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

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 24 November 2021

4.30pm

This meeting will proceed via Microsoft Teams. Either a recording or written summary will be uploaded on the Auckland Council website.

 

Papakura Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Brent Catchpole

 

Deputy Chairperson

Jan Robinson

 

Members

Felicity Auva'a

 

 

George Hawkins

 

 

Keven Mealamu

 

 

Sue Smurthwaite

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Jebel Ali

Democracy Advisor

 

18 November 2021

 

Contact Telephone: 021 599 164

Email: Jebel.ali@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    5

8.1     Deputation -  Counties Manukau Badminton                                                    5

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Governing Body Member's Update                                                                              7

12        Chairperson's Update                                                                                                   9

13        Three Waters Economic Regulation Submission                                                    11

14        Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee - Establish a Local Board Joint Committee to make appointments                                                                             19

15        Update on Ara Kōtui (Improving Māori input into local board decision-making) 23

16        Ngā Hapori Momoho | Thriving Communities Draft Strategy                                 37

17        Auckland Transport Update for the Papakura Local Board                                   73

18        Draft Contributions Policy 2021                                                                                 77

19        Urgent Decision - Papakura Local Board feedback on the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill                         111

20        For Information: Reports referred to the Papakura Local Board                         121

21        Papakura Local Board Achievements Register 2019-2022 Political Term          137

22        Papakura Local Board Governance Forward Work Calendar - November 2021 159

23        Papakura Local Board Workshop Records                                                            165

24        Consideration of Extraordinary Items

 


1          Welcome

 

A board member will lead the meeting in prayer.

 

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

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

 

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 27 October 2021, as true and correct.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

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

 

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

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

 

 

7          Petitions

 

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

 

 

8          Deputations

 

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

 

8.1       Deputation -  Counties Manukau Badminton

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Dennis Greenman from Counties Manukau Badminton will speak to the local board about the activities of their organisation.

2.       Counties Manukau Badminton seeks to engage communities in sports and encourage a healthy and active lifestyle.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      thank Dennis Greenman from Counties Manukau Badminton for his presentation and attendance. 

 

 

9          Public Forum

 

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

 

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

 

 

10        Extraordinary Business

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Governing Body Member's Update

File No.: CP2021/16747

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the Manurewa and Papakura ward councillors to update the local board on Governing Body issues they have been involved with since the previous meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Standing Orders 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 provides for Governing Body members to update their local board counterparts on regional matters of interest to the board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      receive Councillor Angela Dalton and Councillor Daniel Newman’s updates.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jebel Ali - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Chairperson's Update

File No.: CP2021/16748

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the Papakura Local Board Chairperson to update the local board on issues he has been involved in over the past month.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      receive the verbal report from the Papakura Local Board Chairperson.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jebel Ali - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Three Waters Economic Regulation Submission

File No.: CP2021/16883

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To outline the Government’s Economic Regulation and Consumer Protection for Three Waters Services in New Zealand discussion paper, circulated by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, and to seek feedback from local boards.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       On 27 October 2021, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment released a discussion paper, “Economic Regulation and Consumer Protection for Three Waters Services in New Zealand”.

3.       The discussion document describes how the economic regulator is envisioned to operate and what its statutory obligations would be. The discussion document also provides a brief explanation of why economic regulation is required in the face of three waters reform. Finally, it asks for feedback on several topics.

4.       The views of local boards on the proposal are requested by 6 December 2021 to enable those views to influence the overall submission and to be included as an attachment to the council submission.

5.       Final submissions from Auckland Council to Government on this topic are due at 5pm on 20 December 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      consider providing feedback for inclusion in Auckland Council’s submission on the Economic Regulation and Consumer Protection for Three Waters Services in New Zealand discussion paper

Horopaki

Context

6.       On 27 October 2021, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) released a discussion paper, “Economic Regulation and Consumer Protection for Three Waters Services in New Zealand”.

7.       The issues of economic regulation and consumer protection for three waters services in New Zealand is related, but separate, to the broader issue of the Water Services Bill. They require separate submissions as they are two different processes run by two different bodies and on different timeframes. There is a separate process to provide feedback about the reform in general. This process is to provide feedback on only the proposed economic regulation.

8.       According to central government, economic regulation will have a crucial role to play in driving the level of efficiency that will be required to keep water services affordable in the long run.

9.       Economic regulation ensures that the best outcomes for consumers will occur when there are monopoly markets, and the suppliers have a large amount of market power.

10.     In this case, it is proposed that the economic regulator will also act as the consumer protection regulator and be funded through levies.

11.     It is proposed that the Commerce Commission act in both capacities to regulate the newly-formed three waters industry in New Zealand after the Water Services Bill is enacted.

12.     The discussion document describes how the economic regulator is envisioned to operate and what its statutory obligations would be. The discussion document also provides a brief explanation of why economic regulation is required in the face of three waters reform. Finally, it asks for feedback on several topics.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

13.     What follows is a short summary of the discussion document and the areas where feedback is sought through the submissions process.

What is economic regulation and why do we need it?

14.     Economic regulation protects consumers from the problems that can occur in markets with little or no competition and/or a large amount of market power. The regulation is intended to make businesses in the market behave similarly to how they would in a competitive market.

15.     Utilities tend to be what is known as a “natural monopoly”. These markets are more cheaply served by one firm rather than many because of massive fixed costs.

16.     Without regulation, markets with natural monopolies tend to have higher prices and/or lower outputs and/or lower output quality.

17.     While consumer involvement in the governance of natural monopolies is helpful, it is not sufficient to ensure the best outcomes for consumers. Consumer involvement must work in concert with regulation.

18.     Ultimately, the purpose of economic regulation is to advance the long-term interests of consumers. This ensures that suppliers deliver high-quality services that reflect consumer demand and incentivises improved efficiency. It also ensures any gains by the suppliers are passed through to the consumers.

What type of regulation is being proposed and who would pay the costs?

19.     There are several types of regulation – price-quality, information disclosure, and quality-only. In this case, it is proposed that the regulator be a price-quality regulator.

20.     Price-quality regulators essentially set upper limits on the price that can be charged by the supplier while setting lower limits on the quality of service that must be delivered.

21.     Typically, price-quality regulators operate on regulatory cycles of four to six years. It is proposed that the economic regulator operate on a five-year cycle, with the possibility of the first regulatory cycle being shorter.

22.     Economic regulation has costs. These costs come from two places. On one hand, the economic regulator costs money to operate and administer. On the other hand, the suppliers incur compliance costs to meet the requirements of the regulator.

23.     It is proposed that the administrative costs of the regulator be recovered through levies. This is a straightforward, transparent, and standard way of recovering these costs. Ultimately these costs are borne by the consumers.

24.     The cost to the supplier of complying with regulation is also ultimately borne by the consumers. Since both categories of regulatory costs are borne by the consumers, it is necessary to design the regulations to ensure they are net beneficial to consumers.

25.     Given the amalgamation proposed by the Water Services Bill will increase the market power of the water providers, it is likely that regulation is necessary. Further, the research for the Water Services Bill finds that even the current absence of profit motives, and the obligations to promote the social, cultural, environmental, and financial wellbeing of communities has been insufficient to ensure delivery of effective and efficient three waters service. Put another way, there is probably a case for economic regulation, even in the absence of the proposed three waters amalgamation.

26.     Thus, the MBIE’s recommendation is that three waters be price-quality regulated.

27.     However, there is also a question as to whether the regulation should be applied generically across all suppliers or tailored to individual suppliers. Given the inflexibility of generic regulation and Government’s strong commitment to water service quality, it is recommended that the price-quality regulation be flexible to allow for different incentives to the different suppliers.

What parts of three waters should regulation apply to?

28.     The delivery of stormwater services is fundamentally different to drinking water and wastewater.

29.     While drinking water and wastewater services are delivered directly to the beneficiaries (that is, the person drinking the water or flushing the toilet), stormwater services have a public good element as well. When the stormwater in one area is managed, it could make other areas less likely to flood, for instance. This means that it is difficult to identify and charge the consumers of stormwater services.

30.     Additionally, while drinking water and wastewater infrastructure is easily identified, stormwater infrastructure is more difficult. Stormwater systems are often integrated into roading networks, use natural topographical features, and are owned by various land holders and infrastructure providers.

31.     Internationally, when stormwater systems are operated alongside drinking water and wastewater, they tend to be economically regulated.

32.     The preliminary view put forward by the MBIE is that stormwater should be economically regulated, but it will be less straightforward to demonstrate that it is net beneficial.

Should the regulation apply to all providers?

33.     Three waters reform is proposed to result in four main entities serving approximately 85% of the population. The remainder would be served by small community or private schemes, or through self-supply. A recent study for Taumata Arowai suggested that there could be between 75,000 and 130,000 unregistered drinking water suppliers.

34.     None of these small-scale suppliers serves more than 5,000 customers. There are only three non-defense force suppliers that serve between 500 and 5,000 customers. 

35.     For even smaller (less than 500 customers) providers, it is likely that the owners of three waters supplier and the consumers of the services are largely the same people. Therefore, it is less critical to have a regulatory framework to ensure consumer wellbeing.

36.     Since the goal of the reform is to further consumer wellbeing, these other suppliers should only be regulated if the cost of regulation is outweighed by the benefits.

37.     Given the small scale and relatively high compliance costs, the MBIE has recommended that regulatory framework only apply to the new water service entities created by the Water Services Bill.

How and when should regulation be implemented?

38.     To be effective, price-quality regulation requires high quality information on the assets, costs and quality of service provided by regulated suppliers. However, the Three Waters Reform Programme has found that the scope and quality of the available information is not currently at the level that would be required to implement an effective economic regulation regime.

39.     Because of this information gap, it is unlikely that the regulatory regime would be operational by the time the new three waters entities are set to begin operation in 1 July 2024.

40.     However, starting the new entities operations without a regulatory framework in place poses its own risk.

41.     Therefore, the Government’s recommendation is that there should be a graduated approach to implementing a conventional cost-based price-quality path, with the first regulatory pricing period beginning 1 July 2027. In the interim the industry would improve its data and the regulator would work with the industry on information disclosure.

42.     This interim period from 1 July 2024 through to 30 June 2027 would leave the supplies unregulated in terms of price-quality. There are two potential solutions to this gap. The first is that the regulator impose a price-quality path based on incomplete information but using its best judgment. The second option is that an interim price-quality path be implemented by government. There are significant pros and cons to each option and the MBIE is seeking feedback on this issue.

What should be the statutory objectives of the regulation regime?

43.     Recently in New Zealand, regulatory regimes are set to achieve four goals.

a)     There must be incentives to innovate and invest.

b)     There should be incentives to improve efficiency.

c)     That the efficiency gains must be shared with consumers.

d)     Lastly, suppliers are limited in their ability to turn profits. This point is irrelevant to the three waters reform scenario.

44.     However, there is scope for the economic regulator to have responsibility for a broader range of objectives (including issues such as climate change and Te mana o te Wai).

45.     There is also a question as to how Te Tiriti o Waitangi considerations factor into the design of any economic regulatory regime for the three waters sector.

46.     The MBIE seeks feedback on what the precise role of the economic regulator should be and whether it should be expanded in the ways described above.

What should compliance and enforcement look like?

47.     Compliance and enforcement are essential for regulation to be effective.

48.     An economic regulator’s compliance and enforcement toolkit typically includes education initiatives, warning letters, infringement offences, pecuniary penalties, enforceable undertakings, and other civil remedies such as out-of-court settlements.

49.     The MBIE is seeking feedback on whether there needs to be any other tools in the toolkit.

Who should the economic regulator be?

50.     To be effective, regulators need to be at arms-length from government, transparent, accountable, credible, freely share information, and act in a coordinated way with policy agencies.

51.     There are three potential options for the economic regulator: Taumata Arowai, the Commerce Commission, or a new regulatory authority created specifically for economic regulation of three waters.

52.     The MBIE’s multi-criteria analysis suggests that the Commerce Commission is best suited to be the economic regulator. 

Do we need additional consumer protections and how are those regulated?

53.     Due to the nature of the three waters sector, there may be other consumer protections required. There likely needs to be rules around the acceptable likelihood and duration of supply outages, the acceptable level of leakage from reticulated supply networks, the level of resilience to natural and man-made hazards, and the amount of innovation and efficiencies delivered to consumers.

54.     These protections will be required because three waters is a natural monopoly and consumers cannot go elsewhere when unhappy with their service.

55.     Importantly, the current democratic, consultation, and governance mechanisms that are provided for in the Local Government Act 2002 will not apply to the proposed new Water Services Entities. In addition, the Ombudsman’s current role in dealing with complaints about local government agencies will cease.

56.     These points suggest that regulation needs to consider these angles of consumer protection above and beyond the standard roles of an economic regulator.

57.     There is also a need for additional protections for vulnerable consumers. It is recommended that that there should be a positive obligation on the regulator to consider interests of vulnerable consumers, and that minimum service level requirements are flexible enough able to accommodate a wide range of approaches to addressing consumer harm and vulnerability.

58.     The MBIE is seeking feedback on how the consumer protection regime could be designed in a way that contributes to equitable outcomes and mitigates unintended impacts on Māori. This includes impacts on different iwi/hapū, Māori landowners, urban Māori consumers, and rural Māori consumers. Additionally, views are sought on how the consumer protection regulator could be expected to consider Treaty obligations, and the cultural competency of the economic regulator to recognise the significance of water as a taonga for Māori.

59.     As with economic regulation, a multi-criteria analysis suggests that the Commerce Commission should be the consumer protection regulator.

How should consumer disputes be resolved?

60.     There are several ways that consumer disputes can be resolved.

61.     The preliminary preferred option put forward by the MBIE is for mandatory provision of consumer dispute resolution services, but feedback is sought as to whether this should be achieved through a new scheme or by expanding the mandate of an existing scheme.

62.     Traditionally, vulnerable populations face difficulties in accessing dispute resolution schemes. Therefore, it is important that both suppliers and the dispute resolution provider ensure that underserved and vulnerable communities can participate in processes that affect them including dispute resolution processes.

Local Board Feedback

63.     While the MBIE has posed 46 questions to submitters in the discussion document, only a few are acutely relevant. The following 11 questions are the most critical for the council family to provide feedback:

a)      What are your views on whether the stormwater networks that are currently operated by local authorities should be economically regulated, alongside drinking water and wastewater?

b)      Do you consider that the economic regulation regime should be implemented gradually from 2024 to 2027, or do you consider that a transitional price-quality path is also required?

c)      If you consider a transitional price-quality path is required, do you consider that this should be developed and implemented by an independent economic regulator, or by Government and implemented through a Government Policy Statement?

d)      What are your views on how Treaty of Waitangi principles, as well as the rights and interests of iwi/Māori, should be factored into the design of an economic regulatory regime for the three waters sector?

e)      Who do you consider should have primary responsibility for determining the structure of three waters prices: a. The Water Services Entity, following engagement with their governance group, communities, and consumers; b. The economic regulator; or c. The Government or Ministers?

f)       Who do you think is the most suitable body to be the economic regulator for the three waters sector? Please provide reasons for your view.

g)      What are your views on whether minimum service level requirements should be able to vary across different types of consumers?

h)      What are your views on whether the regulatory regime should include a positive obligation to protect vulnerable consumers, and that minimum service level requirements are flexible enough to accommodate a wide range of approaches to protecting vulnerable consumers?

i)        What are your views on how Treaty of Waitangi principles, as well as the rights and interests of iwi/Māori, should be factored into the design of a consumer protection regime for the three waters sector?

j)        Do you agree with the preliminary view that the Commerce Commission is the most suitable body to be the consumer protection regulator for the three waters sector?

k)      Do you consider that there should be special considerations for traditionally under-served or vulnerable communities? If so, how do you think these should be given effect?

64.     A recommendation requesting the views of local boards on the proposal is included in this report.

65.     Local board views are requested by 6 December 2021 to enable those views to influence the overall submission and to be included as an attachment to the council submission.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

66.     The discussion paper acknowledges that addressing climate change challenges and ensuring water service resilience is one of the drivers of the overall Three Waters Reform. However, the economic regulation regime is not being considered for these reasons directly.

67.     The proposed economic regulation framework does not have direct impacts on greenhouse gas emissions or climate. However, it may be in the purview of the regulator to ensure consumer expectations are met with regards to environmental and climate outcomes.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

68.     Relevant council departments and council-controlled organisations have been identified and contributions will be sought from them in developing the council group’s response to the Economic Regulation and Consumer Protection for Three Waters Services in New Zealand discussion paper.

69.     While overall three waters reform will have a direct impact on council and council-controlled organisations, economic regulation put in place after that reform will not have any impact on council or remaining council-controlled organisations.

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

Local impacts and local board views

70.     Local board views are sought as part of the development of the council’s submission and will be reported back to Governing Body. Local board resolutions will be included as part of council’s submission. 

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

71.     The overall three waters reform is, in part, to recognise and provide for iwi/Māori rights and interests with a specific focus on service delivery. It is proposed that iwi/Māori will have a greater role in the new Three Waters system, including pathways for enhanced participation by whānau and hapū as these services relate to their Treaty rights and interests.

72.     On a price-quality basis, economic regulation of the three waters industry does not directly impact on Māori any differently than other three waters services consumers. However, the overall three waters reform and specific topics within the economic regulation of three waters are likely to be of significant interest. In particular, how treaty obligations are considered, the recognition of water as taonga for Māori, and the overrepresentation of Māori in the group of consumers vulnerable to price shocks.

73.     Māori outcomes leads within the council family are being consulted on these topics.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

75.     There is little risk in making a submission on the economic regulation of three waters. Conversely, there is high risk if we do not make a submission. As the work programme progresses, staff can provide further information about the potential impacts on council’s activities.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

76.     The office of the Chief Economist is current drafting a submission on behalf of Auckland Council.

77.     Staff are preparing a report for the Governing Body seeking a delegation of Governing Body members to approve the council’s submission.

78.     The views of local boards on the proposal are requested by the 6 December 2021 to enable those views to influence the overall submission and to be included as an attachment to the council submission.

79.     The deadline for the final submission to Government is 20 December 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Shane Martin - Senior Economist

Authorisers

Jim Stabback - Chief Executive

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee - Establish a Local Board Joint Committee to make appointments

File No.: CP2021/15347

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To agree to establish a joint local board committee and to make appointments to it.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Social Impact Fund Allocations Committee (SIFAC) was established under conditions set by the Board of Inquiry into the proposed Wiri Men’s Correctional Facility in 2011.  The SIFAC and its associated processes are administered by the Department of Corrections. The social impact fund is made available through the Department of Corrections, and the SIFAC is able to allocate $250,000 each year.

3.       Auckland Council must make at least two appointments to the SIFAC.  In the previous term an ad-hoc sub-committee was established of the (then) Governing Body Environment and Community Committee, which met locally in Manurewa to make the appointments and was then discharged.

4.       Staff consider the appointments to the SIFAC are not a regional matter and should be made by local boards.  This view is supported by the southern councillors and by the chairs of the affected local boards.  Because four local boards are affected it is preferable to make the appointments through a joint committee of those local boards.

5.       The Governing Body has delegated the power to make the two appointments to a joint committee of the four local boards.

6.       The process under the Local Government Act 2002 to establish a joint committee requires that each participating entity must reach agreement with other participating local boards before making appointments.  This report contains a draft terms of reference for agreement in Attachment A.

7.       This report also invites the local board to make appointments now subject to the agreement of the other participating local boards on the matters set out in the attached draft terms of reference.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)         note the delegation from the Governing Body:

That the Governing Body::

a)    delegate to a joint committee established by the Manurewa, Papakura, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe local boards, the power to make two Auckland Council appointments to the Wiri Prison Social Impact Fund Allocations Committee subject to:

i)     southern ward councillors having attendance and speaking rights

ii)    the Independent Māori Statutory Board having the ability to appoint two members.

b)    agree that this delegation continues until it is revoked or changed by the Governing Body.

b)    agree to the terms of reference for a joint local aboard committee as set out in Attachment A 

c)    delegate to the chair and deputy chair authority to agree to minor changes proposed by other participating local boards

d)    subject to the draft terms of reference, with any approved minor changes, being agreed by all participating local boards, appoint the chairperson to the joint committee.

Horopaki

Context

8.       In 2011, a Board of Inquiry reported on its hearings in relation to the men’s prison at Wiri.  An outcome of this process was the establishment of a “Community Impact Forum” and a “Social Impact Fund Allocations Committee”.  The social impact fund is to be at least $250,000 annually.  

9.       The Community Impact Forum has the role of discussing impacts to the community arising from the corrections facilities and makes recommendations to the SIFAC which decides how the fund should be allocated. 

10.     The role description of a member of the allocation committee is provided as Attachment B.

11.     The SIFAC has up to seven members:

·   the chair is the chair of the Community Impact Forum

·   at least two members appointed by the Minister of Corrections

·   at least two members appointed by Auckland Council

·   up to two members co-opted by the committee itself.

12.     The appointment of the Auckland Council members to the SIFAC has not been allocated or delegated to local boards.  In the previous term, the (then) Environment and Community Committee established an ad-hoc sub-committee to make the appointments.  The sub-committee was made up of:

·   one of the ward councillors for Manurewa-Papakura

·   one of the ward councillors for Manukau 

·   the chairs (or deputy chairs) of the Manurewa, Papakura, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards 

·   two Independent Māori Statutory Board representatives.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

13.     Advice from the Department of Corrections is that the next social impact report is due by June 2022.  Applications for funding might arise out of this report resulting in a meeting of SIFAC possibly around August 2022.  Council needs to make new appointments to the SIFAC in the first half of 2022.

14.     Staff have taken the opportunity to consider whether the appointments to the SIFAC should be made by the Governing Body and have concluded that these appointments are neither a regional matter, nor a matter that sits entirely within one local board area.  To recognise the sub-regional nature of the allocations able to be made by SIFAC, it would be preferable to make the appointments through a joint committee formed by the four local boards.

15.     Following consultation with the chairs of the affected local boards, staff proposed the joint local board committee to the Governing Body which supported the proposal and delegated the responsibility to make the appointments to a joint committee of the Manurewa, Papakura, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards subject to the southern ward councillors having attendance and speaking rights and the IMSB is invited to appoint two members.

16.     The Governing Body also agreed for the delegation to continue until it is revoked.  It will be listed in the section of the Long-term Plan which contains delegations to local boards and the allocation table.

17.     The Local Government Act 2002, schedule 7, clause 30, provides for joint committees to be formed and clause 30A requires that each participating body agree on certain terms of the joint committee:

Joint committees

 (1)   A local authority may not appoint a joint committee under clause 30(1)(b) unless it has first reached agreement with every other local authority or public body that is to appoint members of the committee.

 (2)   An agreement under subclause (1) must specify—

 (a)    the number of members each local authority or public body may appoint to the committee; and

 (b)    how the chairperson and deputy chairperson of the committee are to be appointed; and

 (c)    the terms of reference of the committee; and

 (d)    what responsibilities (if any) are to be delegated to the committee by each local authority or public body; and

 (e)    how the agreement may be varied.  

18.     Acknowledging the change of focus of the process to a joint committee of local boards whereby local boards appoint the members, staff propose that Governing Body members are extended speaking rights but not membership (and voting) rights.   It is possible for the joint committee to appoint governing body or local board members.

19.     The draft agreement, as required by schedule 7, clause 30, (described above), sets out:

a)   the participating local boards will be the Manurewa, Papakura, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards

b)   each local board appoints its chair or deputy chair to the joint committee

c)   the Independent Māori Statutory Board will be invited to appoint two representatives

d)   the joint committee elects its own chair and deputy chair

e)   Governing Body members are not members of the joint committee but have speaking rights 

f)    the terms of reference of the joint committee are to appoint the two Auckland Council members of the Social Impact Fund Allocations Committee

g)   the power to make these appointments is delegated by the Auckland Council Governing Body

h)   the agreement may be varied by the participating local boards (provided any variation is consistent with the delegation from the Governing Body).

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

20.     This report proposes a change to the process for making two Auckland Council appointments.  The change in the process does not impact climate.

 

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21.     Making two Auckland Council appointments to the SIFAC does not impact the wider council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

22.     The scope of the SIFAC is not regional but is sub-regional, being relevant to the Manurewa, Papakura, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards.  It is because of this that the report proposes a joint committee of local boards makes the two Auckland Council appointments

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23.     Previously when appointments were made by an ad-hoc committee of the Governing Body (or sub-committee of a Governing Body committee), the Independent Māori Statutory Board was invited to make appointments to the ad-hoc committee.  The proposed joint committee is deemed to be a committee of each participating local board and the proposal provides for two Independent Māori Statutory Board members

24.     The process itself does not impact on the Māori community however the Social Impact Fund Allocations Committee will be considering applications for funding for projects which will have an impact on the Māori community.  Mana whenua take part in the Community Impact Forum.  There is also a Tangata Whenua Committee comprising representatives of affected iwi, which advises impacts on Māori to the Minister and also makes recommendations on projects for funding by the Social Impact Fund Allocations Committee.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

25.     There are no financial implications for Auckland Council resulting from this decision.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26.     There are no significant risks for Auckland Council resulting from this decision.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27.     Each affected local board will be invited to agree to the terms and to appoint a member to the joint committee.  Staff will then facilitate a meeting of the joint committee, which will make the Auckland Council appointments to SIFAC.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Rose Leonard - Manager Governance Services

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Update on Ara Kōtui (Improving Māori input into local board decision-making)

File No.: CP2021/16136

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To report on progress and achievements of the Ara Kōtui programme.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Ara Kōtui (formerly known as the Improving Māori input into local board decision making project) was was established in 2015 as a joint mana whenua and southern local boards initiative.

3.       The aim of the project was to explore and support opportunities to enable mana whenua involvement in local board decision-making, including through a co-design process.

4.       Key achievements to date include hui between mana whenua and local boards to share mana whenua priorities and local board plans, actions to promote Māori engagement in the local government elections 2019, mana whenua attendance at local board workshops relating to work programme items of interest, and letters of joint advocacy.

5.       Auckland Council’s Research and Evaluation Unit (RIMU) completed an evaluation of the programme in July 2021.

6.       In response to the RIMU recommendations, the terms of reference and delivery plan have been updated, and the structure of the hui amended.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)         receive the report on progress and achievements of the Ara Kōtui programme.

Horopaki

Context

7.       Ara Kōtui (formerly known as the Improving Māori input into local board decision-making programme, ‘IMI’) was established in 2015 as a joint project between mana whenua and Manurewa, Māngere-Otāhuhu, and Ōtara-Papatoetoe local boards.

8.       Papakura and Franklin Local Boards subsequently joined the project group.

9.       The programme is funded through local board work programmes.  In the 2021/2022 financial year, local boards contributed as follows:

Māngere-Otāhuhu

$10,000.00

Ōtara-Papatoetoe

$6,000.00

Manurewa

$10,000.00

Papakura

$11,000.00

Franklin

$5,000.00

 

10.     Funding for this project goes towards a contract with Ōtara Health (for facilitation including establishing hui appointments, agendas and minutes; catering for hui; administering mana whenua attendance and travel fees; organising regular collective mana whenua / southern local boards hui), and towards deliverables related to the Ara Kōtui delivery plan (examples include additional wānanga between mana whenua and local boards and other deliverables in the joint work plan).

11.     Reporting against these budgets will be provided at the completion of the financial year.

12.     At inception, the aim of the project was to explore and support opportunities to enable mana whenua involvement in local board decision-making, including through a co-design process.

13.     The project comprised the Project Reference Group (PRG), made up of representatives from mana whenua governance entities and one – two local board representatives per board. The PRG approved the Ara Kōtui Delivery Plan, with hui taking place every 2 months, totalling 5 hui per year.

14.     The Project Delivery Group (PDG) comprised council and mana whenua staff with responsibility for delivering actions from the Delivery Plan.  The PDG met monthly, totalling 10 hui per year.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

15.     In July 2021, Auckland Council’s Research and Evaluation Unit (RIMU) completed an evaluation of the programme (Attachment A).

16.     Recommendations from the evaluation were:

·    Local Board Services to ensure a forum is provided for mana whenua and local boards to discuss whether IMI is fit for purpose and is generating outcomes consistent with their strategies and plans. This could include:

High level strategic conversation on where IMI sits within Auckland Council and mana whenua relationships, including to the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum, Ngā Mātārae, individual local board relationships to Mana Whenua.

The relationships between the aspirations of the IMI group to Auckland Council’s Māori Outcomes strategy.

·    The Project Reference Group (PRG) refresh the relationships and thinking informing IMI.

Revisit the eight actions to determine whether they still are fit for purpose.

Discuss the relevance of IMI with the participating local boards

Discuss the relevance of IMI to participating mana whenua organisations.

Discuss which Auckland Council groups are represented at the PRG and the PDG, including the level of seniority of council staff present.

·    That the Project Reference Group generate mechanisms for ensuring oversight and accountability for IMI initiatives

Refresh the terms of reference for the initiative.

Develop feedback mechanisms to participating local boards, including for budget.

Develop feedback mechanisms between the PDG and the PRG.

Build project evaluation into IMI initiatives.

Share successes.

·    The PRG and Local Board Services discuss how IMI should be adequately resourced and managed.

Discussing whether Auckland Council or an external organisation is best placed to facilitate IMI.

Identification of the traits the facilitation role should embody, and the functions they are expected to undertake, with specific consideration to:

§ Onboarding of new IMI participants

§ Meeting scheduling

§ Forward planning for local government election period and new boards

§ Expectations about circulation of meeting minutes and other relevant documentation

§ Meeting quorums, including for mana whenua participants.

17.     In response to the recommendations in the RIMU evaluation:

·    the PDG and PRG were combined into one rōpū, to meet monthly

·    new Terms of Reference were adopted (Attachment B), including roles and responsibilities for facilitation of meetings, Ara Kōtui support, advice and implementation of the delivery plan.

·    the delivery plan was refreshed and updated (Attachment C)

·    improved oversight of the programme to local boards and mana whenua entities through six monthly reporting to local boards via a business meeting report, with same information formatted in a way that is usable by mana whenua, is being implemented.

18.     Further recommendations from the report will be implemented over the next three to six months and the programme will be reviewed regularly to ensure it meets the aspirations and expectations of partners and stakeholders.

Some achievements of the programme

19.     Improving understanding and relationships:

·        A wānanga was held in May 2021 hosted by Ngāti Tamaoho at their office in Karaka, where the iwi representatives shared their unique heritage, priorities and the current form and structure of Ngāti Tamaoho with elected members from Franklin, Papakura, Manurewa, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu, Ōtara-Papatoetoe, Puketāpapa Local Boards, and Councillors Dalton and Fletcher.

20.     Advocacy:

·        Auckland Council’s Chief Executive has been asked to consider the use of mātauranga management and relationship commitment for mana whenua intellectual property shared with council. This includes the use of kōrero, waiata, karakia, kupu, imagery, artwork and proverbs. The letter asks that a consistent, careful and non-commercial approach be developed and agreed with mana whenua, and Ara Kōtui offers to work with council on this.

·        The Chair of the Independent Review Panel on the Future of Local Government has been invited to engage with Ara Kōtui, to explore how councils can maintain and improve the wellbeing of New Zealanders, in the communities they serve and long into the future, in partnership with Māori.

21.     Mana whenua involvement in local board decision-making processes:

·    various workshops related to local board work programme projects were attended by mana whenua

·    hui at Ngāti Ōtara Marae in January 2020 where Ngaati Whanaunga, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei, Te Ahiwaru Waiohua and Ngāti Tamaoho shared their priorities with local boards prior to development of draft local board plans. This was attended by representatives from the five southern local boards, and also representatives from Maungakiekie-Tāmaki and Howick Local Boards.

·    hui at Manukau Civic where the southern local boards presented their local board plans back to mana whenua, including how the boards had responded to mana whenua priorities and Māori outcomes.

22.     Local government elections 2019:

·        Māori community-led co-design with rangatahi developing key messaging to improve rangatahi voter participation

 

·        One-stop-voting booths on marae to encourage Māori voter participation

 

·        inauguration of newly elected local board members held on marae for Papakura, Manurewa and Ōtara-Papatoetoe local boards

Current and future priorities

23.     Future actions from the delivery plan this rōpū is focussed on delivering in the near future include:

·    implementing a pilot programme to involve mana whenua in the process of developing local board annual work programmes

·    sharing local board ‘governance forward calendars’ on a monthly basis to give mana whenua overview of workshops and business meetings items.  In response, mana whenua can indicate any items they have an interest in and subsequently arrange to attend the relevant workshop or business meeting or communicate their perspective to the local board

·    a further hui between mana whenua representatives and all southern local board members is proposed for March/April 2022 to further develop shared understanding of priorities and develop opportunities to work together / partner

·    collaborating with the Elections 2022 team to ensure mana whenua insights inform planning for delivery of the next local government elections

·    develop a delivery plan for involving mana whenua in the induction of local board members, post the 2022 local government elections

·    exploring with Ara Kōtui options around developing a joint committee, to become part of the democracy fabric of council

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

24.     This project does not have any immediate impact on climate.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25.     Departmental staff delivering local board work programmes will need to be prepared to experience mana whenua attending local board workshops and being involved in local board work programming.

26.     Ara Kōtui is developing ‘new’ ways of working with mana whenua.  This may create expectations that other boards also implement these ways of working.

27.     The work of Ara Kōtui complements the role of the Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB) and responds to the Schedule of Issues of Significance to Māori in Tamaki Mākaurau produced by the IMSB, with specific mention of the issue that “Māori are recognised as playing an important role in the development of local communities through the inclusion of Māori in Local Board decision-making”.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28.     Five southern local boards are represented as part of the Ara Kōtui governance structure and their views contribute to the direction and decision-making of the group. They have committed to exploring and supporting opportunities to work with and enable mana whenua participation in local board decision-making.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

29.     Mana whenua across the rohe are invited to send representatives to participate in the direction and decision-making of Ara Kōtui.

30.     Work programme priorities and projects are co-designed with local boards for delivery by mana whenua and Auckland Council kaimahi.

31.     Over time, it is expected that representation at various levels and processes for implementation of the Ara Kōtui Delivery Plan will continue to be refined so that Māori views and aspirations are better reflected in local decision-making in Tāmaki Makaurau

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

32.     This report is an update only to the local board and there are no direct financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

33.     Not all mana whenua regularly attend Ara Kōtui, at either the governance or operational level.  Some mana whenua may prefer to engage directly with individual local boards.

34.     While Ara Kōtui is governance to governance forum that sets direction, it is important that as actions are operationalised, all mana whenua are given the same opportunity to take part, regardless of their attendance at Ara Kōtui.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

35.     Reporting on the progress and achievements of the Ara Kōtui will be six-monthly.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

RIMU Evaluation of Improving Māori input into local board decision-making initiative (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Terms of Reference - Ara Kōtui

29

c

Ara Kōtui Delivery Plan for 2020-2021 updated October 2021

33

 

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Lucy Stallworthy - Local Board Engagement Advisor

John Adams  - Local Board Advisor

Authoriser

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

A picture containing table

Description automatically generated

A picture containing calendar

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Diagram

Description automatically generated with medium confidence


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Ngā Hapori Momoho | Thriving Communities Draft Strategy

File No.: CP2021/16867

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek support for the draft Ngā Hapori Momoho/Thriving Communities Strategy 2022-2032.  

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Ngā Hapori Momoho | Thriving Communities was adopted in 2014 as council’s strategy for community and social wellbeing. A review of the plan in 2018 identified it needed to be refreshed to align with the Auckland Plan 2050 outcomes and better address the changes and challenges in Tāmaki Makaurau. 

3.       These challenges include growing socio-economic disparities, population growth and intensification, the impacts of climate change and more recently COVID-19. These impact on communities’ ability to thrive. 

4.       Through the refresh process we heard from diverse communities across the region on what is needed to help them thrive. These insights have shaped the draft strategy. 

5.       The draft Ngā Hapori Momoho | Thriving Communities strategy sets out the high-level direction for the next 10 years to respond to these challenges and to what communities told us was important. 

6.       The draft strategy has four main outcome areas which are the building blocks for thriving: 

·    Manaakitanga | Quality of life: 

All Aucklanders enjoy the essentials of a good life and fulfil their potential  

·    Whanaungatanga | Community Connection: 
Aucklanders are connected and feel as though they belong 

·    Kotahitanga | Collective action:  

All Aucklanders can participate and they take collective action to meet common goals 

·    Kaitiakitanga | Sustainable futures:  

Aucklanders are connected to and care for the environment. 

 

7.       The high-level outcomes are supported by objectives that cascade to three key shifts in the way we work:  from “one-size fits all” to targeting our responses, from adhoc and siloed to working in integrated ways, and shifting from council as expert to enabling community leadership. 

8.       Four investment principles focus resources to impact on community challenges. This will ensure there is a strong, intentional link between aspiration, investment and action, and that we focus on communities who experience the greatest inequities.

9.       A key constraint is that there is currently no additional budget attached to the strategy. This means the pace of change will be reliant on future budget and implementation planning to either seek new investment or to refocus existing resources to the strategy’s objectives.

10.     Another limitation is that many of the barriers to people thriving relate to complex socio-economic factors where the council is not the primary deliverer.  

11.     The draft strategy will be reported to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee in February 2022 for adoption. 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      support the draft Ngā Hapori Momoho | Thriving Communities Strategy 2022 – 2032 as set out in Attachment A to this report.  

Horopaki

Context

12.     The Auckland Plan Participation and Belonging outcome in particular sets the aspiration that ‘All Aucklanders will be part of and contribute to society, access opportunities, and have the chance to develop to their full potential’ 

13.     Ngā Hapori Momoho | Thriving Communities was adopted in 2014 as council’s community and social wellbeing plan. It is a core plan to deliver the Auckland Plan 2050 which has a strong focus on fostering an inclusive Auckland where everyone has the chance to thrive. 

14.     In 2018 a review of Ngā Hapori Momoho identified several improvement areas. This included refreshing the strategy to better align it to the new Auckland Plan 2050 and to address the changes and growing challenges facing Auckland.  

Diverse community voices have shaped the draft strategy approach

 

15.     The refreshed draft Ngā Hapori Momoho | Thriving Communities strategy (Attachment A) has been informed by feedback from the diverse communities of Tāmaki Makaurau, key sector stakeholders, partners, and mana whenua. These voices are central to both the content of the strategy and how it will be used.  

16.     During 2019 and 2020 staff looked at feedback from over 50 previous public engagements, and then undertook face to-face interviews, focus groups and online hui. We heard from over 400 community groups and leaders from across the region on what it means to thrive and what council can do to support that.  

17.     Staff presented the findings from this community engagement to local boards in April 2021 which can be accessed here.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Auckland is facing local and international challenges impacting thriving communities  

18.     At the 2018 Census there were nearly 1.6 million usual residents in Auckland, an increase of 11% since the 2013 Census, and this is projected to grow to 2.4 million by 2050[1].

19.     Tāmaki Makaurau is very diverse – it is home to the largest Polynesian population of any city in the world, and 40% of the population were born overseas.  

20.     Whilst many of those living in Auckland can make the most of all this region has to offer, there are still many who have limited capability to access social and economic resources and opportunities compared to the general population.  

21.     Many Aucklanders do not have access to the things they need to thrive. This restricts their ability to fully participate in society and in activities that have meaning and value to them. 

22.     Tāmaki Makaurau’s strong economic growth has not been shared equally, with Māori and Pasifika communities making considerably less each week than the rest of the Auckland population.  

23.     Over a third (38.5%) of Pasifika people and 46% of young people in Auckland are living in overcrowded and unsuitable homes[2].

24.     Only 50% of Aucklanders feel a sense of belonging in their neighbourhoods, and 49% have felt isolated and lonely[3]. 

25.     Tāmaki Makaurau is facing some key challenges over the next 10-20 years that provide the strategic drivers for the refreshed strategy. We need to respond to these if we want to maintain social cohesion and ensure all our people and communities are thriving.   

Challenge 1 

Challenge 2 

Challenge 3 

Growing wealth and income inequality will mean too many whānau cannot thrive. 

The pace and scale of growth and social change could undermine Aucklander’s sense of belonging and connection. 

Our changing climate will make outcomes worse for those communities already struggling. 

 

26.     More recently other significant changes both locally and globally are contributing to why we need a strategy that takes an intentional approach to supporting thriving, inclusive and sustainable communities:  

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Changing the way council works can help address community challenges 

27.     In recognition of the 2018 review findings and from our community and stakeholder engagement, we know there needed to be some key shifts in the underlying thinking and approach of the council. We also need to be explicit in our priorities. Key shifts proposed include the following:  

 

From

To

Ad hoc and siloed

Working in integrated ways

We will work across the Auckland Council group, with government and across communities and sectors to support Aucklanders to thrive. We will share data, evidence and learning. 

 

We will prioritise interventions which support coordination and collective impact to deliver on the multiple outcomes which impact Aucklander’s wellbeing (social, environmental, cultural and economic).

One size fits all

Targeting our responses

We will change our current services, activities and ways of working to better meet the needs of whānau and communities, particularly those experiencing the greatest disparity in outcomes.  

We will tailor services and activities to meet local needs and opportunities. 

Council as expert

Enabling community leadership

We will support communities (whānau, hapū, iwi, people) to lead their own responses. We will enable them to define, deliver, and monitor the things that enable them to thrive.

What we want to achieve – an overview of the draft strategy 

28.     To guide how we respond to these identified challenges and to support the key shifts we need to make, the draft strategy sets out four outcomes and six objectives. The outcomes set out where communities want to be in the future. Objectives identify where to focus to get there.  

Outcomes: Four building blocks for thriving 

29.     The draft strategy has four main outcome areas which if achieved would contribute to thriving communities. 

·    Manaakitanga |Quality of life 
All Aucklanders enjoy the essentials of a good life and fulfil their potential  

 

·    Whanaungatanga | Community connection 
Auckland are connected and feel as though they belong 

 

·    Kotahitanga | Collective action 
All Aucklanders can participate and they take collective action to meet common goals 

 

·    Kaitiakitanga | Sustainable futures 
Aucklanders are connected to and care for the environment. 

 

Objectives: Where should we focus our action 

30.     To help give direction on how we might achieve the intended outcomes, we have identified six objective areas which will provide guidance on what actions could be taken by the organisation to contribute to the outcomes. 

Application, logo, company name

Description automatically generated

31.     While we have grouped action areas under each objective many of these will contribute to multiple objectives. Many are focused on addressing complex societal challenges which council does not have all the levers, resource or influence to directly address.  

32.     These objectives do however provide direction on how we can use the levers available to us (such as our procurement power) to affect and influence change, within our control.  

Investment principles will help us to invest in what will make the greatest difference 

33.     The draft strategy proposes we invest in our resource to make the biggest impact, and this will be guided by four key principles:

A screenshot of a computer

Description automatically generated with low confidence

34.     Auckland Council also has a range of roles and levers that we can use to effect change in conjunction with partners to help communities thrive.  

35.     Our presence in and understanding of the community is one of our most powerful tools. This can be utilised in several areas: urban form, procurement, community facilities, our workforce, transport, community development and grants.  

Strengths of the draft strategy  

36.     As an outcome focused strategy, it provides focus and direction, but is not prescriptive on processes or actions. It provides scope for creative and innovative responses to achieving the outcomes and objectives.  

37.     The high-level outcomes and objective in the strategy cascade to key shifts, investment principles and to three-year implementation plans. This will ensure there is a strong and intentional link between aspiration, investment and action.   

38.     The draft strategy also presents both council and partners with an opportunity to do things differently, apply new approaches and have the flexibility to respond to local needs in ways that are appropriate and effective.  

39.     This is important as it not only addresses current challenges but allows flexibility to respond to emerging challenges in the future as our intended end outcomes will not change.  

40.     It also presents us with an opportunity to partner with our communities to incorporate existing and emerging approaches from global research as well as those generated in Aotearoa, so that we are using all tools available to collectively to achieve the outcomes.  

Constraints and limitations of the draft strategy 

41.     Nga Hapori Momoho | Thriving Communities is a 10-year strategy focused on long-term outcomes. It will take some time to see progress and the impact of actions, especially given the complexity of the challenges. 

42.     A key limitation is that many of the barriers to people thriving relate to complex socio-economic factors that council does not hold the primary levers for. 

43.     Council is, however, well-placed to use all of its resources and levers more effectively and work alongside central government and communities to support change. 

44.     A key constraint is that there is no additional budget to support delivery of the strategy, so the pace of change will be subject to how effectively existing resources and budget can be realigned and directed to the strategy’s new objectives.  

45.     New investment will need to be considered as part of future annual and long-term budget processes. 

46.     There is opportunity, however, for reprioritisation of existing resource and investment to be considered as part of implementation planning. The outcome of this will be reported to the governing body as part of the first three-year implementation plan (FY22-25). 

47.     The draft strategy relies heavily on the significant cooperation and commitment across the council, elected members and community partners for it to be effective.  This in turn relies on visible and active leadership, and ongoing monitoring of progress and impact.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

48.     During engagement, we heard from communities that the environment was a significant contributor to their wellbeing. Climate change and environmental degradation are a threat to the way our communities aspire to live in Tāmaki Makaurau. 

49.     The Kaitiakitanga outcome was created to reflect the voices of mana whenua and community, through prioritising environmental wellbeing and encouraging community action and sustainability. Actions developed in the Thriving Communities three-year implementation plans will need to consider the connection between the wellbeing of our communities and the wellbeing of the environment. 

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

50.     This is a strategy for the whole council group and will also be used to challenge and guide council teams and CCO’s in their implementation roles.  

51.     Staff and teams from across the council and CCO’s have been involved in the refresh process, including attending a series of workshops to help identify existing and future actions to support what communities told us was important.  

52.     Going forward staff will work closely with the council group on implementation planning and the development of the first three-year implementation plan.

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

Local impacts and local board views

53.     Local boards have a strong interest, and play a key role, in creating thriving communities in their areas. All local boards have local board plan outcomes that support thriving communities, and many are already working towards several Thriving Communities objectives.

54.     Community engagement included communities from across all local board areas.  

55.     The findings from the engagement phase were shared with elected members and engagement participants in early 2021. They were also published on the Thriving Communities Have Your Say page. 

56.     Staff attended local board workshops in October 2021 to share the high-level draft strategy. Local boards were broadly supportive of the approach and provided helpful feedback that has helped shape the revised draft.  Common themes in local board feedback include: 

·    concern for isolated communities

·    a strong desire to build the strategy into work plans. Boards could see the benefit of the approach and were eager to turn this into a practical response through their local plans

·    concerns about funding the strategy, and opportunities to leverage existing or additional resource to support their communities.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

57.     The 2018 Census found that over 23% of Aotearoa’s Māori population live in Tāmaki Makaurau, making up 11.5% of Auckland’s population – the highest Māori population in any city in Aotearoa[4].

58.     The average age of Auckland’s Māori population is 24.9 years, compared to Auckland’s average of 34.7 years. As this young population grows and reaches working age, Māori will be a critical part of supporting our economy and ageing population. 

59.     Although Māori make up a large proportion of Tamaki Makaurau’s population, they have not equitably shared in our economic growth. In 2018 the median income for all Aucklanders was $34,000, but for Māori it was $27,000[5]. 

60.     By focusing on achieving equitable outcomes for Māori, this strategy will make a positive impact on the social, cultural and economic wellbeing of tangata, whanau and hapori.  

Engagement to understand the needs of Māori communities 

61.     To ensure the strategy is relevant and effective for Māori, staff undertook individual engagement interviews with 17 mana whenua iwi and two mataawaka organisations.  

62.     Key inputs into the strategy from the engagement process include:

·    an environmental objective to reflect the importance of whenua to wellbeing and thriving

·    focus on achieving equity

·    recognition that whakawhanaungatanga and connection is central to thriving communities.

Delivering Māori outcomes 

63.     The council’s direction for delivering Māori outcomes is set out in Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau, which reflects the aspirations of Auckland ‘s Māori communities.  

64.     The draft strategy supports the Schedule of Issues of Significance 2021 by addressing the four pou of social, cultural, economic, and environmental wellbeing for Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau. 

65.     Mana whenua and Mataawaka will have an opportunity to provide further feedback on the draft plan in November 2021. 

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

66.     There is currently no additional budget attached to the draft Ngā Hapori Momoho /Thriving Communities strategy. This means in the short term it will need to be delivered within existing budgets and resources of council and CCOs. Where any additional investment is required, this will need to be considered through the long-term plan or annual plan processes.  

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

If <event>: 

Then <impact>: 

Possible mitigations: 

If it is not clear that the draft strategy should drive reprioritisation of existing resources.   

It may create expectations that there will be additional budget to support the implementation of the draft strategy. 

All public-facing communications and guidance about the draft strategy will make it clear it is intended to focus & re-prioritise existing resources.  

Future budget and implementation planning will identify how actions will be funded from existing budgets or through seeking new investment.  

If the draft strategy is viewed as too ‘high level’ and does not provide clear enough direction 

The draft strategy may fail to have any meaningful impact on the way the organisation delivers services and therefore would have no meaningful impact on the desired outcomes.  

Develop a strong implementation plan and ensure there is visible and active senior leadership to drive implementation.  

The objectives will provide appropriate level of direction without being too prescriptive.  

Incorporating a measurement framework in the implementation plan to help understand impact. 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

67.     Community engagement on the draft strategy will be undertaken in November 2021.

68.     This feedback and local board resolutions will be reported to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee in February 2022, when the committee considers the draft strategy for adoption.  

69.     The draft strategy will be supported by a three-year implementation plan with tailored actions, and a monitoring and evaluation framework to track progress and impact. These two items are being developed for consideration in April 2022. 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Ngā Hapori Momoho | Thriving Communities Draft Strategy

45

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Mackenzie Blucher - Graduate Policy Advisor

Dave Jaggs - Senior Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - General Manager - Community and Social Policy

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

A picture containing text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Chart, bar chart

Description automatically generated

A picture containing table

Description automatically generated

A picture containing chart

Description automatically generated

Chart

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

A picture containing text

Description automatically generated

Letter

Description automatically generated

A picture containing diagram

Description automatically generated

Diagram, schematic

Description automatically generated

A picture containing table

Description automatically generated

A picture containing table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated with low confidence

Diagram

Description automatically generated

A picture containing diagram

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

A picture containing chart

Description automatically generated

Chart

Description automatically generated with low confidence

Table

Description automatically generated

A picture containing chart

Description automatically generated

Diagram, schematic

Description automatically generated

A picture containing chart

Description automatically generated

Chart

Description automatically generated

Chart, bubble chart

Description automatically generated

A picture containing chart

Description automatically generated

A picture containing diagram

Description automatically generated

A picture containing text

Description automatically generated


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Auckland Transport Update for the Papakura Local Board

File No.: CP2021/17170

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To update the Papakura Local Board on transport related matters.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.      The purpose of the report is to provide an update on transport related items including:

·    A review of Auckland Transport outcomes during 2021

·    Update on the Regional Parking Strategy

·    Private plan changes

·    Pukekohe to Papakura electrification.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      receive the November report from Auckland Transport.

Horopaki

Context

3.       Auckland Transport (AT) is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. AT reports on a regular basis to local boards, as set out in the Local Board Engagement Plan. This reporting commitment acknowledges the important engagement role local boards play within and on behalf of their local communities.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

4.       This section of the report contains information about relevant projects, issues, and initiatives. It provides summaries of the detailed advice and analysis provided to the local board during workshops and briefings.

A review of Auckland Transport outcomes during 2021

5.       2021 has been a productive year in terms of Auckland Transport’s delivery of transport outcomes in the Papakura Local Board area. Despite the constraints of the 2020/2021 Emergency Budget, there have been a significant number of projects started as well as issues that are in the process of being addressed. Key projects include:

·        A joint project with Healthy Waters to culvert and fill the open drain on Walters Road and run a 3-metre-wide shared pedestrian/cycling footpath with kerb and channelling. The board was updated on 3 November 2021 regarding this.

·        Auckland Transport appointing a project manager and allocating $50,000 to progress the feasibility of a shared path bridge across the Papakura Stream at the Waiata Shores development. This is a joint project with the Manurewa Local Board.

·        The one-year trial of a rideshare service for the Takanini/Conifer Grove area that replaces the 371 bus services – AT local service.  Promotion of the service has commenced.

·        A successful multi-agency tour conducted with the Minister of Transport, Michael Wood, highlighting the impacts of rapid growth on infrastructure and transport.

·        A presentation to the Auckland Transport Regional Land Transport Board on the Regional Land Transport Plan that was well received.  The presentation focussed on the impacts of growth and developing Papakura station as a transport hub.

·        The above projects are in addition to the planned works, particularly around safety.  These include the Kelvin Road raised intersection currently under construction and the Manuroa/Takanini School Road intersection, planned for delivery in the second half of the 2020/2021 financial year. The board has also allocated most of its Local Board Transport Capital Fund to projects that are being progressed by Auckland Transport staff.

Update on the Regional Parking Strategy

6.       Council and Auckland Transport are working together to update the 2015 Parking Strategy with direction coming from the Auckland Council Planning Committee’s decision on shaping the strategy for the next decade, made on Thursday 4 November 2021.

7.       The reviewed strategy will be consulted on with key stakeholders, local boards, and members of the public.  As a first step in engaging with Aucklanders, AT will publish a Parking Strategy discussion document.

8.       The discussion document will spell out the issues, challenges, and considerations AT must manage for Auckland’s future. This discussion document is intended to start the conversation on the policy considerations. Early feedback may be factored into the draft Parking Strategy 2022.

9.       In the first half of 2022, Aucklanders will have an opportunity to provide feedback on the future parking strategy via a region-wide public consultation.

10.     The current 2015 Parking Strategy is now six years old, and a lot has changed in Auckland since then. Climate change action is a significant driver for the need to manage the transport system. Forecast population growth and changes to the Unitary Plan also mean that we need to respond with better parking management. The Unitary Plan provides for higher density housing in response to growth. It also provides for growth in areas that are, at this stage, not well-served by public transport. More people in areas that are not well-served by public transport mean that people will be more reliant on car-use. This means more demand for parking and more demand on the roads, which requires more management.

11.  Other significant changes that will impact Auckland’s parking management are:

·    Changes to travel behaviour, such as emergence of micro-mobility (e-bikes, e-scooters, etc) and the growth of the delivery economy (Uber Eats, etc.)

·    Auckland’s public transport network has matured over time, providing opportunities for further passenger uptake and more effective park and ride management. This trend will continue as AT invests more into public transport.

 

12.  There has been concern since the Planning Committee meeting and subsequent media coverage that this would been imminent parking loss on town main streets. Noting that there are still engagement and consultation phases to be undertaking there is one key point that cannot be under-emphasised.

                 “The proposed changes to the Parking Strategy will be implemented in a phased

                 approach over the next decade. “

13.     This phased approach will very likely focus first in areas close to the central business district (CBD) with high numbers of public transport (PT) services and high volumes of pedestrian traffic.

14.     There is an online question and answer session on 23 November for business associations. The local boards will be briefed regularly. 

Private plan changes

15.     There have been several plan changes and consents relating to intensive developments that involve transport implications, in particular parking and road width. Traditionally all consultations involving local boards came through AT or its contractors. With recent changes in planning regulations and policy, developers are tasked with seeking input with local boards.

16.     This issue is challenging local boards as to how they will give timely and informed feedback on these proposals. AT’s bylaws and resolutions team are working with local boards policy staff about how to resource this emerging issue.

Pukekohe to Papakura electrification

17.     The board was recently advised that the trains between Pukekohe and Papakura will cease from September 2022, while electrification is delivered for the track between Pukekohe and Papakura. The board will be briefed on the implications and mitigation measures in mid-November. KiwiRail representatives have agreed to provide the local board with regular updates from next year.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

18.     AT 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.

19.     AT’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.

20.     There is a growing global, national, and local need to urgently address the threats posed by climate change through reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The scientific evidence is compelling. In New Zealand the Climate Change Response (Zero-Carbon) Act was enacted in 2019, which requires national GHG emissions to be net-zero by 2050. In June 2019 Auckland Council declared a climate emergency, followed by the endorsement in July 2020 of Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan.

21.     Tackling climate change will require a very significant change to the way we travel around our region although the timing and the detail of how this change might unfold are still to become obvious. Climate change targets in the Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) occurred with a strong awareness of central government climate change legislation and Auckland Council climate change targets. Auckland Council through its Climate Plan has committed to a 50 percent reduction in emissions by 2030, the amount required to keep the planet within 1.5°C of warming by 2100.

22.     Roughly five percent of Auckland’s road and rail strategic networks are found in areas susceptible to coastal inundation, including parts of the state highway network which are crucial links for freight movements and access to key regional destinations. Over 1,000km (or about 13 percent) of AT’s local road network has recently been identified as vulnerable to a 1-in-100 year flood event. AT is currently identifying and prioritising the risks of climate change to the transport system (assets, services, customers and staff) to permit a more strategic approach to designing and managing our assets in the future.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

23.     The impact of information (or decisions) in this report are confined to AT and do not impact on other parts of the council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

24.     The purpose of this report is to inform the local board.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

25.     There are no impacts specific to Māori for this reporting period. AT is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi-the Treaty of Waitangi and its broader legal obligations in being more responsible or effective to Māori.

26.     Our Māori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to 19 mana whenua tribes in delivering effective and well-designed transport policy and solutions for Auckland. We also recognise mataawaka and their representative bodies and our desire to foster a relationship with them.

27.     This plan in full is available on AT’s Website - https://at.govt.nz/about-us/transport-plans-strategies/maori-responsiveness-plan/#about

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

28.     There are no direct financial implications for this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

29.     Risks are managed as part of each AT project.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

30.     In addition to upcoming workshops, the local board will receive a further report at its February 2022 business meeting.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Thomas – Elected Members Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Ioane Afoa – Auckland Transport Southern Hub Manager

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Draft Contributions Policy 2021

File No.: CP2021/16566

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek feedback from local boards on the draft Contributions Policy 2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Development contributions allow for an equitable and proportionate share of the total cost of growth-related capital expenditure to be recovered from the development community.

3.       The Finance and Performance Committee adopted the draft Contributions Policy 2021 for consultation at its meeting on 16 September 2021, FIN/2021/84. 

4.       Local board feedback is being sought to inform the Finance and Performance Committee’s consideration of the adoption of the Contribution Policy 2021 in December 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      resolve feedback on the Contributions Policy 2021 on the key consultation topics:

i)        updating policy for capital projects in the 10-year Budget 2021-2031

ii)       inclusion of projects beyond 10-years to the policy in stages starting with Drury

iii)      requiring developers to pay their contributions earlier

iv)      proposal to support Māori development with grants

v)      any other issues.

Horopaki

Context

5.       Auckland’s population is expected to grow by 260,000 in the next ten years on top of the rapid population growth experienced in the last decade, bringing the projected population to approximately 1.9 million by 2031.

6.       Construction of 145,800 new dwellings is forecast in the next ten years. To support the development enabled by the Auckland Unitary Plan, the council is facing immediate demands for infrastructure in key growth areas and in response to construction on upzoned land, plan changes and the impact of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

7.       Development contributions allow for an equitable and proportionate share of the total cost of growth-related capital expenditure to be recovered from the development community. The Contributions Policy sets out how the council will recover from new development an appropriate and fair share of the cost of infrastructure investment attributable to growth. There were four key consultation topics:

i)     Updating policy for capital projects in the 10-year Budget

          The draft policy provides for the recovery of $2.4 billion of development contributions revenue from $9.0 billion of projects with a growth component included in the10-year budget.  The draft policy also included updated forecasts of population growth and dwelling construction. The combined impact of these changes is to lower the weighted average Development Contributions price from $23,900 to $21,100.

ii)  Inclusion of projects beyond 10-years to the policy in stages starting with Drury

          Extensive work has been undertaken in recent years on the infrastructure requirements to support growth in the investment priority areas. However, further work is required before these costs can be included in the contributions policy. Area specific amendments to the contributions policy will be proposed for consultation as the information becomes available.

          The first step in the Contributions Policy 2021 will be to add a programme of expenditure to fund some of the key infrastructure required to support growth in the Drury area. The impact of this change is to raise the Development Contributions price in Drury to $84,900 from between $11,000 and $18,300.

iii) Requiring developers to pay their contributions earlier

          The council proposed that Development Contributions be paid at the time of building consent for all development (residential and non-residential) except non-commercial development on Māori land (explained further below). This requires Development Contributions due at building consent to be paid 6 to 24 months earlier than under the current policy and reverses the changes made to the policy in 2019. When combined with the other changes proposed this lower the weighted average Development Contributions price to $19,300.

iv) A proposal to support Māori development with grants

          The draft policy proposed continuing the support for marae development and papakāinga and Māori housing[6] on Māori land through grants available through the Cultural Initiatives Fund. These grants can cover payment of development contributions in appropriate circumstances, along with other kinds of development costs.

8.       The proposed changes to the Contributions Policy 2021 were reported to the Finance and Performance Committee at its meeting on 16 September- see Attachment A  Draft Contributions Policy 2021.

Consultation

9.       Formal public consultation was held in September and October 2021. To support the consultation a number of documents were made available on the Have Your Say website, https://akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/dc-policy.

10.     Two online Have Your Say events were held to provide opportunities for developers and other interested parties to learn more about the draft policy, ask questions and provide their feedback. A third event was also held to allow interested parties to present their views directly to the Finance and Performance Committee. All comments have been captured and will be reported through to the Finance and Performance Committee to inform decision-making on the final policy.

11.     A summary of the feedback received from submitters is set out in Attachment B: Draft Contributions Policy 2021 – Analysis of feedback received.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement guidance

12.       Recommendations in this report have a neutral climate impact as they relate to the funding of capital investment rather than decisions on the activities to be undertaken.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views guidance

13.       The information presented on the projects included in the draft Contributions Policy 2021 was developed in conjunction with the following council-controlled organisations and council units:

·    Auckland Transport

·    Eke Panuku Development Auckland

·    Healthy Waters

·    Community Facilities

·    Community and Social Policy

14.        The Chief Economist Unit and Research Investigations and Monitoring Unit worked with us on the impact of higher development contributions on the pace of development and on land and house prices. 

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

Local impacts and local board views

15.        The development contribution price varies by location depending on the cost of infrastructure required to support development in an area.

16.        Local board feedback is being sought to inform the Finance and Performance Committee’s consideration of the adoption of the Contribution Policy 2021 in December 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

17.        Recent legislative changes require the contributions policy to support the development of Māori land. Feedback from iwi on the draft policy was sought as part of consultation and via engagement with the Tāmaki Makaurau Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum.  All developers, including mana whenua, were provided an opportunity to present their feedback to the Finance and Performance Committee on 12 October.

18.        The Tāmaki Makaurau Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum have provided their feedback which has been included in Attachment B: Draft Contributions Policy 2021 – Analysis of feedback received.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

19.     The 10-year budget assumes development contributions revenue of $2.7 billion. After completing the analysis of the cost of investments in the 10-year budget that can be recovered with development contributions and the impact of the proposed policy changes, it is estimated that the revenue will be $2.6 billion. The achievement of this revised revenue forecast requires as a first step the implementation of a contributions policy updated for the capital expenditure decisions in the 10-year budget and the other changes proposed in this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

20.     The recommendation requesting local boards views does not present any risk. The risks associated with amending the contributions policy are set out in the report to the 16 September Finance and Performance Committee, Attachment A: Development Contributions Policy 2021 Consultation.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

21.     Feedback from the public consultation will be reported to the Finance and Performance Committee workshop on 10 November 2021.

22.     Potential changes to the draft will be reported at the Finance and Performance Committee workshop on 1 December 2021. Staff will report to Finance and Performance Committee for the final policy adoption on 9 December 2021. Local board feedback will be included in the report.

23.     The Contributions Policy 2021 is proposed to be implemented in January 2022.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Development Contributions Policy 2021 report to the Finance and Performance Committee

81

b

Draft Contributions Policy 2021 – Analysis of feedback received

97

 

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Andrew Duncan - Manager Financial Policy

Authorisers

Ross Tucker - General Manager, Financial Strategy and Planning

Glenn Boyd – Acting General Manager – Local Board Services

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

A picture containing text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated with low confidence

Text

Description automatically generated

Graphical user interface, text, application

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Graphical user interface, text, application

Description automatically generated

Graphical user interface, text, application, email

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Text

Description automatically generated


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Urgent Decision - Papakura Local Board feedback on the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill

File No.: CP2021/16658

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To note the urgent decision providing the Papakura Local Board formal feedback on the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill (the Bill) was released on 19 October. The stated purpose of the Bill is to improve housing supply in Tier 1 council areas (i.e. New Zealand’s high growth cities) by speeding up implementation of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD) by at least one year and enabling more medium density homes.

 

3.       The council is required to implement the NPS-UD through a plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) by August 2022.

 

4.       The Bill provides for a new Intensification Streamlined Planning Process (ISPP) for this plan change with no Environment Court appeal rights.

 

5.       The Bill would also require Auckland Council to adopt Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS) that allow properties across all urban areas to have three dwellings up to three storeys in height without the need for a resource consent, and more than three dwellings per site through a non-notified resource consent process.

 

6.       The MDRS are based on (but more flexible than) the council’s Mixed Housing Urban zone. The Mixed Housing Urban zone is generally located close to local and town centres and in locations with good public transport. The proposed MDRS rules would have legal effect from the time the council notifies the relevant plan change by August 2022 unless:

·    a qualifying matter applies (e.g. heritage, special character, national grid, designations, open space)

·    the council has proposed more permissive height standards

·    greenfield land is being re-zoned to residential land.

 

7.      In these cases, planning provisions would have legal effect once the plan change decisions have been completed after the submissions and hearings period.

 

8.      Under the Bill, resource consent applications lodged after 20 August 2022 (or sooner if the plan change is notified sooner) would be assessed against these changes.

 

9.       The Bill also:

 

i)          requires the withdrawal in part or full, of relevant proposed plans, plan changes or private plan changes which have been notified but have not completed a hearing by 20 February 2022. Relevant proposed plans or plan changes include those that: implement NPS-UD policies 3 and 4 and/or propose changes to or create new residential zone(s) but do not incorporate the MDRS. This requirement is to ensure that the MDRS becomes the minimum expected density throughout Tier 1 residential areas, and that these plan changes go through the ISPP. The ISPP would be faster than a regular plan change process and have no Environment Court appeal rights.

 

ii)       clarifies that financial contributions (under the Resource Management Act) can apply to permitted activities (i.e. those that do not require a resource consent). The council currently collects development contributions (under the Local Government Act), not financial contributions.

 

iii)      makes changes to Policy 3(d) of the NPS-UD to clarify this policy and provide less scope of interpretation.  Policy 3(d) would be changed to focus solely on enabling height and density adjacent to neighbourhood, local and town centres.  At present, the NPS-UD links height and density to levels of accessibility to a range of goods and services, and demand for housing.

 

10.       Local board feedback was required by midday on Tuesday 9 November 2021 to be incorporated into the Auckland Council submission.

 

11.       The submission period closed on Tuesday 16 November 2021. 

 

12.       The next local board business meeting is scheduled for Wednesday 24 November 2021.  Therefore, the opportunity for the local board to formalise its feedback by resolution falls outside of the scheduled business meeting times.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      note the urgent decision providing the Papakura Local Board formal feedback on the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill as follows:

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)         provide the following feedback on the Resource Management Enabling Housing Supply Amendment Bill:

 

Timeframe

 

1)   The board is concerned about the accelerated timeframe for this Bill. It does not provide submitters with sufficient time for consideration of the proposal and will potentially lead to unintended consequences.

 

Developments meeting existing requirements

 

2)   The board believes this legislation should not negate the requirement for developments to meet current Unitary Plan controls, particularly in relation to, but not limited to, geotech and flood plain requirements.

 

Plan for good community outcomes

 

3)   The board would like the legislation to reflect the principles of planning for good community outcomes as intensification increases, such as:

·    Provision of greenspace within or nearby intensive developments

·    A reduction in the threshold criteria for walking distance to local parks or reserves

·    Public transport options must accompany intensification

·    Secure places to store cycles, e-bikes, e-scooters and other multi-modal transport devices

·    Secure recharging facilities for multi-modal transport options

·    Renewable energy options

·    Water tanks / recycling stormwater run-off

·    Ensure the protection of significant trees

·    Developments that allow access for emergency and utility vehicles as well as public transport options

·    Provision of separated and connected shared pedestrian / cycleways

·    Provision of a shared space to grow food - community gardens with associated tool sheds

·    Planting of trees

 

Quality Urban Design

 

4)   The board believes that the legislation should include requirements to adhere to principles of quality urban design and prevent significant adverse effects on adjacent properties, eg:

·    infringements on privacy

·    shading effects on neighbouring properties.

 

5)   This needs to include the accumulative effects of ongoing intensification and development.

 

Growth Infrastructure Funding

 

6)    The board believes that the most significant constraint on urban growth is lack of funding for growth infrastructure. This legislation does not address this issue, and potentially increases the demands on local government to find this funding. The board strongly believes that any new central Government regulation that creates additional cost for local authorities should be accompanied by increased funding from central Government.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Urgent Decision - Papakura Local Board feedback on the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill

98

 


 

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Lee Manaia - Local Board Advisor

Authoriser

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

PDF Creator

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

For Information: Reports referred to the Papakura Local Board

File No.: CP2021/16749

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the Papakura Local Board to receive reports and resolutions that have been referred from the Governing Body committee meetings, Council Controlled Organisations, forums or other local boards for information.

2.       The following information was circulated to the local board:

No.

Report Title

Item no.

Meeting Date

Governing Body Committee or Council Controlled Organisation or Forum or Local Board

1

Notice of Motion – Member Adrian Tyler – Contractor Performance in Relation to Volunteer Groups

12

20 October 2021

Kaipātiki Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information.

2

Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill (Bill)

23.1

21 October 2021

Ōrākei Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information.

3

Waiheke Local Board - Chairperson's report

12

27 October 2021

Waiheke Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information.

4

Extraordinary Business - Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply) Amendment Bill

12.1

2 November 2021

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      receive the following information from the Governing Body committee meetings, Council Controlled Organisations, forums or other local board meetings:

No.

Report Title

Item no.

Meeting Date

Governing Body Committee or Council Controlled Organisation or Forum or Local Board

1

Notice of Motion – Member Adrian Tyler – Contractor Performance in Relation to Volunteer Groups

12

20 October 2021

Kaipātiki Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information.

2

Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill (Bill)

23.1

21 October 2021

Ōrākei Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information.

3

Waiheke Local Board - Chairperson's report

12

27 October 2021

Waiheke Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information.

4

Extraordinary Business - Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply) Amendment Bill

12.1

2 November 2021

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information.

 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Notice of Motion – Member Adrian Tyler – Contractor Performance in Relation to Volunteer Groups

98

b

Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Bill (Bill)

98

c

Waiheke Local Board - Chairperson's report

98

d

Extraordinary Business - Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply) Amendment Bill

98

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jebel Ali - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Text

Description automatically generated


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Text

Description automatically generated


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Papakura Local Board Achievements Register 2019-2022 Political Term

File No.: CP2021/16750

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for members to record achievements of the Papakura Local Board for the 2019 – 2022 political term.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       An opportunity to add and note achievements of the Papakura Local Board for the 2019 – 2022 political term.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      note the Papakura Local Board Achievements Register for the 2019-2022 political term.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Papakura Local Board Achievements Register for the 2019-2022 Political Term

98

 

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jebel Ali - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Papakura Local Board Governance Forward Work Calendar - November 2021

File No.: CP2021/16751

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To present to the Papakura Local Board the three months Governance Forward Work Calendar.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Governance Forward Work Calendar is a schedule of items that will come before the local board at business meetings and workshops over the next three months. The Governance Forward Work Calendar for the Papakura Local Board is included in Attachment A of this report.

3.       The calendar aims to support local boards’ governance role by:

i)    ensuring advice on agendas and workshop material is driven by local board priorities

ii)   clarifying what advice is required and when

iii)   clarifying the rationale for reports.

4.       The calendar will be updated every month, be included on the agenda for business meetings and distributed to relevant council staff. It is recognised that at times items will arise that are not programmed. Board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      note the Governance Forward Work Calendar.

Horopaki

Context

5.       The council’s Quality Advice Programme aims to improve the focus, analysis, presentation and timeliness of staff advice to elected representatives. An initiative under this is to develop forward work calendars for Governing Body committees and local boards. These provide elected members with better visibility of the types of governance tasks they are being asked to undertake and when they are scheduled.

6.       There are no new projects in the Governance Forward Work Calendar. The calendar brings together in one schedule reporting on all of the board’s projects and activities that have been previously approved in the local board plan, long-term plan, departmental work programmes and through other board decisions. It includes Governing Body policies and initiatives that call for a local board response.

7.       This initiative is intended to support the board’s governance role. It will also help staff to support local boards, as an additional tool to manage workloads and track activities across council departments, and it will allow greater transparency for the public.

8.       The calendar is arranged in three columns, “Topic”, “Purpose” and “Governance Role”:

i)    Topic describes the items and may indicate how they fit in with broader processes such as the annual plan.

ii)   Purpose indicates the aim of the item, such as formally approving plans or projects, hearing submissions or receiving progress updates

iii)   Governance role is a higher-level categorisation of the work local boards do. Examples of the seven governance categories are tabled below:

 

Governance role

Examples

Setting direction / priorities / budget

Capex projects, work programmes, annual plan

Local initiatives / specific decisions

Grants, road names, alcohol bans

Input into regional decision-making

Comments on regional bylaws, policies, plans

Oversight and monitoring

Local board agreement, quarterly performance reports, review projects

Accountability to the public

Annual report

Engagement

Community hui, submissions processes

Keeping informed

Briefings, local board forums

 

9.       Local board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar. The calendar will be updated and reported back every month to business meetings. Updates will also be distributed to relevant council staff.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10.     This report is an information report providing the governance forward work programme for the next three months.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

11.     The council is required to provide Governance Forward Work Calendar to the Papakura Local Board for their consideration.

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

Local impacts and local board views

12.     All local boards are being presented with a Governance Forward Work Calendar for their consideration.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

13.     The projects and processes referred to in the Governance Forward Work Calendar will have a range of implications for Māori which will be considered when the work is reported.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

14.     There are no financial implications relating to this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

15.     This report is a point in time of the Governance Forward Work Calendar. It is a living document and updated month to month. It minimises the risk of the board being unaware of planned topics for their consideration.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

16.     Staff will review the calendar each month in consultation with board members and will report an updated calendar to the board.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Governance Forward Work Calendar - November 2021

98

 

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jebel Ali - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura



Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Table

Description automatically generated



Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Papakura Local Board Workshop Records

File No.: CP2021/16757

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To note the Papakura Local Board record for the workshops held on 20 October 2021, 3 November 2021, and 10 November 2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       In accordance with Standing Order 12.1.4, the local board shall receive a record of the general proceedings of each of its local board workshops held over the past month.

3.       Resolutions or decisions are not made at workshops as they are solely for the provision of information and discussion. This report attaches the workshop record for the period stated below.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      note the Papakura Local Board workshop records from:

i)        20 October 2021

ii)       3 November 2021

iii)      10 November 2021.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Papakura Local Board Workshop Record - 20 October 2021

98

b

Papakura Local Board Workshop Record - 3 November 2021

98

c

Papakura Local Board Workshop Record - 10 November 2021

98

 

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jebel Ali - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Table

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Graphical user interface

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Table

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Table

Description automatically generated with medium confidence


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Table

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated


Papakura Local Board

24 November 2021

 

 

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated

Table

Description automatically generated



[1] Stats NZ (2020). 2018 Census data – Auckland region. Retrieved from https://www.stats.govt.nz/tools/2018-census-place-summaries/auckland-region

[2] Stats NZ (2020). 2018 Census household crowding. Retrieved from https://www.stats.govt.nz/

[3] Allpress, J. and Reid, A. (2021). Quality of Life survey 2020: results for Auckland. Auckland Council technical report, TR2021/16

[4] Stats NZ (2020). 2018 Census. Retrieved from https://www.stats.govt.nz/

[5] ibid

[6] Māori housing grants are only available for housing developments undertaken in conjunction with an urban marae and must fill the same general purpose as papakāinga