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

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

The following are declared interests of elected members of the Henderson-Massey Local Board.

Member

Organisation

Position

Brenda Brady, JP (Deputy Chair)

- Safer West Community Trust

Trustee

Chris Carter

- St Lazarus Trust

- Waitematā District Health Board

- Waitākere Badminton Club

Member

Peter Chan, JP

- Cantonese Opera Society of NZ

- Asian Leaders Forum

- NZ-Hong Kong Business Association

- NZ-China Business Association

- Auckland Chinese Environment Protection Association (ACEPA)

- Whau Coastal Walkway Trust

Member

Advisor

Trustee

Matt Grey

- West Auckland Youth Development Trust

- Billy Graham Youth Foundation

Director

Board Member

Dr Will Flavell

- Asia New Zealand Leadership Network

- COMET

- Te Atatū Tennis Club

- Waitākere Literacy Board

Member

Employee

Board Member

Brooke Loader

- Waitākere Licensing Trust

- Te Atatū Peninsula Business Association

- Neighbourhood Support

- Te Atatū Glendene Community Patrol

Member

Associate Member

Member

Volunteer

Vanessa Neeson
(Chair)

- Hibiscus Coast Quilters

- Ranui Advisory Group

- Waitakere Badminton Club

Member

Chairperson

Patron

Ingrid Papau

- Liberty Impact Community Trust

- #WeLoveTuvalu Community Trust

- Neighbourhood Support

- Liberty Church

- Rutherford Primary Board of Trustees

Board Member

Member

Street Contact

Member

Member appointments

Board members are appointed to the following bodies. In these appointments the board members represent Auckland Council:

External organisation	Leads	Alternate
Central Park Henderson Business Association	Brenda Brady and Brooke Loader
Heart of Te Atatu South	Brenda Brady and Brooke Loader
Massey Matters	Will Flavell and Peter Chan
Ranui Advisory Group	Vanessa Neeson (Chair) and Ingrid Papau
Te Atatū Peninsula Business Association	Peter Chan and Ingrid Papau
Waitākere Ethnic Board	Ingrid Papau and Peter Chan
Waitākere Healthlink	Peter Chan	Chris Carter
Te Whau Pathway Trust	Matt Grey and Brenda Brady

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 21 June 2022, 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 Henderson-Massey 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: Corrie Cook and Raj Maharjan - Road safety in Ranui

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive a deputation from Corrie Cook and Raj Maharjan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Local Ranui residents Corrie Cook and Raj Maharjan will be in attendance to present to the Board on road safety in Ranui.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) receive the presentation on road safety issues in Ranui and thank Corrie Cook and Raj Maharjan for their 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.”

Henderson-Massey Local Board

19 July 2022

Approval for new private and public road names at 50-66 Westgate Drive, Massey

File No.: CP2022/09865

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Henderson-Massey Local Board to name four private roads, being jointly owned access lots (JOALs) and a public road, created by way of subdivision development at 50-66 Westgate Drive, Massey.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria of the Council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region.

3. On behalf of the developer and applicant, Westgate Residential Limited, agents James Robertson and Jennifer Yung of Founders Development Ltd has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the Local Board:

ROAD 1

· Kūaha Road (Applicant Preferred)

· Arawaru Road (Alternative 1)

· Taurepo Road (Alternative 2)

JOAL 1

· Puihi Crescent (Applicant Preferred)

· Ranguru Crescent (Alternative 1)

· Wao Crescent (Alternative 2)

JOAL 2

· Tīeke Lane (Applicant Preferred)

· Ngaruru Lane (Alternative 1)

· Tuke Lane (Alternative 2)

JOAL 4

· Arura Place (Applicant Preferred)

· Wrybill Place (Alternative 1)

· Oro Place (Alternative 2)

JOAL 5

· Heketara Way (Applicant Preferred)

· Hangehange Way (Alternative 1)

· Spiderwood Way (Alternative 2)

4. The proposed names have been assessed against the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines and the National Addressing Standards for road naming. All technical standards are met, and the names are not duplicated anywhere else in the region. It is up to the local board to decide upon the thematic suitability of the proposed names within the local context.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) approves the names Kūaha Road for Road 1, Puihi Crescent for JOAL1, Tīeke Lane for JOAL 2, Arura Place for JOAL 4 and Heketara Way JOAL 5 for the one new public road and four new private roads created by way of subdivision at 50-66 Westgate Drive, Massey, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (Road naming reference RDN90100246 and resource consent references BUN60380772 and SUB60380774).

Horopaki

Context

5. Resource consent reference BUN60380772 (subdivision reference number SUB60380774) was issued in October 2021 for the construction of 124 new residential freehold units, three superlots and four jointly owned access lots (JOAL) and one public road.

6. Site and location plans of the development can be found in Attachment A and B.

7. In accordance with the Standards, any road including private ways, COALs, and right of ways, that serve more than five lots generally require a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical and efficient street numbering.

8. Therefore, in this development, all of the new JOALs and the public road require a road name because they serve more than five lots. This can be seen in Attachment B, where the JOALs and public road that require names are highlighted.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9. The Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region. The Guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the Local Board’s approval

10. The Guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

· a historical, cultural, or ancestral linkage to an area or

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature or

· an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.

11. Theme: Many existing roads in the area surrounding this development have names that reflect natural environmental features i.e., trees, plants, wildlife etc. and historic environmental characteristics of the local area such as ‘Kohuhu Lane’, ‘Kauri Amber Road’ and ‘Baumea Rise’. For this reason, the Applicant chose names to compliment this existing local theme, as detailed in the table below:

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
ROAD 1
Kūaha Road (Applicant preferred)	Gateway or entrance. In reference to the proximity to Westgate and the countryside beyond.
Arawaru Road (Alternative 1)	(noun) Sound of running water. In reference to the catchment pond adjacent to the site.
Taurepo Road (Alternative 2)	Scented flower. In reference to the NZ native plant life.
JOAL 1
Puihi Crescent (Applicant preferred)	(noun) Bush, forest. In reference to the forest life in this area.
Ranguru Crescent (Alternative 1)	A breeding bird follows easterly migration. In reference to NZ bird life.
Wao Crescent (Alternative 2)	(noun) Forest. In reference to the NZ forest life on this site.
JOAL 2
Tīeke Lane (Applicant preferred)	Saddle back bird. In reference to the Native bird life in the area.
Ngaruru Lane (Alternative 1)	(noun) Dense brushwood, forest land. In reference to the forest life in this area.
Tuke Lane (Alternative 2)	Small alpine bird – Rock Wren. In reference to NZ native bird life
JOAL 4
Arura Place (Applicant preferred)	Latin word for ‘Field’. In reference that the land is currently a green space/paddocks.
Wrybill Place (Alternative 1)	A small pale plover, only bird in the world with a laterally-curved bill. In reference to the NZ bird life.
Oro Place (Alternative 2)	(noun) Grove of trees. In reference to the Orchard that once occupied this site.
JOAL 5
Heketara Way (Applicant preferred)	(noun) Tree daisy. In reference to the flower and tree life that flourished in this area.
Hangehange Way (Alternative 1)	A NZ bushy scrub growing up to 4m. In reference to the early days the Hangehange leaves were used as flavouring in Māori cuisine.
Spiderwood Way (Alternative 2)	(noun) A native shrub up to 10m, looks like a cabbage tree. Māori name is taritari awha. In reference to the NZ Native tree life.

12. Assessment: All the name options listed in the table above have been assessed by the council’s Subdivision Specialist team to ensure that they meet both the Guidelines and the Standards in respect of road naming. The technical standards are considered to have been met and duplicate names are not located in close proximity. It is therefore for the local board to decide upon the suitability of the names within the local context and in accordance with the delegation.

13. Confirmation: Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed that all of the proposed names are acceptable for use at this location.

14. Road Type: ‘Road, ‘Crescent’, ‘Lane’, ‘Place’ and ‘Way’ are acceptable road types for the new private roads, suiting the form and layout of the JOALs and public road.

15. Consultation: Mana whenua were consulted in line with the processes and requirements described in the Guidelines. Additional commentary is provided in the Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori section that follows.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

16. The naming of roads has no effect on climate change. Relevant environmental issues have been considered under the provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the associated approved resource consent for the development.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

17. The decision sought for this report has no identified impacts on other parts of the Council group. The views of council-controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of the report’s advice.

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

Local impacts and local board views

18. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate local impact beyond those outlined in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

19. To aid local board decision making, the Guidelines include an objective of recognising cultural and ancestral linkages to areas of land through engagement with mana whenua, particularly through the resource consent approval process, and the allocation of road names where appropriate. The Guidelines identify the process that enables mana whenua the opportunity to provide feedback on all road naming applications and in this instance, the process has been adhered to.

20. The applicant has sent a list of road names to mana whenua groups on 12 April 2022. A representative of Te Kawerau Iwi Tiaki Trust responded on the same day stating:

“[…] it is not considered tika (correct) for developers to take Māori names out of context (including in reference to our former occupation of the area) and place them on the whenua without us. Māori names if used should be gifted by mana whenua.

While I can certainly appreciate the sentiment of wanting to support te reo Māori, it is not safe to do so without the actual mana whenua when it comes to naming the whenua. This potentially puts us, and the future residents, in an awkward situation.

I would prefer you use Pakeha names given Māori were absent from the engagement to date. If you wish to use general Māori words for plants and animals from the area I won’t oppose that, but please refrain from using terms like kainoho or other terms that try to locate us on the whenua.”

21. On 31 May 2022, mana whenua were contacted by council on behalf of the applicant, through the Resource Consent department’s central facilitation process with an updated list of names, as set out in the Guidelines. The updated names now all reference plants and names, except for the noun “kūaha”, “kanohi” had been removed and the suffix for “Oro” was changed to “Way” from “Lane”. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

· Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

· Ngāti Paoa Trust Board

· Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust

· Te Ākitai Waiohua (Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority).

22. By the close of the consultation period, no responses, comments, or feedback were received. Dependant on the scale of the development and its level of significance, not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua.

23. This site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

24. The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the Council.

25. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27. Approved road names are notified to LINZ which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database. LINZ provides all updated information to other users, including emergency services.

28. Jo Michalakis (Manager Planning Consultant at Align Limited), acting on behalf of Council, is the report author.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Location Map for 50-66 Westgate Drive, Massey	15
b ⇩	Scheme Plan for 50-66 Westgate Drive, Massey	17

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Elizabeth Salter - Subdivision Technical Officer

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

19 July 2022

Adoption of the 2022-2024 Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan, and the Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan 2021/2022 Quarter Three Update

File No.: CP2022/10095

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

To adopt the Henderson-Massey Local Board Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024. 2. To provide a quarterly update on the Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan 2021/2022 for the period of 1 January to 31 March 2022.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. The Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan 2021/2022 was adopted by the Henderson-Massey Local Board on 17 August 2021 (resolution number HM/2021/129) and the 2021/2022 plan is available as an agenda attachment to that meeting via the Auckland Council website: https://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/.

4. The development of Joint CCOs Local Board Engagement Plans for 2022-2024 was discussed during workshops held in April and May, and through subsequent follow-up conversations.

5. The Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan (the plan) 2022-2024 is appended as Attachment A to this report. The plan includes four attachments setting out the individual engagement work programmes for the substantive CCOs. The plan and the four appended CCO work programmes will be amended throughout the two years of its intended duration to ensure they are up to date and fit for purpose.

6. The CCOs will provide updates to local boards each quarter on their work programmes and any proposed changes to these.

7. This report also provides the Quarter Three update to the 2021/2022 Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan and summarises the changes between that plan and the new plan for adoption for the 2022-2024 period.

8. A final quarterly update report for the period of 1 April to 30 June 2022 will be provided in September 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) adopt the Henderson-Massey Local Board Joint Council-controlled Organisation (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 (Attachment A to the agenda report), as an agreement between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-controlled Organisations: Auckland Transport, Eke Panuku Development Auckland (Eke Panuku), Tātaki Auckland Unlimited and WaterCare.

b) note that the agreed work programmes of the four substantive Council-controlled Organisations are appended to the Joint Council-controlled Organisation (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 (Attachment A to the agenda report) and these work programmes will be updated as needed by the CCOs, with changes reported to the local board each quarter.

c) authorise the Chair of the local board to sign this agreement on behalf of the local board, alongside representatives from the four Council-controlled Organisations.

d) note the quarter three update to the Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan 2021/2022.

Horopaki

Context

9. In 2020, the CCOs Review report recommended the introduction of a joint CCOs local board engagement plan for each local board. In mid-2021, the first Joint CCOs Local Board Engagement Plans were agreed and adopted. Since then, staff have worked to develop and refine both the process to agree the documents, and the format of the documents themselves.

10. It is noted that the individual CCO work programmes that make up the plans were intended, and adopted, as living documents with incremental change possible with each quarterly update.

11. During April and May 2022, workshops were held between each local board and representatives from the four substantive CCOs. Staff have subsequently worked to ensure that the final document is representative of the discussions held at workshops, and that any outstanding questions have been resolved.

12. The substantive part of the engagement plan (appended as Attachment A to this report but excluding its four attached work programmes pertaining to each CCO) is designed to be in place for two years, though it may be subject to minor changes to ensure accuracy. In subsequent years, this document is likely to remain in use for three years, following the completion of the Local Board Plan.

13. The four CCO work programmes attached to the substantive plan include information that is likely to require updating and will be amended throughout the year to ensure the plan is up to date and fit for purpose.

14. The CCOs will provide regular updates to each local board to show both changes to the plan itself, and updates on the work programme items included in the attachments to the plan.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

15. Workshops between local boards and CCOs staff provided local boards with the opportunity to share their views on CCOs delivery and engagement in their area. Each workshop included an outline of each CCO’s work programme within the local board area, and local boards have provided their views on the degree of engagement they expect for each project or programme.

16. The Joint CCOs Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 addresses key elements of recommendations made by the CCOs Review, including:

· documenting key contacts, including senior CCOs representatives of the organisation well placed to quickly respond to and resolve local concerns

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

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

17. While it is still early days in terms of local board members and staff adjusting to the new way of working together, initial feedback has been positive.

18. Work programme items that will be confirmed with the formal adoption of 2022/2023 budgets will be included as they become available. The same applies to future work programme items that are subject to budget availability and other factors in the 2023/2024 financial year.

Changes to the engagement plan for the 2022-2024 period

19. The substantive part of the Joint Council-controlled Organisation (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 is very similar to the 2021/2022 plan. Staff have updated the plan where there have been:

· new board members

· changes to local board members delegations

· staff changes within Local Board Services or CCOs.

20. It is noted that the 2021/2022 plan was explicitly adopted as a living document, subject to change with each quarterly update. There are therefore some substantive differences between the CCO work programmes adopted in July 2021 as part of the 2021/2022 Local Board Engagement Plans and the work programmes (appended as Attachment A to this report) for 2023/2024.

21. When compared to the 2021/2022 CCO work programmes, the new work programmes attached to the 2022-2024 plan have significant changes in terms of the focus, prioritisation, level of detail, format, wording, and style.

22. For example, Auckland Transport has submitted a work programme with fewer activities listed in the 2021/2022 work programme, choosing to focus on those activities that are of higher relevance to the local board and where more local board involvement is anticipated. Tātaki Auckland Unlimited, on the other hand, has chosen to expand its work programme, incorporating a broader regional view.

23. It is also noted that the engagement approach, established with a five-point scale in 2021, has now been revised and uses a simplified three-point scale to indicate the expected level of involvement of the local board in each activity.

New activities included in the 2022-2024 CCO work programmes include:

CCO name	New activity
Auckland Transport	Bike racks at Te Atatū South Community Centre
	Tui Glen Henderson Creek Shared Path
	Central Park Shared Path Lighting, 141 Central Park Drive, Cycle Connection Walkway
	Footpath connection at corner of Landmark Drive and Danica Esplanade, Te Atatū Peninsula

CCO name	New activity
Eke Panuku	Alderman car park
	Catherine Plaza improvement project
Tātaki Auckland Unlimited	Supporting a resilient and regenerative Māori economy - Taki Hua economic Strategy
WaterCare	No new activities

24. The above, and any other, changes introduced to the four CCO work programmes as part of development of the Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 were workshopped with local board members and have been subsequently discussed with staff.

25. It is noted that several of the projects that are “new” since the adoption of the 2021/2022 plan have already started and are already listed as having an update for the third quarter of the 2021/2022 year, highlighting the relative fluidity of this process as CCO Local Board work programmes are not subject to the strict financial planning timeframes that internal local board work programmes must adhere to.

Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan 2021/2022 Quarter Three update

26. This report also provides the Quarter Three update to the 2021/2022 Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan.

27. A final quarterly update report for the period of 1 April to 30 June 2022 will be provided in September 2022.

28. The Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan 2021/2022 was adopted by the Henderson-Massey Local Board on 28 July 2021 (resolution number WH/2021/68) and the 2021/2022 plan is available as an agenda attachment to that meeting via the Auckland Council website: https://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/.

29. It is noted that the individual CCO work programmes that make up the plans were intended, and adopted, as living documents with incremental change possible with each quarterly update.

Activity highlights for Quarter Three update 2021/2022

Auckland Transport

30. Tui Glen Henderson Creek Shared Path. Project is progressing and Auckland Council Community Facilities team delivering and will provide monthly updates to the local board.

31. Bruce McLaren Rd/Parrs Cross Rd intersection improvements. Construction underway.

Tātaki Auckland Unlimited

32. Landowner approval – screen production: Twelve film permits were issued in Quarter Three.

33. FIFA Women’s World Cup 2023: engagement approach re-assigned from “inform” to “consult” noting the shortlisting of Fred Taylor Park, home of West Coast Rangers Football Club shortlisted as training venue. Final selection due by end of 2022.

Eke Panuku Development Auckland (Eke Panuku)

34. Opanuku Link. Concept design presented to the Corban Estate Arts Centre. Progress continues as Eke Panuku work towards submitting a resource consent.

35. Wai Horotiu Henderson Connection (formerly Oratia Link). The concept designs, staging options and next steps were presented to the local board in May 2022.

WaterCare

36. Further work has been undertaken in the Te Atatū Peninsula to reduce the presence of unsightly overflows onto the local boat ramp. The most recent wastewater upgrade was the duplication of the wastewater main in the area of Lawson Creek.

37. A site visit to the Huia Water Treatment Plant is currently being organised. If there is sufficient interest the local board are invited to have a look at the new Nerve Centre and Incident Control Room at Watercare’s Newmarket Head Office.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

38. The adoption of the Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-controlled Organisations does not have a direct impact on climate, however many of the projects it refers to will.

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

40. Adopting the updated Joint CCOs Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 is likely to have a positive impact on other parts of the Council as well as between the respective CCOs within each local board area.

41. These plans will be shared with the integration teams that implement local board work programmes and will give Council staff greater ongoing visibility of CCOs work programmes.

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

Local impacts and local board views

42. Local board engagement plans enable local boards to signal to CCOs those projects that are of greatest interest to the local board, and to ensure that engagement between the local board and the four CCOs is focussed on those priority areas.

43. The engagement plans also give local boards the opportunity to communicate to CCOs which projects they expect to be of most interest to their communities.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

44. Updating and adopting the Joint CCOs Engagement Plan 2022-2024 may have a positive impact on local engagement with mana whenua and mataawaka.

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

46. The adoption of the Joint CCOs Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-controlled Organisations does not have financial impacts for local boards.

47. Any financial implications or opportunities will be provided to local boards on a project or programme basis.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

48. Changes will be made within the attachments of the Joint CCOs Engagement Plan 2022-2024 to ensure that information is kept up to date. The substantive document will not change until after the development of the next Local Board Plan. This risk is mitigated by ensuring that the document states clearly that it is subject to change and will be re-published on the local board agenda quarterly, to ensure public transparency.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

49. The local board will receive Quarter Four updates in September 2022.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Joint Council Controlled Organisations Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024	25

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors	Michelle Knudsen - Lease Advisor
Authorisers	Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

19 July 2022

Local board feedback on the Water Services Entities Bill

File No.: CP2022/10235

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek feedback from elected members on the Water Services Entities Bill and to highlight changes to the Bill since the exposure draft was released in December 2021 ahead of the council making a submission on the Bill.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Water Services Entities Bill was introduced to Parliament on 2 June 2022 and referred to the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee on 9 June 2022. Submissions close 22 July 2022.

3. The introduction of the Bill follows release of the exposure draft in December 2021 to support the work of the Representation, Governance and Accountability Working Group. The Government has responded to recommendations of this Working Group and this response is reflected in the Bill introduced in early June.

4. The Bill establishes the Northern Water Services Entity that includes Auckland Council, Far North District Council, Kaipara District Council and Whangārei District Council. It also establishes three other entities to provide services across the rest of the country.

5. There are a number of changes in the final Bill which include provisions for:

a) the allocation of population-based shares to territorial authority owners – however these do not come with decision-making rights and cannot be sold so do not provide the typical ownership that shareholding normally brings

b) a divestment proposal requiring unanimous support from territorial authority owners to proceed to a public poll

c) the Water Services Entity (WSE) to fund the work of the Regional Representatives Group (RRG), regional advisory panels, territorial authority owners and mana whenua

d) the introduction of regional advisory panels to provide advice to the RRG

e) a single constitution that applies to the RRG, the regional advisory panels and the WSE board

f) the Statement of Strategic and Performance Expectations to set out how it expects the WSE Board to give effect to Te Mana o Te Wai

g) the strategic elements of the Statement of Intent to be approved by the RRG

h) an individual iwi or hapū or group of iwi or hapū providing Te Mana o Te Wai statements that may relate to one or more freshwater bodies

i) the Minister to consult with the RRG and Taumata Arowai in the preparation of a Government policy statement

j) each local government organisation to provide the Department of Internal Affairs with information about intended decisions during transition that relate to the provision of water services

k) review of governance and accountability arrangements after five years and legislation after 10 years.

6. Local board feedback to be incorporated into the submission is due on 18 July and appended feedback is due on 19 July 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the Water Services Entities Bill to inform the council’s draft submission.

Horopaki

Context

7. The Three Waters reform programme has two prongs:

a) a new regulatory framework encompassing human health, environment and economic aspects

b) a new service delivery model that includes the establishment of four publicly-owned entities to take responsibility for drinking water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure across Aotearoa New Zealand.

8. There has been a range of engagement by the Government with the local government sector and iwi/Māori over the last three to four years. Targeted consultation during 2021 focused on the Government’s service delivery proposals.

9. Initially councils were offered an opt-in approach to the reforms. In October 2021, Minister Mahuta confirmed the reforms were mandatory, and that councils would be required to take part. At the same time, the Minister established three independent working groups to refine elements of the Three Waters programme and to inform the proposals in the Bill:

a) Representation, Governance and Accountability (reported to Minister March 2022)

b) Planning Technical Working Group (in progress)

c) Rural Supplies Technical Working Group (reported to Minister May 2022).

10. An exposure draft of the Water Services Entities Bill was released in December 2021 to inform the work of the Representation, Governance and Accountability Working Group.

11. This Working Group comprised representatives from local government and iwi/Māori, and considered how representation, governance, and accountability arrangements for water services entities could be strengthened. The Mayor was a member of this Working Group and released a minority report. The Working Group made 47 recommendations to the Minister in March 2022 - the Government’s response to these recommendations can be found at https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Three-waters-reform-programme-2022/$file/Summary-Table-of-Working-Group-recommendations-and-Government-response-2022.pdf

12. The work of the Planning Technical Working Group is continuing and will inform the detailed implementation elements which will be contained in the second bill. Auckland Council staff are represented on this working group.

13. The Bill can be found here: https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2022/0136/latest/whole.html#LMS534587

14. The Bill is one component of the legislative package needed to implement the reforms. It will be followed by further legislation to provide for:

a) detailed implementation arrangements including transfer of assets and liabilities

b) specific powers, functions and responsibilities of the new entities and pricing and charging arrangements

c) economic regulation and consumer protection regimes

d) any changes to Treaty settlement legislation that are required.

15. detailed changes to the Local Government Act 2002, the Water Services Act 2021 and other legislation.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Purpose

16. The Bill establishes Northern Water Services Entity’s service area as the districts of Auckland Council, Far North District Council, Kaipara District Council and Whangārei District Council.

17. The entities will commence delivery of services on 1 July 2024.

Legal form and ownership by territorial authorities

18. The exposure draft described the WSEs as “owned collectively” by their territorial owners.

19. The final Bill defines the entities as “co-owned” by the territorial authorities in their service area and in shares allocated to a territorial authority owner based on the population of its district:

a) one share will be assigned per 50,000 people in the territorial authority’s district (or one share if fewer than 50,000 people)

b) the shares cannot be sold or transferred and do not carry any financial interest.

20. The allocation of shares is intended to strengthen community ownership of the new entities and add a layer of protection against privatisation (Clause 15(2)). However, the shares cannot be sold and the constitution cannot confer decision-making rights weighted by shares (Clause 93(2)(b)).

Key elements retained (Clauses 15-16)

A water services entity:

· is a body corporate, a legal entity separate from board members, employees, the Crown, the Regional Representative Group, the territorial authority owners

· is not a council organisation or a council-controlled organisation.

Divestment proposals

21. A new step has been included in the Bill whereby the territorial authority owners rather than the RRG may refer a divestment proposal to a poll of electors. This resolution must be unanimous and gives every territorial owner a veto over divestment with respect to their WSE.

22. Prior to this step, the RRG must achieve a 75 per cent majority vote to refer the proposal to the territorial authority owners in the first place. A divestment proposal must not be implemented unless 75 per cent of the votes cast in the poll are in favour of the proposal (Schedule 4: clause 4(1-3)).

Key elements retained (Schedule 4: clauses 1-14)

· Water services entity must refer any divestment proposal to RRG.

· RRG must consult territorial authority owners, mana whenua and the Minister.

· On a majority vote of 75 per cent, RRG may refer proposal to territorial authority owners.

· [New requirement]: A unanimous decision of territorial authority owners is required to refer proposal to a public poll.

· Proposal must not be implemented unless greater than 75 per cent of votes of a poll of electors are in favour.

Strengthening Te Tiriti o Waitangi

23. In order to recognise and respect the Crown’s responsibility to give effect to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, all persons performing or exercising duties, functions and powers under this Act must give effect to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

24. Where there is inconsistency between the legislation and a Treaty settlement obligation, the Treaty settlement obligation prevails.

Functions, objectives and operating principals

25. The function of a water services entity is to provide safe, reliable, and efficient drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater services.

26. There are six objectives for the WSE proposed in the Bill. A seventh objective in the exposure draft – to give effect to te Mana o te Wai – has been moved and the requirement is now incorporated under Clause 4 that requires every person who exercises a function, power, or duty under the Act to give effect to Te Mana o Te Wai.

27. The operating principles for a WSE remain the same as those contained in the exposure draft.

28. New provision (Clause 14) has been made in the Bill for the WSE to fund the RRG, regional advisory panel, territorial authority owners and mana whenua for remuneration, expenses or costs for carrying out their role.

Key elements retained (Clauses 10 – 13)

Objectives:

· deliver water services and related infrastructure in an efficient and financially sustainable manner

· protect and promote public health and the environment

· support and enable housing and urban development

· operate in accordance with best commercial and business practices

· act in the best interests of present and future consumers and communities

· thriving communities deliver water services in a sustainable and resilient manner that seeks to mitigate the effects of climate change and natural hazards.

Operating principles:

· developing and sharing capability and technical expertise with other water services entities and across the water services sector

· being innovative in the design and delivery of water services and infrastructure

· being open and transparent, including in relation to calculation and setting of prices, determining levels of service delivery to consumers and communities, and reporting on performance

· partnering and engaging early and meaningfully with Māori, including to inform how the water services entity can give effect to Te Mana o te Wai, and understand, support and enable the exercise of mātauranga, tikanga, and kaitiakitanga

· giving effect to Treaty settlement obligations, to the extent that the obligations apply to the duties and functions of an entity

· partnering and engaging early and meaningfully with territorial authorities and their communities

· co-operating with, and supporting, other water services entities, infrastructure providers, local authorities, and the transport sector.

29. The proposal for membership of regional representative groups has changed since the exposure draft. Each RRG consists of no fewer than 12 and no more than 14 regional representatives (Clause 27). The exposure draft provided for no fewer than six and no more than twice the number of territorial owners of the entity.

30. A significant change to the operation of the RRG is the new requirement which encourages consensus decision making and, if that is not possible, decision made by 75 per cent of the regional representatives present and voting (Clause 30).

31. The Representation, Governance and Accountability Working Group recommended bespoke arrangements for Entity A (Northern Waters) RRG:

a) 14 members with 50:50 council and iwi/hapū composition

b) the 14 members comprised of 4 Auckland Council representatives, 4 Tāmaki Makaurau iwi/hapū representatives, one representative each from the Northland councils and three iwi/hapū representatives from Te Tai Tokerau.

32. Each regional representative group will have a binding constitution that includes how appointment of representatives will occur and the maximum number of its members. The first constitution will be set out in regulations. Any subsequent amendments must be approved by the Minister.

33. The Minister of Local Government has agreed that the first constitution for Entity A will provide for the Working Group’s proposed representative arrangements as stated above. This arrangement is therefore not specified in the Bill.

34. In a new addition, the Bill provides for the constitution to include the appointment of co-chairpersons and deputy co-chairpersons to an RRG. If included in the constitution, one co-chairperson and deputy must be elected or appointed by the group’s territorial authority representatives and one by the group’s mana whenua representatives.

35. If the provision for co-chairpersons and deputy co-chairpersons is not included in the constitution, the RRG elects or appoints its own chair and deputy chairperson (Clauses 41 – 42).

36. The Bill also provides for the constitution to include the establishment of one or more regional advisory panels (Clause 45). These must be based on regional or geographic areas with equal representation from mana whenua and councils in the geographic area. This change arises from a recommendation of the Representation, Governance and Accountability Working Group.

37. The role of a regional advisory panel is to provide advice to the RRG. In doing so, the panel must consider all communities in the entity’s service area.

38. The Bill provides that a regional representative, a regional advisory panel member or a member of a territorial authority may not be a member of the WSE board (Clause 97(3)).

39. A new part of the legislation sets out the review of the governance and accountability arrangements which must be carried out after five years (Clause 95). The review must consider:

a) governance structures

b) interaction of the RRG with the WSE board, territorial authority owners, mana whenua and communities

c) interaction of the WSE with territorial authority owners, mana whenua and communities

d) each WSE’s relationships with financiers and financing arrangements

e) accountability, strategic direction, or planning or reporting mechanisms including the GPS, the RRG’s statement of strategic and performance expectations, Te Mana o Te Wai statements, statement of intent

f) the WSE’s constitution.

Key elements retained (Clauses 27 – 44)

RRG established for each water services entity that:

· includes equal number of territorial authority representatives and mana whenua representatives

· appoints and removes the entity's board members and approves remuneration and appointment policy (through its board appointment committee) participates in setting the entity’s strategic direction and performance expectations and reviewing the entity’s performance.

Appointments to the RRG are made by:

· territorial authority owners – representatives must be elected members or chief executives or senior managers

· mana whenua whose rohe or takiwā are within the service area.

Constitutions of water services entities

40. The Bill provides for a single constitution for each WSE that addresses the composition and internal procedures of the RRG, the regional advisory panels and the WSE board. The constitution will also set out the funding and remuneration arrangements for the RRG and any regional advisory panels.

41. The exposure draft provided for a constitution that addressed matters relating to the RRG only.

42. The first constitution is set in regulations. In making the regulations, the Minister must first engage with the territorial authority owners and mana whenua of the service area.

43. The RRG may amend that constitution or adopt a new constitution. This would require the Minister’s approval.

Key elements retained (Clauses 90 – 96)

Most of this section is new:

· Sets out the composition and procedures for the RRG, the Regional Advisory Panel, and the WSE’s board.

· First constitution for model constitution is set in regulations.

· RRG can propose an amendment which must be approved by the Minister.

Statement of strategic and performance expectations

44. The regional representative group must issue a statement of strategic and performance expectations for the entity that relates to at least three financial years and must review the statement at least once every year. The water services entity board must give effect to this statement.

45. The Bill adds a further matter that must be included: how the RRG expects the WSE to give effect to Te Mana o Te Wai (Clause 136(2)(a)(iv)).

Key elements retained (Clauses 135 – 139)

· Statement of strategic and performance expectations:

· purpose is to state the RRG’s objectives and priorities for the WSE and to inform and guide decisions and actions of the board

· must include expected outcomes, how the RRG expects the WSE to meet its objectives and give effect to te Mana o te Wai

· must require the WSE to give effect to objectives in efficient and financially sustainable manner

· Board must give effect to the statement.

Te Mana o te Wai

46. All persons performing or exercising duties, functions and powers under the legislation must give effect to Te Mana o te Wai to the extent it applies.

47. Mana whenua whose rohe or takiwā includes a freshwater body in the service area of a WSE may provide the WSE with a Te Mana o te Wai statement for water services. Mana whenua includes an individual iwi or hapū or group of iwi or hapū. The statement may relate to one or multiple freshwater bodies.

48. The WSE must respond to the statement and include a plan that sets out how the entity intends to give effect to Te Mana o te Wai.

49. A Te Mana o te Wai statement may be reviewed and replaced at any time and expires after 10 years.

50. Te Mana o te Wai encompasses the interconnection with, and the health and wellbeing of, all water bodies affected by the three waters system. The Government is carrying out further work as part of the second bill (expected later this year) to identify how a whole of system view can be achieved. This includes:

a) ensuring new relationships between the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management and any new concepts in the resource management reforms (for example, Te Oranga o Te Taio) and the water services legislation is aligned

b) ensuring integration of new concepts with the Water Services Act 2021 and Taumata Arowai

c) considering any intersections with the National Adaptation Plan and the Emissions Reduction Plan.

Consumer and community engagement

51. A WSE will have certain obligations in relation to consumer and community engagement. This includes:

a) a requirement to establish one or more consumer forums

b) prepare an annual consumer stocktake to capture feedback on performance

c) engage with consumers and communities on the entity’s asset management plan, funding and pricing plan, and infrastructure strategy

52. Engagement will be guided by a set of principles.

Reporting and accountability

53. The WSE board will be required to prepare and adopt an annual statement of intent that sets out how the WSE intends to give effect to the statement of strategic and performance expectations and the Government policy statement.

54. Although the same requirements were included in the exposure draft, the final Bill distinguishes between the strategic, operational and financial elements of the statement of intent (Clause 145).

55. The strategic elements must be approved by the RRG, with or without changes agreed with the WSE’s board (Schedule 3: clause 2). The Board must consider any comments made by the RRG.

56. The exposure draft set out the requirement for the Board to prepare an asset management plan, a funding and pricing plan, and a 30-year infrastructure strategy every three years.

57. In addition to the consumer and community engagement indicated in the exposure draft, the Bill introduces a requirement for the WSE to engage with territorial authority owners on proposals to adopt all three documents (Schedule 3: clauses 7,13, 20).

58. Other changes from the exposure draft include the requirement for the infrastructure strategy to give effect to te Mana o te Wai to the extent it applies to the entity’s duties, functions and powers. The asset management plan must set out how the plan relates to any actions the WSE intends to take a part of its response to a Te Mana o te Wai statement (Clause 148(d) and 154(3)).

Key elements retained

Statement of intent (Clauses 143 – 146):

· sets out WSE’s strategic intentions and provide a base for assessment of performance

· issued annually for the following three financial years

· includes strategic, operational and financial elements.

Financial independence

59. The Bill sets out that a territorial authority owner, a RRG, or a regional representative has no rights or interests in the assets, security, debts or liabilities of a WSE, and must not receive any equity (including profits, distributions or other benefits) from a WSE. They must not give any financial support or capital, lend money or provide credit to a WSE.

Crown monitoring and intervention

60. The role of the Minister is to oversee and manage the Crown’s interests in and relationships with the WSEs. There is no significant change from the exposure draft. The Bill provides for the Minister to appoint a department as a Crown monitor and include a Crown intervention framework based on a graduated risk regime. The Minister’s powers of intervention are based on existing powers in the Local Government Act 2002 and include the appointment of a Crown review team, a Crown observer or, as a last resort, a Crown manager.

61. Clause 196 includes provision for a review of water services legislation within 10 years of the establishment date.

Transition and establishment arrangements

62. The Bill contains a number of transition and establishment arrangements including the Minister appointing establishment boards, statutory oversight powers of the national transition unit, and provisions relating to employment of the water services workforce. An establishment chief executive will be appointed for a period of two years.

63. The WSE establishment chief executive must prepare an allocation schedule that specifies assets, liabilities and other matters that either wholly or partly relate to the provision of water services by relevant local government organisations. The allocation schedule must specify assets or liabilities that should not transfer to the entity.

64. This schedule should not be inconsistent with the water services plan the Department chief executive may also produce. In approving the establishment water services plan, the Department chief executive must consult with the WSE.

65. The Bill also provides the Department of Internal Affairs with oversight powers. During the establishment period, each local government organisation must provide the Department of Internal Affairs with information about intended decisions that relate to or may affect the provision of water services. This includes a decision to adopt an annual plan, amend a long-term plan, or any policy or plan required under the Local Government Act 2002, or to purchase or dispose of assets with a material impact on the provision of water services or the financial wellbeing of the organisation. The chief executive of a local government organisation must ensure that, before implementing a decision, the Department has confirmed the decision in writing.

Key submission themes

66. The Governing Body and the Environment and Community Committee have passed resolutions on the Three Waters reform at key points in the reform programme since 2018 (Attachment A). Resolutions from the Governing Body meeting of 23 September 2021 were communicated directly to the Minister of Local Government.

67. As a member of the Representation, Governance and Accountability Working Group established by the Minister, Mayor Goff released a Minority Report (Attachment B).

68. The key points from these resolutions and the Minority Report are summarised below. It is intended that these points form the basis of the council’s submission on the Bill, together with any further direction from the Governing Body.

69. It is important to note that since the September 2021 Governing Body resolutions, the reforms have been made mandatory and an exposure draft of the Bill was released to support the work of the Representation, Governance and Accountability Working Group. This has resulted in some changes to the Bill which partially or fully address some of Auckland Council’s concerns. These areas are noted against the relevant resolution.

70. In making these changes, the legislation comes closer to the Auckland CCO model than previous government proposals. However, the key issues remain, in particular:

a) lack of appropriate level of control over Auckland’s assets

b) lack of representation at a governance level proportionate to investment in assets by Aucklanders

c) the strong connection between the three waters reform and the resource management reforms and the future for local government review, and the significant risk and unintended consequences of these proceeding without full information as to how they will work together.

Summary of Governing Body resolutions of 23 September 2021

Support:

a) the need to reform the water sector and lift standards of water supply quality and wastewater treatment across Aotearoa

b) an economic regulator to help to improve efficiency and productivity and provide appropriate oversight of the new WSE (or to Watercare without amalgamation) [NOTE: legislation on economic regulation is expected later this year]

c) the need to develop alternative funding and financing arrangements to enable greater investment in water services infrastructure

d) the need outside Auckland, to achieve greater scale and capability

e) a WSE model like our current CCO model where real ownership continues to reside with councils and the WSE must give effect to relevant aspects of Auckland Council’s long-term plan and growth strategies

f) consideration of alternative governance and financial models which will achieve most of the Government’s water reform outcomes

g) the same accountability mechanisms for WSEs as for Auckland Council’s CCOs (e.g. ability to approve and modify statements of intent and directly appoint and remove directors) [NOTE: The Bill includes the following: the strategic elements of the WSE’s statement of intent must be approved by the RRG; appointments to and removals from the board will be made by a board appointment committee that is part of the RRG].

Do not support:

a) ownership and governance arrangements which remove democratic accountability and direct control by Auckland Council over the WSE

b) governance arrangements that do not reflect, through majority control, proportionate investment in assets made by the people of Auckland.

c) In addition, seek further information and work on integration with other local government reform processes and spatial and local planning processes, the benefits and disbenefits of stormwater integration and the transfer of assets and functions, prioritisation of investment decision making processes, and transition arrangements around workforce, information sharing and due diligence for asset transfers.

Mayor Goff’s Minority report of the Representation, Governance and Accountability Working Group

Support:

a) the Government’s desire to achieve change in the delivery of water services and in particular the need for water quality and economic regulation to ensure that the goals are achieved

b) the urgent need to reform the sector, achieve economies of scale outside Auckland and enable increased investment in infrastructure to achieve these outcomes

c) proportional shareholding model by individual councils which emphasises and entrenches community ownership of assets [The Bill provides for one share per 50,000 people but these shares cannot be sold or transferred and do not carry any financial interest]

d) retention of our current CCO model (with some refinement) since Auckland has already achieved most of the size, scale and efficiency benefits the reforms are seeking, it has proven to be effective and would provide for our continued control and accountability.

Do not support:

a) Auckland being a minority voice on the RRG leading to loss of direct accountability and control for Aucklanders through their elected representatives, despite providing 93 per cent of the new water services entity’s assets

b) Removal of existing accountability to Aucklanders through elected representatives.

Seek:

a) Deferral on the inclusion of stormwater in the new WSE until further work is undertaken, including the benefits and costs of transferring stormwater functions and the implications of this function being separated from the land use planning function of council.

Note:

a) consultation and polling indicate the public strongly supports the council’s position, with more than 80 per cent of those submitting agreeing council should have majority control of a new water entity

b) we are committed to work in partnership with mana whenua and believe existing accountability to Aucklanders through elected representatives should be retained

c) Auckland needs to deliver coordinated and timely planning and infrastructure investment – dilution of council’s role will exacerbate piecemeal planning and infrastructure provision and add to the complexity

d) there is insufficient evidence that establishing the four new entities will deliver the efficiency gains the Government is expecting, due to increasing bureaucracy and compliance, the cost of debt which might act as a deterrent to the WSEs, the lack of benefit to Auckland Council from any increased debt headroom, and a fragmented planning and infrastructure delivery environment

e) there is a strong connection between the water reform and the reform of the resource management system and the future for local government review, and the potential for unintended consequences in how these reforms work together.

Developing Auckland Council’s submission

71. The Auckland Plan Strategy & Research Department will lead the development of Auckland Council’s submission, working with staff across the council organisation and the relevant CCOs, including Watercare.

72. Local boards have an opportunity to provide input into the council’s submission.

73. A communication has been sent to all iwi entities advising them of the introduction of the legislation and seeking feedback to inform the council’s submission.

Timeframe for development of the Water Services Entities Bill submission

Milestone	Date
Bill released	2 June 2022
Report to the Governing Body	23 June 2022
Draft submission available	15 July 2022
Deadline for incorporated feedback	18 July 2022
Deadline for appended feedback	19 July 2022
Consultation period closes	22 July 2022

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

74. The decision to delegate approval of the submission does not have direct climate impacts.

75. One of the six objectives of the new water services entities will be to deliver water services in a sustainable and resilient manner that seeks to mitigate the effects of climate change and natural hazards.

76. However, there is no hierarchy provided for in the Bill to address potential conflicts across other objectives, for example, supporting and enabling housing and urban development and delivering infrastructure in an efficient and financially sustainable manner.

77. The Minister may issue a Government policy statement on water services which would state the Government’s overall direction and priorities and inform and guide agencies involved in, and the activities necessary or desirable for, water services. This statement may also include the Government’s expectations in relation to the contribution of water services entities to the outcomes sought by Government in climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

78. Relevant council departments and CCOs have been identified and contributions will be sought from them in developing the council group’s response to the Bill. A communication has been sent to CCO chairs and chief executives advising them that the legislation has been introduced and inviting their staff to input into the process.

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

Local impacts and local board views

79. Local board views are being sought on the draft submission and will be incorporated into the council’s final submission as appropriate.

80. Local boards were briefed, and 19 boards provided input into Council’s feedback on the government’s initial engagement with local authorities on the reform proposal in August and September 2021. A further briefing subsequent to the Bill’s introduction was held on 4 July 2022. This highlighted changes to the Bill since the release of the exposure draft in December 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

81. Under the Bill, a water services entity is required to give effect to Te Mana o te Wai to the extent that it applies to the duties and functions of the entity. This is consistent with the approach across all legislation relating to water services, including the Taumata Arowai – the Water Services Regulator Act 2020, and those who perform or exercise functions, powers and duties under the Water Services Act 2021.

82. Mana whenua whose rohe or takiwā includes a freshwater body in the service area of an entity can make a Te Mana o te Wai statement for water services. The board must respond to the statement within two years, and the response must include a plan for how the entity intends to perform its duty to give effect to Te Mana o te Wai.

83. To ensure that Treaty settlements are enduring, the Bill provides that where there is inconsistency between the legislation and a Treaty settlement obligation, the Treaty settlement prevails. An operating principle of entities is to give effect to Treaty settlement obligations, to the extent that the obligations apply to the duties and functions of an entity.

84. The legislation does not create or transfer any proprietary right or interest in water, or extinguish or limit any customary right of interest any iwi or hapū may have in water.

85. The Tāmaki Makaurau Mana Whenua Forum (TMMWF) provided feedback on the Three Waters reform programme to the Mayor and councillors on 21 September 2021. This feedback was subsequently shared with the Minister and some of the issues raised have now been addressed to a greater or lesser extent in the Bill.

86. The Forum hoped that the proposed reform programme would offer opportunities to strengthen the Treaty partnership between mana whenua and Kaunihera. The Three Waters Reform is a high priority in the Forum’s Annual Plan (FY22).

87. The TMMWF agreed that reform is required, including to enable greater investment in water infrastructure to benefit all who reside in Tāmaki Makaurau, and to enable iwi rights and interests.

88. The Forum raised three key issues.

a) That the Regional Representative Group proposed falls well short of co-governance and co-ownership and would not provide effective oversight and accountability.

b) There is not a clear interrelationship between the range of interconnected reform processes currently underway, and that the resulting siloes need to be addressed.

c) Lack of priority shown by successive Governments on the issue of recognising iwi rights and interests in freshwater including allocation concerns which are fundamental to te mauri and to mana o te wai.

89. A number of further issues were raised:

a) appear to be a direct line of influence, in particular there is a concern that WSE responses to Te Mana o te Wai statements will not be meaningful.

b) Consideration should be given to the consolidation of Te Mana (me te mauri) o te Wai and the statement of intent into a single document.

c) A monitoring strategy by mana whenua would help to ensure that the outcomes agreed on within the Te Mana o te Wai statements come to fruition.

d) Equity concerns around iwi/hapū participation across such a large geographic area for the RRG resulting in inadequate representation of Mana Whenua of Entity A; also concerns re the criteria and process for appointment.

e) Proposed structure disconnects Mana Whenua, Te Mana o te Wai, and the WSE response from the RRG and is not partnership.

f) Resourcing of Mana Whenua to enable adequate participation in a new model.

g) If the WSE is run comparable to a company, with its purpose to return the best result to shareholders, then the reliance on economic outcome and ‘balance sheet’ elements will not achieve the bests outcomes for Mana Whenua.

90. All iwi entities have been contacted to advise them of the introduction of the legislation and seeking feedback to inform the council’s submission

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

92. It is noted that around 28 per cent of Council’s existing assets are water, wastewater and stormwater assets, and that in the 2021-31 Budget, around 25 per cent of Council’s total funding is going to water, wastewater and stormwater.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

93. Significant risks and financial implications of the Three Waters reform have been identified in previous advice to the Governing Body in September 2021, including:

a) strategic direction of Northern Water Services Entity may not reflect Aucklanders’ interests

b) higher costs and poor community outcomes from fragmented and uncoordinated planning and provision of infrastructure

c) levels of service determined by an economic regulator or the WSE which could see Auckland deprioritised to meet obligations outside Auckland

d) insufficient industry capacity to undertake all the investment required

e) the costs of the reform to council

f) the decoupling of stormwater and land management functions making developing and implementing efficient and effective responses to big challenges such as climate change, hazards and growth more challenging.

94. As part of developing the council’s submission, staff will consider whether provisions in the Bill mitigate these risks to any extent. Legislation expected later this year may play a mitigation role.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

95. Local board resolutions on the Water Services Entities Bill will be included in the Auckland Council submission on this matter.

96. Below are the key dates for input into the submission:

· 15 July 2022: a draft submission will be shared with local boards

· 18 July 2022: deadline for feedback to be incorporated into the council’s submission

· 19 July 2022: deadline for feedback to be considered in the council’s submission

· November 2022 (estimated date): The final submission will be reported retrospectively to the Governing Body and circulated to elected members.

97. This submission period closes on 22 July 2022.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Council resolutions related to the Government’s Three Waters Reform Programme	75
b ⇩	Mayor Goff's Minority Report	79

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Jacob van der Poel - Advisor Operations and Policy

Denise O’Shaughnessy - Manager Strategic Advice

Authorisers

Carol Hayward - Team Leader Operations and Policy

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

19 July 2022

Local board feedback on the strategic direction of Auckland's Future Development Strategy

File No.: CP2022/09754

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board feedback on the strategic approach to the Future Development Strategy (FDS).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The purpose of the FDS is to provide the basis for integrated, strategic and long-term planning. It should assist with the integration of land use and infrastructure planning and funding decisions and set out how Tāmaki Makaurau will:

· achieve outcomes across the four well-beings

· achieve a well-functioning urban environment

· provide sufficient development capacity to meet housing and business land demand over the short, medium, and long-term

· coordinate critical development infrastructure and additional infrastructure required and explain how this integrates planning decisions with infrastructure and funding decisions.

3. The updated FDS will replace the existing Development Strategy in the Auckland Plan 2050 and will incorporate the new requirements of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS UD). New information on environmental and social changes such as responses to climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic will also be included.

4. During the early development of the FDS, topics and issues will be researched at a regional scale. As the FDS work develops and becomes more detailed, local board specific material will be available and workshopped with local boards. This is planned for Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 in 2023.

5. Over the first half of 2022, seven ‘big issues’ facing Auckland were discussed at series of Planning Committee workshops. These issues were: hapū and iwi values and aspirations for urban development; climate change, emissions reduction and urban form; inundation and natural hazards; intensification – dispersed or focused; infrastructure; greenfields and future urban areas; and business and employment.

6. Local board feedback is sought on this direction, prior to seeking endorsement from the Planning Committee in August and/or September 2022. If endorsed, the staff will use the strategic direction as a basis for developing the draft FDS over the second half of 2022.

7. An updated FDS is needed in time to inform the Long-term Plan 2024-2034 (LTP). To provide strategic direction that will usefully feed into the LTP process the FDS will need to be completed by mid-2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the strategic direction for the Future Development Strategy.

Horopaki

Context

What is the Future Development Strategy?

8. The purpose of the FDS is to provide the basis for integrated, strategic and long-term planning. It sets out how, where and when Tāmaki Makaurau is expected to grow over the next 30 years and outlines where and when investment in planning and infrastructure will be made. The updated FDS will replace the existing Development Strategy in the Auckland Plan 2050. It sets out how Tāmaki Makaurau will:

· achieve outcomes across the four well-beings

· achieve a well-functioning urban environment

· provide sufficient development capacity to meet housing and business land demand over the short, medium, and long-term

· coordinate critical development infrastructure and additional infrastructure required and explain how this integrates planning decisions with infrastructure and funding decisions.

9. The FDS will show how the direction and outcomes in the Auckland Plan 2050 will be achieved spatially and it will incorporate a clear statement of hapū and iwi values and aspirations for urban development.

10. It will identify the existing and future location, timing and sequencing of growth and infrastructure provision. It will also identify constraints on development.

11. Sequencing of development areas within the existing urban areas and future urban areas will be assessed as part of this update.

Why is it being updated now?

12. There have been many changes since the Development Strategy was adopted as part of the Auckland Plan 2050, nearly four years ago, including central government initiatives under the Urban Growth Agenda and new national policy statements such as the NPS UD. In addition, council has led strategy and policy work focused on environmental and social challenges, including responses to climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic. The growth model is also being reviewed and updated to support the spatial evidence for the FDS.

13. This changing context, but specifically the requirements of the NPS UD, means Tāmaki Makaurau’s long-term spatial plan requires updating. The update will consider the detailed NPS UD changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan, such as intensification around train and bus rapid transit stops, however the purpose is different as it has a long-term (30 year) strategic focus.

14. At its 30 November 2021 meeting, the Planning Committee approved the development of an update to the FDS and endorsed the high-level work programme (committee resolution PLA/2021/137).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Strategic direction on the ‘big issues’

15. Over the first half of 2022, seven ‘big issues’ facing Auckland were discussed at series of Planning Committee workshops. The Future Development Strategy will need to address these issues (as set out below).

16. Local board feedback is sought on this direction, prior to seeking endorsement from the Planning Committee in August and/or September 2022. If endorsed, the staff will use the strategic direction as a basis for developing the draft FDS over the second half of 2022.

Hapū and iwi values and aspirations for urban development

17. The NPS UD directs that the FDS is informed by ‘Māori, and in particular tangata whenua, values and aspirations for urban development’. These values could provide a strong framework for taking a longer term, more sustainable approach to development in Auckland.

18. Strategic direction:

· hapū and iwi values and aspirations are a key aspect to the FDS and should be an overarching theme throughout, rather than a separate section or workstream

· a thorough engagement approach is critical to understanding directly from hapū and iwi what their values and aspirations for urban development are

· mataawaka and relevant Māori organisations should be included in the engagement.

Climate change, emissions reduction and urban form

19. An increased focus on climate change is a key aspect of updating the FDS. The council has committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 50 per cent by 2030 and achieving net zero emissions by 2050. Auckland needs to prepare for the impacts of climate change and plan for a potential 3.5 degree temperature increase. Urban form plays a major role in our ability to reduce emissions, as well as our exposure to natural hazards (see below).

20. Strategic direction:

· climate change related outcomes are non-negotiable, and every decision needs to consider climate change implications

· achieving climate change related outcomes should be an overarching theme throughout the FDS.

Inundation and natural hazards

21. There are areas of Auckland that are, and with the impacts of climate change (discussed above), increasingly will be, exposed to natural hazards such as inundation, flooding and erosion.

22. Strategic direction:

· take a strong approach to development in hazardous areas and provide clear public messages about risks and liability.

Intensification – dispersed or focused

23. Recent government direction relating to intensification under the NPS UD (around centres and rapid transit stations) and the Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS) impact the council’s ability to influence where intensification could or should occur.

24. Intensification that is dispersed (what MDRS enables) is likely to result in low(er) levels of intensification across most of the urban area. This will impact on the ability to provide services over time, for example, public transport.

25. Focused intensification would direct growth to specific areas or locations, for example, around centres, areas with good public transport access or near areas of high employment.

26. A combination of these two approaches would allow intensification across much of Auckland but would also allow greater intensification in specific areas. This approach may undermine the level of intensification in places that are best suited, as growth would also be happening in many other places.

27. Strategic direction:

· work within the legal parameters, use the levers we still have available to focus intensification

· quality aspects are increasingly important with intensification, including the value of greenspace.

Infrastructure

28. Funding and financing all the infrastructure needed in Auckland is a significant challenge. The council cannot provide infrastructure everywhere at the same time and reconsideration is needed of where funding will be focused / provided, and who funds what aspects and to what extent.

29. Strategic direction:

· strong, clear signals are needed that the council will use infrastructure as a lever to support or not support development

· the timing and sequencing of development in strategic plans must be followed.

Greenfields and future urban areas

30. The current Development Strategy (and the Auckland Unitary Plan) provide for 15,000ha of greenfields / future urban land, sequenced for development over a 30-year period. In the first decade (2017-2027) 32% of that land was live-zoned and more future urban land is being considered for live-zoning through private plan changes.

31. Live-zoning is happening much faster and in a haphazard way, creating major infrastructure issues. Additionally, some of this future urban land will, in future, be exposed to greater flooding risk and other natural hazards.

32. Strategic direction:

· reconsider and possibly pull back some Future Urban zone areas, particularly:

- areas at risk of flooding and natural hazards

- other areas given the direction on emissions reduction

· the FDS should give strong signals regarding non-live zoned Future Urban zone land e.g., in terms of sequencing of development and infrastructure provision.

Business and employment

33. Business operations and future needs are changing, for example, the impacts of COVID-19 and working from home, increases in online retail, the needs for large footprint businesses and the role that local centres may play in future.

34. Auckland Council’s data on business land, needs and trends needs updating and work is underway to address this.

35. Strategic direction:

· business land, operations and future needs is an important aspect of the FDS and further research is supported, particularly in relation to the demand for industrial space, robotic warehousing, the weightless economy and the impacts of COVID-19

· access to business and employment is a critical issue, both in terms reducing the need to travel through proximity to residential areas, and accessibility by public transport and active modes

· the importance of access to and provision of quality employment opportunities for Māori and Māori businesses.

Work programme – timeframes, key milestones

36. The high-level milestones of the FDS are set out below. The FDS will be completed by mid-2023 to provide clear strategic direction to the 2024 LTP, as directed by the NPS UD.

37. Research, stakeholder engagement and development of the draft FDS will be on-going in 2022. Engagement with Tāmaki Makaurau Māori and key stakeholders is planned throughout 2022 and the first half of 2023. Public consultation is expected in the first half of 2023.

A picture containing timeline

Description automatically generated

38. It is noted that local body elections will take place in October 2022 and the timeframes acknowledge that there will be a break in Planning Committee and local board meetings at this time.

39. Local board chairs (or alternates) were invited to a series of Planning Committee workshops in the first half of 2022.

40. Indicative timeframes and the proposed format for local board involvement are set out in the table below.

Indicative timeframe	Proposed format
July 2022	Introductory briefing
July / August 2022	Reports to business meetings
August / September 2022	Planning Committee – endorse strategic direction
October 2022	Local body elections
Quarter 1 2023	Planning Committee – approval for public consultation
Quarter 2 2023	Workshops
Quarter 2 2023	Reports to business meetings
Quarter 3 2023	Planning Committee – adopt updated FDS

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

41. There is an increasing national focus on climate change through legislation[1] and through initiatives such as declaration of climate emergencies[2] and the report of the Climate Change Commission (June 2021). The council adopted Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan in 2020. The plan provides a long-term approach to climate action, with a target to halve regional emissions by 2030 and transition to net zero emissions by 2050. The built environment is one of the priority areas within the plan and the associated action areas focus on reducing emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change.

42. The government’s Emissions Reduction Plan (May 2022) and the council’s Transport Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) being developed are recent plans seeking to reduce emissions. The TERP will provide a pathway for achieving a modelled 64 per cent reduction in transport emissions by 2030 in Auckland. Staff are working to align land use aspects of the TERP and the FDS to 2030, while acknowledging that land use and planning decisions typically see climate impacts over the longer-term. This means that decisions need to be made now to realise the benefits as soon as possible.

43. Land use and planning decisions, particularly those around urban form, development and infrastructure, are fundamental to climate action. The impacts of different growth scenarios on climate change mitigation and adaptation are essential to the development of the FDS. These decisions influence and lock in our emissions trajectory and our ability to deal with the risks and impacts of a changing climate for decades to come.

44. For example, in relation to transport emissions, more expansive urban forms generally lead to longer travel distances. Longer trip lengths typically result in higher transport emissions and less propensity for mode shift. Strategic land use decisions consider climate change risks and impacts such as the effects of coastal inundation and sea level rise.

45. The approach taken in the FDS and the council’s approach to implementation has the potential for significant long-term implications. These aspects will be further researched and developed over the course of the project.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

46. The FDS provides Auckland-wide alignment on growth and development approaches and influences council strategies, programmes of work and investment decisions. Involvement, information and support from staff across the council group is a critical aspect needed to achieve alignment.

47. A range of relevant staff from across the organisation, including the Council-Controlled Organisations, are involved in the project’s topic areas or workstreams.

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

Local impacts and local board views

48. The FDS is the long-term strategic spatial plan for Tāmaki Makaurau. The FDS provides information on how, when and where growth is anticipated. This is a topic which is of relevance to local boards as growth and development can have significant impacts at a local board level and informs local board plans.

49. This report seeks local board views on the strategic approach to the Future Development Strategy prior to agreement being sought from the Planning Committee.

50. As the FDS work develops and becomes more detailed, local board specific material will be available and will be workshopped with local boards. This is planned for Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 in 2023.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

51. The purpose of the FDS is to provide the basis for integrated, strategic and long-term planning. It will reflect the direction and outcomes in the Auckland Plan 2050 spatially. The updated FDS will include a clear statement of hapū and iwi values and aspirations for urban development based on engagement with relevant hapū and iwi (as required by the NPS UD).

52. Council has committed to achieving Māori outcomes through Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau, influenced by the Māori Plan and Issues of Significance, and Auckland Plan 2050. These documents provide guidance in understanding the priority areas for Tāmaki Makaurau Māori and a number of these priority areas are relevant to the development and implementation of the FDS, for example:

· involve Māori early in the decision-making process

· Māori housing aspirations

· protection of existing natural resources

· allowing for kaitiakitanga

· benefits to Māori, for example, housing, economic opportunities, and improved access

· impacts of climate change, for example, on marae, whānau, and sites of significance

· opportunities to showcase Māori identity.

53. The priority areas already identified, along with feedback from previous engagement will be incorporated in the development of the FDS. This requires a review of past Māori engagement and provides a starting point for engaging with Māori, in a way that supports their capacity to genuinely participate in the development of the FDS.

54. Staff have developed a Māori engagement plan and are in the beginning phases of engaging with Māori across Tāmaki Makaurau.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

55. Costs for developing the FDS largely fall in FY23. This includes engagement and consultation aspects of the programme. Funding is provided in the 22/23 Annual Budget.

56. The FDS, once adopted, plays a significant role in future asset and service planning, especially assets and services related to growth. Decisions on this are subsequently made through Annual Plans, Long-term Plans, Regional Land Transport Plans etc.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

57. The council faces significant risks (achieving desired development outcomes, financial and reputational) in the absence of a clear, cohesive and strategic approach responding to the FDS requirements of the NPS UD and LGACA. The development of an FDS seeks to address those risks.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

58. Workshops are planned for the first half of 2023, when information specific to each local board will be available.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Claire Gray - Principal Advisor Growth & Spatial Strat

Authorisers

Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Henderson-Massey Local Board policy schedule - July 2022	95

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Henderson-Massey Local Board workshop records for 7, 14 and 28 2022.	99

[1] Legislation includes Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act 2019.

[2] Auckland Council declared a climate emergency in June 2019 while central government announced a climate emergency declaration in December 2020.

Month (2022)	Topic	Governance Role	Purpose
July	Governance Framework Review (now August)	Input to regional decision-making	Define board position and feedback
	Future Development Plan	Input to regional decision-making	Define board position and feedback

August	Governance Framework Review	Input to regional decision-making	Define board position and feedback

September	National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management	Input to regional decision-making	Define board position and feedback

Chairperson	Vanessa Neeson, JP
Deputy Chairperson	Brenda Brady, JP
Members	Chris Carter
	Peter Chan, JP
	Dr Will Flavell
	Matt Grey
	Brooke Loader
	Ingrid Papau

Authors	Brenda Railey - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Adam Milina - Local Area Manager