Agenda of Ōrākei Local Board - Thursday, 21 September 2023

1 Nau mai | Welcome

Chairperson S Milne will welcome those present with a karakia.

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 Ōrākei Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 17 August 2023, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

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 Ōrākei 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 - Men's Shed Auckland East Incorporated

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an opportunity for individuals and groups to deliver a presentation to the board during the deputation segment of the business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Alan Minson and Mal McLennan will be in attendance to present to the board on the Men’s Shed Auckland East Incorporated and a number of ongoing Auckland Council matters.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) receive the presentation and thank Alan Minson and Mal McLennan for their attendance.

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.

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

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.”

Ōrākei Local Board

21 September 2023

Approval for a new private road name at 12 & 46 Abbotts Way, Remuera

File No.: CP2023/11795

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Ōrākei Local Board to name a new private road, being a commonly owned access lot (COAL), created by way of a subdivision development at 12 & 46 Abbotts Way, Remuera.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines (the guidelines) set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. The guidelines state that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.

3. The developer and applicant, Abbotts way Garden NZ Limited, has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

4. The proposed road name options have been assessed against the guidelines and the Australian & New Zealand Standard, Rural and Urban Addressing, AS NZS 4819:2011 and the Guidelines for Addressing in-fill Developments 2019 – LINZ OP G 01245 (the standards). The technical matters required by those documents are considered to have been generally met and the proposed names are not duplicated elsewhere in the region or in close proximity. Mana whenua have been consulted in the manner required by the guidelines.

5. The proposed names for the new private road at 12 & 46 Abbotts Way are:

· Jayden Place (applicant’s preference)

· Gardenview Rise (alternative)

· Virescent Mews (alternative)

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) approves the name Gardenview Rise for the new private road created by way of subdivision undertaken by Abbotts way Garden NZ Limited at 12 & 46 Abbotts Way, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (Road naming reference RDN90108182, resource consent references SUB60340436 of BUN60340434).

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent reference SUB60340436 was approved for the creation of 55 fee simple residential allotments and one COAL.

7. Location and site plans of the development can be found in Attachments A and B.

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

9. Therefore, in this development, the new COAL requires a road name because it serves more than five lots. This can be seen in Attachment B, where the COAL that requires a name is highlighted in yellow.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

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

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

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

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

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

12. Theme: Most of the proposed road names reflect the location site and the landscape feature within the development and in the surrounding area.

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Jayden Place (applicant’s preference)	The proposed name is of significant personal importance to the site owner (named after the site owner’s pet).
Gardenview Rise (alternative)	The proposed name is reflective of the location/geology of the site, in addition to the green space provided onsite and of the neighbouring reserve.
Virescent Mews (alternative)	The name corresponds to the green space provided onsite and of the neighbouring reserve.

13. Assessment: All the name options listed in the table above have been assessed by the council’s Subdivision Specialist team to ensure that they meet both the guidelines and the standards in respect of road naming. While the predominance of the technical standards are considered to have been met and duplicate names are not located in close proximity, the applicant’s preferred name does not have a particular local theme with ‘Gardenview Rise’ considered more reflective of the local context and it is for this reason that the recommendation is to support the first alternative in this instance and while reiterating that it is for the local board to decide upon the suitability of the names within the local context and in accordance with the delegation.

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

15. Road Type: ‘Rise’ ‘Mews’ and ‘Place’ are acceptable road types for the new private road, suiting the form and layout of the COAL.

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

21. On 20 May 2022, mana whenua were contacted by council on behalf of the applicant, through the Resource Consent department’s central facilitation process, as set out in the guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

· Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki

· Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Ngāti Tamaoho

· Te Ākitai Waiohua

· Te Ahiwaru Waiohua

· Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

· Ngāti Paoa Trust Board

· Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust

· Ngāti Maru

· Ngāti Tamaterā

· Waikato-Tainui

· Ngāti Whanaunga

· Te Patukirikiri

22. By the close of the consultation period, no responses, comments, or feedback were received. It cannot be construed that a lack of response is indicative of acceptance of the names proposed, however, and dependent on the scale of the development and its level of significance, not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua.

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Report Attachment A Location Map
b ⇨	Report Attachment B Site Plan

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Amy Cao - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager

Ōrākei Local Board

21 September 2023

Ōrākei Local Board Annual Report 2022/2023

File No.: CP2023/12401

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board adoption of the 2022/2023 Annual Report for the Ōrākei Local Board, prior to it being adopted by the Governing Body on 28 September 2023.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Auckland Council Annual Report 2022/2023 is being prepared and needs to be adopted by the Governing Body by 28 September 2023. As part of the overall report package, individual reports for each local board are prepared.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) adopt the draft 2022/2023 Ōrākei Local Board Annual Report as set out in Attachment A to the agenda report.

b) note that any proposed changes after the adoption will be clearly communicated and agreed with the chairperson before the report is submitted for adoption by the Governing Body on 28 September 2023.

Horopaki

Context

3. In accordance with the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and the Local Government Act 2002, each local board is required to monitor and report on the implementation of its Local Board Agreement. This includes reporting on the performance measures for local activities and the overall funding impact statement for the local board.

4. In addition to the compliance purpose, local board annual reports are an opportunity to tell the wider performance story with a strong local flavour, including how the local board is working towards the outcomes of their local board plan.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

5. The annual report contains the following sections:

Section	Description
Mihi	The mihi is an introduction specific to each local board area and is presented in Te Reo Māori and English.
About this report	An overview of what is covered in this document.
Message from the chairperson	An overall message introducing the report, highlighting achievements and challenges, including both financial and non-financial performance.
Local board members	A group photo of the local board members.
Our area – projects and improvements	A visual layout of the local board area summarising key demographic information and showing key projects and facilities in the area.
Performance report	Provides performance measure results for each activity, providing explanations where targeted service levels have not been achieved. Includes the activity highlights and challenges.
Our performance explained	Highlights of the local board’s work programme which contributed to a performance outcome
Local flavour	A profile of either an outstanding resident, grant, project or facility that benefits the local community.
Funding impact statement	Financial performance results compared to long-term plan and annual plan budgets, together with explanations about variances.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

6. The council’s climate change disclosures are covered in volume four of the annual report and sections within the summary annual report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

7. Council departments and council-controlled organisations comments and views have been considered and included in the annual report in relation to activities they are responsible for delivering on behalf of local boards.

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

Local impacts and local board views

8. Local board feedback will be included where possible. Any changes to the content of the final annual report will be discussed with the chairperson.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

9. The annual report provides information on how Auckland Council has progressed its agreed priorities in the Long-term Plan 2021-2031 over the past 12 months. This includes engagement with Māori, as well as projects that benefit various population groups, including Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

10. The annual report provides a retrospective view on both the financial and service performance in each local board area for the financial year 2022/2023.

11. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

12. The annual report is a legislatively required document. It is audited by Audit New Zealand who assess if the report represents information fairly and consistently, and that the financial statements comply with accounting standard PBE FRS-43: Summary Financial Statements. Failure to demonstrate this could result in a qualified audit opinion.

13. The annual report is a key communication to residents. It is important to tell a clear and balanced performance story, in plain English and in a form that is accessible, to ensure that council meets its obligations to be open with the public it serves.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

14. The next steps for the draft 2022/2023 Annual Report for the local board are:

· Audit NZ review during August and September 2023

· report to the Governing Body for adoption on 28 September 2023

· release to stock exchanges and publication online on 29 September 2023

· physical copies provided to local board offices, council service centres and libraries by the end of October 2023.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Draft Ōrākei Local Board Annual Report 2022/2023

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Sugenthy Thomson - Lead Financial Advisor

David Rose - Lead Financial Advisor

Authorisers

Mark Purdie - Lead Financial Advisor

Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager

Ōrākei Local Board

21 September 2023

Submissions and feedback on the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2023

File No.: CP2023/12977

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an overview of feedback and submissions received from public consultation on the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2023.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. In June 2023, the local board approved a draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2023 for public consultation. The consultation period ran from 13 July to 14 August 2023.

3. A total of 222 pieces of stakeholder and community feedback was received for Ōrākei Local Board, including 208 submissions through the online survey tool, 6 hard copy submissions and 8 pieces of feedback via email.

4. Staff have prepared a Summary of Feedback report (Attachment A) summarising the results of the consultation. This will be made available for the public to view on the AK Have your say website.

5. All feedback submissions will also be available on the Auckland Council website at akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/local-board-plans-2023-feedback

6. The most prevalent topic in the submissions was around climate change and the need for it to be a priority in the plan. Local volunteers were highlighted as being a key component to the success of the community and an emphasis on the importance of our public open spaces and facilities being maintained. Submitters overwhelmingly commented on the importance of water quality and preservation of beaches. Almost half of submissions spoke of the need for the Gowing Drive connection of the Glen Innes to Tamaki Drive Shared Path.

7. The Ōrākei Local Board should consider the submissions and feedback prior to adopting the final local board plan in November 2023. Any changes and/or responses to feedback will be detailed in the report to adopt the plan.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) receive submissions and feedback on the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2023.

b) consider feedback when finalising the Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2023.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires that each local board must:

· adopt its local board plan by 31 October of the year following an election

· use the special consultative procedure (SCP) to engage with their communities.

9. On 22 June 2023, Ōrākei Local Board approved the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2023 for public consultation.

10. Early engagement with the community helped inform the draft local board plan as did feedback from the Annual Budget consultation.

11. The key features of the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2023 were:

· Māori Outcomes – developing a strong iwi presence in Okahu Bay, partnering with iwi to enhance our local ecology and connecting earlier and more frequently with Ngati Whatua Ōrākei on new projects and their aspirations for the area

· Climate Action – build on efforts of our local environmental volunteer groups, support our schools to further environmental education, advocate to Auckland Transport to complete the Glen Innes to Tamaki Drive shared path (including the Gowing Drive connection) to lower emissions and advocate for a sponge city approach for the betterment of our area

· Our People – enable and recognise our local volunteers, strengthen mana whenua relationships and keep our communities informed, included and feeling safe

· Our Environment – strengthen council-community partnerships, enhance our forest, bush and wetlands and improve the quality of our beaches and waterways

· Our Community – our network of open spaces and community facilities meets the need of the growing population, communities connect through art, sport and events and our libraries are restored cultural hubs for the community

· Our Places – development in the area is well planned, transport options are well connected and accessible and community places are well-used and attractive

· Our Economy – local businesses are thriving with bustling town centres and a range of local and international visitors are drawn to the area

12. In addition to understanding the needs and aspirations of the community, feedback was sought on:

· The support for a targeted rate to improve community facilities in the board area

How we consulted:

13. The consultation was held between 13 July and 14 August 2023. A communications campaign encouraged people to “Help Shape the Future’ of the Ōrākei Local Board area and to “Tell us what’s important”. This was promoted through libraries and council facilities, social media and resident and business association meetings.

14. A range of engagement activities were undertaken to encourage the public to have their say, with a focus on digital and online platforms:

· Public submissions: These were hard copy and online collected via email, post, and through libraries, service centres, local board offices, People’s Panel members and the online engagement platform akhaveyoursay/localboardplans.

· Have Your Say: A face-to-face event was held on Thursday 27 July 2023 at Ellerslie War Memorial Hall.

· Translations: The summary of the draft plan was also translated into Mandarin for the Ōrākei Local Board. Some information was also available in Te Reo Māori and New Zealand Sign Language through the Ak Have Your Say website.

15. The Auckland East Community Network (formerly Eastern Bays Network) held a session to support the consultation.

16. In response, the local board received the following feedback:

· 208 submissions through the online survey tool

· 6 hard copy submissions

· 1 piece of feedback via Have Your Say event

· 8 email submissions

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Summary of consultation feedback

17. The results and analysis of the public consultation should be considered by the local board when developing the final local board plan.

18. Staff have prepared a Summary of Feedback report (Attachment A) summarising the results of the consultation. The key messages of the report are described in Table 1 below.

Table 1:

Consultation question	Themed feedback
Our People: Do you agree or disagree the initiatives will help you and your community to thrive?	· 89% strongly agree/agree with this outcome’s initiatives · Volunteers are a high priority · Support mana whenua relationships · Support for Gowing Drive connection
Our Environment: Do you agree or disagree the initiatives reflect your community’s environmental priorities?	· 92% strongly agree/agree with this outcome’s initiatives · Clean waterways and preservation of beaches are a top priority · Support for Gowing Drive connection
Our Community: Do you agree or disagree the initiatives support increased participation from your community and improved connection?	· 87% strongly agree/agree with this outcome’s initiatives · Community spaces and facilities are important and must be maintained · Support for Gowing Drive connection
Our Places: Do you agree or disagree the initiatives will help make Ōrākei a great place to live and work in?	· 75% strongly agree/agree with this outcome’s initiatives · More work needs to be done on transport connections and congestion · Good public transport is vital · Concern around intensification impacts · Support for Gowing Drive connection
Our Economy: Do you agree or disagree the initiatives will support and bolster our local economy?	· 74% strongly agree/agree with this outcome’s initiatives · Supporting local is important
Would you support a targeted rate to improve community facilities in our area, knowing that funds would be used in our local board area rather than in other parts of Auckland?	· 154 out of 220 people answered this question. 60% of those respondents supported a targeted rate · People wanted more detail on projects that would be funded
If you support a targeted rate, what type of facilities would you like to see improved? (top three) · Accelerating delivery of pathways and boardwalks across our parks · Parks and open space improvements and acquisition e.g Mission Bay Bowling Club · Beach sanding and ocean-side recreation improvements · Improving community halls for hire · Dredging Ōrākei Basin · Sports field improvements · Other	· 95 respondents answered this question and the majority supported ‘accelerating delivery of pathway and boardwalk networks’ however this would have been in direct response to the Gowing Drive connection project which would not be funded through a targeted rate · The second highest project priority was ‘park and open spaces improvements and acquisitions e.g Mission Bay Bowling Club’
If you supported a targeted rate, what rating level per year would you support? · $25 a year · $50 a year · $100 a year · $150 a year	· 88 people answered this and the majority of respondents supported $100 a year
Do you agree that our plan reflects your needs and aspirations for our community over the next three years?	· There is overall support for the draft plan · Respondents reiterated the need to focus on environment, preparing for more housing developments and transport improvements
Any other comments	· Too much focus on Māori outcomes · Climate change should be a top priority · More solutions to promote active transport modes · People want more specific details on projects · Rates are already too high · Do not support the closure of the hardstand at The Landing

Publishing the results of public consultation

19. To conclude the consultation phase of the local board plan development, staff recommend that the local board receive the submissions and feedback for consideration.

20. All feedback is available on the Auckland Council website at akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/local-board-plans-2023-feedback.

21. The Summary of Feedback (Attachment A) report will also be available on the AK Have your say website following approval of this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22. Receiving the submissions and feedback has a neutral climate impact. The submissions are available online to reduce the printing of hard copies.

23. The draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2023 contained a specific Climate Action section, focusing on the scope of challenges posted by climate change. It considered such impacts as increasing temperatures, rising sea levels and changing rainfall patterns on the local board area.

24. A number of submissions voice the importance of responding to climate change and support for initiatives that go towards addressing it.

25. The climate impact of any initiatives the Ōrākei Local Board chooses to progress will be assessed as part of the relevant reporting requirements and project management processes.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. Workshops were held with the board and the board had the opportunity to attend briefings on a range of topics including community investment, Māori outcomes, local economy and climate action. Written advice was also provided to the board on a number of topics including strategic context and environmental services.

27. Subject matter experts from across the council, Auckland Transport and Tātaki Auckland Unlimited were also given the opportunity to peer review the draft local board plan and provide advice.

28. Staff will work closely with the local board in the development of the final plan.

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

Local impacts and local board views

29. The Ōrākei Local Board should consider all submissions and feedback to the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2023 prior to adopting the final local board plan in October 2023. Any changes and/or responses to feedback will be detailed in the report to adopt the plan.

30. Feedback received from community in the Annual Budget consultation was used to shape the draft plan.

31. The following local community groups were involved in either the early engagement or through the consultation period:

· Ōrākei Community Forum

· Stonefields Residents Association

· Auckland East Community Network

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32. The draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2023 was developed with consideration given to existing feedback from mana whenua and mataawaka. This included seeking their views and values throughout the development of the local board plan 2023.

33. Two online information sessions for mana whenua were held on 8^thand 13^th June 2023. These sessions provided an opportunity for mana whenua to hear about Local Board Plans, how the perspective of Māori could be reflected through their input, the feedback process and timelines.

34. Mana whenua organisations were asked which (of the 21) draft local board plans they wanted to review, and those requested were shared, along with tailored feedback forms.

35. The Orakei draft Local Board Plan was shared with Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei, and Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki.

36. Ōrākei Local Board Chair Scott Milne and Ngati Whatu Ōrākei Chair Marama Royal meet quarterly and discuss priorities.

37. 16 submissions were received from those identifying as Māori, comprising of 9% of submissions overall.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

38. There are no direct financial implications associated with receiving the submissions and feedback.

39. The budget to implement initiatives and projects is confirmed through the annual plan budgeting process.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

40. The local board will consider all submissions and feedback before making changes to the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2023.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

41. The submissions and feedback are available on the Auckland Council AK Have Your Say website.

42. The Ōrākei Local Board will adopt the Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2023 on 2 November 2023.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2023 Summary of Feedback

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Ali Keiller - Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager

Ōrākei Local Board

21 September 2023

Funding Auckland's Storm Recovery and Resilence

File No.: CP2023/13412

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide local boards with an opportunity to provide input regarding the funding package that has been provisionally agreed with central government.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Seven months on from severe weather events in January and February 2023, many Aucklanders with impacted homes are still facing a challenging and uncertain future.

3. Auckland Council has worked with central government to secure a funding package that would enable people in the region to move forward with certainty, as quickly as possible.

4. The proposed funding package includes just under $2 billion of investment in storm recovery efforts for three key activities:

· repairing storm damage to the transport network

· Making Space for Water (the council’s flood mitigation programme) and other resilience projects

· Category 3 property buyouts.

5. If we do not accept the funding package, we will still need to fund the necessary infrastructure improvements but would not be in a position to buy out Category 3 homes.

6. Public consultation is underway from 11-24 September.

7. Local board feedback will be provided to the Governing Body along with public feedback ahead of its decision-making on 6 October 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that input is being sought from local boards at the same time as public consultation due to the very tight timelines involved and the need to provide certainty for impacted Aucklanders

b) whakarite / provide feedback on whether the local board supports Auckland Council agreeing to the funding package

c) whakarite / provide feedback on features of the package that you would like to comment on

d) whakarite / provide feedback on the design of the Category 3 buyout process.

Horopaki

Context

8. Severe weather events in January and February 2023 have had a devastating and lasting impact on many communities and thousands of individuals across Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland. Flooding and land slips have damaged or destroyed thousands of homes and up-ended lives and communities. Essential lifeline infrastructure and facilities have been impacted and are in urgent need of repair. This includes roads, bridges, stormwater systems and community facilities.

9. Seven months on, many Aucklanders with impacted homes are still facing a challenging and uncertain future. We need to support these Aucklanders and improve the resilience of our infrastructure so that we are better prepared and can mitigate the impacts of severe weather events.

10. Auckland Council has worked with central government to secure a funding package that would enable people in the region to move forward with certainty, as quickly as possible.

11. To achieve all the outcomes of the package the government would provide just under $1.1 billion of new and reprioritised existing funding, with the council investing around $900 million. This is the same “locally-led, centrally-supported” approach that has been taken with other regions affected by the January and February storm events, just at a larger scale. It is different from the Christchurch earthquake recovery, where central government funded all the purchase of properties.

12. As a locally-led effort, Auckland Council is expected to take the lead on the design and implementation of any package. This means we have a number of detailed decisions to make as part of our main decision whether to proceed with the co-funded package.

13. Public consultation is taking place from 11-24 September. Details can be found at https://akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/recoveryfunding

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14. The proposed funding package includes just under $2 billion of investment in storm recovery efforts for three key activities, as outlined in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Proposed central government and Auckland Council contribution to recovery

	Central government funding	Auckland Council funding	Total
Transport network recovery	$309 million	$81 million	$390 million
Making space for water and other resilience projects	$380 million	$440 million	$820 million
Category 3 home buy-outs	$387 million	$387 million	$774 million
Total	$1,076 million	$908 million	$1,984 million

Transport network recovery

15. Auckland Council is projecting that $390 million will be needed to make repairs to roads and bridges that were damaged by the severe weather. This includes the Mill Flat Road bridge, access to Karekare and Piha, and a number of roads in the west, the north and on Aotea / Great Barrier Island that were significantly damaged. The funding would ensure that repairs can be undertaken with greater certainty.

Making Space for Water and other resilience projects

16. A critical part of recovery is making sure we are better prepared for future severe weather. Improving resilience is essential to provide security for those who will continue to live in hazard-prone areas. This includes the flood risk management projects such as those that we have outlined in the Making Space for Water programme that we consulted on last month.

17. This programme would allow us to create new ‘blue-green networks’ in areas with critical flood risks, and to rehabilitate streams so that they are more resilient to floods. We would be able to increase our stormwater maintenance and overland flow path management.

18. This portion of the funding package could also be used for other resilience projects, such as community based geotechnical projects where risks can be mitigated. Importantly, the funding package would allow us to move more quickly with our efforts to build resilience.

Category 3 property buy-outs

19. Homes in Category 3 are not safe to live in because the risk from future flooding or landslips is intolerably high. Options to reduce this risk at a property or community level are not available or affordable. Homes in these areas should not be rebuilt or remain on their current sites.

20. Central government’s co-funding conditions for Category 3 properties are that they must be:

· residential

· impacted by the severe weather events of January and February 2023

· subject to ongoing intolerable risk to life, and

· without an economic way to mitigate the risk.

21. The proposed funding package would provide up to $774 million to buy Category 3 homes and allow people affected by the January and February severe weather events to move on with their lives. The funding for this would be split evenly between Auckland Council and central government.

22. The $774 million is based on current estimates of around 700 homes to be included in this category. If this maximum amount is exceeded, central government and the council have agreed to work together in good faith to decide next steps.

23. Auckland Council would need to administer the buy-out process from start to finish, including the purchase and removal of homes, and the ongoing management of the land. We know that there would be extra costs that wouldn’t be fully co-funded through the proposed funding package, including the costs of demolishing buildings, and any costs arising from the ongoing management of the land. We will also need to consider how we best make use of the newly acquired land, for example public parks and blue-green networks.

24. We need to make some decisions about how the buy-out process would work, including the price we pay for Category 3 houses, how this works with insurance, and any conditions (e.g. price caps or exclusions) that might need to be put in place. Given the complexity of the task, we are proposing to take an approach where we work towards decisions that are simple, fair, cost-effective, timely, and give certainty to affected Aucklanders.

Accepting the funding package

25. If Auckland Council accepts the funding package:

· We will receive additional government funding to accelerate our efforts to increase the resilience of our infrastructure.

· We can get on with making improvements that would otherwise take decades to achieve.

· We can offer a process forward for Category 3 property owners.

· We will need to find extra revenue to meet the council funding commitment.

26. If Auckland Council does not accept the funding package:

· We won’t receive all the proposed funding from central government, although we could still anticipate receiving some of the transport funding in the normal way, and could apply to the National Resilience Plan for further funding without a guarantee of our applications being successful.

· We will still need to fund the necessary infrastructure improvements and may need to take longer to do this using the available council funding methods.

· We won’t be in a position to buy out Category 3 homes: some property owners would face severe hardship and people would remain at risk.

27. Accepting the funding package would be a significant step in the recovery process. We acknowledge that recovery is not happening as quickly as affected communities would like. There is a difficult balance between moving quickly and moving accurately, especially with so many thousands of potentially affected homes needing individual technical assessments. It’s important that everyone can have confidence in the information and evidence available so that we can make robust, defensible and enduring decisions.

28. We also need to balance the needs of impacted homeowners with the needs of the wider community and consider the affordability and hazard management impacts for all Aucklanders.

Methodology of Category 3 buy-outs

29. If we go ahead with the funding package, the details of the purchase methodology for Category 3 properties would need to be determined, and would have a strong influence on how simple, fair, cost-effective and timely our process could be, and how much certainty we could offer affected homeowners.

30. Some of the policy details we need to consider include:

· How we define Category 3 residential properties. We need to consider whether we should make different provisions for holiday homes and rentals that are assessed as being in Category 3, compared to primary residences. We will not be purchasing non-residential properties.

· How we set the buy-out price. If our starting point is to take a ‘fair value’ approach, we need to decide how we assess that. Using capital value (the valuation that helps us to assess rates bills) would be the quickest option but wouldn’t necessarily reflect the true market value of every individual house. Establishing market value would be a much slower option: it could delay the process and would add further administrative costs. We could adopt a hybrid approach that gets most of the money to homeowners sooner and allows the balance to be resolved through valuation. Other alternatives would be to offer a fixed sum to all Category 3 homeowners or establish a sliding scale of payment based on hardship.

· The size of owner contributions. Like all investments, property ownership carries risks. Aucklanders, through Auckland Council, do not guarantee owners against loss. Auckland Council will need to consider whether to offer 100% of the value of the property, or a lesser amount, provided we can meet our objective of removing people from situations of intolerable risk. This could take the form of a cap on buy-out offers above a certain amount.

· What we do about insurance settlements, and uninsured and underinsured properties. Government and council contributions are intended to ‘top up’ rather than replace any amounts received through private insurance or EQC (Earthquake Commission). We still need to decide how this would work in practice. We also need to determine a fair outcome both for homeowners and for the Aucklanders who will have to fund buy-outs. This will mean we need to consider if Aucklanders who had no insurance or limited insurance should receive more, less or the same as other Category 3 homeowners.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

31. The response that is being proposed in this funding package is a one-off, made necessary by the urgent and extraordinary scale of events.

32. As climate change increases the risk of severe weather events, Auckland Council will not be in a position to continue to buy out other flood- and slip-affected homes. We are working to improve public awareness of hazards, so that Aucklanders are better able to manage their risks. We are also reviewing our approach to the planning and development of homes in areas with natural hazards, however the impact of this is confined largely to new development, and doesn’t address the legacy of thousands of homes that are already built in higher-risk areas.

33. We are strongly advocating to central government to establish a national scheme to support recovery from future events, and to put in place better processes for managed retreat in advance of disaster.

34. Both the Auckland Plan 2050 and Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan advocate for greater resilience to severe storms and flood events. A key principle of the proposed Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan is ‘Opportunities to build resilience and avoid future harm are sought proactively’.

35. The funding received from central government for Making Space for Water and other resilience projects will enable Auckland Council to implement the initiatives within these plans in a way that both builds resilience to the impacts of climate change, and has a lower carbon impact than the solutions that have historically been utilised.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

36. The Recovery Office is working with Legal, Finance, the Chief Planning Office and the Mayoral Office to consider the approach set out by the Crown, the implications for council, and the appropriate parameters for council’s actions at each stage of the negotiations and potential implementation process. The Executive Leadership Team sub-group also spans the relevant parts of the council that are necessary to input and/or be involved in this process.

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

Local impacts and local board views

37. During August, local boards and local communities provided feedback on the draft Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan, which will inform how government funding for infrastructure will be allocated. Staff are currently analysing the feedback to inform the final content of the Plan.

38. This report provides the opportunity for local boards to give feedback specifically on the funding agreement that has been agreed in-principle with central government.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

39. The Recovery Office is engaging with mana whenua representatives to discuss the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan. Meetings are underway and will continue throughout September. These meetings also provide opportunity to discuss the government funding package.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

40. Auckland’s recovery from the severe weather events of early 2023 is going to require significant investment, with or without central government co-funding. The proposed package increases the total investment into Auckland, with over $1 billion in new and reprioritised central government funding.

41. Significant funding from Auckland Council would still be required to deliver on the activities described in this package.

42. If we agree to proceed with the funding package, we would initially use borrowing to fund Auckland’s share of the proposal, until we can make more considered funding decisions in the next long-term plan. This is due to be consulted on in early 2024.

43. Using borrowing in the short term would mean we could get the infrastructure repairs and the Category 3 buy-out process moving quickly.

44. Based on initial timing projections the additional council debt required is likely to peak at $650 million. This would increase the debt-to-revenue ratio by 7 – 9 per cent over the next five to seven years, remaining within current debt limits.

45. The council has a number of options to fund the proposed package in the long-term plan, including reducing or deferring other capital spending, sale of assets, service reductions, and rates. These decisions may also be impacted by the outcomes of the government’s water reform process.

46. If the council were to proceed with the full proposed programme and fund it using only rates, then this would require an additional rates increase equivalent to 3.1 per cent of general rates, which could be phased in over two years. Any rates increase would be on top of other significant budget pressures the council is facing. Current indications suggest overall rates increases of over 10 per cent for 2024/2025 for residential ratepayers, if cost reductions or funding sources are not found.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

47. Risks and mitigations with the Crown offer process are identified in Table 2.

Table 2. Risks and mitigations with the Crown offer process

Risk	Mitigations
More than 700 properties are identified as category 3.	Good faith commitment with the Crown to develop a joint response if this situation arises.
Eligibility criteria for the National Resilience Plan have not yet been defined, meaning there is a risk to accessing the pre-committed funding for resilience	Address within terms of the agreement
Significant additional funding required from Auckland Council	An existing risk that will need to be addressed in the Long-term Plan 2024-2034, regardless of the Crown offer.
Terms of the Crown offer do not adequately provide for the complexity of the council processes needed to undertake buy outs.	Policy and legal analysis is underway to consider the implications of the terms of the agreement, to be reported to the Governing Body.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

48. Technical assessment of affected homes and remediation of damaged infrastructure will continue throughout the decision-making process.

49. Public consultation is underway from 11-24 September.

50. The Governing Body will meet on 6 October to consider input from local boards and feedback from public consultation and will decide whether to agree to the proposed funding package.

51. If the package is agreed, the council will begin conversations with confirmed Category 3 home-owners at the end of October.

52. From November, voluntary buy-outs for Category 3 properties will begin, as technical assessments are confirmed.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Megan Howell - Programme Manager

Authorisers

Mat Tucker - Group Recovery Manager

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager

Ōrākei Local Board

21 September 2023

Local board feedback on Emergency Management Bill

File No.: CP2023/12909

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To request local board input into the development of the Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee’s submission on the Emergency Management Bill.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Emergency Management Bill (the Bill) intended to replace the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 (CDEM Act) is open for submissions until 3 November 2023. The Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee will make a submission to the Bill.

3. Further to the Memo to Governing Body, local board members and Independent Māori Statutory Board dated 17 August, this report invites local boards to provide input into the development of the Committee’s submission. A high-level overview of the Bill is provided, and a more detailed summary of the Bill’s more significant changes is attached.

4. Decisions on the Bill, submissions to it and subsequent progress will be made by the government formed after the general election in October 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide input to the development of Auckland Council’s submission on the Emergency Management Bill.

Horopaki

Context

5. The Emergency Management Bill to replace the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 (CDEM Act) is open for submission until 3 November 2023 and can be accessed via legislation.govt.nz

6. The Bill is a part of the programme of policy work known as the Trifecta Work programme that arose out of the government’s response to the 2017 report of the Technical Advisory Group on Better Reponses to Natural Disasters and other Emergencies.

7. Comment is sought on the Bill as currently presented. Please note that decision-making on the progress of the Bill will be made by the government formed after the general election in October 2023.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Emergency Management Bill

8. The Emergency Management Bill updates the emergency management system to improve performance, modernise the current legislative and regulatory framework, and acknowledge the importance of community resilience and preparedness. The Bill builds on the CDEM Act and:

· restructures the Bill to a more modern approach

· includes current provisions with minor amendment

· introduces new language and terminology, as a consequence of the shift from ‘Civil Defence Emergency Management’ to ‘Emergency Management’

· introduces more significant change consistent with the Technical Advisory Group’s recommendations and the government’s response.

A more modern Bill

9. The Bill is structured with parts and sub-parts (some accompanied with outlines of their contents) and makes extensive use of headings. Some sections of the CDEM Act are moved to the Schedules of the Emergency Management Bill.

Current provisions minorly amended

10. Much of the current CDEM Act is carried over with minor amendment. The placement of these clauses within the Bill’s structure means provisions carried over may be placed in a different order than they appeared in the CDEM Act.

Language and terminology

11. Changes to language and terminology appear throughout the Bill including:

New terminology	Outgoing terminology
Emergency Management	Civil Defence Emergency Management
Emergency Management Committee	Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee
Emergency Management Committee Plan	Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee Group Plan
Coordinating Executive	Coordinating Executive Group
Area Controller	Group Controller
Area Recovery Manager	Group Recovery Manager
emergency designation	a state of emergency or a transition period

More significant changes

12. The more significant changes introduced by the Bill are summarised briefly below, and in more detail in Attachment A.

Greater recognition of the role of Māori and enhancing Māori participation

13. The role of iwi and Māori has been increasingly recognised in the practice of emergency management since the Christchurch and Kaikoura earthquakes. The Bill recognises the role of iwi and Māori in emergency management at all levels, through representation, requiring each committee to improve its capability and capacity to engage with iwi and Māori, and making involvement consistent nationally.

Changes to the requirements regarding the Emergency Management Committee Plan (currently the Group Plan)

14. Emergency Management Committees will need to engage with representatives of disproportionately impacted communities (such as seniors and the disabled), iwi and Māori, and other people or groups as appropriate, before it approves a Plan. This is to encourage more proactive engagement with communities as a part of Plan development.

Critical infrastructure

15. New requirements are introduced in addition to changing the terminology from ‘lifeline utilities’ to ‘critical infrastructure’ entities/sector. The requirement to share information is made explicit for the purpose of the Bill. A new requirement to develop and publish the planned level of service during emergencies is introduced.

16. The provisions in the Bill are part of a wider policy development programme to develop a more resilient model led by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, that recognises a broader range:

· of infrastructure (i.e. banks)

· of potential threats (i.e. cyberattack)

· and their dependencies and interdependencies.

The role of Emergency Management Committees compared to the functions and duties of local authority members of Emergency Management Committees

17. The Bill clarifies the different roles of Emergency Management Committees and local authorities. Some new requirements are added, and business continuity is provided for separately. The provisions are expressed in similar terms although the function and duties of local authorities are more oriented towards action.

Changes regarding emergency designation - State of Emergency and Notice of Transition Period

18. The term ‘emergency designation’ is introduced, meaning either a state of emergency or notice of transition. The Bill also requires the appointment of people able to declare a state of emergency or give a notice of transition period from the representatives on the Emergency Management Committee.

Regulations and Director’s rule-making powers

19. The Bill expands the range of matters regulations can be made for, including operational matters, infringement offences and breaches of rules. A new power is granted to the Director of the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) to make rules regarding roles and responsibilities in specific situations, technical standards, training, qualifications and other matters.

Infringements

20. The Bill sets up a framework for issuing, serving and payment of infringement notices for offences made under the regulation making powers of the Bill, for the purposes of the Bill.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21. The definition of emergencies in the CDEM Act and the Bill includes naturally occurring emergencies such as severe weather and drought. It is widely anticipated that these types of emergencies will become more frequent and severe as a consequence of Climate Change.

22. The Bill updates the regulatory framework under the CDEM Act. Under the framework emergency management comprises the four R’s - Reduction, Readiness, Response and Recovery. Emergency management practice seeks to:

· reduce the risk from emergencies

· raise awareness of and preparedness for emergencies

· provide a platform for effective response to and recovery from emergencies.

23. The changes signalled by the Bill will be complemented by the review of the National Emergency Management Plan, the roadmap for the implementation of the National Disaster Resilience Strategy and the wider policy work related to infrastructure.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24. The Bill and proposed changes to the framework for emergency management has implications across the Auckland Council group, due to our obligations as:

· managers of critical infrastructure

· providers of key information during emergencies

· potential staff to be redirected to support response and recovery activities.

25. Auckland Emergency Management is working with various parts of Auckland Council and CCO’s including Auckland Plan Strategy and Research, Healthy Waters, Local Board Services, Ngā Matarae, Auckland Transport and Watercare on the development of the submission to the Bill.

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

Local impacts and local board views

26. This report requests input from local boards into the development of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee’s submission on the Bill.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27. There is a high level of interest amongst iwi and Māori. NEMA has held several national hui. Similarly, engagement with marae and related discussions indicate an awareness and interest.

28. We have written to iwi and Māori to encourage them to both make their own submission on the Bill and provide comment or feedback that can be reflected in the development of Auckland Council’s submission. If there is interest, a hui on this topic may be held.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

29. The changes signalled in the Bill will require amended or additional processes and practices and introduce additional cost across the emergency management system, it is uncertain when they will arise.

30. It is also unclear how such costs will fall between participating Emergency Management Committees, local authorities, ratepayers, critical infrastructure entities and sectors, their shareholders and consumers. There may also be implications for capacity amongst participants across the emergency management system, critical infrastructure entities and sectors.

31. The full financial and resource implications may not be known until the Bill is enacted, the National Emergency Management Plan reviewed, the roadmap for the implementation of the National Disaster Resilience Strategy completed and critical infrastructure policy confirmed. These programmes will be subject to the decision-making of the government to be formed after the General Election in October 2023.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

32. The general direction of policy on which the Bill is based has been signalled for some time. The submission process is the most effective means of managing risk of unfavourable change.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

33. A workshop of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee to consider the recommendations of the draft submission is scheduled for 18 October 2023. Materials will be circulated to Committee members in preparation for the workshop.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Summary of the Emergency Management Bill's more significant changes

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Wayne Brown - Principal Recovery Advisor

Authorisers

Paul Amaral - General Manager Auckland Emergency Management

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager

Ōrākei Local Board

21 September 2023

Local board feedback on Māori seats for Auckland Council

File No.: CP2023/11885

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. For local boards to provide feedback to the Governing Body on whether Māori seats should be established for Auckland Council for the 2025 local elections.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council is undertaking public consultation on whether to establish Māori seats for the 2025 local elections.

3. Local board views and preferences are being sought concurrently as there is a statutory deadline of 23 November 2023 under the Local Electoral Act 2001.

4. Consultation is open from 21 August to 24 September 2023. Feedback provided through consultation will be reported to the Governing Body at their October 2023 meeting where a decision will be sought.

5. The materials developed to support consultation on this matter are attached to this report and include a full consultation document, summary document and feedback form (Attachments A, B and C). They are also available at akhaveyoursay.nz/maoriseats

6. The current legislation allows for one to two elected Māori ward seats on the Governing Body only. There are currently no provisions for Māori seats on local boards and no ability to make appointments to the Governing Body.

7. This report provides local boards with the consultation materials and seeks feedback to inform a Governing Body decision on Māori seats in October 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide feedback to the Governing Body on whether Māori seats should be established for Auckland Council for the 2025 local elections.

Horopaki

Context

8. On 27 April 2023, the Governing Body agreed to seek the views and preferences of Māori and the wider public on Māori seats for Auckland Council.

9. Feedback received through this consultation will inform decision-making on whether to establish Māori seats for the 2025 local elections. This decision needs to be made in October 2023 to both align with the Governing Body meeting schedule and meet the Local Electoral Act 2001 deadline.

10. The material to support this consultation received approval from the Governing Body on 22 June 2023 and is attached to this report (Attachments A, B and C).

11. Local board feedback on Māori representation has been provided previously. In September 2022, Auckland Council submitted feedback on the Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill. Within this omnibus bill are proposed changes to the provisions for Māori representation in local government.

12. In preparation of this submission, staff sought feedback from local boards. 13 of the 19 local boards that provided feedback on the omnibus bill requested that Māori representation at the local board level was investigated.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

13. Māori seats are designated seats on a council for Māori representatives. Seats can be filled by election or by appointment, although in Auckland there is no ability to make appointments to the Governing Body. A change to legislation would be needed to do this.

14. Auckland Council has to date faced two challenges in introducing Māori seats: a binding poll provision and a set number of councillors for Auckland Council. The binding poll provision was repealed in 2021 and proposed legislative changes to the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, currently before the House, will remove the set number of councillors.

15. The removal of the set number will allow Auckland Council to determine the total number of councillors on the Governing Body between five and 29, in line with other councils in Aotearoa New Zealand.

16. Since 2017, the Governing Body has previously agreed ‘in-principle’ support for establishing one or more Māori wards (using the ‘Parliamentary model’) once the set number of councillors had been removed. This position remains the Governing Body’s preference on record to date. The Independent Māori Statutory Board has supported the ‘Royal Commission’ model for Māori representation on Auckland Council since 2021.

17. The ‘Parliamentary model’ (Māori wards) only includes elected seats. This model reflects how the Parliamentary Māori electorates are established. The ‘Royal Commission’ model that has received some support includes both elected and mana whenua appointed seats. This model would require changes to legislation as noted above.

18. Staff undertook preliminary engagement with mana whenua and mataawaka in 2022 on Māori seats for Auckland Council. Feedback from participants in this process was that neither the ‘Parliamentary’ nor the ‘Royal Commission’ model were suitable for Tāmaki Makaurau, however the ‘Royal Commission’ model received slightly stronger support for its inclusion of an appointed mana whenua seat.

19. The only model of Māori representation that is available under existing legislation is the ‘Parliamentary model’. This model includes a formula for determining the number of elected members representing Māori based on the number of voters on the Māori electoral roll and the total number of ward councillors. For Tāmaki Makaurau, this model would result in one or two elected Māori representatives depending on the total number of councillors. Any other model would require legislative change.

20. While the feedback from mana whenua and mataawaka contained a unanimous recognition that the status quo is no longer an option, it also emphasised that timing constraints to investigate and pursue legislative change should not deter investigating a bespoke approach for Tāmaki Makaurau.

Consultation on Māori seats for Auckland Council

21. The decision on Māori seats for Auckland Council is a significant one. It is about how Māori are represented in Auckland and how Aucklanders are represented by their Governing Body. As such, consultation with Aucklanders on this matter will consist of:

· regionwide consultation

· five-week consultation window (21 August-24 September 2023)

· two streams of engagement: a Māori engagement stream and a wider public engagement stream.

22. A range of engagement methodologies will be used including ‘in person’ and virtual with both hard copy and digital materials available. Engagement methods will include:

· marketing (Radio ads, social media, media releases)

· AK Have Your Say webpage

· webinars

· interest group events

· raising awareness of the consultation amongst diverse groups through community partner networking

· hard copy consultation materials at libraries, local board offices and Māori service provider sites

· dedicated mana whenua and mataawaka engagement

23. A key part of the consultation process is seeking input from local boards and presenting these views to the Governing Body for consideration in October 2023. This report seeks feedback to contribute towards decision-making.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

24. While a decision about Māori seats does not in itself impact on climate, the introduction of Māori ward representatives as Auckland Council decision-makers may improve consideration of te ao Māori views on climate change and council-led responses.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25. This matter affects the composition of the Governing Body and does not impact the group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

26. This report seeks the views and preferences of local boards on Māori seats for Auckland Council’s Governing Body. This feedback will be provided to the Governing Body for consideration when a decision is sought on the matter in October 2023.

27. While the decision to be made in October 2023 is whether to establish Māori seats on Auckland Councils’ Governing Body, local boards have previously provided feedback on establishing Māori seats at the local board level.

28. Māori representation at the local board level is outside of the Local Electoral Act and legislative change would be required to introduce Māori seats on local boards. In the process of seeking local board views on the Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill, 13 of the 19 local boards that provided feedback requested that Māori representation at the local board level was investigated.

29. Not all local boards who wish to introduce Māori representation would be eligible for Māori seats under the ‘Parliamentary model’ formula. If legislation were amended to allow for Māori representation on local boards, the formula would only allow for nine out of 21 local boards (43 per cent) to have Māori subdivisions based on current member numbers.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

30. Auckland Council has legal obligations to seek and consider Māori views on matters that Māori will be particularly affected by or interested in. The Local Government Act 2002 requires local governments to maintain and improve opportunities for Māori to contribute to decision-making processes and to consider the views and preferences of the persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in a matter. There are also common law obligations to consider Treaty principles, including partnership, rangatiratanga, active protection and informed decision-making.

31. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires the council to consider the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s advice on matters. The Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Schedule of Issues of Significance to Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau recognises that increasing Māori representation is a priority action for enhancing Māori leadership and participation in local government decision making. The schedule advocates for council to ensure that Māori are enabled to contribute actively and meaningfully to the long-term future of Auckland through representation on council.

32. Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau – the Auckland Council Group’s Māori Outcomes Performance Measurement Framework - includes ten priority outcomes areas to direct council group investment and resource towards delivering Māori Outcomes in Tāmaki Makaurau.

33. The framework includes Kia Ora Te Hononga (effective Māori participation) and is underpinned by the ‘Mana’ outcome objective to ensure that “mana whenua and Māori are active partners, decisionmakers and participants alongside the Auckland Council Group”.

34. The Auckland Plan 2050 includes the outcome area of ‘Māori Identity and Wellbeing’. Council is committed to recognising and providing for te Tiriti o Waitangi outcomes, enabling Māori to exercise rangatiratanga in decisions that matter to and affect them.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35. As this report is seeking the views and preferences of local boards for Governing Body consideration, there are no financial implications associated with this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

36. There are two key known risks associated with consultation on Māori seats for Auckland Council:

· there may be an increased risk of legal challenge due to the high level of public interest in the decision

· the set number of councillors is not removed for Auckland Council.

37. The risk of legal challenge can be mitigated through the commitment of appropriate budget and resourcing to deliver a robust consultation process.

38. As previously reported, the Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill is currently in front of the House and has progressed to the Committee of Whole House stage. Among other legislative changes, the Bill proposes a removal of the set number of councillors for Auckland Council. This change, when it is enacted, will allow council to determine any number of councillors between five and 29, in line with all other councils in New Zealand.

39. Previously, Governing Body has agreed ‘in-principle’ support for establishing Māori seats subject to the removal of the set number of councillors.

Risk

Mitigation

Legal challenge

Failing to undertake a robust consultation process may increase the risk of legal challenge. This risk involves both reputational and financial consequences and may require the consultation to be repeated, resulting in additional costs to the council

Ensure that the consultation process is robust and effective. This requires budget and resource commitment at a time when council is working within a constrained environment. However, staff strongly advise that this robust process is required.

Legislative change not enacted

The Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill may not be enacted before parliament rises, meaning that Auckland Council is uncertain whether or not it will be able to determine the total number of councillors on the Governing Body.

This could impact the decision of the Governing Body to proceed with Māori wards as it will mean that a general ward would need to be disestablished in order to add a Māori ward.

Council cannot fully mitigate this risk.

However, we have provided coverage of this possibility in the consultation material to ensure that Māori and the wider public are appropriately informed when providing feedback.

Staff will monitor the progress of the Bill closely in order to provide accurate advice on options.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

40. Staff will report feedback from Māori, the wider public and local boards along with analysis to the Governing Body in October 2023 and seek a decision on establishing Māori seats for Auckland Council.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Māori Seats Consultation Document
b ⇨	Māori Seats Consultation Summary Document
c ⇨	Māori Seats Consultation Feedback Form

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Libby Orr - Advisor Governance Services

Authorisers

Rose Leonard - Manager Governance Services

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Discussion document Bottom Fishing Access Zones in the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park

Ōrākei Local Board

21 September 2023

Biodiversity Credit System – central government discussion document

File No.: CP2023/13559

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an overview of central government’s discussion document entitled ‘Helping nature and people thrive – Exploring a biodiversity credit system for Aotearoa New Zealand’, and its potential implications for Auckland Council should such a system be advanced.

2. To provide an opportunity for Local Boards to offer any feedback to council staff to help inform the preparation of a council submission on the proposed Biodiversity Credit System.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Central government (Ministry for the Environment, Department of Conservation) published a discussion document on 7 July 2023 (weblink: Biodiversity Credit System) which is exploring the potential for a ‘biodiversity credit system’ that could be developed for Aotearoa New Zealand. Central government is seeking feedback on the need for and possible design of a biodiversity credit system, and the potential roles of government and Māori in implementing it.

4. Staff from Natural Environment Strategy (NES) are coordinating the development of a proposed Auckland Council submission. Staff are inviting feedback from local boards, mana whenua and the Rural Advisory Panel, to help shape the proposed Auckland Council submission which will be considered by the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee on 5 October 2023.

5. NES staff provided a webinar to overview the discussion document with approximately 40 local board members on 21 August 2023. Local board feedback to NES staff is due no later than 29 September 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide any feedback to council staff to help inform a council submission on the proposed Biodiversity Credit System by 29 September 2023

Horopaki

Context

6. The development of a national biodiversity credit system is intended to be used to increase funding opportunities from the private sector towards restoration efforts. This could be a catalyst to, or supplement, council activities, such as the regulatory implementation of the National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPSIB) and the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPSFM).

7. The government’s discussion document is very much an initial consultation to start the national conversation about a potential biodiversity credit system that could be developed for Aotearoa New Zealand. Consequently, the government’s discussion document is very exploratory in nature and does not set out a specific proposed system with clear scope, roles and implementation mechanisms to provide feedback on, rather it discusses a number of different approaches that could be taken to different aspects of designing and implementing such a system.

Main points covered in discussion document

8. The discussion document explains:

a) what biodiversity credits and a biodiversity credit system are with some international examples that are emerging

b) what the benefits could be in the Aotearoa New Zealand context

c) different approaches that could be taken to the scope and design of a system, and

d) the distinct roles that government could play.

9. The discussion document includes consultation questions that seek views on the different approaches and roles for a biodiversity credit system.

10. Biodiversity credits are a way of attracting funding from the private sector, to invest in efforts by landowners to protect, maintain and enhance indigenous vegetation and habitats, including shrublands, grasslands, wetlands and natural and regenerating native forests. The credits are intended to recognise, in a transparent and consistent way, landholder projects or activities that protect, maintain and enhance indigenous biodiversity, or positive outcomes, e.g., a 1 % increase (or avoided decrease) in the indigenous biodiversity of a hectare.

11. By purchasing credits, people and organisations can finance and claim credit for their contribution to ‘nature-positive’ actions and outcomes. This is an emerging approach that is gaining considerable interest internationally. In Aotearoa New Zealand, credits could relate to protecting, restoring, and enhancing nature on public and private land, including whenua Māori (Māori land).

12. A biodiversity credit system could recognise efforts to protect, enhance and restore indigenous biodiversity in any habitat (on land, in freshwater, and / or coastal and marine environments) or only in some. Biodiversity credits could represent work on whole ecosystems or catchments or focus on endangered or taonga species or remnant habitats.

13. The discussion document suggests seven principles that could apply to the design of a government supported biodiversity credit system. The principles would let people know what they can expect when they participate in a biodiversity credit system and what is expected of them. For example, the system should have clear rules for the claims investors can make to avoid ‘greenwashing,’ should reward nature-positive activities additional to business as usual, and the system should maximise positive impact on biodiversity (including uplifting mauri and mana of biodiversity).

14. The discussion document also explains the components of a fully functioning system, including measurement, verification and reporting, legal recognition, potential ways credits can be traded and the roles of industry experts. It notes that regional and district councils could potentially play a role in providing expertise to landowners for biodiversity credit activities and / or projects.

15. The Government is exploring the possible roles it could play to support the establishment of a biodiversity credit system for Aotearoa New Zealand that would operate with both integrity and impact. It suggests the following two roles but notes that a blend of these options may be appropriate, which could evolve over time:

a) market enablement: where it provides policies and guidance for the development and uptake of voluntary schemes in Aotearoa New Zealand, and potentially funding for system development as the market is established. An enablement role seeks to influence the outcomes and operation of the market, using non-regulatory tools such as good practice guidance and optional standards.

b) market administration: where it establishes and manages a voluntary biodiversity scheme and is active in the ongoing management and administration. A market administration role includes setting a regulatory framework, with tools to direct the outcomes and the operation of the market.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Potential implications for Auckland Council

16. Given the nature of the government’s discussion document, it is difficult to be certain about the potential implications of a biodiversity credit system for Auckland Council as no clear proposals have been made about its scope, design and implementation or different roles central government and councils will have within the system.

17. There are potential benefits that a biodiversity credit system could have for funding protection, restoration, and enhancement of indigenous biodiversity on public and private land in the Auckland region. Depending on the scope and design of a biodiversity credit system (which will be developed following feedback on this initial consultation being undertaken by central government), it could be of relevance to initiatives undertaken locally seeking to achieve positive biodiversity and freshwater outcomes as they complement regulatory requirements (e.g. tree planting, stream restoration etc). However, as discussed in paragraph 13 above, one of the suggested principles for a biodiversity credit system is ‘it should reward nature-positive activities additional to business as usual’. For example, this suggests that funding derived from a credit should not serve to substitute funding provided to existing council programmes.

18. As the discussion document is at an early, exploratory stage, it is not clear yet what role councils should play or how the council group including local boards might benefit. MfE stated in a recent presentation to the Te Uru Kahika Resource Managers Group on 31 August that it is very open to hearing suggestions from councils.

19. Our feedback is likely to include a number of our own questions and different views from the council group about the system scope, design and implementation. In some instances, we may also be able to suggest different options for consideration by central government, e.g. in relation to the role councils could play:

a) little or no involvement by council?

b) some partnership with central government to help identify focus areas for achieving best biodiversity outcomes?

c) council acts as a translator / navigator providing advice to landowners in the region about use of biodiversity credits and where to focus efforts?

20. There are 23 questions asked in the discussion document. NES staff have identified the key questions that are more about the system design and overall approaches that could be taken, which we thought local boards may want to focus any feedback on. These can be found in Attachment A of the agenda report.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

21. Feedback from Ōrākei Local Board is due no later than 29 September, to help inform the proposed council submission that will be presented to the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee on 5 October 2023.

22. As part of preparing the council submission, staff will consider and present the potential impacts on climate, Māori and local board views as well as the financial implications, risks and mitigations in the report to the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee. Due to this being an initial consultation to start the national conversation about a potential biodiversity credit system, central government’s discussion document is very exploratory in nature and does not set out a specific proposed system with clear scope, roles and implementation mechanisms to provide feedback on. Therefore, it is difficult to assess the potential impacts and implications at this stage, and this may become more evident in subsequent central government consultations when a more defined approach to the design and implementation of a biodiversity credit system has been developed and proposed.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Key Consultation Questions

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Taran Livingston - Lead Analyst NES

Authorisers

Dave Allen - Manager Natural Environment Strategy

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Chairperson and Board Members' Report

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Feedback under delegation - Ōrākei Local Board equity of funding feedback

Ōrākei Local Board

21 September 2023

Urgent Decision: Local Board Feedback on the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024

File No.: CP2023/12903

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive the local board feedback made under Urgent Decision delegation to provide local board input on the proposed direction of the draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024 for inclusion in Auckland Council’s submission.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Ministry of Transport has released the draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2023/2024-2033/2034 for public consultation.

3. The draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024 sets out the priorities for a 10-year period to 2034 and is updated every three years. It outlines what the government wants to achieve in land transport, and how it expects to see funding allocated between types of activities across the land transport system.

4. The draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024 identifies six strategic priorities that the government wants its investment programme to achieve:

a. Maintaining and Operating the System: focuses on efficiently maintaining the condition of the existing transport system to meet the current and future needs of users

b. Increasing Resilience: aims to enhance the transport system's ability to withstand natural and human-made hazards

c. Reducing Emissions: aims for a transition to a lower carbon transport system to address climate change

d. Safety: aims to significantly improve safety across all modes of transportation

e. Sustainable Urban and Regional Development: aims to provide accessible and reliable transport options to support social, cultural, and economic opportunities. Also emphasizes developing low-emission transport and reducing congestion

f. Integrated Freight System: focuses on designing and operating efficient, resilient, and low-carbon transport corridors and hubs to support economic activities.

5. The draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024 proposes an increase in National Land Transport Fund revenue from $15.5 billion in 2021/2022-2023/2024 to $20.8 billion in 2024/2025-2026/2027, an increase of $5.3 billion (34 per cent).

6. Submissions are due on Friday 15 September 2023, which is after Parliament rises for the 2023 General Elections. Submissions will therefore be received by the incoming government, and it is likely that changes will be made to the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024 as a result.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide feedback on the proposed direction of the draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024.

Horopaki

Context

7. The draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024 (draft GPS 2024) outlines what the government wants to achieve in land transport, and how it expects to see funding allocated between types of activities (for example, roading, public transport and road safety) across the land transport system. The draft GPS 2024 sets out the priorities for a 10-year period to 2034 and is updated every three years. Auckland Council made a submission on the GPS 2021 in May 2020.

Discussion

Summary of strategic priorities

8. The draft GPS 2024 identifies six strategic priorities that the government wants its investment programme to achieve (Attachment A to the agenda report):

· maintaining and operating the system – the condition of the existing transport system is efficiently maintained at a level that meets the current and future needs of users

· increasing resilience – the transport system is better able to cope with natural and anthropogenic hazards

· reducing emissions – transitioning to a lower carbon transport system

· safety – transport is made substantially safer for all

· sustainable urban and regional development – people can readily and reliably access social, cultural, and economic opportunities through a variety of transport options. Sustainable urban and regional development is focused on developing resilient and productive towns and cities that have a range of low-emission transport options and low congestion

· integrated freight system – well-designed and operated transport corridors and hubs that provide efficient, reliable, resilient, multi-modal, and low carbon connections to support productive economic activity.

Discussion of strategic priorities

9. The government’s priorities for GPS 2021 are safety; better travel options; improving freight connections; and climate change. An overview of the draft GPS and related documents can be found here.

10. The draft GPS 2024 removes the specific priority around travel options with this largely, although less explicitly, being incorporated into the urban development strategic priority.

11. Sustainable urban and regional development is a new strategic priority in the draft GPS 2024. Previously, economic and development objectives were less explicit and were spread across the freight and travel options priorities.

12. Maintaining and operating the system is also a new priority. In contrast to GPS 2021 which emphasizes transformation (as opposed to “business as usual”), the draft GPS 2024 seeks to boost funding for maintenance to address what it sees as significant under-investment.

13. The climate change priority in GPS 2021 has been separated into two components, reflecting the need to both mitigate (reducing emissions) and adapt to climate change and other events (increasing resilience).

14. The priorities guide investment decisions by Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) and the crown.

Summary of GPS funding

15. The draft GPS 2024 proposes an increase in National Land Transport Fund (NLTF) revenue from $15.5 billion in 2021/2022-2023/2024 to $20.8 billion in 2024/2025- 2026/2027, an increase of $5.3 billion (34 per cent).

16. This requires a funding package of $7.7 billion, because revenue over 2021/2022-2023/2024 was augmented by a $2 billion crown loan.

17. The proposed between $7-8 billion funding package is made up of:

· increases in fuel taxes over three years ($1.4 billion)

· crown grants of $2.9 billion, including $500 million from the Climate Emergency Recovery Fund (CERF), which would be added to the walking and cycling activity class

· hypothecating traffic infringement fee revenue to the NLTF to increase the safety activity class

· A $3.1 billion crown loan.

18. Key changes in activity class allocations include:

· the public transport services activity class increases by 50 per cent

· the local road maintenance and renewals activity class increases by 35 per cent

· the safety activity class decreases by 37 per cent. Note that this is due to the reallocation of funding for safety related infrastructure improvements to the State Highway and Local Road Maintenance activity classes. The government expects this will enable safety improvements to be delivered as part of a wider improvement programme.

Strategic Investment Programme

19. The draft GPS 2024 also sets out a series of projects that the government considers strategically important for the development of New Zealand’s transport system in the coming decades. Projects identified in the Auckland region are:

· Warkworth to Whangārei – State Highway 1

· Auckland Northwest Rapid Transit

· Auckland rail third and fourth Mains Expansion

· Avondale to Onehunga rail link

· Level Crossing Upgrade and Removal Programme.

20. The Waka Kotahi board approves projects funded from the NLTF, but by highlighting these projects, the government expects that their strategic importance will be given particular consideration during the development of the National Land Transport Plan.

Auckland Council submission process

21. The Ministry of Transport has provided four weeks for consultation on the draft GPS 2024, with submissions closing on Friday 15 September 2023.

22. Auckland Council staff will draft the submission, with input from Auckland Transport (AT). Because submissions close before the next Transport & Infrastructure Committee meeting on 21 September 2023, staff will propose that members of the Governing Body and representatives of the AT Board and Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB), be given delegation to approve the submission.

23. A report summarising the draft GPS 2024 and proposing approval delegations to a sub-committee will be presented to the Governing Body at its next meeting on 24 August 2023.

Government consideration of feedback

24. The delay in publication of the draft GPS 2024 means that the consultation period overlaps with Parliament rising on 31 August 2023, in the lead-up to the 14 October 2023 General Election. This means that feedback will be received by the next government.

25. The Green, National and Act parties have all identified different transport priorities to those outlined in the draft GPS 2024. Changes, potentially of a substantial nature, could be made by the incoming government. It is not clear whether an additional round of consultation will be held should substantive changes be made. Accordingly, staff advise proceeding on the assumption that this may be the only formal opportunity for council to provide feedback to the government on GPS priorities, issues and opportunities.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

26. The timeframe for next steps in the submission process are set out in the table below:

Dates	Events
24 August	Governing Body meets: · approval sought to delegate approval of the submission to members of the Governing Body and representatives of the AT Board and IMSB
1 September	· anticipated first draft to all elected members and IMSB members for feedback, and local board members for information and feedback
6 September	· councillors and IMSB members feedback due
14 September	· delegated group feedback on second draft due · local board views to append to Governing Body submission due
15 September	· finalise submission · delegated group approval · lodge submission.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Draft Government Policy on Land Transport 2024 (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jacob van der Poel - Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Carol Hayward - Team Leader Operations and Policy

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager

Chairperson	Scott Milne, JP
Deputy Chairperson	Sarah Powrie
Members	Troy Churton
	Angus McPhee
	Penny Tucker
	Margaret Voyce
	David Wong, JP

Author	Vanessa Phillips - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager

Author	Monique Rousseau - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager

Author	Katherine Kang - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager