Papakura Local Board

 

OPEN MINUTES

 

 

 

Minutes of a meeting of the Papakura Local Board held in the Local Board Chambers, 35 Coles Crescent, Papakura and online on Wednesday, 27 September 2023 at 4.00pm.

 

Te Hunga kua Tae mai | present

 

Chairperson

Brent Catchpole

 

Deputy Chairperson

Jan Robinson

 

Members

Felicity Auva'a

 

 

George Hawkins

 

 

Kelvin Hieatt

 

 

Andrew Webster

 

 

Te Hunga Kāore i Tae Mai | ABSENT

 

 

 

 

 

 

Te Hunga Āpiti kua Tae mai | ALSO PRESENT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

He Hunga atu anō i Tae mai | IN ATTENDANCE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Papakura Local Board

27 September 2023

 

 

 

1          Nau mai | Welcome

 

George Hawkins led the meeting in prayer.

 

 

2          Ngā Tamōtanga | Apologies

 

There were no apologies.

 

 

 

3          Te Whakapuaki i te Whai Pānga | Declaration of Interest

 

There were no declarations of interest.

 

 

4          Te Whakaū i ngā Āmiki | Confirmation of Minutes

 

Resolution number PPK/2023/149

MOVED by Chairperson B Catchpole, seconded by Member K Hieatt:  

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 13 September 2023, as a true and correct record.

CARRIED

 

 

5          He Tamōtanga Motuhake | Leave of Absence

 

There were no leaves of absence.

 

 

6          Te Mihi | Acknowledgements

 

There were no acknowledgements.

 

 

7          Ngā Petihana | Petitions

 

There were no petitions.


 

 

 

8          Ngā Tono Whakaaturanga | Deputations

 

8.1

Deputation - Beautification Trust

 

A PowerPoint presentation was used in support of the item. A copy has been placed on the official minutes and is available on the Auckland Council website as a minutes attachment.

 

 

Resolution number PPK/2023/150

MOVED by Chairperson B Catchpole, seconded by Member G Hawkins:  

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      whakamihi / thank Daniel Barthow, CEO of the Beatification Trust, and Sterling Ruwhiu, Community Programmes Manager of the Beautification Trust, for their presentation and attendance.

CARRIED

 

Attachments

a     PowerPoint delivered to the Papakura Local Board during Beautification Trust Deputation

 

 

 

9          Te Matapaki Tūmatanui  | Public Forum

 

 

9.1

Public Forum – Pastor Freedom Aiga

 

Resolution number PPK/2023/151

MOVED by Member F Auva'a, seconded by Member A Webster:  

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)     whakamihi / thank Freedom Aiga, Pastor of Unity REK Church, for his attendance and presentation on the proposed Takaanini Christmas in the Park.

 

b)     request that the Community Broker for the Papakura Local Board contact Pastor Freedom Aiga to provide information on support options.

CARRIED

 

 

10        Ngā Pakihi Autaia | Extraordinary Business

 

There was no extraordinary business.

 

 

11

Governing Body Members' Update

 

There was no Governing Body Member’s update.

 


 

 

12

Chairperson's update

 

Resolution number PPK/2023/152

MOVED by Chairperson B Catchpole, seconded by Member K Hieatt:  

That the Papakura Local Board:

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

CARRIED

 

 

13

Papakura Local Board Annual Report 2022/2023

 

Resolution number PPK/2023/153

MOVED by Chairperson B Catchpole, seconded by Deputy Chairperson J Robinson:  

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      adopt the draft 2022/2023 Papakura 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.

CARRIED

 

 

14

Local board feedback on Emergency Management Bill

 

Resolution number PPK/2023/154

MOVED by Chairperson B Catchpole, seconded by Member F Auva'a:  

That the Papakura Local Board:

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

 

                 i.             The Papakura Local Board supports in principle the proposed changes to the Emergency Management Bill.

 

Clarifying roles and responsibilities across the emergency management system

 

                  ii.          The board is supportive of the proposed changes to the Bill to clarify roles and responsibilities across the emergency management system.

 

                 iii.          It is noted that Auckland Council would be the sole local authority member of Auckland’s Emergency Management Committee.

 

Recognising, enhancing, and valuing Māori participation in emergency management

 

                 iv.          The board supports providing greater recognition of the role of Māori and enhancing Māori participation throughout the emergency management system.

 

                  v.          note that mana whenua marae and iwi organisations in the Papakura and Franklin Local Board provided significant community support during the January 2023 weather events

 

                 vi.          support the proposal that Emergency Management Committees:

 

A.     fund mana whenua marae at a level that enables marae to be functional Community Emergency Hubs during emergencies.

 

B.     identify hazards and risks and develop plans to address the emergency management needs of iwi and Māori within their area

 

C.     recognise and communicate the role and contribution of iwi and Māori.

 

D.     note that it is essential that emergency management committees actively involve iwi and Māori communities when assessing and revising Emergency Management Committee Plans. This should involve notifying them of proposed revisions and taking their input into account when considering these proposals

 

               vii.           support the National Emergency Management Plan as a mechanism for collaboratively developing national planning arrangements with Māori, ensuring their active participation and input noting implementing guiding principles for the appointment of Māori representatives to Emergency Management Committees and Coordinating Executives are made in a manner that reflects and respects Māori perspectives and needs.

 

              viii.           support the reimbursement of iwi and Māori organisations for certain welfare expenses incurred in connection with an emergency.

 

Requirements for Emergency Management Committee Plans

 

           ix.                note that Auckland is distinct from other districts in scale and diversity. An Auckland Emergency Management Committee may need to adopt a different approach from most to reflect the Auckland context, and provide a greater degree of resource support including to those that are geographically isolated or service deprived.

 

            x.                endorse the proposal that Emergency Management Committees engage with communities that are likely to be disproportionately impacted by emergencies, noting that in the Auckland context this includes communities that are deprived through isolation from council, public and emergency services i.e. rural and coastal settlements as well as financially deprived communities.

 

           xi.                request that in developing the Auckland Council submission on the Emergency Management Bill, that staff specifically address the needs of those deprived of access to public, council and emergency services.

 

Increasing the resilience of critical infrastructure

 

            xii.             The board is supportive of the proposed changes under the ‘increasing the resilience of critical infrastructure’ heading.

 

           xiii.              note that in Auckland, infrastructure is managed by multiple providers e.g. Counties Energy and Vector. This is another example of the differences in scale in the Auckland context that an Auckland emergency management committee must specifically address.

 

           xiv.              note that stormwater infrastructure, including roadside ‘swales’ in rural areas, must function efficiently to mitigate the impact of weather events.

 

            xv.              note that community spaces, particularly in rural and geographically isolated areas, provide safe places for communities to set up their own local community response centres. Proposed legislation should actively encourage the Auckland Emergency Management committee to fund and work with communities on improvements to some of these spaces so that they are better prepared to accommodate the community during emergencies e.g. by providing or facilitating access to reliable communications, water, generators etc.

Enabling equitable outcomes

 

              xvi.          The board supports a principled approach that requires engagement with representatives of communities that are likely to be disproportionately impacted by emergencies, including iwi and Māori and another groups that may be affected.  These groups will be able to provide insights and advice that will not only benefit their own groups but the wider community.

 

Improving operational effectiveness of the emergency management system

 

             xvii.          The board supports the proposed changes to enable management of concurrent local and national emergencies and the ability for emergency management committee representatives to attend meetings via an audio or audio-visual link during a state of emergency.

 

Updating the legal and regulatory framework

 

           xviii.         The board supports the proposed changes to the legal and regulatory framework.

CARRIED

 

 

 

 

 

 

15

Local board feedback into the council submission to Fisheries New Zealand on bottom fishing access zones (trawl corridors) in the Hauraki Gulf

 

Resolution number PPK/2023/155

MOVED by Chairperson B Catchpole, seconded by Member G Hawkins:  

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)   whakarite / provide the following preference on one of the following options and/or feedback on proposed bottom fishing restrictions in the Hauraki Gulf:

i)          the Papakura Local Board is fundamentally opposed to the practice of bottom contact fishing and Danish seining (bottom trawling) as it believes the practice is destructive to the marine environment.

ii)         However, given the discussion document is seeking views on the four proposed options for establishing bottom fishing access zones (trawl corridors), ie: limited areas where the mobile bottom contact fishing methods of trawling and Danish seining can continue to occur in the Hauraki Gulf, the board’s preference is:

·         Option 4: Danish seine fishing banned from 87.3 per cent and trawl fishing banned from 89.2 per cent of the Gulf shallower than 200 metres and limit these fishing methods to four defined zones.

iii)       The board would like to see a “sunset” or “sinking lid” clause that phases out the bottom trawling fishing practices by 2030.

CARRIED

 

 

16

Local board feedback into the council submission on Hauraki Gulf / Tīkapa Moana Marine Protection Bill to the Environment Select Committee

 

Resolution number PPK/2023/156

MOVED by Chairperson B Catchpole, seconded by Member K Hieatt:  

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)            whakarite / provide the following feedback on the Hauraki Gulf / Tīkapa Moana Marine Protection Bill to be incorporated into the council’s submission to the Environment Select Committee:

 

i)         The Papakura Local Board supports the Hauraki Gulf / Tīkapa Moana Marine Protection Bill which is seeking to contribute to the restoration of the health and mauri of the Hauraki Gulf / Tīkapa Moana by establishing two marine reserves, five seafloor protection areas, and 12 high protection areas in the Hauraki Gulf, while acknowledging customary rights within seafloor protection areas and high protection areas.

CARRIED

 

 

17

Biodiversity Credit System – central government discussion document

 

Resolution number PPK/2023/157

MOVED by Chairperson B Catchpole, seconded by Deputy Chairperson J Robinson:  

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)            whakarite / provide the following feedback on the proposed Biodiversity Credit System:

Biodiversity Credit System discussion document questions

Papakura Local Board feedback

a)    Do you support the need for a biodiversity credit system for New Zealand?

 

The board supports in principle the need for a biodiversity credit system but queries how the system will be implemented.

 

b)    Should credits recognise only positive actions to support biodiversity, or actions that avoid decreases in biodiversity too?

 

The board is concerned that a biodiversity credit system could be seen as a “wealthy ticket” – only people with money will be able to participate.

 

c)    Should a biodiversity credit system focus on terrestrial environments only, or extend to freshwater / estuaries, or coastal marine environment too?

 

The biodiversity credit system should focus on all areas including terrestrial freshwater / estuaries and coastal marine environments.

d)   Should a biodiversity credit system cover all land types (public / private / whenua Māori) or be limited to certain categories, e.g., private / whenua Māori?

 

The board believes Māori are best placed to provide responses on what happens on whenua Māori land.

 

The board believes it should be the landowners’ choice as to whether they want to enter into a biodiversity credit system.

 

e)    Should a biodiversity credit system be based primarily on outcomes, activities, or projects?

 

The board believes the biodiversity credit system should be primarily based on outcomes.

f)     Of the following principles, which do you consider should be the top four to underpin a New Zealand biodiversity credit system?

              i.          Principle 1 – Permanent or long-term (eg: 25-year) impact

            ii.          Principle 2 – Transparent and verifiable claims

           iii.          Principle 3 – Robust, with measures to prevent abuse of the system

           iv.          Principle 4 – Reward nature-positive additional activities

            v.          Principle 5 – Complement domestic and international action

           vi.          Principle 6 – No double-counting, and clear rules about the claims that investors can make

          vii.          Principle 7 – Maximise positive impact on biodiversity?

 

The board believes the following top four principles should underpin a New Zealand biodiversity credit system:

 

·         Principle 2 – Transparent and verifiable claims

 

·         Principle 3 – Robust, with measures to prevent abuse of the system

 

·         Principle 5 – Complement domestic and international action

 

·         Principle 6 – No double-counting, and clear rules about the claims that investors can make.

 

g)    What assurance would you need to participate in a market, either as a landholder or as a potential purchaser?

 

The board believes it will depend on what is happening in the economy whether a landholder or potential purchaser will want to participate.

h)    What do you see as the benefits and risks for a biodiversity credit system not being regulated at all?

The board believes there is a risk of abuse if the system is not adequately regulated and monitored. 

 

The board believes the system should be for first generation purchasers only.

 

i)     A biodiversity credit system has six necessary components. These are:

·         project provision

·         quantification of activities or outcomes

·         monitoring measurement and reporting

·         verification of claims

·         operation of the market and registry

·         investing in credits.

To have the most impact in attracting people to the market, which component(s) should the Government be involved in?

The board believes the government should be involved in:

 

·         Verification of claims

·         Operation of the market and registry

·         Monitoring measurement and reporting

 

j)     Should a biodiversity credit system complement the resource management system? e.g., it could prioritise Significant Natural Areas and / or endangered and at-risk taonga species?

No comment

 

CARRIED

 

 

18

Funding Auckland's Storm Recovery and Resilience

 

Resolution number PPK/2023/158

MOVED by Chairperson B Catchpole, seconded by Member A Webster:  

That the Papakura 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 the following feedback on the funding of Auckland’s Storm Recovery and Resilience package:

Questions

Papakura Local Board Feedback

1. Auckland Council and central government have reached a proposed package to increase the total investment into Auckland’s recovery efforts, with around $2 billion of co-funding for:

·         necessary repairs to the transport network,

·         improvements to reduce risks from natural hazards, and

·         the one-off voluntary buy-out of around 700 homes that pose an intolerable risk to life.

Central government would provide up to $1.1 billion in new and reprioritised existing funding, with the council contributing up to $908 million from its sources.

Do you support the council accepting the proposed funding package?

The Papakura Local Board support council accepting the government funding package for Auckland’s storm recovery efforts.

If council doesn’t accept the package it will have to find funding elsewhere and ratepayers will end up having to pay more.

2. Category 3 properties are not safe to live in because the risk from future flooding or landslips is intolerably high, and no options are available to reduce the risk at an acceptable cost. In purchasing these properties, we will have some decisions to make.

Council has a moral obligation to buy out properties where council has consented for properties to be built in inappropriate places. 

 

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

All residential properties should be treated equally.

 

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 buy-out price should be the capital value (CV) of the property depending on when the CV was done. If the CV is more than 12 months old before the event, an adjustment should be made to reflect any increases in property value. The buy-out price should be a top up of the insurance pay out.

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.

The board believes council will not be able to afford to pay out 100 percent of the value of the property. If council applies a cap to pay outs it must be done in a fair and reasonable way.

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.

It is the property owners’ responsibility to ensure they are adequately insured.

 

The buy-out should top-up any insurance payout.

 

Those with no insurance or limited insurance should only receive what the top-up amount would be.

 

3. 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 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. Would you support Auckland Council advocating for the establishment of national schemes for these purposes?

The Papakura Local Board support Auckland Council advocating for the establishment of national schemes for these purposes.

CARRIED

 

 

 

19

Papakura Local Board Governance Forward Work Calendar - September 2023

 

Resolution number PPK/2023/159

MOVED by Chairperson B Catchpole, seconded by Member A Webster:  

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      tuhi ā-taipitopito / note the Governance Forward Work Calendar – September 2023.

CARRIED

 

 

20

Papakura Local Board Workshop Records

 

Resolution number PPK/2023/160

MOVED by Chairperson B Catchpole, seconded by Member K Hieatt:  

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      tuhi ā-taipitopito / note the Papakura Local Board workshop records held on:

i)       9 August 2023

ii)      16 August 2023

iii)     23 August 2023

iv)     06 September 2023

CARRIED

 

 

 

 

 

21        Te Whakaaro ki ngā Take Pūtea e Autaia ana | Consideration of Extraordinary Items

 

There was no consideration of extraordinary items.

 

 

 

 

4.51pm                                               The chairperson thanked members for their attendance and attention to business and declared the meeting closed.

 

CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD AT A MEETING OF THE Papakura Local Board HELD ON

 

 

 

DATE:.........................................................................

 

 

 

CHAIRPERSON:.......................................................