Agenda of Governing Body - Thursday, 24 June 2021

Governing Body

24 June 2021

Independent Māori Statutory Board - proposed funding agreement for the 2021/2022 financial year

File No.: CP2021/07533

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To consider the 2021/2022 funding agreement between the Auckland Council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. For the Independent Māori Statutory Board to carry out its purpose, perform its functions and exercise its powers, the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (LGACA) requires Auckland Council to meet the reasonable costs of the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s operations, secretariat, the establishment of committees, and seeking and obtaining advice (Schedule 2 clause 20, subclause 1, LGACA).

3. The Independent Māori Statutory Board has drafted its work plan and proposed budget for the 2021/2022 financial year. It includes projects such as informing the council’s te Tiriti o Waitangi Audit and business as usual costs of the board’s operations such as salaries and board remuneration.

4. Staff have considered the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s proposed funding agreement and are satisfied that the level of total direct funding of $3,025,621 for the 2021/2022 financial year is appropriate and is in line with the parameters agreed in the 10 Year Budget. It is recommended that the funding agreement is approved.

5. It is further recommended that the Governing Body agrees that variations to the funding agreement of no more than $50,000 in the financial year (subject to budget being available to cover the variations) can be agreed by the chief executives of Auckland Council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

6. Auckland Council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board also have a Service Level Agreement which records shared services between the council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board, and support services provided by third parties through the council to the Independent Māori Statutory Board, such as finance, information technology and property.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) approve the 2021/2022 funding agreement between Auckland Council and Independent Māori Statutory Board, which comprises a total direct funding of $3,025,621 (opex).

b) approve that variations to the 2021/2022 funding agreement between Auckland Council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board of no more than $50,000 in the financial year can be agreed between the chief executive of the Auckland Council and the chief executive of the Independent Māori Statutory Board, subject to budget being available to cover the variations.

c) note that following approval of the proposed funding by the Governing Body, the 2021/2022 funding agreement between Auckland Council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board will be prepared and signed by the Mayor and the council’s chief executive and the chair and chief executive of the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

Horopaki

Context

7. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (LGACA) requires Auckland Council to meet the reasonable costs of the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s operations, secretariat, the establishment of committees, and seeking and obtaining advice (Schedule 2, clause 20, subclause 1, LGACA).

2021/2022 Budget Proposal

8. The proposed budget covers costs of the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s operations such as salaries and remuneration, and costs of strategic projects outlined in the work plan. A copy of the draft 2021/2022 Independent Māori Statutory Board funding proposal is appended as Attachment A.

9. Details of the budget proposal for both Independent Māori Statutory Board’s operations and work plan projects are provided in the two tables below, including comparisons with the 2020/2021 financial year and percentage changes.

10. The Independent Māori Statutory Board agreed to receive a nil increase in funding in the previous financial year (2020/2021) in response to the financial pressures on the council caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. The proposed funding of $3.025m for the Independent Māori Statutory Board represents a nil increase in funding from the previous two financial years.

Table 1. Independent Māori Statutory Board Funding 2019/2020 to 2021/2022

	2019/2020	2020/2021	2021/2022 (proposed)
Total direct funding (opex)	$3,025,621	$3,025,621	$3,025,621
Percentage increase from previous year	0.73%	0%	0%

Business as usual expenses

12. The budget prepared by the Independent Māori Statutory Board proposes funding for its business as usual activities. These are the activities and costs that the Independent Māori Statutory Board incurs year-on-year, such as staff costs and board member remuneration.

13. Increases in the proposed funding for business as usual activities and costs are below expected inflation.

14. As required by legislation, an independent review of remuneration for the Independent Māori Statutory Board members is underway. The remuneration of board members will need to be adjusted in line with this review.

15. If the Remuneration Authority determines an increase for elected members’ remuneration within the next six months, the Independent Māori Statutory Board members’ remuneration will be adjusted proportionately.

Table 2. Business as usual and work plan costs

	2021/2022 Proposed ($)
Governance	849,995
Secretariat	1,421,159
Expenses (including audit fees)	119,000
Legal and Planning	110,000
Engagement and Reporting to Māori & Stakeholders	120,000
Engage Māori Expertise for Council Projects/Plans Work Program related to Board’s Strategic Priorities	315,467
Te Tiriti o Waitangi Audit	40,000
IMSB Business Case Review	50,000
Total direct opex funding	3,025,621

Other budgetary considerations – funding held in the council’s budgets

16. In addition to direct funding, the 2020/2021 proposal also includes information on the amount to be held in the council’s budgets for jointly commissioned works.

17. Two projects have been identified as necessary to respond to the impacts of the government’s reform programme that will be relevant to local government. These projects will address Māori representation in Local Government and review of expenditure on Māori Outcomes. These projects have a combined budget of $150,000.

18. By commissioning these works jointly we will avoid likely duplication and therefore provide better value for money.

Table 3. Funding held within the council's budgets with agreed sign off between the council and Independent Māori Statutory Board year on year comparison

	2014/ 2015	2015/ 2016	2016/ 2017	2017/ 2018	2018/ 2019	2019/ 2020	2019/ 2020	2019/ 2020
Funding ($000s)	220.0	131.5	130.0	130.0	130.0	130.0	130.0	150.0

Funding Variations

19. The Independent Māori Statutory Board or the council may initiate a review of the funding agreement by giving written or electronic notice to the other party stating the terms of the review (Schedule 20, clause 2, LGACA).

20. For previous funding agreements, the Governing Body agreed that variations of the funding agreement of no more than $50,000 in the financial year (subject to budget being available to cover variation) could be agreed by the chief executives of Auckland Council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board. This process removes the need to formally negotiate an amendment to the agreement as envisaged by LGACA for amounts of no more than $50,000. It is recommended that the same arrangements be put in place for the 2021/2022 financial year.

Advice

21. The legislation notes that the board and the council must negotiate the agreement in good faith. If agreement is not reached either party may initiate a review of the funding agreement by giving written or electronic notice to the other party stating the terms of the review.

22. Staff recommend that the Governing Body approve the funding sought by the Independent Māori Statutory Board as it is consistent with budget parameters and is appropriate to meet the reasonable costs of the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

23. If the Governing Body considers the funding is not reasonable to meet the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s operations, it could delegate to a political working party to further consider the funding agreement. This option is not recommended, as the level of funding sought by the Independent Māori Statutory Board is no increase from the previous funding agreement.

24. In previous years the Independent Māori Statutory Board have managed their opex costs carefully and their actual expenditure has been consistently lower than budget.

Service Level Agreement – Third Parties

25. Alongside the Funding Agreement, Auckland Council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board are updating the Service Level Agreement (SLA) which records shared services agreed between Auckland Council as a supplier and the Independent Māori Statutory Board as the customer. This will allow the council, where possible, to support the Independent Māori Statutory Board through existing contracts and services, thus reducing the overall cost to the ratepayer.

26. There are no actual payments from the Independent Māori Statutory Board to the council for the services covered in the SLA. However, to meet accounting standards, the budget for the support services provided by third parties to the Independent Māori Statutory Board and paid through the council (property, insurance and telecommunications) will be included as a separate line item in the 2021/2022 Service Level Agreement.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

27. The decision to fund the operational costs of the Independent Māori Statutory Board does not have an impact on direct greenhouse gas emissions and the effects of climate change over the lifetime of these decisions are considered minimal.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

28. The Independent Māori Statutory Board has a statutory role in monitoring the implementation of the council’s plans and strategies that achieves improved outcomes for Māori and ensuring that the council and CCOs act in accordance with statutory provisions referring to te Tiriti o Waitangi.

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

Local impacts and local board views

29. Local board views have not been sought in relation to this matter as the Governing Body is responsible for negotiating the funding agreement with the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

30. However, the Independent Māori Statutory Board work supported by the funding may have outcomes that are relevant to local boards.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31. The annual funding agreement supports the Independent Māori Statutory Board to give effect to its statutory purpose of promoting cultural, economic, environmental, and social issues of significance for Māori in Tamaki Makaurau, and ensuring that the council acts in accordance with statutory provisions referring to te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

32. The costs of funding the Independent Māori Statutory Board will be met through existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

33. If the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s request is seen as excessive the Governing Body may request staff initiate a review of the funding request from the Independent Māori Statutory Board. Staff see this as low risk because the funding is required by legislation, and there is no increase in funding from previous years.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

34. Following approval of the funding by the Governing Body, the 2021/2022 funding agreement between Auckland Council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board will be signed by the Mayor and the council’s chief executive, and the Independent Māori Statutory Board chair and chief executive.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	2021-2022 Draft Independent Māori Statutory Board funding agreement	17

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

James Stephens - Senior Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Jim Stabback - Chief Executive

Governing Body

24 June 2021

2021-2022 Funding Agreement (FY22)

between

Auckland Council

and

The Independent Māori Statutory Board

1.0 Signatories and Period of Agreement

The Funding Agreement covers the period from 1 July 2021 to 30 June 2022.

Agreement for any subsequent annual periods needs to be reached "within a time that enables the Board to continue to carry out its purpose without interruption." This means prior to 30 June in any year but every attempt will be made to align with the Council's annual planning cycles.

Signatories to the agreement:

On behalf of: Independent Māori Statutory Board:

Name: David Taipari	Name: Leesah Murray
Title: Chairman	Title: Chief Executive
Date:	Date

On behalf of: Auckland Council:

Name: Phil Goff	Name: Jim Stabback
Title: Mayor	Title: Chief Executive Officer
Date:	Date:

2.0 Summary

The purpose of the Board is as follows:

Assist the Auckland Council to make decisions, perform functions and exercise powers by:

(a) Promoting cultural, economic, environmental and social issues of significance for mana whenua groups and mātāwaka of Tāmaki Makaurau; and

(b) Ensuring the Council acts in accordance with statutory provisions referring to the Treaty of Waitangi.

The general and specific functions include:

(a) to sit as members on each of the Auckland Council’s committees that deal with the management and stewardship of natural and physical resources;

(b) to keep the Schedule of Issues of Significance to mana whenua and mātāwaka of Tāmaki Makaurau up to date;

(d) to work with the Auckland Council on the design and execution of documents and processes to implement the Council’s statutory responsibilities towards mana whenua groups and mātāwaka of Tāmaki Makaurau; and

(e) to meet with the Council to discuss the Board’s performance of its functions.

3.0 Overview of Work Plan

The key tasks to ensure that the Board is able to fulfil its statutory obligations (outlined above) for this period includes the following:

· Annual review of the Board’s remuneration as required by the legislation;

· Engaging and reporting to mana whenua and mātāwaka;

· Reviewing and refining processes by which the Secretariat will support the Board, provide information and support to Board members to effectively participate on Council Committees;

· Engaging specialist resources to provide expert advice on the prioritisation and implementation of He Waka Kōtuia, Te Tiriti o Waitangi Audit recommendations and the Schedule of Issues of Significance/Māori Plan;

· Embedding an understanding and use of the Schedule of Issues of Significance/Māori Plan and the Māori Report;

· Promoting the Māori Values Reports and providing reports on progress of the Māori Plan’s outcome measurements and indicators;

· Engaging specialist resources to provide expert advice on:

o Advising on the implementation, use and monitoring of the Māori provisions in the Auckland Council Group Spatial Plans and strategies such as Auckland Unitary Plan and any subsidiary plans including council’s Climate Change Plan;

o Monitoring and advising on the Auckland Plan implementation

o Monitoring the review and implementation of the Long-term Plan;

o Māori representation at local government and understand how the Board can best promote Māori representation. This includes a piece of work on Māori Wards ahead of the 2025 local election;

o An expenditure review focused on Māori outcomes to ensure the process, application and approval aligns to the annual Māori outcomes plan while identifying areas for improvement to address the year-on-year underspend.

· Ensuring there are provisions and resourcing to achieve Māori outcomes across the plans, particularly in the Long-term Plan 2021-2031;

· Monitoring and reviewing the delivery, measurement and reporting of Māori outcomes across all key Council policies and plans;

· Monitoring and advising on the Council Group Māori responsiveness as expressed through Council’s Te Tiriti o Waitangi Audit Response work programme 2018-2020 and the Māori Outcomes portfolio of work;

· Monitoring the development and implementation of council’s Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau framework.

· Monitoring and reporting on council’s programme of scheduling sites of significance, cultural landscapes and sites of value;

· Monitoring of the CCO’s respective Statements of Intent, plans and their Māori Outcomes Framework, specifically their obligations with respect to statutory provisions referring to the Treaty of Waitangi and achieving Māori outcomes;

· The maintenance of relationships with mana whenua, mātāwaka, the Mayor and his officials, Council Executive and Senior Leadership, CCOs, Local Boards and Central Government Agencies;

· Developing and producing key communication and education resources and tools to assist with effective communication of the Board’s purpose and function;

· Review of the Board’s annual Strategic Work Priorities; and

· Providing corporate and administrative services to the Board and Secretariat.

4.0 Details on the Work Plan

The Auckland Plan, Long-term Plan and Auckland Unitary Plan have high aspirations for achieving Māori outcomes and it is crucial that the Auckland Council family build up the capability and capacity to deliver on "A Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world providing opportunities for all."

The Board has a pragmatic and focused interest in Council's implementation of these plans via Ngā Mātārae including the Response Programme to Te Tiriti o Waitangi. In addition, it is important that the delivery arms of Auckland Council Group, particularly the CCOs, incorporate aspects in their business as usual to deliver infrastructure and services to Māori that achieve Māori outcomes as set out in the Auckland Plan/ LTP and subsidiary plans. It is important that its organisational systems and culture embed good practice in Treaty partnership and adequate resourcing to achieve Māori outcomes that benefit all Aucklanders as a matter of priority.

The Act is specific in requiring the Board to appoint a maximum of two members to each Council Committee that deals with the management and stewardship of natural and physical resources. The Board may appoint members to other Committees as requested by the Council.

The Board, with the Council’s agreement, has appointed members of the Board to participate fully on Council's Committees of the Whole and other committees. The Chair of the Board is an Ex-officio on the Appointments and Performance Review Committee and the Audit and Risk Committee.

Effective participation by Board members on Council Committees is essential to advance the interests of Māori.

The Board requires advice from both a Māori worldview and mainstream perspective independent of council officials to enable them to make informed decisions on Council committees. The Secretariat’s main role is to support and assist the Board, to provide:

· an overview of the committee’s existing and future work programme and alert the Board members to pending agenda items that are relevant to the issues of significance to Māori (mana whenua and mātāwaka) of Tāmaki Makaurau;

· alert the Board members to critical workshops and provide briefings;

· review specific committee papers and provide a written and or verbal brief on issues of importance to the Board members (referring to the Issues of Significance, He Waka Kōtuia - Te Tiriti o Waitangi Audit and Māori Plan and linking to relevant council plans and work programmes);

· advice on issues and drafting of alternative positions and recommendations where there is concern or gaps with council’s position and recommendation;

· seek further information and clarification from Council officers on behalf of the Board member(s);

· follow-up with Council to ensure that resolutions and actions agreed with Council are implemented; and

· attend committee meetings and panels for specific items as required.

The level and type of resource required will be assessed and monitored through the Board's ongoing strategic planning process including consultation with its constituency and through an assessment of how the Council is performing against Māori outcomes, implementation of the He Waka Kōtuia - Te Tiriti o Waitangi Audit recommendations and Schedule of Issues of Significance/ Māori Plan. Where this resource cannot be sourced internally, or independence is required, then it will be sourced externally.

Engagement and Reporting to Māori

This part of the work plan covers both the means by which the Council will communicate and engage with Māori and also the way that the Board will engage and report to Māori.

Maintaining direct relationships with the large number of marae, community groups and organisations is a significant task and one that must be done well. This also includes the management of a website, the production of education and training tools explaining the Board’s purpose and functions, strategic priorities and regular communications on social media platforms.

Maintenance of Key Relationships

To be effective, the Board has established a range of relationships. This includes relationships with the Mayor, Councillors, Local Boards, CCOs and central government departments. Meetings with CCOs and central government personnel is an on-going priority.

Specialist Advisors

The Board will utilise the input of skilled advisors and will include governance and prudential control responsibilities, and specialist advice that is needed to support the Board in carrying out its purpose and performing its functions, including its membership of Council Committees.

A specialist advisor will be contracted to the Board to provide a technical report on how the Board can advance Māori representation at local government level. With the introduction of Māori Wards in 2025, it is important that the Board ensure there are multiple avenues that Māori can participate in local government. This project is an extraordinary piece of work, that should be viewed as a one-off project in FY22.

Council's Performance with respect to the Treaty of Waitangi and Council’s statutory obligations to Māori

One part of the Board’s purpose is to assist the Council by ensuring that the Council acts in accordance with statutory provisions referring to the Treaty. The Board sees this role as one of active monitoring. The Board is also charged with working with the Council on its documents and processes to implement the Council’s statutory responsibilities to Māori.

The third Te Tiriti o Waitangi Audit was received by the Board in August 2018 resolution number IMSB/2018/34. The Board agreed with council that Te Tiriti o Waitangi Audits would be conducted every 3 years. The next is due to be completed by June 2021 and is called He Waka Kōtuia.

Independent assessment of Te Toa Takitini (Māori outcomes portfolio)

In 2017, PWC were contracted by the Board to complete an independent assessment of Te Toa Takitini projects delivered by ATEED, Auckland Transport and Panuku to achieve Māori outcomes for their respective Financial Year 2015/16; and to assess the quality of their systems, their prioritisation process of projects, project management that includes budgets to meet their respective milestones, statement of intent objectives and KPIs for Māori outcomes.

By way of background, in December 2013, the Board contracted KPMG to conduct an independent assessment of expenditure incurred Auckland Council to achieve Māori outcomes in their Financial Year 2012/13 accounts.

This independent assessment resulted from the Board’s concern that the council had a limited approach to allocate resources to Māori outcomes projects. Furthermore, the consistency of resource allocation and level of reporting at that time made it difficult to measure and report on the projects and activities being undertaken by the council.

This follow-up independent assessment completed in 2017 provided the Board with constructive recommendations to advocate to council and CCOs to improve their systems and processes for identifying transformational interventions to deliver, measure and report on their projects resulting in quality Māori outcomes and prudent use of rate payers’ funds.

The Board will continue to do on-going monitoring of how the council implements recommendations from the expenditure reviews and may also prepare updated business cases to inform council’s Māori outcomes for the Long-Term Plan.

As an extraordinary project for FY22, the Board will engage a professional services consultancy group to carry out an expenditure review on the Māori Outcomes portfolio and spend for FY21. Year on year, the Māori Outcomes portfolio is underspent, and the Board would like to look for areas of improvements to ensure this targeted spend is making it to the anticipated Māori projects. This project has been signaled as a separate one-off spend for FY22.

Advocating for Council to Implement the Schedule of Issues of Significance/ Māori Plan in Tāmaki Makaurau

The focus of this work-stream is to continue to use the Schedule of Issues /Māori Plan and the Māori Report as an advocating tool at Council committee level and as a ‘terms of reference to identify relevant actions and measure whether positive change actually occurs for Māori via council programmes and projects.

The successful launch of the Māori Report in November 2016 has provided the Board with an excellent platform to continue to analyse statistics and data that generate the truth about Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau. This information is invaluable and essential to inform council and central government agencies’ planning, processes and practices to ensure that rates and taxpayers contributions are used prudently to achieve Māori outcomes at an optimal level and are sustainable. The Māori Report has created national and international attention due to the leadership and collaborative approach from the Board, Māori, council and central government agencies.

The Board has completed and launched the Māori values reports that provide data relevant to specific values that will assist council to understand how well Māori are doing in a Te Ao Māori context.

The high-level steps are as follows:

· The Board and the Council will work to align the Issues of Significance actions/Māori Plan indicators with the Council policies and action plans within the Council;

· The Board and the Council will work on improving the monitoring, and embedding performance management processes for the Council and other agencies on Māori responsiveness actions, measurement and reporting on Māori outcomes;

· A budget for specialist advice has been provided to enable the Board to work with council to include a Māori perspective, outcomes and actions into its plans, policies and projects; and

· The council will ensure through the implementation of the Long-term Plan and business as usual that relevant managers continue to identify within their project budgets sufficient resources to obtain appropriate expertise to address and deliver Māori outcomes. This appropriately recognises that implementation is primarily the council’s role.

5.0 Work Plan Resourcing by the Secretariat

Based on a functional breakdown, the Board Secretariat is deployed as follows:

Function	Description	Resourcing
Monitoring and Reporting	To monitor and report on the Council’s performance in meeting its obligations under the Treaty and relevant legislation; Māori outcomes and actions addressing Issues of Significance /Māori Plan indicators	Part of policy team internal resource and external consultancy resources as and when required
Monitoring and Evaluation of Māori Wellbeing (Māori Plan and Reports)	To monitor and report on wellbeing indicators from the Māori Plan and Reports.	Part of an internal resource supported by data experts to assess indicators and datasets and assist in producing reports.
Support to the Board in Committees	To prepare advice and briefing; and liaise with council officers as required	Part of Policy team internal resource
Plans	To provide input to review and implementation of key plans of the Council including Auckland Plan, Long- term Plan, Annual Budgets CCO SOIs, Unitary Plan, Structure Plans and Development Plans	Policy team for these key documents and strategic plans. It is beneficial to get involved at an early stage of their review and implementation and stay involved to ensure knowledge is retained by the council
Policies	To provide input to key policies of the Council including policies covering infrastructure, services and regulatory and bylaws.	Dedicated policy team internal resources
Submissions	To provide information to mana whenua and mātāwaka in respect of submissions made and/or to be made by the Council to central government, proposed legislation, boards of enquiry and reviews	Utilise one of the dedicated resources noted above where area of expertise overlaps, otherwise contract in external expertise as and when required
Relationships and public Relations	To develop and maintain relationships with mana whenua and mātāwaka, Governing Body, CCOs, Local Boards, and Central Government including state sector	Part of the internal project management resources including the Senior Communications Manager, the Chief Executive Officer supplemented by advisors for specific areas of expertise
Promotion and Engagement	To promote issues of significance for Māori to the Council and to external agencies	Key part of senior communications manager’s role and supplemented by advisors for specific areas of expertise

6 .0 Budget 2020/2021:

The Independent Māori Statutory Board has maintained the same budget as FY21 and FY20, however has requested a one-off $150k for two extraordinary projects as outlined in Note 2.

		FY22	FY21	FY20
	Board remuneration and expenses (Note 1)	849,995	849,995	833,328
	Salaries	1,421,159	1,421,159	1,393,293
	Expenses (including audit fees)	119,000	119,000	119,000
	Legal, Planning experts for monitoring Māori Provisions- in plans	110,000	110,000	120,000
	Communications includes website, newsletters, brochures, translations, engagement and reporting to Māori and stakeholders	120,000	120,000	140,000
	Housing and Marae Development, Climate Change, Relationship Agreements, Rangatahi, Sites of Significance and Cultural Landscapes, Māori Identity, Data Strategy Implementation Environmental management and water quality.	315,467	270,000	350,000
	Monitoring Te Tiriti o Waitangi Audit and continuous improvement project	40,000	85,467	40,000
	IMSB Business Case Review	50,000	50,000	30,000
TOTAL DIRECT OPEX FUNDING		3,025,621	3,025,621	3,025,621
Additional project work	Note 2: includes an additional $150K for two extraordinary projects	$150,000	$130,000	$130,000

Note: 1 Board remuneration and expenses were completed as part of a remuneration review by Strategic Pay. This funding agreement is subject to change. The Board members remuneration will need to be adjusted in accordance with what the Remuneration Authority determines in future including the travel needs of board members appointed to the IMSB.

Note: 2 Two extraordinary projects were approved by the Board in April 2021 to further work on Māori representation in local government and also carry out an expenditure review on the Māori Outcomes portfolio. Both projects are one-off for FY22.

Governing Body

24 June 2021

Decision-making responsibilities of Auckland Council's Governing Body and local boards

File No.: CP2021/07871

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the Decision-making responsibilities of Auckland Council’s Governing Body and Local Boards 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 (policy) that is published in each long-term plan and annual plan.

3. The policy also records most standing 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 for context.

4. An internal review of the policy was undertaken in early 2021 and considered by the Joint Governance Working Party (JGWP) at their meeting on 22 March 2021. The staff report to the JGWP outlined some proposed changes to the policy and recommendations on how to take forward other issues that were raised but which do not lend themselves to a policy amendment at this time.

5. The amendments made to the draft policy takes forward the recommendations of the review as endorsed by the JGWP. The amendments are largely non-substantive and have been highlighted in Attachment A and discussed in detail in this report.

6. There were various issues raised during the review which relate to supporting responsibilities that have been correctly allocated. These do not require amendments to the policy and can be addressed in other ways. The non-regulatory activities cover a large part of council’s work however the allocation is written in high level policy detail which means it often requires interpretation. These can be addressed through the production of guidance notes to enable staff and elected members to better understand its intended application and to apply it consistently.

7. Requests for delegations require further discussions with subject matter experts who need to assess risks, opportunities, and implications such as resourcing, before a delegation should be made. Except for a clarification to the scope of an existing delegation, staff have recommended piloting requests for delegations before these are considered further. Other requests such as exploring a delegation to local boards to approve area plans will be referred to the Planning Committee to consider.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) approve the Decision-making Responsibilities of Auckland Council’s Governing Body and Local Boards policy for inclusion in the long-term plan

b) confirm the allocation of decision-making responsibilities for non-regulatory activities of Auckland Council contained in the Decision-making Responsibilities of Auckland Council’s Governing Body and Local Boards policy (Attachment A of the agenda report)

c) refer the request for a standing delegation to approve area plans to the Planning Committee and invite the committee to make an appropriate recommendation to the Governing Body as to whether this responsibility should be delegated to local boards including with conditions

d) agree that the scope of the existing delegation to local boards to make objections to liquor licensing applications be clarified to include on, off, club and special licences

e) endorse the recommendation of the Joint Governance Working Party to refer delegation requests relating to transport and town centres to be considered in the next phase of the Waiheke pilot

f) note that the Decision-making Responsibilities of Auckland Council’s Governing Body and Local Boards policy is updated annually and refer any issues relating to the Governing Body responsibilities to the next review.

Horopaki

Context

8. 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 (Act)

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

· delegations - regulatory and/or non-regulatory responsibilities that rests with another but delegated to be exercised by someone else. The Governing Body has delegated some of its responsibilities to local boards.

9. A summary of all the decision-making responsibilities from the above sources are recorded in the policy. For completeness and context, the policy summarises statutory responsibilities and is also used as a register of key standing delegations which have been given by the Governing Body to local boards. However, its primary purpose is to set out and make decisions on the allocation of non-regulatory decision-making responsibilities, a task that sits with the Governing Body. The allocation is required to be included in the long-term plan and annual plans.

Review of the Decision-making Responsibilities Policy

10. In early 2021, staff reviewed the existing policy and took a series of recommendations to the JGWP. The scope of the review was limited to reviewing issues in implementation or interpretation that had already been identified by elected members and staff in discussions with the Governing Body and local boards in late 2020.

11. In their November 2020 workshop, the Governing Body gave some general guidance to staff but did not identify any substantive issues to include in the review. They indicated that any new allocations or delegations should be cognisant of funding and to have regard to other work including the Governance Framework Review - Equity of Service Levels project, which may impact on funding of assigned responsibilities.

Scope and staff assessment

12. The tables below provide a summary of the key issues canvassed during the review. The table also outlines staff recommendations on the issues as presented to the Joint Governance Working Party at their meeting in March 2021.

13. Not every issue canvassed during the review lent itself to a substantive change in the policy. Some of the issues raised have arisen from interpretation and practices that may be inconsistent with the intention of the allocations or a delegation – these require only clarifications. Others were requests for additional and/or delegated decision-making which cannot be granted without further work to identify how such a delegation can work and what parameters, if any, are required to be stipulated in the delegation. Other matters raised are more to do with resourcing and support than the policy. Staff recommendations include how council can respond to these requests outside of the policy.

14. Issues relating to non-regulatory activities that are allocated to local boards and the Governing Body were assessed using the principles in section 17(2) of the Act.

“Section 17(2) | The principles are—

a) decision-making responsibility for a non-regulatory activity of the Auckland Council should be exercised by its local boards unless paragraph (b) applies:

b) decision-making responsibility for a non-regulatory activity of the Auckland Council should be exercised by its governing body if the nature of the activity is such that decision making on an Auckland-wide basis will better promote the well-being of the communities across Auckland because—

i. the impact of the decision will extend beyond a single local board area; or

ii. effective decision making will require alignment or integration with other decisions that are the responsibility of the governing body; or

iii. the benefits of a consistent or co-ordinated approach across Auckland will outweigh the benefits of reflecting the diverse needs and preferences of the communities within each local board area.”

Issues and recommendations: Allocation of decision-making for non-regulatory activities

15. Key issues relating to existing and potential new allocations that were canvassed during the review are:

	Issue	Recommendation
1	Area plans – request to allocate to local boards	Keep allocation with Governing Body Amend policy to clarify the rationale for the allocation JGWP request to explore a delegation to local boards
2	Local purpose drainage reserves governance responsibilities	Amend policy: clarify shared decision-making responsibilities by inserting explanatory note
3	Role of local boards in regional environmental programmes and projects	Amend policy: clarify local board role by inserting explanatory note - local boards can input and tailor projects, in addition to input at policy and programme level
4	Local procurement – request for increased decision-making by local boards	No policy amendment required Local procurement decisions are already allocated to local boards with some exceptions where significant efficiencies can be gained by procuring on a larger scale or a coordinated basis Issues may be operational so staff will seek to clarify the process in guidance notes (to be developed)
5	Placemaking activities within regional programmes	No policy amendment required at this time Several improvements are being planned through the CCO (Council Controlled Organisations) Review implementation that should help local boards and CCOs work together better and achieve clarity in roles and activities. Await outcome of these initiatives before seeking to refine and make changes to the policy Refer to Waiheke pilot next phase for consideration
6	Naming of parks and open spaces vested in and managed by CCOs	No policy amendment required Governing Body and local boards already have an allocation to name parks that are owned by Auckland Council. Any land vested in CCOs is best considered on a case-by-case basis
7	Town centres – define the types of responsibilities involved	No policy amendment required Refer to Waiheke pilot next phase to identify the types of responsibilities that Auckland Council (and Auckland Transport) should have in relation to town centres before expanding allocations to local boards
8	Allocate (or delegate) decisions on prioritisation of major upgrades to existing parks and sports fields	No policy amendment required Allocating of funding for major upgrades is a responsibility that should remain allocated to the Governing Body as it is responsible for overall financial management of the council The process for local board input and role, if not clear, can be clarified in guidance notes
9	Commercial leases on local reserves	No policy amendment required Local boards are responsible for the uses of local facilities, local parks and reserves including all leases Process to be clarified in guidance notes
10	Social housing – request to allocate to local boards	No policy amendment required Council’s social housing portfolio is being managed by a joint venture with oversight by the Governing Body. A consistent coordinated approach is required
11	Open cemeteries - request to allocate to local boards	No policy amendment required A consistent coordinated approach is required to managing these assets as impact of decisions extend beyond local board areas that they are located in
12	Request for local boards to be able to make formal submissions to government on legislation	No policy amendment required Sufficient exception already in the policy ie local boards can submit on legislation where it specifically relates to their local board area
13	Decision-making relating to regional parks maintenance and development	No policy amendment required Decision-making on regional parks is allocated to Governing Body as it meets exceptions in Sec 17(2). The main issue is a desire for local parks and regional parks teams to work collaboratively in local board areas where regional parks are located. This can be addressed at the operational level
14	Request for increased resources to support local boards to develop and deliver local economic development plans	No policy amendment required Recommend that the Governing Body note the request for resourcing

Issues and recommendations: Delegations to local boards

16. The following are issues relating to existing and potential delegations that were canvassed during the review and includes new issues raised in the most recent local board feedback.

	Issue	Recommendation
15	Input into notification decisions for resource consent applications (including plan changes etc) - Request to increase decision-making	Existing delegation is sufficient Local boards have been delegated input into notification decisions. Recommend elected members refer to An overview of the local board role in council’s planning processes (Kura Kawana training) for an explanation on rationale for the limited involvement of local boards and elected members in general
16	Request for support for local boards to exercise delegated responsibility to make disposal decisions in accordance with the Service property optimisation approach	Existing delegation is sufficient Recommend that the Governing Body note the request for resourcing
17	Making objections to liquor licensing applications	Requires clarification of scope of existing delegation
18	Area plans – request to delegate from Governing Body to local boards	Refer to Planning Committee to make a recommendation to the Governing Body (discussed below)
19	Permits to film on parks - request from Albert-Eden Local Board to delegate to local boards	Does not require a delegation Permitting is a regulatory activity which rests with the Governing Body and delegated to staff who are guided by the relevant bylaw. It is not available to allocate to local boards nor do we support a delegation as it would be inconsistent with general practice However, local boards can approve or decline the use of a local park for filming through its landowner approval process
20	Request Auckland Transport to consider some delegations to local boards for street trading, decisions on non-transport activities on road reserves and placemaking and urban design decisions	Include in the next phase of the Waiheke pilot Outcome of a trial can inform a delegation, if appropriate

Recommendations by the Joint Governance Working Party

17. The JGWP carefully considered the issues that were in scope for the review as well as the staff advice, and resolved as follows:

23 March 2021 | 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.

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

18. Following on from the JGWP’s review in March 2021, staff made amendments to the existing policy and sought local board endorsement. The feedback from all 21 local boards is included in Attachment B.

19. Eighteen local boards have either unconditionally or conditionally endorsed the draft policy contained in Attachment A. While they did not specifically endorse the draft policy in their resolutions, the remaining three local boards (Albert-Eden, Devonport-Takapuna and Waitākere Ranges local boards) all endorsed the JGWP’s recommendations on which the amendments in the policy and staff recommendations in this report are based.

20. Some local boards used the opportunity to give feedback to restate some of the issues they had raised in their earlier feedback to the JGWP and which have already been canvassed during the review. One local board gave some additional feedback.

21. In its recent feedback in May 2021 the Kaipātiki Local Board has requested Auckland Transport to delegate decision-making over unformed paper roads to the local board, with appropriate conditions. Further, they also requested that they be considered if the scope of the Waiheke Pilot gets broadened. This request recognises that some trials may be appropriate in other parts of the region. The relevant resolutions will be sent to the project manager of the Waiheke pilot for his consideration.

Key changes to the policy

Area plans allocation

22. Local boards had requested that the responsibility for adopting area plans, 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 responsibility to local boards if it should decide to allocate it to itself.

23. As part of the review, staff had advised the JGWP that:

· The adoption of area plans is considered a non-regulatory activity and therefore must be allocated between the Governing Body and local boards under section 17.

· Area plans appear very ‘local’ in nature given its focus on local planning, which is otherwise a responsibility allocated to local boards

· However, area plans are also a tool used in council’s spatial planning framework. They are used to strategically plan an area usually for the purpose of seeking and/or supporting changes to our regulatory planning framework (Unitary Plan). The responsibility for the Unitary Plan and regulatory decisions rests with the Governing Body.

· During the Waiheke pilot, the Waiheke Local Board sought a delegation to sign off the Waiheke Local Area Plan. This delegation was granted with some conditions after careful consideration by the Governing Body.

24. Staff considered that allocating area plans to the Governing Body would be consistent with the exceptions in section 17(2). These decisions require alignment and integration with Governing Body decisions on funding, infrastructure planning and spatial planning. There is no legal impediment to the Governing Body considering delegating this power to local boards on a case-by-case basis in the future, as it has done for Waiheke.

25. The JGWP carefully considered the advice of staff but had strong views about the need to empower local boards in their local planning role. They accepted that the overall responsibility should sit with the Governing Body but considered that if it is possible for the Governing Body to delegate on a case-by-case basis then a standing delegation should also be able to be given. They requested staff to explore the risks and possible risk mitigation for a standing delegating to local boards (from the Governing Body) including conditions, if any, that may need to be specified to ensure the views and direction of the Governing Body is considered when/if a local board exercises any such delegation.

26. Before agreeing any new delegation, the Governing Body (as the delegator) must 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).

27. Staff recommend that the Governing Body, through its Planning Committee consider this issue separately and at an appropriate time before making an informed decision on the request for a delegation. It is recommended this matter is deferred, given that the current workload of the Governing Body is high while finalising the long-term plan. A delegation can be made at any time and will take immediate effect.

Clarification of responsibilities over local purpose (drainage) reserves

28. The JGWP were supportive of the staff recommendation to clarify this matter through the insertion of an explanatory note. The note explains that 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 but that they retain the decision-making responsibility over all other activities of local parks.

Clarification of role of local boards in environmental programmes and grants

29. Currently, local board input into regional environmental programmes is typically sought for at the policy and/or programme approval decision stage. Local boards desire more input into project decisions, both selection of projects to prioritise in implementation (e.g. key locations) and design.

30. Staff have considered that the approved programme direction provides sufficient guidance to staff, acting under delegation from the Governing Body, when developing the implementation plan and selecting the locations for ecological projects.

31. However, once ecological locations and projects have been identified, in line with the programme direction, local board involvement is appropriate and expected where these projects are to be delivered in local parks, other key locations within the local board area and/or involving the local community.

32. Some members of the JGWP were concerned with potential delays to identified and funded projects should the input and tailoring role of local boards require formal decision-making. Given the role of local boards is to input and assist in tailoring projects, and to ensure progress is not held up by meetings and reporting requirements, staff recommend using local board workshops to seek input from local boards, where projects are identified in their area.

33. An explanatory note is proposed to be inserted into the policy to clarify this requirement.

Clarification of statutory responsibilities

34. Health and safety considerations are a key factor to be considered in decisions taken by council. The council needs to have a shared approach to risk, and decisions taken should reflect consideration of this approach.

35. A note referencing the need to comply with requirements of health and safety legislation and plans has been inserted in the draft policy.

36. Another matter that has been clarified in the draft policy is responsibilities in relation to disposals. On 28 September 2017, the Governing Body delegated final decisions on local asset disposal and reinvestment to local boards, providing all policy criteria have been met. (GB/2017/117). This delegation was incorrectly entered into the policy as an allocated responsibility and has now been corrected by listing it as a delegation.

37. To ensure clarity and provide context for this delegation, a note has been inserted to clarify that the overall decision-making responsibility for disposals is directly conferred on the Governing Body as part of its responsibilities to establish and maintain capacity of service and facilities (including local activities) and decision making in relation to financial management of the Council (section 15 Local Government Act 2002).

Clarification of scope of existing delegation to local boards: making objects to liquor licensing applications

38. Local boards sought clarification that special liquor license applications are included in the scope of the existing delegation from Governing Body which grants them the ability to make objections under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 and if included, that administrative support be enabled so that they can be notified of these types of applications.

39. Staff have ascertained that the Governing Body intended to delegate the ability to object to any application (on, off, club and special licence) that is publicly notified. The issue here is simply to do with administrative processes supporting notification to local boards.

40. To ensure clarity a note has been inserted in the policy to clarify that the scope of this delegation and staff have been asked to ensure notifications for special licence applications that are publicly notified are sent to local boards.

Issues to consider as part of Waiheke Pilot Phase 2

41. With regards to requests for delegations that were raised during the review, most of which relate to issues that CCOs are also working on, staff recommend that more work be undertaken and led by subject matter experts on those issues, in order to inform any recommendation to delegate.

42. The Waiheke pilot (part of the Governance Framework Review) will be continuing and likely to put more focus on trialling extended decision-making. This presents an opportunity to trial the issues raised in this review.

43. The JGWP have recommended that the following issues be considered in the scope of the next phase of the Waiheke pilot:

(a) street trading for roads and beaches - potential delegation from Auckland Transport

(b) delegating placemaking and urban design decisions along the road corridor – potential delegation from Auckland Transport

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

(d) identifying decision-making elements in relation to town centres – to inform an expanded allocation to local board

Request relating to responsibilities of the Governing Body

44. The JGWP made an additional request to staff to scope a review of the role of the governing body. This appeared to have been based on a perception that the current review had focused exclusively on refining local board decision-making, and there was little focus on areas of responsibility allocated to local boards.

45. The annual review and update of the policy is the appropriate forum to explore this issue as the policy covers both local boards and the Governing Body’s areas of responsibilities. The next review of this policy during the preparation of the next Annual Budget, in 2022.

46. Even if such a review were to take place outside of the annual reviews of the policy, there are several reviews and initiatives that are underway currently that are relevant to discussions about responsibilities and the governance model. These include the review of the role of local government, water and Resource Management Act reforms, CCO Review implementation, the implementation of the Governance Framework Review which is due for evaluation and the Waiheke pilot. A review of the mechanics of the Auckland Governance model would follow, rather than lead these initiatives.

47. Staff will provide the scoping advice and recommendations directly to the JGWP.

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

48. Local boards requested some clarity regarding the process for escalating and resolving genuine complaints about the allocation table, including where there are disputes over its interpretation.

49. The basic escalation process outlined below is intended to be resolution focused and will vary depending on the issue at hand.

50. Two local boards have requested further details on timeframes and how the process will function, and one local board has requested the ability to give additional input. Staff will work on refining this process for inclusion in guidance notes to be developed with the guidance of the JWGP.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

51. This report relates to a policy and does not have any quantifiable climate impacts. They relate to the allocation of decision-making responsibility.

52. Decisions that are taken, in execution of this policy, may have significant climate impacts. However, those impacts will be assessed on a case-by-case basis and relevant information on those climate impacts will be considered as part of reporting and decision-making processes.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

53. The relevant departments were consulted and gave input that informed the staff recommendations during the review. These included Plans and Places, Infrastructure and Environmental Services, Alcohol Licensing team and others.

54. Staff have taken care to refer issues relating to responsibilities that rest with CCOs to be piloted so that an informed recommendation for delegating responsibilities can be made to CCOs, if appropriate.

55. The feedback includes request for increased operational support in two key areas that the local boards feel they are not well supported on. These are local economic development and service optimisation decisions. Currently the subject matter expertise is provided by CCOs – Auckland Unlimited for economic development issues and Eke Panuku for service optimisation decisions.

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

Local impacts and local board views

56. This majority of issues canvassed during the review were raised by local boards. Staff will prepare responses to specific issues raised by local boards and will share it in due time.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

59. The are no identified risks other than timeframes. The policy needs to be adopted as part of the long-term plan in June 2021.

60. Other recommendations from the review include referral of issues to other workstreams and preparation of guidance notes to support clarity and understanding of the allocations. Timeframes for these other workstreams are not known however, the policy will be reviewed again in 2022 and any outstanding issues can be picked up then.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

61. Staff will prepare guidance notes to assist elected members and staff in understanding the different elements of the policy. This was scheduled to be part of the JGWP’s work but had been delayed. When ready, staff will take the guidance notes to local boards for feedback, and then to the JGWP for recommendation to the Governing Body for endorsement.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Decision-making Responsibilities Policy	39
b ⇩	Local board feedback May 2021	53

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Shirley Coutts - Principal Advisor - Governance Strategy

Authorisers

Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Jim Stabback - Chief Executive

Governing Body

24 June 2021

Proposed new Navigation Bylaw: Bylaw Panel report

File No.: CP2021/08086

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the proposed new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-Rohe Urungi Āhuru / Auckland Council Navigation Bylaw 2021 and associated controls.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable a decision on whether to adopt the proposed new Navigation Bylaw and associated controls, an appointed Bylaw Panel has deliberated and made recommendations on public feedback to a proposal and on local board and Maritime New Zealand views.

3. The proposed new Bylaw continues to regulate the use of Auckland’s navigable waters (for example by regulating recreational vessels, water skiing, swimmers, divers, ferries and cargo vessels) to help ensure maritime safety and minimise the risk of accidents, nuisance and damage.

4. The Governing Body adopted the proposal for public consultation on 13 October 2020. Feedback was received from 242 people and organisations.

5. The Bylaw Panel recommends the Governing Body adopt the proposal with amendments in response to matters raised (Attachments A and B). Taking this approach will further ensure maritime safety and minimise risk of accidents, nuisance and damage on Auckland’s navigable waters. Key amendments include:

· amending Proposal 1 to retain the current 12 knot speed limit in the Waitematā Harbour Restricted Speed Zone in Map 7.0

· adding further related information about existing rules in other legislation that protect marine life, marine reserves and birdlife in Clause 8

· amending Proposal 2 to require a Very High Frequency (VHF) radio to be carried on vessels operating in the vicinity of a harbour entrance bar and adding other examples of forms of communication to be carried on a vessel in Clause 34(1)(c) and (d).

· clarify the intention of the Bylaw to allow for the use of a mooring by other vessels and the transfer of a mooring licence in clause 38 as a condition of the licence under Part 3.

· technical and editorial amendments in response to feedback from the Director of Maritime New Zealand and to correct drafting errors.

6. There is a negative perception risk if people or organisations who provided feedback do not feel that their views were addressed. This can be mitigated by communicating the reasons for the decisions to those who gave written feedback.

7. If adopted, staff will publicly notify the decision and publish the Bylaw and controls when changes come into force on 31 July 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

a) That the Governing Body:

a) approve the Bylaw Panel recommendations on the proposed changes to Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-Rohe Urungi Āhuru / Auckland Council Navigation Bylaw 2021 and associated controls in Attachment A and Attachment B of the agenda report.

b) confirm that the proposed new Navigation Bylaw 2021 and associated controls in Attachment C of this agenda report:

i) is the most appropriate way to ensure maritime safety and minimise the risk of accidents, nuisance and damage on Auckland’s navigable waters

ii) is the most appropriate form of bylaw

iii) does not give rise to any implications under, and is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 or the Maritime Transport Act 1994.

c) adopt the proposed new Navigation Bylaw 2021 and associated controls in Attachment C of this agenda report with effect from 31 July 2021.

d) approve the distribution of this agenda report and associated minutes to local boards for their information.

e) delegate authority through the Chief Executive to the manager responsible for bylaws to make any amendments to the Bylaw and associated controls in Attachment C of this agenda report to correct errors or omissions.

Horopaki

Context

The Governing Body adopted a proposal to make a new Bylaw for public consultation

8. Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-Rohe Urungi Āhuru 2014 / Auckland Council Navigation Safety Bylaw 2014 (Bylaw) seeks to protect the public from safety risks and nuisance, and to manage the use of Auckland’s navigable waters.

9. Following a statutory bylaw review,^{^[1]} the Governing Body adopted a Statement of Proposal to make a new Bylaw and associated controls for public consultation. An appointed Bylaw Panel^{^[2]} deliberated and made recommendations on matters raised (see figure below):

10. More information about the proposal, public notification and feedback can be viewed on council’s have your say and hearings webpages.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Bylaw Panel considered feedback and views in accordance with legislative requirements

11. The Bylaw Panel considered and made recommendations on all public feedback and local board and Maritime New Zealand views in accordance with relevant statutory requirements, including that council:^{^[3]}

· must receive public feedback with an open mind and give it due consideration

· must provide the decisions and reasons to people who provided feedback

· must ensure all meetings are open to the public

· must meet its requirements under the Maritime Transport Act 1994 to consult the Director when making a bylaw

· may consider or request comment or advice from staff or any other person to assist their decision-making

· must ensure that the Bylaw is the most appropriate way to address risk of accidents, nuisance and damage on Auckland’s navigable waters, is the most appropriate form of bylaw, and is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

12. The Bylaw Panel structured its deliberations by topic. Each topic and recommendations are summarised in the table below and contained in full in Attachment A.

13. Key recommendations include retaining the current 12 knot speed limit in the Waitematā Harbour Restricted Speed Zone and requiring a VHF radio to be carried on vessels in the vicinity of a harbour entrance bar.

Summary of key Bylaw Panel recommendations

Topic	Summary of key Bylaw Panel recommendations
Proposal 1: Increase the maximum speed limit on the Waitematā Harbour Restricted Speed Zone to 18 knots (from 12 knots)	Amend the proposal to: · retain the current 12 knot speed limit in the Waitematā Harbour Restricted Speed Zone to better ensure maritime safety while continuing to use the approval process to allow higher speeds for public transport ferries (Map 7) · reference rules and guidelines from Department of Conservation about marine mammals and marine reserves in related information notes (Clause 8). Reasons include to: · better ensure maritime safety while continuing to use the approval process to allow higher speeds for public transport ferries · to support the protection of marine life, marine reserves and birdlife by raising awareness of existing rules in other legislation · to improve public awareness and ensure rules and guidance are easily accessible to the public.
Proposal 2: New rules about carrying a means of communication on a vessel	Amend the proposal to require a VHF radio to be carried on vessels operating in the vicinity of a harbour entrance bar (for example the Manukau and Kaipara Harbour bar) and adding other examples of forms of communication to be carried on a vessel (Clause 34). Reasons include to: · increase maritime safety and to minimise the risk of accidents when crossing the bar or navigating near the bar entrance · improve understanding of the different forms of communication that is practical for the range of activities on the water.
Proposal 3: New rules about Novel Craft	Adopt proposal as publicly notified to better ensure maritime safety and to minimise the risk of accidents and collisions between novel craft and people, objects and infrastructure on Auckland’s navigable waters.
Proposal 4A & 4B: New rules for the Tamaki River Entrance and the Commercial Port Area	Adopt proposal as publicly notified to increase safety in these congested areas (Maps 3.5 and 11).
Proposal 5: Align rules about the use of the Ōrākei Basin with current accepted practices	Adopt proposal as publicly notified to reflect the current practices displayed on the signs at the Basin (which includes separate areas reserved for non-power-driven vessels and water skiing) and better ensure maritime safety and to minimise the risk of accidents and damage (Maps 1.11 and 1.12).
Proposal 6: Remove rules about licensing of commercial vessels	Adopt proposal as publicly notified to reduce duplication by replacing rules covered by existing regulations with a related information note.
Proposal 7: Remove rules about Marine Mammals	Adopt proposal as publicly notified with the amendment to add more related information notes about speeding rules around marine mammals.
Proposal 8: Clarify and update existing rules	Adopt proposal as publicly notified to make the bylaw easier to read and understand.
Other matters raised
Moorings	Amend proposal about moorings to clarify the intention to allow the use of a mooring by other vessels and the transfer of a mooring licence as a condition of the licence (Clause 38).
Technical and editorial matters	Amend proposal to address technical and editorial matters raised by the Director of Maritime New Zealand and staff, and to include crossing the Kaipara Harbour bar as an example in Clause 19(1)(b) (wearing personal floatation devices at times of heightened risk) to improve the bylaw form.

14. Where Bylaw Panel recommendations in Attachment A amend the proposal, the recommended changes are shown in a comparison table in Attachment B. The recommended changes:

· help ensure maritime safety and minimise the risk of accidents, nuisance and damage on Auckland’s navigable waters

· are authorised by statute, not repugnant to other legislation and not unreasonable

· improve the Bylaw form (for example certainty and user friendliness)

· does not give rise to any implications and is not be inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990

· are not inconsistent with the Maritime Transport Act 1994, Maritime Rules, Resource Management Act 1991 or Auckland Unitary Plan.

Bylaw Panel recommends the Governing Body adopt the proposal with amendments

15. The Bylaw Panel recommends that the Governing Body make the necessary statutory determinations to adopt the new Bylaw and associated controls in Attachment C.

16. The Bylaw and controls in Attachment C incorporates recommended amendments in Attachments A and B. Taking this approach will make the proposed Bylaw and controls better ensure maritime safety, minimise the risk of accidents, nuisance and damage on Auckland’s navigable waters and be easier to read and understand.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17. There are no impacts for climate change arising from the decisions to this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18. The proposal impacts the operation of the Harbourmaster and other council teams involved in resource management, events and public transport (ferry operations). These teams are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

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

Local impacts and local board views

19. The proposal impacts the Auckland region. All local boards provided views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal (click link to view 14 May 2021 Deliberations agenda). Most views supported all proposals with the exception of Proposal 1. Eight local boards^{^[4]} chose to present their views in person to the Bylaw Panel on 7 May 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

20. Māori have a close association with the harbours, lakes and rivers in Tāmaki Makaurau. The Bylaw contributes to the Māori Plan’s key directions and aspirations by supporting safe recreational and cultural activities on Auckland’s navigable waters.

21. As the Bylaw regulates the operation of any commercial, recreation, and sporting activities on the water, it will apply to activities undertaken by Māori, including vessels used for fishing and diving, waka ama, and other water based cultural or sporting events.

22. The Bylaw recognizes Māori rights under Te Tiriti o Waitangi to exercise their tikanga and rangatiratanga across the Domains of Tangaroa. The Bylaw has been prepared acknowledging Māori customary rights (yet to be determined) under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 in the rohe of Tāmaki Makaurau.

23. Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person. Feedback received from Māori indicate support for proposals 2 through to 8 and split feedback for proposal 1. This was consistent with the overall percentage of public feedback in support.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

24. There are no financial implications arising from decisions to this report. The cost of public notification of the decision and implementation will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

25. The following risks have been identified:

If….	Then…	Mitigation
People or organisations who provided feedback do not feel that their views were addressed	There may be negative perception about the recommendations of the Bylaw Panel.	Communicating the reasons for the decisions to those who gave written feedback

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps q

26. If adopted, staff will notify the public and people who provided feedback on the proposal of the decision and publish the new Bylaw and controls when it comes into effect on 31 July 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Deliberations Table	85
b ⇩	Comparison of proposed and Panel-recommended changes	95
c ⇩	Proposed new Navigation Bylaw 2021	107

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Councillor Linda Cooper – Chair of the Bylaw Hearing Panel

Councillor Efeso Collins

Independent Māori Statutory Board Member Glenn Wilcox

Governing Body

24 June 2021

Group Remuneration Policy

File No.: CP2021/08357

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek Governing Body approval of the Auckland Council Group Remuneration Policy.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. In 2020 the CCO Review recommended that the council and CCOs should work together to develop and agree a group policy on remuneration (recommendation 61). This recommendation was agreed by the Governing Body in August 2020.

3. The recommendation for a Group Remuneration Policy was to ensure a more equitable approach to remuneration across Auckland Council and the CCOs, to enable consistency in decisions made and alignment in the processes and procedures.

4. The officers responsible for remuneration across the Auckland Council group worked together to develop the proposed policy which sets out the principles on which our remuneration decisions will be based. The working group will continue meeting regularly to ensure consistent policies, procedures, and practices across the group.

5. In April 2021 each of the Board of Directors for each CCO approved the proposed policy.

6. It is a Local Government Act 2002 requirement that the adoption of a ‘remuneration and employment policy’ is by Governing Body and that any such policy must also be reviewed every three years.

7. Once the policy is adopted, it is then the Chief Executive’s operational responsibility to employ staff (and negotiate terms of employment) in accordance with the policy.

8. Auckland Council has a current remuneration policy, adopted by Governing Body in 2018, which will be replaced by the group policy once adopted.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) approve the Group Remuneration Policy (Attachment B of the agenda report).

Horopaki

Context

9. In 2020 the CCO Review recommended that the council and CCOs should work together to develop and agree a group policy on remuneration (recommendation 61) as follows:

The council and CCOs should work together to draw up group policies on:

· […]

· remuneration. (This would contain common salary bands for all staff except chief executives, common rules on placing staff in, and progressing them through, bands, and a common process for dealing with exceptions to the rules. Chief executives’ salaries would be dealt with in a statement of expectation.)

10. This recommendation was agreed by the Governing Body in August 2020.

11. The recommendation for a group remuneration policy was to ensure a more equitable approach to remuneration across Auckland Council and the CCOs, to enable consistency in decisions made and alignment in the processes and procedures. This was due to the discrepancies it found in chief executive pay and the differences in remuneration practices in each of the entities.

12. In April 2021 the Board of Directors for each CCO approved the proposed policy.

13. It is a Local Government Act 2002 requirement that the adoption of a ‘remuneration and employment policy’ is by Governing Body and that any such policy must also be reviewed every three years.

14. Once the policy is adopted, it is then the Chief Executive’s operational responsibility to employ staff (and negotiate terms of employment) in accordance with the policy.

15. Auckland Council has a current remuneration policy, adopted by Governing Body in 2018, which will be replaced by the group policy once adopted.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16. The approach to the proposed Group Remuneration Policy is to set and align the principles by which operational remuneration decisions are made in Auckland Council and the CCOs and to specify some key procedures and practices. This provides flexibility to address unique challenges in the market.

17. The key principles proposed are:

1. Fairness

We ensure the methodologies we use are fair and enable a diverse and inclusive workforce to deliver to the best of their capabilities. Policies and practices must be based on best practice approaches to remuneration, using well proven methodologies and independent advice.

2. Financial responsibility

We manage remuneration in a financially responsible and measured way that balances the needs of Auckland and Aucklanders with our need to develop and attract talented individuals who will help deliver our vision.

3. Social equity through a living wage

We acknowledge that how we remunerate our people has an impact on their economic well-being and meaningful increases will be a priority for employees in roles at the lower end of the pay scale. We aim to ensure that our remuneration is aligned to a living wage and helps our people meet the basic necessities of life and participate as active citizens in society. A living wage is calculated and monitored by Auckland Council whānau.

4. Contribution

We review and monitor remuneration levels and validate they are aligned with peoples’ contribution to the organisation and in line with the external market.

18. Other key aspects in the proposed Group Remuneration Policy are as follows:

Methodologies and benchmarks: All entities will use proven job evaluation methodologies that provide common bands for all people and provide the basis to set salary ranges. The benchmark used by all entities will be the General Market Fixed Remuneration (excludes bonuses) which will be reviewed annually. Premiums for certain roles may only apply if validated by market information.

Policies for exceptions and Executive Leadership teams: Out of cycle increases and appointment salaries will be subject to the appropriate approval processes in order to ensure parity. All Executive Leadership Team (direct reports to the Chief Executives) appointments and increases to remuneration follow a standard process which is aligned to the methodology used for all jobs. These jobs are externally evaluated, and market remuneration comparisons are sourced from two external providers. This enables a measure of consistency within the whānau and parity with the external market.

Chief Executive Remuneration: Remuneration for Chief Executives is set by the Board of Directors for CCOs or Governing Body for Auckland Council. The guidance is provided through the statement of expectation.

19. A comparison between the proposed Group Remuneration Policy and the 2018 Auckland Council Remuneration policy is below:

Key areas	Auckland Council Remuneration Policy	Group Remuneration Policy
Principles	Fairness, Financial Responsibility, Social Equity through a Living Wage and Contribution	Aligned to 2018 Auckland Council policy
Job Evaluation	Use of proven methodologies	Aligned to 2018 Auckland Council policy
Market positioning	General Market Fixed Remuneration excluding bonuses	Aligned to 2018 Auckland Council policy
Setting Remuneration on appointment	Approvals in place to manage exceptions above the band	Aligned to 2018 Auckland Council policy
Out of Cycle Remuneration changes	Approvals in place based on thresholds	Aligned to 2018 Auckland Council policy
Diversity and Inclusion	NA	New section on our commitment to Diversity and Inclusion
Executive Leader Remuneration	NA	New section on managing Remuneration through a common process
Chief Executive Remuneration	NA	New section indicating that guidance for CCOs is provided through the statement of expectations

20. The working group will continue to meet regularly and share information on procedures, policies and practices enabling parity across Auckland Council and the CCOs and to address any challenges. The group will also provide reports on key issues impacting remuneration for the Group Chief Executives to consider.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21. The Group Remuneration Policy does not impact the climate.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

22. The Boards of our CCOs have supported and endorsed the policy, on the dates shown in the below table:

CCO	Date of Board of Directors approval
Auckland Unlimited	28 April 2021
Eke Panuku Development Auckland	28 April 2021
Watercare Services Limited	29 April 2021
Auckland Transport	29 April 2021

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

Local impacts and local board views

23. It is a Local Government Act 2002 requirement that the adoption of a ‘remuneration and employment policy’ is by Governing Body.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

24. The Group Remuneration Policy specifies a commitment to diversity and inclusion and the setting of fair and equitable salaries, including both gender and ethnicity (which would include Māori) pay parity.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

25. As with all remuneration decisions, there may be operational financial implications for the council or CCOs from remuneration decisions made in accordance with this policy. Specific financial implications and budget considerations will be considered at the time remuneration decisions are made.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. A potential reputational risk is that it may be perceived by the public that group remuneration is not appropriately benchmarked versus the market. This risk will be mitigated by the financial responsibility principle and working group continuing to work together on an ongoing basis to review, monitor and have oversight of consistent application of the Group Remuneration Policy, and reporting to the Group Chief Executives.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27. This policy will be reviewed every three years as required by the Local Government Act 2002.

28. The officers responsible for remuneration continue to meet regularly sharing practices and policies to ensure alignment across the group.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland Council Remuneration Policy 2018	153
b ⇩	Group Remuneration Policy June 2021	157

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Wendell D'Cunha - Manager Reward

Authorisers

Patricia Reade – Deputy Chief Executive

Jim Stabback - Chief Executive

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Forward Work Programme	165
b ⇩	Statement from Haumaru Housing	177

Governing Body

24 June 2021

Tira Kāwana / Governing Body
Forward Work Programme 2021

The Governing Body deals with strategy and policy decision-making that relates to the environmental, social, economic and cultural activities of Auckland as well as matters that are not the responsibility of another committee. The full terms of reference can be found here: Auckland Council Governing Body Terms of Reference

Area of work and Lead Department	Reason for work	Committee role (decision and/or direction)	Expected timeframes Highlight the month(s) this is expected to come to committee in 2021
Area of work and Lead Department	Reason for work	Committee role (decision and/or direction)	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
Chief Executive’s Performance Objectives	The Appointments and Performance Review Committee has the delegation to recommend performance objectives. The Governing Body must then consider the recommendations and make a decision.	Decision to approve performance objectives Progress to date: Setting the Chief Executives 2020/2021 performance objectives – Open Process Report 26 November 2020 Link to decision Update Report on workforce and full-time equivalents CONFIDENTIAL 25 March 2021								New Objectives		Review FY21/22
City Rail Link	Construction of the City Rail Link in the central city	Decisions to approve matter associated with City Rail Link Decisions to note any matters raised by the Audit and Risk Committee about the project Progress to date: Appointments to board of City Rail Link 25 June 2020 Link to decision open process report Link to restatement Report on shareholder approval of major transaction 27 August 2020 Link to decision	As and when required
Review of council- controlled organisations	Overview of and decisions relating to any council-controlled organisations review including the implementation of any resulting changes to council-controlled organisations	Decision on appointment of a council-controlled organisations review panel Consider draft report on the key issues, feedback from the community and stakeholders Decision on final report and recommendations Progress to date: 11 August 2020 – Confidential Workshop 19 August 2020 – Confidential Workshop Decision on the CCO Review 27 August 2020 Link to decision Report and proposal to merge Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development (ATEED) and Regional Facilities Auckland (RFA) 27 August 2020 Link to decision
10-year Budget (Long-term Plan)	Statutory requirement	Decision to approve consultation documents, supporting information and process prior to consultation Decision to adopt the 10-year Budget (Long-term Plan) Progress to date: Various workshops being held January 2021 – June 2021 Agree items for consultation 9 December 2020 Link to decision Agree other items for consultation 9 December 2020 Link to decision Agree changes to urban rating and rating of farm and lifestyle properties for consultation 9 December 2020 Link to decision Agree other Rates and Fees Issues for consultation 9 December 2020 Link to decision Agree to consult on Paremoremo Public Transport Targeted Rate 18 February 2021 Link to decision Agree to consult on amendments to the Revenue and Financing Policy 18 February 2021 Link to decision Adopt consultation material 18 February 2021 Link to decision Adopt Communications and Engagement Plan 18 February 2021 Link to decision Agree Recovery Budget Mayor’s Final Proposal 25 May 2021 Link to decision Agree Recovery Budget: Other Proposals 25 May 2021 Link to decision Agree Changes to the Urban Rating Area and Rating of Farm and Lifestyle Properties within the Urban Rating Area 25 May 2021 Link to decision Agree Other Rates and Fees Issues for the Recovery Budget 25 May 2021 Link to decision		Consultation documents				Adoption
Annual Report	Statutory requirement	Decision to adopt the Annual Report										Adoption
Committee Forward Work Programmes	Responsibility for oversight of work programmes of all committee of the Governing Body.	Decisions to note that all committee have adopted a forward work programme
Review of Code of Conduct	The experience of working with the current Code of Conduct indicates that it could be further improved. In particular, it could be clearer about complaint, investigation and resolution processes, as well as available sanctions	Decision to adopt new Elected Members Code of Conduct Progress to date: Scope of the Review Report 26 November 2020 Link to decision Final report for adoption 25 May 2021 Link to decision					Adoption
Terms of Reference	The Terms of Reference enables the governing Body to delegate to committees those power necessary for them to carry out their responsibilities to the most efficient and effective levels. Any changes to the Terms of Reference must be done by the Governing Body.	Decision to adopt the Terms of Reference Decision to adopt changes to Terms of Reference Progress to date: Terms of Reference approved November 2019 Link to decision Terms of Reference amended to include working parties November 2019 Link to decision Terms of Reference amended to include the Emergency Committee March 2020 Link to decision	As and when required
Standing Orders	Statutory requirement under the Local Government Act 2002, Schedule 7, clause 27 Originally adopted 16/12/2010	Decision to amend standing orders Progress to date: Change in light of COVID-19 March 2020 Link to decision Change for Attendance by Electronic Link 25 June 2020 Link to decision	As and when required
Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Operations Plan	Section 60 of Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Act 2014 requires the Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority (Tūpuna Maunga Authority) and Auckland Council to annually agree an operational plan as part of the annual or long-term plan process. This requires the council to consult on a summary of the Draft Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Operational Plan (the Draft Tūpuna Maunga Plan). The Governing Body is also required to adopt the final plan.	Decision to adopt Operations Plan and summary Progress to date: Tango (adopt) DRAFT Operational Plan and Summary for consultation 9 December 2020 Link to decision		Consultation				Adoption
Health, Safety and Wellbeing	The Governing Body has the role of the person or organisation conducting a business or undertaking.	Decision to receive quarterly Health, Safety and Wellbeing report Progress to date: Report for December 2020 to Audit and Risk Committee 8 December 2020 Link to decision Report for March 2021 to Audit and Risk Committee 25 March 2021 Link to decision Report for May 2021 to Audit and Risk Committee 27 May 2021 Link to decision
Auckland Council Hauora (Wellbeing) Review	The Auckland Council conducted a Hauora (Wellbeing) review for its staff in early 2021.	Decisions and reporting as and when required. Progress to date: Initial review report 27 May 2021 Link to decision
Auckland Council Top Risk Register	The Audit and Risk Committee will refer the risk register to the Governing Body every quarter.	Decision to note the top risk register and risk heat map Decision to receive quarterly reports Progress to Date: Enterprise Risk Update – February 2021 25 March 2021 Link to decision Enterprise Risk Update – May 2021 27 May 2021 Link to decision
Te Tiriti o Waitangi / Treaty of Waitangi	The Crown negotiates settlements with iwi on a confidential basis and from time to time invites Council to express its views. The Te Tiriti o Waitangi / Treaty of Waitangi Settlement Working party is accountable to the Governing Body and reports its findings to the Governing Body.	Decision to approve submissions to the Crown as and when required Decision to approve establishment and on-going implementation of co-management and other governance arrangements	As and when required
Governance Framework Review	The Joint Governance Working Party will make recommendations to the Governing Body on governance matters of mutual interest to the Governing Body and local boards	Decisions on Joint Governance Working Party recommendations Decisions on Service Levels and Funding Decisions on Governance Framework Review implementation as required	As and when required
National Three Waters Programme	The Minister of Local Government recently established a joint central-local government steering committee to provide oversight and guidance to support the reform, and to assist in engaging with local government, iwi/Māori, and other water sector stakeholders on options and proposals.	Decision to opt in to the first stage of the national three waters reform programmes Progress to Date: Report and decision on opt in 27 August 2020 Link to decision						Initial Stage
Independent Review of Health and Safety at Port of Auckland	On 14 September 2020 the mayor announced that Auckland Council, as Ports of Auckland’s sole shareholder, would initiate an independent review of health and safety at Ports of Auckland The proposed focus of the council’s independent review is to assess and comment on Ports of Auckland’s management of its critical risks for health and safety (including hazard identification, risk assessment, monitoring controls and resilience) and the health and safety culture at Ports of Auckland.	Decision to agree Terms of Reference. Consider independent review. Ports of Auckland Limited will present progress to implement the CHASNZ report recommendations in July and October 2021. Progress to Date: Report to agree Terms of Reference for the review 24 September 2020 Link to decision Workshop held 12 April 2021 Final Report 29 April 2021 Link to decision							Report from POAL			Report from POAL
Maori Outcomes Performance Measurement Framework		Decision to agree to finalise the framework.
BYLAWS
Alcohol Control Bylaw Review	Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended. Progress to date: Statement of Proposal 24 September 2020 Link to decision Final decision report 29 April 2021 Link to decision				Recommendation
Animal Management Bylaw Review	Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended. Progress to date: Statement of Proposal 27 May 2021 Link to decision						Recommendation
Construction Bylaw 2015	Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.											Options
Freedom Camping in Vehicles	Explore the need for and options for regulating freedom camping in Auckland Regulatory response may be required following completion of research and pilot	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended. Progress to Date: Report on next steps 25 March 2021 Link to decision Options Report 27 May 2021 Link to decision			Direction
Navigation Safety Bylaw Review	Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended. Progress to Date: Approve statement of proposal 29 October 2020 Link to decision					Recommendation	Recommendation
Property Maintenance Nuisance Bylaw Review	Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.											Recommendation
Signage Bylaw Review	Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.									Proposal
Stormwater Bylaw	Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.								Proposal
Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw Review	Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended. Progress to Date: Approve statement of proposal 27 May 2021 Link to decision						Proposal
Traffic Bylaw Review	Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended. Progress to Date: No decision required until 2022.
Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015	Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended. Progress to Date: Approve statement of proposal 25 February 2021 Link to decision		Proposal
Wharves Bylaw 2015	Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.											Options

Completed

Area of work	Committee role (decision and/or direction)	Decision
Ark in the Park	Decision to appoint GB representatives to Ark in the Park.	Appointment of councillor representatives February 2020 Link to decision
Local government elections Evaluation of 2019 election and preparation for 2022 election	Consider evaluation report of 2019 election Decision on submission to Justice Select Committee Inquiry into 2019 election Decision on voting system for the 2022 election and whether to establish Māori wards	Decision on evaluation and Māori wards February 2020 Link to decision Decision on submission in Inquiry into 2019 election February 2020 Link to decision
Emergency Budget/ Annual Budget (Annual Plan) Statutory requirement	Decision to approve consultation documents, supporting information and process prior to consultation Decision to adopt Emergency Budget	Decision on Emergency Budget and consultation given COVID-19 – 16 April 2020 in confidential and released on 7 May 2020 Link to decision Decisions on Emergency Budget and consultation 14 May 2020 Confidential Link to decision 21 May 2020 released 25 June 2020 Link to decision 28 May 2020 released 25 June 2020 Decisions on Emergency Budget feedback Link to decision 16 July 2020 Final adoption of Emergency Budget Link to decision 30 July 2020
Elected members expense policy	Responsibility to adopt expense policy rules for Remuneration Authority approval	Adoption of policy 30 July 2020 Link to decision
Appointment of Chief Executive	Statutory requirement	Decision to appoint a new chief executive June 2020 in confidential Chief Executive appointed July 2020 Link to announcement
Water Strategy	Monitoring drought situation.	Update from Watercare 25 June 2020 Link to decision Update on water matters from Auckland Council 25 June 2020 Link to decision Drought Restrictions Summer 2020/2021 24 September 2020 Link to decision Review of Drought Restrictions for the 2020/2021 summer season 26 November 2020 Link to decision Going forward this subject will be dealt with at the Environment and Climate Change Committee.
Americas Cup 2021	Locations, infrastructure and funding	Decisions to approve locations, infrastructure and funding Last decision December 2018.
Food Safety Information Bylaw Review	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended. Legislative requirement	Adoption of Food Safety Information Bylaw Review 30 April 2020 Link to decision
Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014	Decision to approve statement of proposal # Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw ^#public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended. Legislative requirement	Statement of Proposal 24 September 2020 Link to decision Approve panel recommendations and adopt amended bylaw 25 February 2021 Link to decision

[1] Findings report (REG/2020/16) and Options report (REG/2020/31).

[2] Councillor Linda Cooper (Chair), Councillor Efeso Collins, and Independent Māori Statutory Board Member Glenn Wilcox.

[3] Sections 82(1)(e), 82(1)(f), 83(3), 147A(1)(a) and 155 of the Local Government Act 2002 and sections 46 and 47 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

[4] Albert-Eden, Aotea / Great Barrier, Devonport-Takapuna, Howick, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu, Rodney, Waitākere Ranges and Waitematā Local Boards.

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

Date	Memorandum
1/6/21	Statement from Haumaru Housing

Date	Workshop/Briefing
9/6/21	Three Waters Reform CONFIDENTIAL
9/6/21	Noise Controls CONFIDENTIAL

Date of Decision	Subject
27/5/21	Appointment to the Heritage Advisory Panel
27/5/21	Nomination to Alleva Animal Health Limited Animal Ethics Committee

Author	Sarndra O'Toole - Kaiarataki Kapa Tohutohu Mana Whakahaere / Team Leader Governance Advisors
Authoriser	Jim Stabback - Chief Executive