1 Nau mai | Welcome

Chairperson I Fordham will open the meeting and welcome everyone in attendance.

2 Ngā Tamōtanga | Apologies

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

3 Te Whakapuaki i te Whai Pānga | Declaration of Interest

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

4 Te Whakaū i ngā Āmiki | Confirmation of Minutes

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 27 June 2023, as true and correct.

5 He Tamōtanga Motuhake | Leave of Absence

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

6 Te Mihi | Acknowledgements

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

7 Ngā Petihana | Petitions

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

8 Ngā Tono Whakaaturanga | 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 Aotea / Great Barrier 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 - Geoff Hills - Mulberry Grove skate ramp shelter

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To consider the deputation from Geoff Hills seeking the removal of the Mulberry Grove skate ramp canopy.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board received a written deputation request from Geoff Hills dated 25 July 2023 (refer to page 1 of Attachment A).

3. Geoff Hills is seeking the removal of the canopy over Mulberry Grove skate ramp providing documents that supports his request (refer to pages 2 – 42 of Attachment A).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Geoff Hills for his attendance and presentation regarding the removal of the Mulberry Grove skate ramp shelter.

8.2 Deputation - Ben Sanderson - Proposal for Land Donation at Claris, Great Barrier Island for a Central Public Community Cemetery and World War Veterans Memorial

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To consider the deputation from Ben Sanderson on behalf of the BWR Sanderson and Workington Trust with regards to a land donation proposal for a public community cemetery and World War Veterans memorial in Claris, Aotea Great Barrier Island.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. An email correspondence was received by the Chairperson I Fordham on Monday 24 July 2023 from Ben Sanderson with regards to a proposal for land donation at Claris, Aotea Great Barrier Island for a central public community cemetery and World War veterans memorial (referred as Attachment A).

3. A written correspondence from Beverly Blackwell was received on 19 July 2023 in support of the Sanderson cemetery proposal (referred as Attachment B).

4. Ben Sanderson is seeking consideration of the proposal for land donation for a community cemetery and World War veterans memorial.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Ben Sanderson on behalf of the BWR Sanderson and Workington Trust for his attendance and presentation regarding the proposal for land donation for a community cemetery and World War veterans memorial.

9 Te Matapaki Tūmatanui | 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 three minutes per speaker is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

9.1 Public Forum - Derek Bell, Destination Great Barrier Island - walking access project

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

Derek Bell – chairperson of Destination Great Barrier Island (DGBI) will be in attendance to introduce a walking access project.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Derek Bell for his attendance and public forum presentation.

9.2 Public Forum - Dot Dalziell, Herenga ā Nuku – walking access project support/expertise

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

Dot Dalziell from Herenga ā Nuku will be in attendance to speak to the board in support of Destination Great Barrier Island’s walking access project.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Dot Dalziell of Herenga ā Nuku for her / his attendance and public forum presentation.

10 Ngā Pakihi Autaia | 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.”

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Update on single use cups
b ⇨	Aotea / Great Barrier Natural Environment-Islands monthly update – July 2023

Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board

22 August 2023

End-of-year accountability reports of Aotea / Great Barrier Island community groups

File No.: CP2023/09266

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive the end-of-year accountability reports from mana whenua and five community groups funded by the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The local board supports mana whenua and five community groups to undertake work in the community. The groups are:

· Ngāti Rehua-Ngātiwai ki Aotea (NRNWKA) for running the Visitor Information Centre

· Aotea Family Support Group (AFSG) for provision of welfare services including management of the Community Worker contract

· Destination Great Barrier Island (DGBI) for tourism support

· Aotea Education Trust (AET) for education services including the Aotea Learning Hub, the Aotea Early Learning Centre and community te reo courses

· AoteaOra Community Trust (AoteaOra) for sustainability projects, including management of two food resilience contracts

· Building a Flourishing Community Aotea (BFCA) for community housing projects

3. Funding is provided to support the delivery of initiatives outlined in the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board Plan 2020 and the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board Agreement 2022/2023.

4. The groups’ funding agreements stipulate that they must submit accountability reports at the end of the funding period.

5. This report presents the annual accountability reports of the groups.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) receive / whiwhi the end-of-year accountability reports from the following entities:

i) Ngāti Rehua-Ngātiwai ki Aotea Trust – Visitor Information Centre (Attachment A to the agenda report)

ii) Aotea Family Support Group (Attachment B to the agenda report)

iii) Aotea Family Support Group - Community Worker project (Attachment C to the agenda report)

iv) Destination Great Barrier Island (Attachment D to the agenda report)

v) Aotea Education Trust (including community Te Reo courses, Attachment E to the agenda report)

vi) AoteaOra Community Trust noting that the report is not published due to some sensitive items.

vii) Building a Flourishing Community Aotea (Attachment F to the agenda report)

Horopaki

Context

6. The 2022/2023 local board work programme included funding to mana whenua and five community groups to support the delivery of initiatives outlined in the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board Plan 2020 and the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board Agreement 2022/2023. The group, purpose and funding amounts are outlined in table 1.

Table 1 Mana whenua and community groups funding table:

Community Group	Purpose of funding	Amount of funding
Ngāti Rehua-Ngātiwai ki Aotea Trust	Manage and run the Visitor Information Centre at the Claris airfield	$29,450
Aotea Family Support Group	Provide services for the island's families, youth and elderly	$40,400
Aotea Family Support Group	Support the community worker to provide a focal point for residents trying to navigate central government departments, with a focus on community health and social services, safety, and marae capacity building.	$44,420
Destination Great Barrier Island	Fund DGBI to employ a Trust administrator.	$20,000
Aotea Education Trust	Support AET to govern the Aotea Lifelong Learning Strategy and Action Plan (which aims to improve education outcomes among all age groups on the island – from Under 5s to adult learners) and contribute to the running of the Aotea Learning Hub.	$45,900
Aotea Education Trust	Fund AET to deliver a community Te Reo course in collaboration with Kawa marae.	$10,000
AoteaOra Community Trust	Provide funds to the AoteaOra Community Trust so the Trust can employ an administration person	$10,200
AoteaOra Community Trust	Fund a Food Resilience Coordinator role and a manager of the Oruawharo Community Garden in Medlands.	$34,000
Building a Flourishing Community Aotea	Fund BFCA to progress potential solutions to Aotea / Great Barrier Island's housing issues	$8,000
Total		$242,370

7. The funding agreements with mana whenua and the five community groups stipulate that they must provide an accountability report to the local board at the end of the financial year.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

8. The following local board-funded mana whenua and community groups have provided accountability reports for financial year 2022/2023:

· Ngāti Rehua-Ngātiwai ki Aotea Trust (refer to Attachment A)

· Aotea Family Support Group (2x reports – one covering core work and one covering the Community Worker project, refer to Attachment B and C respectively)

· Destination Great Barrier Island (refer to Attachment D)

· Aotea Education Trust (covering two funding agreements – core work, plus delivery of a community Te Reo course, refer to Attachment E)

· AoteaOra Community Trust (covering two funding agreements – administration and food resilience work, note that this report is not included due to some sensitive items)

· Building a Flourishing Community Aotea (refer to Attachment F)

9. The groups’ work include social service provision, family support, education, administration of Aotea’s tourism sector, improving island resilience and sustainability, addressing Aotea’s housing pressures, and running the visitor information centre in Claris.

10. The reports identify challenges and successes experienced by the service providers.

11. Overall it has been a challenging year, marked by extreme weather, rising cost of living pressures, budget constraints and the tragic loss of several community members. These have been felt across all our groups.

Ngāti Rehua-Ngātiwai ki Aotea Trust (NRNWKAT)

12. NRNWKAT took over the over the running of the Visitor Information Centre (VIC) in Claris in December 2021.

13. The Trust describes this collaboration with the local board as a “successful and important implementation for mana whenua, the island community and incoming tourists”.

14. As part of its funding agreement with the board, the Trust manned the VIC over the busy summer 2022-2023 period, with staff rostered on four days per week for 5-6 hours per day.

15. When not manned the site exists as static/passive information display.

16. In May 2023, NRNWKAT developed a three-year strategic plan for the site, to meet the changing needs of the island community and on-island tourism, and to allow “mana whenua to be more present down island and create more opportunities for wider whanau on island.”

17. Year one of the strategy document focuses on upgrading and renovating the VIC site to better represent mana whenua’s role of kaitiaki of the motu, their mana, mahi, history and vision for the future. The local board allocated $10,000 from its Māori Responsiveness budget line for the Visitor Information Centre (VIC) site upgrade at its May business meeting.

18. It’s important to note that the annual funding provided by the Local Board does not adequately cover the total cost of providing the visitor centre service. NRNWKA has taken responsibility for sourcing supplementary funding from elsewhere.

Aotea Family Support Group (AFSG)

19. This has been a year quite unlike any other for AFSG. As the immediate threat and demands of COVID finally waned, they lost a key staff member and experienced a slew of subsequent funding issues, leaving the organization battling for survival.

20. Throughout, AFSG has managed to continue providing its services, which include Over 60s activities, youth, family and crisis support.

21. They report an “exponential growth” in demand for welfare services.

22. They report a regeneration in staffing levels, “post Covid mandates” that has allowed them to keep up with service provision.

23. AFSG is now governed by a whole new Trust, comprising eight very capable community members. They continue to try and resolve their finances.

Community Worker

24. The community worker reports that the rising cost of living is putting a strain on Aotea families and households, with food, fuel, rent and travel costs all skyrocketing in the past year.

25. Bad weather has had a noticeable effect on some people’s ability to work, resulting in lower pay packets and increased need for support.

26. The community worker expresses concern that the situation will only get worse, with the end of government subsidies for fuel and diesel miles. However she also points out that NZ Super is rising, and the $5 prescription charge has now been scrapped.

27. Compounding things is a series of deaths and tragic events in the community. As the community worker says, “this is especially worrying as the island’s only registered councillor resigned in March and a replacement has not been found.”

28. The housing shortage continues to be an issue, and with rising rents, tenants are expecting landlords to adhere to healthy living standards. However they are also wary of bringing this up, as there is often no alternative and they “fear being turned out of the homes they are in”.

29. The community worker is experiencing weekly requests for advice on tenancy laws.

30. From page 6 of the report: “As a whole the island is facing some tough times with no dentist, one doctor, no counsellor, housing issues, and the rising cost of living.”

Destination Great Barrier Island (DGBI)

31. Over the past year DGBI has continued as a destination management advocacy group, with a focus on marketing and providing accurate information to visitors.

32. However the group is currently reviewing its operations due to “inadequate funding to continue”.

33. Until final decisions are made, DGBI will continue to manage the www.greatbarrier.co.nz website until November 2023, to honour advertising fees paid by local operators and to provide timely essential information.

34. DGBI will advise the Local Board in a timely manner of any changes involving DGBI.

35. The trust is also awaiting the release of the Destination Management Plan, which may provide a pathway forward for much of the work that DGBI has traditionally done.

36. More generally, DGBI reports that the La Nina weather system has been very challenging for local businesses this season. It’s understood many didn’t generate normal summer revenue and this has impacted their ability to take a break over winter.

37. DGBI still holds residual local board dark sky funding, $5,000 of which was paid out to the coordinator of the newly-established Dark Sky Enthusiasts Group.

Aotea Education Trust (AET)

38. AET describes the year as “challenging for many reasons”.

39. A large focus was getting Aotea’s first ever early learning centre up and running, which they finally managed to do in April.

40. On average 12-15 children now attend the centre, with two teachers and a manager. The centre is seeking a new manager and additional teaching staff.

41. The Aotea Learning Hub had its official opening in April. It continues to prove its worth, but the biggest challenge is getting rangatahi from the north to class. There isn’t adequate transport in place and AET are having difficulties finding anyone to drive from the north.

42. The Ministry of Education granted the Trust money towards student engagement but it is not allowed to be used to purchase a vehicle.

43. Community Te Reo classes were put on hold while the tutor had a baby, but are expected to resume again in Term 3 of 2023.

AoteaOra Community Trust

44. AoteaOra has continued its focus on food and water resilience.

45. They have so far sold 60 water tanks and have ordered five more as part of their push for improved household water storage.

46. Earlier in the year, AoteaOra’s Food Resilience Coordinator helped establish gardens at Orama, and assisted Kaitoke School and the community garden.

47. However, the food resilience work took a bit of a backseat as she and the Community Garden Coordinator reduced their hours to deal with personal issues and home life.

48. The weather (including Cyclone Gabrielle) also had a significant impact on all food production across the island.

49. Regular Growers and Makers market days were held over summer and spring – these were hugely popular and very worthwhile for stallholders.

50. AoteaOra commenced the Follow the Drop project, which is designed to give people a greater understanding of where their water comes from and how they’re using it.

Building a Flourishing Community Aotea (BFCA)

51. BFCA employed two administrators over the year, to try and advance housing solutions on Aotea.

52. It is a tough nut to crack, with four of seven potential projects concluding unsuccessfully.

53. They report that the long term repercussions of COVID have impacted progress in terms of being able to secure land and funding.

54. The Trust is still hopeful of “being able to nail down one of the remaining three to provide a tangible outcome to our current work”.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

55. Overall, developing Aotea / Great Barrier’s ability to be self-sufficient in providing community services reduces the number of residents travelling to the mainland to access services, which reduces carbon emissions.

56. Almost all of AoteaOra’s work touches on climate change – whether it’s mitigating against food miles by building food resilience locally, or adapting to climate change via increased use of rainwater tanks.

57. Food resilience work must bear climate change in mind, as crops and production will be impacted by changing climatic conditions. We have seen evidence of that this year.

58. The remainder of the projects outlined above are more focused on welfare provision and education, and therefore don’t relate to the climate.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

59. There are no identified council group impacts associated with this report.

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

Local impacts and local board views

60. Funding is provided to mana whenua and the five community groups to support the delivery of initiatives outlined in the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board Plan 2020 and the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board Agreement 2022/2023.

61. The work of mana whenua and the community groups aligns with the outcome of the local board plan – “Ko te tino hia hia ki a manawaroa to tatou motu / our island is resilient”.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

62. The Visitor Information Centre in Claris is now managed and run by mana whenua, and as they begin to implement their strategic plan, we expect to see a greater focus on their role as kaitiaki of the motu; their mana, mahi, history and vision for the future.

63. The roll at the Aotea Learning Hub is now 70 per cent Māori. A real focus is on how AET can transport these rangatahi south to the Hub three days a week.

64. AET’s community Te Reo courses aim to grow the number of Aotea residents familiar with and using the Māori language.

65. The Destination Management Plan mentioned in the DGBI section of this report had specific input from mana whenua.

66. The community worker works up North one day a week, where a high proportion of the population is Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

67. The local board allocated a total of $242,370 across mana whenua and the five community groups in 2022/2023.

68. All funding was accounted for within the received accountability reports.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

69. There are no identified risks associated with this report.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

70. The financial year 2023/24 funding for mana whenua and the five community groups was approved at the 27 June 2023 Local Board Business Meeting (resolution number GBI/2023/59). Implementation plans for the groups’ work programmes will now be finalised and the annual grants paid out.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Ngāti Rehua-Ngātiwai ki Aotea Trust Accountability report
b ⇨	Aotea Family Support Group accountability report – core work
c ⇨	Aotea Family Support Group accountability report - Community Worker project
d ⇨	Destination Great Barrier Island accountability report
e ⇨	Aotea Education Trust accountability report – core work and delivery of a community Te Reo course
f ⇨	Building a Flourishing Community Aotea accountability report

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kathy Cumming – Aotea / Great Barrier Island Community Broker

Authorisers

Stephen Johnson - Connected Communities Lead & Coach

Janine Geddes – Acting Local Area Manager – Aotea / Great Barrier & Waiheke Local Boards

Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board

22 August 2023

Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board for quarter four 2022/2023

File No.: CP2023/09983

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board with a quarterly performance report for quarter four, 1 April to 30 June 2023 and the overall performance for the financial year against the approved 2022/2023 local board work programmes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report provides an integrated view of performance for the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board and includes financial performance and delivery against work programmes for the 2022/2023 financial year. The work programme is produced annually and aligns with Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board Plan outcomes.

3. Forty-eight activities within the agreed work programmes were delivered including multi-year projects that have progressed as expected. Three activities were undelivered, cancelled, put on hold or deferred and two multi-year projects/activities have not progressed as expected during 2022/2023.

4. Key activity highlights from quarter four of the 2022/2023 work programme include:

i Ahu Moana communications (ID#130) - progress was made with water/dive surveys in the two key locations: Catherine Bay and Schooner Bay. A weekend wananga was also held which brought the teams from both locations together.

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

i An Area Plan for Aotea Great Barrier (ID#1289)

ii Business emergency resilience programme – Great Barrier (ID#1361)

iii Pa Point Reserve - renew coastal access steps (ID#1724)

iv Mulberry Grove - seawall renewal (ID#1721)

v 59 Whangaparapara Road: Great Barrier Island Golf Club Incorporated (ID#3025)

6. Qualifying budgets of unfinished activities will be carried forward into 2023/2024 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 (high level summary only) – on or about 29 August 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Aotea / Great Barrier 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 2022/2023 are released to the New Zealand’s Exchange (NZX) which are expected to be made public on or about 29 September 2023.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board has an approved 2022/2023 work programme for the following:

· Customer and Community Services

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services

· Plans and Places

· Auckland Emergency Management

9. All work programme activities meet the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board Plan 2020 outcome ‘Ko te tino hia hia kia a manawaroa to tatou motu / Our island is resilient’.

Storm events

10. On Auckland anniversary weekend, an unprecedented storm event caused flash floods and other impacts on lives, homes, possessions and businesses. This led to the declaration of a local State of Emergency on 27 January. On 12-14 February, another major storm event, Cyclone Gabrielle, followed. A National state of emergency was invoked as thousands of people were displaced, with widespread damages across large parts of the North Island.

11. A National State of Emergency was declared on 14 February, with the region transitioning to recovery mode from Friday, 3 March.

12. Impacts to individual activities are reported in the work programme update (attachment A).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

13. 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 1: Work programme performance by RAG status

A green and yellow pie chart

Description automatically generated

14. The graphs below show 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.

Graphs 2 and 3: Work programme performance by activity status and department

A graph with text overlay

Description automatically generated

Key activity updates from quarter four

15. The following are key activity highlights in the delivery of Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board’s 2022/2023 work programme for reporting period quarter four, 1 April – 30 June 2023:

i Ahu Moana communications (ID#130) – progress was made with water/dive surveys in the two key locations: Catherine Bay and Schooner Bay. A weekend wananga was also held which brought the teams from both locations together. A representative from the Ministry of Primary Industries also attended - a very positive few days. The local board supported the wananga with the full $1,500 from this budget.

ii Build Capacity: Aotea Lifelong Learning Action Strategy (ID#125) - the doors finally opened at the Aotea Early Learning Centre. A monumental moment which has really changed things for local whanau. An average 12-15 children attended the centre during the quarter. The centre is now seeking a new manager and additional teaching staff. The Aotea Learning Hub had its official opening in April. The Hub’s biggest challenge is getting rangatahi from the north to class. There isn’t adequate transport in place and the Aotea Education Trust are having difficulties finding anyone to drive from the north.

iii Dark Sky Sanctuary (ID#130) - the Dark Sky Enthusiasts Group was established with a part-time group coordinator appointed. Funding for this role was paid out using residual Dark Sky funds from the local board held by Destination Great Barrier Island. In its first few months, the group submitted the 2022 Aotea/GBI IDA Annual Report, started initial work on a Lighting Management Plan for Aotea, began taking regular Dark Sky measurements and planned an outreach evening for the community on 21 July.

Changes to the local board work programme in quarter four

Activities with changes

16. The following work programmes activities have changes which been formally approved by the board.

Table 1: Work programmes change formally approved by the board

ID/Ref	Work Programme Name	Summary of Change	Resolution number
ID#137	Iwi responsiveness - Respond to Māori aspirations: Ngāti Rehua	After the dissolution of this project in quarter 3, $14,359.69 was granted to Ngāti Rehua-Ngātiwai ki Aotea Trust to support the establishment of an office in the north of the island at the board’s April business meeting.	GBI/2023/33
ID#517	Aotea awa restoration programme	In May, the board approved grant funding of $25,000 from the Aotea Awa Restoration budget line to Envirokiwi to deliver the community-led Okupu Beach Reserve Stream Restoration project.	GBI/2023/43
ID#3541	Local Māori responsiveness	In May, the board allocated $10,000 from the Māori Responsiveness budget line to Ngāti Rehua Ngātiwai ki Aotea Trust for the Visitor Information Centre (VIC) site upgrade.	GBI/2023/44
ID#130	Dark Sky Sanctuary	In May, the board allocated $1000 from the Dark Sky Sanctuary budget line to Orama for Motairehe and Orama Matariki celebrations	GBI/2023/44

Overview of work programme performance

Customer and Community Services work programme

17. In the Customer and Community Services work programme, there are 25 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of June 2023 (green), seven activities that are in progress but are delayed (amber), and one activity that has been cancelled and deferred in the period April to June 2023 (grey). Activities with significant or moderate impact are discussed below:

Table 2: Customer and Community Services activities with significant or moderate impact

Activity name	RAG status	Activity status	Explanation and mitigation
General open space and building assets - renew - 2021/2022 - Aotea Great Barrier (ID#20222)	Amber	In progress	Scope of this project includes providing a shelter over the Mulberry Grove Skate Ramp, chip sealing the access road for the local board office and toilet refurbishment at the service centre. Construction completed for the shelter project. Next steps: Monitor construction phase expected to be completed by July 2023.
Aotea Great Barrier - LDI minor capex fund 2021/2022 (ID#20484)	Amber	In progress	Local Board approved the planting of native shade trees at Okiwi Park close to the pump track to increase the tree canopy cover on the island. Next steps: Works have been awarded to contractor and planting of the trees will be completed during planting season.
Tryphena Coastal Trail directional signage (ID#22285)	Amber	In progress	Design has been finalised and order placed for the bollards. Next steps: Proceed to install once bollards arrive at the island.
Aotea Great Barrier Island - Interpretive signage – continuation (ID#22286)	Amber	In progress	Scope of this project involves installation of interpretation signage at Oruawharo for which a draft been developed by working with stakeholders. Local Board has asked for this to be put on hold due to recent events onsite. Next steps: Proceed with revisions to interpretation signage once more feedback is obtained from the Local Board.
Community spaces and reserves activation plan - implement priority actions (ID#25972)	Amber	In progress	Local Board approved the installation of a new picnic table at Okiwi Park. Next steps: Works have been awarded to contractor and the picnic table is currently being made, installation expected to be completed before summer.
Aotea/Great Barrier accessways and linkages plan (ID#2993)	Amber	In progress	The accessway and linkages project has been delayed this financial year while planning mana whenua engagement. Associated budget in FY23 was allocated to progressing the Pou project which involves marking the cultural significance of open spaces on the island. Staff undertook a hikoi in Q4 and a list of key sites for potential location of Pou has been shared with the local board. Work on the accessway and linkages project will be resumed in FY24 with no requirement for discretionary opex budget at this time. Once the assessment of routes has been completed by staff and the board have approved priority linkages, funds (approx. $3,000) for consultation purposes will be required in FY25. Alternatively, the project could progress straight to feasibility.
Aotea / Great Barrier Parks Amenities Provision Service Assessment (ID#3513)	Amber	In progress	The final draft Service Assessment was reviewed by the local board at a workshop. This led to some minor changes. The Aotea / Great Barrier Parks Amenities Provision Service Assessment will be carried over so that the document can be presented for adoption at the August or September 2023 business meeting.
59 Whangaparapara Road: Great Barrier Island Golf Club Incorporated (ID#3025)	Grey	Deferred	Progress of the new lease is on hold due to the outcome of the Golf Investment Plan

Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme

18. In the Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme, there are nine activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of June 2023 (green), and two multi-year projects/activities have not progressed as expected during 2022/2023 (green). Activities with significant or moderate impact are discussed below:

Table 3: Infrastructure and Environmental Services activities with significant or moderate impact

Activity name	RAG status	Activity status	Explanation and mitigation
Pa Point Reserve - renew coastal access steps (ID#1724)	Green	On hold	The scope of this project and its inclusion within the regionally funded coastal asset renewals programme is currently being reviewed as part of the 2023/2024 work programme.
Mulberry Grove - seawall renewal (ID#1721)	Green	On hold	Project approach is being confirmed internally with the project team and stakeholders. Auckland council is looking into arranging a site visit consisting of subject matter expert Asset owner and Coastal Engineer. Project on-hold until further information from lead team.

Plans and Places work programme

19. The Plans and Places work programme has one activity that has been cancelled and deferred in the period April to June 2023 (grey). Activities with significant or moderate impact are discussed below:

Table 4: Plans and Places activities with significant or moderate impact

Activity name	RAG status	Activity status	Explanation and mitigation
An area plan for Aotea Great Barrier (ID#1289)	Grey	On hold	Project is on hold awaiting consultation with new elected members and Mana Whenua.

Auckland Emergency Management work programme

20. In the Auckland Emergency Management work programme, there are two activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of June 2023 (green) and one activity that has been cancelled and deferred in the period April to June 2023 (grey). Activities with significant or moderate impact are discussed below:

Table 5: Auckland Emergency Management activities with significant or moderate impact

Activity name	RAG status	Activity status	Explanation and mitigation
Business emergency resilience programme - Great Barrier (ID#1361)	Grey	Deferred	No activity was delivered this quarter due to a lack of community capacity. Money has been returned. Future work will be delivered through the new line item agreed with the Local Board.

Deferred activities

21. The Lead Financial Advisors are identifying projects from the local board’s 2022/2023 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 2023/2024.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

23. 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. Some key updates from this quarter include:

i Construction Waste Leadership Project (ID#3030) - Anamata continues to engage with builders and support workers one on one through this quarter. Key industry players are supportive and the level and quality of diversion is increasing. A firewood drop saw and bench were purchased and a moveable shelter constructed from demolition materials. A Standard Operating Procedure was produced and a clear methodology developed to enable untreated timber waste to be cut in to standardised pieces for firewood. This includes decking and packing cases and training for staff to be able to identify untreated timber waste. A new firewood bunker has been created with a concrete floor and block walls for easy management.

ii Food Resilience and Sustainability (ID#1504) – it was a quiet quarter. However, the two contractors kept the regular Growers and Makers markets going and supported the establishment of gardens at Kaitoke School.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24. 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

25. This report informs the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board of the performance for quarter four ending 30 June 2023 and the performance for the 2022/2023 financial year.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

26. The 2022/2023 work programme supports the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board Plan 2020 outcome ‘Ko te tino hia hia ki a manawaroa to tatou motu / Our island is resilient’. One of the plan’s main objectives is that mana whenua will prosper.

27. Auckland Council have been actively engaging with mana whenua on several regional and local projects. Some key updates from this quarter include:

i Māori Responsiveness: Community Te Reo course (ID#123) - the Aotea Education Trust provided invaluable data to the local board about how much of this budget has been spent and how much remains for use in future years. Meanwhile Te Reo classes finally recommenced again at the beginning of Term 3. There will be two classes per week - one in the North and one at the Aotea Learning Hub in the South.

ii Ngāti Rehua Ngātiwai ki Aotea - Visitor Information Centre (ID #3455) – the Visitor Information Centre (VIC) provided a regular service to locals and tourists. The Ngāti Rehua Ngātiwai ki Aotea Trust Board (NRNWKA) approved the Visitor Information Centre Strategic Plan 2023. Staff worked with NRNWKA to secure additional local board funding for the VIC to help it achieve objectives set out in Year 1 of the strategic plan. NRNWKA updated its mihi/ greeting and formally wrote up its hitori / history, which will soon be available at the centre. NRNWKA reports a substantial slowing down of tourists on island as we enter the winter period.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

28. This report is provided to enable Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board to monitor the organisation’s progress and performance in delivering the 2022/2023 work programme. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Financial Performance

29. Auckland Council (Council) currently has a number of bonds quoted on the New Zealand, Singapore and Swiss Debt Markets (Quoted Bonds). As a result, the Council is subject to continuous disclosure obligations, which it must comply with under the listing rules of the NZX (Listing Rules), the listing rules of other exchanges and the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 (FMCA).

30. These obligations restrict the release of annual financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX – on or about 29 August 2023.

31. Due to these obligations the financial performance attachment to this report (Attachment B) is excluded from the public and is under confidential cover.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

32. Information about any significant or moderate 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

33. Work programmes for 2023/2024 were approved at the board’s business meeting in June 2023.

34. Deferral of budgets of unfinished activities will be added into 2023/2024 work programmes by quarter one reporting.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board - 1 April to 30 June 2023 Work Programme Update
b ⇩	Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board - Operating Performance Financial Summary (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Jacqui Fyers - Senior Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Janine Geddes – Acting Local Area Manager – Aotea / Great Barrier Local & Waiheke Local Boards

Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board

22 August 2023

Council-controlled organisation update on work programme items (Apr-Jun 2023) and expected milestones (Jul-Sep 2023)

File No.: CP2023/08443

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board with a council-controlled organisation (CCO) update on the work programme (Apr-Jun 2023) and expected milestones and engagement approaches in its area for Quarter One (Jul-Sep 2023).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The 2022/2023 CCO Local Board Joint Engagement Plans were adopted in June 2022. These plans record CCO responsibilities and local board commitments with Auckland Transport, Tātaki Auckland Unlimited, Eke Panuku Development Auckland and Watercare.

3. Local boards and CCOs were expected to review the joint engagement plans (CCO responsibilities and local board commitments) in June 2023. Due to annual budget impacts and CCO staff restructures, this review is now recommended to occur in September 2023.

4. CCOs provide local boards with the CCO work programme in their area. Each work programme item lists the engagement approach with the local board, activity status, updates and milestones anticipated for the next quarter.

5. Providing local boards with the CCO work programme addresses the 2020 CCO Review’s recommendation to coordinate CCO actions better at the local level.

6. As per the 2022/2023 CCO Local Board Joint Engagement Plans:

· CCOs, when creating their work programme, consider the priorities identified in the local board plan and any relevant strategies or policies specific to the local board area

· Local boards advise CCOs of issues or projects of significance, communicate the interests and preferences of their communities and allow for flexibility in terms of engagement, recognising differing levels of interest.

7. CCOs and local boards workshop the CCO work programme and engagement approach regularly to identify and maximise opportunities for good community outcomes within the local board area.

8. This report provides a formal update on the CCO work programme items from April to June 2023 and the engagement approach and anticipated milestones for Quarter One (Jul-Sep 2023).

9. The Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board will receive the next update in October 2023 which will include an update on projects from Quarter One (Jul-Sep 2023) and expected milestones and engagement approaches for work in Quarter Two (Oct-Dec 2023).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) whiwhi / receive the council-controlled organisation update on the work programme (Apr-Jun 2023) and anticipated milestones and engagement approaches for Quarter One (Jul-Sep 2023).

Horopaki

Context

What are CCO Local Board Joint Engagement Plans?

10. The 2020 Review of Auckland Council’s council-controlled organisations recommended that CCOs and local boards adopt an engagement plan to:

· help cement CCO and local board relations

· agree on a common understanding of accountability between CCOs and local boards

· coordinate CCO actions better at the local level.

11. These plans record the commitment between Auckland Transport, Tātaki Auckland Unlimited, Eke Panuku Development Auckland, Watercare and the local boards to work together.

12. Each local board adopted their 2022/2023 CCO Local Board Joint Engagement Plans in June 2022. These plans include CCO responsibilities and local board commitments.

13. This report does not update the CCO responsibilities and local board commitments. Local boards were expected to revise their engagement plans in June 2023. Due to annual budget impacts and CCO staff restructures, this is now recommended to occur in September 2023.

What are the CCO work programme items?

14. CCOs provide local boards with a work programme that lists the different CCO projects happening in the local board area.

15. The work programme is not a full list of projects in the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board area. It includes work programme items for engagement purposes. Providing local boards with the CCO work programme addresses the 2020 CCO Review’s recommendation to coordinate CCO actions better at the local level.

16. As per the joint engagement plans:

· CCOs, when creating their work programme, consider the priorities identified in the local board plan and any relevant strategies or policies specific to the local board area

· Local boards advise CCOs of issues or projects of significance, to communicate the interests and preferences of their communities and to allow for flexibility in terms of engagement, recognising differing levels of interest.

17. Each work programme item records an engagement approach with the local board, activity status, updates and milestones anticipated for the next quarter.

18. The CCO work programme is intended to be reported through a local board business meeting quarterly for clarity and transparency. These updates may include the following types of changes:

· new work programme items and proposed engagement level

· changes to the engagement approach with the local board

· updates to status or anticipated milestones during the next quarter.

19. The work programme and engagement approach are workshopped regularly between CCOs and local boards to identify and maximise opportunities for good community outcomes within the local board area.

20. The engagement approach is based on the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) standards which are provided in Table 1 below. Note that the “involve” and “empower” categories are not included in the CCO reporting as decided when the joint engagement plans were adopted.

Table 1: International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) Engagement Approach Levels

CCO engagement approach	Commitment to local boards
Inform	CCOs will keep local boards informed.
Consult	CCOs will keep local boards informed, listen to and acknowledge concerns and aspirations, and provide feedback on how local board input influenced the decision. CCOs will seek local board feedback on drafts and proposals.
Collaborate	CCOs will work together with local boards to formulate solutions and incorporate their advice and recommendations into the decisions to the maximum extent possible.

21. Local boards received the last update to the CCO work programme and engagement approach in April 2023.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

22. The following sections list key highlights and changes since April 2023 to the CCO work programme for any:

· completed work programme items

· new work programme items

· changes to engagement levels.

23. Watercare have no projects in the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board area and therefore no CCO work programme for Aotea.

24. More detailed updates to the CCO work programme are provided in Attachments A-C.

Auckland Transport

25. The key highlight of the Auckland Transport work programme is the completion of the cowshed bridge geotechnical investigation.

26. Most Auckland Transport work programme items are in progress. There are no completed work programmes, no new work programmes and no changes to engagement levels to report.

27. Auckland Transport’s work programme items are provided in Attachment A.

Tātaki Auckland Unlimited

28. The key highlight of Tātaki Auckland Unlimited work programme is that the Localised Destination Management Plan has been finalised and it will be on the board’s August business meeting agenda. Next steps will be to work with the local board in the development of an advisory group to implement the plan.

29. A majority of Tātaki Auckland Unlimited work programme are in progress. There are no completed work programme items and no new work programme items to report.

30. Changes to the engagement levels are noted due to recent organisation in restructure in Tātaki Auckland Unlimited. Further work is being done to consider how the work programmes will be delivered in the future.

31. Tātaki Auckland Unlimited’s work programme items are provided in Attachment B.

Eke Panuku Development Auckland

32. All Eke Panuku work programmes are in progress. There are no completed work programme items, no new work programme items, and no changes to the engagement levels to report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

33. This report does not have a direct impact on climate, however the projects it refers to will.

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

35. Local boards advise CCOs of issues or projects of significance, communicate the interests and preferences of their communities and allow for flexibility in terms of engagement, recognising differing levels of interest.

36. The joint engagement plans and work programme items are shared with the integration teams that implement local board work programmes and give council staff greater ongoing visibility of CCO work programmes.

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

Local impacts and local board views

37. This report on the CCO work programme items ensures the communication of clear, up-to-date information from CCOs to local boards on projects in their area.

38. As per the joint engagement plan, CCOs, when creating their work programme, consider the priorities identified in the local board plan and any relevant strategies or policies specific to the local board area.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

39. This report does not have a direct impact on Māori, however the projects it refers to will.

40. Local boards and CCOs provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to their decision-making processes. These opportunities will be worked on a project or programme basis.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

41. This report does not have financial impacts on local boards.

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

43. Some local boards expressed concern over the quality of CCO work programme reporting in April 2023 and provided views on requiring more regular engagement with CCOs. All local board resolutions in April 2023 were sent to the relative CCO staff for their consideration.

44. If local boards prefer a more formal commitment for workshops with their CCOs, this arrangement can be addressed through revision of the next CCO joint engagement plans (CCO responsibilities and local board commitments) in September 2023.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

45. The local board will receive the next CCO work programme report in October 2023 which will include an update on projects from Quarter One (Jul-Sep 2023) and expected milestones for work in Quarter Two (Oct-Dec 2023).

46. CCOs and local boards will have an opportunity to workshop the CCO forward work programme through August and September before the next report in October 2023.

47. CCOs and local boards are expected to revise their next joint engagement plans (CCO responsibilities and local board commitments) in September 2023.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Auckland Transport work programme update
b ⇨	Tātaki Auckland Unlimited work programme update
c ⇨	Eke Panuku Development Auckland work programme update

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Maclean Grindell - Senior Local Board Advisor

Jacqui Fyers - Senior Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Janine Geddes – Acting Local Area Manager – Aotea / Great Barrier Local & Waiheke Local Boards

Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board

22 August 2023

Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan

File No.: CP2023/10844

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek feedback on the Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan consultation version (draft CDEM Group Plan).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Civil Defence Emergency Management Act requires Civil Defence Emergency Management Groups to develop Group Plans. Group Plans are strategic documents that set out the strategic vision and action plan for achieving disaster resilience in an area.

3. The current Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan is dated 2016-2021 and is under review. It will remain in force until replaced.

4. A draft Group Plan has been developed for consultation with the public. Consultation on the draft was approved by the CDEM Committee on 25 July 2023 (Resolution CDEMC/2023/15).

5. This paper describes the content of the draft Group Plan, the process that has been taken to prepare the draft Group Plan, the parties that have been involved in its development, the consultation that will be conducted in August 2023, and next steps.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the draft CDEM Group Plan (Attachment A).

Horopaki

Context

6. A Group Plan is a statutory requirement of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 (the CDEM Act). The current Group Plan is dated 2016-2021. A CDEM Group Plan remains operative for the period specified, but if the plan is not replaced before the close of that period, it remains in force until replaced. The review of the current Group Plan commenced with public notice in the New Zealand Herald on 21 October 2021. There have been delays in completing this review due to local elections, intended alignment with the Emergency Management Bill, and other factors, which have previously been reported to the Coordinating Executive Group (CEG) and the CDEM Committee.

7. In April 2023, the CDEM Committee approved a project timeline for completion of the review of the current plan (Attachment B). The programme requires public consultation on a draft Group Plan in August 2023. Consultation on the draft was approved by the CDEM Committee on 25 July 2023 (Resolution CDEMC/2023/15).

8. Next steps involved in the development of the draft CDEM Group Plan are set out below:

Timeframe for development of the National Emissions Reduction Plan

Milestone	Date
Public consultation, Local board feedback, Advisory panel feedback, National emergency management agency technical review	August 2023
Submissions and hearings	September 2023
Brief Coordinating Executive Group (CEG) and CDEM Committee on consultation feedback themes (Committee)	October 2023
Create final draft	November - December 2023

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Content of the Group Plan

9. The draft Group Plan sets out the strategic direction for our work on Auckland’s Defence Emergency Management system. It outlines the CDEM mission and objectives for Tāmaki Makaurau, how we will achieve them and how we will measure our performance.

10. The draft Group Plan is designed to be used by the CDEM Group and key partners and stakeholders involved in CDEM functions in Auckland. It also provides the public with an understanding of how these stakeholders work together, and the role they themselves can play in building individual and community resilience.

11. In accordance with the CDEM Act and Director’s Guidelines for Group Plans, the draft Group Plan includes a comprehensive summary of the natural, built, social and cultural environments of Tāmaki Makaurau and an analysis of the hazards and risks facing Auckland. These factors guide the focus of activities and actions that are described in the later chapters of the plan.

12. The plan contains chapters on the four Rs of emergency management (reduction, readiness, response and recovery), and chapters addressing mana whenua and mātāwaka partnership, management and governance, and monitoring and evaluation.

13. Each chapter describes the existing arrangements that are in place, identifies what we need to focus on to make improvements in that area, and sets out objectives and actions over the 5-year life of the plan. An ‘action plan’ table is set out for each chapter, which describes the objectives, actions, key deliverables or success measures, and results expected from achieving the objectives. The lead within Auckland Council and key supporters (either from within Auckland Council or the wider community of CDEM partners and stakeholders), are also identified for each action. This is intended to support clarity of roles and responsibilities, and to communicate that everyone has a role to play in contributing to a Tāmaki Makaurau that is resilient to disasters.

14. Further detail on timing of delivery of actions will be set out in business plans, to ensure they can be adapted quickly to changing circumstances.

Development of the Group Plan

15. The Group Plan has been developed in accordance with, and informed by the following:

a) the legal requirements of sections 48-56 of the CDEM Act

b) CDEM Group Planning Director’s Guidelines [DGL 09/18]

c) the National Disaster Resilience Strategy 2019 Ruataki ā-Motu Manawaroa Aituā

d) supporting plans of Auckland Council and partners and stakeholders

e) risk assessments, involving collaborative workshops with CDEM partners and stakeholders, and online surveys

f) international, national and local climate change and emergency management research and policy

g) learnings from previous emergency responses, including independent reviews of Auckland Council emergency management readiness and response.

16. The draft has been developed incorporating input and advice from a range of parties including:

a) the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA)

b) a working group comprised of CEG organisation representatives

c) a project advisory group comprised of subject matter experts across the Council whānau regarding strategy, the four environments (natural, built, social and economic), strategy, sustainability, hazard risk, infrastructure and statutory land use planning

d) the Independent Māori Statutory Board Secretariat (IMSB)

e) Auckland Emergency Management department and Controllers

f) Auckland Council legal advisors

g) Ngā Mātārae, Ngati te ata Waiohua, the National Māori Wardens Response Team, Nelson / Tasman emergency management, Ngai Tahu emergency management and Massey University (specifically in relation to development of Whakaoranga marae, Whakaoranga whanau), the framework for supporting disaster resilience of mana whenua and mātāwaka that is embedded within the draft Group Plan

h) Local boards (refer to the Local impacts and local board views section).

Public notification

17. The CDEM Act requires public notification for a period not less than one month to enable the public to make submissions on the draft Group Plan. It also requires that any person who makes a written submission, is given a reasonable opportunity to be heard by the body to which the submission is made. These factors have informed arrangements for the public notification phase.

18. The draft Group Plan will be made available on Auckland Council’s ‘AK Have Your Say’ online platform, along with frequently asked questions and a feedback form. Submissions will be accepted from 31 July 2023 to 31 August 2023. A hard copy reference document will be made available in all council libraries and service centres, accompanied by the feedback form. A summary document and feedback form has been translated into Te Reo Māori, simplified Chinese, traditional Chinese, Samoan, Hindi, Korean and Tongan (available online and in libraries and service centres) to support participation of Aucklanders who either do not speak English, or English is their second language.

19. To raise awareness about the consultation, a link to the AK Have Your Say platform will be shared with our CDEM partners and stakeholders, along with posts on the Auckland Emergency Management social media channels and website. The Citizen Engagement team at Auckland Council will also share the consultation link with their network of community partners, who are representatives of Auckland’s diverse communities, and work with Council to broaden engagement reach. Local boards are invited to share the consultation material with their communities.

20. The Recovery Office and Healthy Waters department of Auckland Council are engaging with the public at the same time as consultation on the draft Group Plan. We are working with the communications and engagement specialists across both projects to ensure clarity of messaging to the public. To assist with this, a flyer has been developed for placement at libraries, service centres and any community events throughout this period (such as community hui on local board plans). The flyer describes the projects, where people can go for more information, and how they can provide feedback.

21. Any party that indicates they wish to be heard in support of their submission on the draft Group Plan will be given the opportunity to present to the CDEM Committee in September.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22. The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change^{^[1]} declares the scientific evidence is unequivocal: climate change is a grave and mounting threat to human wellbeing and the health of our planet. People’s health, lives and livelihoods, as well as property and critical infrastructure, including energy and transportation systems, are being adversely affected by hazards from heat waves, storms, drought, and flooding, as well as slow-onset changes including sea level rise.

23. The evidence for warming in New Zealand continues to build. New Zealand experienced its warmest year on record in 2022, surpassing the previous record set in 2021. The upper North Island and Auckland confidently point towards increasing temperature trends^{^[2]}. Annual rainfall patterns are also expected to change, with eastern portions of the North Island likely to see more summer rainfall, and rainfall intensities accompanying sub-tropical systems and airmasses expected to increase. Marine heat waves and drought are also set to become more frequent and intense. Climate change is likely to increase the chances of strong El Nino and La Nina events.

24. The Group Plan contains actions that intend to reduce the risk of hazards (including those influenced by climate change), and to support community and operational readiness, response to and recovery from emergencies.

25. While not directly incorporated into the risk calculations for the hazard risk assessment described in the draft Group Plan, the five-year reassessment cycle will allow us to incorporate the latest science and understanding of the changing climate into our scenarios and severity determination.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. The Project Advisory Group described in paragraph 15 c) was established to contribute to the development of the draft Group Plan. This has been integral to ensuring that the draft Group Plan aligns with related Council policy, and that the activities of the wider Council that contribute to building disaster resilient communities are incorporated.

27. Council-controlled Organisations are connected to the Group Plan review through both CEG and Lifelines.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28. Local boards have an important role to play in supporting disaster resilient communities through their knowledge of local communities and local government. Auckland Emergency Management’s Lead Team have conducted a series of workshops with local boards in recent months to build and strengthen relationships. Clarity on roles and responsibilities, communication, and the need for local plans to support response were key themes that were expressed by the board members.

29. The draft Group Plan sets out the roles and responsibilities of local board members before, during and after emergencies. Actions to support response communication, local board plans, and community resilience plans are also included.

30. A Local Board member briefing session on the draft Group Plan was held on 26 June 2023. Local board views are being sought on the Group Plan and will be incorporated into the final plan as appropriate.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31. In line with the National Disaster Resilience Strategy- Rautaki ā-Motu Manawaroa Aituā, Auckland Emergency Management (AEM) have been working hard to incorporate a Te Ao Māori worldview into our mahi to ensure greater recognition, understanding, and integration of iwi/Māori perspectives and tikanga in emergency management. The impacts on Māori from disasters can be significant and there are real strengths in integrating kaupapa Māori, mātauranga Māori and tikanga Māori into resilience building for disasters.

32. Engagement with iwi and Māori on the Group Plan began with a presentation to the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki forum in late 2022. The forum was encouraging and supportive of the kaupapa. AEM continues to build relationships with iwi and Māori at all levels, from the Independent Māori Statutory Board secretariat, to individual marae through their resilience planning work via Whakaoranga marae, Whakaoranga whānau.

33. The draft Group Plan acknowledges our partnership obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and acknowledges mana whenua mātauranga mai rā anō (traditional and historical lived-experience and knowledge of an area, place or space). Objectives and actions within the plan aim to:

· coordinate with our partners and stakeholders to expand work to support mana whenua and mātāwaka with disaster resilience through Whakaoranga marae, Whakaoranga whānau and Kia Rite and Kia Mau (a resilience programme focused on tamariki and rangatahi), and

· secure representation of mana whenua and mātāwaka in the Incident Management Team and Coordinating Executive Group.

34. Whakaoranga marae, Whakaoranga whānau was developed collaboratively as described in paragraph 14 g). These parties were also involved in the development of Ngā Mātāpono, values and principles that underpin ways of working with iwi and Māori in Auckland that form part of the strategic framework for the Group Plan.

35. The engagement period in August 2023 provides an opportunity for mana whenua and mātāwaka to consider the Group Plan content (that has been developed collaboratively as described above) and advise if there are any areas that could be further enhanced from a Te Ao Māori perspective.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36. The consultation process can be delivered within approved budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

Submission numbers and programme

37. The weather events in early 2023 and the subsequent Auckland Flood Response Review (the Bush report) generated an increased level of interest in the Auckland CDEM Group Plan. This is likely to increase the number of submissions than might have otherwise been expected. Whilst this is positive in terms of public participation, only a month has been allocated to submission analysis in the programme in Attachment B. Additional support from the wider Council family (or consultants) may be required, depending on the number of submissions received.

38. Similarly, two days of hearings have been scheduled with the CDEM Committee in September 2023, to enable those parties who wish to be heard, to do so. If a large number of submitters wish to be heard, the number of hearing days will need to be increased.

Public and media interest

39. There is a need to be clear in public messaging about the purpose of the Group Plan; that it is a strategic vision and action plan for CDEM activity in Auckland. It is not an operational document, nor a tactical response plan. Key messages are being developed with Corporate Communications and Media to address this.

40. To anticipate potential media interest in the draft Group Plan, Adam Maggs, Group Controller and Head of Capability and Public Awareness, has been identified as media spokesperson.

Emergency Management Bill

41. The Emergency Management Bill (the Bill) was introduced to Parliament on 7 June 2023. Advice from NEMA is that it is likely to take some time to progress through the formal stages to become an Act. The Bill will not affect the current programme for the review of Auckland CDEM Group Plan as it has not yet been made into law.

42. There will likely be a requirement for CDEM Groups to review their Group Plans within a period of time after the bill is enacted (for example, two years).

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

43. Consultation will take place in August as described. The remainder of the Group Plan review will progress in accordance with the timeline in Attachment B, mindful of the risk and mitigations outlined above.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Group Plan Consultation document
b ⇨	Timeline

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kristen Spooner, Principal Advisor Strategy and Planning, Auckland Emergency Management

Authorisers

Paul Amaral, General Manager Auckland Emergency Management

Carol Hayward, Team Leader Operations and Policy Planning & Operations

Louise Mason, General Manager, Local Board Services

Janine Geddes – Acting Local Area Manager – Aotea / Great Barrier Local & Waiheke Local Boards

Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board

22 August 2023

Local board feedback on the proposed direction of the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2024

File No.: CP2023/10965

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek feedback on the proposed direction for the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan for 2024.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The 2018 Waste Management and Minimisation Plan must be reviewed by 2024 in accordance with statutory requirements. As an operational plan, the waste plan sets out objectives, policies, targets, actions and funding to achieve effective and efficient waste management and minimisation within Auckland for the following six years.

3. The review of the waste plan will be informed by the Waste Assessment 2023, which will provide an insight into the waste context in the region, including tonnages sent to landfill, opportunities for diversion, services provided in Auckland, and forecasts for demand.

4. Staff do not propose any significant changes to the vision or direction of the 2018 plan of zero waste by 2040.

5. The following opportunities have been identified to guide the 2024 waste plan:

· Continuing on our current pathway to zero waste by 2040 including standardisation of kerbside services, reflecting the Revised Resource Recovery Network Strategy 2021, and an ongoing focus on litter, illegal dumping and marine waste

· refreshing our focus areas for commercial waste streams, with a key focus on construction and demolition waste, organic, plastics, cardboard/paper and textile waste

· strengthening our focus on climate change mitigation, adaptation and resilience

· extending our food scraps collection services to additional urban areas

· reflecting ways to strengthen our partnership approach with mana whenua, and recognise the benefits of te ao Māori

· re-focusing advocacy to central government to ensure that delivery of the 2023 waste strategy goals and targets, and that cross-ministry policy supports a circular economy

· continuing to address waste generated from council and council-controlled organisations’ operational activities, particularly from activities generating high volumes of waste

· refreshing actions to work closely with others, recognising that we cannot get to zero waste by acting alone.

6. These opportunities have been informed by the work undertaken to prepare a waste assessment that describes waste infrastructure and services, and forecasts demands and options to meet those demands. Preliminary findings of the assessment will be presented at an elected members briefing on 7 August 2023.

7. The opportunities have also been informed by early engagement with mana whenua, and with mataawaka groups working in the area of waste minimisation, and by Te Rautaki Para / Waste Strategy 2023 the new national waste strategy released by central government earlier this year (refer also Attachment A).

8. Staff are seeking input from local boards to inform the draft plan. In particular, staff are seeking feedback on the draft opportunities outlined in this report.

9. Local board feedback will be incorporated into the draft waste plan, which will be presented to the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee on 30 November 2023 for approval to publicly consult. Local boards will have an opportunity to provide feedback on the draft plan following public consultation in 2024.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide feedback on the proposed direction of the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan for 2024-2030.

Horopaki

Context

10. The Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 is due to be reviewed by 2024 in accordance with the council’s responsibilities under the Local Government Act 2022 and Waste Minimisation Act 2008. This will be Auckland Council’s third waste plan on the journey towards zero waste by 2040.

11. As an operational plan, it will include objectives, targets, and methods for achieving effective and efficient waste management and minimisation within the region as outlined in sections 43 and 44 of the Waste Minimisation Act. The plan provides the statutory framework for council decision-making relating to waste issues, together with our approach and actions to achieve zero waste.

12. The plan will also outline how implementation will be funded. It will have regard to Te Rautaki Para / Waste Strategy 2023 for New Zealand and the council’s own waste assessment, which forms the evidence base for the plan. The 2018 plan is available online and is outlined below.

13. Previous Waste Management and Minimisation Plans have helped to guide initiatives to standardise kerbside collections, evolve the resource recovery network, strengthen the council’s community partnerships, and successfully advocate to central government for an increased waste levy and product stewardship.

14. The 2024 Waste Plan will progress the vision of the earlier waste plans for zero waste by 2040 and take into account the progress and achievements of the last six years.

2018 vision, key priorities and targets

15. The 2018 Waste Plan sets out a vision for Auckland to be zero waste by 2040. Zero waste is a long-term goal, but there are steps to progress towards this goal that the council and residents can undertake now.

16. The plan also sets out the steps which were to be taken over the six years from 2018-2024. There are nine key actions in the 2018 plan:

· advocate for an increased waste levy

· advocate for product stewardship

· address three priority commercial waste streams (construction and demolition waste, organic waste, and plastic waste)

· continue establishing the Resource Recovery Network

· focus on reducing litter, illegal dumping, and marine waste

· continue to transition to consistent kerbside waste and recycling services for households

· deliver the domestic kerbside collection of food scraps

· address waste diversion from our own operational activities

· work in partnership with others to achieve a zero waste Auckland.

Getting to Zero Waste / Tīkapa Moana Hauraki Gulf Islands Waste Plan 2018

17. The Tīkapa Moana Hauraki Gulf Islands Waste Plan provides goals and key actions specific to the Hauraki Gulf islands, including Aotea / Great Barrier, Waiheke, Kawau, and Rakino. Staff have engaged separately through workshops with the three relevant local boards on the proposed direction for that plan.

18. Staff will continue to work separately with Aotea / Great Barrier, Waiheke, and Rodney local boards to confirm the direction for the 2024 Tīkapa Moana Hauraki Gulf Islands Waste Plan.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

19. A waste assessment is being undertaken to provide the evidence base for the direction and actions of the next waste plan. This assessment provides an insight into the waste context in the region based on the tonnages sent to landfill and opportunities for diversion. It also describes relevant services provided in the Auckland region and forecasts demand for those services together with options to meet those demands. Preliminary findings from the assessment are included in the analysis below.

Performance against 2018 Waste Plan targets

20. The 2018 waste plan set interim targets in three key areas: total regional waste, domestic waste, and council waste. The targets and our performance to date are summarised below.

Table 1: Progress against Waste Plan 2018 targets – as at December 2022

Total regional waste
Target	Reduce total council- and private-sector-influenced waste to landfill by 30 per cent by 2027 (from the 2010 baseline of 832kg to 582 kg per capita per year)
How we’re tracking	Not on track 873kg (small increase from the baseline)
Explanation: Auckland Council has direct control over only approximately 20 per cent of the waste stream through the contracts for domestic collections that it manages and the Waitākere Refuse and Recycling Transfer Station. While domestic kerbside waste has reduced slightly (refer target below), overall waste quantities including commercial, and construction and demolition waste have increased. Although the effects of COVID-19 have impacted continuity of datasets, recently, tonnages are showing signs of stabilising which may reflect improvements in waste diversion. Proposed legislative changes to drive a circular economy and support for waste minimisation should impact total waste to landfill in the future.
Domestic waste
Target	a. Reduce domestic kerbside refuse by 30 per cent by 2021 (from 160kg in 2010 to 110kg per capita per year). b. After 2021, reduce domestic kerbside refuse by a further 20 per cent by 2028 (from 110kg to 88kg per capita per year)
How we’re tracking	Partly on track 141kg (decrease of 12 per cent from the baseline)
Explanation: Domestic kerbside waste has reduced slightly, however due to the delay in the rukenga kai/food scraps collection rollout, there is a delay in reaching the 2021 target. Food scraps currently comprise about 45 per cent of kerbside waste by weight; and removing those from refuse bins, combined with a reduced frequency for refuse collections, will enable us to reach the target.
Council waste
Target	a. Reduce council’s own in-house office waste by 60 per cent per capita by 2024 (from a 2012 baseline) b. Work across council to set a baseline for operational wastes and, by 2019, put in place targets for reduction.
How we’re tracking	Partly on track 44 per cent reduction of in-house office waste in 2019 – noting not assessed since the pandemic as the way offices are used has changed markedly. Targets for operational waste not yet established.
Explanation: As of 2019, waste from council offices had reduced from the baseline by 44 per cent; however, COVID-19 related impacts such as working from home mean we are unable to meaningfully assess current performance. The approach to set operational waste baselines and targets has not yet been established due to the complexity and breadth of council and CCO activities, however the waste plan has led to a zero waste outcome being included in council’s sustainable procurement framework which is being applied to high value contracts and major construction projects and will be incorporated within all contracts in the future.

Preliminary findings on waste to landfill and kerbside collection trends

21. Preliminary findings from the 2023 waste assessment were provided at a local board members’ briefing on 7 August. Key findings on total waste to municipal landfill (domestic and non-domestic sources) are outlined below.

· There has been a slowing of growth in tonnages of waste to municipal landfill in recent years.

· Materials identified in the 2018 Waste Plan as priority commercial waste streams to be addressed are still relevant. These include:

o construction and demolition waste (such as concrete, timber, and plasterboard)

o organic materials (such as food and garden waste)

o plastics.

· Other materials that have a sizeable carbon footprint include cardboard/paper and textiles.

· Research from overseas has identified textiles to be a fast-growing waste stream, with trends for fast fashion exacerbating the issue. Textiles also have a high carbon footprint, especially if production emissions are factored, and have limited options for recycling and reuse in Aotearoa / New Zealand.

22. Key findings on household waste collected at the kerbside are:

· Domestic (household) waste still comprises around 16 per cent of the total waste to landfill.

· Domestic waste has decreased from 160 kilograms per person in 2010 to 137 kilograms in 2023.

Climate change and lessons from the Auckland Anniversary floods and Cyclone Gabrielle

23. In June 2019, Auckland Council declared that the region is facing a climate emergency. In 2020, the council approved Te-Tāruke-a-Tawhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan, the region’s plan to tackle this challenge. The plan includes actions and priorities relevant to reducing emissions related to waste (refer to the Climate Impact section below).

24. Climate change is projected to increase temperatures and change seasonal patterns in rainfall including greater rainfall intensity. This could mean more intense flooding in the future. Earlier this year, the region saw more than 7,000 buildings impacted by flooding and landslips in late January and early February, resulting in over 6,200 tonnes of waste to landfill.

25. Many community recycling centres played critical, multi-faceted roles during the disaster response including receiving and transferring flood damaged material, collecting flood damaged material from households using their own trucks and staff, receiving and/or collecting donated materials, and distributing reusable materials, including food, to those in need. They also acted as local community hubs, providing vital support for communities in need. The ongoing expansion of the Resource Recovery Network provides further opportunity to integrate community recycling centres within Auckland’s disaster response infrastructure, and strengthen community resilience in the face of climate change.

26. While waste infrastructure and services responded well to recent events, it is important to review lessons from every disaster event to further strengthen our approach to climate change adaptation and resilience. Inclusion of waste infrastructure within council’s Infrastructure Strategy and actions in the waste plan to develop digital tools to assist with disaster waste response will enable continual improvement for the benefit of local communities.

The new waste strategy, regulatory framework for kerbside waste services, and the container return scheme

27. In March 2023 the government released a new waste strategy for the country, replacing the 2010 version. The new strategy, Te Rautaki Para / Waste Strategy 2023, resets the vision for waste to transition to a circular economy by 2050, outlines eight goals, and sets three national targets (summarised in Attachment A). Amongst other things, the strategy proposes new legislation and regulatory tools to reduce waste, together with a process to create regular action and investment plans to implement the strategy.

28. The government has also announced that new regulation will be put in place around council provision and household recycling services. This includes standardising materials for recycling and food scraps collections and ensuring all councils offer recycling and food scraps collections in urban areas (i.e., towns of 1,000 people or more).

29. While a container return scheme was approved by Cabinet, work on this has been deferred. This is important as the container return scheme was a product stewardship initiative aligning with one of the nine key actions in Auckland’s 2018 Waste Plan. Staff propose to continue advocacy around the scheme.

Initial feedback from Māori

30. Initial engagement with mana whenua representatives and with mataawaka groups working in the area of waste minimisation indicates we can strengthen the waste plan to reflect a te ao Māori perspective and include opportunities to build community support for waste minimisation amongst other things.

31. Further work (outlined in the Māori impact statement below) is underway with these groups to review the 2018 Waste Plan content for 2024, including ways to strengthen our partnership approach and opportunities with Māori.

Opportunities identified for the next Waste Management and Minimisation Plan

32. Staff propose that the new waste plan will continue the ‘zero waste by 2040’ vision as an aspirational target and continue to deliver on key initiatives already identified in the 2018 plan.

33. The plan will be updated to reflect the current context including issues and opportunities, while ensuring we align with the new central government regulatory requirements for kerbside waste services. We will also futureproof the plan for further central government initiatives signalled in the National Waste Strategy 2023. Targets, actions, and priorities for the next six years will also be reviewed.

34. Other key opportunities identified to date for the 2024 Waste Plan include:

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

35. The 2024 Waste Plan will align with Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan, adopted in July 2020, from both a mitigation and adaptation perspective. The plan commits to halving greenhouse gas emissions (against a 2016 baseline) by 2030 and reaching net zero emissions by 2050. Based on emissions from landfill gas, the waste sector generates about 3.1 per cent of Auckland’s total emissions. Specific priorities in the plan related to waste minimisation are outlined below:

· Built environment: ensuring the management of existing infrastructure increases climate resilience and reduces emissions.

· Economy: accelerating the uptake of innovation that supports the delivery of a resilient, climate-proof and regenerative economy; managing our resources to deliver a zero waste, circular economy.

· Food: prevent and reduce waste and maximise the value of surplus food.

36. Impact on emissions is one of the factors taken into account when identifying priorities and actions for the 2024 Waste Plan. The key opportunities identified above will help to reduce landfill emissions - particularly from organics - and should reduce the amount of embodied carbon lost from manufacturing new products.

37. Delivery of actions in the waste plan, such as the expansion of the Resource Recovery Network, will also strengthen the resilience of the communities of Tāmaki Makaurau in the face of climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

38. Staff are working across the council group to seek input on the waste plan and ensure our planning and activities around waste management and minimisation are aligned.

39. Council group waste is also within scope of the waste plan, and staff recognise it is particularly important for the council to ‘walk the talk’ and that council is a large employer and community infrastructure provider and partner within the region. Waste Solutions are currently collecting data from across the council group to better understand the activities generating most waste, and how we can best prioritise efforts to create circularity effectively and efficiently.

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

Local impacts and local board views

40. Work is underway with community partners, the waste industry, and relevant businesses to inform the Waste Assessment 2023 and the review of the 2018 Waste Plan.

41. A memo to introduce this work was provided to all local boards in August 2023 and a local board members’ briefing was held on 7 August.

42. Local boards are requested to indicate whether they support the proposed approach for the 2024 Waste Plan outlined above. Staff are particularly interested in hearing Local Board views on the key opportunities identified in paragraph 34.

43. A separate opportunity will be provided for the Aotea / Great Barrier, Waiheke and Rodney local boards to provide input on the Tīkapa Moana Hauraki Gulf Islands Waste Plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

44. Staff have been working to engage with mana whenua and mataawaka on the review of the 2018 Waste Plan. Some initial feedback indicates we can strengthen the waste plan to reflect a te ao Māori perspective and include opportunities to build community support for waste minimisation.

45. So far, mana whenua representatives from four iwi have provided input, with two iwi taking up an invitation to work more closely with staff on plan content. Staff are continuing to provide progress updates through the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua Forum. Further engagement with mana whenua organisations will occur throughout the plan’s development.

46. Mataawaka groups including Para Kore ki Tāmaki, Papatūānuku Kokiri Marae and Te Awa Ora Trust have also provided feedback which will be used to inform the draft plan.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

47. There are no financial implications for the local board in providing feedback on the direction of the revised waste plan.

48. The actions proposed in the Waste Plan will need to be funded through a combination of rates funding and revenue from the waste levy. For example, in the 2022/2023 financial year the council spent $147 million on waste activities, with 83 per cent from targeted rates, eight per cent from general rates, and nine per cent from the waste levy. As the levy rises, the proportion of funding from our share of the waste levy is expected to increase. Other funding may also be available for specific activities from central government through the Waste Minimisation Fund.

49. Infrastructure to enable commercial resource recovery will require investment from external sources such as government and the private sector. For example, financial support from Fonterra, Visy, Astron Sustainability and from the COVID-19 Response and Recovery Fund was used to upgrade Auckland Council’s Visy recycling facility.

50. The budget for implementing the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan will be considered through the Long-term Plan 2024-2034 process.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

51. There are no risks identified for the local board in providing feedback on the direction of the revised waste plan. However, there is a risk that if local board views are not captured, the direction of the plan will not reflect the range of local views and issues. We are mitigating this risk by providing this opportunity for local board feedback.

52. Key risks around upcoming steps to approve the plan for public consultation are outlined below.

Risk	Mitigation
That we miss the statutory timeframe set to review the Waste Plan 2018 under section 50(1)(b) of the Waste Minimisation Act.	We have already begun a review of the plan within the statutory timeframe; the decision on whether to amend, revoke and replace the plan will be made well in advance of the six-year period allowed since the last plan.
The lack of robust data means we have had to make estimates of waste volumes, which in turn may compromise our ability to reach the goals and targets of the plan.	We have cross-checked data where available to strengthen our estimates; and will include text in the plan recognising the risks of limited data.
We may not meet our goals and targets if increasing costs or lack of funding make implementation unaffordable.	We will make clear in the draft plan that funding is linked to the long-term plan process and availability of waste levy funding.
Lack of mana whenua, stakeholder, and community buy-in, capacity or resource may undermine our ability to partner well with those groups and implement the plan to full effect.	We will continue to reach out to groups through our public consultation process to seek input on the plan so that it can be strengthened.
Changes to waste legislation and regulation may change the policy landscape for councils requiring further changes to the waste plan.	We will continue to work with central government to understand the implications of proposed legislation and ensure that the plan is future-proofed.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

53. Once local board feedback has been received, it will be considered for incorporation into the draft plan.

54. The draft plan will be taken to the Planning Environment and Parks Committee at its 30 November business meeting for approval to consult publicly.

55. Public consultation is expected to take place in early 2024, with an opportunity in April/May for further local board input once public submissions on the draft plan are summarised.

56. Approval of the final plan will take place in mid to late 2024.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Aotearoa New Zealand Waste Strategy

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Sarah Le Claire, Waste Planning Manager, Waste Solutions

Tania Utley, Senior Waste Planning Specialist, Waste Solutions

Authorisers

Barry Potter, Director, Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Louise Mason, General Manager, Local Board Services

Janine Geddes – Acting Local Area Manager – Aotea / Great Barrier Local & Waiheke Local Boards

Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board

22 August 2023

Local board feedback on current proposals for achieving funding equity through the Long-term Plan

File No.: CP2023/10756

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek the views of the local board regarding options to address local board funding equity ahead of a decision by the Governing Body for inclusion in consultation for the Long-term Plan 2024-34 (LTP).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. At its 11 July 2023 meeting, the Joint Governance Working Party (JGWP) passed a series of resolutions (Attachment A) and approved the discussion paper on local board funding equity (Attachment B) for local boards to consider at workshops to be held during July and August 2023.

3. In particular, the JGWP indicated that its preferred option to achieve local board funding equity through the first three years of LTP 2024-34 is by a combination of new funding and reallocation of existing funding. These matters were also canvassed at a local board members’ briefing on 24 July 2023.

4. Local boards are invited to provide feedback on the recommendations below, indicating support or otherwise for each component of the proposal.

5. A further JGWP meeting is scheduled for late September to review the feedback from local boards. The discussion paper along with local board feedback and JGWP direction will then be presented to the Governing Body in a workshop in October or November.

6. The Governing Body will decide on option(s) to be included in consultation for the Long-term Plan 2024-34 as part of the Mayor’s Proposal.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) indicate its tautoko / support (or otherwise), with reasons and alternatives if appropriate, on the following components of the proposal to address local board funding inequity.

Scope of the proposal

b) tautoko / support locally driven initiatives (LDI) funding being included in the scope for this analysis, in the light of increased local board decision-making and 80:15:5 being adopted as the equitable model.

c) tautoko / support limiting the scope of the local board funding equity project to local community services and LDI funding.

d) tautoko / support excluding the following items from the scope:

i) growth funding

ii) funding for discrete projects

iii) other specific-purpose funds such as slips remediation and coastal renewals

iv) targeted rate funding

v) other local activities such as local environmental management, local planning and development, and local governance

vi) most unallocated budgets, with the possible exception of some minor capex for response renewals and new non-growth investment.

e) tautoko / support considering capital expenditure (CAPEX) and operational expenditure (OPEX) funding separately for achieving equity.

Timeframe

f) tautoko / support seeking to achieve funding equity for local boards in a much shorter timeframe (three years) than the 10–15-year period approved in-principle in 2021, noting that this may mean a reduction in funding for some local boards.

g) tautoko / support taking a staged implementation approach of using year one of the Long-term Plan (i.e., 2024-2025) to prepare, and implementing the changes from year two.

Alternative options

h) tautoko / support achieving equity by using a mix of new funding and reallocating funding from local boards that are currently funded over the equitable funding level to local boards that are funded below the equitable funding level.

i) tautoko / support holding new funding in the later seven years of LTP 2024-2034 in a pool which is to be allocated to local boards according to agreed criteria, which is yet to be developed, if getting most local boards to within 5% of funding equity in 3 years is pursued.

Multi-board services

j) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that the proposal for multi-board services needs further investigation to better understand the implications for local boards and the governance structure and that further advice will be brought to the Joint Governance Working Party and local boards in due course.

Horopaki

Context

7. At its 30 May 2023 meeting, the Joint Governance Working Party (JGWP) considered a discussion paper (Attachment B) seeking direction on initial options developed by staff to address local board funding inequity in a shorter timeframe as requested by the mayor.

8. Staff had developed the following three options (alongside the existing approach agreed by the Governing Body in 2021) to address inequity:

i) using new funding

ii) redistributing existing funding between local boards only, and

iii) a combination of i and ii.

9. The JGWP considered these matters and supported in principle focusing future work on options based on new funding or a mix of reallocation and new funding. It did not support option ii) to only look at redistributing funding between local boards.

10. The JGWP also supported making significant change within three years while noting that if the scope was expanded as sought by the mayor, further changes may take longer. The JGWP asked for further clarification from the mayor as to the scope of this enquiry, compared to the scope agreed in 2021.

11. The JGWP also requested staff further investigate and provide supplementary information on several different matters.

12. At the JGWP’s 11 July 2023 meeting, staff provided an updated discussion paper covering all these matters in detail and addressing areas of confusion.

13. Following resolutions from the 11 July meeting (Attachment A), the attached discussion paper has been presented to local boards at workshops during July and August 2023.

14. Feedback is now sought from local boards to inform consideration by the Governing Body for inclusion in consultation for the Long-term Plan 2024-34.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

15. The advice below pertains specifically to the recommendations being made in this report. This report should be read in conjunction with the attached discussion paper, which contains the bulk of the background information, analysis, and advice.

Scope – Recommendation B

16. The model for equitable funding has been adopted as 80% population, 15% deprivation and 5% land area (80:15:5) (see Governing Body Resolution number GB/2021/138 Part N(iii)). A 90:5:5 model is currently being used for LDI funding distribution.

17. Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) funding is proposed to be included in the scope, as with increased decision-making local boards have discretion over almost all of their funding.

Scope – Recommendation C

18. The scope of the local board funding equity project is proposed to be limited to local community services and LDI because of the current decision-making arrangements of the local board and that a wider scope would be far more significant in terms of implementation requirements.

Scope – Recommendation D

19. Staff propose to exclude the following items from the scope for the reasons outlined:

iv) Growth funding

Growth funding is proposed to be excluded as it is collected for a specific purpose and is governed by the Development Contributions Policy and legislation. Reallocating this funding creates complexities which would likely contribute to delays in growth investment, which could potentially require council to return development contributions previously collected.

v) Funding for discrete projects

Funding for discrete projects is proposed to be excluded as including under a reallocation model may result in inadequate funding to deliver these projects. This would mean council is not delivering on past decisions. This may also result in council having to return external funding received or growth funding collected for some of these projects.

vi) Other specific purpose funds

Funding for other specific purpose funds such as slips remediation and coastal renewals are proposed to be excluded as these are allocated to local boards based on a regionally accepted programme over which local boards do not have decision-making over. Also, including this funding may result in inadequate funding to deliver these outcomes.

vii) Targeted rate funding

Targeted rate funding is proposed to be excluded from scope as these are collected for a specific purpose and cannot legally be reallocated.

viii) Other local activities

Funding for other local activities is proposed to be excluded from scope due to limited local board decision-making and legislative constraints. This includes local environmental management (mostly targeted rates or regional budget allocation to LBs), local planning and development (99% is targeted rates collected from Business Improvement Districts), and local governance (staff costs, and elected member honorariums and support costs) activities.

ix) Most unallocated budgets

Over time, the anticipated potential of unallocated budgets has decreased to be of less significance than was initially thought, due to most of this budget being growth funding. Most unallocated budgets are therefore excluded from scope.

Scope – Recommendation E

20. Capital expenditure (CAPEX) and operational expenditure (OPEX) funding are proposed to be considered separately. The reasons for this are outlined in detail on pages 8-9 of the attached discussion paper.

21. Note that some unallocated CAPEX provisioned for minor CAPEX, response renewals and new investment (not growth) could be considered for reallocation under alternative options. If these are reallocated going forward these will be the responsibility of the local board.

Timeframe – Recommendation F

22. This paper proposes achieving funding equity for local boards in a much shorter timeframe (three years) than the 10–15-year period approved in 2021. This is based on expectations communicated by the mayor’s office and endorsed by the JGWP in principle, so long as it can be achieved practically, fairly, and in an informed way.

Timeframe – Recommendation G

23. A staged implementation approach has been recommended to ensure that policy, legislative and resource constraints can be addressed as required to implement these changes.

Alternative options – Recommendation H and I

24. Staff have provided alternative options to help achieve local board funding equity in three years. The options align with the scope outlined in recommendations A-G. The discussion paper and its attachments explain the impacts of these options on local boards.

Multi-board services – Recommendation J

25. Work on the multi-board services workstream has not progressed as far as other aspects of this programme as the rationale and benefits of this element are less clear, and the governance arrangements are likely to be complex. Furthermore, allocating budget to multi-board services will have implications on a local board’s equity ranking and this requires further analysis.

26. Staff propose to do more work on these matters, informed by local board feedback and in conjunction with the mayor’s office regarding his views on this proposal.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

27. There are no climate implications from providing feedback on proposals to implement a more equitable local board funding scheme.

28. In the future, a more equitable regime for local board funding may allow more influence from local boards and local communities on how local funding is used to implement climate-friendly projects.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

29. Staff have been working for several years to understand and incorporate any potential implications for policy, strategy, and operations across the council group. Multiple iterations of these proposals have been discussed, and feedback given, since 2017.

30. Most recently, these revised proposals have been discussed at:

i) JGWP meetings in May and July 2023

ii) Local board workshops in July and August 2023.

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

Local impacts and local board views

31. Local board views have been sought a number of times through the Governance Framework Review, and this report seeks formal local feedback on the latest iteration of proposals that will go back to the JGWP and to the Governing Body later in 2023.

32. Depending on the final shape of these proposals there is likely to be significant implications for local boards, and these will be clarified further as the proposals are developed into policy.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

33. There is no specific impact for Māori of providing feedback on proposals to implement a more equitable local board funding scheme.

34. In the future, a more equitable regime for local board funding may allow local boards to be more responsive to mana whenua and mataawaka in their rohe in deciding how local funding is used to support their communities.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35. There are no specific financial implications for providing feedback on proposals to implement a more equitable local board funding scheme.

36. The final implementation of these proposals will have significant financial implications, and these are outlined in detail in the attached discussion paper.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

37. There are a range of risks and proposed mitigations outlined in the discussion paper. The impact of these risks will vary depending on which options and timeframes are pursued.

38. The key risk is that if local board funding inequities are not addressed as proposed in this report, then the timeline will either revert to the 10–15-year timeframe adopted by the Governing Body in 2021, or additional time will need to be taken developing further alternative options.

39. At the same time as progressing proposals for local board funding equity, the JGWP will also be receiving advice from staff on local board reorganisation. While a reorganisation proposal is likely to take longer than the three years being proposed for changes to local board funding, staff have advised that the principles on which the equity programme are based should be able to apply regardless of the number of local boards. This will be analysed further as the reorganisation proposal progresses.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

40. A JGWP meeting is scheduled for late September to receive feedback from local boards.

41. At this meeting, the JGWP will make recommendations that will inform the Governing Body’s approach to local board funding equity. This will be finalised by December and included in the Mayor’s Proposal for the Long-term Plan 2024-34.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	11 July 2023 - Joint Governance Working Party Minutes
b ⇨	Discussion Paper - Local Board Funding Policy

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kat Ashmead, Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Janine Geddes – Acting Local Area Manager – Aotea / Great Barrier Local & Waiheke Local Boards

Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board

22 August 2023

Local board feedback on the draft Future Development Strategy

File No.: CP2023/10755

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board feedback on the draft Future Development Strategy.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPS UD) requires an update to the Future Development Strategy (FDS). The revised FDS (Attachment A) will replace the current Development Strategy in the Auckland Plan 2050. A key purpose of the FDS is to inform the Long-term Plan 2024-2034.

3. Significant changes are proposed. These address key strategic goals of the council around climate change, managing the cost of infrastructure funding and delivery, promoting natural environmental outcomes, and better managing natural hazard risk.

4. The draft FDS confirms and refines the council’s well-established 'quality compact' planning approach. There is a greater focus within Auckland’s existing urban area on achieving more quality, higher density and mixed-use development near stops on the rapid transit network, and near centres and key employment areas.

5. The draft FDS continues to provide for some future urban development. However, it amends some timeframes for when future urban land may be ready for development. The draft also recommends reducing the extent of land in some future urban areas to reduce the exposure to significant natural hazard risks in these areas.

6. Over the shorter term (10 years), the draft FDS identifies supporting the Auckland Housing Programme in Mt Roskill, Māngere and Tāmaki, an identified live-zoned area within Drury-Ōpaheke, and the Westgate and city centre nodes as the spatial priorities for council investment.

7. It concurrently proposes that investments should be made at a local level to strengthen communities, particularly improving accessibility and sustainability.

8. Following finalisation of the FDS, a comprehensive implementation plan will be developed with supporting actions forming the basis.

9. Public consultation on the draft Future Development Strategy ran for eight weeks from 6 June 2023 to 31 July 2023. The council received 8,279 submissions from individuals, 259 submissions from organisations and 1,318 proforma submissions (based on provisional data as of 2 August 2023).

10. Feedback from local boards and from the public will be considered ahead of a final version of the FDS being adopted by the Planning, Environment and Parks (PEP) Committee in late 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide feedback on the draft Future Development Strategy.

Horopaki

Context

11. The purpose of the Future Development Strategy (FDS) is to provide the basis for strategic and long-term planning for growth and development in Auckland. It informs the integration of land use planning with infrastructure planning and funding decisions as well as the preparation of the Long-term Plan 2024-2034.

12. Under the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPS UD), the FDS must set out how Auckland will achieve a well-functioning urban environment. The FDS must also state how and where sufficient development capacity will be enabled to meet housing and business land demand over the short, medium, and long term.

13. Much has changed in Auckland and Aotearoa New Zealand since the Development Strategy was adopted as part of the Auckland Plan 2050 five years ago. While the NPS UD provides the statutory basis for the update, there are also other important reasons to update the FDS, including:

· Climate change: Auckland has made firm commitments to climate change mitigation under Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan (2020): halving greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, and reaching net zero emissions by 2050. The NPS UD also emphasises the need for planning approaches to support reductions in emissions. The Resource Management Act (RMA) was amended in 2020 to require council to consider the National Emissions Reduction Plan and the National Adaptation Plan in its planning framework.

· Natural hazards: the flooding events of 2023 underscore the importance of strategic planning about where development should and should not occur, and how it should occur, to reduce exposure to risk posed by natural hazards. Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan commits the council to taking a precautionary approach when adapting to the impacts of climate change.

· Planning directives from central government: while the intensification mandates under the NPS UD and the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021 will assist council in achieving housing capacity and other goals, they will also create challenges that need to be addressed.

· Fiscal challenges: are exacerbated by the pandemic and high levels of inflation. Plan changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan that are unanticipated or brought forward ahead of time can generate significant funding challenges and financial risk for council, and disrupt existing and planned infrastructure work programmes.

14. In May 2023, the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee approved the draft Future Development Strategy for public consultation (resolution number PEPCC/2023/62).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Strategic framework of the Future Development Strategy

15. The diagram below sets out the strategic framework of the FDS. This framework was informed by many sources, including the council’s wider strategic direction and policy goals, workshops with elected members, mana whenua values and aspirations, and legislative requirements. Monitoring evidence, technical analysis of various growth scenarios and housing and business development capacity were also key inputs.

Future Development Strategy Strategic Spatial Framework
Our vision	Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland’s built environment will underpin the development of prosperous, inclusive, and vibrant communities. Quality development will help to regenerate the environment and deliver our commitments to greenhouse gas emission reduction as we grow and change.
Te Tiriti o Waitangi	Honouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi and enabling Te Tiriti outcomes
Hapū and iwi values and aspirations for urban development	Mauri, Rangatiratanga, Mana Motuhake, Mātauranga Māori, Kaitiakitanga, Manaakitanga
Overarching challenges	1. Spatial planning in an uncertain and changing environment 2. Halting the ongoing degradation of the natural environment 3. Achieving equitable growth and change 4. Investing in infrastructure in a financially constrained environment
Spatial outcomes	· Tāmaki Makaurau is viewed as an interconnected living system · Development achieves high quality living environments · Disparities in our communities and investments are addressed · Development results in resilient built systems, natural environment and communities
Principles for a quality compact approach to growth and change	1. Support greenhouse gas emission reduction
	2. Adapt to the impacts of climate change
	3. Make efficient and equitable infrastructure investments
	4. Protect and restore the natural environment
	5. Enable sufficient capacity for growth in the right place at the right time
Inputs to our spatial response	Conceptual growth scenarios Constraints on development Development capacity
Our spatial response	Spatial scales Spatial environments Prioritising areas for development Approach to natural hazard constrained areas
Implementation	Actions to implement this Future Development Strategy

Housing and Business Capacity Assessment

16. The NPS UD requires that the FDS is informed by a Housing and Business Capacity Assessment. An assessment was completed in 2021 with further work done as part of Plan Change 78 to understand how much additional housing capacity the plan would enable.

17. This work has now been updated. Over the next 30 years the population of Tāmaki Makaurau is expected to continue to grow by around 30 per cent, or 520,800 people, to a total of 2,230,800.

18. The FDS does not need to focus on creating additional housing development capacity. Rather, the focus for the FDS needs to be on the quality aspects of accommodating growth: where and how development occurs.

19. Where plan-enabled capacity is reduced or constrained by the FDS (which would mainly be due to natural hazard risk) the intention is to create additional capacity in good locations elsewhere, so that overall capacity is broadly maintained.

20. Further work was also done on business capacity. The estimated total employment is expected to increase by 30.6 per cent^{^[3]} or 282,600 jobs over the 2023 to 2053 period.

21. However, initial results from the council’s Business Capacity Assessment, which explores these factors in more detail but is still in draft form, indicate there is likely to be at least sufficient plan-enabled business capacity on an aggregate region-wide basis. Shortfalls in some sub-regions, or for specific business sectors, particularly for land extensive sectors could occur in the short to medium-term. Over the medium to long-term these are planned to be addressed by the provision of additional business-zoned land, including through the provision of centres in new development areas. The finalised Business Capacity Assessment will inform decisions on the final FDS.

Proposed amendments to the FDS

22. The draft strategy puts forward several amendments to the approach of the 2018 Development Strategy in the Auckland Plan 2050. These include:

· inclusion of iwi values and aspirations – an emphasis on mauri provides opportunities for change that will support all Aucklanders to thrive

· strengthening the concept of quality compact – further shifting the emphasis to intensification in the existing urban areas with less reliance on expansion into future urban areas

· urban areas – intensification of existing urban areas and focusing investment in infrastructure on a smaller number of spatial priorities, but emphasising the need for smaller scale investment at a local level to improve accessibility and sustainability

· future urban areas – removal (in whole or part) of some areas for urban development and changes in development readiness timeframes to some areas

· spatial prioritisation based on nodes, joint priorities (Auckland Housing Programme), a defined area within Drury-Ōpaheke, and local planning priorities

· strengthening climate change considerations

· greater emphasis on achieving better natural environment outcomes.

23. The following sections provide more information on these changes in approach. Iwi values and aspirations are addressed throughout these sections.

Strengthening the quality compact concept

24. The quality compact philosophy has underpinned planning in Auckland since the 2012 Auckland Plan. Since 2020 a number of central government mandates mean even greater emphasis is given to urban intensification.

25. Although many of the mandated changes support and build on the quality compact approach, some create challenges or risks to it. In particular, the Medium Density Residential Standards’ (MDRS) unfocused approach to intensification across wide parts of the urban area introduces the following challenges:

· makes it harder for council to plan for growth and development, in terms of investment in infrastructure, and community facilities and services

· may result in a significant amount of development occurring in locations across Auckland where public transport services and general accessibility are poor with limited potential for improvements – resulting in more traffic congestion and higher emissions.

26. The updated FDS focuses on the ways in which the council can provide a strong framework to maximise the amount of quality, higher density development occurring in and near centres, and near stops on the rapid transit network.

27. Mana whenua strongly support a quality compact approach.

Urban area

28. As part of the quality compact approach to accommodating growth, most growth is anticipated within Auckland’s existing urban areas. This is in line with previous policy.

29. The draft FDS emphasises increasing sustainability of neighbourhoods by supporting intensification in centres and walkable catchments, encouraging a broader range of services to meet communities’ day-to-day needs locally, and improving accessibility to/within centres and neighbourhoods via walking, cycling and public transport.

30. The draft FDS prioritises infrastructure provision in a small number of priority areas that would result in long-term benefits. This will help to focus and make better use of resource and achieve multiple outcomes. These priorities include the Auckland Housing Programme areas. They will, in time, also support major projects, such as Auckland Light Rail, that are currently in the planning stage.

31. Funding will also be required for local level upgrades and initiatives, particularly accessibility and sustainability initiatives.

Changes to future urban areas

32. Provision of future urban land remains a key aspect of the draft FDS.

33. There are however changes to the timing of ‘development readiness’ for some future urban areas and reducing the spatial extent of some. At a high level, the basis for this includes:

· land areas that are prone to significant natural hazard risk, which will increase with ongoing climate change

· poor access to employment and services in some locations, likely to result in high levels of private vehicle usage, with the potential to lead to higher levels of congestion and higher emissions

· significant challenges in funding infrastructure investment to support growth and the need to better align development readiness with the ability to fund infrastructure.

Spatial prioritisation

34. Infrastructure investment is one of the few remaining tools available to the council to focus development. The draft FDS proposes that, in future, infrastructure investment is based on the best areas for growth in a region-wide and investment-maximising sense.

35. The draft brings together spatial priorities for existing urban areas and future urban areas in one place. It identifies three different types of spatial priorities, these are:

Nodes: to provide greater sub-regional sustainability.

Joint priorities between the council and central government: these focus on the Auckland Housing Programme where long-term projects cover significant areas and bulk infrastructure is needed to enable regeneration, housing, jobs and recreation areas.

Local areas and communities: to provide for smaller scale projects that strengthen communities throughout the region, for instance town centre revitalisation led by Eke Panuku, environmental outcomes (e.g., naturalising waterways) or improving accessibility (e.g. better walking connections).

36. Within the priorities framework, the draft FDS sets out short to medium term priorities, to be considered in the council’s 2024-2034 Long-term Plan. The priorities are:

· the Auckland Housing Programme areas of Mt Roskill, Tāmaki and Māngere

· the city centre, focusing on completing the two new train stations (Maungawhau and Karangahape) and associated investment and development on the City Rail Link

· Westgate, where infrastructure is needed to support future rapid transit

· a defined area within Drury-Ōpaheke where development has already started.

Stronger emphasis on climate change

37. Significant changes in terms of climate change considerations have arisen since the Development Strategy of 2018. These include central government statutory and legislative changes, and new plans and initiatives developed by Auckland Council.

38. The NPS UD has a strong focus on planning approaches that support the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. This requirement aligns with the 2020 RMA amendments that require council to consider the National Emissions Reduction Plan and National Adaptation Plan in its regional policy statement. Both the RMA and the NPS UD also emphasise the importance of climate change adaptation and resilience.

39. The draft FDS takes a stronger approach to addressing the causes and impacts of climate change, aligning with mana whenua feedback. This is done in several ways. A key part is further developing the quality compact approach, where development is focused in locations where active transport and good, high frequency public transport options are more available or can reasonably be expected to be made available. This is supported by elements such as enabling greater mixed use, improving environmental outcomes and increasing local accessibility.

Greater emphasis on natural environment outcomes

40. The draft FDS takes a much stronger approach to addressing natural environment outcomes. This aligns with mana whenua feedback and is part of making the FDS a more integrated and holistic planning strategy, where a range of factors are addressed alongside growth and development capacity.

41. Though this was already possible under existing statutory frameworks, the introduction of the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management (NPS FM) further underlines this. Among other matters, the NPS FM encourages managing the freshwater resource within a coordinated and sequenced approach to urban growth management.

42. The draft FDS also focuses on Auckland’s urban ngahere, both for its intrinsic qualities but also for what it can offer in terms of absorbing carbon, increasing climate resilience, amenity and wellbeing.

Relationship between the Future Development Strategy and RMA processes

43. Private plan change applications will always present challenges to the council in terms of alignment with the sequencing strategy in the FDS and the affordability of infrastructure. This creates confusion and uncertainty for the community, the council and stakeholders and may weaken the coherence of the strategy that is being developed.

44. In law, unless there are clear grounds to reject the private plan change request, it makes it very difficult for the council to do anything other than accept private plan change requests for the submission, detailed assessment and hearings process.

45. Options to meaningfully address this matter of out of sequence private plan changes, and the risks it poses to council’s (and other partners’) ability to fund infrastructure, are limited. The draft FDS proposes that priority locations for investment should be strictly adhered to and that, once confirmed through the 2024-34 LTP, the council should adhere to funded programmes.

46. In addition, actions to support implementation of the draft FDS include a plan change to the Regional Policy Statement to strengthen the statutory decision-making framework (over and above the FDS) that applies to plan changes in future urban areas.

Previous documents to be incorporated into FDS

47. The Future Urban Land Supply Strategy (FULSS) sets out the ‘where and when’ of the urban zoning of future urban land, taking a sequenced approach to rezoning, aligning it with council’s funding of infrastructure to support development. The FULSS as a standalone document will be removed, and the information currently contained within it reframed and included within the draft FDS. This better integrates strategic approaches and confirms status under the RMA.

Community views

48. Public consultation on the draft Future Development Strategy was initially scheduled to run from 6 June 2023 to 4 July 2023 but was extended until 31 July 2023 due to the level of public interest.

49. The engagement process included the following key activities:

· Media to promote the consultation (including radio, community newspapers, social media advertising, online banner advertising on NZ Herald & Stuff websites, articles in OurAuckland and The Spinoff)

· Six drop-in sessions (in Warkworth, Albany, Kumeū, Westgate, Central City and Papakura), attended by 140 individuals

· Two regional organisation and interest group Have Your Say events with councillors, attended by 29 groups

· webinars for the public and for regional organisations/interest groups at which staff were available to discuss the proposal

· Two meetings in Papakura at the request of the local community

· Discussions with key stakeholders including central government, other local councils, utility providers and interest groups.

50. Based on provisional data, as of 2 August 2023, the council received:

· 8,279 submissions from individuals

· 259 submissions from organisations

· 1,318 proforma submissions.

51. A separate attachment has been provided for each local board with feedback from the local community in that area (see Attachment B).

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

52. The council adopted Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan in 2020. The plan provides a long-term approach to climate action, with a target to halve regional greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and reach to net zero emissions by 2050. It also calls for a precautionary approach to adaptation.

53. Land use and planning decisions, particularly those around urban form, development and infrastructure, are fundamental to climate action. These decisions influence and lock in our emissions trajectory and our ability to deal with the risks and impacts of a changing climate for decades to come. These land use planning decisions fundamentally affect how Auckland will achieve its climate goals set out in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan in the short, medium and long term.

54. For example, in relation to transport emissions, more expansive urban forms generally lead to longer travel distances. Longer trip lengths typically result in higher transport emissions and less propensity for mode shift. Land use decisions also affect exposure to climate change impacts such as coastal inundation and erosion which is exacerbated by sea level rise.

55. The approach taken in the draft FDS focuses on planning for more intensive urban development close to existing centres and stops on the rapid transit network. This is one of many important approaches which together seek to maximise the number of Aucklanders who walk, cycle and use public transport, thereby reducing transport related emissions.

56. The draft FDS also proposes to create stronger links between development in future urban areas and the ability to fund public transport infrastructure and services. Development without these services will be car dependent, increasing Vehicle Kilometres Travelled (VKT) and likely lock in travel behaviours that may be hard to change once, or if, public transport services are provided. The draft delays the live zoning of some future urban areas and links live zoning to infrastructure triggers. These aspects are expected to result in relatively positive climate outcomes compared to the current trend (mitigation).

57. The draft further proposes to remove some future urban areas, that have significant natural hazard risks, from urban development. It also identified additional future urban areas to be further investigated to determine their suitability for urban development based on natural hazard risk. These aspects are expected to result in relatively positive climate outcomes compared to the current trend (resilience).

58. The draft FDS also considers natural hazard risk in existing urban areas. It identifies and prioritises locations with potential natural hazard risk, combined with population density and levels of deprivation, as the initial focus for adaptive planning to determine appropriate responses.

59. The draft FDS sets the strategy and direction. Achieving its direction and the climate change outcomes sought is dependent on following through in implementation. This includes actions aligned with Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri, particularly actions around the built environment and the protection and enhancement of the natural environment, and the Transport Emissions Reduction Pathway’s targets to reduce vehicle kilometres travelled and transport greenhouse gas emissions.

60. It is expected that, if the “Principles for a quality compact approach to growth and change” (as applied in the direction set in the draft FDS), are applied with ambitious implementation actions as proposed in (but not limited to) the FDS, then some of the adverse climate impacts could be avoided or mitigated. However, the FDS needs to be implemented with ambitious, bold, climate policies and regulations across different domains, as well as local implementation action.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

61. As a first order strategy, and legislative requirement, the FDS impacts all parts of the council group that are focussed on growth and development. It provides Auckland-wide direction and integration of the council’s approach to growth and development and guides subsequent strategies, operational plans, programmes of work and investment decisions.

62. Achieving the alignment of resources and outcomes sought by the FDS requires the involvement, sharing of information and ongoing support from staff across the council group throughout its implementation.

63. Development of the draft FDS included information, expertise and involvement of staff from across the council and its council-controlled organisations.

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

Local impacts and local board views

64. Local boards provided feedback on the initial strategic direction in July-August 2022. This feedback was considered through the development of the draft FDS.

65. Local board chairs (or alternates) were invited to all Planning, Environment and Parks Committee workshops during strategy development. Chairs received the workshop material ahead of the workshops.

66. Local boards were provided with a memo on 9June 2023 and invited to a briefing about the FDS consultation on 16 June 2023.

67. This report provides the opportunity for the local board to give their feedback, based on consideration of their community’s feedback, on the draft Future Development Strategy.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

· involving Māori early in the decision-making process

· Māori housing aspirations

· protection of existing natural resources

· allowing for kaitiakitanga

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

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

· opportunities to showcase Māori identity.

69. These priority areas, along with a review of past Māori engagement and feedback, provided a starting point for engaging with Māori, in a way that supported their capacity to genuinely participate in the development of the FDS.

70. This engagement has helped the council understand Māori values and aspirations for urban development and has helped shape the overall growth approach, as well as the spatial outcomes and principles for growth and change.

71. A key theme was the importance and integration of mātauranga Māori at all levels of decision-making, recognising mauri as a life-sustaining principle of all living systems. Mana whenua were consistent in advocating for a holistic view of “maunga to moana”. This is much broader than a catchment approach – it is a lens through which Māori see Tāmaki Makaurau as an interconnected living system.

72. Engagement was initiated through an invitation to each of the mana whenua organisations. A panel with a range of Māori planning expertise and resourcing for up to two representatives was available for each organisation. Collective and individual hui were held and feedback was received through these engagements.

73. The emerging themes were reinforced by Iwi Management Plans and environmental documents, and input into previous council engagements including Te Tāruke-a-Tāwhiri, Auckland’s Water Strategy, and Thriving Communities Strategy. This analysis formed the basis of the hapū and iwi values and aspirations in the consultation document but requires further engagement with mana whenua. This statement of values and aspirations for urban development is currently with mana whenua for review.

74. Views were sought from Māori researchers, marae, community organisations, the homeless and rangatahi and what was received was shared with the relevant teams.

75. Engagement continued throughout the consultation period.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

76. There are no financial implications from the local board providing feedback on the draft FDS.

77. Once adopted, the FDS will help council to make investment decisions that maximise benefits to our communities.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

78. There are risks associated with adopting a new FDS, however these must be weighed against the opportunity costs of not having an appropriate framework in place to manage Auckland’s growth. These include:

Risk	Assessment	Mitigation/Control measures
The FDS is not bold enough to support achieving the council’s strategic goals around climate change mitigation	Medium-High risk Achieving significant change in land use requires a long-term approach, and land use change takes time. Even with the proposed emphasis on prioritising growth in existing urban areas and reductions in the future urban areas, the draft FDS retains large areas of future urban land. Given council’s ambitious climate change goals, the retention of these large areas of future urban land will create risk to achieving those goals, especially with regard to reductions in transport emissions.	The FDS proposes a number of measures to promote and incentivise more urban development near centres and rapid transport in the existing urban area. The market has also been moving significantly in this direction (and is likely to continue to do so). Sequencing timing for many of the future urban areas has been extended significantly, to dates well beyond 2030 (TERP). Land use policy will need to be supplemented by a strong policy framework - for instance transport demand management and initiatives to achieve mode shift. It is likely that Auckland’s car fleet would have transitioned significantly towards an electric vehicle fleet by 2040, which will help mitigate transport emissions impacts.
The council receives negative feedback from stakeholders, including landowners, on the proposals on topics such as intensification in the existing urban area or reducing the extent of future urban areas and / or timing	Medium – High risk Consultation on the FDS is intended to gauge the community’s views on a range of matters addressed in it. Some of those views will be supportive, and some of them oppositional. All views need to be considered.	The consultation process enables council to receive feedback, and potentially reconsider certain aspects of the FDS before it is finalised. This ensures a robust decision-making process is followed and reduces risks later in the process.

Risk

Assessment

Mitigation/Control measures

The FDS is not bold enough to support achieving the council’s strategic goals around climate change mitigation

Medium-High risk

Achieving significant change in land use requires a long-term approach, and land use change takes time.

Even with the proposed emphasis on prioritising growth in existing urban areas and reductions in the future urban areas, the draft FDS retains large areas of future urban land.

Given council’s ambitious climate change goals, the retention of these large areas of future urban land will create risk to achieving those goals, especially with regard to reductions in transport emissions.

The FDS proposes a number of measures to promote and incentivise more urban development near centres and rapid transport in the existing urban area. The market has also been moving significantly in this direction (and is likely to continue to do so).

Sequencing timing for many of the future urban areas has been extended significantly, to dates well beyond 2030 (TERP).

Land use policy will need to be supplemented by a strong policy framework - for instance transport demand management and initiatives to achieve mode shift.

It is likely that Auckland’s car fleet would have transitioned significantly towards an electric vehicle fleet by 2040, which will help mitigate transport emissions impacts.

The council receives negative feedback from stakeholders, including landowners, on the proposals on topics such as intensification in the existing urban area or reducing the extent of future urban areas and / or timing

Medium – High risk

Consultation on the FDS is intended to gauge the community’s views on a range of matters addressed in it. Some of those views will be supportive, and some of them oppositional.

All views need to be considered.

The consultation process enables council to receive feedback, and potentially reconsider certain aspects of the FDS before it is finalised.

This ensures a robust decision-making process is followed and reduces risks later in the process.

79. Strong, considered feedback from local boards will support Auckland Council to make good decisions about the FDS while they balance these risks against the opportunity costs described above.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

80. Feedback from local boards and from the public will be reviewed and taken into account as staff consider any amendments to the draft FDS.

81. Workshops with the PEP committee on feedback received and the proposed amendments will take place in August and September. Local board chairs (or alternates) will be invited to participate in these.

82. The PEP committee will be asked to adopt the FDS in late 2023.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Draft Future Development Strategy
b ⇨	Public consultation - summary of local feedback

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Claire Gray, Principal Advisor Growth and Spatial Strategy

Authorisers

Jacques Victor, GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Nina Siers, Acting General Manager, Local Board Services

Janine Geddes – Acting Local Area Manager – Aotea / Great Barrier Local & Waiheke Local Boards

Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board

22 August 2023

Local board feedback on the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan and Making Space for Water

File No.: CP2023/11091

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board feedback on the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan, and associated initiatives proposed as part of the Making Space for Water programme.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Recovery Office is coordinating efforts to support communities to recover from the extreme weather events of early 2023. A Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan is being developed to guide this work. Making Space for Water is one work programme within the proposed Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan and includes a range of proposed flood resilience activities.

3. Region-wide public consultation is taking place from 3 August to 31 August 2023. It is seeking Aucklanders’ feedback on two topics:

· their experience during the storms and their aspirations for recovery to inform planning, and

· their views on ways to better manage stormwater to reduce future flood risk.

4. Public consultation documents on storm recovery and resilience are included as Attachments A, B and C. Much of the consultation will be place-based, working with affected communities and households to hear their feedback on the recovery process, their ongoing needs, and their suggestions for improving resilience to future events.

5. Feedback is being requested from local boards concurrently with public consultation, as the timeline for decision-making is very short.

6. Local board views are sought on the questions outlined in the consultation document (Attachment C) as well as the proposed principles and two-tiered structure of the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan that is outlined in this report.

7. Workshops have been held with all local boards to provide information on the proposed Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan and the Making Space for Water programme, including information specific to proposed programmes in each local board area.

8. Local board feedback will be provided to the Governing Body along with public feedback and further programme detail in September 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide feedback on the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan and the Making Space for Water programme, as set out in the public consultation documents (Attachments A, B, and C)

b) whakarite / provide feedback on the proposed principles and structure of the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan.

Horopaki

Context

9. The Recovery Office is coordinating a programme to support communities to recover from this year’s storm events which has been developed collaboratively across the council group and external agencies. Planned recovery efforts will be presented in the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan, bringing together the delivery of recovery projects, initiatives and activities across the four recovery workstreams: Community and Social, Māori Partnership and Participation, Economic, and Natural and Built Environment.

10. The purpose of the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan is to:

· provide assurance to the people of Tāmaki Makaurau

· set objectives, providing direction for collaborative recovery efforts to address the impacts and consequences of severe weather events of early 2023

· document collaborative delivery of recovery projects, initiatives and activities, their participants and lead agencies, and timeframes

· provide a framework for planning the transition from recovery based upon the completion of projects, cessation of initiatives and activities, or their incorporation into business as usual by appropriate organisations

· provide a basis for monitoring progress towards the achievement of objectives and transition to delivery of services across council and recovery partners.

11. The plan will be a ‘living document’ with sections released progressively as programmes are finalised. One of the programmes within the Natural and Built Environment workstream is Making Space for Water, the proposed flood risk reduction programme.

12. The Making Space for Water programme is being proposed in response to more frequent and severe flood events in Auckland. Its purpose is to prioritise flood readiness in stormwater operations, and to ensure that communities, households, and businesses are supported to build their resilience to storms.

13. Local boards received a copy of the 23 May 2023 Governing Body report including the proposed Making Space for Water initiatives.

14. A briefing was held with all local board members on 17 July 2023 to provide more information to local boards about the direction of both programmes and how they can engage with the process.

15. At its July 2023 meeting, the Governing Body agreed to public consultation about the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan and the Making Space for Water programme in August 2023, and approved the public consultation documents (Attachments A, B and C).

16. Public consultation will take place from 3 August to 31 August 2023. Aucklanders have the opportunity to provide feedback through the AK Have Your Say website, as well as online webinars and drop-in events. Additional events are taking place for highly affected areas.

17. A memo circulated to local boards on 2 August 2023 provided more detailed information about consultation activities and events.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

18. Local board feedback is sought on the questions in Attachment C regarding communities’ experiences and aspirations for recovery, and the proposed initiatives for Making Space for Water.

19. Local board feedback is also sought on the proposed principles and structure of the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan, as outlined below. This feedback will inform the development of the plan, to be reported to the Governing Body in September.

Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan

20. The Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan is intended to support the coordination of recovery efforts. Recovery from the events of early 2023 needs to be effective at the local and regional level, take account of different timeframes for different impacts and consequences to be fully understood, and be based on engagement with iwi and Māori and Tāmaki Makaurau communities.

21. The design of the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan is informed by its purpose and principles, in support of good recovery practice. This includes ensuring suggestions for improvement are captured for future events.

Principles

22. The proposed principles of the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan are:

· people and their communities are foremost

· projects, initiatives, and activities addressing impacts and consequences, and the communities in which they are delivered, are prioritised based on need

· equity is an inherent consideration

· opportunities to build resilience and avoid future harm are sought proactively

· projects, initiatives and activities are integrated to maximise the benefit to Tāmaki Makaurau and its communities, and to mitigate or manage disruption

· projects, initiatives and activities are funded, have funding secured or have mechanisms in place to ensure funding is secured

· the plan is a living document: changes to projects, initiatives, and activities can be accommodated provided the intended outcome is not affected.

Structure

23. The impacts of consecutive events earlier this year mean that there are widespread impacts across the region, with a number of localities more severely impacted. To address these circumstances appropriately, the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan is envisaged as being two-tiered, with a region-wide section and sections that are place-based. It is proposed that local sections will align to individual or clusters of local board areas where communities were more significantly impacted by the weather events. It is also intended to be modular, so that sections can be added as information becomes available or replaced if key information changes.

Delivery

24. The Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan will be delivered in stages, with the regional section first followed by more focused local sections informed by local experience and feedback. The regional section will include discussion of exiting from the formal ‘recovery’ phase through a transition plan in early 2024.

Making space for water

25. As reported in the May 2023 report to Governing Body (GB/2023/88), nine initiatives have been identified as part of the proposed Making Space for Water programme. These are identified in Table 1, and described in more detail in Attachment A. Together, the initiatives are designed to address all flood-affected areas within the scope of the programme, with a cascade of interventions from education and advice through to engineering solutions and, in limited situations (as an option of last resort and subject to central government decisions), property acquisition.

Table 1. Proposed Making Space for Water initiatives

Operations and maintenance

1. Increased maintenance

2. Flood intelligence

Neighbourhood solutions

3. Community-led flood resilience

4. Stream rehabilitation

5. Rural settlements

6. Culvert and bridge upgrades

7. Blue-green networks

Site-specific interventions

8. Overland flow path management

9. High risk properties

26. Lessons from previous projects have been important in developing the possible work programmes. Staff are using lessons from Project Twin Streams and the more recent naturalisation projects of Te Ara Awataha in Northcote and parts of Te Auaunga (Oakley Creek) in Mount Roskill / Mount Albert. These more recent projects were designed and built to specifically reduce flood risk while enabling growth through nature-based solutions. Both projects performed very well in the recent storm events despite the intensity of the storm event.

27. Specifically, the design of the Te Auaunga project protected 89 habitable floors from flooding by adding capacity to the stream and reducing the previous flood plain. Te Ara Awataha project has helped facilitate a large-scale re-development of the Northcote area where Kāinga Ora are currently developing 1,700 apartments and Eke Panuku are re-developing the town centre including a further 300 homes.

28. Further, Project Twin Streams in Waitākere involved the purchase of approximately 150 properties over 10 years and their removal from flood hazard. The locations of these properties were flooded during the recent storm events and, had the houses not been removed previously, they would almost certainly have been flooded.

29. The proposed projects are anticipated to deliver three levels of benefit:

· Site-by-site benefit: Some of the proposed interventions will directly benefit individual properties, for example removing buildings that are at an unacceptable risk of repeated or severe flooding. Approximately 400 properties could be taken out of flood hazard zones through the proposed blue-green networks and culvert and bridge upgrades, and a further 150 properties have been identified as high-risk. These benefits depend on sufficient co-funding being made available for property acquisition.

· Community benefit: Other initiatives will provide benefits at a community level, for example the work to build community-led flood resilience, support rural settlements, and rehabilitate streams would support communities to act to reduce their flood risks by managing the infrastructure in their immediate community. Blue-green networks also provide community-scale benefits.

· Regional benefit: Investment in flood intelligence and overland flow path management impacts the entire region. Flood intelligence informs asset planning, maintenance, and mapping of flood risks. Overland flow path management requires council resources to identify, investigate and intervene in obstructions to overland flow paths. Our modelling and observations after the flood show that better overland flow path management would have noticeably reduced the extent of flooding in some areas by allowing the water to drain away.

Local dimensions to recovery

30. The potential for blue-green approaches is being assessed in the areas listed in Table 2.

Table 2. Proposed blue-green network projects by local board area

Local board	Proposed blue-green network
Albert-Eden Local Board	Meola-Epsom
Kaipātiki Local Board and Devonport-Takapuna Local Board	Wairau Valley, Totaravale and Sunnynook
Franklin Local Board	Whangapouri Creek
Henderson-Massey Local Board	Opanuku Stream and Swanson-Waimoko Stream
Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board	Harania Creek and Te Ararata Creek
Puketāpapa Local Board	Te Auaunga Stage 2
Rodney Local Board	Kumeū River
Waitākere Ranges Local Board	Porters Stream
Waitematā Local Board	Opouteteka / Cox’s Creek
Whau Local Board and Puketāpapa Local Board	Whau River

Some communities will need tailored consultation

31. Some local board areas were more severely impacted than others or experience frequent flooding. Of these, the Recovery Office has also identified communities that are more vulnerable to emergency events and has designed more active and targeted consultation through community groups in these areas. These include Māngere, Piha, Muriwai, Henderson, Rānui, Swanson, Milford, Karekare and Mount Roskill that were particularly impacted by this year’s storm events.

32. Direct efforts will continue to be made to connect with these affected residents and property owners through targeted promotion and additional community drop-in events.

33. Care will need to be taken with these communities as there will be overlap with property owners who are being contacted as part of initial assessments in respect of central government’s proposed voluntary buy out proposals. It is important that we clearly communicate the different purposes of each engagement and do not contribute more stress to individual scenarios.

34. In June, 6,838 letters were sent to property owners across Auckland seeking information regarding whether their property may be eligible for the government’s proposed voluntary buy-out scheme. While responses are still being received, as of 27 July, 28 per cent of respondents had indicated that they believe their property should be considered ‘Category 3’ (not safe to live in because of the unacceptable risk of future flooding and loss of life).

35. Staff recognise that the impacts of flooding on rural communities have been different to those on urban communities. The Recovery Office is working with the Northern Adverse Event Team and the Waikato Primary Industry Adverse Events Cluster to support engagement with rural communities. We will also seek specific feedback through community groups, guidance from rural local boards, and the Rural Advisory Panel on workstreams that affect rural areas, for example resilience of roading, power and communications.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

36. On 29 June 2023 the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee noted three main lines of action to build Auckland’s resilience to climate change through adaptation:

· strengthening the Unitary Plan

· speeding up community adaptation action

· initiatives within the Making Space for Water programme.

37. These lines of action are consistent with the overall strategic direction, commitments and outcomes sought in the Auckland Plan 2050, and policy settings in Ngā Hapori Momoho: the Thriving Communities Strategy, Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan, and the Water Strategy.

38. ‘Opportunities to build resilience and avoid future harm are sought proactively’ is a proposed principle of the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan and responds to climate change.

39. Both the Auckland Plan 2050 and Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan advocate for greater resilience to severe storms and flood events. The initiatives proposed in ‘Making Space for Water’ will have a beneficial impact on Auckland’s climate adaptation.

40. The proposed blue-green network and stream rehabilitation projects will include measures such as restoring wetlands, developing water detention areas, clearing overland flow paths, and naturalising channels. These nature-based solutions will generally have a lower carbon impact than the more carbon-intensive grey infrastructure. Some will also be able to sequester carbon.

41. The Making Space for Water programme will also promote the use of low carbon technologies and methodologies in the design, construction, and renewal of the piped network in line with the targets set by Te-Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri.

42. Infrastructure provision and construction are likely to cause some emissions in the short- to medium-term but will be beneficial in the long-term to improve Auckland’s ability to be prepared for adverse weather and climate disruption.

43. The social outcomes associated with the impacts of climate change on the community, cultural and natural ecosystems will be considered in the programme.

44. In combining engagement and consultation for the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan and Making Space for Water, the materials deployed, travel and resource use will be lower than if conducted separately.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

45. Many parts of council have responsibilities that influence how we manage flood risks and build community resilience. This detail was provided to the Governing Body on 22 June 2023. Staff have worked across the council group to align programme scope with policy direction and other work programmes led by the council, and with our partners, including council-controlled organisations.

46. Healthy Waters and the Recovery Office are working with the Chief Planning Office, Local Board Services, Legal, and Finance to refine Making Space for Water, develop the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan, and the associated consultation plan, to ensure alignment with council policy and priorities.

47. On 26 April 2023, the Civil Defence and Emergency Management (CDEM) committee approved accelerated consultation on the Auckland CDEM Group Plan review (CDEMC/2023/7). This consultation is occurring at the same time as the Storm Recovery and Resilience consultation. Staff across both workstreams are working to ensure these processes align.

48. The consultation document includes a list of internal and external parties who will be part of the continued development and implementation of the programme.

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

Local impacts and local board views

49. In the wake of storms and flooding, local boards play a critical role both in representing their communities and in the delivery of recovery activities in their respective areas.

50. This report seeks feedback from local boards on the experiences of their local communities and aspirations for recovery, the proposed priorities for the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan, and the proposed initiatives for Making Space for Water.

51. Feedback is being requested from local boards concurrently with public consultation, as there is a need to progress the recovery promptly.

52. Feedback from local boards will inform decisions by the Governing Body on the shape of the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan and Making Space for Water programme.

53. The Recovery Office and Healthy Waters presented to a briefing for all local board members on 7 July 2023 to provide an update on the development of the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan and Making Space for Water. Local boards have been provided with information on specific impacts of initiatives in their local areas to inform their feedback.

54. More specific plans to gather local views in a tailored manner, including those from more impacted communities are described in the analysis and advice section.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

55. Māori Partnership and Participation is a whenu (strand) in the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan. Direct consultation with mana whenua began in mid-May. Since then, staff have worked through their established relationships to refine some initiatives. Staff gave an overview of the programme to the Tāmaki Makaurau Mana Whenua Forum pou taiao on 7 June 2023. At this hui, staff were asked to hold a workshop on this and other broader water issues.

56. Hui with Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB) staff has highlighted a need to work more intentionally with IMSB members through programme development and public consultation. The Recovery Office recognises the need for effective consultation with Māori. Māori have interests across each of the recovery workstreams such as marae, businesses, housing, tamariki, and the natural environment. An iwi consultation plan is in development, with additional events proposed for mana whenua and mataawaka.

57. Staff are working with the council’s Māori outcomes specialists to maximise opportunities for mana whenua and Māori to provide input on the range of options for consultation and engagement, throughout the consultation period, programme design, and delivery.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

58. A proposed principle of the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan is that ‘projects, initiatives and activities are funded, have funding secured or have mechanisms in place to ensure funding is secured.’ Work is underway to quantify the costs of project initiatives and activities which will be reflected in the plan and incorporated into the development of the Long-term Plan 2024-2034, as appropriate.

59. On 1 June 2023, the government proposed entering into funding agreements with councils in cyclone and flood affected regions to support them to offer voluntary buy-out for owners of high-risk (Category 3) properties and to co-fund work needed to protect properties where risk can be managed (Category 2). Details of these arrangements are yet to be confirmed.

60. The proposed Making Space for Water programme of additional investment is currently estimated to cost around $1.65 billion. Elements of the programme may be co-funded by central government.

Funding options and impacts still need to be worked through

61. Different funding sources could be considered by the council to fund the remainder of the costs, but practicable options are likely to be limited to increases to general rates or the creation of a specific, new, targeted rate(s).

62. Any additional rates charge would be over and above the starting point general rates increase which is estimated to be 13 per cent for the 2024/2025 year for the average value residential property. This is, however, a very preliminary estimate and is subject to many variables and decisions as part of developing the Long-term Plan 2024-2034.

63. If the council were to fund the entire Making Space for Water programme with an estimated cost of $1.65 billion, this would require funding equivalent to an additional 8 per cent increase in general rates for the average value property.

64. The council is working through negotiations with central government in regards funding. Any Crown funding through this process will reduce the requirement for funding from Auckland’s ratepayers.

65. Further options could be available to the council around a targeted rate, including funding specific projects only from properties within each affected catchment, or collectively from all affected catchments. This could result in rating increases for some properties of well over 50 per cent.

66. Other rating policy options would be available to the council such as phasing in a targeted rate over two years to manage the impact on ratepayers.

67. This level of detail will be subject to further development for future consultation and eventual consideration by the Governing Body, including feedback from local boards. Future consultation will include updated cost projections and more detail on funding options, informed by feedback from this consultation and any funding agreements with central government.

68. Operating costs incurred within the 2023/2024 financial year will be met from existing budgets, including the Storm Response Fund.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

69. There are no risks associated with local boards providing feedback on these matters. Local board feedback will be shared with the Governing Body for consideration in developing the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan and the Making Space for Water programme.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

70. Engagement on the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan and Making Space for Water will take place between 3 August and 31 August 2023.

71. The Recovery Office will report to the September 2023 meeting of the Governing Body, seeking approval in principle for the structure and delivery of the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan. Community and local board feedback will be included in this report and used to inform the development of the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan. It is proposed to seek approval of the plan in sections thereafter.

72. The revised Making Space for Water work programme will be presented to the Governing Body in September 2023 for support in principle.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Storm Recovery and Resilience Consultation Document
b ⇨	Storm Recovery and Resilience Consultation Document Summary
c ⇨	Storm Recovery and Resilience Consultation Feedback Form

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Nicholas Vigar - Head of Planning, Healthy Waters

Mace Ward - Deputy Group Recovery Manager

Authorisers

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Mat Tucker - Group Recovery Manager

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Janine Geddes – Acting Local Area Manager – Aotea / Great Barrier Local & Waiheke Local Boards

Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board

22 August 2023

2025 Auckland Council elections - electoral system

File No.: CP2023/09400

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide feedback to the Governing Body on whether the electoral system should change from First Past the Post (FPP) to Single Transferable Voting (STV).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The council has previously decided to retain FPP, giving priority to keeping the voting experience as simple as possible for the voter.

3. STV has recognised benefits as an electoral system and the Future for Local Government Review has recommended it be mandatory for all councils.

4. A key feature of STV is that it permits the voter to vote for the candidate they prefer without being deterred by the prospect their vote might be wasted if the candidate is not a popular choice. STV allows the voter’s vote to count towards the voter’s second preference if their first preference is not elected. Their vote may be transferred to subsequent preferences if this is required.

5. Another key feature of STV is that it can allow a more proportional outcome in a multi-member election. A “quota” defines the number of votes required to be elected. Under STV a minority group might have enough votes to elect the group’s candidate whereas under FPP a minority group may never be represented (those in a majority group will always outnumber those in a minority group).

6. A downside to STV is that it can add complexity to the voting experience for voters who do not have sufficient knowledge about candidates. In these situations, it is difficult enough for a voter to decide for whom to vote, without then having to decide a ranking. However, STV as practiced in New Zealand does not require a voter to indicate a preference for each position. A voter could just indicate a first preference if that is their wish.

7. It is also debatable whether voters in New Zealand local government elections vote in groups, whether those groups are political parties, or demographic groups. In local government elections overseas where STV is used candidates stand in political parties and voters align with such political parties. STV ensures the success of political party candidates is proportional to the voting patterns in the community. In New Zealand local government elections, voters and candidates do not align with political parties to the same extent (though there is some alignment) – the meaning of a proportional outcome is less clear.

8. This report sets out the key advantages and disadvantages of STV. On balance there may be a benefit to voters through being able to express preferences thereby avoiding wasting their vote, even though this introduces some complexities for some voters. The complexity associated with STV voting can be mitigated with simple and clear instructions on how to vote.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) whakarite /provide feedback to the Governing Body on whether the electoral system should be changed from First Past the Post to Single Transferable Voting for the 2025 elections.

Horopaki

Context

9. The Local Electoral Act 2001 (LEA) provides for two electoral systems for council elections:

(i) First Past the Post (FPP)

(ii) Single Transferable Vote (STV).

10. Prior to each council election the council can decide which electoral system to use. If the council wishes to change its electoral system to STV it must resolve to change to STV for the next two elections by 12 September 2023 (LEA s 27). A council may resolve to conduct a poll (referendum) on whether to change to STV. This might be held as a standalone poll or in conjunction with the next election. Also, a petition from 5% of electors can demand that the council conduct a poll.

11. Whenever the Governing Body has considered these matters in the past it has decided to retain FPP, its focus being on the voter and making the voting experience as simple as possible.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

FPP

12. FPP, also known as plurality voting, has the feature that candidates having more votes win over candidates having fewer votes. In a community which has minority groups, minority groups might never be represented if it is assumed that groups vote only for candidates representing their group or community of interest.

13. A simple scenario illustrates the implications. In this hypothetical scenario an electorate has a majority group and a minority group and each group puts up candidates for a multi-vacancy election (for example a multi-member ward). The majority group will out-vote the minority group for each vacancy because it has more voters and each voter can vote for each vacancy. FPP is characterised as a ‘winner takes all’ electoral system. In this simple scenario of a majority group and a minority group the minority group will never be represented. It does not have enough votes to out-vote the majority group. (In this example the term “group” is used generically. Discussion about FPP and proportional systems like STV in the literature is typically in terms of political groups. However the same arguments apply if the groups are demographic groups such as ethnic groups or age groups).

STV - features

14. For STV, voters mark the candidates in order of preference -1st, 2nd, 3rd etc. To determine who is elected, a quota is determined from the number of votes and the number of positions to be filled. The first preferences for each candidate are counted. Any candidate who has votes equal to or greater than the quota is elected. Any surplus votes (over the quota) of the elected candidates are redistributed to voters' next preferences. When all surpluses have been redistributed, the last placed candidate is excluded and their votes redistributed to voters' next preferences. This process continues until the total number of candidates to be elected is reached.

15. One key feature of STV is the “quota”. This is the number of votes a candidate must receive in order to get elected. Because each voter has only one vote the total pool of votes is equal to the total number of electors who are voting. The quota is obtained by dividing the total votes by one more than the number of vacancies and adding a small number^{^[4]} to avoid a tie. For example, if the total number of voters is 10,000 and there are 4 vacancies, then the quota is obtained by dividing 10,000 by five to give 2,000 votes (plus a small number) as the quota. Any candidate reaching the quota will be elected^{^[5]}. If there was a majority group of 6,000 voters and a minority group of 4,000 voters the minority group now has a chance of electing a representative because it is able to provide the required 2,000 votes to elect a candidate (whereas under FPP the majority group could take all seats).

16. STV is considered to be a proportional electoral system in that the outcome of an election will be more closely proportionate to the voting patterns in the community, particularly in a multi-member election (single or double-member wards would not provide the scope for a range of groups to be represented).

17. A second key feature of STV is that it addresses the issue of wasted votes by enabling voters to express their preferences. FPP can discourage a voter from voting for the candidate they prefer because they know their vote would be wasted if the candidate was not likely to get elected. Under STV a voter’s first preference might be for the candidate they prefer but if that candidate was eliminated then their vote would go to their second preference and so on. Under STV it is safer for a voter to vote for the candidate they actually prefer because they know that if their preferred candidate is not eventually elected then their vote will count toward their second and subsequent preferences.

18. The aspect of wasted votes under FPP has been highlighted at mayoral elections. In the most recent mayoral election candidates withdrew to avoid voters wasting their votes on them. If STV had been in place this might not have been necessary.

19. For single-seat elections such as a mayoral election or election of one member in a single-seat ward, STV has the feature that a winning candidate will receive a majority of votes and not just more votes than other candidates. This is because at each iteration of vote counting the lowest scoring candidate is eliminated until, at the final iteration, the contest is between two candidates.

20. The Governing Body might resolve to provide for Māori representation by way of one or more Māori wards. There would, at most, be two members elected from a Māori ward. STV could assist those voting on the Māori roll – a voter could express a first preference for a candidate that represents their own mana whenua group and also express a second and subsequent preferences in case that candidate did not get elected.

STV – concerns

Voter turnout

21. The effect of varying patterns of voter turnout might be a greater concern than achieving proportionality. For proportionality to be achieved it is best to have multi-member electorates. Governing Body wards are currently single or double member wards. As noted in the review of the 2022 elections there are widely varying voter turnout patterns around Auckland. If, say, a six-member ward was created, being three times the size of a double-member ward, then the differences in voter turnout within the ward might be of more significant concern than achieving proportionality through STV.

22. For example, if the Manukau, Howick and Manurewa-Papakura wards were combined then the part of this new large ward that would have the most voter turnout would be in the Howick area. It is possible that Howick voters would determine who represented Māngere and Ōtara.

23. The ward system spreads representation around Auckland geographically and because of the varying voter turnout patterns might be of more importance in terms of achieving representation of communities than adopting STV. STV might still be of benefit in single-member ward elections because of its preferential voting features which address the wasted vote issue. Local board elections use multi-member electorates (members are elected at-large or by subdivisions) and STV could be of benefit in achieving proportional representation.

New Zealand council elections not party- based

24. In New Zealand local government elections achieving a proportional result might not be very meaningful. The proportionality benefits of STV are usually explained in terms of voters voting in groups for candidates that represent the voters’ groups. For example, if there are younger voters who make up a proportion of the electorate but there are a greater number of older voters who vote for candidates in their own age group the younger voters as a group might not be represented under FPP^{^[6]} but under STV might be able to achieve sufficient votes to reach the quota. However, if voters do not vote in groups then it is difficult to explain how STV might enhance proportionality. In local government elections voting in groups does not occur to the extent it occurs in Parliamentary elections when voters align with political parties.

25. In local elections overseas where STV is used such as Ireland and Scotland, candidates are party-based. If, in New Zealand local government elections, voters tend to vote for candidates they consider to be the best candidates regardless of political group, age group, ethnic group or other type of group, then the proportionality benefits of STV are more difficult to argue.

Complexity

26. STV adds complexity for the voter. For example, at the 2022 local elections the Manurewa Local Board had 8 vacancies and 29 candidates. The voter is faced with deciding not only which 8 of the 29 candidates should be elected but how to rank them (noting there is no requirement to vote for, or express a preference for, each vacancy). This could make the task of voting more difficult for a voter who does not have any knowledge of candidates other than the information presented in the accompanying profile statements. On the other hand it might make voting a better experience for a voter who does have knowledge of all candidates, has clear preferences for candidates and wishes to use their vote to have an effect on who is elected. Ensuring the voting experience is user-friendly has been a key concern of the council in the past.

27. Hamilton City Council in 2022 moved to STV (and also established a Māori ward) for the first time. It experienced the lowest voter turnout nationally in 2022 at 29.4%.

STV – other councils in New Zealand

28. The following tables list which city and regional councils adopted FPP / STV for the 2022 elections^{^[7]}.

29. Territorial authorities – Auckland Council and city councils (omitting district councils).

30. Data in the table below includes voter turnout, informal votes and election of women councillors. There tend to be more informal votes under STV (voters not marking their voting documents correctly and therefore not counted). STV does not seem to have had a significant effect in 2022 on voter turnout (except for Hamilton) or the election of women councillors.

		Voter turnout	Total votes	Informal votes	Informal votes %	Total coun-cillors	Women coun-cillors	Women coun-cillors %
Auckland Council	FPP	35.2%	404,541	488	0.12	20	8	40.0
Christchurch City Council	FPP	44.4%	120,210	432	0.36	16	5	31.3
Hutt City Council	FPP	41.0%	64,002	250	0.39	12	5	41.7
Invercargill City Council	FPP	53.2%	20,907	87	0.42	12	4	33.3
Napier City Council	FPP	43.9%	18,451	31	0.17	12	6	50.0
Upper Hutt City Council	FPP	43.9%	24,296	42	0.17	10	4	40.0
Dunedin City Council	STV	40.1%	48,133	961	2.00	14	6	30.6
Hamilton City Council	STV	29.4%	32,357	846	2.61	14	7	50.0
Nelson City Council	STV	53.2%	41,794	937	2.24	12	2	16.7
Palmerston North City Council	STV	38.6%	21,370	515	2.41	15	6	40.0
Porirua City Council	STV	37.3%	15,640	212	1.36	10	4	40.0
Wellington City Council	STV	45.5%	73,067	287	0.39	15	8	53.3

Regional councils

Bay Of Plenty Regional Council	FPP
Southland Regional Council	FPP
Hawke's Bay Regional Council	FPP
Northland Regional Council	FPP
Taranaki Regional Council	FPP
Waikato Regional Council	FPP
West Coast Regional Council	FPP
Canterbury Regional Council	FPP
Otago Regional Council	FPP
Manawatū-Whanganui Regional Council	FPP
Wellington Regional Council	STV

STV – Future for local government review

31. The Future for Local Government Review Panel has recommended that STV becomes mandatory for all council elections^{^[8]}:

32. “STV can be more representative of voters’ choices because a vote can be transferred if a preferred candidate does not meet a certain threshold. This transfer of votes avoids wasted ballots. Early research demonstrates that STV leads to improvements in the representation of women (Vowles and Hayward 2021). However, the representative benefits of STV work best when there is a large pool of candidates and wards with more than one seat being contested.”

33. It is unknown whether this, or any other recommendation, will be implemented by the incoming Government in time to be in place for the 2025 elections.

STV – poll

34. The council is required to give public notice by 19 September 2023 of the right for 5% of electors to demand a poll on the electoral system to be used for the 2025 elections. Such a public notice is required prior to each election and, in the past, has not resulted in any interest for a poll on whether to change to STV.

35. The council itself may resolve to conduct a poll on the electoral system to be used. A stand-alone poll on changing to STV for 2025 would cost $1.2 – 1.3 million. A poll held in conjunction with the 2025 elections on whether to change to STV for 2028 would cost an additional $90,000 - $120,000.

Conclusion

36. While there are arguments for and against STV, on balance the ability for voters to express preferences is a benefit and is likely to become mandatory if the Future For Local Government Review Panel’s recommendations are implemented.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

37. A change of electoral system will not impact climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

38. A decision about the electoral system affects the election of the mayor, councillors and local board members. It does not have an impact on the council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

39. This report sets out the benefits and disadvantages of the STV electoral system. The choice of electoral system impacts the election of local board members. Because local board elections are at-large or by multi-member subdivision the proportionality aspects of STV could be of benefit in achieving an outcome that is proportional to the voting patterns in the community.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

40. The Governing Body is considering providing for Māori representation by way of a Māori ward. STV would allow those on the Māori roll to express first preferences for their own mana whenua group candidates while allowing second and subsequent preferences to be counted if their first preference is not elected.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

41. There would be some minor additional cost associated with using STV as compared to FPP due to STV requiring more processing.

42. There would be an additional cost if the council chose to conduct a poll on whether to change to STV as outlined earlier in the report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

43. If the electoral system is changed to STV it will be important to provide very simple and clear advice to voters on how to vote.

44. Ballot order effect can be more pronounced the harder voting is for a voter. Under STV there may be more of a risk that candidate names at the top of the list might be selected. One mitigation would be to order candidate names randomly. A report on the order of candidate names will be presented for feedback in due course.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

45. The feedback from the local board will be conveyed to the Governing Body.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Carol Hayward - Team Leader Operations and Policy

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Janine Geddes – Acting Local Area Manager – Aotea / Great Barrier Local & Waiheke Local Boards

Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board

22 August 2023

Urgent decision under delegated authority - Aotea Great Barrier Island Destination Management Plan (DMP)

File No.: CP2023/08006

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To ratify an urgent decision made by the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board to receive the Aotea Great Barrier Island Destination Management Plan and commit to supporting the plan outcomes and assist in monitoring.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board, Destination Great Barrier Island Trust and the local community have aspirations for a more sustainable, and regenerative approach to manage and attract visitors to their region in a way that honours the environment and maintains the island life. To guide the implementation of those aspirations in the Aotea Great Barrier Island Destination Management Plan (DMP) was developed with funding support from Tātaki Auckland Unlimited (TAU) and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s (MBIE) Strategic Tourism Assets Protection Programme (STAPP).

3. The purpose of the Aotea Great Barrier Island Destination Management Plan (Attachment B) is to provide a roadmap for the future of the visitor economy on the island, set a sustainable projected direction forward and in doing so, attend to its residents needs and aspirations for a balance between visitor economy growth and its impacts.

4. This plan outlines a long-term vision for Aotea / Great Barrier Island as a destination and recommends actions to achieve this vision.

5. This is a ‘living document’ that will adapt to the environment in which it operates and will be amended as progress is made while ensuring its outcomes remain relevant and achievable.

6. It will continually be referred to, edited and updated by key stakeholders with an interest in the visitor economy on the island. It brings together elements of the overarching Destination AKL 2025 strategy and its guiding principles of kotahitanga (collaboration), kaititakinga (guardianship) and manaakitanga (hospitality or warm welcome).

7. In order to achieve and maintain the recommendations of the plan, staff request Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board to commit to supporting the plan and assist in monitoring.

8. The local board made an urgent decision on Friday 30 June to receive the Aotea Great Barrier Island Destination Management Plan, work with Tātaki Auckland Unlimited and key stakeholders to establish a local Destination Management office or officer (DMO) and thank Karen Thompson-Smith for all her mahi. This report is to ratify that decision.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board:

a) confirm / whakaū the urgent decision under delegated authority (Attachment A to the agenda report) to:

i) receive the Aotea Great Barrier Island Destination Management Plan

ii) work with Tātaki Auckland Unlimited and key stakeholders to establish a local Destination Management office or officer (DMO) that would work out of existing available space and/or a home base.

iii) thank Karen Thompson-Smith for all her mahi in completing the Aotea Great Barrier Island Destination Management Plan.

Horopaki

Context

9. The Destination Great Barrier Island Trust identified a need for the future of the island’s visitor economy sector to be better defined, with added focus on visitor number control and visitations impact management. Let by the Trust’s aspirations, in 2020 Tātaki Auckland Unlimited (TAU) appointed Aotea / Great Barrier as a key area within Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland where in order to attend to its residents needs and aspirations, a balance between visitor economy growth and its impacts needed to be achieved.

10. Stafford Strategy was engaged to complete this work due to its experience in destination management activity, including its vital role in the development of the Destination AKL 2025 strategy.  

11. The plan focuses on tourism reset and provides a unique opportunity for mana whenua, the Aotea / Great Barrier community, DOC, local government and tourism industry stakeholders to impellent a sustainable growth approach aiming to preserve what makes Aotea / Great Barrier a special place for future generations.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

12. The Aotea Great Barrier Island Destination Management Plan was developed through an extensive stakeholder consultation process including guidance and input from Ngāti Rehua Ngātiwai ki Aotea Trust, Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board, Destination Great Barrier Island Trust, Department of Conservation and Tātaki Auckland Unlimited. A complete list of stakeholders can be found in the Aotea Great Barrier Island Destination Management Plan itself.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

13. The visitor economy sector puts pressure on the environment.

The need for communities to respond to climate challenges in accordance with Auckland’s climate targets are outlined in Tāruke-ā- Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan, and two key TAU-led sustainability strategies: the Destination AKL 2025 www.aucklandnz.com/destinationakl and the Destination AKL Recovery Plan (DARP)76.

The above scripts recognise the necessity for:

· A better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland’s visitor economy, in terms of emissions and sustainability more broadly;

· Leadership and an action plan, developed in collaboration with the sector, to guide the visitor economy’s recovery towards a more resilient, adaptable and low impact (regenerative) sector.

14. A high-level ‘roadmap for change’ has therefore been developed to support the sector’s transition towards being regenerative, setting out key evidence-based actions that will reduce emissions resulting from the visitor economy and support the sector to operate in a more sustainable manner.

15. Auckland's Sustainable Visitor Economy: Towards A Low-Carbon, Sustainable Future77 includes baseline data (or, where are we now?), and a plan of action (what changes will we make?) which were stress-tested by TAU and organisations from the visitor economy. The report finishes with brief recommendations about how TAU can take these actions forward and ensure that progress is made.

16. While ‘sustainable tourism’ aims to have no negative impact on a place, regenerative tourism’ aims to have a net-positive effect. Under regenerative tourism, visitors travel with the intent of leaving a destination in a better position than it was before they arrived.

This DMP has taken the following into account:

17. Tourism must add more than only economic value, it must actively enrich our communities and help protect and restore our environment.

18. Building a regenerative model for the visitor economy sector is important for ensuring the long-term sustainability and resilience of tourism. As tourism is a significant sector of the island economy building a regenerative tourism sector will also contribute to wider efforts to decarbonise our economy.

19. Regenerative tourism will ensure that visitors to Aotea / Great Barrier have a positive impact on our community with an aim to leave as storytellers who are able to share our unique culture and heritage with their family/friends and the world.

20. Regenerative tourism will play a central role in the refresh of Destination AKL 2025, with information gleaned from the process of creating this plan and other regions within Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland forming part of this refresh.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21. Other council organisations consulted with this programme include:

· Auckland Transport,

· Auckland Regional Parks / Glenfern Trust and Sanctuary

· Auckland Council

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

Local impacts and local board views

22. This DMP will help the board and key stakeholders decide the type of visitor and tourism the island wants and the benefits they would like to receive from the visitor economy.

During this process, the local board has been actively involved in the consultation process, helping to identify the islands unique attributes, assets, challenges, and opportunities. Alongside the local board organisations such as Ngāti Rehua Ngātiwai ki Aotea Trust, Destination Great Barrier Island, Department of Conservation (DOC) and Regional Parks have also inputted to the process along with a robust response from the community on the island through a public survey. This feedback has been evaluated and has offered the local board and the visitor economy on the island advice for action. There are six key priority recommendations to be agreed upon and action to be taken in the following six-twelve months.

The first key recommendation for the board to address alongside Tātaki Auckland Unlimited and others is the appointment of an individual to work upon the feasibility of a localised destination office/r to drive the recommendations in the plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23. High levels of care and consideration have been taken in the development of this plan and in engaging mana whenua and Māori communities. Timings that best align to iwi priorities will guide this process therefore engagement will vary, led by iwi priorities.

24. We would like to acknowledge the leaders guiding this kaupapa for Ngāti Rehua - Ngāti Wai ki Aotea Trust, Martin Cleave (Ngāti Wai Trust Board), Jeff Cleave, Jan Piahana (Kawa Marae), Peter Hoey (Motairehe Marae), Darren Cleave (Motairehe Marae), Hori Parata (Kāhui kaumatua) and Opo Ngawaka – Chair of Ngāti Rehua - Ngāti Wai ki Aotea who met with consultants and TAU representatives, and Fletcher Beazley - Trustee Ngāti Rehua - Ngāti Wai ki Aotea Trust Board.

25. Conversations with the above leaders have helped guide the recommendations and opportunities that have been highlighted in the Aotea Great Barrier Island Destination Management Plan.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

26. The setting up of the destination management office/r (DMO) will incur some financial input from the local board. Initial annual investment of $10-15K for the first three-year period in which the project is getting established is advised. Once the project enters a second phase of maturity, it is recommended that expenses incurred by the office maintenance are looked to be covered through contributions sought from key stakeholders.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

27. There is a significant risk to the success of the Aotea Great Barrier Island Destination Management Plan if the local board does not commit to supporting the plan or the setting up of the destination management office/r to assist in the delivery and monitoring of the plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28. Following receipt by the local board Tātaki Auckland Unlimited will release the plan to the community through the Barrier Bulletin, social media, on Tātaki Auckland Unlimited Industry website and with hard copies at the library.

29. Tātaki Auckland Unlimited will set up a meeting with the local board and key stakeholders to discuss the DMO set up and implementation.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	20230630 Urgent decision Aotea Great Barrier Island Destination Management Plan
b ⇨	Aotea Great Barrier Island Destination Management Plan

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Karen Thompson-Smith - Destination Management Planner, Tātaki Auckland Unlimited

Jacqui Fyers - Senior Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Annie Dundas - Head Visitor Economy, Tātaki Auckland Unlimited

Janine Geddes – Acting Local Area Manager – Aotea / Great Barrier Local & Waiheke Local Boards

[1] IPCC. (2022). Climate Change: A Threat to Human Wellbeing and Health of the Planet. Retrieved from https://www.ipcc.ch/2022/02/28/pr-wgii-ar6/ [date accessed: 19 August 2022].

^{^[2]}Bodeker, G., Cullen, N., Katurji, M., McDonald, A., Morgenstern, O., Noone, D., Renwick, J., Revell, L. and Tait, A. (2022). Aotearoa New Zealand climate change projections guidance: Interpreting the latest IPCC WG1 report findings. Prepared for the Ministry for the Environment, Report number CR 501, 51p.

[3]Market Economics, Medium projection, measured as Modified Employment Count (MEC), which accounts for sole trader and self-employment undercount issues in the official SNZ Employment Count (EC) statistics. EC equivalents are 809,000 for 2023, and 1,057,300 for 2053.

[5] The actual formula used in New Zealand is contained in the Local Electoral Regulations 2001, Schedule 1A.

[6] It should be noted though that New Zealand’s youngest Mayor (Gore District Council) was elected under FPP.

Chairperson	Izzy Fordham
Deputy Chairperson	Patrick O'Shea
Members	Laura Caine
	Chris Ollivier
	Neil Sanderson

Author	Guia Nonoy - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Janine Geddes – Acting Local Area Manager – Aotea / Great Barrier Local & Waiheke Local Boards

Purpose of the report

Purpose of the report

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