.

40.     All other issues raised by local boards in their feedback were canvassed in the staff advice that formed part of the review. This information is available to all local boards.

41.     Staff have also prepared responses to specific issues raised by local boards and have shared this information in a memo.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

42.     There are no decisions being sought in this report that will have a specific impact on Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

43.     There are no financial implications directly arising from the information contained in this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

44.     The are no identified risks other than timeframes. The Governing Body will be adopting this policy in June as part of the Long-term Plan. Local board feedback is requested in early May in order to provide time to collate and present this to the Governing Body for consideration.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

45.     Staff will prepare guidance notes to aid the interpretation of the decision-making policy following its adoption.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Decision making responsibilities policy

165

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Shirley Coutts - Principal Advisor - Governance Strategy

Authorisers

Louise Mason – General Manager, Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

04 May 2021

 

 

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



[1] Please note two submissions were received from St Lukes Environmental Protection Society Incorporated.