Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 November 2024

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Nau mai | Welcome 5

2 Ngā Tamōtanga | Apologies 5

3 Te Whakapuaki i te Whai Pānga | Declaration of Interest 5

4 Te Whakaū i ngā Āmiki | Confirmation of Minutes 5

5 He Tamōtanga Motuhake | Leave of Absence 5

6 Te Mihi | Acknowledgements 5

7 Ngā Petihana | Petitions 5

8 Ngā Tono Whakaaturanga | Deputations 5

8.1 Deputation - Turn Your Life Around (TYLA) Youth Group 5

8.2 Deputation - Beautification Trust 6

9 Te Matapaki Tūmatanui | Public Forum 6

9.1 Public Forum - Ōtāhuhu Historical Society 6

10 Ngā Pakihi Autaia | Extraordinary Business 7

11 Governing Body member Update 9

12 Local Board Leads and Appointments Report 11

13 Chairperson's Report 15

14 2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Local Grant Round One Grant Allocations 17

15 Local Board views on Proposed Plan Change 102 - Sites of Significance to Mana Whenua - Tranche 2a 35

16 Update on Māngere East Village Business Improvement District (BID) Programme and targeted rate as of 30 June 2025 45

17 Local board views on Plan Change 105 (Private) Waitomokia Precinct 53

18 Local board views on draft changes to cemetery bylaw / code 65

19 Annual Plan 2025/2026 - Input on Regional Consultation Content 97

20 Draft Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy – Part 2 109

21 Draft Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy – Part 1 127

22 Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) Electoral Reform Working Group - Issues Paper 141

23 Response to Ombudsman's recommendation to open workshops by default 165

24 Appointment of delegated local board member to provide feedback on stormwater activities 173

25 URGENT DECISION: Local Board input to Auckland Council submission on the Proposed amendments to the Biosecurity Act 179

26 Hōtaka Kaupapa / Governance Forward Work Calendars 187

27 Record of Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Workshop Notes 191

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

1 Nau mai | Welcome

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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakaū / confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 16 October 2024, 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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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 - Turn Your Life Around (TYLA) Youth Group

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. The "Turn Your Life Around" (TYLA) youth group working with the local board Youth Advisor and Youth Panel, will be in attendance to talk about their organisation and what they can bring to the community if they were to occupy the youth space at High St.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank the Turn Your Life Around (TYLA) group for their attendance and presentation.

8.2 Deputation - Beautification Trust

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. CEO Daniel Barthow and Community Programmes Manager Sterling Ruwhiu will be in attendance to share the recent impacts the trust has had in our South Auckland communities.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Daniel Barthow and Sterling Ruwhiu from the Beautification Trust for their attendance and presentation.

9 Te Matapaki Tūmatanui | Public Forum

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of three minutes per speaker is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

9.1 Public Forum - Ōtāhuhu Historical Society

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Raewyn Goodger from the Ōtāhuhu Historical Society will be in attendance to talk about the objects of the society, its activities, place at 12-16 High Street and why renewal of the lease is important to them.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Raewyn Goodger for her attendance and public forum presentation.

10 Ngā Pakihi Autaia | Extraordinary Business

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and

(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 November 2024

Local Board Leads and Appointments Report

File No.: CP2024/15016

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To allow the local board members an opportunity to present verbal and written updates on their lead roles, such as relevant actions, appointments and meetings.

2. To make any appointments to vacant positions.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Members have an opportunity to update the board on their activities as topic area leads.

4. The table below outlines the current leads and alternates for topic areas of local board business meetings and organisations on which the board is represented through a formal appointment.

Topic Area	Lead	Alternate
Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee Appointments Committee	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	1st half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa 2nd half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Staff consultation over landowner approval applications (excluding applications for filming and events)	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
Staff consultation on applications for filming	Christine O’Brien	Makalita Kolo
Liquor licence matters, to prepare and provide objections, if any, and speak to any local board views at any hearings on applications for liquor licences	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
Resource consent matters to: i) provide the local board views, if any, on whether a resource consent should proceed as a non-notified, limited notified or fully notified application ii) prepare and provide local board’s views, if any, on notified resource consents and speak to those views at any hearings if required iii) provide the local board’s views on matters relating to or generated by the COVID-19 (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 while this legislation remains in force	1st half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa 2nd half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Christine O’Brien
Local Government New Zealand Auckland Zone	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	1st half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa 2nd half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Select shared representatives to council working groups, working parties and other internal bodies, where there is a limited number of local board representatives to be selected from amongst all 21 or clusters of local boards	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
Manukau Harbour Forum joint committee	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo
Ara Kōtui (formerly Māori input into local board decision-making political steering group)	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
Staff consultation on applications for events and other activities on local parks and local facilities that also require regulatory approval, or may involve reputational, financial, performance or political risk	Christine O’Brien	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
Approve the local board’s input into Auckland Council submissions on formal consultation from government departments, parliament, select committees and other councils, when timeframes do not allow for local board input to be considered and approved at a local board meeting	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	1st half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa 2nd half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Infrastructure and Environmental Services	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Harry Fatu Toleafoa
Arts, Community and Events (including libraries)	Christine O’Brien	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
Parks, Sport and Recreation and Community Facilities	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	Christine O’Brien
Local planning, housing, and heritage – includes responding to resource consent applications on behalf of board	1st half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa 2nd half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	1st half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua 2nd half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa
Transport	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	1st half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa 2nd half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Economic development	Harry Fatu Toleafoa	Makalita Kolo
Youth, Children, Seniors and Uniquely Abled	Harry Fatu Toleafoa	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo
Water care COMMUNITY	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo
Auckland Airport Community Trust for Aircraft Noise Community Consultative Group	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
Ambury Park Centre	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo	Christine O’Brien
Department of Corrections - Community Impact Forum for Kohuora Corrections Facility	Makalita Kolo	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo
Māngere Bridge Business Association	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	Christine O’Brien
Māngere East Village Business Association	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Māngere Mountain Education Trust	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Makalita Kolo
Māngere Town Centre Business Association	Makalita Kolo	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo
Ōtāhuhu Business Association	Christine O’Brien	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
Ōtāhuhu Portage Project Steering Group	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo	Christine O’Brien
Ōtāhuhu Town Hall Community Centre Incorporated Society joint committee	Makalita Kolo	Harry Fatu Toleafoa
South Harbour Business Association	Harry Fatu Toleafoa	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo
Tāmaki Estuary Environmental Forum	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Makalita Kolo
Te Pukaki Tapu O Poutukeka Historic Reserve & Associated Lands Co-Management Committee	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
Te Pūkaki Tapu o Poutūkeka Co-Management Committee. MO/2023/187 · to agree changes of a minor nature to the Te Pūkaki Tapu o Poutūkeka Co-management Agreement in Attachment A of the agenda report, in consultation with Te Ākitai Waiohua / Pūkaki Māori Marae Committee · to sign on behalf of Auckland Council the Te Pūkaki Tapu o Poutūkeka Co-management Agreement in Attachment A of the agenda report · as an additional member to Te Pūkaki Tapu o Poutūkeka Co-management Committee, to come into effect on agreement with Te Ākitai Waiohua / Pūkaki Māori Marae Committee on a total Co-management committee membership of six	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
The Southern Initiative (TSI) Steering Group	Harry Fatu Toleafoa	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
Emergency Readiness and Response Forum MO/2024/52 To participate in the Emergency Readiness and Response Forum	Chairperson Deputy Chairperson Member Harry Fatu Toleafoa

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whiwhi / receive the verbal and written reports from local board members.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jacqueline Robinson - Democracy Advisor

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 November 2024

2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Local Grant Round One Grant Allocations

File No.: CP2024/15557

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To fund, part-fund or decline applications received for 2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Local Grant Round One.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. On 15 May 2024, the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopted the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Grants Programme 2024/2025, provided as Attachment A, which sets application guidelines for contestable community grants submitted to the board.

3. This report presents applications received in the 2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Local Grant Round One, provided as Attachment B.

4. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $216,771 for the 2024/2025 financial year.

5. On 18 September 2024, a total of $43,233.88 was allocated towards 2024/2025 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Quick Response Round One (MO/2024/123). This leaves a total budget of $173,537.12 for two Local Grant rounds and one Quick Response Grant round in 2024/2025.

6. Thirty-nine applications have been submitted to the 2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Local Grant Round One, requesting a total of $430,208.84.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) agree to fund, part-fund, or decline each application in the 2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Local Grant Round One.

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested
LG2509-101	Peromona Laufiso	Community	Towards furniture, signage, appliances, entertainment equipment to start KEMBO initiative at Mangere Town Centre from 4 December 2024 to 4 December 2025	$13,196.00
LG2509-102	The Miracle Church of Jesus Christ	Events	Towards venue, sound and lighting, marketing, hospitality, logistics, miscellaneous, contingency, and gifts cost to deliver Voices of Aroha event at the Te Puke ō Tara Community Centre on 13 December 2024	$10,000.00
LG2509-103	Māngere 275 Times	Community	Towards technical devices and printing costs to promote town centre businesses through monthly community magazine in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area from 1 February 2025 to 1 December 2025	$11,704.00
LG2509-104	Maliumai Community Trust	Community	Towards koha, advertisement, admin, facilitator wage, refreshment and gift vouchers to run Pacific Cadetship Career Pathways project in Māngere-Otāhuhu from 14 April 2025 to 25 April 2025	$6,000.00
LG2509-107	Fix Up, Look Sharp	Community	Towards a contribution to leasing cost of Fix Up, Look Sharp Hub on 100 Neilson Street, Onehunga from 3 December 2024 to 3 December 2025	$2,000.00
LG2509-108	Muslim Focus	Community	Towards food, transportation and social services to support Muslim in needs in South Auckland from 4 January 2025 to 31 May 2025	$5,000.00
LG2509-109	Life Education Trust Counties Manukau	Community	Towards a contribution to Life Education Programme delivery cost at Māngere-Ōtāhuhu local schools from 27 January 2025 to 11 April 2025	$10,000.00
LG2509-110	Oceania Literacy Trust	Arts and culture	Towards gift boxes of culturally specific books for Māori and Pasifika families in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu area from 2 December 2024 to 20 December 2024	$3,000.00
LG2509-111	Mangere Hawks Netball Club Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards netball goal posts to deliver Junior Programmes at Mangere Hawks Netball Club from 20 January 2025 to 31 January 2025	$3,513.25
LG2509-112	Katrina Iosia	Arts and culture	Towards project management, artist fees, promotion, meeting, curation, workshop facilitation, photography and videography and developer fees to deliver an exhibition at the Mangere Arts Centre from 4 December 2024 to 4 August 2025	$25,650.00
LG2509-116	The Cause Collective	Community	Towards training, activities, catering, art and sport supplies, advertising costs, merchandise, transport costs to deliver Do Good, Feel Good Changemakers Programme at The Cause Collective hub from 2 December 2024 to 31 July 2025	$26,500.00
LG2509-117	Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust	Community	Towards a contribution of annual costs to supervise and train volunteers at the Youthline House to support youth from 1 December 2024 to 1 December 2025	$2,000.00
LG2509-121	School Start First Impressions	Community	Towards School Starter Pack for Māngere-Ōtāhuhu students from 2 December 2024 to 3 February 2025	$3,008.10
LG2509-124	Action Education Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards facilitator cost to deliver twenty Spoken Word Poetry workshops at Otahuhu College, McAuley High School, Zayed College for Girls from 1 January 2025 to 1 June 2025	$5,000.00
LG2509-125	Disability Sport Auckland Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards registration and accommodation for Halberg Games at Kings College, and facilitator cost for Mt Richmond Inclusive Afterschool programme from 10 February 2025 to 8 December 2025	$13,783.49
LG2509-127	Polynesian Entertainers Limited	Arts and culture	Towards venue hire, presentation, staff time and catering to deliver Ava Feiloai project at the Mangere Arts Centre from 7 December 2024 to 6 March 2025	$5,750.00
LG2509-130	Momentum Charitable Trust	Community	Towards cost to run six one-day life and financial skills programmes at Probation Centres in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu from 2 December 2024 to 28 February 2025	$10,170.00
LG2509-132	Road Safety Education Limited	Community	Towards venue hire and facilitator fee to deliver Road Safety programme for Māngere-Ōtāhuhu local students at Life Church South Venue from 1 January 2025 to 30 June 2025	$5,000.00
LG2509-134	KidsCan Charitable Trust	Community	Towards food cost to deliver KidsCan programmes for disadvantaged children in forty local schools and ECEs in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu from 1 January 2025 to 31 December 2025	$15,000.00
LG2509-135	Mangere Bridge Progressive Business Association	Community	Towards operation, activities, admin, promotion, maintenance, event management time for Town Centre Revitalisation at Mangere Bridge Village from 1 December 2024 to 30 August 2025	$50,000.00
LG2509-136	Pet Refuge New Zealand Charitable Trust	Community	Towards a contribution to operating cost to run Pet Refugee Shelter in North Auckland from 1 January 2025 to 31 December 2025	$10,000.00
LG2509-137	T.W.H Incorporated	Community	Towards marketing and venue hire cost to deliver Whakamana Hapu Services at Mangere East Community Centre from 4 December 2024 to 12 February 2025	$2,900.00
LG2509-139	Warriors Community Foundation	Community	Towards a contribution to programme delivery cost at Mangere Otahuhu Schools from 1 February 2025 to 31 July 2025	$10,000.00
LG2509-140	The Brain Injury Association Auckland	Sport and recreation	Towards resource and ambassador cost to deliver Concussion Education Programme in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu local schools from 27 January 2025 to 11 April 2025	$4,000.00
LG2509-141	Pregnancy Help Incorporated	Community	Towards rent to support Pregnancy Help Auckland operation at Pakuranga Plaza from 25 February 2025 to 30 June 2025	$6,640.00
LG2509-143	Ambury Park Centre Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards hay cost to deliver riding therapy for people living with disabilities at Ambury Park from 2 February 2025 to 30 May 2025	$10,000.00
LG2509-144	Youthtown Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards staff time, transportation, food, admin time and resources to deliver EmpowerHER project at Māngere-Ōtāhuhu local schools from 3 February 2025 to 11 April 2025	$10,000.00
LG2509-147	Sustain and Enable Limited	Community	Towards workshops delivery, marketing, venue hire and refreshment, travel, energy efficiency devices, accountability report time to deliver Community Energy Education Workshops at Otāhuhu Town Hall from 6 January 2024 to 2 February 2026	$3,068.00
LG2509-148	Brain Play Limited	Community	Towards usage of equipment to run travelling coding and robotics workshops in local libraries and community centres in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu from 1 December 2024 to 28 February 2025	$3,036.00
LG2509-151	Great Potentials Foundation	Community	Towards Programme Manager salary to deliver MATES project at Māngere East Primary School, Māngere College and Ōtāhuhu College from 2 December 2024 to 28 February 2025	$8,000.00
LG2509-152	Home in Place (New Zealand) Limited	Community	Towards groceries, hamper boxes and toys to create Christmas Hamper Boxes for community housing residents from 2 December 2024 to 24 December 2024	$5,000.00
LG2509-153	Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards re-roofing, plumbing replacement, security upgrade and new bleachers for Manukau City Association Football Club clubroom from 2 December 2024 to 28 February 2025	$67,000.00
LG2509-154	The Helping Paws Charitable Trust	Environment	Towards a contribution to veterinary care including de-sexing cost for Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Community Stray and Dumped Cat Management Programme from 1 December 2024 to 30 November 2025	$5,000.00
LG2509-155	New Zealand Blue Light Ventures Inc	Community	Towards Street Smart Magazine printing cost and App cost to support high school students in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu area from 2 December 2024 to 31 March 2025	$5,208.00
LG2509-157	Pearl of the Islands Foundation	Arts and culture	Towards lamp cost to deliver a mosaic lamp-making workshop at Mangere Central Community Hall or Memorial Hall or Otahuhu Town Hall from 1 January 2025 to 30 June 2025	$4,760.00
LG2509-158	Mapura Studios Division of Panacea Arts Charitable Trust	Community	Towards venue hire, facilitator and admin wage to deliver Mapura Sings Otahuhu project at Otahuhu Town Hall from 3 February 2025 to 27 June 2025	$2,800.00
LG2509-163	The Operating Theatre Trust T/A Tim Bray Theatre Company	Arts and culture	Towards free theatre access for disadvantaged, disabled children to attend The Little Yellow Digger 2025 at the Māngere Art Centre from 5 May 2025 to 29 May 2025	$6,522.00
LG2509-164	Mangere Town Centre BID Incorporated	Community	Towards landscaping and plants, AV fixtures, infrastructure upgrades and event cost to Revitalise Māngere Town Centre from 1 December 2024 to 30 March 2025	$20,000.00
LG2509-166	Marist Brothers Old Pupils Association Samoa New Zealand Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards venue and tent hire, event launch, equipment hire, health and safety, portaloo, koha, catering and refreshment, security and marketing cost to run Marist Pacific Sevens at Manukau Rovers Rugby Club on 23 November 2024	$20,000.00
Total				$430,208.84

Horopaki

Context

7. The local board allocates grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders and contribute to the vision of being a world-class city.

8. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· higher priorities for funding

· exclusions

· grant types, the number of grant rounds, and when these will open and close

· any additional accountability requirements.

9. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopted the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Grants Programme as presented in Attachment A. The programme sets application guidelines for contestable community grants submitted to the board.

10. The community grant programme has been extensively advertised through the council grants webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters, Facebook pages, council publications, and community networks.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. The aim of the local board grant programme is to deliver projects and activities which align with the outcomes identified in the local board plan. All applications have been assessed utilising the Community Grants Policy and the local board grant programme criteria. The eligibility of each application is identified in the report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

12. The Local Board Grants Programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to address climate change by providing grants to individuals and groups for projects that support and enable community climate action.

13. Community climate action involves reducing or responding to climate change by residents in a locally relevant way. Local board grants can contribute to expanding climate action by supporting projects that reduce carbon emissions and increase community resilience to climate impacts.

14. Examples of projects include local food production and food waste reduction, increasing access to single-occupancy transport options, home energy efficiency and community renewable energy generation, local tree planting and streamside revegetation, and educating about sustainable lifestyle choices that reduce carbon footprints.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

15. The focus of an application is identified as arts, community, events, sport and recreation, environment, or heritage. Based on the focus of an application, a subject matter expert from the relevant department will provide input and advice.

16. The grants programme has no identified impacts on council-controlled organisations and therefore their views are not required.

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

Local impacts and local board views

17. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications against the local board priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

18. Staff will provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants so they can increase their chances of success next time.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

19. The local board grants programme aims to respond to the council’s commitment to improving Māori wellbeing by providing grants to individuals and groups who deliver positive outcomes for Māori. Auckland Council’s Māori Outcomes Delivery, Ngā Mātārae has provided input and support towards the development of the community grant processes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

20. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $216,771 for the 2024/2025 financial year.

21. On 18 September 2024, a total of $43,233.88 was allocated towards 2024/2025 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Quick Response Round One (MO/2024/123). This leaves a total budget of $173,537.12 for two Local Grant rounds and one Quick Response Grant round in 2024/2025.

22. Thirty-nine applications have been submitted to the 2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Local Grant Round One, requesting a total of $430,208.84.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

23. The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Community Grants Policy and the local board grants programme. The assessment process has identified a low risk associated with funding the applications in this round.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

24. Following the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board allocating funding, grants staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	2024/2025 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Community Grants Programme	25
b	2024/2025 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Grant Round One Application Summary (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Amber Deng - Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Pierre Fourie - Grants & Incentives Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 November 2024

Local Board views on Proposed Plan Change 102 - Sites of Significance to Mana Whenua - Tranche 2a

File No.: CP2024/10276

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To inform the local board of the submissions received on the Council-initiated Plan Change 102: Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua Tranche 2a (PC102) to the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP), and to invite local board views on the plan change in light of these submissions.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. PC102 seeks to introduce nine Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua (SSMW) to Schedule 12 of the AUP. Changes to two other schedules in the AUP are proposed to recognise the association mana whenua have with scheduled Outstanding Natural Features and Historic Heritage Places in Schedules 6 and 14.1 of that plan. A name change is proposed to one already scheduled Historic Heritage Place.

3. Decision-makers on Council-initiated plan changes to the AUP must consider local boards’ views on the plan change, if the relevant local boards choose to provide their views.

4. As part of the development of PC102, a confidential workshop and business meeting was held with Māngere Ōtāhuhu Local Board on 14 February 2024 and 20 March 2024 respectively. The local board resolution MO/2024/28 from the 20 March 2024 business meeting is at Attachment 1.

5. The plan change was publicly notified on 23 May 2024. Twenty submissions and four further submissions have been received.

6. There is one nominated site of cultural significance in the Māngere - Ōtāhuhu Local Board area, Te Wai o Ruarangi. Six parties have made submissions on this site.

7. Four of the submitters are landowners and leaseholders on the southern bank of the creek; Auckland International Airport Limited, RB Takeoff LP, Foodstuffs, and Tel Properties Nominees Limited. One submitter is a business owner located north of the creek, Gloucester Industrial Park Limited. The sixth submitter is a private landowner located to the west of Oruarangi Road.

8. Gloucester Industrial Park Limited has submitted in support of the site and this has been supported by a further submission from Fort Richard Laboratories Limited.

9. Three of the business landowners and leaseholders on the southern bank of the creek support the scheduling in part but seek minor mapping amendments so the scheduled extent avoids private property and stormwater infrastructure. Tel Properties Nominees Limited has made a submission in opposition and seeks to engage with a town planner to understand the impact of the schedule on their property.

10. The private landowner to the west of Oruarangi Road seeks a repeal of the Manukau Harbour Control Act 1911, something which is not within the scope of this plan change.

11. In addition to these specific submissions, a plan change-wide submission in support of PC102 has been received from the mana whenua entity Te Kawerau ā Maki. A plan change-wide submission point has also been made by the mana whenua entity Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei seeking that greater certainty is provided on which mana whenua group(s) should be consulted on future development proposals within scheduled SSMW.

12. A local board can present local views and preferences when expressed by the whole local board. This report is the mechanism for the local board to resolve and provide its views on PC102 in light of the submissions received, including seeking to present at a forthcoming hearing.

13. Staff do not recommend what view the local board should convey.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide local board views on the Council-initiated Plan Change 102.

b) kopou / appoint a local board member to speak to the local board views at a Council hearing on Plan Change 102.

c) tautapa / delegate authority to the chairperson of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board to make a replacement appointment in the event the local board member appointed in resolution b) is unable to attend the plan change hearing.

Horopaki

Context

14. Each local board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people in its area regarding the content of Auckland Council’s strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. Local boards provide their views on the content of these documents. Decision-makers must consider local boards’ views when deciding the content of these policy documents (ss15-16 Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009).

15. A plan change will result in amendments to the AUP if it is approved. Local boards must have the opportunity to provide their views on plan change proposals.

16. If the local board chooses to provide its views, the planner includes those views in the hearing report. The hearing report will address issues raised in local board views and submissions.

17. If appointed by a resolution, local board members may present the local board’s views at the hearing to commissioners, who in turn decide on the plan change.

18. This report provides an overview of the plan change, and a summary of submissions’ key themes.

19. The report does not recommend what view the local board should convey, if the local board expresses its views on PC102. The planner must include any local board views verbatim in the evaluation of the submissions on the plan change. The planner cannot advise the local board as to what its views should be.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

20. PC102 seeks to introduce nine SSMW to Schedule 12 of the AUP. Changes to two other schedules in the AUP are proposed to recognise the association mana whenua have with scheduled Outstanding Natural Features and Historic Heritage Places in Schedules 6 and 14.1 of that plan. A name change is proposed to one already scheduled Historic Heritage Place.

21. The purpose of the plan change is to recognise and protect the tangible and intangible Māori cultural values of sites and places within Tāmaki Makaurau to provide for the relationship of mana whenua with their cultural heritage.

22. Within the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area, PC102 applies to Te Wai o Ruarangi, the Oruarangi Creek and some of its tributaries. A location map of the site is included as Figure 1. The site is individually illustrated in Figures 2 and 3.

Figure 1: Location Map of Te Wai o Ruarangi

Figure 2: Aerial map of Te Wai o Ruarangi

Figure 3: Zoning map of Te Wai o Ruarangi

23. The plan change includes technical reports and evaluation that assesses the efficiency and effectiveness of scheduling these sites in the AUP. The reports and other application details are available from council’s website here. Council’s planner, and other experts, will evaluate and report on:

· submissions

· views and preferences of the local board, if the local board passes a resolution.

Themes from submissions received

24. Key submission themes are listed below.

· Support the plan change (general submission across all sites),

· Support the scheduling of Te Wai o Ruarangi,

· Decline the plan change (pending further discussion with a town planner),

· Include a specific requirement that only the 'appropriate' or 'correct' hapū which are recognised as 'tangata whenua' are engaged with for development proposals within identified SSMW,

· Amend the extent of Te Wai o Ruarangi on the southern boundary to avoid scheduling private property and stormwater infrastructure.

25. Submissions specifically on the site Te Wai o Ruarangi were made by six submitters.

Table 1: Submissions on Te Wai o Ruarangi for PC102

Submissions	Number of submissions
In support	1
Support in part	4
In opposition	1

26. Information on individual submissions, and the summary of all decisions requested by submitters, is available from council’s website here.

Queries from Local Board Workshop

27. On 7 August 2024, the lead planner for Tranche 2a presented the submissions received at a Māngere - Ōtāhuhu Local Board workshop.

28. The board members present sought to understand the position of the iwi Te Ahiwaru Waiohua and Te Ākitai Waiohua with respect to the submissions.

29. Te Ahiwaru Waiohua is the nominating iwi authority for Te Wai o Ruarangi and the council team are having discussions with the iwi on the relief sought by submitters. The iwi have not yet formalised their position on these matters.

30. The views of Te Ākitai Waiohua, or any other mana whenua group of Tāmaki Makaurau who is not the nominating iwi have not been sought with respect to individual submissions on PC102.

31. This is because of the tikanga (correct process) agreed under the Māori Cultural Heritage Programme for nominations. All iwi were made aware of the nominations and were able to jointly-nominate (in the event of having a strong interest) or are able to engage directly with the nominating iwi at any time. Mana whenua were also encouraged to submit on the plan change to ensure they had an individual ‘seat at the table’ during hearing processes and some iwi took up that opportunity.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

32. Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan sets out Auckland’s climate goals:

· to adapt to the impacts of climate change by planning for the changes we will face (climate adaptation)

· to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50 per cent by 2030 and achieve net zero emissions by 2050 (climate mitigation).

33. The local board could consider whether the Council-initiated plan change:

will reduce, increase or have no effect on Auckland’s overall greenhouse gas emissions

prepare the region for the adverse impacts of climate change (i.e. does the private plan change elevate or alleviate climate risks (e.g. flooding, coastal and storm inundation, urban heat effect, stress on infrastructure).

34. Of relevance to climate impact is an aspiration by the nominating iwi to naturalise SSMW rather than enable their development.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

35. No council-controlled organisation has made a submission on PC102.

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

Local impacts and local board views

36. PC102 affects five local board areas. One of the nominated sites of cultural significance, Te Wai o Ruarangi, is located within the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area.

37. Factors the local board may wish to consider in formulating its view:

· interests and preferences of people in local board area,

· well-being of communities within the local board area,

· local board documents, such as a local board plan or local board agreement,

· responsibilities and operation of the local board.

38. Engagement was undertaken with the local board during the development of PC102 and local board views were provided in relation to the proposed plan change.

39. This report is the mechanism for obtaining formal local board views in light of submissions received on PC102. The independent hearings commissioners will consider local board views, if provided, when making the Council’s decision on the Council-initiated plan change.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

40. If the local board chooses to provide its views on the plan change it includes the opportunity to comment on matters that may be of interest or importance to the Māori people, well-being of Māori communities or Te Ao Māori (Māori worldview).

41. PC102 is the result of work undertaken through Auckland Council’s Māori Cultural Heritage Programme, a programme that works alongside the 19 recognised mana whenua entities of Tāmaki Makaurau to understand the cultural values and therefore significance of sites and places of significance to mana whenua. This included working with Te Kawerau ā Maki and Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei, who have submitted on this plan change.

42. Te Kawerau ā Maki is in support of the plan change as notified. Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei seeks that the plan provisions clearly identify the relevant mana whenua group to be consulted for the purpose of planning processes.

43. The hearing report will include analysis of Part 2 of the Resource Management Act 1991 which requires that all persons exercising RMA functions shall take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

44. The hearing report will analyse these matters as they are of particular relevance to the plan change.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

45. No financial implications have been identified with respect to Te Wai o Ruarangi.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

46. No significant risks to the local board have been identified in the submissions received.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

47. The planner will include, and report on, any resolution of the local board in the hearing report. The local board member appointed to speak to the local board’s views will be informed of the hearing date and invited to the hearing for that purpose.

48. The planner will advise the local board of the decision on the plan change by memorandum.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment 1 - MOLB Resolution	43

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Matthew Gouge - Senior Policy Planner

Authorisers

Celia Davison - Manager Planning - Central/South

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 November 2024

Update on Māngere East Village Business Improvement District (BID) Programme and targeted rate as of 30 June 2025

File No.: CP2024/16232

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To update Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board on next steps relating to the Māngere East Village BID programme due to continuing non-compliance with the Business Improvement District Policy (2022).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Māngere East Village BID (MEV BID) has been non-compliant with the Auckland Council BID Policy (2022) (policy) since 2023.

3. At the 15 May 2024 meeting, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board approved a recommendation in support of “council officers working with Māngere East Village Business Association Society Inc. (the society), towards the discontinuation of the Māngere East BID programme and targeted rate by 30 June 2025” (MO/2024/48).

4. The society is responsible for implementing the BID programme under the BID Policy.

5. There has been no feedback received from the society in response to correspondence regarding continued non-compliance. The society has not notified the council of any amount of BID targeted rate for inclusion in councils’ annual budget for 2025/2026.

6. Auckland Council proposes that due to the society’s continued non-compliance, and no visible efforts to resolve the current situation, the next steps towards the discontinuation of the MEV BID programme, the BID targeted rate and the end and stop (termination) of the society’s BID Targeted Rate Grant Agreement will now commence.

7. In July 2024, Auckland Council advised the society that due to continuing non-compliance with the policy, the remaining BID targeted rate grant funds from the targeted rate set for 2024/2025 would be delayed (not provided to the society) and held by Auckland Council ($4,575 in total) until final decision-making about the future of the BID programme is made. The annual targeted rate amount set for the MEV BID is $6,100 per annum.

8. Staff recommend the future of the MEV BID programme (that is, a proposal to discontinue the programme and the associated targeted rate), is included in both the local board 2025/2026 local consultation content and the Governing Body annual budget 2025/2026 consultation material.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whiwhi / receive the update outlining next steps relating to the Māngere East Village Business Improvement District (BID) programme, and its associated BID targeted rate.

Horopaki

Context

Māngere East Village Business Improvement District Programme

9. The Māngere East Village BID programme commenced in 2010 under Manukau City Council. The BID has received the targeted rate grant amount of $6,100 per annum since 2010 (14 years).

10. The small targeted rate amount means the MEV BID would have always been financially unsustainable, and unable to comply with the BID Policy, without additional funding.

11. Alongside the annual BID targeted rate grant amount, the MEV BID has been the recipient of additional funding from the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board until 2021/2022.

12. Management of the MEV BID has been provided by an arrangement with, and subsidised by, the Māngere Town Centre BID (MTC BID) for approximately the past seven years. This arrangement finished in December 2023.

13. As at the most recent financial statements available (30 June 2023), the MEV BID had equity of around $17,000 in bank accounts, assets, and receivables due to them. There are no financial statements available to 30 June 2024.

Continued non-compliance with the BID Policy (2022)

14. Every BID operating within the Auckland Council’s BID Programme is required to meet the requirements of the BID Policy 2022 and the conditions set out in the three-year BID Targeted Rate Grant Agreement.

15. The policy requires annual accountability reporting and separation between the decision-making and direction of the society (implementation of actions).

16. The MEV BID had, through the management support it received from the MTC BID, been able to meet most of the BID Policy compliance requirements until December 2023.

17. The BID programme annual compliance reports provided to the local board in May 2023 and May 2024 signalled the issue of policy non-compliance and concerns for the ongoing financial sustainability for the MEV BID.

18. As of the time of this report, the MEV BID continues to be non-compliant with the BID policy in relation to:

· the failure to meet accountability requirements as of 10 March 2024, no audit report and no audit management letter, no online platform (website), incomplete 2023 Annual General Meeting AGM minutes and no online platform (website).

· the provision of financial statements and audited accounts for year ending 2024

· non-compliance as of 10 March 2023, no audit report to year end 2022

· not having a management/coordinator resource since December 2023 (the seperation of governance and management responsibilities)

· not having a current strategic plan

· non-compliance with the MEV constitution as lodged with the Companies Office under the Incorporated Society 1908 (as amended or replaced from time to time)

19. Staff have commmunicated with the MEV BID on several occasions:

· September 2023 – staff attendance at the executive committee meeting discussing future options.

· 12 April 2024 – email on non-compliance with accountability requirements due 10 March 2024.

· 9 July 2024 – email on decision to delay the remainder of targeted rate grant to the MEV BID for 2024/2025. These funds are held by Auckland Council.

· March and September 2024 – emails asking for executive committee time to resolve issues and non-compliance.

BID programmes established before 2010 receiving less than $120,000 pa of targeted rate

20. Of note also is the BID Policy requirement (section 1.4.2) for BIDs established before 2010 and receiving less than $120,000 pa of targeted rate. These BIDs are required to have increased their total ongoing income to at least $120,000 by 1 July 2028.

21. There is provision within the BID Policy (section 4.2.3) for another BID to take on the responsibility of providing services to manage, implement the total BID programme and targeted rate grant spend, on behalf of another BID.

22. While the MEV BID has been under the management of the MTC BID (shared manager and admin support) for the past seven years, this arrangement ended December 2023.

23. Council staff have encouraged the MEV BID to increase the amount of the targeted rate grant to make the option of overall management of the MEV BID financially viable and more attractive to another BID. However, the executive committee has declined to increase the amount of targeted rate.

24. At this stage, there is no evidence of the MEV BID being able to meet this requirement by 2028.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

No communication received from the society since March 2024

25. As of the date of this report there has been one communication received from the MEV BID (March 2024) advising their unavailability to deal with outstanding matters. No other communication in relation to non-compliance has been received.

26. The BID policy annual accountability reporting deadline of 31 October relating to their 2024 AGM has not been met by the society. The society is required to confirm via their AGM documents the BID targeted rate grant amount for 2025/2026 for inclusion in the council’s draft annual 2025/2026 budget consultation material. This confirmation comes from decision-making at the society’s (AGM).

27. Alongside the communications to the MEV BID specifically, there is also generic communications to the BID whanau relating to annual reporting deadlines and requirements set out in the policy that BIDs are obliged (under the BID grant agreement) to meet.

28. As of the date of this report there has been no communication to the council and no information or documents received from the society in relation to their 2024 MEV AGM.

MEV BID Management role

29. It is a requirement under the BID policy section 4.1.2, Requirement 12, that all BIDs have a delineation between the governance and management of a BID programme. MEV BID has not had a management resource since December 2023.

Compliance with the Incorporated Societies Act 1908 requirements

30. The society under its constitution rule 24.1 is required to hold an AGM within four months of their financial end of year date (by 31 October 2024).

31. Council staff are also unsure if the society is complying with its constitution in relation to holding the required number of six executive committee meetings per year (rule 21.1) and meeting the required quorum of members for decision-making. Executive committee meetings require three full members (rule 21.6) and AGMs require six full members (rule 28.2).

32. This has been an ongoing issue with the society’s ability to achieve meeting quorums required for both AGMs and executive committee meetings.

33. All BIDs must meet the rules set out in their constitution as a requirement of the policy.

Financial sustainability of the Māngere East Village BID programme

34. Due to its small and restricted BID boundary area and limited membership, the MEV BID has been financially vulnerable as a BID programme since its creation. Financial ‘top-up’ funds have been provided by the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board which have been used for placemaking and security initiatives.

35. Funding available to the BID has decreased over time as local boards encourage BIDs to increase their amount of targeted rate (permitted under the policy) and to become more financially sustainable.

36. The management of the MEV BID provided by the MTC BID enabled the society’s executive committee to come close to meeting the minimum requirements of the BID Policy up to December 2023.

37. Whilst contracted, the MTC BID manager undertook a review of whether other BID programmes would be interested in the overall management of the MEV BID and its annual BID targeted rate grant. The result showed this was not seen as a financially viable option by other BIDs due to the exceptionally low annual BID targeted rate grant amount of $6,100.

38. Since the MTC BID relationship finished in December 2023, the society has made no progress towards management of the MEV BID, and the accompanying targeted rate, by another BID programme.

39. Council staff have encouraged the MEV BID to increase the amount of the targeted rate grant. This could have made the option of overall management of the MEV BID financially more viable. The executive committee has declined to increase the amount of targeted rate.

40. For the 2024/2025 financial year, the MEV BID has had its annual targeted rate struck for $6,100. This amount of funding is inadequate to meet compliance costs associated with remaining in the BID Programme (for example, management overheads, audit costs).

41. The small BID targeted rate grant amount effectively provides no value to the MEV BID members, who are those paying the targeted rate directly (property owners) or indirectly as a business owner/ tenant.

Delay of MEV BID quarterly grant payments

42. Due to the absence of communication and action by the society’s executive committee towards compliance with the BID policy since December 2023, on 9 July 2024, Council staff notified the MEV BID that under policy section five and the BID targeted rate grant agreement, the council intended to delay the following MEV grant payments:

· Second BID quarterly payment – scheduled for first week in October

· Third BID quarterly payment – scheduled for mid-December

· Fourth BID quarterly payment – schedule for April 2025.

43. The society was advised the three delayed payments (totaling $4,575.00), would be set aside by the council for the completion of the MEV BID financial statements and audit report to year end 30 June 2024.

Continued non-compliance with the BID Policy

44. The society’s continued non-compliance and the absence of communication and action by the society’s executive committee means it is unlikely policy compliance will be achieved.

45. Non-compliance with the policy undermines the policy framework which aims to sustain public trust and confidence with the BID programme.

46. The lack of compliance with a council policy is a perception risk to a local board’s reputation and diminishes the accountability and governance approach for public funds as set out in the BID Policy. It could set a precedent with other BIDs involved in the regional BID programme.

Discontinuation of the MEV BID Programme from 30 June 2025

47. At the 21 May 2024 meeting, the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board approved a recommendation in support of “council officers working with the society towards the discontinuation of the Māngere East BID programme by 30 June 2025” (MO/2024/48).

48. The option to discontinue a BID programme and targeted rate would be considered where there is continued non-compliance against the BID Policy (2022) and inadequate evidence of effort towards resolving the issues identified.

49. Officers are proposing that, in failing to achieve and maintain compliance with the policy and the conditions set out in the BID grant agreement, the MEV BID programme and targeted rate should be discontinued as of 30 June 2025.This would mean that the council will not set the MEV BID targeted rate for 2025/2026 and subsequent years.

50. The process to discontinue the BID programme and the associated targeted rate will need to be undertaken by both the local board and the Governing Body through the annual budget 2025/2026 consultation process.

51. Wording for both documents will provide context and seek feedback. Wording relating to the proposed discontinuation of the MEV BID is “the local board is proposing to recommend to the Governing Body to end the Māngere East Village BID programme and associated BID targeted rate as at 30 June 2025.

Do you support the ending of the Māngere East Village Business Improvement District (BID) programme and associated BID targeted rate?”

52. Consultation for both documents is open to the public during February and March 2025.

53. Depending on feedback received from the consultation processes, it is proposed that staff will report to the local board in May 2025 seeking their approval to recommend to the Governing Body to set, or not to set, the MEV BID targeted rate for the subsequent rating years from 1 July 2025 onwards.

54. The Governing Body has the authority to a) consider the setting of rates (including targeted rates) and b) to set the rates.

55. The local board’s decision will be included in a report to the Governing Body in June 2025. That report will communicate the local board’s recommendation to either continue, or discontinue, the MEV BID programme, and the accompanying targeted rate for the MEV BID for the 2025/2026 year and subsequent years.

56. Māngere East Village Business Association Society Inc. will continue as a society under the Incorporated Societies Act.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

57. The outlining of the process towards the discontinuation of the Māngere East Village BID Programme will have no climate impact.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

58. There will be no impact from the Auckland Council perspective from this update report.

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

Local impacts and local board views

59. The process of discontinuation, and any decision to continue to set, or not set the MEV BID targeted rate for subsequent years, will require consultation through the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board draft annual budget 2025/2026 process.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

60. The BID Policy does not prescribe individual BID programme’s effectiveness, outcomes, or impacts for Māori. However individual BIDs may include and deliver programmes and projects for Māori with reporting at the local BID member level.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

61. There are no financial implications from this update report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

62. There are limited risks attached to this update to the local board.

63. It will be up to the members of the Māngere East Village Business Association Society Inc. to continue compliance with their registration with the Incorporated Societies Act.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

64. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board draft annual budget 2025/2026 local consultation content will include wording seeking feedback on the continuation, or discontinuation, of MEV BID.

65. After the consultation period, a report will be prepared for the local board regarding consultation feedback received and the next steps. That report may ask the local board to approve a suitable recommendation to the Governing Body about whether to set, or not set, a BID targeted rate grant for 2025/2026 for MEV BID.

66. Staff will include actions in relation to the MEV BID programme, (for example, use of the Auckland Council retained targeted rate not paid to the MEV BID for the 2024/2025 financial year), in the report.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Gill Plume - BID Senior Advisor

Claire Siddens - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager CCO/External Partnerships team

Anna Bray - General Manager Group Strategy, Transformation and Partnerships

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 November 2024

Local board views on Plan Change 105 (Private) Waitomokia Precinct

File No.: CP2024/16529

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To invite local board views on a private plan change request by Goodman (NZ) Nominees Limited at 350, 400 & 470 Oruarangi Road, 118 Montgomerie Road and 88 Pavilion Drive, Māngere.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Decision-makers on a private plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan must consider local boards’ views on the plan change if the relevant local boards choose to provide their views.

3. Goodman (NZ) Nominees Limited lodged a private plan change for 350, 400 & 470 Oruarangi Road, 118 Montgomerie Road and 88 Pavilion Drive, Māngere. Private plan change 105 seeks to apply the Waitomokia Precinct provisions, within the Auckland Unitary Plan, over Business – Light Industry zoned land inside the proposed precinct boundaries for the purpose of enabling urban development, while recognising the cultural, spiritual and historical values of mana whenua and their relationship to the land and waterbodies in and around Waitomokia.

4. A total of 14 submissions have been received. Five submissions are in support (including one submission’s support being conditional upon amendments being made) and one submission is neutral on the decision sought. Five submissions seek that the plan change be declined, but if it is approved amendments are made; and three submissions seek that the plan change be declined. No further submissions have been received.

5. The key themes of concern from the submissions on private plan change 105 include:

· the absence of scheduling Waitomokia (particularly the undeveloped inner and outer slopes) as a site of significance to Mana Whenua in the Auckland Unitary Plan given it’s cultural and geological significance at a regional level

· the absence of scheduling Waitomokia as an outstanding natural feature in the Auckland Unitary Plan to protect its geological and geoheritage features/values which reflect one of the best-preserved large craters in the Auckland Volcanic Field

· reverse sensitivity effects on adjoining industrial sites and the Māngere Wastewater Treatment Plant.

6. A local board can present local views and preferences when expressed by the whole local board. This report is the mechanism for the local board to resolve and provide its views on private plan change 105. Staff do not recommend what view the local board should convey.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide local board views on private plan change 105 by by Goodman (NZ) Nominees Limited at 350, 400 & 470 Oruarangi Road, 118 Montgomerie Road and 88 Pavilion Drive, Māngere

b) kopou / appoint a local board member to speak to the local board views at a hearing on private plan change 105

c) tautapa / delegate authority to the chairperson of Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board to make a replacement appointment in the event the local board member appointed in resolution b) is unable to attend the private plan change hearing.

Horopaki

Context

Decision-making authority

7. Each local board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people in its area regarding the content of Auckland Council’s strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. Local boards provide their views on the content of these documents. Decision-makers must consider local boards’ views when deciding the content of these policy documents (ss15-16 Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009).

8. A private plan change request will be included in the Auckland Unitary Plan if it is approved (or approved with modifications). Local boards must have the opportunity to provide their views on private plan change requests – when an entity other than council proposes a change to the Auckland Unitary Plan.

9. If the local board chooses to provide its views, the planner includes those views in the hearing report. The hearing report will address issues raised in local board views and submissions by themes.

10. If appointed by resolution, local board members may present the local board’s views at the hearing to commissioners, who decide on the private plan change request.

11. This report provides an overview of the private plan change, and a summary of the key themes raised in submissions.

12. The report does not recommend what the local board should convey, if the local board expresses its views on private plan change 105. The planner must include any local board views verbatim in the evaluation of the private plan change. The planner cannot advise the local board as to what its views should be, and then evaluate those views.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Plan change overview

13. The private plan change applies to 350, 400 & 470 Oruarangi Road, 118 Montgomerie Road and 88 Pavilion Drive, Māngere. Figure 1. The land is zoned Business – Light Industry zone as shown below in Figure 1.

A map of a city

Description automatically generated

14. Goodman (NZ) Nominees Limited primary stated reason for private plan change 105 is to enable the development of light industrial activities, some accommodation and commercial, and community activities within the Plan Change area while recognising the cultural, spiritual and historical values of mana whenua and their relationship to the land and waterbodies in and around Waitomokia.

15. To achieve the above stated outcomes, private plan change 105 proposes to amend the Auckland Unitary Plan by applying a Precinct (Waitomokia Precinct) with specific standards and assessment criteria which vary the standard Business – Light Industry zone and Auckland-wide provisions to introduce more tailored standards, matters of discretion and assessment criteria that respond to the cultural values and significance of the Plan Change area. These include specific precinct provisions relating to building heights, specified no build areas, yard setbacks, landscaping, stormwater management provisions to contribute to the improvement of the mauri of the Ōruarangi Awa, and roading and access controls.

16. The precinct provisions and plans are summarised as follows:

• building height standard to ensure that the effects of building height, visual dominance and privacy are managed, in particular for sub-precincts A and C within and upon the outer slopes of the Waitomokia volcanic explosion crater, adjacent to the Pā site, and across from Puketaapapa Papakāinga

• identified no build areas within sub-precincts A and C to avoid anticipated light industry and commercial development on the most culturally sensitive areas of the Plan Change area, including limiting the extent of buildings, structures or earthworks within the crater rim’s spatial extent, to protect mana whenua values associated with the Waitomokia maunga (noting exception to enable provision of community facilities and small-scale public amenity structures for use by mana whenua in no build areas with their agreement)

• yard and landscaping standards within sub-precinct A, providing for separation and visual screening and privacy between future industrial development and the neighbouring Pā site and papakāinga

• stormwater management standard requiring treatment of runoff, use of specified building materials, and water reuse to contribute to overall improvements to water quality, stream health and the mauri of the Ōruarangi Awa;

• end-of-trip facility requirements for all commercial and industrial activities to encourage a mode shift to walking and cycling

• roading and access standard and vehicle access restriction control to restrict heavy vehicle traffic movements from the Waitomokia Precinct on to Ōruarangi Road due to safety concerns raised by mana whenua living at Puketaapapa papakāinga

• special information requirements to accompany resource consent applications: archaeological assessment, riparian planting plan, landscape plan

• associated objectives, policies, rules, matters of discretion, and assessment criteria.

17. Refer to Figure 2 below depicting the Waitomokia Precinct’s spatial extent and proposed sub-precincts:

Figure 2 - Proposed Precinct Map (source: Appendix 4 to the Applicant’s Section 32 Report)

18. The applicant provided the following information to support the private plan change request:

· private plan change request, including drafted changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan,

· section 32 evaluation report, which includes site history background and details of the existing resource consents for the site,

· cultural values assessments from Te Ahiwaru Waiohua, Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua, Te Ākitai Waiohua, Te Kawerau ā Maki, Ngāti Tamaoho and Ngaati Whanaunga,

· cultural values matrix and record of Mana Whenua consultation

· specialist documents:

o Civil engineering report

o Freshwater classification memorandum

o Preliminary hydrology report

o Stormwater management report

o Integrated transport assessment

o Landscape visual assessment

o Archaeological report

o Geoheritage assessment

o Environmental due diligence investigation

o Geotechnical factual report

o Preliminary settlement memorandum

o Acoustic memorandum

The reports and other application details are available from council’s website at:

https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-plans-strategies/unitary-plan/auckland-unitary-plan-modifications/Pages/details.aspx?UnitaryPlanId=271

19. Council’s planner, and other experts, will evaluate and report on:

· technical reports supplied by the applicant

· submissions

· views and preferences of the local board if the local board passes a resolution.

Strategic Planning Context

20. The Auckland Plan 2050 (Auckland Plan) is Auckland’s long term spatial plan. A key direction of the Auckland Plan is to develop a quality compact urban form to accommodate growth by ensuring development occurs in areas that are easily accessible by active transport modes and maximises the efficient use of urban land.

21. Goodman (NZ) Nominees Limited’s section 32 evaluation considers their proposed plan change will be consistent with the Auckland Plan’s strategic direction and contribute to achieving a quality compact approach by including precinct provisions which specify end-of-trip facility requirements for all commercial and industrial activities to encourage a mode shift to active modes, while also increasing land use efficiency through enabling industrial development of an existing urban area in a manner which ensures cultural values associated with the Waitomokia crater and waterbodies, archaeological, ecological, and amenity values inside the Plan Change area are protected, restored and enhanced.

22. The National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (updated in 2022) (NPS-UD) seeks to ensure New Zealand’s towns and cities are well-functioning urban environments that meet the changing needs of diverse communities. Plan Change 80 (PC 80) to the Auckland Unitary Plan’s Regional Policy Statement (RPS) gives effect to the NPS-UD, by amending existing AUP objectives and policies to reference “well-functioning urban environments” which are “resilient to the effects of climate change”.

23. The section 32 evaluation states the proposed plan change will give effect to the RPS and is complementary to PC 80. In particular, it notes that the proposed plan change is in keeping with the concepts of a well-functioning urban environment which is resilient to the effects of climate change by introducing provisions encouraging a shift to active modes, thereby reducing car dependence.

24. The hearing process will test the extent to which private plan change 105 as proposed will give effect to the relevant provisions of the NPS-UD, Auckland Plan and Auckland Unitary Plan’s RPS.

Themes from submissions received

25. The key themes of concern from the submissions on private plan change 105 include:

· the absence of scheduling Waitomokia (particularly the undeveloped inner and outer slopes) as a site of significance to Mana Whenua in the Auckland Unitary Plan given its cultural and geological significance at a regional level

· reverse sensitivity effects on adjoining industrial sites and the Māngere Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Table 1: Submissions received on Plan Change 105

Submissions	Number of submissions
In support	4
Support in Part	1
Neutral	1
In opposition	8

26. Information on individual submissions, and the summary of all decisions requested by submitters, is available from council’s website:

https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/UnitaryPlanDocuments/pc-105-summary-of-decisions-requested.pdf

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

27. Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan sets out Auckland’s climate goals:

· to adapt to the impacts of climate change by planning for the changes we will face (climate adaptation)

· to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50 per cent by 2030 and achieve net zero emissions by 2050.

28. The first of council’s climate goals is relevant because it relates to climate adaption. That goal aligns with the legal principlefor RMA decision-makers to have particular regard to the effects of climate change (section 7(i) RMA).

29. The plan change proposes precinct provisions which specify end-of-trip facility requirements for all commercial and industrial activities to encourage a mode shift to active modes, thereby lessening car dependence and helping to reduce greenhouse gases.

30. There were no submissions that raised specific climate matters.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31. Healthy Waters, Auckland Transport and Parks will review the relevant submissions and provide expert input to the hearing report.

32. Watercare have made a submission. The key matter raised was reverse sensitivity air quality effects on the Māngere Wastewater Treatment Plant.

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

Local impacts and local board views

33. The private plan change request encompasses sites at 350, 400 & 470 Oruarangi Road, 118 Montgomerie Road and 88 Pavilion Drive, Māngere, within the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area. The site is adjacent to public open space and within walking distance of several other open spaces for which the local board has some decision-making powers. As shown in figure 3 below, these are:

· the historic reserve containing a pā site and adjoining esplanade reserve at 82 Pavilion Drive, Māngere (yet to be named and rezoned to public open space) which adjoins the site at 88 Pavilion Drive, Māngere

· Oruarangi Road Esplanade Reserve at 490R Oruarangi Road, Māngere which adjoins the sites at 470 Oruarangi Road and 88 Pavilion Drive, Māngere

· Montgomerie Road Reserve at 11R Montgomerie Road, Māngere which adjoins the site at 88 Pavilion Drive, Māngere

· Otuataua Stonefields Reserves (14R Quarry Road, 56 Ihumatao Quarry Road and 303 Ihumatao Road) and Oruarangi Road Reserve at 498R Oruarangi Road which are located immediately west of 88 Pavilion Drive, Māngere, on the opposing side of Oruarangi Awa.

34. Factors the local board may wish to consider in formulating its view:

· strengthening relationship and collaboration with Mana Whenua

· interests and preferences of people in the local board area

· well-being of communities within the local board area

· local board documents, such as local board plan, local board agreement and area plan

· responsibilities and operation of the local board.

35. Goodman (NZ) Nominees Limited did not engage with the local board prior to lodging their proposed plan change. This report is the mechanism for obtaining formal local board views. The decision-maker will consider local board views, if provided, when deciding on the private plan change.

Figure 3 – Public reserves (excluding road reserves) around plan change sites (source: Geomaps)

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

36. If the local board chooses to provide its views on the plan change, it includes the opportunity to comment on Te Ao Māori (Māori worldview) matters of interest and importance to Mana Whenua, Māori people and the well-being of Māori communities.

37. In early 2022, Mana Whenua groups with a registered interest in the proposed plan change area were contacted by Goodman (NZ) Nominees Limited and invited to engage on the plan change proposal. A total of 11 mana whenua groups were contacted, and six groups responded confirming their interest for further engagement.

38. Mana Whenua who actively engaged in development of the plan change proposal through hui and the provision of CVA’s are as follows:

• Te Ahiwaru – Waiohua;

• Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua;

• Te Ākitai Waiohua;

• Te Kawerau ā Maki;

• Ngāti Tamaoho; and

• Ngaati Whanaunga

39. Figure 4 sets out a summary of key steps of engagement undertaken by Goodman (NZ) Nominees Limited with Mana Whenua on the plan change proposal prior to its lodgment.

Figure 4 – Key steps of Applicant’s engagement with Mana Whenua on the Plan Change Proposal prior to lodgement (source: Appendix 8 to the Applicant’s Section 32 report)

40. Te Ahiwaru – Waiohua and Te Kawerau ā Maki have made submissions in support of private plan change 105, while Te Ākitai Waiohua, Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua and Ngāti Tamaoho have made submissions seeking that the current plan change proposal be declined as it fails to schedule Waitomokia (particularly the undeveloped inner and outer slopes and their proximity to the adjacent pā site) as a site of significance to Mana Whenua in the Auckland Unitary Plan given its cultural and geological significance at a regional level.

41. The hearing report will include analysis of Part 2 of the Resource Management Act which requires that all persons exercising RMA functions shall consider the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

42. The private plan change request does not pose any financial implications for the local board’s assets or operations, nor to the infrastructure assets of Auckland Transport, Watercare and Healthy Waters, with the costs of providing any required on-site infrastructure (including upgrades to existing infrastructure) to be met by Goodman (NZ) Nominees Limited.

43. Costs associated with processing the private plan change request will be recovered from Goodman (NZ) Nominees Limited.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

44. There is a risk that the local board will be unable to provide its views and preferences on the plan change if it doesn’t pass a resolution. This report provides:

· the mechanism for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board to express its views and preferences

· the opportunity for a local board member to speak at a hearing.

45. If the local board chooses not to pass a resolution at this business meeting, these opportunities are forgone.

46. The power to provide local board views regarding the content of a private plan change cannot be delegated to individual local board member(s) (Local Government Act 2002, Schedule 7, clause 36D). This report enables the whole local board to decide whether to provide its views and, if so, to determine what matters those views should include.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

48. The planner will advise the local board of the decision on the private plan change request by memorandum.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Nicholas Lau - Senior Policy Planner

Authorisers

Celia Davison - Manager Planning - Central/South

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 November 2024

Local board views on draft changes to cemetery bylaw / code

File No.: CP2024/17157

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive local board views on draft proposed changes to Auckland Council’s bylaw and code about council cemeteries and crematoria.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable the local board to provide its views on draft proposed changes to the Auckland Council Ture ā-Rohe mo ngā Wāhi Tapu me ngā Whare Tahu Tupāpaku | Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014 (Bylaw) and Arataki Tikanga mo ngā Wāhi Tapu me ngā Whare Tahu Tupāpaku | Cemeteries and Crematoria Code of Practice 2014 (Code), staff have prepared a draft statement of proposal in Attachment A.

3. The changes are in response to a review by the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee and its request for development of options and a proposal for improvements.

4. Key draft proposed changes are to:

· add a bylaw approval framework that clarifies when and how council approval is required, for example for burial and headstones.

· clarify who must comply with an approval and any council directions, for example the approval holder, a person acting on behalf of the approval holder, and cemetery visitors.

· move rules from the Code to operational guidance (for example, on the types of approval conditions that may apply), and the Bylaw (for example, the approval framework and general rules about adornments).

· update the bylaw structure, definitions and wording for clarity.

5. Staff recommend the local board provide its views on the draft proposed changes. Taking this approach will help develop a proposal to improve the regulatory framework.

6. There is a reputational risk that the proposed changes or the local board’s views do not reflect the view of people in their local board area. This risk would be partly mitigated by the opportunity for the local board to provide views on public feedback prior to deliberations.

7. The Regulatory and Safety Committee will consider the local board views in December and recommend a proposal to the Governing Body. Public consultation on the proposal is scheduled for early 2025, and deliberations and final Governing Body decision later in 2025

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide feedback on draft proposed changes to the Auckland Council Ture ā-Rohe mo ngā Wāhi Tapu me ngā Whare Tahu Tupāpaku | Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014 and Arataki Tikanga mo ngā Wāhi Tapu me ngā Whare Tahu Tupāpaku | Cemeteries and Crematoria Code of Practice 2014, in the draft statement of proposal in Attachment A of the agenda report.

Horopaki

Context

The Bylaw and Code help to manage council cemeteries and crematoria

8. Council seeks to minimise public safety risks, cemetery misuse, distress to families, obstruction, and damage to property, heritage and the environment from the use of council cemeteries and crematoria by the public, by:

· using a bylaw to set a framework that enables council to make detailed rules in a separate code

· using a code that requires council approval for certain services and activities (for example, for burial and headstones) and sets general rules (for example, for adornments), at council cemeteries and crematoria only

· council cemetery and Aotea Great Barrier Island service centre staff using an education-focused approach to compliance (information and advice)

· managing council cemeteries within a wider regulatory framework.^{^[1]}

9. Council in 2014 made the the Auckland Council Ture ā-Rohe mo ngā Wāhi Tapu me ngā Whare Tahu Tupāpaku | Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014 and Arataki Tikanga mo ngā Wāhi Tapu me ngā Whare Tahu Tupāpaku | Cemeteries and Crematoria Code of Practice 2014 (GB/2014/67). The Bylaw was amended in 2021 for ease of understanding (GB/2021/10).

A recent Bylaw and Code review identified improvements

10. In July 2024, the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee completed a review of the Bylaw and Code and requested development of options for improvements and a proposal on the preferred option (RSCCC/2024/46).

11. A summary of the draft proposed changes is contained in Attachment A of this report.

The local board has an opportunity to provide its views on the draft proposed changes

12. The local board has an opportunity to provide its views on the draft proposed changes in Attachment A by resolution to the Regulatory and Safety Committee before a final proposal is adopted for public consultation.

13. For example, the board could support the draft proposed changes for public consultation, recommend changes or defer comment until it has considered public feedback on the proposal.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The draft proposed changes seek to improve the council cemetery management framework

14. The draft proposed changes seek to amend the current Bylaw and revoke the Code.

15. The Table below summarises the key draft proposed changes. Attachment A contains more details, including other options considered.

Proposed key change	Reasons for proposal
· Add a bylaw approval framework that clarifies when and how council approval is required.	· Reflects current operational practice to require approvals, for example for burial, cremation, monuments, burial plots, vaults, mausolea, ash scattering and disinterment. · More reasonable and authoritative approach, for example clearly provides council discretion to set approval conditions. · Matters requiring approval are fundamental elements of regulations that are better located in a bylaw (not a code).
· Move rules from the Code to: · operational guidance such as on the council website (for example, on the types of approval conditions that may apply in a particular case) · the Bylaw (for example, approval framework and general rules).	· More flexible (cemetery management can directly amend operational guidance for the efficient provision of services). · Removes duplicate, out-of-date, and detailed approval conditions which are already in operational guidance. · Streamlines regulatory framework by removing unnecessary rules (code).
· Clarify who must comply with an approval and any council directions (for example the approval holder, a person acting on their behalf, and cemetery visitors).	· Reflects current operational practice for effective and efficient service provision and facility management.
· Update bylaw structure, definitions, and wording for clarity.	· Reflect current operational practice. · Easier to read, understand and comply with. · Aligns with best practice drafting standards (removes duplication of legislation and internal operational matters).

Staff recommend the local board consider providing its views on the draft proposal

16. Staff recommend that the local board consider the draft proposed changes and whether it wishes to provide its views by resolution to the Regulatory and Safety Committee. Taking this approach will help develop a proposal to improve the regulatory framework.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17. There are no implications for climate change arising from this decision.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18. The draft proposed changes impact the Cemetery Services and Aotea Great Barrier Island service centre units of council.

19. Relevant staff input was sought to inform the draft proposed changes, and staff are aware of the impacts of the changes and their implementation role.

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

Local impacts and local board views

20. The Bylaw and Code have a potential impact on local governance and public interest in previous reviews has been low.^{^[2]}

21. 12 interested local boards held workshops on the draft options and proposed changes to inform any views in response to this report.

22. Local boards will have a further opportunity to provide views on any local public feedback to any proposed changes prior to deliberations in 2025.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23. The Bylaw and Code support whanaungatanga, rangatiratanga, manaakitanga and kaitiakitanga in Houkura | the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau and the Schedule of Issues of Significance by providing regulations that support council services to meet social, cultural and physical needs, and support the role of the Waikumete Urupā Komiti (Komiti) at Te Urupā o Waikumete (Waikumete Cemetery).^{^[3]}

24. Feedback from three mana whenua representatives highlighted concerns with burial capacity and costs, waste associated with adornments, and climate change impacts of common practices. Feedback from the Komiti included to clarify the Komiti role.

25. Mana whenua, mataawaka, and Komiti feedback will be sought on any proposed changes as part of the public consultative process.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

26. There are no financial implications to the local board for any decisions on the draft proposed changes.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

27. The following risk has been identified:

If…

Then…

Mitigation

… the draft proposed changes or the views of the local board on the draft proposed changes differ from the views of people in the community.

… there may be negative attention to council regarding the Bylaw and Code.

(low reputational risk)

The local board will have an opportunity to consider any public feedback and provide its formal views to a Panel prior to the final decision being made.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28. Staff will present the local board views and a Statement of Proposal of proposed changes to the Bylaw and Code to the Regulatory and Community Safety Committee on 3 December 2024.

29. Public consultation on the Proposal is scheduled for early 2025, and deliberations and final Governing Body decision later in 2025.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Statement of Proposal to amend Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014 and revoke Cemeteries and Crematoria Code 2014	71

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Elizabeth Osborne - Senior Policy Advisor, Regulatory Practice

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Louise Mason - General Manager Policy

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 November 2024

Annual Plan 2025/2026 - Input on Regional Consultation Content

File No.: CP2024/17708

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide input on regional consultation content and local board advocacy for the Annual Plan 2025/2026.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Annual Plan 2025/2026 contains the proposed budget and funding impact statement for the year, identifies any variations from the financial statements and funding impact statement in the 10-year budget for the relevant year, and provides for integrated decision-making and coordination of the council’s resources. The Governing Body is responsible for adopting the Annual Plan. As part of this process, local boards develop annual local board agreements which are agreed between local boards and the Governing Body (and are included in the Annual Plan).

3. Consultation on the Annual Plan 2025/2026 is planned to take place late February to late March 2025. These dates are yet to be confirmed and so are subject to change.

4. This report seeks the views of the local board on priority regional topics to be included in the Annual Plan 2025/2026 consultation.

5. The Budget Committee will approve regional items for consultation on 4 December 2024. The regional and local consultation items (adopted in separate report) will then be incorporated into the Annual Plan 2025/2026 consultation document and supporting information, which is also planned to be adopted by the Budget Committee on 19 February 2025.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide feedback on the draft Mayoral Proposal including potential regional consultation topics and local board advocacy for the Annual Plan 2025/2026.

Horopaki

Context

6. The Annual Plan 2025/2026 contains the proposed budget and funding impact statement for the year, identifies any variations from the financial statements and funding impact statement in the 10-year budget for the relevant year, and provides for integrated decision-making and coordination of the council’s resources. The Governing Body is responsible for adopting the Annual Plan. As part of this process, local boards develop annual local board agreements which are agreed between local boards and the Governing Body (and are included in the Annual Plan).

7. When making decisions, the Governing Body has a statutory obligation to consider the views and preferences of the local boards if the decision affects, or may affect, the responsibilities or operations of the local board or the well-being of communities within its local board area.

8. Public consultation on the Annual Plan 2025/2026 is planned to take place late February to late March 2025. These dates are yet to be confirmed.

9. Aucklanders will be able to provide feedback during the consultation period through a variety of channels, which include face-to-face (for spoken and New Zealand sign language interaction), written and social media.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10. At the beginning of this annual plan process, the Mayor and Councillors provided direction to staff including a request for options relating to the following areas:

· Council-Controlled Organisation Reform,

· Planning and paying for growth, and

· Funding major events, destination marketing and visitor attraction.

11. Local board chairs were invited to attend the Budget Committee workshops on the development of the regional topics for consultation. Local board members were provided recordings or briefings of the Budget Committee workshops for the Annual Plan 2025/2026.

12. The draft Mayoral Proposal is scheduled to be released the week of the local boards’ meeting to approve feedback on the Mayoral Proposal including the Annual Plan regional consultation topics. The draft Mayoral Proposal will be tabled as Attachment B when it is released. The final Mayoral proposal, which outlines the mayor’s priorities for consultation will be released toward the end of November after local boards have presented their feedback to the Budget Committee.

13. The local board is asked to provide feedback on the draft Mayoral Proposal for the Annual Plan 2025/2026 consultation. The feedback from the local boards will be collated and provided to the Budget Committee to consider when making decisions, including agreeing regional items for consultation on 4 December 2024.

14. Staff are also proposing to consult on the following changes to targeted rates and fees and charges:

· changes to waste management targeted rates to reflect updated budget forecasts including a 3 per cent increase to the overall waste management targeted rate for a typical household

· the introduction of the refuse targeted rate to the former Rodney and Franklin districts in conjunction with the rollout of rates funded refuse to these areas

· possible changes to some Business Improvement District (BID) targeted rates (noting that relevant boards have received advice and will provide a formal recommendation in May 2025 on whether the Governing Body should set each rate depending on ballot results and compliance)

· changes to some animal management fees including an increase in the dog adoption fee from $350 to $450 and an increase vet fee from $75 to $150

· changes to some cemetery fees

· changes to other fees and charges that are over and above inflationary adjustments including:

o changing deposit levels for some regulatory services to better reflect actual final charges,

o realigning bach fees into pricing tiers based on occupancy levels, capacity and location and

o aligning staff charge out rates with staff pay bands for services in regional parks.

15. More information on proposed targeted rates and fees and charges can be found in the ‘Proposed changes to targeted rates and fees and charges for Annual Plan 2025/2026’ memorandum as attachment A.

16. Local boards may also have advocacy items they want to advocate for to the Governing Body.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17. The decision to consult is procedural in nature. These decisions are unlikely to result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions. The effects of climate change will not impact the decisions.

18. Some of the proposed initiatives or projects included in the consultation content may have climate change impacts. The impacts of any initiatives or projects Auckland Council chooses to progress as a result of this consultation will be assessed as part of the relevant reporting requirements.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19. The Annual Plan 2025/2026 is an Auckland Council group document and will include budgets at a consolidated group level.

20. Consultation items and updates to budgets to reflect decisions and new information may include items from across the group. This will be reflected in the report on regional consultation items going the Budget Committee on 4 December 2024.

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

Local impacts and local board views

21. Local board chairs have been invited to be involved in the development of the regional topics for consultation by attending Budget Committee workshops. Local board members were provided recordings or briefings of the Budget Committee workshops for the Annual Plan 2025/2026.

22. Local boards will have further opportunities to provide information and views as the council progresses through the Annual Plan 2025/2026 process.

23. Aucklanders will have the opportunity to give feedback on regional and local proposals through the public consultation on the Annual Plan 2025/2026. All feedback received from submitters that indicate that they reside in the local board area will be analysed by staff and made available for consideration by the local board.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

24. The approach to Māori engagement for Annual Plan 2025/2026 will be finalised once consultation topics are confirmed, including development of bespoke materials.

25. There is a need to continue to build local board relationships with iwi and the wider Māori community. Ongoing conversations will assist the local board and Māori to understand each other’s priorities and challenges.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

26. The local board provides input to regional plans and proposals. There will be information in the council’s consultation material for each plan or proposal with the financial implications of each option outlined for consideration.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

27. Under the Local Government Act 2002, the consultation document for the Annual Plan must be audited. The draft consultation document (including local consultation content) will be prepared by staff and audited in December and January ahead of adoption by the Budget Committee in mid-February.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28. The Budget Committee will agree items for consultation and approve the consultation approach for the Annual Plan 2025/2026 on 4 December 2024.

29. Following the decisions on consultation content, staff will prepare the consultation document and supporting information for the Annual Plan 2025/2026. These will be adopted by the Budget Committee on 19 February 2025.

30. Following consultation, the Governing Body and the local board will make decisions on the Annual Plan 2025/2026 and local board agreements respectively in June 2025.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Proposed changes to targeted rates and fees and charges for Annual Plan 2025/2026’ memorandum	101
b ⇩	Draft Mayoral Proposal for consultation on the Annual Plan 2025/2026 (To Be Tabled)	107

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Phoebe Peguero - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 November 2024

Draft Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy – Part 2

File No.: CP2024/17622

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board feedback on the proposed policies in Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau, the draft Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy, including on two options to update the open space provision standards.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Staff have drafted Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau, the Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy. It aims to provide open spaces and sport and recreation opportunities to benefit all Aucklanders now and in the future and improve the health of Tāmaki Makaurau. It contains:

· five strategic directions and four investment principles (see Part 1 report on this agenda).

· three supporting policies for making the most of our open spaces, for open space provision and acquisition, and for the council’s investment in play, sport and recreation (see Attachment A).

3. The proposed policies are the focus of this report. They set Auckland Council’s expectations for delivery. Like Part 1, their development has been guided by an advisory structure and engagement with local boards.

4. They build on adopted policies and plans. Proposed updated and new information is as follows:

· new objectives to guide the development of Auckland's existing open space network

· two options to change current open space provision standards and add to our existing open space network to continue serving the needs of a growing population:

o Package 1 – High-density focused: provide more open space than currently enabled in high-density areas (mostly located in brownfield areas)

o Package 2 – Capacity focused: provide more open space than currently enabled in high- and medium-density areas where residents have low or moderate levels of provision (recommended by staff as the best way to balance open space outcomes and value for money).

· more targeted council investment in play, sport and recreation to enable more equitable participation.

5. As a next step, staff will seek approval from the Policy and Planning Committee in December 2024 to undertake consultation on the draft strategy, including the proposed policies and the two options for open space provision standards. The committee report will include local board feedback.

6. If approved, consultation would take place early in 2025. The policies are detailed and technical in nature and intended for use by individuals and local and regional organisations that will deliver the draft strategy. This will be reflected in our approach to consultation.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide feedback on the proposed policies in Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau, the draft Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy, for consideration by the Policy and Planning Committee

b) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note the two options for updated open space provision standards for consultation:

i) Package 1 – High-density focused: provide more open space than currently enabled in high-density areas

ii) Package 2 – Capacity focused: provide more open space than currently enabled in high- and medium-density areas where residents have low or moderate levels of provision.

Horopaki

Context

Proposed policies in the draft strategy set the council’s expectations for delivery

7. The draft Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy aims to provide open spaces and sport and recreation opportunities to benefit all Aucklanders now and in the future and improve the health of Tāmaki Makaurau.

8. It provides a refreshed and simplified approach to planning and investment and sets five strategic directions, outlining where we are heading, and four investment principles, outlining how we will get there. This material is presented in a separate report on this agenda (see Part 1).

9. What the council will deliver is informed by three policies contained in the draft strategy. The policies set the council’s expectations for delivery through objectives, rules or guidelines. They contain detailed technical information intended for a professional audience (e.g. developers, consultants, council kaimahi, sport funding agencies).

10. Budgets for delivery are set through the annual and long-term plan processes.

11. The policies build on the Parks and Open Space Acquisition Policy 2013, the Open Space Provision Policy 2016 and the Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport: Investment Plan 2019-39 and propose updated and new information detailed in this report.

12. Local boards have key decision-making responsibilities in relation to open spaces and play, sport and recreation, and the proposed policies are designed to support them to deliver for their communities.

13. A separate three-yearly implementation and monitoring plan will detail what we will deliver. It will include priorities for delivery and track progress against key performance indicators.

Staff considered evidence and political input and direction in developing the proposed policies

14. The proposed policies in the draft strategy have been developed using:

· a strong body of evidence, including the background paper and a fit for purpose review of the Open Space Provision Policy 2016, options development and testing through working examples and assessment

· input from the advisory and Māori rōpū and key council kaimahi

· input and direction from the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group; the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee; the Policy and Planning Committee and local boards.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Policy 1: Making the most of our open spaces

15. Auckland has an extensive network of green, blue and grey open spaces and facilities that are much used and valued by Aucklanders.

16. The quality, accessibility and functionality of those spaces and places are essential to drive participation and use. In addition, increasing demand from population growth and intensification, as well as financial and land availability challenges, mean we need to deliver more from our existing assets.

17. The policy for making the most of our open spaces sets four objectives and proposes new tools and guidelines to support delivery of the objectives (see Attachment A, pages 28-41).

Proposed objectives	Proposed new tools and guidelines
1. Increase the range of benefits our open space network delivers consistent with each space’s primary purpose	· Identification of opportunities to deliver multiple benefits from our open spaces · An overview of the primary and secondary purposes of different open space types to assist with identifying risks and trade-offs associated with delivering additional functions · A risk appetite framework to support strategic asset owners taking on more risk to realise greater benefits from the open space network
2. Improve the quality of our open spaces	· Best practice guidance for improving the quality of our existing open spaces
3. Improve our network to provide diverse recreation opportunities accessible to all Aucklanders	· An open space recreation opportunities tool that outlines the diverse range of opportunities we want to provide for Aucklanders to be physically active, recreate and connect with nature across the network and how we can provide them
4. Improve open spaces’ accessibility and functionality by prioritising connections and linkages across all types of open space	· Planning and development responses to ensure the delivery of quality connections and linkages across all types of open space, including using streets and footpaths, along waterways and the coast, and in our blue-green network

18. The policy informs the planning, development and management approach for open spaces by Auckland Council, its council-controlled organisations, private developers and external development agencies such as Kāinga Ora.

Policy 2: Open space provision and acquisition

19. The open space provision and acquisition policy sets standards and methods for the types of open space we need, how we acquire them, and how we achieve quality outcomes from our open space network.

20. The policy sets two objectives and proposes new rules and guidelines to support delivery of the objectives (see Attachment A, pages 42-76).

Proposed objectives	Proposed new rules and guidelines
5. Plan for the provision of a high-quality open space network that keeps pace with growth and celebrates our cultural landscapes	· Two options for updated provision standards for pocket parks and neighbourhood parks to deliver better open space outcomes in high-density and greenfield development (see paragraphs 21 to 36) · New open space capacity measure to enable us to compare provision levels across areas and over time (for more details see paragraph 25)
6. Ensure the acquisition of fit for purpose open space land that provides value for money and is sustainable in the long-term	· Updated criteria for prioritising potential acquisitions aligned with our strategic directions · Updated acquisition process to include the development of an open space land acquisition priority plan to provide a 10-year and 30-year view of the open space acquisition pipeline · Strengthened acquisitions standards (mandatory standards and site assessment criteria) to ensure acquisitions are fit for purpose and align with our strategic directions · Detailed qualitative standards (including location, configuration, accessibility, coastal inundation and soil contamination) to ensure we acquire quality open space land from the start · Emphasis on reconfiguring, redistributing or redeveloping open spaces rather than disposing of them to help us cater for growth · Methodology to identify future regional park acquisitions so we can continue to meet the needs of Aucklanders

Proposed objectives

Proposed new rules and guidelines

5. Plan for the provision of a high-quality open space network that keeps pace with growth and celebrates our cultural landscapes

· Two options for updated provision standards for pocket parks and neighbourhood parks to deliver better open space outcomes in high-density and greenfield development (see paragraphs 21 to 36)

· New open space capacity measure to enable us to compare provision levels across areas and over time (for more details see paragraph 25)

6. Ensure the acquisition of fit for purpose open space land that provides value for money and is sustainable in the long-term

· Updated criteria for prioritising potential acquisitions aligned with our strategic directions

· Updated acquisition process to include the development of an open space land acquisition priority plan to provide a 10-year and 30-year view of the open space acquisition pipeline

· Strengthened acquisitions standards (mandatory standards and site assessment criteria) to ensure acquisitions are fit for purpose and align with our strategic directions

· Detailed qualitative standards (including location, configuration, accessibility, coastal inundation and soil contamination) to ensure we acquire quality open space land from the start

· Emphasis on reconfiguring, redistributing or redeveloping open spaces rather than disposing of them to help us cater for growth

· Methodology to identify future regional park acquisitions so we can continue to meet the needs of Aucklanders

21. The policy informs developers, planners, implementers and decision-makers in their planning and investment decisions to expand Auckland’s existing open space network to best respond to Aucklanders’ needs and balance value for money and affordability considerations. It is an important consideration in regulatory and planning processes such as plan changes, structure plans and resource consents.

We propose to change provision standards for pocket and neighbourhood parks as part of Policy 2

22. As part of Policy 2, staff are proposing updated provision standards for pocket parks and neighbourhood parks to provide better open space outcomes in high-density areas and greenfield areas (see Attachment A, page 45).

23. Two options for updating the provision standards are outlined below. Those options reflect different ways of adding to our existing open space network across Auckland to continue serving the needs of a growing population.

Density	Park type	Current provision standards	Package 1 High-density focused	Package 2 Capacity focused (recommended)
High-density areas or other areas developed to an equivalent density	Pocket parks	1000-1500m² provided at no capital cost to the council	1000-1500m² acquired at cost to the council regardless of capacity	1000-1500m² in areas with moderate or low capacity acquired at cost to the council
	Neighbourhood parks (within 400m walking distances)	3000m² to 5000m²	5000m² regardless of capacity	2000m² to 5000m² depending on capacity
Medium-density areas	Pocket parks	No pocket parks	1000-1500m² provided at no capital cost to the council
Medium-density areas	Neighbourhood parks (within 400m walking distances)	3000m² to 5000m²	No change	2000m² to 5000m² depending on capacity
Low-density areas	Neighbourhood parks (within 600m walking distances)	3000m² to 5000m²	3000m²

24. Urban density is based on the Auckland Unitary Plan zones. Varying provision standards based on planned intensification levels enables us to better provide according to the likely demand for public open space, as well as likely private open space provision levels.

25. The capacity measure is a proposed addition to the existing policy. While the quantity of open space provision per capita is not a meaningful metric in isolation, it provides a basis of comparison when considering future provision across Auckland’s urban areas. There is no accepted international or national capacity standards. Based on local observations and international examples, we propose that capacity is considered low when below 10m² of open space per person, moderate when between 10 and 20m² and high when more than 20m².

Both Package 1 and Package 2 involve trade-offs

26. Both options involve trade-offs, as shown below.

	Trade-offs
Package 1 High-density focused	Delivers more open space in high-density areas than current policy but larger parks might be difficult to acquire due to land ownership and cost Is a simple standard to understand but not tailored to where provision is most needed


Package 2 Capacity focused	Is more affordable than Package 1 but does not deliver the same level of additional open spaces in high-density areas Takes an equity lens by focusing provision where most needed but is more complicated to understand and apply

27. Both options are included in the draft strategy (see Attachment A, page 45). The final strategy will reflect the option (or variation of) that the Policy and Planning Committee chooses through resolution after consultation.

28. In addition, improving open space outcomes where needed can be supported by increasing access to and functionality of existing open space, including connection, linkage and access open spaces. This is reflected in Policy 1 – Objective 4 (Improve open spaces’ accessibility and functionality by prioritising connections and linkages across all types of open space).

HOW WERE THESE TWO OPTION PACKAGES DEVELOPED?

The current provision policy is generally consistent with good practice but could be improved

· The proposed change to existing open space provision standards responds to a fit for purpose review of Auckland Council’s current Open Space Provision Policy 2016. The review found that it was generally consistent with good practice, but there was room for improvement and innovation. In particular, it found that the policy is not working effectively in high-density urban areas and is delivering low capacity in greenfield areas.

· Staff investigated how to vary the quantity of open space provided to best respond to this problem. The process for revising the open space provision standards is outlined in Attachment B. It includes significant political input and direction.

Staff developed options to vary the quantity of open space and improve open space outcomes

· To vary the quantity of open space, staff developed 12 options along a policy continum involving changes to the size, distribution and / or number of pocket and neighbourhood parks as they are the most common types of parks. The options also included increasing access to and functionality of other types of open space (e.g. riparian margins and esplanade reserves).

· Provision standards for suburb and destination parks, civic squares, and connection, linkage and access open spaces set in the Open Space Provision Policy 2016 are unchanged.

· After applying the 12 options in four brownfield and greenfield working examples and assessing them against a set of criteria, staff developed five packages of options that vary provision according to urban density and open space capacity.

· This will enable investment to be targeted where it is needed most, focusing on areas with less open space per person, to respond to both Auckland’s population growth and the council’s financial constraints. The five packages of options are:

Package 1

High-density focused

Package 2

Capacity focused

Package 3

Budget focused

Package 4

Doing things differently

Package 5

Consolidating and simplifying

Acquire pocket parks and larger neighbourhood parks in high-density areas and increase access to / functionality of existing public and private open space

Acquire pocket parks in high-density areas depending on capacity, vary the size of neighbourhood parks depending on capacity and increase access to / functionality of existing public and private open space

Do not acquire new land for open space, instead enable pocket parks in medium-density areas and increase access to / functionality of existing public and private open space

Acquire pocket parks and increase access to / functionality of existing public and private open space

Maintain existing provision standards but acquire pocket parks in high-density areas and increase access to / functionality of existing public and private open space

Based on assessment and political direction two options are presented for local board feedback

· The five packages were assessed using four additional working examples (two greenfield areas and two brownfield areas). The results of the assessment are below.

Criteria	Package 1 High-density focused		Package 2 Capacity focused		Package 3 Budget focused	Package 4 Doing things differently		Package 5 Consolidating and simplifying
Alignment	üü		üü		üüü	üüü		üü
Open space outcomes	üü		üüü		ü	ü		üü
Response to growth	üü		üüü		ü	ü		üü
Value for money	üü		üü		üü	üü		üü
Achievability	üü		üü		üüü	üüü		üü
Key:		ü Low		üü Medium			üüü High

· Based on this assessment and direction from the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group; the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee; and the Policy and Planning Committee, two options are presented for local board feedback: Package 1 and Package 2.

· Both Package 1 and Package 2 scored well across the brownfield and greenfield working examples. Staff recommend Package 2 as it was the highest scoring package.

Policy 3: Auckland Council’s investment in play, sport and recreation

29. Regular physical activity, whether it be play, sport or recreation, provides significant health and wellbeing benefits. While many Aucklanders are physically active, not everyone is getting enough physical activity in their lives and some are missing out as they face barriers to participation.

30. The policy for Auckland Council’s investment in play, sport and recreation sets three objectives and proposes new planning and investment approaches and indicators of what success looks like to support delivery of the objectives (see Attachment A, pages 77-88).

Proposed objectives	Proposed new planning and investment approaches and indicators of success
7. Increase physical activity levels by targeting our investment to low-participating communities and addressing disparities	Planning and investment approach: · balance investment to increase physical activity levels across four key groups: all Aucklanders, Māori, young people (5-17 years old) and low participation groups (based on Active New Zealand surveys, Auckland Council and Aktive information) · invest to enable Aucklanders to be more physically active, whether through play, recreation or community sport. Indicators of what success looks like: · increasing numbers of adult Aucklanders meeting physical activity guidelines (150-plus minutes per week) · increasing numbers of Aucklanders aged 5-17 years meeting physical activity guidelines (420-plus minutes per week) · increasing numbers of Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau meeting physical activity guidelines · increases in specific community groups with low levels of physical activity meeting physically activity guidelines · increase in the proportion of the regional sport and recreation grants directed to low participation groups and emerging physical activity opportunities that target these groups.
8. Deliver a fit for purpose, future proofed facility network that makes the most of what we have	Planning and investment approach: · plan for a regional sport and recreation facilities network to provide opportunities for Aucklanders to be physically active through their choice of activity, focusing primarily on facilities for community sport · accelerate the transition to multi-use and adaptable facilities to provide more opportunities for community participation, including high-level guidance on developing multi-use facilities · improving the performance of our facilities to reduce negative environmental impacts and supporting the development of universally accessible facilities so more people in our community can use them. Indicators of what success looks like: · increasing community satisfaction with the level of access to sport and recreation facilities and the range of opportunities provided.
9. Strengthen partnerships with mana whenua and mataawaka, local communities and other sport and recreation providers	Planning and investment approach: · partner with others to improve public access to existing non-council facilities and identify joint solutions for delivery of opportunities for Aucklanders · work with communities to understand barriers to participation, including guidance on co-designing with the community · support delivery of play, sport and recreation opportunities by Māori for Māori. Indicators of what success looks like: · increasing number of Auckland schools and tertiary institutions making their sport and recreation facilities available for public use over time · increasing number of sport and recreation initiatives delivered by Māori for Māori · a more visible Māori presence in sport and recreation spaces, places and activities.

31. The policy outlines how Auckland Council will fund and invest in play, sport and recreation alongside many other organisations delivering these opportunities to Aucklanders at both the local and regional level.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

32. Delivering the proposed policies in the draft strategy will positively contribute to Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan’s core goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change.

33. The proposed policies help enable the achievement of strategic direction three in the draft strategy: ‘Enhance our response to climate disruption.’ This focuses on better planning and designing our open spaces and places network to respond to climate change and prioritising our investment to make Auckland greener and spongier.

34. The proposed policies provide:

· guidance on delivering multiple benefits from our open spaces (including designing or retrofitting recreation parks to contribute to water retention)

· guidance on increasing connections between open spaces to green the city and manage stormwater (such as blue-green corridors)

· clear qualitative standards to ensure we acquire fit for purpose land for open spaces, including relating to flood plains, overland flow paths and coastal inundation

· a planning and investment approach focused on improving the performance of our spaces and places to reduce negative environmental impacts, including carbon emissions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

35. Kaimahi from across the council group have provided input throughout the development of the draft strategy.

36. The proposed policies were developed with detailed input from Policy; Parks and Community Facilities; Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience; Community Wellbeing and Engineering, Assets and Technical Advisory. This helps ensure that the proposed policies provide the necessary information and clarity to support implementation.

37. Staff will continue to work closely with colleagues in planning for and supporting delivery.

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

Local impacts and local board views

38. The proposed policies are designed to support local boards to deliver open spaces and play, sport and recreation opportunities for their communities in line with their local board plan priorities.

Allocated decision-making responsibilities

Examples of proposed policies to support decision-making

Acquisition of new local parks (within budget parameters agreed by the Governing Body) and their specific location and acquisition of new local sport and recreation facilities (within budget parameters agreed by the Governing Body) and their specific location, design, build and fit out

Local parks improvement and place-shaping, the use of and activities within local parks and the use of local sport and recreation facilities

Local sport and recreation programmes and initiatives and local community funding and grants.

Standards to ensure the acquisition of fit for purpose open space land, including relating to location, configuration and accessibility

Best practice guidance for improving the quality of existing open spaces

A tool to support the provision of a diverse range of accessible recreation opportunities across the open space network

Standards to ensure the acquisition of fit for purpose open space land, including relating to location, configuration and accessibility

Guidance on developing multi-use sport and recreation facilities and maximising community benefits.

39. Two local board members were on the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group: Member Sandra Coney and Member Margi Watson. In addition, staff have engaged with local boards on the proposed policies in workshops and briefings between July and October 2024.

40. Local board views on the proposed policies, including on the two options for updating the open space provision standards, will be reported to the Policy and Planning Committee when staff seek approval to undertake consultation on the draft strategy.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

41. In a Māori worldview, Auckland's open spaces and places are interconnected parts of the natural world, imbued with spiritual and ancestral significance.

42. The draft strategy puts manaakitanga, a te ao Māori way of showing respect, generosity, and care for one another and for our resources, at the forefront of open space, sport and recreation to achieve oranga tāngata, whenua, wai and whānau.

43. The proposed policies provide:

· guidance on delivering multiple benefits from our open spaces (including reflecting mana whenua culture and identity and drawing on mātauranga Māori to protect and enhance our environment, biodiversity and heritage)

· best practice guidance for improving the quality of existing open spaces (including emphasis on the importance of integrating indigenous knowledge from mana whenua)

· a planning and investment approach that targets increased participation in physical activity by Māori Aucklanders (including in traditional Māori sports) and supports the delivery of sport and recreation opportunities by Māori for Māori.

44. The views of mana whenua and mataawaka have been sought in the development of the proposed policies. This includes input from the advisory and Māori rōpū (with mana whenua and mataawaka representatives) and input and direction from the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group (with a Houkura representative).

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

45. There are no financial implications for the local board associated with providing feedback.

46. The development of, and consultation on, the draft strategy can be completed within the existing policy departmental budget.

47. Implementation will be enabled through available budgets set during the long-term plan and annual plan processes.

48. The proposed policies reflect the resource constraints faced by the council and the need to deliver value for money. They place a greater emphasis on making the most of our open spaces and facilities, as well as recognising the need to continue to cater for a growing Auckland and to target our investment where it is needed most and will have the greatest impact.

49. All the options for changes to the open space provision standards involve high-level trade-offs, including on cost. The recommended changes (Package 2) take an equity lens, balancing the higher cost of acquisition of larger parks in some areas to address capacity issues with acquiring smaller parks in areas that are already well served.

50. The emphasis on reconfiguring, redistributing or redeveloping open spaces rather than disposing of them includes the opportunity to make greater use of the service property optimisation process. This means that money generated by disposing of an open space can be used by local boards to fund already-planned open space acquisition or development.

51. The strengthened acquisition standards will help ensure that we acquire fit for purpose open space land from the outset, with a positive flow on effect to the cost of developing and managing our open spaces.

52. The draft strategy also proposes developing an open space land acquisition priority plan every three years to provide a 10-year and 30-year view of the open space acquisition pipeline. This will support decision-makers, including local boards, in understanding the trade-offs between meeting the expectations set in the draft strategy and budgetary allocation.

53. Our investment in sport will be primarily focused on community sport, where participation levels are higher and we can achieve the most impact. Investment will also be targeted to low-participating communities and addressing disparities.

54. The draft strategy proposes changes to the Sport and Recreation Facilities Investment Fund to increase the proportion directed to low participation groups and emerging physical activity opportunities, with a corresponding decrease in the amount of contestable funding available.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

55. Potential risks and mitigations relating to the proposed policies are outlined below:

If…

Then…

Possible mitigations…

The proposed policies, and open space provision options, go for consultation.

Some Aucklanders may feel unable / unwilling to provide their views due to the technical nature and complexity of the information.

Low reputational and strategic risk.

Consultation material will simplify the content of the draft strategy.

The two open space provision packages will be articulated in plain English and supported by images to explain what density could look like.

Staff will present at stakeholders’ meetings (as resources allow). This will enable us to answer questions and provide clarity where needed.

We will engage with mana whenua and mataawaka separately in a way that suits them.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

56. Staff will include local board feedback when seeking approval from the Policy and Planning Committee at its December 2024 meeting to consult on the draft strategy, including the proposed policies and open space provision options.

57. If approved, public consultation will begin in February 2025 and run for approximately one month.

58. The findings from the public consultation and an updated draft strategy will then be reported to local board business meetings ahead of going to the Policy and Planning Committee for adoption.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau: Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy – proposed policies (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇩	Process to develop revised open space provision standards	121

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Aubrey Bloomfield - Senior Advisor, Community Investment

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Louise Mason - General Manager Policy

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 November 2024

Draft Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy – Part 1

File No.: CP2024/17623

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board feedback on Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau, the draft Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee directed staff to refresh and consolidate five regional strategies, policies and plans that guide Auckland Council‘s planning and investment for open space, sport and recreation.

3. In response, staff have drafted an open space, sport and recreation strategy (see Attachment A) that responds to the challenges and opportunities of a growing and changing Auckland (refer background paper reported to the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee in April 2024).

4. The work has been guided by the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group, an advisory and Māori rōpū and key council kaimahi, as well as targeted engagement with partners and key stakeholders. Two local board members are on the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group. Local boards members have also been involved through briefings and workshops.

5. The draft strategy aims to provide open spaces and sport and recreation opportunities to benefit all Aucklanders now and in the future to improve the health of Tāmaki Makaurau. It provides a refreshed and simplified approach to planning and investment and sets five strategic directions and four investment principles.

6. The draft strategy also contains three supporting policies that set expectations for delivery. They are presented in a separate report on this agenda for ease of understanding and to avoid lengthy reports. This enables local boards to tailor their feedback to the different components of the draft strategy.

7. The draft strategy reduces duplication and complexity and reflects the key challenges and opportunities Auckland currently faces, taking a holistic view to better support decision-makers to respond to the needs and preferences of local communities.

8. Staff will include local board feedback in the agenda report when seeking approval from the Policy and Planning Committee to engage with Aucklanders on the draft strategy. If approved, engagement will take place in early 2025. Following engagement, the strategy will be finalised and presented again to local boards for consideration and to the Policy and Planning Committee for adoption.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide feedback on the strategic directions and investment principles in Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau, the draft Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy, for consideration by the Policy and Planning Committee

b) ohia / endorse Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau, the draft Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy, going for public consultation.

Horopaki

Context

Open space, sport and recreation contribute to all six Auckland Plan 2050 outcomes

9. Open space, sport and recreation deliver a wide range of benefits, from enhancing the physical and mental health and wellbeing of Aucklanders to climate change mitigation and resilience. They contribute to all six Auckland Plan 2050 outcomes, with activities spanning across the council’s investment areas.

10. In addition to the council, many organisations contribute to providing open spaces and sport and recreation opportunities for Aucklanders. By enhancing collaboration and partnerships with other providers and having clear common directions for success we can focus our collective efforts to maximise benefits to Aucklanders.

Staff are delivering an approved programme of work

11. In August 2022, the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee approved the development of a refreshed and consolidated open space, sport and recreation policy framework [PAC/2022/68], which currently consists of:

· Parks and Open Spaces Strategic Action Plan (2013)

· Parks and Open Space Acquisition Policy (2013)

· Open Space Provision Policy (2016)

· Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan 2014-2024 (2014, refreshed 2017)

· Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport: Investment Plan 2019-39 (2019).

12. The committee set clear expectations that the draft strategy:

· retain Auckland Council leadership

· enable collaboration with open space, sport and recreation interests and sectors

· enable integration using a te ao Māori framework

· reflect changes in Auckland Council’s legislative, strategic and fiscal environment

· align the five documents to achieve better coordination of long-term decision-making and forward planning.

Staff have drafted a strategy underpinned by evidence and guided by an advisory structure

13. Staff developed a strong evidence base to inform the drafting of the strategy. Evidence includes assessment of the existing policy framework, relevant legislative, strategic and fiscal documents, horizon scanning of current and future trends, relevant data, contemporary literature. Staff also undertook targeted engagement with partners and key stakeholders.

14. This evidence base is provided in a background paper that outlines eight key challenges and opportunities for the draft strategy to consider. It was reported to the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee and local board members in April 2024.

15. Three key themes cut across the challenges and opportunities presented:

· focus on wellbeing and resilience: we can increase Auckland’s and Aucklanders’ oranga (wellbeing) by encouraging our communities to be more active more often and taking an ecosystem approach in the face of climate change

· make the most of what we have: we can make better use of Auckland’s many assets to deliver multiple benefits for people and the environment

· work within budget constraints: this calls for different responses, such as relying less on assets to deliver services, working with partners and the community and prioritising our efforts where they deliver the most value.

16. An advisory structure made up of the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group, an advisory and Māori rōpū (with mana whenua, mataawaka and sector representatives) and council kaimahi has provided input and direction throughout work. Details of memberships and frequency of meetings are provided in Attachment B.

17. The development of the draft strategy has been informed by local board views through the two local board members on the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group. Staff also engaged with local boards through targeted engagement on the background paper, memos, briefings and workshops (see paragraph 54).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The draft strategy combines open space and sport and recreation, and consolidates existing policies into a single document

18. The draft strategy brings together the domains of open space and of sport and recreation. Combining these two domains reflects the significant contribution investment in open space makes in enabling Aucklanders to live healthy, active lives. Walking, running and playing are the most popular forms of physical activity among Aucklanders.

19. The draft strategy consolidates and simplifies all five existing strategies, policies and plans into a single document. It provides decision-makers and implementers with a single source of information and contains:

· five strategic directions and four investment principles that set out where we are heading and how we will get there

· supporting policies that set the council's expectations for delivery (this more technical information is presented in a separate report on this agenda).

The draft strategy connects and builds on key council strategies

20. The draft strategy takes a te ao Māori lens. It builds on and simplifies Te Ora ō Tāmaki Makaurau, the wellbeing framework developed with the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in response to Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan.

21. It speaks to the role that open space, sport and recreation play in contributing to four dimensions of wellbeing (oranga): tāngata, whānau, whenua and wai, all of which contribute to the health of Tamaki Makaurau.

22. It sets five holistic strategic directions, integrating the domains of open space and sport and recreation to better recognise their interrelated nature.

23. It also sets four investment principles to guide our investment approach. The investment principles are adapted from those adopted in Ngā Hapori Momoho: Thriving Communities Strategy 2022-32.

24. It is underpinned by a single value that will guide implementation: manaakitanga, a te ao Māori process of showing respect, generosity and care for resources and for others. Manaakitanga was chosen by the Māori rōpū for this kaupapa as it fosters community connection, supports caring for the land and each other and promotes a spirit of unity.

25. The draft strategy on a page is shown below.

Figure 1: Strategy on a page

Five strategic directions outline where we are heading to contribute to te ora ō Tāmaki Makaurau

26. The draft strategy aims to provide open spaces and sport and recreation opportunities to benefit all Aucklanders now and in the future to improve the health of Tāmaki Makaurau.

27. It contains five strategic directions that reflect the importance of Auckland’s green, blue and grey open spaces and places and take an ecosystem view of people, place and the environment.

28. Each strategic direction is presented on a page outlining: why it matters, how we manaaki (i.e. what we will do to make it happen) and our implementation focus (see Attachment A, pages 9-14).

29. They were developed in response to the challenges and opportunities articulated in the background paper. In addition to feedback received on the challenges and opportunities, the five strategic directions were refined iteratively based on input and direction from our advisory structure.

Four investment principles guide our approach to prioritising investment to deliver on the five strategic directions

30. The existing policy framework contains several different approaches to prioritising investment, with little guidance about how they relate to each other.

31. The refresh and consolidation of the existing framework provides an opportunity to design a more effective approach to investment, one that is:

· streamlined – to reduce complexity

· consistent – to provide a more robust approach to prioritisation and enable better comparison of options

· flexible – to reflect and adapt to differences across communities and changes in demand over time.

32. Staff considered a prescriptive ‘action plan’ approach to investment where specific detailed priorities are identified. However, this would maintain the risk of investment prioritisation being rigid and very ‘point in time’, failing to keep pace with change and new opportunities.

33. A principles-based approach was considered to better provide both the consistency and flexibility needed. It can be more easily applied across the entire scope of the draft strategy, allow for investment to be responsive to changing circumstances, and still ensure that investment is appropriately targeted.

34. Staff reviewed existing council policies for relevant investment principles in an effort to reduce duplication.

· The principles adopted as part of the Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport: Investment Plan 2019-2039 were viewed as specific to that context, rather than to the broader scope of the draft strategy

· Those adopted as part of the council’s Ngā Hapori Momoho: Thriving Communities Strategy 2022-32 were regarded as well aligned to the strategic context and direction of the draft strategy. They have been slightly adapted to specifically respond to the unique open space, sport and recreation delivery and funding environment. They can support investment priorisation for sports and recreation.

35. The four investment principles for the draft strategy (see Attachment A, pages 15-23) are:

· take a benefits-led approach to improve the holistic wellbeing of people, places and the environment

· invest based on evidence of need and the voices of Aucklanders

· honour our Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations

· work together towards a healthy future, using all our resources.

The draft strategy supports decision-makers and delivers for Aucklanders

36. When scoping this programme of work, two alternative approaches to refreshing and consolidating the five existing strategies, policies and plans that form the policy framework were considered: keeping the status quo or refreshing the individual documents without consolidating them. Those two options were discarded based on a technical assessment and feedback from stakeholders. The refresh and consolidation approach was approved by the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee.

37. The option not to have any regional strategy for open space, sport and recreation was not considered. Having a whole of region direction is considered valuable. Having no regional strategy may provide more local flexibility but would risk not delivering equitable outcomes for all Aucklanders as well as creating inefficiencies through a less integrated network. Providing regional direction is also needed to support regional decision-making as well as to enable joint delivery with our partners and stakeholders.

38. The draft strategy better supports decision-makers to respond to the needs and preferences of their communities than existing plans and policies. This is because it reduces duplication and complexity. It is contemporary and reflects the key challenges and opportunities Auckland currently faces. It takes a holistic view: it reflects the interrelationship between open spaces and sport and recreation, encompasses green, blue and grey spaces, takes an ecosystem view, and has a strong focus on wellbeing, climate change, the environment and biodiversity.

39. Delivery of the strategy will be supported by an implementation and monitoring plan. The three-yearly plan will set out what we will deliver and track progress against the five strategic directions. A key consideration is how to best support local boards in making decisions and delivering the relevant priorities expressed in their local board plans.

The draft strategy will be refined based on the views of Aucklanders

40. Going for consultation will enable us to gather the views of Aucklanders, as well as our partners and stakeholders. This would add to the inputs from previous targeted engagement and from our advisory structure and help us refine the draft strategy.

41. Consultation would involve running an online Have Your Say submissions campaign, a limited series of regional events, hui with partners and stakeholders, as well as a People’s Panel survey. We will work closely with local board engagement advisors to maximise our reach to local groups and residents.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

42. Auckland faces significant challenges from climate change, including rising temperatures, becoming more drought prone, higher probability of extreme weather events and threats from coastal erosion, storm surges and flooding.

43. These challenges will impact our open spaces and sport and recreation opportunities. Hotter temperatures and extreme weather events will disrupt the ability of Aucklanders to engage in play, sport and recreation. Heatwaves, drought and water restrictions will affect the health of vegetation in our open spaces and its ability to moderate temperatures and mitigate the urban heat island effect.

44. The draft strategy considers how to adapt to these challenges and work to mitigate climate change by reducing emissions. One of the five strategic directions is to enhance our resilience to climate change and our contribution to mitigation, including through reducing carbon emissions, in line with Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan.

45. The draft strategy outlines what we will do to make this happen, including:

· develop the blue-green network to better manage stormwater

· accelerate the use of nature-based solutions in our open spaces and built environment to improve water capture and storage, green the city and reduce temperatures in urban areas

· improve the performance of our open spaces and facilities to reduce negative environmental impacts, including carbon emissions

· adapt our open spaces and facilities on the coast and in flood-prone areas.

46. While we already contribute to this strategic direction, the draft strategy proposes a ’do more’ approach to implementation. This is in recognition of the challenges we are facing and their significant impacts on Aucklanders now and in the future.

47. The investment approach in the draft strategy also includes a greater emphasis on identifying and quantifying the environmental benefits of our investment and designing initiatives to deliver multiple benefits, such as making recreation parks better able to support stormwater management.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

48. Kaimahi from across the council group have provided input throughout the development of the draft strategy (see Attachment B).

49. This includes staff from Policy; Parks and Community Facilities; Community Wellbeing; Planning and Resource Consents; Group Strategy, Transformation and Partnerships; Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience; Engineering, Assets and Technical Advisory; Financial Advisory; Governance and Engagement; Chief Sustainability Office; Environmental Services; Māori Outcomes; Auckland Transport; Eke Panuku and Tātaki Auckland Unlimited.

50. Implementing the draft strategy will span across the investment areas identified in the council’s performance management framework.

51. We will continue to work closely with colleagues in planning for and supporting delivery, and monitoring progress.

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

Local impacts and local board views

52. Local boards have a role in communicating the views and preferences of their local communities. Parks and sport and recreation assets are highly valued by Aucklanders, whether they use them or not. This is reflected in outcomes and priorities expressed in local board plans.

53. Local boards have been represented by the two local board members on the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group: Member Sandra Coney and Member Margi Watson. The direction and input received are summarised in memos after each meeting.

54. In addition, staff have engaged with local boards as follows:

· November 2023: targeted engagement on the background paper

· April 2024: memo presenting the background paper

· June 2024: memo presenting the draft strategic directions

· June 2024: briefing to all members on the draft strategic directions

· July 2024: briefing to all members on the investment principles

· July 2024: workshop with the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee, local board chairs and Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group members on the investment principles and open space provision options

· August 2024: briefing with all members on the open space provision options

· August and September 2024: individual local board workshops on the draft strategy, including a high-level overview of the proposed policies

· October 2024: workshop with the Policy and Planning Committee, local board chairs and Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group members on the open space provision options.

55. Both the Governing Body and local boards have a role in delivering the regional strategy in accordance with their allocated decision-making responsibilities. For local boards this includes:

· acquisition of local parks and local sport and recreation facilities (within budget parameters agreed by the Governing Body) and their specific location and development

· local parks improvement and place-shaping, the use of and activities within local parks (including community events and programmes) and the use of local sport and recreation facilities (including leasing and changes of use)

· local sport and recreation programmes and initiatives and local community funding and grants.

56. Local boards will consider how to deliver on the strategy, once adopted, as part of their local board plans and work programmes.

57. The strategy will support local boards in their investment and priorisation decisions, as outlined in Attachment A, page 23. It represents a number of beneficial shifts for local boards including:

· from having to navigate the application of five strategies, policies and plans to having a single coherent document to support decision-making by local boards and advocacy within annual and long-term planning processes

· from a narrow focus on costs to a wider focus on the value created by better understanding the full range of benefits delivered by different projects

· from having a one size fits all approach to having a consistent yet flexible approach to better reflect differences in local boards’ context and priorities and support local boards to deliver in response to local needs

· from having multiple uncoordinated investment frameworks to ensuring investment is evidence-based in response to needs and supports equitable outcomes

· from a focus on the council as the sole provider to strengthening the opportunity to use a wider range of potential funding sources and delivery options.

58. Local board feedback on the draft strategy will be reported to the Policy and Planning Commitee when it considers whether to approve the draft strategy going for consultation.

59. We will work with Governance and Engagement to ensure we reach local community groups and residents during consultation on the draft strategy.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

60. Mana whenua have special relationships to open spaces and places in Tāmaki Makaurau through whakapapa, including the tūpuna maunga and other sites and places of significance. They are kaitiaki of the whenua and wai.

61. Open spaces and physical activities play an important role in achieving te tuakiri Māori me tōna oranga – a thriving Māori identity and wellbeing in Tāmaki Makaurau. Young Māori are active participants in play, sport and recreation, but this declines as they get older and historic inequities exist.

62. The views of mana whenua and mataawaka have been sought throughout the development of the draft strategy including:

· regular meetings of the advisory and Māori rōpū, which includes mana whenua and mataawaka representatives

· Houkura representation on the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group to provide input and direction

· invitation to mana whenua and mataawaka organisations to provide feedback as part of the targeted engagement on the background paper.

63. All iwi were invited to join the rōpū or engage in the manner that best suited them. Mana whenua have also been kept up to date with progress via memos.

64. The draft strategy incorporates a te ao Māori lens, one of the expectations of success set by the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee and one of the key themes identified in the background paper. This includes:

· Te Ora ō Tāmaki Makaurau wellbeing framework adapted and simplified by the Māori rōpū to sit at the heart the draft strategy with four dimensions of wellbeing (oranga): tāngata, whānau, whenua and wai

· manaakitanga as a single value to guide implementation

· a focus on honouring our Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations embedded in our investment approach

· Māori as a key target group for investment in play, sport and recreation.

65. Implementation of the draft strategy includes a focus on investing in ‘by Māori for Māori’ solutions, building the capacity and capability of mana whenua and mataawaka and partnering with mana whenua to co-design our spaces and places.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

66. There are no financial implications for the local board associated with providing feedback on the draft strategy.

67. The development of, and consultation on, the draft strategy can be completed within the existing policy department budget.

68. Each strategic direction specifies an implementation focus, from emphasising continuing to do things that work well and embedding emerging practices to delivering differently and doing more.

69. Two strategic directions have a focus on doing more:

· Direction 2 ‘Deliver innovative open spaces in high-density areas’ – because population growth and intensification mean we have more people living closer together with less private green space and our ability to deliver more parks is constrained

· Direction 3 ‘Enhance our response to climate disruption’ – because significant climate change impacts and extreme weather events mean we need to make our city greener and spongier.

70. Implementation will be enabled through available budgets set during long-term plan and annual plan processes.

71. The draft strategy reflects the resource constraints faced by the council and the need to deliver value for money. The proposed investment approach emphasises the importance of establishing a robust evidence-based approach to investment and prioritisation to better support elected decision-makers.

72. Advice around investment in open space and sport and recreation will be based on a better articulation of costs and benefits, including in relation to local board plan priorities. This will be supported by a new tool to enable better identification, description and quantification of these benefits to help local boards prioritise investment.

73. Consideration of a broad range of funding and delivery tools will support implementation, including making the most of what we have, delivering differently and partnerships.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

74. Potential risks and mitigations are outlined below:

If…	Then…	Possible mitigations…
Aucklanders, key stakeholders and partners are not supportive of the draft strategy.	Decision-makers may be less likely to adopt the draft strategy. Low reputational, strategic and delivery risk.	· Stakeholders and partners were supportive of the refresh and consolidation They have been involved through the programme of work. · Engagement provides a further opportunity to seek the views of Aucklanders, partners and stakeholders and refine the draft strategy to reflect feedback as required.
The draft strategy does not provide clear enough direction to implementers.	The draft strategy may not be incorporated into business as usual. Low reputational, strategic and delivery risk.	· Implementers provided regular input into development of the draft strategy. · The implementation context, including financial constraints, has also informed the draft strategy. · Implementers will be further engaged to develop the draft strategy’s implementation and monitoring plan.
The draft strategy is perceived as unfunded.	There may be less support for the draft strategy and decision-makers may be less likely to adopt it. Medium financial, reputational and strategic risk.	· The draft strategy sets strategic directions and investment principles to guide prioritisation and enable better informed discussions on future budget allocation.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

75. Staff will include local board feedback when seeking approval from the Policy and Planning Committee in December 2024 to consult on the draft strategy.

76. If approved, public consultation will begin in February 2025 and run for approximately one month.

77. The findings from the public consultation and an updated draft strategy will then be reported to local board business meetings ahead of going to the Policy and Planning Committee for adoption.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau: Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy – draft strategic directions and investment principles (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇩	Advisory structure memberships and meetings	139

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Aubrey Bloomfield - Senior Policy Advisor, Community Investment

Authorisers

Carole Canler - Senior Policy Manager, Community Investment

Louise Mason - General Manager Policy

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 November 2024

Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) Electoral Reform Working Group - Issues Paper

File No.: CP2024/17355

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an opportunity for the local board to feed back its responses to the questions raised in the Electoral Reform Group’s Issues Paper.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Local Government New Zealand has established an Electoral Reform Working Group (ERWG) which has published an Issues Paper for public comment. Consultation closes on 19 January 2025. The paper is attached in Attachment A.

3. The chair of the ERWG, Hon Dr Nick Smith, Mayor of Nelson, notes in the foreword:

“This Issues Paper is about Local Government New Zealand leading a discussion on how we can strengthen the democratic mandate we have to represent communities across New Zealand.

The decline in participation in local elections is an existential threat to local government”.

4. The body of this report summarises the issues raised in the paper. Members are encouraged to refer to the Issues Paper itself for further detail.

5. The paper poses five issues. There are questions associated with each issue. The issues are:

Issue 1: The public’s understanding of local government and why it’s important

Issue 2: Understanding candidates and their policies

Issue 3: Voting methods

Issue 4: Administration and promotion of elections

Issue 5: Four-year terms (including transition and implementation).

6. Attached (as Attachments B, C and D) is the previous feedback from local boards on electoral matters.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide its feedback on the questions asked in the Electoral Reform Working Group’s Issues Paper.

Horopaki

Context

7. The National Council of LGNZ set up the Electoral Reform Working Group to lead efforts to strengthen local government’s democratic mandate, with a focus on increasing participation in local elections.

8. Members of the working group are:

· Mayor Hon Dr Nick Smith, Nelson City (Chair)

· Mayor Campbell Barry, Hutt City

· Councillor Toni Boynton, Whakatāne District, Co-Chair Te Maruata

· Professor Andrew Geddis, University of Otago

· Mayor Susan O'Regan, Waipā District

· Mayor Rehette Stoltz, Gisborne District.

9. The working group’s issues paper focusses on five key topics:

· The public’s understanding of local government and why it’s important

· Understanding the candidates and their policies

· Voting methods

· Administration and promotion of elections

· The possibility of moving to four-year terms (including how this would work).

10. Feedback on the issues paper will help shape the group’s position paper. A draft position paper will be open for discussion from March to May 2025.

11. The issues paper is on the LGNZ website and available to the public for their comment.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Issue 1: The public’s understanding of local government and why it’s important

12. Auckland Council has found this to be a key issue in terms of people’s participation in elections. More recently the Joint Governance Working Party has noted this concern through its experience with the review of representation arrangements.

13. Options in the paper for addressing Issue 1 include:

· Greater support for delivery of civics in schools

· Strengthened civics education requirements in the New Zealand Curriculum

· Partnering with community organisations to better engage people who aren’t participating

· Nationwide promotion of local government’s work and value

· Greater use of localism approaches by councils

· Enhancing how councils communicate their value

· Introduce a stewardship function that includes a role of promoting the role of councils.

14. Issue 1 consultation questions:

i) What should be done to improve understanding of local government and its value, and who should hold responsibility for this?

ii) What should be done, given the decline in local media, to increase visibility of local government work and local elections?

Issue 2: Understanding candidates and their policies

15. Auckland Council has found that a lack of knowledge of candidates has been a key reason for people choosing to not vote.

16. Options in the paper for addressing Issue 2 include:

· A centralised digital platform providing candidate information to voters

· Require candidates to provide an explanation of their policies.

17. Issue 2 consultation questions:

i) How should voters receive better information on candidates and their policy positions and whose role should it be?

ii) Is it important to improve candidate knowledge of local government, and if so, how should this be done?

Issue 3: Voting methods

18. The paper notes the decline of postal voting. Staff have reported recently on the possibility of booth voting but have recommended against it because of cost and logistics.

19. Options in the paper for addressing Issue 3 include:

· Postal voting, booth voting, online voting (the paper lists advantages and disadvantages of each)

· Options to improve the existing postal system, such as making it possible for voters to download voting papers rather than have them posted.

20. Issue 3 consultation questions:

i) Given the challenges outlined, what should be the future method (or methods) of voting in local elections, and why?

ii) Should the voting method (or methods) be nationally consistent or decided locally, and why?

iii) What short-term improvements should be made to the postal voting system, until a permanent solution can be implemented?

Issue 4: Administration and promotion of elections

21. Postal voting requires equipment that is used only every three years, such as commercial grade optical scanners for processing votes. Auckland Council believes it is reasonable to contract services which provide these when required from suppliers who have experience and long-standing reputations. If such suppliers did not exist then the council would be in the position of having to run elections in-house.

22. Auckland Council has previously supported local elections being administered by the Electoral Commission. This would not be taking decision-making away from council elected members since elections are required to be run at arm’s length from elected members. There could be issues relating to funding. If the Electoral Commission was totally government funded it might be expected to apply a standard approach across the country, which might not be desirable. Alternatively there might be variation between councils if funding was by way of a levy, or charge for services, where the level of service might be negotiated.

23. Options in the paper for who is responsible for the administration of local elections include:

· Councils administer elections in-house

· Councils outsource administration to commercial third-parties

· Electoral Commission administers elections.

24. Options for who could be responsible for promoting local elections include:

· Councils (in-house)

· A national umbrella organisation (either funded by councils or centrally)

· The Electoral Commission.

25. Issue 4 consultation questions:

i) Who should administer local elections, and why?

ii) Who should be responsible for promoting local elections, and why?

Issue 5: Four-year terms (including transition and implementation)

26. Options in the paper for aligning local and central government four-year terms include:

· One year apart – to allow three years with stable central and local government

· Two years apart – every two years there is either a central government election or local government election

· In same year or even concurrently. If concurrent this could lead to higher turnout for local elections however voting would be more challenging to the voter who would need to vote for: electorate Member of Parliament, Parliamentary political party, Mayor, ward councillor, local board members. It would also provide 4 years without elections.

27. Ideas on transition:

· The paper seeks views on whether changing the term from 3 years to 4 years should affect planning documents that are based on a 3 year term, such as the Long-term Plan.

· In addition, it would make sense for the term of appointment to council-controlled organisations to move to 4 years.

28. Noting that moving to a 4 year term could decrease elected members’ accountability to the electorate, options in the paper to address accountability include:

· Retain status quo arrangements for Ministerial powers of intervention

· Minister to have stronger powers of intervention, councils to have stronger codes of conduct and stronger powers for chairs of meetings

· Recall elections – a petition can trigger a re-election in order to remove one or more members

· An external body or stewardship agency to hold elected members to account.

29. Issue 5 consultation questions:

i) Which of the three timing options, for a four-year term, do you prefer?

ii) How should councils’ budget and planning cycles be adjusted to a four-year term?

iii) Do four-year terms for local councils require increased accountability mechanisms, and if so, which do you support?

30. The paper invites any other ideas or options to improve participation in local elections.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

31. This report deals with an Issues Paper relating to electoral processes. There are no proposals in the report which impact on climate.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

32. The Issues Paper deals with the election of elected members. One of proposals is to extend the electoral term from three years to four years. This could provide council-controlled organisations with a longer period of political consistency.

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

Local impacts and local board views

33. This report seeks the views of local boards which will be reported to the Governing Body and form part of the response of Auckland Council to the invitation for comments.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

34. The Issues Paper does not consider any issues specific to Māori however the overall concern in the paper is about how to improve electoral turnout. Improvements to the community’s understanding of local government and how to participate meaningfully in elections may also benefit Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35. While the decision to provide feedback on an Issues Paper does not in itself have any financial implications, some of the proposals in the paper will have financial implications. If elections are run every four years rather than every three years as at present, there will be a significant saving.

36. Similarly there will be financial implications if the responsibility for elections moves to the Electoral Commission. There are no proposals for how this might be funded and so the implications are not known.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

37. A key risk this paper is trying to address is the decline in the democratic mandate. It is important to support all efforts to improve the metrics around elections.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38. Feedback from local boards will be reported to the Governing Body and added to any feedback provided by Auckland Council.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Electoral Reform Working Group Issues Paper (Under Separate Cover)
b	Local board feedback on the evaluation of the 2022 elections (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇩	Local board feedback on the submission to the Justice Committee Inquiry into the 2022 elections	147
d	Local board feedback on the submission to the Future for Local Government Review report (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 November 2024

Response to Ombudsman's recommendation to open workshops by default

File No.: CP2024/17735

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To respond to the recommendations made in the Ombudsman’s report ‘Open for business’ in relation to transparency and workshop practices.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Local board workshops are informal, non-decision-making meetings used for discussions and refining options before formal board decisions.

3. The standard approach to workshops is that they are closed however, the decision to open a workshop can be made by each local board. As at July 2024, six boards allow public observation, and eight release workshop materials proactively.

4. In October 2023, the Ombudsman released a report which found no evidence of decision -making occurring in workshops but noted practices that could undermine transparency. The Ombudsman recommended that workshops should be open by default, with any closures justified on a case-by-case basis.

5. Local boards generally follow best practices aligned with many of the Ombudsman’s recommendations, such as publishing workshop records and releasing information proactively. However, there is variation in how this is applied.

6. In light of the Ombudsman’s report, local board elected members and senior staff with experience in open workshops were asked to provide their views. They reported:

· risks to opening workshops, such as breaching confidentiality, discouraging free and frank discussions, causing public confusion about whether a decision is being made and potential disruption of subsequent community engagement and governance processes; public attendance is also very low for those local boards that do hold open workshops

· benefits of opening workshops, such as supporting transparency and holding elected members accountable, increasing public awareness of council matters, and enabling community connection; there is also a level of public expectation that the Ombudsman’s recommendations will be adopted.

7. To meet the Ombudsman’s expectations for transparency, it is recommended local board workshops default to being open. Staff will update the Best Practice Guidance for the 2025-28 term.

8. Some methods for opening workshops include in-person attendance, live streaming or recording. Staff will explore feasible options if workshops are open.

9. At its 27 June meeting, the Governing Body agreed that from 1 September 2024 the default setting for its workshops will be open to the public unless the relevant chairperson considers it is reasonable to close a workshop in a particular case. It also agreed that the way the workshop will be made open to the public is by recording the workshop and uploading that video to the council’s website.

10. If workshops default to being open, staff will need a period to implement it to ensure staff are properly briefed and systems are in place to deliver. Alternatively, the board may wish to implement this for the start of the 2025-2028 term.

11. The chairperson can open or close a workshop without a board resolution, as it is an informal meeting. However, a decision helps to confirm support of the local board.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that to meet transparency, the Ombudsman expects workshops to be open by default

b) whakaae / agree that workshops will be open to the public by default, unless the chairperson deems it reasonable to close a specific workshop

c) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that staff are preparing guidance to support an open by default approach into the Best Practice Guidance for the 2025 term

d) whakaae / agree that the local board will implement an open by default approach from Wednesday 5 February 2025.

Horopaki

Context

Defining workshops

12. The Governance Manual (Section 10.8) defines elected member workshops as:

· informal, non-decision-making meetings, which are generally closed to the public or media. Workshops support the decision-making process by informing elected members on items prior to making a formal decision

· a mechanism for staff to seek informal guidance from elected members to improve future advice, including identifying information gaps and discussing options for policy development.

13. Local boards use workshops for informal discussions, brainstorming, scoping draft proposals, unpacking complex topics and refining options for a final decision. Workshops are typically used to enable discussion between elected members, and between elected members and staff. Workshops are also used for cross local board collaboration and for joint discussions between the Governing Body and local board members.

14. Workshops are not used for decision-making and this is made clear to members when elected.

LGOIMA requirements

15. The Local Government Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) promotes the open and public transaction of business at meetings of local authorities.

16. LGOIMA states that a meeting at which no resolutions or decisions are made, is not a meeting for the purposes of setting requirements for local authority meetings. Therefore, there is no statutory requirement that a non-decision-making workshop be open to the public, notified in advance and have minutes taken.

17. Although not required, local boards may hold non-decision-making workshops in open and invite members of the public, media or stakeholders to attend.

18. Through each term’s induction process, elected members are reminded of their obligations to be open and transparent in decision-making. It is made clear to elected members that closed workshops do not replace the decision-making meetings.

Current local board practice

19. At the time of writing, six local boards allowed public observation at their workshops. They are Devonport-Takapuna, Kaipātiki, Waitākere Ranges, Hibiscus and Bays, Rodney and Waitematā.

20. While the driver for this practice is to demonstrate a commitment to openness and transparency, public attendance has been low.

21. Eight local boards had adopted the practice of proactively releasing workshop materials. They are Devonport-Takapuna, Hibiscus and Bays, Kaipātiki, Puketāpapa, Rodney, Waiheke, Waitākere Ranges and Waitematā.

Best practice guidance

22. At the start of the 2022-2025 term, the Local Board Services Best Practices Review 2022 recommended that workshops should be closed to the public because:

· a non-public setting can better facilitate and support free and frank exchanges between staff and elected members

· workshops do not provide opportunity for the public to give input (in the way that the business meeting provides for a public forum), so the role of the public in the workshop would only be to bear witness to the informal discussions

· attending a workshop may not provide a complete picture of council processes or may lead to some premature assumptions about decisions and projects

· workshops provide a safe space for elected members to assess the overall progress, measure the effectiveness of its work programme and reflect on their own effectiveness as a local board. This type of exercise is unlikely to be robust and less likely to be authentic if done with a public audience.

Ombudsman’s findings

23. In October 2023, the Ombudsman released a report, Open for business, detailing the investigation into the actions and decisions of eight councils regarding both council meetings held under LGOIMA and workshops (and other informal meetings) to which LGOIMA meeting provisions do not apply.

24. The Ombudsman’s review was carried out using their powers under the Ombudsman Act 1975 which allows the Ombudsman to review any act or omission by a local authority – except for a decision made by a full council (i.e. a decision by the Governing Body or a committee of the whole).

25. The purpose of the investigation was to test concerns that councils were using workshops and other informal meetings to make decisions.

26. The eight councils investigated were Rotorua Lakes Council, Taranaki Regional Council, Taupō District Council, Palmerston North City Council, Rangitīkei District Council, Waimakariri District Council, Timaru District Council and Clutha District Council.

27. The Ombudsman’s report highlights the requirement under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) for a local authority to “conduct its business in an open, transparent, and democratically accountable manner”. It also highlights the requirement in the LGOIMA that anything taking place or provided to any meeting is “official information” and subject to the principle of availability, unless there is a good reason to withhold it.

28. The Ombudsman found no evidence of decisions being made in workshops. They did see workshop practices that in their opinion were “counter to the principles of openness and could contribute to a public perception that workshops are not being used in the right way”. These examples included not advertising workshops or having all workshops closed to the public.

29. The Ombudsman also cautioned against using workshops to include a significant component of determination, such as a substantial narrowing of options prior to public consultation.

30. The Ombudsman has provided three principles of good administrative practice, which they consider should guide council workshops:

· Councils have a general discretion to advertise and undertake all meetings in public, and this is consistent with the principle in the LGA that councils should conduct their business in an open, transparent, and democratically accountable manner.

· A general policy of not publicising / closing all non-decision-making meetings, such as workshops, may be unreasonable and / or contrary to law. The Ombudsman can assess this on a case-by-case basis.

· Using closed workshops to do “everything but” make a final decision could be seen as undermining the principles in the LGA and purposes of the LGOIMA and may be unreasonable in terms of the Ombudsmen Act 1975.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Aligning to the Ombudsman’s recommendation

31. The Ombudsman reports that workshops should be open by default as a matter of good practice. Open workshops are consistent with the principles of transparency, openness, and accountability.

32. The Ombudsman recognises there may be good reasons to close a workshop to the public, and that LGOIMA doesn’t require workshops to be open.

33. The six key recommendations made by the Ombudsman in respect of council workshops are:

· adopt a principle of openness by default for all workshops, including a clear commitment to record a clear basis for closure where justified, on a case-by-case basis

· publicise times, dates, venues, and subject matters of all workshops in advance, including a rationale for closing them, where applicable

· provide clear audit trails of all workshops and internal guidance for the keeping of records of workshop proceedings

· publish workshop records on the council website as soon as practicable

· formalise a process for considering the release of information from closed workshops

· consider sign-posting on the council website that members of the public can complain to the ombudsman in relation to the administration of workshops.

34. The Ombudsman’s report is not legally binding on the council. But the Ombudsman has made it clear that open by default is the best practice approach, and they will be closely monitoring decisions on these matters.

35. To meet the Ombudsman’s expectations that workshops are seen to be open, transparent and democratically accountable, it is recommended local boards have a default setting of open for workshops.

How local boards currently adhere to the recommendations

36. Local boards individually set their own meeting practices in accordance with LGOIMA.

37. Local Board Services identifies that many of the existing practices already meet the Ombudsman’s expectations. This includes:

· having a standing report on business meeting agendas which notes the record of any workshops held since the previous meeting

· posting agendas on the council’s website with as much advance notice as possible before meeting dates

· clear and robust practices for keeping of meeting minutes and drafting of public exclusion resolutions

· publication of workshop records on the council’s website as soon as practicable after the workshop

· actively releasing confidential information as soon as practicable, when the reason for withholding has passed

· restating information in subsequent open meetings and keeping records of the workshop.

38. In principle, the holding of closed workshops does not mean that workshops are secret or inconsistent with the principles of transparency and openness. Any lack of transparency can be addressed through the proactive release of workshop information (where possible), restating information in subsequent open meetings and keeping records of the workshop.

39. Governing Body workshops are currently closed to public observation. To address transparency, workshop records are proactively published as part of its next meeting agenda, including presentations and other documentation discussed or made accessible.

40. At its 27 June meeting, the Governing Body agreed that from 1 September 2024 the default setting for its workshops will be open to the public unless the relevant chairperson considers it is reasonable to close a workshop in a particular case. They also agreed that the way the workshop will be made open to the public is by recording the workshop and uploading that video to the council’s website.

41. Staff will incorporate the Ombudsman’s recommendations into the next Local Board Services Best Practice Review, which will inform induction for the 2025-2028 term.

How to implement open workshops

42. Options for open workshops include:

· opening the workshop so the public can attend in-person

· providing remote access via MS Teams link without the public present in the room

· recording workshops without the public present and making available on Auckland Council’s website.

43. Each method for conducting an open workshop has its own risks, benefits, and operational impacts. These are currently being investigated further for each option. The resulting guidance will be included in the 2025-2028 Best Practices Review.

44. Guidance will also include considerations for when to close workshops if operating under a default open workshop approach. The Ombudsman recognises that in some instances it will be reasonable to close workshops to the public and that this should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

45. Should any local boards choose to change to open workshops before the next term begins, staff will assist in this process.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

46. The decisions in this report are not expected to have any significant impact on our climate objectives or targets. Staff have not quantified the impact of increased administrative requirements or the likely impact of increased travel requirements for in-person workshop observers.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

47. As staff are seeking a political decision from local boards on their approach, there has not been a comprehensive consultation with the council group.

48. Senior Governance staff provided views which largely reflect the pros and cons highlighted by elected members with some additional concerns including:

· low public attendance: the benefits of transparency are limited

· communication challenges: keeping the public updated on workshop details can be difficult due to last-minute changes

· reduced input opportunity: local boards may miss the chance to provide early input on topics not ready for public release

· staff exposure: open workshops may make staff vulnerable to inappropriate behavior, especially as their faces are visible to the public and their names may be published by the media.

49. The Ombudsman’s investigation had canvassed a few concerns and potential risks and concluded that while there are good reasons that exist for closing workshops, they did not consider controversy and complexity to be good reasons in themselves.

50. If the decision to open workshops is approved before next term, staff will need an implementation period to ensure the council group is properly briefed and supported.

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

Local impacts and local board views

51. Staff have gathered the views from some local board elected members with open workshops to understand their current experiences.

Benefits of open workshops

· Transparency and community connection: media access boosts public awareness of local board business, helps local board members gain recognition, and reduces reliance on social media.

· Access to information: even if public attendance is low, people appreciate the option which fosters a better understanding of decision-making and the ability to follow topics of interest.

Risks of open workshops

· Media sensationalism: can hinder effective governance by swaying decisions based on a few vocal individuals rather than the broader community.

· Public disruption: the presence of the public can alter interactions between board members and staff, leading to potential harassment of staff and reducing the willingness of staff to participate. Public interjections can derail workshop progress and disrupt important relationships, such as those with local iwi and community groups.

· Overemphasis: a small number of vocal attendees can gain disproportionate political influence, overshadowing the broader community's input.

52. Opinions on whether workshops should be open or closed varied. Some elected members preferred closed workshops to create a safe environment for staff, allowing for free and frank discussions in a more relaxed setting. They believed that open workshops often led to political posturing, which could harm the democratic process by giving undue influence on a small number of voices. And they noted negative impacts on subsequent community engagement, such as when the media prematurely releases information. Overall, they felt that the benefits were outweighed by the disadvantages.

53. Conversely, other elected members argued that workshops should be open to ensure transparency and public trust. They believed that the presence of the public generally did not pose significant issues. These chairs felt that board members should be prepared to handle the political environment and potential media exposure and public scrutiny.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

54. Māori were not consulted on this report. There are no identified direct impacts on Māori arising from this report.

55. Open workshops would provide an opportunity for Māori to observe a workshop but would not provide for an opportunity to engage in the decision-making process and would not go beyond what is already available through invitation by a local board to engage directly on an issue.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

56. There will be financial implications to open workshops, depending on how they are conducted, including time and cost of enabling online access or potentially managing security at a physical meeting. These costs will vary by board, including what technology is currently used, so will need to be considered on a case by case basis.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

57. The Ombudsman’s recommendations are non-binding. However, there may be reputational and/or political consequences arising from a failure to act where needed to respond to recommendations from the Ombudsman.

58. The Best Practice Review 2022 notes some risks that should be considered when opening a workshop, such as:

· increasing likelihood of breaching the LGOIMA and the Auckland Council Confidential Information Policy and Protocols through wilful or advertent ‘disclosure of information for which good reason to withhold would exist’

· discouraging free and frank exchange of views between members and provision of advice from staff, which is often necessary in the early stages of a project or idea

· potentially creating misinformation or confusion in the community about the status of projects

· increasing potential for Code of Conduct complaints about predetermination and conflicts of interest if elected members indicate specific preferences in a workshop

· exposing staff to opportunities for harassment and complaints based on comments made when giving free and frank advice to elected members (note Auckland Council has obligations under the Health, Safety and Work Act 2015 to ensure staff are not put at risk while conducting their role).

59. There is also a risk that workshops can be called or cancelled at very short notice. This may impact on members of the public that may plan to attend. Staff will do all they can to keep advertised information about workshops current.

60. Local boards can review their approach in the future if opening workshops by default leads to unintended adverse consequences.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

61. If the local board decide to hold open workshops by default, staff will provide advice on practices, procedures, and information technology to support this decision.

62. If a local board requests to open their workshops before next term, staff will need an implementation period to ensure the council group is properly briefed and supported.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Alyson Roach - Senior Advisor Business Planning & Projects

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

20 November 2024

Appointment of delegated local board member to provide feedback on stormwater activities

File No.: CP2024/15831

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To appoint a lead to provide local board views and preferences on council’s stormwater activities that take place over local parks.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Section 17 Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (LGACA) requires that decision-making for activities that impact beyond a single local board area, and which are beneficial and effective to be managed and coordinated on an Auckland-wide basis must be exercised by the Governing Body. As such, decision-making responsibility for stormwater management and the stormwater network is allocated to the Governing Body.

3. Local boards are responsible for a wide range of non-regulatory activities of the council that are deemed to be local in nature. This includes the use of and activities in local parks and reserves. However, as parks and reserves are crucial to the stormwater network, council’s allocation of non-regulatory responsibilities acknowledges that local board decision-making over parks and reserves may be constrained where decisions relate to council stormwater management activities.

4. Prior to June 2024, staff treated all stormwater management activities on local parks as subject to local board approval. However, as part of the LTP, it was clarified that it is not appropriate to require a landowner approval from local boards for activities of the council that are required for the management of stormwater activities. This is because council’s own activities are to be undertake under the authority that already rests with the Governing Body.

5. Although a landowner approval will not be required for the council’s own stormwater activities, LGACA requires that the Governing Body (including staff acting under delegation) consider the views and preferences of local boards when making its decisions (section 15 LGACA). Therefore, the new process now requires Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience staff to liaise directly with local boards and consider the views and preferences of local boards when making decisions (under delegation from the Governing Body). If a local board wishes to object to any decision made by staff under delegation, they can consider raising an objection with the Governing Body via the Policy and Planning Committee.

6. Staff recommend local boards appoint a lead who can identify and communicate each local board’s views and preferences over stormwater management-related decisions that impact local parks.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) kopou / appoint a lead, and an alternate, for stormwater activities feedback and delegate authority to these members to:

(i) identify and communicate the local board views and preferences on proposed council stormwater management activities in local parks.

(ii) represent the local board at the Policy and Planning Committee, if required, to discuss any objections to proposed council stormwater management activities in local parks.

Horopaki

Context

7. As per their legislative role and council’s allocation of non-regulatory responsibilities (pursuant to section 17 of LGACA), local boards are accountable for the range of non-regulatory activities of the council deemed to be ‘local’ in nature.

8. On the other hand, the Governing Body is responsible for decision-making over activities that are ‘regional’ in nature i.e. that extend beyond local board areas, and which are beneficial and effective to be managed and coordinated on an Auckland-wide basis.

9. Staff who manage local parks and reserves have relied on council’s allocation of decision-making responsibilities over local parks to require local board approval (referred to as landowner approval or landowner consents) for most activities that take place over local parks. This means that staff have been treating all stormwater management works that occur on parks, including those that the Governing Body has been allocated decision-making responsibilities for, as being subject to landowner approvals.

10. Although local boards have generally managed to accommodate council’s stormwater management activities in local parks, a recent case where landowner approval was likely to be withheld highlighted a misalignment between council’s agreed allocation of responsibilities and operational process assumptions.

11. Staff have now provided advice to local boards clarifying that activities allocated to the Governing Body, i.e. council’s own stormwater management activities, should not be subject to a landowner approval. They have clarified that the operational processes that facilitated this misunderstanding have been changed.

12. This change does not affect third-party applications for works over local parks that relate to or connect to the stormwater network. Those applications will continue to require landowner approval from local boards.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

13. Auckland Council’s allocation of non-regulatory responsibilities acknowledges that the decision making of local boards in relation to local parks may be constrained when such decisions intersect with council stormwater management activities, including the stormwater network. This provision ensures the Governing Body’s decision-making, and the effectiveness of the stormwater network, are not compromised.

14. A well-functioning stormwater system enhances flood resilience, reduces waterway contamination, and ensures local beaches are safer for swimming. Parks and reserves play a crucial role in this system, acting as flood plains, hosting waterways, and providing essential facilities for the effective functioning of the council’s stormwater network.

15. Decisions relating to the maintenance of the stormwater network have been delegated by the Governing Body to staff in Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience via the Chief Executive.

Process for giving input to stormwater network decisions

16. Local boards have been advised of the new process that will see Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience, instead of Land Advisory, seeking the views of local boards before making decisions (under delegation from the Governing Body) on whether to proceed with any proposed council-led stormwater projects in local parks.

17. The experience of local boards should not differ from the previous process, where consultations occurred over landowner approval applications while final decision-making is exercised by (Land Advisory) staff under delegation from local boards. Figure 1 shows the comparison between the current and updated processes.

Figure 1: Current and updated decision-making processes for stormwater activities on

local parks

Appointment of a lead to provide input to stormwater network decisions

18. To enable the effective and efficient conduct of a local board’s business, LGACA provides that a local board may delegate to a committee, subcommittee, or member of the local board, or to an officer of council, any of its responsibilities, duties, or powers, except for the exceptions listed in clause 36D, schedule 7 of the Act. The responsibilities that cannot be delegated include the duty to identify and communicate the interests and preferences of the people in the local board area in relation to the content of the strategies, policies, plans and bylaws of Auckland Council.

19. The updated process in Figure 1 requires that Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience seek input from local boards. Seeking input from local boards often requires a report and a decision at a business meeting.

20. Appointing a lead to finalise and provide input on stormwater network decisions can enable efficiencies. While it is expected that stormwater projects on local parks may be referred for discussion to a local board workshop and may include site visits, relying on staff to identify the agreed local board view might lead to misunderstandings, especially if different views are expressed in workshops and site visits. Having a single point of contact on the local board who can be accountable for collating, finalising, and communicating the local board view can prevent confusion and avoid unnecessary delays in decision-making.

21. If it were not possible to identify a shared view from the local board, it is open to the lead to refer the matter to the whole local board for a decision (on the local board input). This can be done at an upcoming local board meeting.

Resolving disputes and disagreements over use of local parks

22. In circumstances where the local board does not support use of a local park for a stormwater management activity and Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience and the local board are unable to agree on reasonable conditions for the use of a local park, Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience staff are encouraged to escalate the matter to the Chief Executive for a decision. This is on the basis that the Chief Executive at an operational level may be best placed to determine issues from an organisation wide perspective and may provide some assurance to the local board that competing perspectives are being carefully balanced.

23. It would also be open to the local board to seek the intervention of the Governing Body, via the Policy and Planning Committee.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

24. This is a procedural decision and is not expected to have any impact on council’s climate commitments.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25. This report recommends the appointment of a lead to ensure that local board input can be provided in a timely manner enabling the council to undertake its operational and statutory duties efficiently.

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

Local impacts and local board views

26. This report seeks to appoint a local board member to perform a specific function on behalf of the local board. Any local board member who is appointed as a lead should ensure that they represent the wider local board views and preferences on each matter before them.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27. This procedural decision is not anticipated to have a direct impact on Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

28. A decision of this procedural nature is not considered to have financial implications on Auckland Council.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

29. If a local board chooses not to appoint a lead, staff will need to seek input from the local board at a business meeting. This may require a report which delays input and further risk delays to council projects.

30. Where a local board may feel dissatisfied with a proposed council stormwater project or feel that a project may adversely impact on the wellbeing of its community or other local board areas of decision making, and this cannot be resolved in discussions with Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience, staff are expected to escalate the matter to the Chief Executive. It is also open to local boards to seek intervention from the Governing Body via the relevant committee (Policy and Planning Committee)

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

31. Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience will provide a template to help the appointed lead quickly finalise and communicate the local board’s feedback.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Shirley Coutts - Principal Advisor - Governance Strategy

Authorisers

Oliver Roberts - Planning & Operations Manager

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

[1] For example, the Burial and Cremation Act 1964, Cremation Regulations 1973 and Burial and Cremation (Removal of Monuments and Tablets) Regulations 1967.

[2] Local boards have delegated authority for council cemeteries that are inactive (function as local parks; no longer in regular use) and active (on Aotea Great Barrier Island). Only 17 local boards have council cemeteries in their area (not Albert-Eden, Henderson-Massey, Manurewa or Ōrākei).

[3] Committee with an advisory role for Te Urupā o Waikumete in partnership with council.

Chairperson	Tauanu’u Nick Bakulich
Deputy Chairperson	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Members	Harry Fatu Toleafoa
	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
	Makalita Kolo
	Christine O'Brien
	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo, JP

Author	Jacqueline Robinson - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager