Agenda of Henderson-Massey Local Board - Tuesday, 16 August 2022

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, 19 July 2022, as a 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 - Open drain channels 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 open drain channels in Ranui.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) receive the presentation on Ranui open drain channels 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.

9.1 Public Forum: Te Pou Theatre - introduction and activities update

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive public forum from Te Pou Theatre.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Amanda Rees and Amber Curreen, on behalf of Te Pou Theatre, will be in attendance to introduce Te Pou Theatre and provide an activities update to the Board.

3. Te Pou is a kaupapa Māori performing arts venue for all, located at Corban Estate Arts Centre in Auckland.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) receive the presentation on Te Pou Theatre activities and thank Amanda Rees and Amber Curreen for their attendance.

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

16 August 2022

New road name in the Kāinga Ora subdivision at 14, 16 and 18 Holmes Drive and 3, 5, 7 and 9 Cecil Beatt Place, West Harbour

File No.: CP2022/10622

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval for a name for a new private road being a commonly owned access lot (COAL) created by way of the subdivision at 14, 16 and 18 Holmes Drive and 3, 5, 7 and 9 Cecil Beatt Place, West Harbour.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines (the Guidelines) set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. The guidelines state 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.

3. On behalf of Kāinga Ora, their Senior Stakeholder Relationship Manager Catherine Gilhooly, has submitted the following names below for consideration of the local board.

4. The proposed Road names are:

· Mioweka Lane (applicants preferred name)

· Tara Iti Lane (alternative name)

· Kawau Lane (alternative name).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) approve the name ‘Mioweka Lane’ for the private road constructed within the subdivision being undertaken by Kāinga Ora at 14, 16 and 18 Holmes Drive and 3, 5, 7 and 9 Cecil Beatt Place, West Harbour in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

Horopaki

Context

5. Resource consent council ref. BUN60382777 (and SUB60382779) was issued on April 2022 for a 22 lot residential subdivision and a COAL at 14, 16 and 18 Holmes Drive and 3, 5, 7 and 9 Cecil Beatt Place, West Harbour.

6. A site plan of the road and development can be found in Attachment A.

7. A location map of the proposed development can be found in Attachment B.

8. In accordance with the national addressing standards, the private road requires a name as it serves more than 5 lots.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically require that road names reflect:

· A historical or ancestral linkage to an area

· A particular landscape, environment or biodiversity theme or feature or

· An existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area

· The use of Māori names is actively encouraged.

10. Theme: The road names submitted were provided to Kāinga Ora by Te Kawerau Iwi Tiaki Trust. The Te Kawerau ā Maki name for Massey is ‘Manutewhau’ – (birds of the whau). In this regard the names submitted represent birds which are categorised as nationally critical and nationally endangered.

Kāinga Ora supports the use of Te Reo Māori in developing street names, while acknowledging and celebrating the heritage of the area.

The applicant has proposed the names set out in the following table.

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Mioweka Lane (applicant’s preferred name)	Māori name for the Banded Rail.
Tara Iti Lane (alternative)	Māori name for the Fairy Tern.
Kawau Lane (alternative)	Māori name for the Shag.

11. 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.

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

13. Road Type: ‘Lane’ is an acceptable road type for the new private roads, suiting the form and layout of the private roads.

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. The naming of roads is linked to the Auckland Plan Outcome “A Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world”. The use of Māori names for roads, buildings and other public places is an opportunity to publicly demonstrate Māori identity. To aid Local Board decision making, the ‘Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines’ includes:

· the Objective of recognising ancestral linkages to areas of land by engagement with mana whenua and the allocation of road names as appropriate and a Principle that Māori road names are actively encouraged and

· an agreed process to enable mana whenua to provide timely feedback on all proposed road names in a manner they consider appropriate.

19. The applicant has consulted with relevant mana whenua, as set out in the Guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

· Ngāti Tamaterā (Ngāti Tamaterā Settlement Trust)

· Ngāti Te Ata (Te Ara Rangatu o Te Iwi o Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua)

· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara (Ngā Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust)

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei (Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Trust)

· Te Ākitai Waiohua (Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority)

· Te Kawerau ā Maki (Te Kawerau Iwi Settlement Trust)

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua (Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua).

20. Te Kawerau ā Maki responded and proposed the road names presented in this report. By the close of the consultation period, no other responses had been received.

21. The level of feedback received from mana whenua is often dependent on the scale of the development and its level of significance.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

24. There are no significant risks to council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process with consultation being a key part of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

25. 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.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	14, 16 and 18 Holmes Drive and 3, 5, 7 and 9 Cecil Beatt Place Site Plan	15
b ⇩	14, 16 and 18 Holmes Drive and 3, 5, 7 and 9 Cecil Beatt Place Location Map	17

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Dale Rewa - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

16 August 2022

Henderson-Massey Urban Ngahere Action Plan 2022

File No.: CP2022/10970

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the Henderson-Massey Urban Ngahere Action Plan 2022.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The regional Te Rautaki Ngahere ā-Tāone o Tāmaki Makaurau/ Auckland’s Urban Forest Strategy responds to changes in ngahere canopy cover and potential climate change impacts. The strategy’s target is to increase tree canopy cover across all local board areas in Tāmaki Makaurau to 30 per cent by 2050.

3. In 2019/2020, the Henderson-Massey Local Board funded an implementation plan to understand the current canopy cover and plan for increasing ngahere cover in the local area. The three stages of the implementation plan are ‘knowing’, ‘growing’ and ‘protecting’.

4. The first part of the ‘knowing’ stage involved analysis of the 2013 and 2016/2018 Light Detecting and Ranging Technology (LiDAR) data for the Henderson-Massey Local Board tree canopy cover.

5. Analysis of urban tree canopy coverage and comparison with the overall extents from 2013 and 2018 was undertaken, alongside population statistics and current growth projections outlined in the Auckland Plan.

6. The report has established that urban tree coverage in the local board area is approximately 15 per cent of the overall land area in 2018. The Urban Ngahere Canopy Analysis Report was adopted by the local board on 19 October 2021.

7. The final part of the ‘knowing’ stage has been to develop a 10-year action plan that identifies target areas where trees can be planted to help increase canopy cover in the local board area.

8. This report is seeking adoption of the Henderson-Massey Urban Ngahere Action Plan 2022 (Attachment A).

9. The local board’s adoption of the action plan will set the process and direction for tree planting over the next 10 years and enable planning and preparation for the ‘growing’ phase to commence.

10. It is recommended the action plan is reviewed every three years to align with local board plan development. This will update the board on planting progress, enable planning for maintaining existing trees, provide opportunities for inclusion of new initiatives, and highlighting next steps to further increase tree canopy cover.

11. Each year an annual planting plan, including site specific analysis, tree selection, soil and environmental condition analysis, will be prepared. The development of the annual planting plan process will require local board funding.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) adopt the Henderson-Massey Urban Ngahere Action Plan 2022.

b) request that Parks, Sport and Recreation staff review the Henderson-Massey Urban Ngahere Action Plan every three years and provide a report updating the local board on progress of delivery of the action plan over a 10-year period

c) request that Parks, Sport and Recreation staff review the Henderson-Massey Urban Ngahere Action Plan implementation work programme annually and provide a report to the local board on the delivery of new tree plantings

d) delegate authority to the General Manager - Parks, Sport and Recreation, to make minor changes and amendments to the text and design of the Henderson-Massey Urban Ngahere Action Plan 2022.

Horopaki

Context

12. In 2016, staff studied the extent of urban forest canopy coverage across Tāmaki Makaurau using information captured from an aerial flight using LiDAR survey technology.

13. A detailed tree canopy analysis report was developed by staff from the Research Investigation Monitoring Unit (RIMU) and a regional strategy was developed, which the Governing Body approved in October 2018.

14. The regional strategy’s objective is to increase regional tree canopy cover to 30 per cent, with no local board area having less than 15 per cent canopy cover by 2050.

15. Local boards’ role in reaching this target is to develop local implementation plans to address the canopy loss in their local board area. The local implementation plan has three stages: ‘knowing’, ‘growing’ and ‘protecting’.

16. The ‘knowing’ stage of this planning included analysis of the cover that currently exists across the local board area, and a comparison of net change over a three to five-year period. The percentage canopy cover analysis measures all vegetation on public and private land that is over three metres in height.

17. The Henderson-Massey Urban Ngahere (Forest) Analysis Report was approved by the local board on 19 October 2021 (resolution HM/2021/155). It found that the average tree canopy cover across the local board area was 15 per cent based on the findings of the 2013-2016/2018 LiDAR canopy cover analysis.

18. The findings from the analysis report have been used to help inform development of the Henderson-Massey Urban Ngahere 10-Year Action Plan, providing guidance on the process to direct new tree planting efforts across council teams and the community.

19. The action plan will provide longer-term direction over a 10-year period on planting new trees across the local board area with a goal to increase overall tree canopy coverage on publicly owned land.

20. Adoption and implementation of the action plan will lead to:

· planting of new specimen trees

· undertaking enrichment planting in local parks

· working with Auckland Transport to increase tree cover in the road corridor

· providing guidance and direction on priorities for community groups and council departments undertaking or organizing community planting events.

21. Targets and areas to focus planting efforts are outlined in the action plan. Planting trees in these areas will increase canopy cover, establish or enhance ecological corridors for wildlife and provide shade for key areas in parks and reserves.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

22. The action plan has been informed by findings from the canopy analysis report. Findings in the tree canopy analysis report were based on a LiDAR survey that was completed in 2013.

23. A follow up LiDAR survey was carried out in 2016-2018 and comparative analysis of the data findings show a net increase in canopy cover in the local board area between 2013 and 2018. The net increase in overall tree canopy coverage equates to approximately 14 square hectares more tree canopy cover when compared to 2013. The overall net increases in tree canopy coverage took place across the entire local board area.

24. The comparative findings show overall positive increases in tree cover took place between 2013 and 2018 on publicly owned land. The largest net increases in tree canopy coverages were observed on public land with net increases of two per cent on public parks, and one per cent in the road corridor. These net gains on public land following the analysis work appear to directly offset the net two per cent loss of tree canopy cover on private land.

25. Site assessments have been carried out to investigate suitable locations for planting new specimen trees based on the information in the analysis report. The primary areas of assessment were parks with playgrounds and the local street network that could provide green corridor connections between local parks.

26. These investigations, along with a detailed site assessment and subject matter expert input, have helped to inform the proposed locations and set the target for planting that is outlined in the action plan.

27. The target for the local board is to maintain existing and to increase tree canopy cover by two percent over a 10-year period to increase tree canopy cover on public land to help achieve a regional target of 30 per cent as outlined in the regional strategy.

28. A concerted effort is necessary to increase tree canopy cover on public land and a focus on planting large growing specimen trees. New planting if completed annually will increase overall tree canopy coverages on publicly managed land by 2030 and provide positive benefits to local communities.

29. The adoption of the action plan and its implementation will (over a 30-year period), lead to incremental changes that will help work towards achieving above the regional target of 30 per cent tree canopy cover across Tāmaki Makaurau.

30. Reporting on implementation of the 10-year action plan every three years aligns with local board plan development. This will enable the local board to review the target and planting strategy, consider inclusion of new initiatives plan for the next areas of planting and consider the allocation of budgets required.

31. Staff have recommended a realistic target for the local board to work towards in the action plan. It is forecast that with small increases in new planting and decreases in tree removal year on year; the current 15 per cent cover is at least maintained with potentially an incremental increase of two per cent as new annual tree plantings take place over the next 10 years.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

32. Implementation of the strategy and the action plan is an example of an integrated approach to help mitigate emissions, build resilience longer term and enable adaptation to the impacts of climate change to meet Auckland Council’s climate goals.

33. The strategy is identified as a key action in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri - Auckland’s Climate Plan 2020.

34. Increasing stock of trees and vegetation in Tāmaki Makaurau will increase carbon sequestration and contribute towards reducing net greenhouse gas emissions.

35. Increasing trees and vegetation also provides various natural functions that assist with adaptation to the climate change impacts for humans and other species, such as:

· providing a shading and cooling effect to counter rising temperatures

· slowing and reducing stormwater runoff to assist in managing increased rainfall events

· improve air quality by trapping particulates and filtering vehicle pollutants

· providing additional habitat for indigenous species to occupy, enhancing their resilience to climate change impacts.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

36. Collaboration across Parks, Sport and Recreation (PSR), Infrastructure and Environmental Services (I&ES) and Community Facilities (CF) has been key to the development of the action plan.

37. Community Facilities has helped inform where the current maintenance and renewal programme for trees can be strengthened to improve the overall diversity and increase the extent of the tree canopy cover.

38. Parks Sport and Recreation will work with Community Facilities in developing the renewals programme to ensure an ongoing programme of tree renewal occurs to replace poor and ailing stock and to replant where dead, dying or diseased trees are removed.

39. Staff will continue to collaborate and develop a tree planting programme and implementation plan for the delivery of new tree plantings in the 2023 planting season and beyond.

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

Local impacts and local board views

40. The initial draft action plan was workshopped with the local board in September 2021. At the workshop board members were presented the draft Ngahere Action Plan and were asked to provide feedback.

41. The feedback received at the first workshop was incorporated into and helped direct development of the final draft Henderson-Massey Ngahere Action Plan 2022. The final draft has been included in the document as Attachment A to this report.

42. Board members provided details on park locations for planting, and areas that represented their open space network across the Henderson-Massey geographic area. The photos in the final Ngahere Action Plan are all taken within the local board area and aim to reflect the value of the local landscape and how trees play are an integral part.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

43. The strategy was workshopped with mana whenua during its development in three workshops during 2017 and 2018. Feedback and views discussed at the hui helped to shape the final version of the strategy.

44. The use of native trees for all new tree planting is a strong view of mana whenua, and as such natives are the first choice for planting as outlined in the strategy. Native trees are also identified as the preference for planting in the action plan.

45. New tree plantings will benefit local Māori and the wider community by providing increased opportunities for access to nature and providing shade in the local park network.

46. Mana whenua has recently been updated through councils’ engagement forum on the local implementation programme. Further engagement sessions are taking place in 2022 to support tree planting advice and to provide a cultural narrative in the choice of species for local areas.

47. Mana whenua have agreed to continued engagement sessions with council officers from Parks, Sport and Recreation and Community Facilities on the wider ngahere implementation programme and will continue to help advise, inform and direct planting efforts.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

48. The adoption of the action plan will conclude the ‘knowing’ stage of the local board’s implementation of the strategy, which is funded by the Locally Driven Initiative (LDI) OPEX budget.

49. Delivery of the ‘growing’ stage will be funded by CAPEX from various budgets. These include LDI, Asset Based Services (ABS), the Natural Environment Targeted Rate (NETR) and Mayors Million Trees, Climate Action Targeted Rate budgets that are allocated by the Governing Body.

50. In 2021/2022 the local board has allocated LDI OPEX to undertake site assessments to develop planting plans to direct new tree planting efforts. A meeting with the board took place in March, to review the detail of the planting plans and seek board support to proceed with planting.

51. In 2021/2022 the local board proposed to allocate LDI CAPEX for new tree planting in the Ngahere programme. The adoption of the action plan will help to direct priorities for any future funding and ensure the right trees are planted in the right place.

52. To ensure the target outlined in the action plan is met, a scaled approach to increasing the amount of LDI CAPEX annually through the local board’s Community Facilities annual work programme is recommended to increase the numbers of new trees being planted. The amount of funding required will be quantified annually based on priorities to advance new tree plantings in areas of need.

53. Funding will be required each year for development of site-specific plans to enable the delivery of the local board’s annual tree planting programme.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

54. The trajectory of loss of tree canopy cover across the local board area is expected to continue on private land as the area develops. New tree planting on public land is necessary to help offset these changes over the longer term.

55. Sufficient time is required to plan and prepare for planting. Should the local board not adopt the plan there is a risk that the ‘growing’ stage of the strategy will not be able to start in June 2023.

56. The 10-year action plan outlines a detailed ‘Planting Opportunities List’ to ensure the right tree is planted in the right place. Should the local board not adopt the action plan there is a risk that trees planted in 2023 will not be appropriate for their location.

57. There is a risk of poor maintenance of plants once they are in the ground. Adoption of the action plan will help mitigate this risk and enable staff to employ best practice tree planting and ongoing maintenance methods.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

58. Following adoption of the action plan, annual planting plans will be completed that identify areas for new planting in 2023 and 2024 These assessments will advise CF, Auckland Transport and other delivery partners on priorities for the ‘growing’ stage.

59. When the funding becomes available to fund new planting, the programme plans to provide an annual update on the ‘growing’ stage to the local board. These reports will be provided by departments that are leading the tree planting and collated by Parks Sports and Recreation staff to enable high level reporting on total numbers of new trees planted.

60. In 2023, staff will review the Henderson-Massey Ngahere Action Plan implementation, report to the board on successes and challenges and recommend direction for planting and funding allocation for the following three years.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Henderson-Massey Urban Ngahere Action Plan 2022	25

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Howell Davies - Senior Advisor - Urban Forest

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

16 August 2022

Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products (Smoked Tobacco) Amendment Bill

File No.: CP2022/11703

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek input from local boards on the draft council submission to the Health Select Committee on the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products (Smoked Tobacco^{^[1]}) Amendment Bill (the Bill).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Smokefree Aotearoa 2025 Action Plan sets out several measures that focus less on influencing consumer behaviour and more on changing the smoking environment.

3. The Health Select Committee has introduced the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products (Smoked Tobacco) Amendment Bill, which contains measures to help reduce smoking rates. Specifically, the bill:

· significantly limits the number of retailers able to sell smoked tobacco products

· aims to prevent young people from taking up smoking by prohibiting the sale of smoked tobacco products to anyone born on or after 1 January 2009

· aims to make smoked tobacco products less appealing and addictive

4. Local board feedback is being sought on this submission. The deadline for feedback to be considered in the council’s submission is 16 August 2022, whilst the final date for any local board feedback to be appended to the submission is 17 August 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products (Smoked Tobacco) Amendment Bill draft submission.

Horopaki

Context

5. The government has a goal that Aotearoa-New Zealand is smokefree by 2025. The Smokefree Aotearoa 2025 Action Plan sets out several measures that focus less on influencing consumer behaviour and more on changing the smoking environment. Legislative change is required to achieve the Smokefree 2025 goal and address the gaps remaining in New Zealand’s comprehensive regulation of tobacco products. Auckland Council has endorsed this goal for Tāmaki Makarau.

6. The Health Select Committee has introduced the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products (Smoked Tobacco) Amendment Bill, which contains measures to help reduce smoking rates. Specifically, the bill:

· significantly limits the number of retailers able to sell smoked tobacco products

· aims to prevent young people from taking up smoking by prohibiting the sale of smoked tobacco products to anyone born on or after 1 January 2009

· aims to make smoked tobacco products less appealing and addictive.

7. The Bill is currently being considered by the Health Select Committee, who have invited submissions.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Summary of feedback on the Bill

8. There are three elements to the Bill:

· Proposal One – Reduce smoked tobacco supply

o new provisions restrict the sale of smoked tobacco products to retailers approved by the Director-General of Health, set out the application process and criteria to be an approved retailer, and provide for the Director-General of Health to set a maximum number of retail premises allowed in a certain area. The intent of these provisions is to significantly limit the number of retailers able to sell smoked tobacco products

· Proposal Two – Smokefree generation

o new provisions allow for the introduction of a smokefree generation policy by prohibiting the sale of smoked tobacco products to anyone born on or after 1 January 2009. The intent of the policy is to prevent young people, and successive generations, from ever taking up smoking

· Proposal Three – Nicotine removal in smoked tobacco.

o new provisions regulations on the manufacturing, importing, sale and supply of smoked tobacco products. A specific provision sets limits on the quantity of nicotine levels and other constituents of smoked tobacco products.

9. The intent of these provisions is to increase the number of people who successfully stop smoking, and support tamariki/young people to remain smokefree, by making smoked tobacco products less appealing and addictive. These legislative changes are mutually reinforcing, and together are expected to deliver the substantial changes needed to achieve the Smokefree 2025 goal and improve health outcomes for all New Zealanders.

10. Overall, council supports the passage of the Bill. However, to maximise the effectiveness of measures in the Bill we suggest it is paired with:

· more and better support for smokers to quit

· more effective enforcement of existing regulations, particularly around vaping

· a plan to consider the role of vaping, which is an effective smoking cessation tool but will become unnecessary to the degree that the Bill is effective in achieving the goal of a smokefree Aotearoa

· a robust monitoring and evaluation framework to ensure the Bill is effective and enable its implementation to be adjusted as necessary.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

11. The submission will have no impact on climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

12. The feedback aligns with council’s goal that Tāmaki Makarau is smokefree by 2025 and our plans to achieve this. This goal and the associated plan were developed with input from relevant departments and Council-Controlled Organisations.

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

Local impacts and local board views

13. Local board views are being sought to feed into the draft submission and will be incorporated into the council’s final submission where possible.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

14. In Tāmaki Makaurau Māori and Pacific communities have the highest overall smoking prevalence, with the highest prevalence rates amongst these communities in Henderson, Massey, Glen Innes, Point England, Māngere, Ōtāhuhu, Ōtara, Papatoetoe, Manurewa and Papakura.

15. To reach the national smokefree 2025 goal, 7000 to 8000 Māori and Pacific peoples in Tāmaki Makaurau would need to stop smoking each year over the next four years. The number of new Māori and Pacific smokers would also need to reduce to zero.

16. Overall, the measures in the Bill are likely to help to reduce smoking rates among Māori and Pacific communities. However, we believe the Bill would be more effective if partnered with more and better support for smokers to quit. Given the high smoking rates in some Māori and Pacific communities this support should be delivered with community partners with experience and connections in these communities.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

17. There are no financial implications associated with this submission.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

18. There are no significant risks associated with the submission.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

19. Feedback from local boards will be incorporated into the council’s final submission as appropriate. Local board resolutions on the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products (Smoked Tobacco) Amendment Bill draft submission will be appended to the Auckland Council submission.

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

· 11 August: draft submission sent to local boards

· 16 August: deadline for feedback to be considered in the council’s submission

· 17 August: final date for any formal local board feedback to be appended to the submission

· 23 August: final submission will be approved by Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee Chair, Deputy Chair and Independent Māori Statutory Board member

· 22 September: The final submission will be reported retrospectively to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee and circulated to elected members.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products (Smoked Tobacco) Amendment Bill	63

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Jacob van der Poel - Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Carol Hayward - Team Leader Operations and Policy

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

16 August 2022

Temporary changes to landowner approval process for filming activities

File No.: CP2022/11333

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt a 12-month pilot programme where landowner approvals for filming permits (with low and medium impacts) are assessed by staff, without the need for consultation with the local board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Screen Auckland, part of Tātaki Auckland Unlimited, is the film office responsible for attracting, advocating for, and facilitating filming activities across the Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland region. The approval process for filming permits is guided by the:

· Auckland Film Protocol (2019) (Attachment A)

· Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022

· Local Board General Delegation to the Chief Executive and Delegation Protocols (2013).

3. As local boards are responsible for activities that take place on parks and other local facilities, they have a limited involvement in the film permitting process through the landowner approval process.

4. All 21 local boards have delegated the responsibility for making landowner approval decisions to Auckland Council staff. This delegation is subject to a requirement for consultation that means that for every landowner approval application – except for low and medium impact event applications – staff must consult the local board’s dedicated lead when making landowner approval decisions. In addition, the local board can “call in” a landowner approval delegation if it wishes to make that decision itself.

5. Due to an increase in permit applications, Screen Auckland is also seeking this process change to support Auckland’s economic recovery from COVID 19, by enabling a smoother permitting process which will attract more international screen production business, and also improve Auckland’s ‘film friendliness’. This proposed streamlined process will also reduce workloads and increase wellbeing for staff at the frontline of the permit application process.

6. Screen Auckland recommends a 12-month pilot programme that removes the requirement for local board consultation on film permits of low and medium impact. Local boards would still be consulted for high and major impact filming activities and would continue to be notified of all applications.

7. The risk of change in quality of permit application decisions is low, as staff already rigorously apply the requirements of the Auckland Film Protocol and the Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022.

8. If approved, the pilot programme would begin Monday, 19 September 2022, and staff would report to the local board quarterly on permit and revenue numbers.

9. After 12 months, Screen Auckland will work collaboratively with local boards and Community Facilities staff to identify potential improvements to the pilot programme and assess a desire to continue.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) agree to waive the requirement (in the Local Board Delegation Protocols) for staff consultation with the local board on landowner approvals, for low and medium impact film shoot permit applications, for a 12-month period.

b) agree that Screen Auckland notifies the local board film lead of all low and medium impact film permits granted in local parks and facilities, ahead of these activities taking place.

c) agree that Screen Auckland continues to work with Community Facilities staff in assessing and determining conditions for the use of local parks and facilities, where appropriate, for all film shoot permit applications.

d) agree to provide a list of sensitive locations with particular escalation points that might elevate an application out of the minor category, or require further discussion, to Screen Auckland before 19 September 2022.

Horopaki

Context

Permit approval process

10. Screen Auckland, part of Tātaki Auckland Unlimited, is the film office for Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland and is responsible for:

· Attraction – Developing Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland as a film-friendly region and attracting international productions, stimulating regional economies, employment and cultural life

· Advocacy – Supporting local screen businesses to grow and develop in the region while supporting decision makers to protect the interests and safety of mana whenua businesses, residents and the environment

· Facilitation – Streamlining the permit process for filming activities in open public spaces such as parks, beaches and reserves.

11. The process for film approvals is currently controlled by:

Local Board Delegation to the Chief Executive (2013)

· must receive landowner approval when filming is on a park or in a local facility

· must consult with local boards where landowner approval is required

· must refer the landowner consent decision to the local board where required

· that land owner approvals for film permits can be administered by Community Facilities staff without the requirement to consult with local board film representatives

Auckland Film Protocol (2019)

· film facilitator issues the Application Summary document, summarising the information supplied by the filmmaker to the appropriate council local board(s) and external stakeholders for consideration.

Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw (2022)

· minimises public safety risks, nuisance and misuse of council-controlled public places by enabling council to prescribe conditions and requirements in relation to all filming.

12. Screen Auckland follows a rigorous process when reviewing applications and considers all applicable national and local legislation. It also liaises directly with the wider Auckland Council family and other decision makers, in the approval process – such as: mana whenua groups, Tūpuna Maunga Authority, Auckland Transport, Environment and Biodiversity, Regional Parks, Sports Parks, Closed Landfills and Heritage.

Pressure due to film sector growth

13. A record-breaking number of film permit applications received by Screen Auckland is putting pressure on workloads and the tight turnaround requirements of the screen sector.

14. The projected increase in application numbers will require efficiencies to be implemented in the application process, to support reducing workloads and time pressures while maintaining ‘film friendliness’.

15. Auckland Council’s commitment to film friendliness (ratified by the Environment and Community committee as ENV/2019/152) was instituted to improve positive experiences in terms of administration and bureaucracy for film permit applications, to help retain screen productions in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland instead of them choosing to shoot in other parts of the country, or even the world. Screen Auckland would like to build on our reputation of ‘film friendliness’ to future proof these production pipelines

16. There is an urgent need to help revitalise Auckland’s economy due to the impacts of COVID-19, through supporting good experiences within, and return business from the screen sector, which contributes significant value to Auckland’s economy.

Different categories of film applications

17. The impacts table for the different film permit categories can be found on page 14 of the Auckland Film Protocol 2019 document in the supplied attachments.

18. To encourage economic activity, the Auckland Film Protocol and the Public Trading Events and Filming Bylaw 2022, provide detailed guidance and purposefully seek to enable filming where there is negligible impact on public facilities – i.e. low and medium impact categories, also known as Minor Categories. Being able to reflect this ‘film-friendly’ intention in our administration processes, supports the intention of this regional policy.

19. In addition to considerations on impact scale, local boards can also advise Screen Auckland of any specific location-based areas that staff should consider when processing permit applications, such as ecologically sensitive areas. These are added to Screen Auckland’s film permit processing software system, FilmApp, for the future reference of Screen Auckland facilitators.

Consistency with approach to other permits

20. This pilot programme will be consistent with other land-owner approval processes for regulatory activities. For example, in the permitting process for events, local board protocols do not require consultation with the local board for minor category events.

21. Events and filming are both regulated under the Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022. By providing an approval process for film permits that is consistent with events, it allows Council to be more efficient and enabling in these customer-facing processes.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Pilot to provide efficient process

22. To create a more efficient permit process, Screen Auckland recommends a 12-month pilot programme where landowner approvals for filming permits with low and medium impacts are decided by staff as per their existing delegation, without the need for consultation with the local board.

23. This pilot will involve four local boards. The intention is to demonstrate that efficiencies can be gained from delegating these low risk activities, without compromising the protection of parks and facilities.

24. As efficiencies are demonstrated over the pilot period, other local boards will be invited to join this streamlined process.

25. If the pilot proves to be efficient and without significant detriment to mana whenua, local boards, businesses, residents or the environment, then Screen Auckland will seek the endorsement of participating local boards, to institute this as a permanent process.

26. There is also the added benefit that removing the consultation requirement will reduce the time and resource involved with local board members monitoring delegated approvals.

Details of the pilot programme

27. Landowner approvals for high and major impact film shoots will still go to local board film representatives for consultation. Local boards will be notified of all applications in advance so that they are aware of activities happening in the facilities that they govern.

28. The measurements for success would include:

· an increased number of same-day-turnaround film applications

· positive feedback from the screen sector if it is enjoying the streamlined approach

· no significant rise in complaints or negative feedback from mana whenua, businesses, residents or environmental groups

· local board film representatives describing a lighter workload following the establishment of the new process.

29. More details of the pilot programme can be found in the attached PowerPoint document.

Review of the pilot programme

30. Screen Auckland will assess the pilot programme collaboratively with Community Facilities staff and local board film leads. It will review comments and complaints as well as positive feedback from mana whenua, businesses, residents, screen sector applicants and local groups. Screen Auckland will provide this feedback to each local board every three months. Data will be kept on the number of permits applied for and issued in the local board area. This data will be compiled and presented for review after 12 months from the date of the first implementation.

31. If the review of the streamlined process is favourable, Screen Auckland will recommend that the process be instituted across all local boards permanently, to ensure consistency in the way that Screen Auckland handles minor category film applications.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

32. As this is a change in internal delegation processes, there are no impacts on the climate, however the screen sector does take improving climate impacts and sustainability seriously. Screen Auckland is working with the screen sector to identify ways it can help contribute to a more sustainable Aotearoa. The New Zealand Screen Sector Emissions Study, produced by Screen Auckland in partnership with Arup, seeks to understand the climate impacts of the sector so together, we can map out a transition to sustainability.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

33. Screen Auckland, part of Tātaki Auckland Unlimited, is proposing the pilot programme as it:

· reduces the administration time and workload involved in processing and approving film permit applications.

34. Increases Auckland’s ‘film friendliness’ in line with the Auckland Film Protocol 2019, endorsed by Auckland Council’s Environment and Community Committee ENV/2019/152.

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

Local impacts and local board views

35. Screen Auckland workshopped streamlining the facilitation process for film applications in the minor categories (Attachment B) with the local board on Tuesday, 26 July 2022.

36. At the workshop, the Henderson Massey Local Board signalled general support for the pilot programme.

37. Concerns from the Henderson Massey Local Board included the ability to identify early any popular or overly used filming spots. The Auckland Film Protocol does note that filming is typically restricted to weekdays in high use parks and reserves. Staff will ensure these situations can be better managed by noting which parks and reserves have high demand at certain times of the year into the Screen Auckland FilmApp permit system so that these can be flagged at the time of application. Screen Auckland will require local boards to notify it of high demand locations.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

38. The existing permit system requires consultation with mana whenua on sites identified in Auckland Unitary Plan section D21, Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua, as well as Tūpuna Maunga Authority spaces. The pilot programme is not changing this requirement to engage with Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

39. Other than minor increases in film permit revenue for local boards, and the additional economic growth that comes with more film productions shooting in local board areas, there are no financial risks or implications that Screen Auckland has identified.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

40. Screen Auckland film facilitators work closely with the Auckland Council family and other decision makers in rigorously applying the Auckland Film Protocol 2019, The Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 as well as the Local Board Protocol 2013 when assessing film permit applications, to mitigate risks to businesses, residents and the environment.

41. The local board film lead will still have oversight of all applications, so a risk increase is very unlikely. The only thing that is changing is that this process will shift from a consultation with a local board film representative to a notification. All information will still be supplied.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

42. If approved, the pilot programme will begin on Monday, 19 September 2022.

43. Local boards will be notified of all applications that are approved and consulted on only high and major impact category film applications.

44. At the start of the pilot, Screen Auckland will email local board film leads and Community Facilities staff, inviting them to identify a list of sensitive locations and escalation points. Once these have been discussed and entered into the Screen Auckland permit system, they can be reviewed at the quarterly check ins. If there are any further additions to the list, these can be added and discussed with the Relationship Facilitator – Film, or the Screen Auckland facilitation team lead at any time.

45. After the 12-month pilot, Screen Auckland will review with the local board’s film lead and provide data on complaints, permit approval numbers and other feedback. If there is no significant detriment identified, Screen Auckland will recommend it institutes this streamlined permit process across all local boards permanently, to ensure consistency in the way that Screen Auckland handles minor category film applications.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Screen Auckland Ngā Tikanga Hopu Whakaahua i te Rohe o Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland Film Protocol 2019	113
b ⇩	Screen Auckland Land Owner Approvals - Minor Category for Screen presentation	171

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Matthew Donaldson – Relationship Facilitator - Film

Authorisers

Jesse Joseph – Screen Facilitation Manager

Matthew Horrocks - Contractor

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

16 August 2022

Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill

File No.: CP2022/11730

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide feedback to the Governing Body for when it considers an Auckland Council submission on the Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill (the Bill).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Bill is an omnibus bill in that it amends several statutes. It:

· removes the restriction of 20 councillors on the Governing Body

· provides a revised process for establishing Māori wards

· allows minor changes to local board boundaries for the purpose of alignment between ward and local board boundaries

· provides a dedicated process for the reorganisation of local boards

· provides more flexibility for lodging candidate nominations (eg electronic nominations)

· provides more detail around resolving ties and conducting recounts.

3. The provisions that relate to Auckland Council are in response to submissions the council has made previously. Staff recommend general support for the provisions relating to the number of councillors on the Governing Body, the alignment of boundaries and a separate process for the reorganisation of local boards (as in the proposed Schedule 3A).

4. The process for establishing Māori wards arises out of feedback from consultation on a discussion document. The proposed provisions generally align with the feedback provided by Auckland Council on the discussion document. Some local boards at that time raised the issue of Māori representation on local boards. That has not been addressed in the proposed provisions.

5. Staff recommend support for the provisions relating to candidate nominations, tied votes and recounts.

6. The Bill is attached as Attachment A. There is an explanatory note at the front of the Bill. There is additional information, including Cabinet papers and submissions on the previous discussion document, on the Department of Internal Affairs website: https://www.dia.govt.nz/maori-wards

7. Attachment B contains a comparison of proposed provisions for the reorganisation of local boards in Schedule 3A with the current provisions in Schedule 3.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) consider its feedback on the Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Bill was introduced on 26 July 2022. It has had its first reading and has been referred to the Governance and Administration Committee. Submissions to the committee close on 14 September 2022.

9. The Bill is an omnibus bill and amends three statutes.

10. It amends the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 to remove the set number of councillors on the governing body for Auckland Council. Like every other council, the number of councillors on the governing body will be able to be reviewed to be between 5 and 29 total councillors. Auckland Council has been requesting this since 2015.

11. It amends the Local Electoral Act 2001 to:

a) provide a revised process for establishing Māori wards

b) allow minor changes to local board boundaries for the purpose of alignment between ward and local board boundaries, to be included in the council’s proposal when it conducts its review of representation arrangements

c) provide more flexibility for lodging candidate nominations (eg electronic nominations)

d) provide more detail around resolving ties and conducting recounts.

12. It amends the Local Government Act 2002 to include a new Schedule 3A. The current schedule 3 deals with the reorganisation of councils (establishment, abolishment, amalgamation) and any reorganisation of local boards would currently have to be conducted under those provisions. The proposed schedule 3A provides a process specifically for unitary authorities which have local boards.

13. The Governing Body will consider a submission from Auckland Council at its meeting on 25 August 2022.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Government Auckland Council Act 2009

14. The amendment to the Local Government Auckland Council Act 2009 to remove the restriction on the number of councillors on the governing body has been requested previously by the council. It will allow the council to review the total number of members when it conducts a representation review for the 2025 elections.

15. Every other council in New Zealand is able to review the number of councillors between a minimum of 5 and maximum of 29. In reviewing the number of councillors, Auckland Council will be able to consider Auckland’s growing population. It will also take into account that the number of members elected from Māori wards is proportional to the total number of councillors.

16. Staff propose that the Auckland Council supports this provision in line with its previous submissions.

Local Electoral Act 2001 – Māori wards

17. The proposed process for establishing Māori wards has two-steps:

a) A council decides whether it should have Māori representation

b) If a council resolves to have Māori representation, then it must provide for Māori wards when it conducts its representation review.

18. The Bill requires a council to consider Māori representation at the following times:

a) If the council did not have Māori wards for the previous two elections, it must consider Māori representation for the next election

b) If the council did have Māori wards for the previous two elections, then it may consider Māori representation for the next election.

19. Before a council decides whether to have Māori representation it must engage with Māori and other communities of interest and take their views into account.

20. The decision on whether to have Māori representation must be made by 20 December two years prior to an election. The review of representation arrangements takes place in the year prior to an election year, following the decision on Māori representation.

21. Auckland Council’s submission on the discussion document that preceded the bill reflected the position of the Governing Body that Māori representation in local government should be modelled on Māori representation in Parliament. The Parliamentary Māori electorate provisions are contained in legislation – the Electoral Act 1993. Any legislation, before it is made, must provide for public consultation through a select committee. Once enacted, legislation remains in place until Parliament chooses to review it.

22. The proposed process requires councils to consider Māori representation if they do not already have it, including engagement with Māori and the community. There is no requirement on councils to resolve to have Māori representation. However, if a council has Māori representation then it is not required to reconsider Māori representation though it may if it chooses. Staff consider that the proposed process is in line with the previous position of the Governing Body and recommend support for the process.

23. Staff propose that Auckland Council supports these provisions.

24. Some local boards, in their feedback on the previous discussion document, advocated for Māori representation on local boards (the local board equivalent to a Māori ward would be a Māori subdivision). The Bill does not address this. Although possibly out of scope of the current proposals, local boards who feel strongly about Māori representation on local boards might consider advocating for this.

Local Electoral Act 2001 – minor changes to local board boundaries as part of a representation review

25. When a council establishes wards one of the principles it must observe is fair representation. This principle requires that each councillor represents the same number of people as the average across the whole of Auckland, within a 10 per cent margin. The Local Government Commission may approve exceptions to this requirement based on maintaining communities of interest. However, when ward boundaries have to change to meet the fair representation requirement, they get out of alignment with local board boundaries.

26. The Governing Body, at its meeting on 30 July 2015, aware of the potential for such misalignments to occur, resolved to:

“seek legislative change that provides the Local Government Commission the power to determine a change to a local board boundary where the key purpose is to achieve alignment with a ward boundary that is changed as a result of a review of representation; provided that either the change is minor or, if not minor, the change:

(i) ensures effective representation of communities of interest within both the local board area and the ward, and

(ii) is supported by the affected local boards, and

(iii) was publicly notified as part of the representation review.”

(GB/2015/1)

27. The advice received back at the time was that the Minister declined to take this forward. The Bill picks this issue up again but in a slightly different way.

28. Presently the boundaries of local boards can only be altered through a reorganisation process. This is a resource intensive process which means it is unlikely to be used to make minor changes to local board boundaries.

29. The Bill provides that a unitary authority, when it proposes its representation arrangements, is able to include proposals for adjusted local board boundaries in order to maintain alignment with ward boundaries where these are minor. The extent of permissible adjustment will be defined in regulations in terms of the maximum population transfer permitted. Staff expect this quantity to be low.

30. Such changes would need to result in boundaries that enable democratic local decision making by, and on behalf of, communities of interest throughout the district and enable equitable provision to be made for the current and future well-being of all communities of interest within the affected area. They would also, so far as practical, coincide with ward boundaries.

31. Staff consider that this provision will most likely be rarely used but support its inclusion as an option available to the council when it conducts its review of representation arrangements. The provisions in the Bill mean that any proposal to change local board boundaries will be included in the council’s initial proposal. The Governing Body has, in the past, consulted with local boards on any matters it includes in the council’s initial proposal that affect local boards. Following public notification of the initial proposal, the public and local boards can make submissions and the Governing Body then decides the council’s final proposal which is publicly notified for objections and appeals. The Local Government Commission determines any objections and appeals. There is therefore ample opportunity for consideration of a proposal to change local board boundaries to align with ward boundaries, with local boards and the public able to make their views known.

32. There are operational costs associated with changes to local board boundaries and these would need to be considered as part of any change to local board boundaries. For example, records on council’s property database include a local board field. A change to a local board’s boundaries would require changes to affected property records.

33. Staff propose that the Auckland Council supports these provisions.

Local Electoral Act 2001 – ties and recounts

34. The Bill provides that rather than resolving a tie by lot, a judicial recount is held. A council cannot be sworn in until recounts are resolved, but an urgent meeting may be held if necessary.

35. Staff propose that the Auckland Council supports this provision.

Local Electoral Act 2001 – candidate nominations

36. The Bill provides for candidates to submit nominations in a manner approved by the Electoral Officer (such as electronically).

37. Staff propose that the Auckland Council supports this provision.

Local Government Act 2002 – Schedule 3A - Establishment or reorganisation of local board areas in unitary authority districts

38. Currently any reorganisation of local boards would have to be carried out under the provisions relating to reorganisation of local authorities (Schedule 3 of the Local Government Act 2022). Because of this, these provisions are cumbersome when used solely to address local board numbers and boundaries within a single unitary authority. For example, they provide for dealing with assets and for transition committees, which are not relevant to local board reorganisation.

39. The Bill proposes a new Schedule 3A as a replacement for Schedule 3 when being used to addressing local board numbers and boundaries within a single unitary authority. It retains the two alternative processes for determining a reorganisation plan, but removes unnecessary requirements:

a) The Local Government Commission conducts an investigation, on receipt of a re-organisation initiative or a request for an investigation, and, as a result, adopts a re-organisation plan

b) A unitary authority adopts a re-organisation plan which the Local Government Commission must approve if the requirements in the Bill are met.

40. Attachment B contains a table comparing the current process under Schedule 3 with the proposed process under Schedule 3A. This shows the process the council would use for a reorganisation of local boards without a legislation change compared to the process with the legislation change.

41. The following describes the key elements of the process in Schedule 3A.

First process

42. Under the first process, a unitary authority or group of 10 per cent or more of electors (of the affected area), or the Minister, may submit a reorganisation initiative or request for an investigation. Before making a decision on whether to investigate the Commission must consult the unitary authority and any affected local board. If the Commission decide to investigate, it must adopt a process. The process must include consultation.

43. The Commission must take into account how best to achieve all of the following objectives:

a) enabling democratic decision making by, and on behalf of, communities within the local board area

b) better enabling the purpose of local government to be given effect to within the local board area

c) efficiencies and cost savings

d) assurance that a local board has the resources necessary to enable it to effectively perform or exercise its responsibilities, duties, and powers in respect of any local board area established or change

e) effective responses to the opportunities, needs, and circumstances of the affected areas

f) better alignment of local board areas with communities of interest

g) enhanced effectiveness of decision making for non-regulatory activities of a unitary authority

h) enhanced ability of local government to meet the changing needs of communities for governance and services into the future

i) effective provision for any co-governance and co-management arrangements that are established by legislation (including Treaty of Waitangi claim settlement legislation) and that are between local authorities and iwi or Māori organisations.

44. The Commission may then adopt a reorganisation plan. In deciding whether to adopt a reorganisation plan the Commission must have regard for:

a) the scale of the potential benefits of the proposed changes in terms of the objectives set out in the previous paragraph and the likelihood of those benefits being realised

b) the financial, disruption, and opportunity costs of implementing the proposed changes at the proposed time

c) the risks and consequences of not implementing the proposed changes at the proposed time

d) existing communities of interest and the extent to which the proposed changes will maintain linkages between communities (including iwi and hapū) and sites and resources of significance to them

e) the degree and distribution of demonstrable public support for the proposed changes within communities in the affected area

f) the degree and distribution of any public opposition to the proposed changes within communities in the affected area.

45. A reorganisation plan specifies:

a) the name of the district of the unitary authority

b) the number and names of local board areas within the district

c) the boundaries of—

(i) each local board area

(ii) electoral subdivisions, if any, of each local board area

d) the number of elected members of the local board for each local board area and, if a local board area is subdivided for electoral purposes, the number of members to be elected by the electors of each subdivision

e) whether each local board may include members appointed by the governing body of the unitary authority

f) for each local board, whether the chairperson of the local board is to be—

(i) elected by the members of the local board from among themselves using one of the systems of voting set out in the Local Government Act 2002; or

(ii) directly elected to that office by the electors of the local board area.

46. The provision in e) is relevant to local boards established under the Local Government Act 2002 and does not apply to Auckland Council local boards (Auckland Council local boards are established under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009). It allows a unitary authority to appoint ward councillors to local boards.

47. The provision in f) is also relevant to local boards established under the Local Government Act 2002 and not Auckland Council local boards.

Second process

48. The second process is termed a unitary authority-led reorganisation application. A unitary authority may adopt a reorganisation plan as if it were the Commission and then submit it to the Commission for approval.

49. Before submitting a unitary authority-led reorganisation application, the unitary authority must consider any views and preferences expressed by any local boards that would be affected by the reorganisation plan.

50. The reorganisation plan must be accompanied by—

a) a statement that

· explains how the plan will achieve the objectives (as set out above for an investigation by the Commission)

· provides a balanced assessment of the reorganisation plan and outlines the advantages and disadvantages of the plan.

b) a report from the affected unitary authority, adopted by that unitary authority, that records—

(i) unconditional support for the plan from the governing body of the unitary authority

(ii) any views and preferences expressed by any local boards that would be affected by the reorganisation plan

(iii) the public consultation undertaken by the unitary authority

(iv) the themes and outcomes of that consultation.

51. The Local Government Commission must not approve the reorganisation plan if:

a) the reorganisation plan is not accompanied by the required documentation; or

b) the Commission considers, on reasonable grounds, that—

(i) the provisions for adopting reorganisation plans, their notification and content, were not complied with; or

(ii) the unitary authority has not complied with the requirement to consider the views of affected local boards; or

(iii) the plan does not have the support of affected communities.

Submission

52. Staff consider the council should support a streamlined process defined for the reorganisation of local boards within a single unitary authority. The proposed process maintains the essence of the current process but provides a process that is more fit for purpose for local boards and requires a unitary authority to consider the views and preferences of affected local boards.

53. There has been longstanding provision for reorganising community boards as part of the review of representation arrangements conducted by a territorial authority. Community boards may be established and disestablished as a part of such a representation review. An option might be to deal with the reorganisation of local boards through a representation review similarly to community boards. Staff consider that this would not be appropriate. Local boards are a part of the shared decision-making governance of Auckland Council and not just a means of increasing representation at the community level. It is more appropriate for the reorganisation of local boards to be dealt with as if they were local authorities rather than as if they were community boards but the processes for reorganisation should be simpler than those for local authorities – as being proposed in Schedule 3A.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

54. The proposals being considered in this report are neutral in terms of impact on climate.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

55. The outcome of a change in representation arrangements or the organisation of local boards would have implications for the group. However, the proposed legislative change is about the process for deciding the outcomes and not about the outcomes themselves.

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

Local impacts and local board views

56. The provisions relating to the alignment of local board and ward boundaries and the provisions for the reorganisation of local boards are of major significance to local boards. Local boards will be supported by local board staff with feedback or drafting their own submissions for attachment to the Auckland Council submission approved by the Governing Body.

57. The provisions relating to Māori wards are of significance to those local boards who consider there needs to be Māori representation on local boards (Māori subdivisions).

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

58. Staff are currently engaging with mana whenua and mataawaka on Māori representation. The models being considered are the ‘Parliamentary’ model (which the current legislation provides), the ‘Royal Commission’ model (which provides for an appointed mana whenua councillor as well as two elected members) and other less-developed models.

59. The current position of the Governing Body is to support the Parliamentary model but the Independent Māori Statutory Board has asked the Governing Body to also consider the Royal Commission model. The incoming Governing Body will reconsider its position based on feedback from the engagement in December 2022.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

60. There are no financial implications surrounding the decisions to make a submission.

61. The proposed legislative provisions may or may not have financial implications. Engaging with the community on establishing Māori wards will have a cost. Increasing the number of councillors will have costs associated with councillor support and corporate property and technology assets. The reorganisation of local boards will have an associated cost.

62. Increasing the number of councillors is likely to have an impact on the remuneration of councillors under current Remuneration Authority determination framework.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

63. With all submissions to Parliament the time frame is constrained and there is a risk that local boards and the Governing Body do not have sufficient time to consider all the ramifications. Usually this risk is mitigated in the sense that all other councils, Local Government New Zealand and Taituarā also make submissions – any aspect that is missed by one may be picked by another. However most other councils will not be interested in the provisions that apply only to Auckland or that apply only to unitary authorities. The mitigation here is that there has been good communication between the Department of Internal Affairs and Auckland Council at staff level.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

64. Staff will be reporting the Bill to the Governing Body on 25 August 2022 and seeking approval for a submission to the Select Committee.

65. Boards who wish their feedback to be reported to the Governing Body should provide it by Monday 22 August 2022. Staff will recommend that the Governing Body delegates further consideration of local board feedback to the mayor and deputy mayor following the Governing Body meeting, then those boards who cannot meet the 22 August 2022 deadline have until Friday 26 August 2022.

66. The deadline for submissions to the select committee is 14 September 2022.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill	183
b ⇩	Comparison of current Schedule 3 and proposed Schedule 3A	229

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Carol Hayward - Team Leader Operations and Policy

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

16 August 2022

Local board feedback on the proposed Auckland Climate Grant programme 2022/2023

File No.: CP2022/12003

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board feedback on the proposed new Auckland Climate Grant, including grant programme scope and criteria, priority action focus areas and timing of funding rounds.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Budget for a climate grant programme was allocated through the 10-year Budget 2021-2031.

3. In 2021/2022, these additional funds were distributed through the existing Regional Environment and Natural Heritage grant while staff worked to establish a new grant scheme.

4. Staff have now developed a proposal for a new Auckland Climate Grant. This has been developed with feedback from mana whenua and community group stakeholders.

5. In 2022/2023, the Auckland Climate Grants programme has a budget of $400,000.

6. The purpose of the grant scheme is to support projects that will:

· reduce greenhouse gas emissions through community-based action

· build community resilience to climate change impacts

· support Māori-led responses to climate change

7. Key priority areas for funding for the grant in 2022/2023 have been identified, based on the priorities in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri and an analysis of other available grants. They are:

· Transport: Projects that support a low carbon and safe transport system.

· Built environment and Energy: Projects that support a built environment and energy system that provides for a low carbon, climate disaster resilient Auckland.

· Food: Projects that support a low carbon, resilient, local food system and enable Aucklanders to make sustainable and healthy food choices.

· Māori-led projects: Projects that build Māori capacity to respond to climate impacts and support mana whenua and mātāwaka to reduce emissions and build community resilience.

8. All local board feedback received by 26 August 2022 on the proposed Auckland Climate Grant will inform the recommendation to the Environment and Climate Change Committee.

9. The proposed Auckland Climate Grant will be presented to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for approval on 8 September 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the proposed Auckland Climate Grant.

Horopaki

Context

New funding for a climate grant scheme

10. Budget for a climate grant programme was allocated through the 10-year Recovery Budget 2021-2031. The grant was intended to provide increased investment to support local community-based climate projects that would:

· reduce emissions

· increase community resilience to climate impacts

· generate more community-based climate action projects, reaching at least 20,000 Aucklanders over 10 years.

11. Previously support for regional sustainable living projects has been allocated through the Regional Environment and Natural Heritage (RENH) grant programme.

12. In 2020/2021, staff distributed the increased funding for community climate projects through the RENH. This allowed funds to be allocated rapidly to the community by December 2021, after the adoption of the Recovery Budget in July 2021.

13. While funds were being allocated in this fashion, staff carried out a review of the current processes used to distribute climate and sustainability grants through the RENH along with the other priorities it covers such as conservation, water quality and kaitiakitanga.

14. The review showed that there are various disadvantages to continuing to use the existing Regional Environmental and Natural Heritage Grant to distribute climate and sustainability projects. These include that the:

· the existing process covers many priorities with less clear guidance about what type of climate projects to fund than might be expected from a stand-alone climate grant

· assessment processes are more complex and time consuming for staff due to the wide range of priorities – they require various moderation and review workshops to ensure that grants are being compared fairly across the range of priority areas.

15. Staff determined that creating a stand-alone climate grant would provide a better experience for applicants and simplify and improve the grant assessment process.

Stocktake of existing grants and analysis of allocations

16. To develop a new climate grant, staff carried out a review of other grants that are available to fund projects which have climate outcomes. Grants identified include the:

· RENH – provides funding for conservation projects

· Community Coordination and Facilitation grant – supports capacity building for conservation groups

· Waste Minimisation and Innovation Fund

· Love Food Hate Waste

· Auckland Transport Community Bike Fund

· Ngā Tiriti Ngangahau - The Vibrant Streets Programme

· local board grants to projects with climate outcomes.

17. Grants external to Auckland Council, such as those offered through Foundation North were also considered. This process aimed to avoid the grant ‘duplicating’ or ‘replacing’ other potential sources of funding for community groups.

18. Staff also analysed allocations from regional and local grants to over 200 projects with climate outcomes over the last five years. This review yielded insights into which areas the community are already active and working in (and seeking funding in). It also identified that some Aucklanders are being under-served by our current grants processes.

19. The proposed new climate grant aims to expand areas of community enthusiasm for climate action and to make the grant process more accessible to some under-served groups (including Māori, Pacific people, other diverse ethnic groups and youth-led organisations).

20. Three online workshops were also held to get feedback from community group stakeholders and previous grant applicants in May 2022.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

21. An outline of the proposed grant purpose, priorities, criteria, activities that are in scope and exclusions are provided below for local board members to review.

Proposed grant purpose

22. For the 2022/2023 pilot year, the Auckland Climate Grant programme has a proposed purpose of supporting projects that:

· reduce greenhouse gas emissions through community-based action

· build community resilience to climate change impacts

· support Māori-led responses to climate change

23. The Auckland Climate Grant programme will support community projects focused on providing resources, education, and opportunities that result in more Aucklanders engaging with climate change issues. It will support Aucklanders to make behaviour changes in areas with the greatest greenhouse gas emissions reduction potential.

24. Projects that support reductions in greenhouse gas emission will be the focus for the 2022/2023 funding allocations with a target allocation of 70 per cent of grants. This allocation target will be reviewed annually. This 70 per cent may also include projects that are Māori-led (the purpose statements are not exclusive).

25. The Auckland Climate Grant programme will also support projects that build community resilience to respond to the impacts of climate change. Projects should focus on giving Aucklanders a voice in proactive community resilience planning and climate adaptation, particularly communities who will be the most vulnerable to climate impacts and have traditionally been under-served by the council.

26. By building stronger connections between neighbours and within neighbourhoods, at key community sites, and with community-based organisations, projects can create resilience against climate-related stresses with a focus on food and energy.

27. The Auckland Climate grant programme will also aim to support projects that enable mana whenua and mātāwaka to respond to climate change. The allocation of funding will recognise the partnership between the council and Māori-led organisations – particularly mana whenua in the council’s role as a partner under Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Scope and criteria

28. Projects supported through the Auckland Climate Grant programme should meet one or more of the following criteria:

· result in new or expanded climate action activity, either by implementing new initiatives, or by significantly expanding the scope or coverage of existing activities

· support mana whenua and mātāwaka to reduce carbon emissions and build community resilience to climate related impacts

· provide support and resources to Māori organisations and community groups to build organisational capacity and capability, develop strategic plans and develop sustainable funding models, increasing the total funding or support secured for climate projects in Auckland

· increase participation in climate action activity in high emission communities (generally, higher income communities) targeting the highest emitting behaviours

· increase participation in activities that build community resilience in under-served communities who most need our support to respond to climate impacts

· support Aucklanders of different ages, abilities and ethnicities to take climate action.

Climate action priority areas

29. Projects supported through the climate grant may address a wide range of the priorities included in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan including built environment, energy, transport, communities and coast, food, and Te Puawaitanga ō te Tātai.

30. For the 2022/2023 pilot year, priority will be given to applications under the transport, energy and food themes and to Māori-led projects. This will include:

· Transport: Projects that support a low carbon, safe transport system that delivers social, economic and health benefits for all.

· Food: Projects that support a low carbon, resilient, local food system that provides all Aucklanders with access to fresh, sustainable, affordable and healthy food and projects that support Aucklanders to make sustainable dietary choices.

· Energy: Projects that support a built environment and energy system that provides for a low carbon, climate disaster resilient Auckland.

· Māori-led projects: Projects building Māori capacity to respond to climate change and supporting mana whenua and mātāwaka to reduce emissions and build community resilience.

31. Some projects that support other priorities in the plan may also be funded. These include:

· Built environment: Projects that support a low carbon and resilient built environment.

· Communities: Projects that support communities to increase awareness of climate change and to prepare for changes in our climate and coastline and projects that support Aucklanders to understand their carbon footprints and changes they can made to reduce these.

32. Applicants will be directed for future guidance on what types of activities to support through these priorities to Auckland Council’s Live Lightly website, which provides advice and information for individuals and community groups on climate change: https://livelightly.nz/

33. Priority areas will be updated on an annual basis.

Exclusions

34. General grant programme exclusions outlined in the Community Grants policy will apply to the Auckland Climate Grants. In addition, specific exclusions for the Auckland Climate Grants programme are:

· climate action projects focused on the natural environment, industry and the economy are out of scope for the Auckland Climate Grant programme – this will avoid duplication with other funds such as the RENH and Climate Connect, the new climate innovation hub being developed by Tātaki Auckland Unlimited

· projects with a focus on the circular economy, food waste, composting, upcycling, recycling, repair and reuse should apply through the Waste Minimisation and Innovation Fund

· activities whose primary purpose is the private gain or advancing of private business interests without a significant public good component

· purchase of vehicles and any related ongoing maintenance, repair, overhead costs or road user charges

· conference fees and costs

· funding for existing roles or organisational costs

· subscription services where these are ongoing and not associated with a specific event or outcome

· replication of council services

· websites and electronic platforms.

Applicants

35. The grant will be open to community groups, neighbourhoods, mana whenua and mātāwaka applicants, social enterprises, businesses, business improvement districts and education providers (early childhood centres, schools, kura and tertiary institutions).

36. Staff propose to hold several response grants rounds which are intended to make the application process quicker, simpler and easier for community groups and increase the volume of successful applications from under-served groups.

Types of grants available

37. Grants from $1,000 up to $50,000 will be offered, with both response grants and strategic grants available as shown in Table 1 below.

Response grants ($1,000 - $15,000)

38. These grants seek to grow community participation in climate action, and amplify existing community action, particularly among under-served communities such as youth, Pacific peoples and Māori-led groups.

39. Applications will be encouraged from groups that have not previously engaged with climate action activity or are rapidly building capacity in this area.

40. Staff propose that for these smaller grants, allocation decisions will be made by the General Manager of Environmental Services.

Strategic grants ($15,000 – $50,000)

41. These grants seek to support programmes and activities aligning with the Auckland Climate Grant purpose, scope and priority actions. Strategic grants will be expected to have more significant impacts than response grants. They could potentially be used to either expand best practise projects or develop innovative new responses to the climate challenge.

42. Staff propose that allocation decisions for strategic grants could be made by the Environment and Climate Change Committee (or equivalent committee) in future years.

43. In 2022, because of the timing of the proposed grant adoption decision in early September, staff propose that decision-making for the strategic grant be delegated to the General Manager Environmental Services for this year. This will provide continuity of funding for community groups by December 2022.

44. If grants are approved by a committee of council, it will not be possible for them to be allocated to community groups until May 2023 due to the timing of the election and the Christmas and New Year holidays.

Table 1. Timing of grants rounds

Open

Close

Decision date

Response grants

September 2022

February 2023

April 2023

October 2022

March 2023

May 2023

November 2022

April 2023

June 2023

Strategic grants

September 2022

October 2022

December 2022

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

45. The Auckland Climate Grant will support projects that lead to community climate change action to reduce carbon emissions and increase community resilience to climate impacts. The provision of grants through the Auckland Climate Grant programme contributes towards Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan action area C4: Remove barriers and support community initiatives that reduce emissions and build resilience in a fair way.

46. Individual projects supported through the Auckland Climate Grant programme may respond to a range of action areas within Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan including:

· Action area T3: Increase access to bicycles, micro-mobility devices and the safe, connected and dedicated infrastructure that supports their use.

· Action area C1: Work together to strengthen the resilience of our communities, people and places.

· Action area F4: Increase supply and demand for local, seasonal and low carbon food.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

47. The Auckland Climate Grants may potentially impact work within the Waste Solutions and Customer and Community Services departments, and the existing support provided to community-led food initiatives. Input from the Waste Solutions department and Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships team within Customer and Community Services was sought during the development of the Auckland Climate Grant and their views on relevant applications will be sought during the delivery of the 2022/2023 pilot grant rounds.

48. The Auckland Climate Grants support of community-led transport initiatives may have an impact on Auckland Transport. Input from Auckland Transport was sought during the Auckland Climate Grant development and their views on relevant applications will be sought during the delivery of the 2022/2023 pilot grant rounds.

49. Input into the Auckland Climate Grant was sought from Tātaki Auckland Unlimited. These grants will not overlap with support provided through Climate Connect and there is no impact on Tātaki Auckland Unlimited.

50. The Environment Climate Committee decision is not a strategy, bylaw, policy or plan so the local board’s feedback can be made under delegated authority if needed (Local Government Act 2022, sch7 clause 36D (1) (a)).

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

Local impacts and local board views

51. Equitable geographical distribution of grant allocations across different local board areas will be considered alongside other factors when setting funding recommendations for the Auckland Climate Grants.

52. Information on funding allocation and successful applicants will be provided to all relevant local boards following the approval of grant recommendations by the General Manager Environmental Services or Environment and Climate Change Committee.

53. Local boards have the ability to operate their own local grants programmes and may choose to fund local climate action projects and activities, some of which may complement the grants provided at a regional level, or vice versa.

54. Local board views are being sought on the proposal to establish the Auckland Climate Grant programme. Local board feedback will inform the recommendation to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 8 September 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

55. Staff presented to the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua Hui seeking feedback from mana whenua kaitiaki representatives on aspects of the grant development.

56. Key feedback points included the need for the grant process to be easy and accessible to mana whenua organisations and for the grants to build capacity of mana whenua to respond to climate change.

57. From December 2021 to March 2022, Māori specialists in the Community Climate Action team also met with each of the 19 iwi to seek their feedback on climate priorities that they would like to see advanced through the sustainable and resilient marae project. Feedback from mana whenua through this process has informed the priorities identified in the grant scheme, particularly in relation to Māori-led climate action.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

58. Budget for the Auckland Climate Grants was allocated through the 10-year Recovery Budget 2021-2031. For 2022/2023 financial year there is $300,000 available for allocation.

59. As climate projects had historically been supported through the Regional Environment and Natural Heritage (RENH) grant programme, $100,000 from the RENH grant budget will be used to support grant allocations through the Auckland Climate grant.

60. Grant allocations through the Auckland Climate grant response and strategic grant rounds will be managed within the $400,000 total grant budget. The majority of funds will be allocated through the strategic grants round.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

61. A risk assessment has only identified two low level risks associated with the adoption of the Auckland Climate Grant programme. These are listed below along with the mitigations:

· Low reputational risk – applicants may query the grant scope, priorities and decision making and feel these are inconsistent or unfair. This risk is mitigated through the grant development process seeking community input and the transparent evaluation and assessment process applied to guide decision making.

· Low financial risk – insufficient applications of sufficiently high quality will be received to fully allocate available funds. This risk is mitigated through grant programme promotion and applicant support. Support with the application process will be available from Auckland Council staff and community contractors involved with delivery of other areas of the Community Climate Action Team local and regional work programme.

62. Once grant allocation decisions are made, staff will maintain regular contact with grant recipients during project implementation to follow up on progress and make sure any risks of individual projects are properly addressed.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

63. All local board feedback received by 26 August 2022 on the proposed Auckland Climate Grant will be considered before an updated version is presented to committee.

64. Staff will present the proposed Auckland Climate Grant to Environment and Climate Change Committee for approval on 8 September 2022.

65. Once guidelines for the Auckland Climate Grant have been approved, staff will start the promotion and delivery of 2022/2023 Auckland Climate Grant funding rounds.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Emma Cowie-Dixon - Principal Advisor

Jacob van der Poel - Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Carol Hayward - Team Leader Operations and Policy

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Henderson-Massey Local Board policy schedule - August 2022	249

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Henderson-Massey Local Board workshop record for 23 July 2022	253

Henderson-Massey Local Board

16 August 2022

Auckland Council's Quarterly Performance Report: Henderson-Massey Local Board for quarter four 2021/2022

File No.: CP2022/11531

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Henderson-Massey Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter four, 1 April to 30 June 2022 and the overall performance for the financial year against the approved 2021/2022 local board work programmes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report provides an integrated view of performance for the Henderson-Massey Local Board and includes financial performance and delivery against work programmes for the 2021/2022 financial year. The work programme is produced annually and aligns with Henderson-Massey Local Board Plan outcomes.

3. Thirty activities within the agreed work programmes were delivered including multi-year projects that have progressed as expected. Eleven activities were undelivered, cancelled, put on hold or deferred and four multi-year projects/activities have not progressed as expected during 2021/2022.

4. Key activity achievements from the 2021/2022 work programme include:

· delivery of Snow in the Park: The event was successfully delivered to an estimated audience of 4,000 on 12 June 2022.

· on-going programme to support community and volunteer ecological and environmental initiatives: Volunteer community groups have been preparing for the planting season and planting trees. Three schools planted this quarter with a total of 1,600 trees planted. Three community plantings were held with a total of 800 trees planted at the Harbourview-Orangihina planting day.

5. Key activities not delivered / not progressed as expected include:

· event partnership fund Henderson-Massey: Some events in the West were not delivered due to the impacts of COVID-19 (eg: Elvis in the Park and Waitangi Day).

6. Qualifying budgets of unfinished activities will be carried forward into 2022/2023 work programmes.

7. The financial performance report is attached but is excluded from the public. This is due to restrictions on releasing annual financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX – on 29 August 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) receive the Performance Report for quarter four ending 30 June 2022.

b) note the financial performance report in Attachment B of the report will remain confidential until after the Auckland Council Group results for 2021/2022 are released to the New Zealand’s Exchange (NZX) which are expected to be made public on 29 August 2022.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Henderson-Massey Local Board has an approved 2021/2022 work programme for the following:

· Customer and Community Services

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services

· Plans and Places

· Tātaki Auckland Unlimited.

9. The graph below shows how the work programme activities meet Local Board Plan outcomes. Activities that are not part of the approved work programme but contribute towards the local board outcomes, such as advocacy by the local board, are not captured in this graph.

Graph 1: Work programme activities by outcome

Chart, bar chart

Description automatically generated

COVID-19 restrictions

10. Auckland has faced COVID-19 restrictions (Level 3 and 4) from 17 August to 2 December 2021, when all of New Zealand moved to the COVID-19 Protection Framework, also known as the traffic lights. Auckland went into traffic light red, moving to traffic light orange on 30 December 2021.

11. Auckland Council regional and community facilities were closed in Level 3 and 4. Restrictions were slightly eased in Level 3, Step 2 and from mid-November 2021 libraries and the majority of arts and community centres were reopened. Pools and leisure centres were able to reopen from 3 December 2021 when New Zealand moved to the COVID-19 Protection Framework.

12. From 30 December 2022 until 13 April 2022, Auckland was in the red traffic light setting under the COVID-19 Protection Framework, which impacted council and community-delivered event planning and programming. From 13 April 2022 Auckland has been in the orange traffic light setting.

13. COVID-19 has also had an impact on the supply chain for capital projects materials causing delays.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

14. The graph below identifies work programme activity by RAG status (red, amber, green and grey) which measures the performance of the activity. It shows the percentage of work programme activities that are on track (green), in progress but with issues that are being managed (amber), activities that have significant issues (red) and activities that have been cancelled/deferred/merged (grey).

Graph 2: Work programme performance by RAG status

Chart, pie chart

Description automatically generated

15. The graph below shows the stage of the activities in each departments’ work programmes. The number of activity lines differ by department as approved in the local board work programmes.

Graph 3: Work programme performance by activity status and department

Chart, bar chart, histogram

Description automatically generated

Key activity updates from quarter four

16. MPHS Community Trust local governance and community business hub support: Four workshops were completed in this quarter and include Cyber Security and Privacy, The Art of Minute Taking, The Leadership of a Board and Legal Responsibilities of Board Members. MPHS has had positive comments from participants.

17. Climate Action Activator: Connected with 15 organisations to share information, broker connections and identified collaborative opportunities to amplify local climate action. The ‘micro fund’ supporting community climate action during Matariki generated 10 applications, with six approved for funding including a rongoā garden at Massey Matters Hub, tree planting at Matipō Primary School and an amazing race using public transport.

18. Pacific aspirations, social enterprise, IndiGenius programme: The Mokopuna Pasifika survey was completed in quarter four. 170 local Pasifika including 10 ethnic groups from 15-65+ years were surveyed. Two priority areas were identified: a) Pasifika language and places to participate in Pasifika activities and entrepreneurship and access to Pasifika business and products. In response, Ranui 135 is exploring the idea of developing the IndiGenius space to create more pathways for entrepreneurship.

Key activity achievements from the 2021/2022 work programme

19. The key achievements in the delivery of the local board work programmes for 2021/2022 include:

· delivery of Snow in the Park: The event was successfully delivered to an estimated audience of 4,000 on 12 June 2022.

· implementation of the Henderson-Massey Ngahere Action Plan: The planting plan development for 2021/2022 has been completed enabling 2022/2023 planting and handover to Community Facilities.

Overview of work programme performance

Customer and Community Services work programme

20. In the Customer and Community Services work programme, there are 29 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of June 2022, 69 activities that are in progress but are delayed, five activities that are significantly delayed, on hold or not delivered, and seven activities that have been cancelled and deferred in the period April to June 2022. Activities with significant impact are discussed below:

Table 3: Customer and Community Services activities with significant impact

Activity name	RAG status	Activity status	Explanation and mitigation
Event partnership fund Henderson-Massey	Red	Not delivered	Elvis in the Park and Waitangi Day were not delivered
Corban Estate Old Wine Shop – rebuild heritage building	Amber	On Hold	The Corban Wine shop heritage building is on hold. The local board resolved to design and install a heritage information sign at the original site of the building and to rebuild the wine shop on an agreed alternative suite when budget is available

Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme

21. In the Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme, there are 15 activities that are in progress for the period April to June 2022. There are no activities with significant impact.

Plans and Places work programme

22. In the Plans and Places work programme, there is one activity that has been deferred for the period April to June 2022.

Tātaki Auckland Unlimited work programme

23. In the Tātaki Auckland Unlimited work programme, there is one activity that was completed and one activity in progress in the period April to June 2022. There are no activities with significant impact.

Deferred activities

24. The Lead Financial Advisors are identifying projects from the local board’s 2021/2022 Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) operational budget which meet the criteria to be carried forward. These will be added to the work programme to be delivered in 2022/2023.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

25. Receiving performance monitoring reports will not result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions.

26. The local board is invested in a number of sustainability projects, which aim to build awareness around individual carbon emissions, and changing behaviour at a local level. These include:

· Ope Hauāuru: Building Sustainable Community: Seeks to generate momentum for resilient, sustainable futures for the communities of Henderson-Massey. Funding will involve establishing the partnerships and structures required to increase engagement with local schools, growing capacity within local communities and bringing communities together.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

27. When developing the work programmes council group impacts and views are presented to the local board.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28. This report informs the Henderson-Massey Local Board of the performance for quarter four ending 30 June 2022 and the performance for the 2021/2022 financial year.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

29. The local board continues to support the development and delivery of environmental projects with Māori communities to enhance both environment and wellbeing. Projects include the installation of the pā harakeke at Te Rangi Hiroa, further development of the pā harakeke at Harbourview-Orangihina and reconnecting with Te Piringatahi o te Maungaarongo Marae on related initiatives.

30. The local board continues to support the implementation of the Whakapiki Te Mauri O Pukearuhe. Community Waitakere have partnered with Uru Whakaaro and Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o te Kotukuto co-develop a restoration and monitoring plan that explores options for land use including rongoā Māori, pā harakeke, landscaping for easier access to the wetland and creating an outdoor learning space. On-going site preparation for the planting areas has been undertaken in quarter four, with planting undertaken in late June 2022.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

31. This report is provided to enable the Henderson-Massey Local Board to monitor the organisation’s progress and performance in delivering the 2021/2022 work programme. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Financial Performance

32. Auckland Council (Council) currently has a number of bonds quoted on the NZ Stock Exchange (NZX). As a result, the Council is subject to obligations under the NZX Main Board and Debt Market Listing Rules and the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 sections 97 and 461H. These obligations restrict the release of annual financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX – on 29 August 2022. Due to these obligations the financial performance attached to this report is excluded from the public.

33. Due to these obligations the financial performance attached to the quarterly report is under confidential cover.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

34. Information about any significant risks and how they are being managed and/or mitigated is addressed in the ‘Overview of work programme performance’ section.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

35. Work programmes for 2022/2023 were approved at the board’s business meeting in June 2022.

36. Deferral of budgets of unfinished activities will be added into 2022/2023 work programmes by quarter one reporting.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Henderson-Massey Local Board -1 April to 30 June 2022 Work Programme Update	263
b ⇩	Henderson-Massey Local Board - Operating Performance Financial Summary - Confidential

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

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

[1] Definition: any tobacco product manufactured from tobacco and intended for use by smoking and inhalation, but does not include any medicine (being a medicine in respect of which there is in force a consent or provisional consent given under section 20 or section 23 of the Medicines Act 1981) that is sold or supplied wholly or principally for use as an aid in giving up smoking.

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