I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Strategic Procurement Committee will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 10 August 2021

10.00am

Room 1, Level 26
135 Albert Street
Auckland

 

Kōmiti Mahi Āta Torotoro Rawa /

Strategic Procurement Committee

 

OPEN ADDENDUM AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Cr Greg Sayers

 

Deputy Chairperson

Cr John Watson

 

Members

Cr Dr Cathy Casey

 

 

Deputy Mayor Cr Bill Cashmore

 

 

Cr Linda Cooper, JP

 

 

Cr Alf Filipaina

 

 

Cr Tracy Mulholland

 

 

IMSB Member Karen Wilson

 

Ex-officio

Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP

 

 

 

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Michelle Judge

Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere / Governance Advisor

 

9 August 2021

 

Contact Telephone: 0211950262

Email: michelle.judge@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


Strategic Procurement Committee

10 August 2021

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

 

10        Auckland Council Rating Valuation Services                                                             5

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

Procedural motion to exclude the public                                                                                9

C1       CONFIDENTIAL: Auckland Council Rating Valuation Services                               9


Strategic Procurement Committee

10 August 2021

 

 

Auckland Council Rating Valuation Services

File No.: CP2021/11250

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval for the rating valuation services procurement plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Based on legacy arrangements rating valuation services are currently performed partly in-house, and partly outsourced. Quotable Value (QV) maintain 75 per cent of the Auckland region and the internal valuation team maintains the remaining 25 per cent (these 25 per cent are the highest value and most complex areas of the city).

3.       The current annual costs to carry out the required property rating valuation function are on average $5.3 million. This average cost includes yearly maintenance and the triennial revaluation.

4.       Council also sells rating valuation data and sales data to external organisations, for which we receive approximately $800,000 in revenue each year. These arrangements are not impacted by this procurement plan.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Strategic Procurement Committee:

a)      note the information contained in this report, on the rating valuation services procurement plan, enables transparency on the topic due for discussion in the public excluded part of the meeting.

b)      note that the confidential report contains information that could prejudice the council’s position in future negotiations with suppliers.

Horopaki

Context

5.       Under the Rating Valuations Act 1998, the council is required to undertake rating valuations for all properties listed within its rating database. By function, the activities can be broadly categorised into two discrete areas: (1) triennial revaluations; and (2) roll maintenance of valuations following resource consents, building consents and changes of ownership.

6.       The council manages this through an in-house team and a contract with the Valuation Service Provider (VSP), Quotable Value (QV).

Quotable Value

7.       QV is a state-owned enterprise specialising in both private and rating property valuations.

8.       In Auckland, QV maintain the legacy areas of Waitākere, Manukau, North Shore, Rodney and non-commercial areas within Franklin and Papakura District Councils. This contains around 75 per cent of Auckland’s property base.

9.       The values for these rating units are currently created and maintained using QV’s own valuation system, QVIS. Although a robust system, QVIS is more than 15 years old, and has not had any major innovative functionality added for automation or customer reporting. Furthermore, it does not rely on data inputs to deliver a valuation, therefore data quality in some areas has been identified as poor.

Auckland Council’s Internal Valuation Team

10.     The internal council team maintain and value the legacy area of Auckland City Council. While this is only 25 per cent of the total number of rating valuations, it is the most complex and high value area in the region.

11.     The council use a software package called Valor. This system is provided as a Software as a Service (SaaS) model[1] by Opteon.

12.     The internal team predominately use a data-driven model called Hedonic Home Value Model to value its allocated region. This method values properties based on key data elements. This results in a property’s value being built from the ground up, depending on its different property attributes, as opposed to indexing where the value of a property is increased based on a percentage amount.

13.     This results in high data quality which better reflects the value of the property and also allows for on-selling opportunities for the data. We currently receive approximately $800,000 in revenue each year.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14.     There are currently a limited number of providers of sufficient scale and expertise to carry out rating valuations.

15.     Further details regarding analysis and advice of this procurement will be provided in the confidential section of the Strategic Procurement Committee meeting agenda.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

16.     It is not anticipated that there will be any climate impact through this procurement activity.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

17.     Since Auckland Council is the only member of the council family to carry out the valuation function, it is not anticipated that there will be any impact on the wider council family through this process.

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

Local impacts and local board views

18.     It is not anticipated that there will be any impact on local boards. Local boards will see no change as a result of this procurement activity.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

19.     Procurement staff have engaged with the Independent Māori Statutory Board, Amotai – The Southern Initative, and Te Hunga Roia Māori o Aotearoa leading the development of a set of Māori outcomes priorities for this procurement activity. Details will be provided in the confidential section of the Strategic Procurement Committee meeting agenda.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

20.     The financial implications for Auckland Council will be provided in the confidential section of the Strategic Procurement Committee meeting agenda.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

21.     Details regarding the risks and mitigations of this procurement will be provided in the confidential section of the Strategic Procurement Committee meeting agenda.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

22.     Once the Strategic Procurement Committee has approved the procurement plan, staff will start the sourcing process in SAP Ariba.

23.     It is anticipated that the procurement process will be completed by the end of November 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Dilin Abraham Kuriakose - Strategic Procurement Manager

Danny Doyle - Strategic Procurement Specialist

Authorisers

John Bishop - Group Treasurer

Peter Gudsell - Group Chief Financial Officer

Jazz Singh - General Manager Procurement

 


Strategic Procurement Committee

10 August 2021

 

 

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

That the Strategic Procurement Committee

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

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

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

 

C1       CONFIDENTIAL: Auckland Council Rating Valuation Services

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

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

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

s7(2)(b)(ii) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information.

s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

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

In particular, the report contains information that could prejudice the council’s position in future negotiations with suppliers.

s48(1)(a)

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

 



[1] Software as a service (SaaS) is a software distribution model in which a cloud provider hosts applications and makes them available to end users over the internet.