Agenda of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

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

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 22 June 2021 as true and correct.

5 Leave of Absence

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

8.1 Meadowbank Pony Club - Samantha Fowler

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Providing Samantha Fowler of Meadowbank Pony Club the opportunity to present to the board on the club’s history, current users, involvement with the community and plans for the future.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. As per standing orders the Chairperson has approved the deputation request from Samantha Fowler.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) thank Samantha Fowler for her attendance.

8.2 Levi Hawken

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Providing Levi Hawken with the opportunity to present to the board on his ideas for a skateable sculpture park.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. As per standing orders the Chairperson has approved the deputation request from Levi Hawken.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) thank Levi Hawken for his attendance.

9 Public Forum

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

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

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board Chair's report July 2021	13

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

27 July 2021

Draft proposal to make a new Signs Bylaw

File No.: CP2021/09837

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek support on the draft proposal to make a new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2022 / Signs Bylaw 2022 and associated controls before it is finalised for public consultation.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable the local board to decide whether to support a proposal to make a new signs bylaw and associated controls, staff have prepared a draft proposal.

3. The draft proposal is the culmination of decisions by the Regulatory Committee and Board of Auckland Transport on the review of the current Signage Bylaw 2015. These decisions were made at meetings to consider the review’s findings in June 2020 and options in October 2020 and April 2021 and provided direction on the content of the draft proposal.

4. The draft proposal would continue to enable council to manage the problems signs can cause in relation to nuisance, safety, misuse of public places^{^[1]}, the Auckland transport system and environment.

5. The main draft proposals in comparison to the current bylaws about signs are to:

· combine the current Signage Bylaw 2015 and Election Signs Bylaw 2013

· increase the current portable sign prohibited area to cover the entire City Centre Zone

· increase the maximum area of flat wall-mounted signs in the Heavy Industry Zone to 6m² (currently 2.88m² for sale of a property and 5m² for goods, services or events)

· retain the intent of the rules in the current bylaws (unless otherwise stated) in a way that is up to date and more certain

· use a bylaw structure, format and wording more aligned to the Auckland Unitary Plan and current council drafting standards.

6. Staff recommend that the local board support the draft proposal.

7. There is a reputational risk that the draft proposal or the local board’s support do not reflect the views of people in their local board area. This risk would be partly mitigated by the opportunity for the local board to provide views on public feedback prior to a final decision.

8. Local board support on the draft proposal will help develop a proposal for the Regulatory Committee to recommend to the Governing Body and for the Board of Auckland Transport. Public consultation is scheduled for September and October, deliberations for March 2022 and a final Governing Body and Board of Auckland Transport decision for April 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Local Board:

a) support the draft Statement of Proposal in Attachment A of this agenda report to make a new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2022 / Signs Bylaw 2022 and associated controls for public consultation.

Horopaki

Context

The draft proposed Bylaw and controls regulate most signs in Auckland

9. The draft proposed new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2022 / Signs Bylaw 2022 and associated controls seek to manage the problems signs can cause in relation to nuisance, safety, misuse of public places, Auckland transport system and environment.

10. The draft proposed new bylaw and controls:

· would continue to provide for signs related to activities on the same property as long as they meet certain conditions for their design, construction and duration of display

· would continue to limit signs unrelated to the day-to-day activities on the land it is located (for example signs on footpaths)

· would continue to provide more opportunities to display signs about elections, polls and referendums during an election period that would not normally be allowed

· would continue to be enforced by the Licencing and Regulatory Compliance unit using a graduated compliance model (information / education / enforcement)

· would remain part of a wider regulatory framework^{^[2]}

· must be adopted using a public consultative process and commence before 28 May 2022 to avoid a regulatory gap (the Signage Bylaw 2015 expires on 28 May 2022).

The proposal is the outcome of a statutory review of the current signage bylaw

11. The Regulatory Committee (committee) and Board of Auckland Transport (board) requested staff commence the process to make a new bylaw and controls following a statutory review of the Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Signage Bylaw 2015 (refer diagram below).

2015 Signage Bylaw review process

12. Staff have prepared a draft proposal to implement the decision of the committee and board (Attachment A). The draft proposal includes the reasons and decisions which led to the proposed new bylaw and controls and provides a comparison between the current bylaws and the proposed new bylaw and controls.

The local board has an opportunity to provide its views on the draft proposal

13. The local board has an opportunity to support the draft proposal in Attachment A by resolution to the Regulatory Committee and the Board of Auckland Transport before it is finalised for public consultation.

14. The board could support the draft proposal for public consultation, recommend changes or defer comment until after it has considered public feedback on the proposal.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The draft proposal improves how council manages signs in Auckland

15. The draft proposal makes a new bylaw and controls about signs to better manage the problems signs can cause in relation to nuisance, safety, misuse of public places, Auckland transport system and environment.

16. The table below summarises the main proposals in comparison to the current bylaws:

Main proposals	Reasons for proposals
· To make a new bylaw and associated controls that combine the current Signage Bylaw 2015 and Election Signs Bylaw 2013. · The current bylaws will be revoked.	· reduce confusion from having two bylaws about signs. · clarify intention to provide more opportunities to display election signs during pre-election periods than would otherwise be allowed for a sign that does not relate to activities on the property.
· To increase the current portable sign prohibited area to cover the entire City Centre Zone.	· prioritise the area for pedestrians and place-making activities. · remove potential safety risks, nuisance and clutter. · improve accessibility for mobility and vision-impaired pedestrians.
· To increase the maximum area of flat wall-mounted signs in the Heavy Industry Zone to 6m².	· allow more visible display of information in an area which has a larger built form and a lower priority on amenity values. (current maximum is 2.88m² for sale of a property and 5m² for goods, services or events on a property).
· To retain the intent of the rules in the current bylaws (unless otherwise stated) in a way that is up to date and more certain.	· retain the effect of rules considered to still be appropriate. · ensure rules are current, clear, and easier to understand and comply with.
· To use a bylaw structure, format and wording more aligned to the Auckland Unitary Plan and current council drafting standards.	· ensure rules are easier to understand and comply with. · comply with current council bylaw drafting standards. · assist future reviews of the Auckland Unitary Plan in relation to the most appropriate distribution of sign rules.

The draft proposal complies with statutory requirements

17. The draft new bylaw and controls has been prepared in accordance with statutory requirements to:

· help manage the problems signs can cause in relation to nuisance, safety, misuse of public places, the Auckland transport system and environment

· use a structure, format and wording that are easier to read, understand and comply with than the current bylaws about signs and meet current council bylaw drafting standards

· be authorised by statute, not be repugnant to other legislation, or be unreasonable

· not give rise to any implications and not be consistent with the Bill of Rights Act

· not be inconsistent with other Acts, regulations and bylaws (refer footnote 2).

Staff recommend the local board support the draft proposal

18. Staff recommend that the local board consider whether to support the draft proposal by resolution to the Regulatory Committee and Board of Auckland Transport.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

19. There are no implications for climate change arising from this decision.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

20. The draft proposal impacts the operations of several council departments and council-controlled organisations. This includes Auckland Council’s Licencing and Regulatory Compliance Unit and Parks, Sports and Recreation Department, Auckland Unlimited, Panuku and Auckland Transport.

21. Relevant staff are aware of the impacts of the draft proposal and their implementation role, and the proposal is being developed jointly with Auckland Transport.

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

Local impacts and local board views

22. The draft proposal impacts local governance, for example it regulates signs about community events and signs on local facilities and parks.

23. Representative local board views were provided in April 2021 through a joint working group established by the Regulatory Committee and Board of Auckland Transport.^{^[3]} Group members unanimously supported a new bylaw and controls that would be more aligned to the Auckland Unitary Plan and provided suggestions on the detailed content of the Bylaw.^{^[4]}

24. The Regulatory Committee and Board of Auckland Transport considered these views on 20 April 2021 (REG/2021/20) (29/04/2021:18). The committee and board directed staff to draft a new bylaw and controls. Group suggestions on detailed content have been considered in preparing the draft proposal.

25. This report gives the local board an opportunity to provide its support on the draft proposal by resolution to the Regulatory Committee and Board of Auckland Transport.

26. The local board will have further opportunity to provide its views to a Bylaw Panel on how the Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal related to its local board area.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27. The proposal contributes to the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau and the Auckland Plan 2050’s Māori Identity and Wellbeing outcome by supporting Māori who want to make their businesses uniquely identifiable and visible.

28. The proposal also helps protect all people living in Tāmaki Makaurau from the potential harms and nuisances that signs can cause.

29. People identifying as Māori presented views during the 2015 signage bylaw review. This feedback primarily identified ways to improve inappropriate signage standards. The draft proposal addresses those views by clarifying and updating standards.

30. Staff will engage with mana whenua and mataawaka during the public consultative process to ensure Māori are able to provide their views on the proposal.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

31. There are no financial implications to the local board for any decisions to support the draft proposal for public consultation. The Governing Body and the Board of Auckland Transport will consider any financial implications associated with public notification at a later date.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

32. The following risk has been identified:

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The draft proposal or the local board’s support do not reflect the view of people in the local board area.	There may be negative views about council’s process to develop the proposal.	The local board will have an opportunity to consider any public feedback and provide its formal views to a Bylaw Panel on how the Panel should address the matters raised in the feedback prior to the final decision being made.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

33. Staff will present a proposal and any local board support to the Regulatory Committee and Board of Auckland Transport in August 2021.

34. If at any time a joint bylaw is not able to progress, Auckland Council will continue to progress a bylaw for sign-related matters it is responsible for.

35. If the Governing Body of Auckland Council and the Board of Auckland Transport decide to proceed with a joint bylaw, the subsequent steps include public consultation, local board views on public feedback, Bylaw Panel deliberations and a final decision by the Governing Body of Auckland Council and Board of Auckland Transport (refer to the diagram in Context).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A - Draft proposal for new signs bylaw and controls	25

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Victor Faletutulu - Graduate Policy Advisor

Steve Hickey - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

27 July 2021

PDF Creator

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

27 July 2021

Resource management system reform: Natural and Built Environment Bill exposure draft submission

File No.: CP2021/10203

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide information on Auckland Council’s upcoming submission on the Natural and Built Environments Act exposure draft and invite local board input.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The government is undertaking comprehensive reform of the Resource Management Act (RMA).

3. Cabinet has agreed to the repeal and replacement of the RMA with three pieces of legislation: a Natural and Built Environments Act, a Spatial Planning Act, and a Managed Retreat and Climate Change Adaptation Act.

4. The first area of focus is the proposed Natural and Built Environments Bill. Key aspects of this have been released in an exposure draft which will form the basis of a select committee inquiry. Submissions on the inquiry close on 4 August 2021. A copy of the paper can be found here: https://environment.govt.nz/publications/natural-and-built-environments-bill-parliamentary-paper-on-the-exposure-draft/

5. The Natural and Built Environments Bill and Spatial Planning Bill are likely to be introduced in early 2022 and are expected to be in place by early 2023.

6. Auckland Council will make a submission on the bill and local board input into the Auckland Council submission is sought by 27 July 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the Natural and Built Environments Bill exposure draft for inclusion in the Auckland Council submission, noting that local boards feedback is required by close of business on 27 July 2021 for inclusion in the council submission.

Horopaki

Context

Resource management system reform

7. The government is undertaking comprehensive reform of the resource management system.

8. The first stage of this reform was a review which started in 2019 by The Resource Management Review Panel (the panel). The panel reported back to the Minister for the Environment in June 2020 in its report, New Directions for Resource Management in New Zealand. The report set out a proposed future resource management system, including indicative drafting of legislation for key provisions.

9. Through this, the council arrived at various positions through its submission to the panel which staff will use to guide submission development on the next stages of reform.

10. After receiving the panel’s report, Cabinet decided to proceed with Resource Management Act reform largely modelled on the panel’s recommendations.

11. Cabinet agreed to the following objectives for reform:

· protect and, where necessary, restore the natural environment, including its capacity to provide for the wellbeing of present and future generations

· better enable development within environmental biophysical limits, including a significant improvement in housing supply, affordability and choice, and timely provision of appropriate infrastructure, including social infrastructure

· give effect to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and provide greater recognition of te ao Māori, including mātauranga Māori

· better prepare for adapting to climate change and risks from natural hazards and better mitigate emissions contributing to climate change

· improve system efficiency and effectiveness and reduce complexity while retaining appropriate local democratic input.

12. Cabinet agreed to the repeal and replacement of the RMA with three pieces of legislation (names may be subject to change):

· the Natural and Built Environments Act (NBA) to provide for land use and environmental regulation (this would be the primary replacement for the current RMA)

· the Strategic Planning Act (SPA) to integrate with other legislation relevant to development (such as the Local Government Act and Land Transport Management Act) and require long-term regional spatial strategies

· the Managed Retreat and Climate Change Adaptation Act (CAA) to enable and address issues associated with managed retreat and funding and financing adaptation.

13. It is intended that the NBA and SPA be introduced to Parliament by early 2022, with their passage through the house likely to take around a year.

The NBA exposure draft and select committee inquiry process

14. This exposure draft of the NBA has been released to enable early public engagement on some aspects of the proposed legislation and inform the development of the final bill. This will be conducted through a select committee inquiry.

15. The purpose of the inquiry is to provide feedback on the extent to which the provisions in the exposure draft of the Natural and Built Environments Bill will support the resource management reform objectives stated in paragraph 11.

16. The scope of the select committee inquiry is limited to:

· matters covered by the exposure draft or in the support material

· collating a list of ideas for making the new system more efficient, more proportionate to the scale and/or risks associated with given activities, more affordable for the end user, and less complex compared to the current system.

17. There are many aspects of the final NBA which are not in the exposure draft. The council will have an opportunity to submit on these matters when the final NBA bill is introduced in early 2022. These matters include:

· process to develop the National Planning Framework

· consenting

· existing use rights

· allocation of resources and economic instruments

· compliance, monitoring and enforcement

· water conservation orders

· heritage orders

· designations

· subdivision

· transitional provisions

· provision for urban design, including urban tree cover

· the function and roles of ministers and agencies, as well as regional councils and territorial authorities in the system.

18. The inquiry is open for public submission with a closing date of 4 August 2021. The select committee will report back to the Minister for the Environment by 18 October 2021.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Summary of the Natural and Built Environments Act exposure draft

19. The exposure draft contains the proposed clauses relating to:

· key definitions

· purpose and related provisions (including the concept of Te Oranga o te Taiao)

· Te Tiriti o Waitangi

· environmental limits including their purpose and key requirements

· environmental outcomes which the National Planning Framework and all Natural and Built Environments Plans must promote

· implementation principles

· aspects of the Natural and Built Environments Plans (NBEPs) including what they are to contain and the nature of the committees which are proposed to develop them. These plans would take place at a regional level and replace current land use environmental plans e.g. the Auckland Unitary Plan.

· aspects of the National Planning Framework (NPF) including what outcomes must be covered by it, and the mechanism for its development. This framework would replace the current system of national direction (e.g. National Policy Statements and National Environmental Standards).

20. A parliamentary paper is also provided that provides rationale for the clauses in the exposure draft.

Purpose and related provisions

21. The exposure draft proposes the purpose of the act as to enable:

· Te Oranga o te Taiao to be upheld, including by protecting and enhancing the natural environment

· people and communities to use the environment in a way that supports the wellbeing of present generations without compromising the wellbeing of future generations.

22. In this context, the concept Te Oranga o te Taiao is suggested to incorporate:

· the health of the natural environment

· the intrinsic relationship between iwi and hapū and te taiao

· the interconnectedness of all parts of the natural environment

· the essential relationship between the health of the natural environment and its capacity to sustain all life.

23. According to the support material, Te Oranga o te Taiao is intended to be connected to and supported within other NBA provisions that provide for the better alignment of the relationship management to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and te ao Māori. This includes environmental outcomes and implementation principles.

24. Wellbeing is defined to encompass the four wellbeings and the environment is defined to include the natural environment as well as people and communities and the built environment they create.

25. The proposed purpose largely aligns with the council’s previous submission to the panel on the Transforming the resource management system: Opportunities for change paper.

Principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi

26. The exposure draft’s proposed principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi clause requires that any person exercising functions or powers under that act must give effect to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. This is stronger than the current RMA equivalent which requires the principles to be taken into account. The proposed clause reflects the council’s submission to the panel.

27. The supplementary information states that it is intended that the NBA would contain direction and guidance as to how this clause is to be implemented. This could be an area for feedback in the council’s submission.

Environmental limits

28. Environmental limits prescribe the minimum standards of the system to protect the ecological integrity of the natural environment and/or human health.

29. Limits (either in terms of a minimum state or the maximum allowable harm of stress permitted) are required for air; biodiversity, habitats, and ecosystems; coastal waters; estuaries; freshwater; and soil. These limits could be different for different locations or circumstances.

30. Limits can be either qualitative or quantitative and will be either prescribed through the NPF or through NBEPs.

31. The exposure draft’s clauses relating to environmental limits largely align with council’s previous submission in the matters it covered and the requirement for a precautionary approach.

Environmental Outcomes

32. These outcomes must be promoted by the National Planning Framework and all Natural and Built Environments Plans.

33. Given their importance in the new system the proposed outcomes in the draft exposure draft will be a key focus for council’s submission.

34. They cover outcomes related to:

· the quality of air, freshwater, coastal waters, estuaries and soils

· ecological integrity

· outstanding natural features and landscapes

· areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna

· access and character of the coast, lakes, rivers, wetlands and their margins

· the relationship of iwi and hapū, and their tikanga and traditions, with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wāhi tapu and other taonga

· the mana and mauri of the natural environment

· cultural heritage, including cultural landscapes

· protected customary rights

· greenhouse gas emissions

· urban areas

· housing supply

· rural areas

· infrastructure services

· natural hazards and climate change.

35. These outcomes go further than the current RMA’s equivalent (matters of national importance and other matters), particularly by including the mana and mauri of the natural environment, cultural landscapes, climate change mitigation, urban areas and housing supply, rural areas, and provision of infrastructure services.

Key clauses for the National Planning Framework

36. The NPF will include and replace existing forms of national direction and combine their existing functions and powers. This approach was supported by council’s previous submission to the panel on the Transforming the resource management system: Opportunities for change paper.

37. Its purpose will be to provide integrated direction on matters of national significance or where consistency nationally or across parts of New Zealand would be desirable.

38. The NPF will:

· prescribe environmental limits or enable plans to do so

· set out provisions directing the following outcomes: the quality of air, freshwater, coastal waters, estuaries, and soils; ecological integrity; outstanding natural features and landscapes; areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna; greenhouse gas emissions; urban areas; housing supply; rural areas; infrastructure services; and natural hazards and climate change

· contain provisions to help resolve conflicts relating to the environment, including conflicts between or among any of the environmental outcomes.

39. In doing the above, it must include strategic goals such as the vision, direction and priorities for the integrated management of the environment within the environmental limits; and how the wellbeing of present and future generations is to be provided for within the relevant environmental limits.

40. The NPF may also include provisions on any other matter that accords with the purpose of the NPF.

41. The process for the preparation of the NPF is not provided in the exposure draft. The supporting material suggests that this could take several forms, such as a board of inquiry or independent panel with a simplified process for less significant matters, or there could be a standing independent body to maintain consistency and integration.

42. The support material states that the eventual process is intended to provide for:

· a role for iwi, hapū and Māori that gives effect to the principles of Te Tiriti

· effective and proportionate public consultation

· appropriate evidence and technical expertise including mātauranga Māori and independent advice

· opportunities for early engagement with decision-makers, including local government

· robust evaluation and analysis

· consideration of the precautionary approach, integrated management, cumulative effects and the purpose of the act.

43. The support material acknowledges the need for further work to determine the role for iwi, hapū and Māori in the process and substance of the NPF.

Implementation principles

44. The exposure draft contains placeholder language on the principles that people who are involved in the system must follow.

45. The current principles cover integrated management of the environment; kawa, kaitiakitanga, and mātauranga Māori; public participation; participation by iwi and hapū; authority and responsibility of each iwi and hapū to protect and sustain the health and wellbeing of te taiao; cumulative effects; and the precautionary approach.

Key clauses for the Natural and Built Environments Plans

46. Cabinet agreed that regulatory planning be conducted at a regional level through a single plan. This would see around 14 plans created nationally and would be similar in nature to the current Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) which combines the functions of regional and district plans. Plans would be subject to an independent hearings panel (IHP) process in line with the development of the AUP.

47. The exposure draft proposes that the purpose of plans would be to further the purpose of the act by providing a framework for the integrated management of the environment in the region that the plan relates to.

48. The supplementary information makes it clear that the government is still considering the best approach to plan preparation and decision-making. In the absence of a clear policy preference, the exposure draft adopts the panel’s approach of permanent bodies made up of one member from each local authority of the region, a number of mana whenua representatives, and one representative of the Minister of Conservation reflecting their interests in relation to the Coastal Marine Area.

49. The supplementary material sets out the following matters relating to committees where they are seeking specific feedback:

· size and scope of the committees (e.g. whether all councils are represented, whether the size of the committee varies by region, proportionality of membership between central and local government and mana whenua, and whether there is an optimal size for efficiency)

· local authority membership (e.g. whether there are elected members, experts or officials, and the selection method)

· mana whenua membership (e.g. selection method and the approach to representation)

· number of local authorities and mana whenua members (e.g. whether the same in all regions for all issues)

· how the planning committee secretariat will be funded (noting the panel’s recommended approach was for local authorities to fund the secretariat)

· legal status of planning committees.

50. The exposure draft is silent on who would chair these planning committees and method of appointment. The panel recommended that these committees would be fully autonomous meaning their decisions would not be subject to further approval from local authorities, with local authorities able to submit on the plans to the IHP.

51. There may be some matters for which local authorities would also carry out local planning for, although the exposure draft is not clear on these matters or the process for doing this.

System efficiencies

52. The support material includes a list of examples of how the system could be more efficient and less complex. The select committee is invited to add to this list and council could provide suggestions as part of its submission.

Further material

53. The exposure draft and support material can be found here: https://environment.govt.nz/publications/natural-and-built-environments-bill-parliamentary-paper-on-the-exposure-draft/

54. Further information and summary documents on resource management system reform can be found here: https://environment.govt.nz/what-government-is-doing/areas-of-work/rma/resource-management-system-reform/

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

55. The proposed decisions this report seeks are procedural and do not have any direct impacts on climate change.

56. The panel’s report paper acknowledges addressing climate change challenges as being a key consideration in future-proofing our resource management system.

57. A reformed resource management system is expected to significantly impact Auckland Council’s roles and responsibilities as Auckland prepares for and is more adapted to the effects of climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

58. Relevant council departments and council-controlled organisations have been identified and contributions will be sought from them in developing the council group’s response to the NBA exposure draft.

59. The potential impacts on the council group and activities will become clearer once the NBA, SPA, and CAA are introduced in bill form.

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

Local impacts and local board views

60. Local board views are being sought during the development of council’s submission and will be reported back to the Planning Committee. Local board resolutions received by 27 July 2021 will be included as part of council’s submission.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

61. The decisions this report seeks do not directly impact on Māori, however both the resource management system review and specific issues likely to be covered in the NBA exposure draft are likely to be of significant interest to and have a significant impact on Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

62. The submission can be developed within existing budget provision and as part of business as usual central government advocacy activity.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

63. No risks related to the local board input into this process have been identified.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

64. Local board resolutions on the NBA exposure draft will be included in the Auckland Council submission on this matter.

65. The NBA exposure draft is likely to be introduced in early July 2021 with an expected submission period of four weeks.

66. The SPA and NBA are likely to be introduced in December 2021 or early in 2022 and their progress through the house is likely to take around a year. This will include the usual opportunity to submit to the select committee.

67. The CAA will be introduced at some point in the first half of 2022 and will also involve a select committee submission opportunity.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Mark Macfarlane - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Helgard Wagener - Acting Policy and Planning Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board feedback on the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission (Te Waihanga) proposal He Tūāpapa ki te ora, Infrastructure for a better future	173

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

27 July 2021

Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCO) Engagement Plan 2021-2022

File No.: CP2021/10611

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. For the local board to adopt its Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCO) Engagement Plan 2021-2022.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The review panel for the independent review of Auckland Council’s substantive council-controlled organisations presented its findings to the Governing Body and local board chairs in August 2020. All 64 recommendations were adopted.

3. Recommendations 6, 34, and 53 were designated as those that CCOs would work with local boards to implement. Recommendation 34 (b) of the 2020 CCO Review advised the preparation of joint CCO engagement plans for each local board.

4. A template for the joint engagement plan has been developed in conjunction with local board members and CCO staff over the last six months. While it will be signed, it will be a live document that will be updated as required.

5. Workshops have been held at all 21 local boards with CCO staff. Local boards have provided their views on CCO delivery and engagement in their area, and the degree of engagement they expect for each project or programme, both for the local board and for the community.

6. These discussions have formed the basis of the Joint Engagement Plan 2021-2022 that is provided as Attachment A.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) adopt the Joint Engagement Plan 2021-2022 as agreed between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-Controlled Organisations: Auckland Transport, Auckland Unlimited, Panuku Development Auckland, and Watercare

b) note that the Joint Engagement Plan is a live document that will be updated as needed, with changes reported to the local board each quarter.

c) authorise the chair of the local board to sign this agreement on behalf of the local board, in conjunction with representatives from the four CCOs.

Horopaki

Context

7. In November 2019, the Governing Body approved the draft terms of reference for an independent review of Auckland Council’s substantive council-controlled organisations (CCOs) (GB/2019/127).

8. These terms of reference required the independent review panel to consider whether CCOs were an efficient and effective model for delivering services, and whether the CCO decision-making model had enough political oversight, public transparency and accountability.

CCO Review Findings

9. The independent panel presented the findings of the CCO Review to the Governing Body and local board chairs on 11 August 2020.

10. The review made 64 recommendations noting that the recommendations should be considered as a package. On 27 August 2020, the Governing Body resolved to agree in principle all of the review’s recommendations (GB/2020/89).

11. Local boards provided input to the CCO Review by:

· participating in the CCO Review process

· providing feedback on the final report to the Governing Body in August 2020.

12. The 64 recommendations were divided up into categories of work:

· those to be implemented by the council’s chief executive

· those the council’s chief executive would work with CCO chief executive(s) to implement

· those that the Panuku Development Auckland board would consider and report back on

· those that CCOs would work with local boards to implement; this last group includes recommendations 6, 34, and 53.

13. Recommendation 34 was that CCOs and local boards reset how they engage with one another, by means of:

a) a workshop to develop a more meaningful way for CCOs and local boards to work together

b) the preparation of joint CCO engagement plans for each local board

c) more initiative by local boards in integrating their own planning with CCO planning

d) liaison between CCOs and local boards at a more senior level so CCOs can quickly remedy local board concerns

e) the preparation of joint CCO six-monthly reports for each local board

f) the communication of clear, up-to-date information from CCOs to local boards on projects in their area.

14. This report focusses on activities undertaken to deliver part (b) of recommendation 34, the preparation of a joint CCO engagement plan for each local board.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Developing a joint CCO engagement plan template

15. Prior to the 2020 CCO Review, the Governance Manual for substantive council-controlled organisations set the expectation that each CCO would prepare a local board engagement plan every three years, by 31 July following local board elections, and report to local boards accordingly. These engagement plans were created separately by the five CCOs, and were generic across all 21 local boards.

16. Recommendation 34 (b) of the 2020 CCO Review advised the preparation of joint CCO engagement plans for each local board.

17. A template for the joint engagement plan has been developed iteratively over the last six months, with input from Auckland Council, Auckland Transport, Auckland Unlimited, Panuku Development Auckland, and Watercare staff.

18. The template includes:

· CCO responsibilities

· local board commitments

· local board plan outcomes and objectives

· names of local board members and staff from the CCOs and local board services

· leads and/or delegations in place

· an overview of the IAP2 Public Participation Spectrum that is used to indicate the degree of engagement in each project

· work programme tables for each CCO.

19. The sections on CCO responsibilities and local board commitments have largely been imported from previous engagement plans, or directly from the Governance Manual.

20. Local board plan outcomes and objectives have been included to ensure these are front and centre when CCOs are working with local boards.

21. While directly addressing recommendation 34(a), the joint engagement plan also addresses other elements of recommendation 34 as follows:

· documents key contacts, including senior CCO representatives of the organisation well placed to quickly respond to and resolve local concerns (34d)

· gives local boards the opportunity to highlight projects likely to be most significant to them as governors, and contributes to a “no surprises” environment

· the process of developing, agreeing and documenting levels of engagement for each project or programme is the first step towards ensuring the communication of clear, up-to-date information from CCOs to local boards on projects in their area (34f).

22. This template was shared with local boards for feedback via the Chairs’ Forum (December 2020 and May 2021) and via a memo in May 2021.

23. It will be used for the 2021 financial year, with feedback from this 2021 process taken into account and any necessary changes incorporated for future years.

A workshop to develop a more meaningful way for CCOs and local boards to work together

24. In delivering parts (a) and (b) of recommendation 34, staff have linked the two outcomes together and supported local boards and CCOs to customise the content of each local board’s engagement plan via a joint workshop.

25. Staff from the four CCOs have attended joint workshops facilitated by Local Board Services at each of the 21 local boards between May and July 2021.

26. These workshops have provided local boards with the opportunity to share their views on CCO delivery and engagement in their area. They included an outline of each CCO’s work programme relating to the local area, and local boards have provided their views on the degree of engagement they expect for each project or programme.

27. The local board also indicated their preference for whether and how community engagement is undertaken for each project.

Customised engagement plans

28. The discussions that took place at the joint workshops are reflected in the customised version of the engagement plan provided for this local board as Attachment A.

29. This plan represents a point in time, and will be subject to change over the course of the year. It is a “live document” that will be updated when needed. Major changes to the CCO work programme, or to the agreed level of local board and public engagement, will be workshopped with the local board ahead of any change. Minor changes will be summarised and reported on each quarter.

30. Work programme items that will be confirmed with the formal adoption of the Long-term Plan 2021-2031 (LTP) will be included as they become available. This includes items from the Economic Development Action Plan, and the Regional Land Transport Plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

31. The adoption of the Joint Engagement Plan 2021-2022 between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-Controlled Organisations does not have a direct impact on climate.

32. Each CCO must work within Te Taruke-a-Tawhiri: Auckland's Climate Action Framework and information on climate impacts will be provided to local boards on a project or programme basis.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

33. Adopting the Joint Engagement Plan 2021-2022 is likely to have a positive impact on other parts of the council as well as between the respective CCOs within each local board area.

34. These plans will be shared with the integration teams that implement local board work programmes, and will give council staff greater visibility of CCO work programmes.

35. To avoid or reduce disruption, staff will align the processes for the local board work programme and the updating of the CCO engagement plans over time.

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

Local impacts and local board views

36. Local board engagement plans will enable local boards to customise engagement between CCOs and communities in their areas, by signalling those issues and projects which are of most significance within their communtiies.

37. Local boards provided input to the CCO Review by:

· participating in the CCO Review process

· providing feedback on the final report to the Governing Body in August 2020.

38. Local boards have been kept up to date on the development of the engagement plan template via:

· input and feedback at December 2020 Chairs’ Forum

· update at May 2021 Chairs’ Forum

· a memo to all local board members in May 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

39. Adopting the Joint Engagement Plan 2021-2022 is likely to have a positive impact on local engagement with mana whenua and mataawaka.

40. While both CCOs and local boards have engagement programmes with Māori, the engagement plan will allow a more cohesive and coordinated approach to engagement, with more advance planning of how different parts of the community will be involved.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

41. The adoption of the Joint Engagement Plan 2021-2022 between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-Controlled Organisations does not have financial impacts for local boards.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

42. It is likely that there will be changes made to work programme items in the engagement plan during the year, or to the level of engagement that the board or the community will have. This risk is mitigated by ensuring that the document states clearly that it is subject to change, contains a table recording changes made since it was signed, and will be re-published on the local board agenda quarterly, to ensure public transparency.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

43. With the engagement plans completed for all 21 local boards, staff will develop a reporting framework that best responds to the type of projects and the level of engagement to which local boards and CCOs have agreed.

44. CCOs will work with local boards to ensure that any major changes to the work programme or to engagement levels are workshopped with the board, and well documented.

45. Minor changes will be noted within the live document and shared with the local board each quarter.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Joint Engagement Plan 2021-2022 between Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-Controlled Organisations: Auckland Transport, Auckland Unlimited, Eke Panuku Development Limited, and Watercare	181

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kat Ashmead, Senior Advisor Operations and Planning, Local Board Services

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Governance Forward Work Calendar - July 2021	199

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Record of Workshops	203

[1] For example, local parks, reserves, civic spaces, footpaths and roads.

[3] Local board representatives were Margi Watson (Albert-Eden Local Board) and Mike Turinsky (Howick Local Board)

[4] Suggestions included: retaining the current size of signs advertising commercial sexual services in non-residential areas as there is insufficient evidence to justify a change; requiring council event signs to meet the Bylaw’s standards; clarifying requirements for landowner approval and the definition of community event; clarifying how election signs are regulated between parliamentary and local elections, and within and outside of the election period..

Chairperson	Maria Meredith
Deputy Chairperson	Chris Makoare
Members	Don Allan
	Debbie Burrows
	Nerissa Henry
	Peter McGlashan
	Tony Woodcock

Author	Blair Morrow – Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Author	Simone Tongatule - Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager