Agenda of Puketāpapa Local Board - Thursday, 16 September 2021

Puketāpapa Local Board

16 September 2021

Allocation of Local Board Transport Capital Fund

File No.: CP2021/13644

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update to the Puketāpapa Local Board (the Board) on its Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) and to recommend allocation of the remaining LBTCF budget.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report updates the Puketāpapa Local Board that it has $1,377,590 remaining in its LBTCF budget this political term following the June 2021 adoption of the regional land transport plan 2021 – 2031.

3. It updates members on transport projects previously prioritised by the local board and the current status of those projects.

4. Five projects are briefly described and recommended to be funded through the LBTCF and the report notes that this will expend nearly all of the remaining LBTCF budget.

5. There are risks that the latest COVID-19 lockdown may mean further budget cuts are necessary in the future, therefore it is expedient that prioritised projects are contracted out as soon as practicable.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) note the priorities of the projects set by the Puketāpapa Local Board in 2019 under:

i) resolution number PKTPP/2019/101 (Greenway Route D)

ii) resolution number PKTPP/2019/187 (a prioritised list of transport projects).

b) allocate the remainder of the Local Board Transport Fund as follows:

· $440,000 to the Greenways D Project, Part 2.

· $410,000 to the 244 Hillsborough Road Crossing

· $150,000 to the pedestrian refuge at 65 Hillsborough Road

· $110,000 to the pedestrian refuge in Melrose Road

· $195,000 to improve pedestrian safety at the Hillsborough Road/Mt Albert Road intersection

Horopaki

Context

6. Auckland Transport (AT) is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. As set out in our Local Board Engagement Plan we report on a regular basis to local boards. Regular reporting commitment acknowledges the important role local boards play in the governance of Auckland on behalf of their local communities.

7. AT has been reporting in 2021 on projects and operations in the local board areas by way of a monthly central bulletin. Information on local board consultations and updates on the status of the Community Safety Fund (CSF) and the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) have been conveyed by memo or email.

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

9. The LBTCF is a capital budget provided to all local boards by Auckland Council and delivered by AT. Local boards can use this fund to deliver transport infrastructure projects that they believe are important but are not part of AT’s work programme. Projects must also be:

· safe

· not impede network efficiency

· be in the road corridor (although projects running through parks can be considered if there is a transport outcome.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10. In 2019, the local board resolved to allocate $600,000 to the Greenways D Project (PKTPP/2019/101), which aimed to provide a safe cycling and walking route between Monte Cecilia Park and the Roskill school campus.

11. Also in 2019, the local board resolved both on a prioritised list of transport projects to cover both the community safety fund (CSF) and the LBTCF fund (PKTPP/2019/187). An update on all these allocations and their status is below.

Transport Projects 2019

Project	Description	Status
Greenways D	To improve walking and cycling connections between Monte Cecelia Park and the Roskill School Campus	Stage 1 – in delivery Stage 2 – Funding TBC
65 Hillsborough Road	Pedestrian refuge	Funding TBC
244 Hillsborough Road pedestrian crossing facility (Goodall Street)	Signalised pedestrian crossing	Funding TBC
383 Hillsborough Road pedestrian crossing facility (Waikōwhai Primary School)	Signalised pedestrian crossing	CSF Construction FY21-22
639 Richardson Road	Safety improvements at the crossing	CSF Delivered
Pah Road	Safety improvement	CSF Delivered
Wesley Primary School	Safety measures around the school	CSF Construction FY21-22
Stoddard Road near Tory Street	improved pedestrian crossing safety	AT to deliver
Melrose Road	Pedestrian refuge island near shops	Funding TBC
Hillsborough Road/ Mt Albert Road	Pedestrian safety improvements	Funding TBC
Arundel Street, Stamford Park Rd, Rogan Street	Intersection improvements (roundabout)	AT to construct FY2021-2022

12. In FY2020-2021, due to Auckland Council’s Emergency Budget, many of the community safety projects in the region were paused and the Puketāpapa Local Board’s LBTCF was reduced to $167,138. With this reduced budget, the local board resolved to deliver Stage 1 of its Greenway D project (start date August 2021) and to continue to fund the detailed design of the Hillsborough Road crossing at Goodall Street.

13. With new budgets approved in late June 2021, it was confirmed that the Puketāpapa Local Board has $1,377,590 to allocate in this political term. AT is requesting the local board to consider and confirm its allocation of LBTCF budget based on the local board’s resolved list of transport projects, delivery of Stage 1 of Greenways D and an extra project suggested by AT road safety engineers.

14. Noting that the estimate for Greenways D Part 2 is $440,000, which includes a 30% contingency, however if the final cost exceeds the original local board allocation of $600,000 (PKTPP 2019/187), AT will need to come back to the local board for increased funding.

Puketāpapa Prioritised Transport Projects

15. At its workshop on 12 August 2021, the board discussed the list of transport projects that had been prioritised in 2019 by resolution (PKTPP/2019/187). It was established at the August 2021 workshop which projects had already been delivered by the Community Safety Fund and which are scheduled for delivery in FY2021/2022.

16. In addition, AT confirmed that it intends to cover two of the unfunded projects in its own programme, being the delivery of the Rogan/Arundel/Stamford Park Road roundabout and the investigation and delivery of improvements to the zebra crossing on Stoddard Road, near Tory Street.

17. After taking into consideration this update, the projects below with their estimated costings still remain unfunded.

Project	Description	Notes	Estimates
Greenways D Part 2	Completion of similar works in Haughey Avenue and the completion of the upgrades to the two laneways running between Dornwell Road and Clinker Street, and Clinker Street to Hayr Road.	*This figure is a general estimate (30% contingency). See note above.	*$440,000
244 Hillsborough Road Crossing	Signalised Pedestrian Crossing at Goodall Street	The cost of this project has increased as contingency has been added (post COVID-19, most projects are tendering at higher than original firm estimates).	$410,000
65 Hillsborough Road	Part of Greenways D Part 2. Pedestrian Refuge (near Haughey Street)	The cost of this project has increased as contingency has been added (post COVID-19, most projects are tendering at higher than original firm estimates).	$150,000
Melrose Road	Pedestrian refuge Island near shops	The cost of this project has increased as contingency has been added (post COVID-19, most projects are tendering at higher than original firm estimates).	$110,000
Hillsborough Rd/Mt Albert Road	Pedestrian Crossing Safety	From 2019 Community Safety list	$195,000
Frederick Street/Queenstown Road Roundabout improvements	Upgrade roundabout with raised tables	Suggestion by AT’s Roading Safety Dept. On AT’s safety list but has low priority.	$300,000

18. AT’s recommendation is for the local board to support all the above projects with the exception of the Frederick Street/Queenstown Road roundabout improvements as this improvement is already on AT’s minor safety improvement list. This project was put forward by AT for consideration as it is currently a low priority for AT to deliver. As it is possible that AT might deliver it some time in the future, this project is not recommended at this stage.

19. Funding all the above projects (except the one noted) will expend nearly all the local board transport capital fund allocation with any left over budget being available to deliver bus shelters at strategic locations or other minor projects.

20. AT considers it particularly important to continue with Greenways D Part 2, and the Hillsborough Road (Goodall Street) crossing projects because public funds have already been expended on design of these projects. In addition, if funds are allocated to Greenway D, Part 2, AT may be able to vary the contract in place for Greenway Stage 1 and deliver savings in both time and budget.

21. Complementary to both the Greenways D projects is the Safer Communities project for Mt Albert Road which is now out for public consultation.

22. The lack of safe crossings on Hillsborough Road has also been highlighted by local residents in relation to access to schools and bus services and these crossings will likely be well received by residents.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

24. Auckland Transport’s core role is in providing attractive alternatives to private vehicle travel, reducing the carbon footprint of its own operations and, to the extent feasible, that of the contracted public transport network. These projects all support pedestrian and/or cyclist safety therefore contributing to climate change actions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25. The impact of information in this report is mainly confined to AT. Where LBTCF projects are being progressed by Auckland Council’s Community Facilities group, engagement on progress has taken place. Any further engagement required with other parts of the Council group will be carried out on an individual project basis.

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

Local impacts and local board views

26. AT attended a workshop with the Puketāpapa Local Board on 12 August 2021. At this workshop matters discussed included:

· Priority of local board resolutions passed in 2019

· An update on the delivery of the Community Safety Fund

· Allocation of the remaining LBTCF to projects.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27. The proposed decision of receiving the report has no impacts or opportunities for Māori. Any engagement with Māori, or consideration of impacts and opportunities, will be carried out on an individual project basis.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

28. Allocating the local board transport capital fund budget as recommended will expend nearly all of the outstanding funds in this political term.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

29. The impact of the latest COVID-19 lockdown has not been factored into these recommendations. There is a risk that budgets might be impacted by budget cuts resulting from the August/September 2021 lockdown.

30. After the last lockdown in 2020, projects that were already contracted out once the Emergency Budget was resolved continued to be delivered, therefore the local board is advised to allocate funding to its preferred projects as soon as possible.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

31. Once the local board’s resolutions are finalised, AT will work to contract out the projects as soon as possible.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Lorna Stewart – Elected Member Partner, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Stephen Rainbow – Head of Community Engagement, Central Hub, Auckland Transport

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

16 September 2021

Puketāpapa Local Grants and Multi-Board Round One 2021/2022, grant allocations

File No.: CP2021/13341

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To fund, part-fund or decline the applications received for Puketāpapa Local Grants Round One and Multi-Board Round One 2021/2022.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report presents applications received for the Puketāpapa Local Grants Round One (Attachment B) and Multi-Board Round One 2021/2022 (Attachment C).

3. The Puketāpapa Local Board adopted the Puketāpapa Local Board Community Grants Programme 2021/2022 on 15 April 2021 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

4. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $124,417 for the 2021/2022 financial year.

5. Twenty-five applications were received for Puketāpapa Local Grants, Round One 2021/2022, requesting a total of $129,640.35 and eleven multi board applications were also received requesting a total of $34,594.44.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in Puketāpapa Local Grants Round One 2021/2022 listed in the following table:

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
LG2215-117	No. 3 Roskill Theatre	Arts and culture	Towards the cost of delivering the project "Welcome Home - Finding your place", specifically the cost of providing artistic engagement and leadership within participating schools including the development of the artistic concept for “Welcome Home”, liaise with schools, lead and workshop the creative process with contributing school children and facilitation of final performances.	$6,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-102	New Settlers Family and Community Trust	Community	Towards the cost of running weekly "Healthy Eating and Healthy Lifestyle" workshops at the Wesley Community Centre for the former refugees and migrant families within the Puketapapa local board area, including the facilitators' fees, venue hire, gardening workshop equipment, project coordinator, marketing, administration, and the cooking demo cost.	$6,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-104	Dance Therapy NZ	Community	Towards programme facilitation, marketing, materials, venue hire, coordination, administration, and overhead costs for the "Dance 4 Us Mount Roskill" workshops from 18 October 2021 to 18 April 2022.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-108	Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the cost of support centre services, counselling and clinical supervision of the youth worker team and counsellors from 1 October 2021 to 31 March 2022.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-111	Aotearoa Africa Foundation	Community	Towards the costs of venue hire, project development, and facilitation including the Master of Ceremonies and Disc Jockey cost to host "Africa Week" in October 2021.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-116	Communicare CMA (Auckland) Incorporated	Community	Towards the weekly venue hire of the Hillsborough Friendship Centre for one year from 4 October 2021 to 30 September 2022 and the part-time coordinator's wages.	$6,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-118	Bhartiya Samaj Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the cost of running a school holiday programme for children from the South Asian community including the cost of volunteer reimbursement, activity material, hall maintenance, and facilitators koha.	$2,900.00	Eligible
LG2215-119	New Zealand Council Of Victim Support Groups Incorporated	Community	Towards the operational costs of the "Volunteer Support" programme, including the cost of staff expenses, volunteer expenses, technology, administration, learning and development, training, operational travel, communications, and fundraising.	$3,750.00	Eligible
LG2215-121	New Zealand Nejashi Trust Incorporated	Community	Towards the cost of delivering the weekly "Positive parenting and Women's wellbeing" workshops, including the cost of venue hire, resources, stationery, refreshment, a project coordinator, and facilitator/translator cost. for refugee women from 15 October 2021 to 30 September 2022.	$6,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-122	Mt Roskill Baptist Church	Community	Towards the hiring of the ride-on preschool toys, a photo booth, three bouncy castles, and an inflatable jousting arena for the “Light Party” on 30 October 2021.	$2,771.30	Eligible
LG2215-124	Communities Against Alcohol Harm Incorporated	Community	Towards the cost of appointing a lawyer for conducting two community workshops, web, and social media moderation and monitoring, community liaising, and administrative support for conducting workshops.	$5,675.00	Eligible
LG2215-125	Puketāpapa Business Voice Incorporated	Community	Towards the cost of governance support, marketing collaterals, set up of Customer Relationship Management (CRM) database and newsletters for "Puketāpapa Business Voice".	$5,984.00	Eligible
LG2215-127	Life Education Trust Counties Manukau	Community	Towards the overall costs to deliver a health and well-being programme to the schools in the Puketāpapa Local Board area including the costs of educational resources, insurances and teachers' salaries.	$4,999.88	Eligible
LG2215-128	Hillsborough Playcentre	Community	Towards the purchase of sleep and play equipment for the Playcentre, including a cot and mattresses, cot sheets, a rocking chair for nursery, carpentry and clay equipment, outdoor easels, Ukuleles, chiffon scarf sets, rainbow vortex drapes, animal wings, and hand and finger puppets.	$4,646.07	Eligible
LG2215-129	St John’s Presbyterian Church (Mt Roskill)	Community	Towards the design and construction of a pergola for the "St John's Presbyterian Church's Community Hall extension project".	$6,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-132	Auckland Marathi Association Incorporated	Community	Towards the cost of hosting a Diwali celebration at the Fickling Centre in November 2021, including venue hire, sound, and lighting, decoration and set up, pull up banner, recyclable cutlery, catering, and printing of the community magazine.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-110	Pet Whisperer Rescue Trust	Environment	Towards trapping, desexing, microchipping and vaccinating 100 cats within the Local Board area.	$6,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-115	Waikowhai Community Trust	Events	Towards the “Molley Green Community Day” on 19 March 2022 including the cost of sound equipment and tent hire, generators, port-a-loos, waste management, prizes, event permit fee, fun activities, and games.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-130	Arateco Systems Limited	Events	Towards the marketing cost of storage space web-based marketplace "Sharewell" including the purchase of a gazebo and design and printing of marketing materials.	$4,527.10	Eligible
LG2215-103	Almanar Trust	Sport and recreation	Towards the cost of coaching fees to run weekly fitness classes over 26 weeks.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-106	Hay Park Primary School	Sport and recreation	Towards the accommodation and the Youthtown programme administration cost of the Hay Park School Camp for Year 5 and 6 students.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-109	Chinese Senior Citizens Health Exercise Group Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the venue hire cost to run Tai Chi, Qi Gong, and other exercise classes for Chinese seniors at the Fickling Convention Centre and the Three Kings Tennis Pavilion.	$6,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-113	Auckland Basketball Services Limited	Sport and recreation	Towards venue hire, affiliation fee, and the cost of the Court Manager from 1 October 2021 to 31 May 2022.	$6,000.00	Eligible
LG2215-120	Auckland City FC Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the cost of delivering the "Auckland City FC Football programme" to 300 students from the Marshall Laing Primary School during school time, including the purchase of balls and coaching costs.	$5,387.00	Eligible
LG2215-123	Lynfield Tennis Club Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the costs to uplift, dispose of, and install a new synthetic turf on four Lynfield Tennis Club courts.	$6,000.00	Eligible
Total				$129,640.35

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

b) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in Puketāpapa Multiboard Round One 2021/2022, listed in Table Two below:

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
MB2022-120	The Operating Theatre Trust	Arts and culture	Towards gift a seat theatre tickets and transport costs for low decile school and early childhood centre children between October 2021 and May 2022	$4,348.00	Eligible
MB2022-113	Big Buddy Mentoring Trust	Community	Towards operational costs including wages, rent, transport, and equipment to recruit, screen, and train up to 50 more Auckland men to be volunteers (Big Buddies) to Auckland boys who do not have a father in their life	$5,000.00	Eligible
MB2022-121	The Student Volunteer Army Foundation	Community	Towards the Student Volunteer Army (SVA) "Kids Programme Volunteer Project" in various primary schools including the costs of school kits and providing administrative support from 31 October 2021 to 1 August 2022.	$2,000.00	Eligible
MB2022-140	New Zealand Tamil Senior Citizens Association	Community	Towards the “Senior’s Wellbeing” programme including community radio, various events, venue hire and excursions, from 1 November 2021 to 31 October 2022.	$6,000.00	Eligible
MB2022-144	Auckland Deaf Society Incorporated	Community	Towards the Christmas event including two sign language interpreters, entry fees for 74 adults and children to Butterfly Creek and donations for volunteers on 11 December 2021	$630.44	Ineligible
MB2022-145	Eduquest	Community	Towards venue hire and project costs for the healthy meal planning programme for women from ethnic communities at Mangere Old School Hall from 4 October to 30 October 2021.	$2,500.00	Eligible
MB2022-161	The Order of St John Northern Region Trust Board	Community	Towards the St John's Youth Development programme including venue hire, course fees, operational costs and First Aid kit renewals from 4 October 2021 to 30 June 2022.	$2,516.00	Eligible
MB2022-168	The Order of St John Northern Region Trust Board	Community	To purchase of 24 defibrillators to place in public spaces and Marae in each local board area.	$6,000.00	Eligible
MB2022-126	New Settlers Family and Community Trust	Events	Towards the Persian New Year event at Long Bay Regional Park on 10 January 2022.	$2,000.00	Eligible
MB2022-101	The Auckland Softball Association Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards a proportion of the annual operating expenses of the Auckland Softball Association	$3,000.00	Eligible
MB2022-127	Weet-Bix TRYathlon Foundation	Sport and recreation	Towards subsidised costs for children to enter the Central West Auckland TRYathlon on 5 December 2021 at Keith Hay Park	$600.00	Ineligible
Total				$34,594.44

Horopaki

Context

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

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

8. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· exclusions

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

· any additional accountability requirements.

9. The Puketāpapa Local Board adopted the Puketāpapa Local Board Community Grants Programme 2021/2022 on 15 April 2021 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

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

11. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $124,417 for the 2021/2022 financial year.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

· local food production and food waste reduction

· decreasing use of single-occupancy transport options

· home energy efficiency and community renewable energy generation

· local tree planting and streamside revegetation

· education about sustainable lifestyle choices that reduce carbon footprints.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

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

18. A summary of each application received through Puketāpapa Local Grants, Round One 2021/2022 and multi-board applications is provided in Attachment B and Attachment C.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

20. Eight applicants applying to Puketāpapa Local Grants Round One and seven applicants applying to the multiboard round one 2021/2022 indicate projects that target Māori or Māori outcomes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

21. The allocation of grants to community groups is within adopted 10 Year Budget 2021/2031 and local board agreements.

22. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $124,417 for the 2021/2022 financial year.

23. Twenty-five applications were received for Puketāpapa Local Grants, Round One 2021/2022, requesting a total of $129,640.35 and eleven multiboard applications were also received requesting a total of $34,594.44.

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Puketāpapa Local Board Grants Programme 2021/2022 (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇨	Puketāpapa Local Grants Round One 2021/2022 - grant applications (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇨	Puketāpapa Multiboard Round One 2021/2022 - grant applications (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Moumita Dutta - Senior Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Rhonwen Heath - Head of Rates Valuations & Data Mgmt

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

16 September 2021

Public feedback on proposal to amend the Animal Management Bylaw 2015

File No.: CP2021/12929

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend Auckland Council’s bylaw and associated controls about animals before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe / Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 and associated controls, staff have prepared feedback summary and deliberation reports.

3. The proposal seeks to improve the current Bylaw and controls to better minimise animal-related risks to public health and safety, nuisance, offensive behaviour and misuse of council-controlled public places.

4. Council received responses from 189 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 16 July 2021. All feedback is summarised by proposal and other matters as following:

Topic	Description
Proposal 1	Require an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban premises with a land area of less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required).
Proposal 2	Incorporate rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property.
Proposal 3	Update the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw and controls.
Other	Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

5. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

6. There is a reputational risk that the feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7. The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 29 October 2021. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the public feedback on the proposal to amend Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe 2015 / Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 and associated controls in this agenda report.

b) provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c) appoint one or more local board members to present the views in b) to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

d) delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

Horopaki

Context

The Animal Management Bylaw enables council to regulate the keeping of animals

8. Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe 2015 / the Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 (Bylaw) and associated controls (controls) seek to minimise animal-related risks to public health and safety, nuisance, offensive behaviour and misuse of council-controlled public places.

9. The rules are enforced by the Licensing and Regulatory Compliance unit using a graduated compliance model (information, education and enforcement).

10. The Bylaw and controls are one part of a wider regulatory framework, including the:

· Animal Products Act 1999 and Animal Welfare Act 1999 for animal welfare

· Resource Management Act 1991 and Biosecurity Act 1993 to protect the environment

· Dog Control Act 1996 and Auckland Council Dog Management Bylaw 2019 for the care and control of dogs.

Council proposed amendments to improve the Bylaw for public feedback

11. On 27 May 2021, the Governing Body adopted a proposal to improve the Bylaw and controls for public consultation (Item 11, GB/2021/50).

12. The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Bylaw (see figure below).

13. The proposal seeks to better regulate the keeping of animals by:

· requiring an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban premises with a land area of less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required)

· incorporating rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property

· updating the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw and controls to make them easier to read and understand.

14. The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 June until 16 July 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 177 people and 12 organisations.

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

15. The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

16. Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

17. The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

· indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

· recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area supports the proposal

18. One person from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal via online and email feedback. This person supported all three proposals, including Proposal One which the majority of all people who provided feedback opposed.

Support of proposal in the local board area

Topic	Local board area feedback	Auckland-wide feedback
1: Require an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban premises with a land area of less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required).	100 per cent support 0 per cent oppose (want more rules) 0 per cent oppose (want less rules) 0 per cent ‘other’ 0 per cent no response	34 per cent support 6 per cent oppose (want more rules) 48 per cent oppose (want less rules) 10 per cent ‘other’ 2 per cent no response
2: Incorporate rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property.	100 per cent support 0 per cent oppose 0 per cent ‘other’ 0 per cent no response	62 per cent support 15 per cent oppose 12 per cent ‘other’ 11 per cent no response
3: Update the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw and controls.	100 per cent support 0 per cent oppose 0 per cent ‘other’ 0 per cent no response	64 per cent support 10 per cent opposed 15 per cent ‘other’ 11 per cent no response

19. The submitter from the local board area did not provide any comments with their submission so there is no comparison available between key themes from this submitter’s feedback and all public feedback.

20. The full proposal can be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report which includes a summary of all public feedback. Attachment B contains a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

21. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22. There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

23. The proposal impacts council’s Licensing and Regulatory Compliance team who implement the Bylaw. The unit is 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

24. The Bylaw is important to local boards as a topic of high community interest.

25. Local board views were sought on a draft proposal in March and April 2021. The draft was supported in full by 13 local boards and with suggested changes by seven local boards. One local board opposed the proposal for public consultation.

26. A summary of local board views and changes made to the proposal can be viewed in the link to the 11 May 2021 Regulatory Committee agenda (Attachment B to Item 11, page 101).

27. This report provides an opportunity for local boards to provide views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28. The Bylaw has significance to Māori as kaitiaki of Papatūānuku.The proposal supports the key direction of kaitiakitanga in the Independent Māori Statutory Board Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau by minimising the misuse of council-controlled public places.

29. The proposed amended bylaw also supports the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Schedule of Issues of Significance by clarifying how the Bylaw applies to Māori and papakāinga. For example, the proposal clarifies that limits on the ownership of animals in urban areas do not apply to papakāinga within the Māori Purpose Zone of the Auckland Council Unitary Plan.

30. 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.

31. The majority of people identifying as Māori who provided feedback support Proposals Two and Three (consistent with the overall public feedback). The majority of people identifying as Māori who provided feedback opposed Proposal One (consistent with the overall public feedback).

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

32. There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

33. The following risk has been identified:

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people.	The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.	This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

34. On 29 October 2021 the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021 (refer to the ‘Process to amend the Animal Management Bylaw 2015’ diagram in Context).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report	29
b ⇩	Public feedback from people in the Puketāpapa Local Board area	57

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Saralee Gore - Policy Advisor

Breanna Hawthorne - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

16 September 2021

Public feedback on proposal to make a new Public Trading Events and Filming Bylaw 2022

File No.: CP2021/12965

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposed new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Tauhokohoko, Whakahaerenga me te Tango Kiriata Tūmatanui / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, staff have summarised the feedback and provided a structure for deliberations.

3. The proposal helps to minimise safety risks, nuisance and the misuse of council-controlled public places (for example footpaths, local parks and civic spaces) by continuing to regulate trading, events and filming activities.

4. Council received responses from 75 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 16 July 2021. All feedback is summarised into the following topics:

Topic	Description
Proposal 1	Continue to regulate trading, events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw.
Proposal 2	Clarify the need for rental micromobility devices to be approved under their own licence instead of a mobile shop licence as they currently are.
Proposal 3	Clarify which activities require an approval, don’t require an approval as long as certain conditions are met, and are not addressed in the Bylaw.
Proposal 4	Update the title, structure, format, definitions, and wording to ensure that a new bylaw is easier to read, understand and comply with.
Other	Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

5. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

6. There is a reputational risk that feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations, and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7. The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 20 October 2021. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive public feedback on the proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Tauhokohoko, Whakahaerenga me te Tango Kiriata Tūmatanui 2022 / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 in this agenda report.

b) provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c) appoint one or more local board members to present the views in (b) to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

d) delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in (c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

Horopaki

Context

Bylaw regulates trading, events and filming in council-controlled public places

8. The current Auckland Council Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 / Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-Rohe Hokohoko, Whakahaerenga i ngā Wāhi Tūmatanui 2015 seeks to protect public safety, minimise nuisance and misuse of council-controlled public places caused by trading activities, events and filming.

9. The rules are enforced by the Licensing and Regulatory Compliance Unit using a graduated compliance model (information, education and enforcement).

10. The current Bylaw is one part of a wider regulatory framework that includes the:

· Reserves Act 1997, Resource Management Act 1991, Food Act 2014, Road User Rule 2004, Trespass Act 1980, Fair Trading Act 1986, Customer Guarantees Act 1993, Electricity (Safety) Regulations 2010 and Auckland Unitary Plan

· Auckland Council Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013, Signage Bylaw 2015, Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 and Waste Management and Minimisitaion Bylaw 2019

· Auckland Transport Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015.

11. The current Bylaw will expire on 26 February 2022 and council must adopt a new bylaw before that date to avoid a regulatory gap.

Council proposed a new bylaw for public feedback

12. On 27 May 2021, the Governing Body adopted a proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Tauhokohoko, Whakahaerenga me te Tango Kiriata Tūmatanui / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 (Bylaw) for public consultation (GB/2021/51).

13. The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Auckland Council Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 (see figure below).

14. The proposal helps to minimise safety risks, nuisance and the misuse of council-controlled public places (for example, in local parks, reserves and civic spaces) by:

· continuing to regulate trading, events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw

· clarifying the need for rental micromobility devices to be approved under their own licence instead of a mobile shop licence as they currently are

· clarifying which activities require an approval, don’t require an approval as long as certain conditions are met, and are not addressed in the Bylaw

· updating the title, structure, format, definitions, and wording to ensure that a new bylaw is easier to read, understand and comply with.

15. The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 June until 16 July 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 59 people and 16 organisations. In addition, the ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage received 525 hits.^{^[1]}

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

16. The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

17. Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

18. The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

· indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

· recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area

19. There was no public feedback from people identifying with the Puketāpapa Local Board area.

20. Across Auckland 59 people and 16 organisations provided feedback to the proposal via online and email feedback. There was majority support for all Proposals.

21. Support for proposals across Auckland

Proposal	Total support from people across Auckland
1: Continue to regulate trading, events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw.	66 per cent (40/61 submitters)
2: Clarify the need for rental micromobility devices to be approved under their own licence instead of a mobile shop licence as they currently are.	74 per cent (46/62 submitters)
3: Clarify which activities require an approval, don’t require an approval as long as certain conditions are met, and are not addressed in the Bylaw.	75 per cent (44/59 submitters)
4: Update the title, structure, format, definitions, and wording to ensure that a new bylaw is easier to read, understand and comply with.	83 per cent (48/58 submitters)

22. Key themes from feedback from people across Auckland included:

· micromobility devices should be regulated to reduce safety risks

· the proposal sends a clear picture of what is or is not allowed

· for filming to be treated separately to events.

23. The full proposal can be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report which includes a summary of all public feedback.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

24. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

25. There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. The proposal impacts the operation of several council departments and council-controlled organisations. This includes Auckland Council’s Licensing and Regulatory Compliance Unit, Events in Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships Unit, Alcohol Licensing and Environmental Health Unit, Auckland Unlimited (previously known as Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development), and Screen Auckland. These teams are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

27. The proposal may also impact the Auckland Transport Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015. Auckland Transport is aware of the proposal. Auckland Transport has also made council aware of Auckland Transport’s review of its bylaw.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28. The proposed new bylaw impacts on local governance as it regulates trading, event and filming activities in council-controlled public places, for example local parks.

29. Local boards views were sought on a draft proposal in April 2021. The draft was supported in full by 13 local boards and with suggested changes by eight local boards.

30. A summary of local board views and changes made to the proposal can be viewed in the link to the 11 May 2021 Regulatory Committee agenda, page 191 (Attachment B to Item 12).

31. This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32. Māori have strong bonds to the land as kaitiaki. The proposal supports the Independent Māori Statutory Board Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau by minimising the misuse of council-controlled public places and facilitating opportunities for Māori business owners.

33. The proposed rules for trading, events and filming in council-controlled public places apply to activities undertaken by Māori, particularly major or international events.

34. 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.

35. Those submitters who identified as Māori supported Proposals One, Three and Four which is consistent with the overall percentage of the Auckland-wide feedback. Comments included that the proposed regulation seems sensible and provides appropriate balance between mitigating risks and enabling businesses to operate. While the support for Proposal Two was split, submitters agreed that rental micromobility should remain regulated.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36. There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. Costs associated with the special consultative procedure will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

37. The following risks have been identified:

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations.	The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.	This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38. On 20 October 2021, the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021 (refer to the ‘Process to make the new Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022’ diagram in Context).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Bylaw Panel Deliberations Report	67

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Magda Findlik - Principal Policy Analyst

Sam Bunge - Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

16 September 2021

Public feedback on proposal to amend the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015

File No.: CP2021/13434

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposed amendments to the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para / Auckland Council Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. The proposal helps to protect the water and water networks from damage misuse and interference and assist in the provision of reliable, safe and efficient water and wastewater services in Auckland.

4. Council received responses from 46 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 16 July 2021. All feedback is summarised into the following topics:

Topic	Description
Proposal 1	To further define the rules regarding unauthorised taking of water from the water supply network
Proposal 2	To further define the rules regarding unauthorised discharges to the wastewater network
Proposal 3	Clarification of linkages to other legislation, bylaws and other documentation
Other	Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters

5. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal and, if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel. Taking this approach will assist the panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

6. There is a reputational risk that feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7. The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 5 November 2021. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive public feedback on the proposal to amend the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para / Auckland Council Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 in this agenda report.

b) provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c) appoint one or more local board members to present the views in b) to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

d) delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

Horopaki

Context

Bylaw protects the water supply and wastewater networks

8. The Governing Body adopted the Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para 2015 / Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 on 25 June 2015 (resolution number GB/2015/62). This Auckland Council bylaw is administered by Watercare Services Limited.

9. This bylaw seeks to protect the water supply and wastewater networks by:

· requiring authorisation from Watercare to connect to or disconnect from the water supply or wastewater network and enabling Watercare to refuse connections where there is insufficient network capacity

· ensuring appropriate standards for any new infrastructure under Watercare's control

· protecting the quality of the water supply and prohibiting illegal use from hydrants

· managing work near the water supply and wastewater network to protect it from damage

· allowing for restricting the water supply to maintain enough drinking water in the event of drought or other emergency

· managing inflows and illegal dumping of material into the wastewater network to avoid wastewater overflows.

10. The bylaw is one part of a wider regulatory framework. Issues related to access to private property are addressed under the Local Government Act 2002 while those related to the compliance with water quality are addressed under the Health Act 1956.

11. In addition, uniquely to Auckland, Watercare has a contractual relationship with its customers. This enables the bylaw to focus on matters relating to the impact of household and businesses’ behaviours on the public assets, while the customer contract addresses the rights and obligations for each customer’s water and wastewater connection.

Council proposed amendments to the bylaw for public feedback

12. On 25 February 2021, the Governing Body adopted a proposal to make amendments to the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw for public consultation (resolution number GB/2021/11).

13. The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Water and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 (see figure below).

14. The proposal helps to clarify and further define the rules in the bylaw by clarifying:

· the rules around the unauthorised taking of water from the water supply network

· the definitions around unauthorised discharges to the wastewater network

· linkages with other bylaws and documentation.

15. The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 June until 16 July 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 43 people and three organisations. In addition, the ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage received 396 hits.^{^[2]}

Process to amend Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015

Graphical user interface, text, application, chat or text message

Description automatically generated

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

16. The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

17. Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

18. The nature of the local board views is at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

· indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

· recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area

19. No public feedback was received from the Puketāpapa Local Board area. There was majority support for proposals 1, 2 and 3 from all people who provided feedback across the Auckland region, as outlined in the following table:

Support of proposal in the Auckland region

Topic	Total support from people across Auckland
1: To further define the rules regarding unauthorised taking of water from the network	70 per cent
2: To further define the rules regarding unauthorised discharges to the wastewater network	79 per cent
3: Clarification of linkages to other legislation, bylaws and documentation	76 per cent

21. The full proposal can be viewed in the link provided. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report which includes a summary of all public feedback.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

22. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution and, if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23. There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24. The bylaw impacts the operations of many Watercare teams in charge of the operations and the planning of water sources and water and wastewater networks. It also impacts some Auckland Council teams involved in compliance and stormwater management. Relevant staff 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

25. Local board members were invited to give feedback on the bylaw in December 2019. This included an offer by staff to present workshops to interested local boards at their meetings.

26. Communication was received from one local board in relation to wastewater overflows, a matter unrelated to bylaw and already covered by the Resource Management Act 1991.

27. This low interest in the bylaw review is consistent with the Auckland Council’s classification of the bylaw as ‘low impact and low interest to local boards’ under the agreed principles and processes for Local Board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws 2019.

28. An update on the findings and options stages were included in Watercare’s local board communications in June 2020.

29. This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

30. The bylaw contributes to the Māori plan’s key directions and aspirations of Manaakitanga (Improve Quality of Life ‘Satisfaction with our environments and standard of living’) and Kaitiakitanga (Ensure Sustainable Futures ‘lntergenerational Reciprocity’) by ensuring the public water supply and wastewater network is future-proofed and not contaminated or damaged, which would be detrimental to the people and the natural environment.

31. Input by mana whenua was sought at a special hui of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in January 2020. The main concerns related to environmental issues beyond the bylaw scope, such as archaeological sites and clarifications of asset ownership and responsibilities.

32. Staff sought input by mana whenua on the proposed options in June 2020. A meeting with the chairperson of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum confirmed his support for the direction taken and recommended a written update at the June 2020 forum to carry on the engagement.

33. Watercare staff presented an update of the bylaw review process to the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in mid-October 2020.

34. Those respondents who identified as Māori during the public consultation were all generally supportive of the three proposals.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35. There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. Costs associated with the special consultative procedure will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

36. The following risks have been identified:

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations	The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community	This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

37. On 5 November 2021, the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in February 2022 (refer to the ‘Process to make the amend the Water and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015’ diagram in the ‘Context’ section of this report).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Bylaw Panel Deliberations Report	119

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Sharon Danks -Operations and Delivery Manager, Watercare

Authorisers

Mark Bourne – Chief Operations Officer – Watercare

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

16 September 2021

Local board feedback on the Kerbside Refuse Charging Mechanism Policy

File No.: CP2021/13473

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek formal feedback from local boards on the kerbside refuse charging model policy review.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council is currently committed to expanding the pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) funding model for kerbside refuse collection across the Auckland region. This reflects the policy within our Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 to provide consistent waste services across the region.

3. This would involve moving the legacy Auckland City Council and Manukau City Council areas away from a rates-funded service to a PAYT funding model.

4. Before we make this shift, Waste Solutions is reviewing the evidence to support the decision to move these areas to a PAYT model to assess whether PAYT is still the best solution for achieving the objectives of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.

5. Evidence gathered so far is being assessed against three options:

· all areas pay-as-you-throw (PAYT)

· keeping a hybrid model (currently, 55 per cent of the region’s refuse collection is rates-funded, 45 per cent PAYT)

· all areas rates-funded.

6. The options will have a different impact on each local board area, depending on the current service charging mechanism relative to the proposed service change (Attachment A).

7. A memo was circulated to all local boards on 23 July 2021 (Attachment B) outlining initial conclusions reached through the analysis of evidence gathered to date. This was used as a basis for discussion with local boards at workshops throughout August 2021 to understand their views on the risks and impacts of the potential options within their respective areas.

8. This report seeks formal feedback from local boards, using the template in Attachment C as a guide, to inform the recommendation that staff will present to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the kerbside refuse charging model policy review.

Horopaki

Context

9. The 2012 Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) made provision to move all Auckland households towards a user-pays charging system for refuse collection, known in Auckland as pay-as-you-throw (PAYT). This transition to a consistent regional PAYT refuse service (weekly, changing to fortnightly over time) was confirmed in WMMP 2018.

10. The decision was based on:

· best evidence at the time that this was the most effective way to incentivise diversion from landfill and enable householders to reduce their waste costs

· the understanding that technology would be available to enable pay-per-lift charging through radio-frequency identification (RFID) chipped bins.

11. In legacy rates-funded areas, it was decided that the move to PAYT would take effect after the introduction of a food scraps collection service, to reduce the financial impact on households.

12. Since then, more information has become available about the effectiveness of PAYT, particularly in the context of the other complementary services that the council has rolled out, for example regionwide recycling and the pilot food scraps service, due to be rolled out regionwide from early 2023. Prior to making the change to PAYT, Waste Solutions is reviewing the evidence base for this shift.

13. In this review we are assessing several factors, including:

· the potential effects of each funding model on communities

· the potential waste minimisation impacts of each funding model

· the expected cost to implement each funding model taking into account the changing financial circumstances of both ratepayers and council.

14. To assist with this review, Waste Solutions commissioned independent consultants, Morrison Low, to examine the evidence currently available against the following aspects of the refuse collection service and its impact on the council, customers and the environment:

· waste minimisation

· cost effectiveness

· reputation

· technology

· household responsibility / accountability

· access / equity

· downstream impacts on the collections industry

· climate change

· amenity

· health and safety.

15. Evidence gathered so far is being assessed against three options:

· all areas PAYT

· keeping a hybrid model (currently 55 per cent rates-funded, 45 per cent PAYT)

· all areas rates-funded.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16. Currently, 55 per cent of Auckland households (legacy Auckland City and Manukau City) are provided with a rates-funded refuse service, with the remaining 45 per cent (legacy Franklin, Waitākere, Papakura and North Shore City Council) on a PAYT service provided by either the council or a private operator. There is no council refuse collection service in legacy Rodney, but under current policy there is a commitment to provide a PAYT service in the future. See Attachment A for a breakdown of council refuse collection services by local board area.

17. Detailed analysis and advice were provided to local boards in a memo dated 23 July 2021 (Attachment B). This memo was marked confidential, but the need for confidentiality has now lapsed.

Conclusions on key issues

18. Aotearoa/New Zealand is unique in having side-by-side competition between private and council services in the residential refuse collection market. This impacts the way PAYT operates and introduces a number of challenges not experienced overseas.

19. Financial modelling currently indicates that PAYT is less cost-effective for the council than rates-funded solutions because of more complex systems, duplication of workloads by multiple suppliers and the council’s need to offer the service to properties across the entire region.

20. Evidence from overseas found only a very weak link between marginal pricing changes and change in refuse quantities. This is consistent with a 2021 examination of refuse tonnages, which found no clear evidence that PAYT areas of Auckland produce less refuse per capita than rates-funded areas.

21. The current price in Auckland does not appear to be a sufficient economic driver to motivate behaviour change in households.

22. International evidence indicates the greatest waste minimisation is achieved through providing easy access to services that divert waste away from landfill (such as the recycling and food scraps collection services), good community education programmes, and reduced access to refuse volume to encourage use of the diversion services.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23. Enhancing access to diversion and resource recovery, along with optimising efficiencies around collecting refuse at the kerbside, presents opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions directly, for example through the reduction of vehicle movements and diversion of organic material from landfill, and indirectly by encouraging better resource use.

24. Therefore, considerations to take into account when assessing options include the opportunities to minimise both direct and immediate impacts on greenhouse gas emissions, for example:

· emissions can be mitigated where the council retains greater control over household behaviour and container size (larger customer base), to drive higher participation rates from households in the weekly food scraps service which is critical to reducing methane emissions from landfill

· emissions can be mitigated by choosing the option that will bring efficiencies to vehicle servicing routes. This includes reducing duplication of refuse collectors operating side-by-side in the same areas of Auckland.

25. The rates-funded option provides the opportunity to reduce total truck kilometres travelled from a sole supplier, the ability to specify the truck requirement through the procurement process and efficiencies in route design.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. This review is about the way in which council charges for domestic kerbside rubbish collections and so views have not been sought from the wider council family.

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

Local impacts and local board views

27. Local boards provided feedback through the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 development process. All local boards supported the proposed WMMP. Only Devonport-Takapuna, Manurewa, Ōrākei and Papakura Local Boards expressed views on refuse charging mechanisms within their responses.

28. Staff provided a detailed memo to all local boards on 23 July 2021, outlining the early findings of the review, acknowledging that detailed works on costs and equity were still being completed.

29. Staff attended workshops with local boards between 29 July and 24 August 2021 to present on the key points of the review and seek views on the current refuse collection services. Informal feedback was noted during these workshops.

30. This report seeks formal feedback from the local board using the template provided in Attachment C to inform the recommendation to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31. Mana whenua and mataawaka were engaged in the development of the 2018 Waste Management and Minimisation Plan and identified priority actions for Māori.

32. The council partners with Para Kore ki Tāmaki – a Māori-developed and implemented programme that integrates mātauranga Māori and zero waste principles and practices to support marae, Māori organisations, Kura Kaupapa Māori and Kōhanga Reo to divert significant quantities of recycling and organic waste from landfill.

33. Staff outlined the purpose of the review and early findings to the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Regional Hui on 9 July 2021 and then at a Regional Projects Workshop on 20 July 2021. Members of the forum receiving the presentation raised concerns that poorer communities had fewer choices in relation to controlling their waste production. Staff acknowledged that this was recognised by Waste Solutions and that multiple approaches are needed, including advocacy to central government on phasing out hard-to-recycle plastics and the introduction of product stewardship schemes.

34. Staff are also working with specialist community facilitators Rākau Tautoko and Waste Solutions community partners to hold targeted focus groups with Māori and Pacific communities during August and September 2021 to seek their views on different refuse collection payment mechanisms. These views will inform the recommendation to Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35. In terms of cost-effectiveness, when comparing rates funded with PAYT models, the Morrison Low study concluded that the rates-funded option provides greater cost-effectiveness for the council than both the current hybrid model and the PAYT option due to economies of scale.

36. This was based on:

· cost: results of financial modelling commissioned by the council, using existing parameters and the weekly PAYT service, show that the cost of delivering a rates-funded service is similar, but costs the community significantly less overall when all service costs, including private collection costs, are included.

· cost sustainability: an estimated variation in cost per pickup based on the number of customers serviced by Auckland Council which shows that the cost of operating the council service increases sharply when the council is servicing less than 30 per cent of the community. At 30 per cent, it is approximately double the cost per pickup compared to 80 per cent.

37. Further analysis of costs is being carried out by council staff as part of this discovery phase.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38. High level risks are outlined in Table 1. More detailed risks and mitigations will be examined as part of the development of options for Environment and Climate Change Committee throughout September.

Table 1: Kerbside refuse charging policy review high level risks and mitigations

Risk	Mitigation
The perception of unfairness in offering the same service/charge to all households: households that produce large amounts of waste are favoured under the rates-funded model, whereas households that produce less waste are favoured under the PAYT model.	Staff are investigating the cost of offering three different bin sizes (80l/120l/240l) under the rates-funded model to accommodate different households’ needs.
There is no agreement on which charging model works best for the whole of Auckland	Consideration of a hybrid model will be presented as part of the options analysis to Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.
The preferred option costs council more to deliver than the current hybrid option.	Detailed costs will be provided for all three options. These will be presented at workshops with elected members and local board chairs as part of the Annual Budget 2022/23 process. This will include analysis of the cost to the community and an estimate of the cost of failing to meet Auckland’s climate change goals.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

39. Staff are currently engaging with elected members, local boards, industry and community groups, prior to developing options and recommendations to take to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for a decision on 14 October 2021.

40. Local board feedback received by 28 September will help inform the recommendation, and will be included within the report.

41. In addition to the above, the following studies are currently underway, or have recently concluded:

· radio-frequency identification (RFID) trial to show whether this service will be able to be operated at scale, with a sufficiently low error rate to be considered feasible in Auckland

· detailed analysis of costs of all options

· investigation of the social impacts of the three options.

42. The results of these studies will conclude the desk-based discovery phase and will inform the final evaluation of options by Morrison Low. This final report will help to inform the recommendation that will be presented to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

43. If the Environment and Climate Change Committee decide to deviate from current Waste Management and Minimisation Plan policy by approving either the rates-funded or hybrid model option, the current proposal is to engage more widely on options through a special consultative procedure as part of the Annual Plan 2022/2023 process.

44. Local boards will be consulted on the preferred option, which will include a more detailed analysis of the timings of any changes to service, during that process.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Current refuse services and impact of options by local board area	131
b ⇩	Memo Kerbside Refuse Charging Review	133
c ⇩	Template for local board feedback – refuse charging	141

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Sarah Le Claire - Waste Planning Manager

Authorisers

Parul Sood – General Manager Waste Solutions

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

16 September 2021

Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua - Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan

File No.: CP2021/13766

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek support for the draft Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua - Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The number and diversity of older Aucklanders is growing, and this creates challenges and opportunities for improving the age-friendliness of our environment, infrastructure, and services now and in the future.

3. Older people experience barriers to participation across all areas of life.

4. The draft Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua Action Plan (Action Plan) is our commitment to supporting older Aucklanders to participate fully in their communities.

5. It is a region-wide, cross-sector plan that commits the council, council-controlled organisations (CCOs) and sector partners to improve outcomes for older Aucklanders through the delivery of tangible and meaningful short, medium and long-term actions.

6. To develop the Action Plan, staff listened to over 3,000 Aucklanders who shared their thoughts on what is needed to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

7. Engagement with kaumātua and whānau to hear what is important to Māori led to the development of our unique Age-Friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework. The Framework combines the WHO domains with Te Ao Māori concepts and reflects the bicultural identity of Aotearoa and the diversity of Tāmaki Makaurau.

8. Many activities within the plan will benefit people of all ages and what we do now to improve older Aucklander’s accessibility and quality of life will also benefit future generations.

9. The Action Plan is constrained by actions needing to be delivered within existing resources, or as and when new funding can be secured. Greater or quicker impact could be possible in the future if budget is not such a limitation.

10. By working together council and cross-sector partners can, however, leverage resources to achieve greater collective impact and prioritise efforts to where it is needed most.

11. Over time the plan will help create an age-friendly lens that becomes embedded in the way council and partners design and deliver services and infrastructure. This will result in ongoing and incremental change that makes a tangible impact on the lives of older people.

12. Community engagement on the draft Action Plan is underway and will be completed in September 2021.

13. The final Action Plan will be reported to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee for adoption in November 2021.

14. The adopted Action Plan will enable Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland to join the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Global Network of Age-friendly Cities and Communities.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) support the draft Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan.

Horopaki

Context

15. Auckland Council has a strong interest in the wellbeing of older people, because:

· Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland is home to New Zealand’s largest population of older people^{^[3]} - this number will more than double between 2018 and 2043

· of the current 65+ population, most are well-placed but some face hardship and this will increase^{^[4]}

· diversity in life stage, needs and abilities, culture, language, living situation and financial stability affect how older people contribute and participate in the community.

16. In view of this, in July 2018 Auckland Council’s Environment and Community Committee resolved to become an Age-friendly City and seek membership to the World Health Organisation’s Global Network of Age-friendly Cities and Communities (ENV/2018/88).

17. The network includes cities that are committed to supporting each other and creating inclusive and accessible environments for all people to enjoy. It identifies eight interconnected domains of urban life that contribute to improving the wellbeing and participation of older people.

18. To obtain membership to the network, council has led a process to develop a region-wide cross-sector Action Plan that will deliver over 80 actions to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

19. To develop the Action Plan, staff listened to over 3,000 Aucklanders who shared their thoughts on what is needed to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

20. The Action Plan has been created to ensure infrastructure, activities and services are developed or adapted to respond to the diverse needs of Auckland’s growing and increasingly more diverse ageing population.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The problem/opportunity

21. Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s older population is growing faster than any other age-group and faces challenges and barriers to participation across all areas of life.

22. Our older people are taonga, and deserve to live full, meaningful lives where they can participate and are valued for the contribution they make to our communities.

Our services and infrastructure need to respond and adapt to older peoples’ diverse needs

23. Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s growing and increasingly diverse ageing population means we need short-term as well as longer-term, system-level solutions to ensure older people can actively participate in their communities now and in the future.

24. The burden on the environment, infrastructure and on services such as healthcare will expand exponentially as the older population grows to a projected 432,800 Aucklanders by 2043. To enable older people to live active and full lives in Tāmaki Makaurau, we need to ensure infrastructure, activities and services are developed or adapted to respond to their diverse needs.

Older Aucklanders told us they face challenges related to accessibility across all areas including public space, buildings, transport, and housing options

25. Older people told us they need:

Older Aucklanders can find it difficult to access information and to keep up to date with technology

26. Older people told us they need:

Older people can feel invisible, disconnected, and discouraged from taking an active role in their community

27. Older people told us they need:

Our response to the problem/opportunity

28. The development of Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan (Attachment A).

29. This is a cross-sector action plan that responds to the diverse needs and aspirations of older Aucklanders to improve their wellbeing and quality of life; and to make Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland a more age-friendly region.

Strengths

A cross-sector action plan will deliver collective impact in an innovative, sustainable, and equitable way

30. Auckland Council has worked with a range of organisations and communities who are active in advancing the wellbeing of older Aucklanders including:

· nineteen organisations with different specialities, such as health, recreation, and housing

· regional and local organisations, ensuring a breadth of reach across communities.

31. Together we identified and developed actions that will address the challenges and opportunities raised by older Aucklanders. This approach:

· enables collaboration between the council, aged-sector organisations, and communities

· creates opportunities to leverage resources and deliver greater collective impact over time.

· develops an action platform for organisations to build upon

· encourages interest and participation from other organisations to be part of delivery

· recognises that improving the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland relies on many different groups and agencies playing their part

· ensures the delivery of actions that have impact for older Aucklanders of all ethnicities, abilities, and beliefs.

32. It is anticipated that having a shared vision for an age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau will continue to build momentum within the organisations who are responsible for delivering actions.

33. The intent is that over time an age-friendly lens will become embedded in the way council and partners design and develop services and infrastructure across the region.

34. The result of this will be ongoing action and incremental change that makes a tangible impact on the lives of older people.

The Action Plan includes a mixture of over 80 new and existing actions

35. Impact will be delivered through a mix of short, medium, and long-term actions. They are spread across all ten domains, but not equally.

36. Some domains have more actions than others, for example the Housing Domain has fewer actions than the Respect and Social Inclusion Domain. This is because some things, such as refurbishing Haumaru Housing units take time and money to implement whereas supporting community-led social activities can use existing resource or may build upon activities that are already happening.

37. Council’s actions are primarily focused in the areas where most council services are provided. These are:

· Te Taiao; council maintains outdoor spaces and facilities for the community,

· Respect and Social Inclusion; council hosts region-wide and local community events and activities that foster belonging and inclusion for diverse Aucklanders, and

· Communication and Information; council informs communities about what is happening and offers support through libraries and community centres.

It has a unique Age-Friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework to reflect our bicultural foundations

38. Staff developed the Age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework in response to feedback from kaumātua.

39. The framework provides a holistic way to frame the plan that integrates the WHO domains with Te Whare Tapa Whā- a Māori wellbeing framework - and Te Ao Māori values.

40. It includes two additional domains and expanded another:

· Culture and Diversity and Kaumātua and Kuia domains were added to reflect Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s diversity and bicultural foundations

· The WHO Domain of Outdoor Spaces and Buildings was expanded to become Te Taiao, representing the natural and built environment.

41. The framework is unique to Tāmaki Makaurau. It ensures the actions within the plan are meaningful, achievable, and impactful for older Aucklanders.

42. The framework will continue to be used to guide how we collectively improve and evaluate the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

The Action Plan will have a wider community and intergenerational impact

43. The actions within the plan will benefit older people and others in the community now and, in the future. For example, ensuring all buses are accessible will benefit small tamariki (children) and disabled community members.

44. Many activities within the plan benefit people of all ages and stages and what we do now to improve older Aucklander’s accessibility and quality of life will also benefit future generations.

Constraints and limitations

It will take time to see the full, long-term impacts of the Action Plan

45. The Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan will deliver impact but that will happen over time.

46. Some actions are small and local and will not have significant or regional impact. However, there is opportunity for these local activities to be expanded as the age-friendly vision and plan gains traction.

47. Some actions will be delivered immediately or are in progress, others will take time. For instance, making roads, buildings and parks more accessible will be achieved over time, subject to the roll-out of relevant capital works and renewal programmes.

Council, CCOs and partner organisations are constrained by the financial impact of COVID-19 and operating within existing budget and resources

48. The Action Plan has been developed on the basis that everyone is operating in a constrained financial environment and actions will be delivered within existing resources.

49. The current assumption is that:

· no additional budget will be available

· where new funding is required, it will need to be reprioritised from elsewhere, secured through grants, or considered through budget-setting processes.

50. Consequently, the first one to five years of the action plan focus on existing or new actions that are easier and more affordable to carry out within existing budgets.

51. There is potential for this to change as the Action Plan evolves and if more funding becomes available in the medium to long term (5-10 years).

Success relies on cooperation, ongoing commitment, and resources to support collaboration

52. The Action Plan relies on the dedication and commitment of council and partner organisations working together to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland:

· many of the partner organisations are community-led with limited capacity and dependant on ongoing public funding

· larger entities and agencies (including government and council departments) may have competing priorities

· success is dependent on all parties continuing to prioritise age-friendly outcomes and delivering the actions they have developed.

53. Resources will also be needed to support sector collaboration. It will take time and effort to facilitate organisations working together and supporting each other to build an age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau.

54. As part of council’s commitment to the plan, council staff will play a key backbone role in keeping the Action Plan alive, bringing partners together, and monitoring implementation and impact.

Community views

55. Staff undertook extensive community engagement in 2019-2020 to ensure the voices of diverse older Aucklanders were at heart of the plan. We developed surveys, held workshops across the region, hui with kaumātua and had one-on-one interviews with rainbow community members.

56. Targeted engagement was facilitated by Age Concern, Toa Pacific, New Zealand Indian Senior Citizens Association, Hindu Elders Foundation Inc and The Selwyn Foundation to ensure we heard the diverse voices of older Aucklanders.

57. Over 3,000 people shared their vision for an Age-friendly Auckland and told council what actions they think will support older people to live full, active and healthy lives.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

58. During our engagement we heard, particularly from kaumātua, that environmental wellbeing was missing from the WHO framework. The wellbeing of the natural environment is important to our own wellbeing, and we have a role in looking after our environment in all its forms.

59. In response, we have expanded the existing WHO Domain Outdoor Spaces and Buildings to include Te Taiao (the natural environment), to recognise that the environment’s wellbeing and our own are connected.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

60. This Action Plan includes actions developed with CCOs including Auckland Transport.

61. The Seniors Advisory Panel acted as kaitiaki throughout the process, providing advice, guidance and feedback and contributing to workshops and action planning sessions.

62. The Seniors Advisory Panel will continue to provide support and guidance on the Action Plan as it is delivered.

63. Auckland Council, Seniors Advisory Panel and CCOs are aware of the impacts of the Action Plan and their role in implementation.

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

Local impacts and local board views

64. Local boards have a strong interest in the wellbeing of older people. All local boards have outcomes that foster social inclusion and participation among their residents, and many have age-friendly specific goals and actions.

65. Community engagement was held at locations across the region in 2019-2020, from Warkworth to Pukekohe.

66. Two reports were produced on the findings, the Community Engagement Findings Report and the Age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Report.^{^[5]} These were shared with elected members, stakeholders, and the community. These reports were also published on the council Age-friendly website.

67. Staff attended local board workshops in August and September 2021 to share the draft Action Plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

68. The Action Plan is relevant to Māori as tangata whenua and kaitiaki of the sky, land and sea and supports the Māori Identity and Wellbeing outcome within the Auckland Plan 2050

69. In the 2018 Census older Māori made up over four per cent of the Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland over-65 population.

70. Older Māori have lower levels of equity, income and rely heavily on superannuation. Actions that are focused on kaumātua delivered by Māori organisations and others will make a positive impact on wellbeing.

71. The involvement of kaumātua, whānau and organisations has been influential on the design of the Framework, work on implementation; and ensuring this is a living document.

Engagement to better understand the needs of kaumātua and Te Ao Māori

72. To ensure the Action Plan is relevant and effective for kaumātua, mana whenua and mataawaka were invited to a dedicated hui in February 2020. The hui was organised in partnership with Te Kōtahi a Tāmaki and hosted at Manurewa Marae.

Recognition of tangata whenua, hauora Māori concepts and Te Tiriti o Waitangi are important to kaumātua

73. Kaumātua also told us:

· Importance of building and marae accessibility – safety of our kaumātua

· Utilising marae more e.g., events, programmes, line dancing, tai chi, learning Te Reo

· Age-appropriate housing design

· More disability parking

· More Te Reo visible everywhere

· Environmental recognition – care for Papatūānuku and te taiao incorporated into plan

· Sport and recreation options available for older people and open areas for activities

· Affordable digital communication.

74. Te ao Māori values from the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s (IMSB) Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau are also imbedded in the Framework:

· Whanaungatanga (Develop Vibrant Communities), in relation to the different opportunities to engage and participate in their own and other cultures.

· Rangatiratanga (Enhance Leadership and Participation), in relation to the activities under Respect and Social Inclusion.

· Manaakitanga (Improve Quality of Life), in relation to the Action Plan’s outcome of improving the hauora of older Aucklanders.

· Wairuatanga (promoting distinctive identity), in relation to valuing and protecting Māori heritage and Taonga Māori.

· Kaitiakitanga (ensuring sustainable futures), in relation to protecting Te Taiao now and in the future.

75. These values underpin the way people and organisations will work together to deliver this plan with, and for, our communities.

76. The Action Plan supports the IMSB’s Schedule of Issues of Significance 2021 by addressing social, cultural, environmental and wellbeing for Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau.

77. The Age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework incorporates the WHO framework, Te Whare Tapa Whā and te ao Māori. The unique Framework contributes to the awareness, education and understanding of Māori perspectives.

78. Mana whenua and mataawaka will have an opportunity to provide further feedback during public engagement on the Action Plan.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

79. The Action Plan has been designed to be delivered within the existing budgets and resources of council, CCOs and sector partners.

80. Where additional investment is desired by Auckland Council to implement new or joint actions this will need be considered through Long-term Plan or Annual Plan processes.

81. There are no financial implications to the local board for any decisions to support the Action Plan.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

Risk	Mitigation
Adoption of a new plan may create expectations that there will be additional budget to support age-friendly outputs.	All public-facing communications and guidance about the new plan will reference that actions will be funded from existing budgets. Where new funding is required, this will be sought through grants and processes such as the long-term plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

82. Public engagement for the Action Plan is expected to be completed by the end of September 2021.

83. A summary of all feedback, including from local boards, and a final Action Plan will be reported for adoption by the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee in November 2021.

84. Following adoption of the Action Plan, staff will seek membership to the WHO network.

85. An annual progress report will provide details on the impact and success of our actions. This will include an update on the delivery of actions against the identified measures of success, high-level wellbeing indicators and examples of good and promising practice. This will be presented to the Governing Body, the WHO and shared with all organisations supporting delivery.

86. The Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan will be reviewed every five years.

87. Baseline research was carried out in 2017 - The Older Aucklanders: A Quality of Life Status Report. The research is across the domains that contribute to quality of life and wellbeing. This research is being conducted this year and will be carried out every five years to help monitor progress and guide the development of future actions.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua - Age-Friendly Tāmaki Makaurau (draft)	153

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Cleo Matthews - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

16 September 2021

Draft Business Improvement District Policy (2021) Kaupapa Here ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi

File No.: CP2021/13769

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide local board feedback on the draft Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (2021) and supporting documents.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The BID Team has implemented a review of the Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (2016) Kaupapa Here ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi and supporting documents, as advised in the memo to local board members dated 23 April 2021. The memo can be found on the Auckland Council website, InfoCouncil.

3. The review sought informal and formal feedback from local boards, BID-operating business associations, non-BID business associations, council-controlled organisations (CCOs), council departments and other external stakeholders.

4. The review has focused on strengthening those parts of the policy relating to issue resolution and, following local board feedback, the financial sustainability of BID programmes.

5. The review also focused on elected member needs and identifying any political risks and mitigations.

6. The draft BID Policy (2021) has been before the Finance and Performance committee at a workshop on 18 August 2021. Feedback received has been incorporated into this version of the BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents.

7. Staff are now seeking formal feedback from local boards on the draft BID Policy (2021) provided as Attachment A.

8. Following formal feedback received from local boards, BID-operating business associations, non-BID business associations, CCOs, council departments and other external stakeholders, the final version of the BID Policy (2021) and support documents will be presented to the Finance and Performance Committee for adoption on 9 December 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) provide formal feedback on the draft Business Improvement District Policy (2021) and supporting documents by 1 October 2021.

Horopaki

Context

Overview of the Auckland BID programme

9. BID-operating business associations are membership-based organisations independent of Auckland Council. The draft BID Policy (2021) supports the independent nature of the BID-operating business associations. They are responsible for the BID programme delivery, its success, and are accountable to BID members/BID affiliates.

10. Local boards have the primary relationship with BID-operating business associations in their area:

· Local boards and business associations have a vested interest in a particular place and share similar goals. Working collaboratively achieves greater outcomes.

· Local boards have significant allocated decision-making responsibility for BID programme establishments, amending existing BID programmes, BID boundary changes, continuation/discontinuation and issue resolution.

11. Auckland Council requires BID-operating business associations to fully comply with the Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (Kaupapa Hereā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi) (refer Attachment A).

12. The BID policy sets out the process for:

· establishing, continuing/discontinuing BID programmes

· changes to the BID programme boundary area/map

· changes to the BID targeted rating mechanism

· issue resolution

· key stakeholder roles and responsibilities.

13. The BID policy includes the engagement and reporting requirements for BID-operating business associations to ensure all BID members/BID affiliates have access to the relevant BID programme information. BID-operating business associations must use their Annual General Meeting (AGM) process to obtain formal member approval for the BID programme delivery, budget, and to confirm their BID targeted rate grant amount for the following financial year.

14. The BID policy describes the balance between the independence of the BID-operating business association and the accountability role council has for monies collected as a public sector organisation. This balance is necessary to sustain public trust and confidence with the Auckland Council BID programme.

The review

15. Commencing April 2021, the review of the current policy began with communicating with local boards and all stakeholders involved in the management and operation of BID programmes across Tāmaki Makaurau, both BID-operating and non-BID business associations, council departments and interested parties. The process to date has included informal feedback and comments on the current policy.

16. The review process focused on strengthening parts of the policy (and updating supporting documents) relating to issue resolution and, following local board feedback, financial sustainability of BID programmes.

17. The review has also provided the opportunity to clarify the documentation between Auckland Council (collecting the BID targeted rate and the funder) and the BID-operating business association relating to the BID Programme Agreement (2016) document.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Rationale for the review

18. The primary objective for reviewing the current 2016 policy is a focus on the issue resolution sections. Experience in this space over the last five years has illustrated gaps in the usefulness of the current policy to address and resolve issues in a timely manner.

19. The review provided an opportunity to update parts of the policy relating to Auckland Council changes in operation, current business practices and where the advancement of technology has contributed to how business is done, for example zoom meetings.

20. There was also an early opportunity to capture informal feedback from local boards and BID-operating business associations.

21. The information and informal feedback collected in May, June and July of this year has been incorporated into the draft BID Policy 2021 (Attachment A) and supporting documents (Attachments B and C). A summary of the BID Policy (2021) requirements is provided with this report (Attachment D).

22. BID programmes are operated by independent business associations, and their programmes and services are provided according to their members’ stated priorities. In recognition of their independent status, the BID policy does not prescribe standards for programme effectiveness. That is a matter for business association members to determine. Staff, therefore, cannot base recommendations on these factors, but only on the policy’s express requirements.

Participants in the review

23. In addition to local boards, there are a range of stakeholders involved in BID programmes, both internal and external to Auckland Council. The BID team set a programme of informal engagement, outlined in Table 1 below:

Table 1 – Key engagement activity

Stakeholder	Engagement	Dates
BID-operating business associations Business associations without BID programmes	BID communication including newsletters and emails: Sent to 50+ BID-operating business associations and other interested parties	March, April, May, June and July 2021
	Three network meetings	May, June and July 2021 An average attendance exceeded 20+ BID-operating business associations
	Four special workshops - topics included: issue resolution, conflict of interest and developing a board charter	June and July 2021 An average of 23+ BID programmes were represented at each workshop.
Local boards	18 local board workshop presentations	June and July 2021 Introduction memo and BID policy review information
Local boards	Three special topic workshops - topics included: issue resolution, conflict of interest and developing a board charter	June and July 2021 An average of 16 local board elected members attended each workshop
Local Board Services Division Lead team	Presentation and information feedback received	Presentation on 18 June 2021
Finance and Performance Committee	Memo on BID policy review project	April 2021
Council departments including: · Legal Services · Connected Communities · Ngā Mātārae · Risk and Assurance · Finance and Policy · Local Board Services	Regular meetings, engagement and feedback	May, June, and July 2021
Independent polling agent	Engagement and feedback regarding the ballot/polling process	June 2021
Finance and Performance Committee workshop	The draft BID Policy (2021) V1 and support documents were presented and feedback received	18 August 2021

24. The process to undertake the review of the current policy (2016) takes place from February 2021 to June 2022. Progress to date is set out in Table 2 below:

Table 2 - Progress to date

Date	Progress
2021 Feb/March	· Project planning, stakeholder communications
April to July	· Directed consultation with local boards and stakeholders on the current BID policy and identified themes o issue resolution o conflicts of interest o board charter development
May/June	· Cross council, external engagement and feedback
June/July	· Draft BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents created
August 18	· Finance and Performance Committee workshop
August/September	· Distribution of draft BID Policy (2021) for formal feedback

Informal local board feedback

25. Discussions with local boards during workshops centred around:

· issue resolution – how to do this fairly and in a timely manner

· operational issues – relating to management and governance of BID-operating business associations

· opportunities for collaboration and cost savings between BIDs

· elected members involvement with BID-operating business associations

· growth opportunities for BID-operating business associations

· continued dependence on local board funding.

Seeking local board formal feedback on the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

26. Local boards are now being asked to provide formal feedback on a revised draft policy (2021) and support documents (Attachments A, B and C). Local boards are encouraged to engage with BID-operating business associations in their local board area (where relevant/possible) to help to inform this feedback process.

27. Any feedback from local boards will help the further development of BID Policy (2021). It would be, however, particularly useful to get local board views on proposed changes set out in Tables 3 and 4 below.

28. Feedback from local boards, external stakeholders and any further feedback from BID-operating business associations will be reviewed by staff and this will help inform the final version of the policy. Formal feedback can be sent to bids@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

29. Once the BID Policy 2021 is approved, other support material will be made available on the BID Auckland Council website www.bid.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz and include:

· BID-operating business association constitution (template 2021)

· BID-operating executive committee board charter (template 2021)

· individual BID programme area maps

· BID affiliate/BID business association membership qualification diagram

· local board BID representative position description

· template documents, including:

o AGM agenda

o AGM minutes

o BID programme income and expenditure budget (for BID grant $120,000).

Summary of changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

30. The key proposed changes incorporated into the draft BID Policy (2021) are set out in Table 3:

Table 3 - Key changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

Key change from current policy	Description	Note	2021 section, page
Issue resolution	Improving the ability to resolve issues with a clear process in a timely manner	An issue is identified as non- compliance with the BID policy	3.5, Requirement 24
BID Programme Funding Agreement (2021) Attachment B	Replaced BID Programme Agreement (2016)	Clarifies the relationship between the parties	3.1, Requirement 18
Size and scale of BID programmes Minimum BID targeted rate grant $120,000 No change from 2016	Minimum BID targeted rate grant $120,000 remains A new requirement for legacy BID programmes (11 in total) that currently receive less than $120,000pa to increase their targeted rate up to that amount over the next five years A variety of options are suggested to achieve this	This requirement is a result of local board feedback on concerns to continually fund non-financially sustainable BID programmes	1.4, Requirement 3 and 4
Exceptional or unexpected circumstances	Council may, at its discretion, depart from the requirement set out in section 2.4 (25% of total voting forms must be returned for the ballot to be valid	Council will consider evidence of support to date, what is fair and any impact from amending the voting threshold mandate	3.4.2
BID operating business association constitution (template 2016)	This supporting document was included as part of the current policy and now removed from the BID Policy (2021)	This allows the business association to amend their constitution to suit their local needs, on the basis it’s not inconsistent with the BID policy A template document is provided on the www.bid.auckland.govt.nz website	1.1, 2.3.2 Requirement 12
BID operating executive committee board charter (template 2016)	This supporting document was included as part of the current policy and now removed from the BID Policy (2021)	This allows the business association to amend their board charter to suit their local needs, on the basis it’s not inconsistent with the BID policy A template document is provided on the www.bid.auckland.govt.nz website	1.1, 2.3.2 Requirement 12

31. Minor changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) are set out in Table 4 below:

Table 4 - Minor changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

Minor changes to current policy	Description	Note	2021 section, page
Other council funding	Organisational view on risk regarding BID-operating business association receiving other council funding	The draft BID policy acknowledges other council funding grants allocated to BID-operating business associations	2.3.4, Requirement 16
Local boards – other roles	Updated	Refer to elected member conflicts of interest policy A link to these documents can be found here	2.5.3
BID Annual Accountability Report (2021) Attachment C	Name change from BID Annual Accountability Agreement (2016)	To include BID targeted rate grant amount and copy of AGM resolution	3.2, Requirement 22, Table 2, item 9
Audit – provision for a review audit or full audit	Recognition of increased risk and increased reporting requirement based on the amount of targeted rate received	Set as a sliding scale BID targeted rate grants less than $200,000pa must commission a review audit BID targeted rate grants more than $200,000pa must commission a full audit	3.2, Requirement 23, Table 2, item 4
Rating mechanism - flat rate	Lifted the maximum flat rate amount from $500 to $900 per rateable property	To provide more flexibility for BID-operating business associations when considering BID programme budgets and the impact of BID targeted rates on ratepayers	3.1.2

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

32. The BID Policy (2021) focuses on the governance and accountability for BID-operating business associations. Individually the BID programme, through targeted rate-funding, can focus on advocacy and activities.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

33. Formal feedback will be sought from other council teams including CCOs and those who work and have an interested in the BID programme and business community space.

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

Local impacts and local board views

34. Local boards have engaged with the review of the BID Policy (2016) and their informal feedback has been incorporated into the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents. Table 1 outlines local board engagement to date.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

35. Officers are working with Auckland Council’s Ngā Mātārae Unit to ensure that the BID Policy (2021) aligns with the Auckland Council Māori Responsiveness Framework.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36. There are no financial implications for local boards under the draft BID Policy (2021).

37. Targeted rates for BID-operating business associations are raised directly from commercial ratepayers in the district and used by the business association for improvements within that rohe. The council’s financial role is to collect the BID targeted rates and pass them directly to the association every quarter.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38. There are no direct financial risks to the local board or the council that could result from the draft BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents.

39. The policy describes the balance between the independence of the BID-operating business association and the accountability for monies collected by a public sector organisation.

40. The draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents set out the requirements and obligations for BID-operating business associations and are intended to help minimise the potential for business associations to misuse BID targeted rate funds by requiring each BID to plan for their intended use, report on its activities to its members, and to undertake and meet all requirements set out in the policy.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

41. Following formal feedback received from local boards, CCOs, BID-operating business associations, non-BID business associations, council departments, other external stakeholders and those with an interest in BID programmes, a final BID Policy (2021) and support documents will be updated and the steps outlined in Table 5 below will be completed by the BID team:

Table 5 - Progress to completion

Date	Progress
2021 August	· Draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents updated to post Finance and Performance Committee workshop feedback
Mid-August to 1 October	· Draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents distributed to local boards, BID-operating business associations, council departments, CCOs and other stakeholders for formal feedback · Update www.bid.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz website with feedback link · Feedback open 24 August to 1 October
October	· Update draft BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents incorporating formal feedback
9 December	· Presentation of final version of BID Policy (2021) and support documents to Finance and Performance Committee meeting
2022 January/February	· Post Finance and Performance approval actions, communications with local boards, BID-operating business associations, all stakeholders, and update www.bid.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz website
March to June	· BID Policy (2021) communication, support and advice · The BID team will provide assistance to the 50 BID-operating business associations to comply with the BID Policy (2021), including guidance with aligning their individual constitutions and governance documents to meet the timing of their 2022 AGM timeframes

42. The BID Policy (2021), if approved by the Finance and Performance Committee in December 2021, would become operational on 1 July 2022.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft BID Policy (2021)	209
b ⇩	BID Funding Agreement	231
c ⇩	BID Annual Accountability Report	243
d ⇩	Draft BID Policy requirements	245

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Claire Siddens - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

16 September 2021

Addition to the 2019-2022 Puketāpapa Local Board meeting schedule

File No.: CP2021/13137

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve bringing forward the date of the Puketāpapa Local Board ordinary business meeting in December to Thursday, 02 December 2021 at 10.00am from Thursday, 09 December 2021at 10.00am and to add two meeting dates to the 2019-2022 Puketāpapa Local Board meeting schedule in order to accommodate the Annual Budget 2022/2023 timeframes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Puketāpapa Local Board adopted the 2019-2022 meeting schedule on Thursday, 05 December 2019 (resolution number: PKTPP/201/238).

3. At that time, the specific times and dates for meetings for local board decision-making in relation to the local board agreement as part of the Annual Budget 2022/2023 were unknown.

4. The local board is being asked to approve bringing forward the date of the Puketāpapa Local Board ordinary business meeting in December to Thursday, 02 December 2021 at 10.00am from Thursday, 09 December 2021 at 10.00am. The local board is also being asked to add two meeting dates as an addition to the Puketāpapa Local Board meeting schedule so that the modified Annual Budget 2022/2023 timeframes can be met.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) approve bringing forward the Puketāpapa Local Board December ordinary business meeting date to Thursday, 02 December 2021 at 10.00am at Puketāpapa Local Board, 560 Mt Albert Road, Three Kings from Thursday, 09 December 2021 at 10am at the Puketāpapa Local Board, 560 Mt Albert Road, Three Kings to accommodate the Annual Budget 2022/2023 timeframes.

b) approve the addition of two meeting dates to the 2019-2022 Puketāpapa Local Board meeting schedule to accommodate the Annual Budget 2022/2023 timeframes as follows:

· Thursday, 12 May 2022, 10.00am at the Puketāpapa Local Board office, 560 Mt Albert Road, Three Kings.

· Thursday, 23 June 2022, 10.00am at the Puketāpapa Local Board office, 560 Mt Albert Road, Three Kings.

Horopaki

Context

5. The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) have requirements regarding local board meeting schedules.

6. In summary, adopting a meeting schedule helps meet the requirements of:

· Clause 19 Schedule 7 of the LGA on general provisions for meetings which requires the chief executive to give notice in writing to each local board member of the time and place of meetings. Such notification may be provided by the adoption of a schedule of business meetings.

· Sections 46, 46(A) and 47 in Part 7 of the LGOIMA which requires that meetings are publicly notified, agendas and reports are available at least two working days before a meeting and that local board meetings are open to the public.

7. The Puketāpapa Local Board adopted its 2019-2022 business meeting schedule at its Thursday, 05 December 2019 business meeting (resolution number: PKTPP/201/238).

8. The timeframes for local board decision-making in relation to the local board agreement, which is part of the Annual Budget 2022/2023, were unavailable when the meeting schedule was originally adopted.

9. The board is being asked to make decisions in early December 2021, and early May and mid-June 2022 to feed into the Annual Budget 2022/2023 process. These timeframes are outside the board’s normal meeting cycle.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10. The local board has two choices:

· option 1: add the meetings as additions to the meeting schedule

· option 2: add the meetings as extraordinary meetings.

11. For option 1, statutory requirements allow enough time for these meetings to be scheduled as additions to the meeting schedule and other topics may be considered as per any other ordinary meeting. However, there is a risk that if the Annual Budget 2022/2023 timeframes change again or the information is not ready for the meeting, there would need to be an additional extraordinary meeting scheduled.

12. For option 2, only the specific Annual Budget 2022/2023 topic may be considered for which the meeting is being held. There is a risk that no other policies or plans with similar timeframes or running in relation to the Annual Budget 2022/2023 process could be considered at this meeting.

13. Since there is enough time to meet statutory requirements, staff recommend option 1 – approving this meeting as an addition to the meeting schedule, as it allows more flexibility for the local board to consider a range of issues. This requires a decision of the local board.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

14. This decision is procedural in nature and any climate impacts will be negligible. The decision is unlikely to result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions. The effects of climate change will not impact the decision’s implementation.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

15. There is no specific impact for the council group from this report.

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

Local impacts and local board views

16. This report requests the local board’s decision to schedule additional meetings and consider whether to approve them as extraordinary meetings or additions to the meeting schedule.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

17. There is no specific impact for Māori arising from this report. Local boards work with Māori on projects and initiatives of shared interest.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

18. There are no financial implications in relation to this report apart from the standard costs associated with servicing a business meeting.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

19. If the local board decides not to add this business meeting to their schedule, this will cause a delay to the Annual Budget 2022/2023 process which would result in the input of this local board not being able to be presented to the Governing Body for their consideration and inclusion in the budget.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

20. Implement the processes associated with preparing for business meetings.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Renee Burgers - Lead Advisor Plans and Programmes

Authorisers

Louise Mason – GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

[1] ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage ’hits’ comprised of 54 ‘engaged’ participants (people who completed the online survey), 134 ‘informed’ participants (people who downloaded a document, visited a FAQ page or multiple project pages, or completed the survey) and 337 ‘aware’ participants (people who visited at least one page).

[2] ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage ’hits’ comprised of 43 ‘engaged’ participants (people who completed the online survey), 88 ‘informed’ participants (people who downloaded a document, visited a FAQ page or multiple project pages, or completed the survey) and 265 ‘aware’ participants (people who visited at least one page).

[3] Statistics New Zealand, 22.9% (163,161) estimated in 2017

[4] Ministry of Social Development. Briefing to the Incoming Ministers, October 2014, p.31.

[5] A systems analysis conducted by Auckland Council’s Innovation Unit.

Chairperson	Julie Fairey
Deputy Chairperson	Jon Turner
Members	Harry Doig
	Ella Kumar, JP
	Fiona Lai
	Bobby Shen

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Harry Doig's Member Report, 01 August - 31 August 2021	257
b ⇩	Ella Kumar's Member Report, 01 August - 31 August 2021	259
c ⇩	Fiona Lai's Member Report, 01 August - 31 August 2021	263
d ⇩	Bobby Shen's Member Report, 01 August - 31 August 2021	265
e ⇩	Jonathan Turner's Member Report, 01 August - 31 August 2021	269

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Record 12 August 2021	283
b ⇩	Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Record 19 August 2021	287
c ⇩	Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Record 26 August 2021	289
d ⇩	Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Record 02 September 2021	293

Author	Selina Powell - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Nina Siers - Local Area Manager