|
Resolution
number PKTPP/2025/75
MOVED by
Chairperson E Kumar, seconded by Deputy Chairperson F Lai:
That the Puketāpapa Local Board:
Schedule 4 – Local boards’ powers, functions,
and responsibilities in relation to local roads and collector roads in
Auckland
a)
Collector roads
should be included in Governing Body decision-making because they form part
of a wider network; however, we value Auckland Transport’s Stakeholder
Engagement Spectrum, “Inform, Consult, Collaborate”. As a local
board, we request that the Governing Body either consult or collaborate with
us on decision relating to collector roads.
b)
Note that there
could be an inherent tension as lower priorities in the Government Policy
Statement for Land Transport (GPS) may be higher priority to local boards and
their communities. This includes community safety, safe speeds,
infrastructure for active modes and place-making. The limited budget
allocated in the GPS for these activity classes may constrain local boards to
deliver outcomes for their communities.
c)
Concern about the
cost implications of the rebranding initiative, particularly considering
current budget constraints and competing community priorities. Additionally,
if a brand transition proceeds, it may cause confusion for the public and
negatively impact the usability of public transport.
d)
Requests a review
by the Independent Remuneration Authority to assess whether new determination
is warranted, given the increasing responsibilities being delegated to local
board members. Beyond remuneration, these additional duties require a
significant commitment of time, energy, and expertise from elected members.
e)
While current local
board candidates were provided with an indicative estimate of weekly time
commitments for the role, these did not account for the additional
responsibilities now being proposed. As such, the evolving scope of the role
may exceed what candidates reasonably anticipated when standing for election.
f)
Requests that
training, support and quality advice is provided to local boards’
fulfilling these additional powers, functions and responsibilities
successfully. It will significantly increase the workload for local board
members, and therefore support should include (but is not limited to):
i)
appropriate subject
matter expertise and quality advice is allocated to each local board to make
effective decisions
ii)
legal support,
advice and process by challenges of local board from public.
iii) the continuation of relationship management
staff who can ensure quality governance and working relationships between
local boards and the Transport CCO
iv) suitable budget allocation
v)
information on
transport assets in the local board area, including their condition
vi) intellectual property, information and
databases on transport matters and are relevant to the local board area
vii) ensuring transport strategy, policy and
planning is coordinated and integrated with the newly-established Auckland
Development Office to ensure broader urban development and place-making
outcomes.
g)
Request that
consideration is given to the network aspects of transport decisions.
Local boards cannot operate in isolation, as people regularly travel across
ward boundaries. To ensure a seamless and consistent experience for all road
users, we urge greater coordination, particularly in areas such as speed
limits, to avoid abrupt changes that may cause confusion or compromise
safety.
Reformed Transport CCO
h)
Support the
reformed Transport CCO to provide public transport services in Auckland,
noting
i)
current Kiwirail and NZTA powers and functions relating to public transport
in Auckland could be allocated to the Transport CCO, as doing this would
deliver complete and integrated services across Auckland’s public
transport network.
Transition period
i)
Note that six
months is an insufficient amount of time to review all Auckland Transport
bylaws, policies and plans. Rather, it is recommended that they remain in
place, and be reviewed by no later 1 September 2028. Suggests avoiding
election cycle, preferably first year of the term. This arrangement is
similar to the review process for legacy council bylaws following the
creation of Auckland Council.
This timeframe places an unreasonable burden
on staff, and local board members. The review of these bylaws, policies and
plans will require an element of local board engagement and feedback, and
this is unreasonable for local board members who will be learning about their
new responsibilities per Schedule 4 of the Bill and undertaking their
existing responsibilities during this period. For example, local boards are
legislatively required to develop a new local board plan and develop a local
board agreement during between January and September 2026.
Other considerations
j)
Request
consideration regarding the transparency and fairness of the financial
division process between projects that span multiple local boards.
k)
Recommend that all
local boards be allocated a baseline level of funding for essential
transport-related maintenance such as footpaths and general upkeep, without
strict budget constraints. Beyond this, we support a more flexible funding
model that allows local board to direct the remaining budget toward areas
they identify as priorities and where investment is most needed.
l)
Requests that for
local board-led projects exceeding $1 million, such as prioritised footpath
upgrades, local boards be empowered to utilise Auckland Council’s
procurement processes. This would allow boards to lead the tendering process,
enabling greater local oversight, accountability, and alignment with
community priorities.
m) Seek clarification on the role of local boards
in traffic management decisions within their areas, particularly in relation
to budget implications. Concerns of scenarios where contractors may become
insolvent or withdraw from projects, potentially leaving the local board to
manage unforeseen financial gaps or project delays. Understanding who holds
accountability in such cases is critical to effective local governance and
budget planning.
n)
Request
consideration and assurance that a master schedule of works will be
maintained to ensure that projects progressed independently by local boards
do not inadvertently disrupt or negatively impact the wider transport
network. Coordination at a regional level is essential to ensure efficiency,
minimise duplication, and maintain network integrity.
o)
Requests that any
new set up has monthly reporting to the local board in a manner similar to
the Community Facilities monthly reports to local boards.
p)
Notes its concern
around the rushed time frame which has meant local boards are acting on
extremely limited information and requests this concern is passed on to
central government.
q)
recommends clearer
guidance and a stronger working relationship between the planning teams and
the new Auckland Transport structure within Council. A holistic approach is
needed to ensure transport decisions are aligned with urban intensification,
community and economic development, and the management of public spaces such
as town centres and parks. Integration across these areas is essential to
support well-functioning and future-ready neighbourhoods.
CARRIED
|
