Governing Body 12/2013

7/27/2019 Governing Body 12/2013

1/250

Note: The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policyunless and until adopted. Should Members require further information relating to any reports, please contactthe relevant manager, Chairperson or Deputy Chairperson.

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Governing Body will be held on:

Date:Time:Meeting Room:Venue:

Thursday, 19 December 201310.00amReception LoungeAuckland Town Hall301-305 Queen StreetAuckland

Governing BodyOPEN AGENDA

MEMBERSHIP

Mayor Len Brown, JPDeputy Mayor Penny HulseCouncillors Cr Anae Arthur Anae Cr Dick Quax

Cr Cameron Brewer Cr Sharon Stewart, QSMCr Dr Cathy Casey Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBECr Bill Cashmore Cr Wayne WalkerCr Ross Clow Cr John WatsonCr Linda Cooper, JP Cr Penny WebsterCr Chris Darby Cr George Wood, CNZMCr Alf FilipainaCr Hon Chris Fletcher, QSOCr Denise KrumCr Mike LeeCr Calum Penrose

(Quorum 11 members)

Elaine StephensonDemocracy Advisor

16 December 2013

Contact Telephone: (09) 373 6328Email: [email protected]: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz


2/250

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Those powers which cannot legally be delegated:

(a) the power to make a rate; or

(b) the power to make a bylaw; or

(c) the power to borrow money, or purchase or dispose of assets, other than in accordance withthe long term council community plan; or

(d) the power to adopt a long term plan, annual plan, or annual report; or

(e) the power to appoint a Chief Executive; or

(f) the power to adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under the LocalGovernment Act 2002 in association with the long term plan or developed for the purpose ofthe local governance statement; or

(g) the power to adopt a remuneration and employment policy.

Additional responsibilities retained by the Governing Body:

(a) Approval of a draft long term plan or draft annual plan prior to community consultation

(b) Approval of a draft bylaw prior to community consultation

(c) Resolutions required to be made by a local authority under the Local Electoral Act 2001,including the appointment of electoral officer

(d) Adoption of, and amendment to, the Committee Terms of Reference, Standing Orders andCode of Conduct

(e) Relationships with the Independent Maori Statutory Board, including the funding agreement

and appointments to committees.

(f) Approval of the Unitary Plan

(g) Overview of the implementation of the Auckland Plan through setting direction on key strategicprojects (e.g. the City Rail Link and the alternative funding mechanisms for transport) andreceiving regular reporting on the overall achievement of Auckland Plan priorities andperformance measures.


3/250

Governing Body

19 December 2013

Page 3

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Affirmation 5

2 Apologies 5

3 Declaration of Interest 5

4 Confirmation of Minutes 5

5 Acknowledgements 5

6 Petitions 5

7 Public Input 5

7.1 Public Input - Living Wage Aotearoa 5

7.2 Public Input - Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project (SkyPath) 6

7.3 Public Input - Lisa Prager 6

8 Local Board Input 6

9 Extraordinary Business 6

10 Notices of Motion 7

11 Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project - Information Report 9

12 Resolution from Orakei Local Board - Mission Bay streetscape upgrade

targeted rate 141

13 Local Board Agreements 2014/2015 155

14 Adoption of the draft Annual Plan 2014/2015 157

Due to its size, the attachment for this report has been circulated to GoverningBody members only and will be available on the Auckland Council website as

an attachment to the agenda.

15 Submissions and Hearings process for the 2014/2015 Annual Plan 163

16 Navigation safety review, statement of proposal and bylaw 169

17 Proposals on the role and functioning of Councils "demographic

advisory panels 237

18 Inquiry into the 2013 Local Elections - Issues Paper 247

19 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

20 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 249

C1 Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project - Confidential Report 249

C2 Recommendations from the Audit and Risk Committee - Appointment of

External Co-opted Committee members to the Audit and Risk Committee 249

C3 Shareholder Approval of Wynyard Quarter transaction 250


4/250


5/250

Governing Body

19 December 2013

Page 5

1 Affirmation

His Worship the Mayor will read the affirmation.

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Governing Body:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 29 October 2013,and

the extraordinary minutes of its meetings, held on Thursday, 7 November 2013 andThursday, 14 November 2013, including the confidential sections, as true and correctrecords.

5 Acknowledgements

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

6 Petitions

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

7 Public Input

Standing Order 3.21 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to theCommittee Secretary, in writing, no later than two (2)working days prior to the meetingand must include the subject matter. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion todecline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders. Amaximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5)minutes speaking time for each speaker.

7.1 Public Input - Living Wage Aotearoa

Purpose

1. To provide Living Wage Aotearoa the opportunity to address the Governing Bodyregarding the proposed Living Wage policy.

Recommendation/s


a) receive the presentation by Living Wage Aotearoa regarding the proposed LivingWage policy.


6/250

Governing Body

19 December 2013

Page 6

7.2 Public Input - Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project (SkyPath)

Purpose

1. To provide the following organisations the opportunity to address the GoverningBody regarding the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project (SkyPath):

Northcote Residents Association, the St Marys Bay Association and theWesthaven Marina Users Association (two speakers)

Heart of the City

Cycle Action Auckland.

Recommendation/s


a) receive the presentations made on behalf of the Northcote Residents Association,the St Marys Bay Association and the Westhaven Marina Users Association, Heart

of the City and Cycle Action Auckland, regarding the Auckland Harbour BridgePathway Project (SkyPath).

7.3 Public Input - Lisa Prager

Purpose

1. To provide the opportunity for Lisa Prager to address the Governing Body regardingthe accountability of Elected Members.

Recommendation/s


a) receive the presentation from Lisa Prager regarding the accountability of ElectedMembers

8 Local Board Input

Standing Order 3.22 provides for Local Board Input. The Chairperson (or nominee of thatChairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time. TheChairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical,give two (2) days notice of their wish to speak. The meeting Chairperson has thediscretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of StandingOrders.

This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 3.9.14 to speak to matters on theagenda.

9 Extraordinary Business

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


7/250

Governing Body

19 December 2013

Page 7

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 thepublic,-

(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 asubsequent meeting.

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (asamended) 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 localauthority; and

(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a timewhen 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 itemexcept to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for furtherdiscussion.

10 Notices of Motion

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


8/250


9/250

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project - Information Report Page 9

Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project - Information Report

File No.:CP2013/26853

Purpose1. The purpose of this report is to update the Governing Body on progress on the Auckland

Harbour Bridge Pathway project.

Executive Summary2. This report has been prepared in response to resolution from the 9 May 2013 meeting of the

Strategy and Finance Committee.

3. This report provides updated information on walking and cycling access on the AucklandHarbour Bridge (AHB). Attachment A contains detailed information in relation to this project.

4. The Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Trust (the Trust) has developed the SkyPath

proposal to complete the missing link for walking and cycling access across the AHB, whichis proposed through a privately financed scenario. The SkyPath proposal is described inmore detail in sections a to c of Attachment A.

5. Key updated information in relation to the SkyPath proposal (more detail is provided inparagraph 23 of this report and in sections u to yy of Attachment A) includes:

A Project Plan was developed for work up to December 2013, with input from allstakeholders. The Project Plan sets out the tasks required and timeframe to reportprogress back to Council by December 2013.

Patronage: An independent review of the patronage numbers has been completed andfurther survey work undertaken. This report is attached in Attachment B.

A financial model has been developed by Council using these patronage numbers andother base information. This model has been used to compare options and scenarios.

Internal discussions on the commercial implications have occurred based on theadditional information available since May and the financial modelling.

The Trust has proposed the use of composite materials, as utilised by the marine andaircraft industries, for the structure of SkyPath.

Capital costs: The change to composite material increases the estimated capital costfrom $33 million to $33.5 million. However, the expected advantages of use of thismaterial would be a lighter structure, easier manufacturing and installation processes, alonger service life, less strengthening of the AHB being required, and reduced whole of

life maintenance costs.

A preliminary technical review has been undertaken with a focus on anticipatedmaintenance obligations.

Landings: Further design work has been undertaken, and is continuing, to take intoaccount feedback received from residents, other stakeholder groups, the Council familyand the New Zealand Transport Agency in respect of the landings at each end. However,the Trust have not undertaken any further consultation with local residents since mid-July2013, as there was a clear preference from local residents to wait until after the Councildecision in December.

No negotiations have been undertaken. Negotiations will depend on the guidance

received from the Governing Body regarding procurement.


10/250

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013


6. This report provides an update on the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway project and is notseeking a decision from the Governing Body. A separate report provides an update on thedelivery options relating to the project, and contains commercially sensitive financial andlegal information. For these reasons, it is proposed that the second report be considered inthe confidential session of this meeting.

Recommendation/sThat the Governing Body:

a) receive the report on the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway project.

b) request that a copy of this report be forwarded to the Kaipatiki, Waitemat andDevonport-Takapuna Local Boards for their information.

DiscussionBackground

7. The Auckland Harbour Bridge (AHB) does not currently have any walking or cycling accessover it. This missing connection is a critical gap in Aucklands Cycling Network (ACN). Pastinvestigations have considered how to provide walking and cycling access over the AHB butno plans have been progressed. For a number of years, the Auckland Harbour Bridge Trust(the Trust) has been championing for a pathway across the AHB. The Trust has considereda range of options and developed the SkyPath concept, which is proposed to be privatelyfinanced, with all the costs being met by admission fees. An equity partner was sought bythe Trust due to lack of available funding within central and local government agencies.

8. The New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) is custodian of the AHB. The existing AHBclip-on lanes were strengthened by the NZTA in 2010. This work has considerablyextended the life span of the clip-on lanes and consequently the NZTA expects the clip-onlanes to have an indefinite service life (e.g. the next 100 years) providing heavy freightmovements are transferred to a new harbour crossing at a certain load trigger point.However, further strengthening would be necessary for a pathway to be attached to the AHBand the NZTA has advised it may consider funding some of this cost.

9. Uncertainties around timing and funding of an Additional Waitemat Harbour Crossing(AWHC) has led the NZTA to put plans for an alternative walking and cycling facility as partof the next harbour crossing on hold in favour of SkyPath. Through the evaluation of theTrusts concept design, the NZTA has found thatthe SkyPath concept design is considered

to be a feasible engineering solution. However, the NZTA has advised that it is not in aposition to fund SkyPath due to budget constraints and its cycling and walking forwardprogramme already being in place. Internal processes within the NZTA require fullconsideration of a public private partnership (PPP), joint Ministerial approval and compliancewith the Better Business Case process. The NZTA have advised that the costs involved withthis would be prohibitive for a project of this small scale.

10. Additionally, the NZTA has stated that SkyPath would be compatible with the AWHC. Evenwith AWHC in place there is likely to be limited space on the AHB to provide for both cyclingand walking, and in this situation it is recommended that the modes would be split withSkyPath being used as a covered walkway, while a lane (or a part lane) on the AHB is usedby cyclists.


11/250

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013


11. Auckland Transport and the NZTA have agreed that funding should be brought forward toconstruct a cycle and walking connection to the north of SkyPath, if the SkyPath proposalproceeds and subject to a future funding decision by the NZTA. This northern link would beprovided for users to access Akoranga/Takapuna and therefore have less impact on localroads.

12. The SkyPath proposal was considered by the Transport Committee on 3 May 2011, 15August 2011 and 13 February 2013. The transport benefits (and recreational and tourismbenefits) were recognised by the Transport Committee in February 2013, and it wasresolved that further work would be undertaken and reported back to the Strategy andFinance Committee. This further work was undertaken and a report prepared for theStrategy and Finance Committee meeting on 9 May 2013. The resolutions from the August2011 and February 2013 meetings are included in sections r to t of Attachment A.

13. There is a zero capital budget for this project in the Regional Land Transport Programme2012-2015, on the basis that the construction costs would be met by the private sector.

14. At the meeting on 9 May 2013, the Strategy and Finance Committee resolved:

that work continue with internal resources on the Auckland HarbourBridge pathway and that this be reported back to the Transport Committeeat the appropriate time.

15. At the Strategy and Finance Committee meeting on 9 May 2013, regarding the Annual Planbudget, the Mayor Len Brown announced that the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway:

is a project that I support but believe more work is required before thecouncil can consider the nature of the support we wish to give. I also wantto ensure that the affected communities are engaged and supportive of theproject. I propose that we use existing resources to continue to work withthe relevant parties and that this be taken back to the Transport Committeeat the appropriate time.

Proposal

16. SkyPath is an architecturally designed structure which would be attached under the easternclip-on lane of the AHB. It would be a 4 metre wide shared pathway for cyclists andpedestrians with viewing platforms, and would connect into the existing cycling and walkingnetwork and future proposals at each end. Further detail on SkyPath can be found insections a to c of Attachment A.

17. The Trust has obtained an initial offer to fund the construction of SkyPath from Morrison &Cos Public Infrastructure Partnership Fund (PIP Fund). The SkyPath proposal is a form ofprivately financed project. Under this proposal, Council's involvement would be limited to a

partial underwrite of the admission fare revenue and assumption of ownership rights andobligations at the end of the concession period.

18. A special purpose vehicle (SPV) would be established by the PIP Fund to take allresponsibility and risk to design and build SkyPath, initially own the SkyPath structure andassociated rights, operate and maintain SkyPath for a term of 20 years and receive allrevenues from admission fares and meet all costs associated with SkyPath over that term(subject to the underwrite and sharing of any up-side arrangements). At the end of that 20year term, the SPV would transfer SkyPath and all associated rights required to operateSkyPath to Council for a nominal amount or for free.

19. The PIP Fund is seeking an underwrite from Council should gross revenues from SkyPathusers in any year fall below an agreed level. The SPVs underwrite would permanently fall

away upon certain conditions being met. Finally, the PIP Fund has offered a sharing of up-side or gain share once the post-tax return of the project has reached a pre-agreed level.


12/250

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013


20. Reversionary ownership by Council would mean that the walking and cycling link across theharbour is maintained after 20 years and is a more efficient use of infrastructure than simplyremoving it. The current design indicates that the life of SkyPath would be a minimum of50 years. However, it is assumed that the admission fare would cease when Councilassumes the ownership obligations at the end of the concession period. The only assumedincome here is from naming rights and possibly private leasing arrangements. If Councilwishes to continue with an admission fare or charging for entry into the viewing platforms,there is potential to cover the operating costs. The operating costs are currently beingupdated by quantity surveyors due to the proposed change to composite material and will beavailable soon.

Progress since Strategy and Finance Committee Meeting

21. Following the Strategy and Finance Committee meeting in May 2013, a Project Sponsor(Brett O'Riley, Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development (ATEED)) and ProjectLeader (Marguerite Pearson, Transport Strategy Unit, Council) were identified and a ProjectPlan was developed by Council officers for Stage One (up to December 2013). The ProjectPlan had input from key stakeholders (Auckland Transport, ATEED, Auckland Waterfront

Development Agency (WA), the NZTA and the Trust) and was signed off in July 2013. Thepurpose of this Project Plan was to identify key pieces of work that needed to be undertakento report back to Council on, to identify key tasks, and to guide inputs from the Councilfamily, the NZTA and the Trust for the remainder of 2013.

22. The Project Plan identified a number of pieces of work that need to be undertaken for StageOne to enable Council officers to report back to an appropriate Committee in December2013. The majority of this work has been completed and this assessment has providedsufficient information to guide Council officers to make recommendations on the deliveryoption as outlined in a second report which is to be considered confidential section of theagenda. A summary of the work undertaken is provided below and further details areprovided in sections x to y of Attachment A:

i. Patronage: A review of the potential patronage was essential to clarify revenueprojections in order to manage Councils risks in relation to the potential revenueunderwrite. The review was undertaken by independent experts (Angus andAssociates) and, while the results are purposefully conservative estimates ofpatronage, the review has provided increased confidence in patronage expectations.A summary of the process undertaken and results of this work are outlined in sectionsu to oo of Attachment A, while the patronage report is attached as Appendix B.

ii. Following the patronage review, financial modelling has been undertaken by Councilofficers. The detail of this work is outlined in the second report in the confidentialsection on the agenda.

iii. Consideration of commercial elements and governance in relation to the project have

been undertaken based on additional information available since May and the financialmodelling.

iv. A preliminary technical review of maintenance requirements has been undertaken inregard to the SkyPath design. The purpose of this work is to assist in managingCouncils risks in relation to the resumption of maintenance obligations at the end of20 years. The proposed use of composite materials by the Trust is being reviewed aspart of this work. This work is being led by Auckland Transport and undertaken byBeca and Total Bridge Solutions. This preliminary review identified likely maintenancerequirements for SkyPath and areas where SkyPath would affect maintenance of theAHB box girder. In addition, detailed information regarding composite material and itslikely maintenance regime was provided by the composite experts in response to a

number of questions raised by Beca.v. A preliminary business case has been developed to support a future decision by

Council to enter into a commitment relating to a privately funded project


13/250

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013


vi. No negotiations or drafting has occurred. The Councils Project Plan indicated thatupon successful completion of pre-requisite tasks, then discussions to form a non-binding heads of agreement might occur between the interested investor and Council.However, time constraints and a preference to wait for the Councils guidance inDecember 2013 regarding procurement meant this did not occur.

Purpose of This Report

23. This report is for information purposes only and is to provide an update of progress to theCouncillors. The attachments to this report also provide detailed information about theupdated patronage results and the preliminary technical review.

Next Steps

24. The decision currently being sought on this project is approval to move from the currentphase of high level assessment to detailed discussions with a single investor. This ishighlighted in yellow in the diagram below. The second report (to be consideredconfidentially) is seeking an in-principle decision of support for the project to enable Council

officers to continue advancing this project. Councils future role in this would be focused onthe underwrite and taking reversionary ownership of SkyPath. By necessity, this requiresthat Council carry out full due diligence and to be satisfied on all elements of the project.

25. Prior to entering into any binding financial commitment (in relation to a partial revenueunderwrite and reversionary ownership) on the SkyPath proposal, Council would need to besatisfied that its risks and financial exposure are acceptable and able to be mitigated to anacceptable level. This would involve legal and financial assessments by Council, furtherdetailed discussions in relation to the proposal and procurement procedures, and a review ofthe robustness of the PIP Fund offer.

26. The project is considered to be not large enough to warrant the transaction costs of a fullcompetitive tender, therefore it is recommended that an independent probity audit will becommissioned to ensure that due process was followed in such a manner to give confidence

that the project provides value for money to Council and that the assessment of risks toCouncil has been properly carried out.


14/250

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013


27. If the above steps are undertaken and it is a positive result, then Council officers would seekthe Governing Bodysapproval before entering into a final binding agreement. However,any discussions would be non-binding and Council could withdraw from the project at anystage if value for money cannot be achieved or there are unforeseen complications. If thiswere to happen, Council could consider funding the project itself or do nothing.

28. The Trust is currently focussed on the preparation for the resource consent phase andundertaking detailed design. It is anticipated that the Trust would lodge a resource consentapplication in early 2014 (March) and it has a design team in place for this.

Consideration

Local Board Views

29. The Trust has presented to and met with the relevant Local Boards including Waitemat,Kaipatiki, and Devonport-Takapuna Local Boards. These Local Boards are supportive ofthis project and have either included it in their Local Board Plans (as an unfunded item)and/or passed resolutions in support. These Local Boards spoke in support of SkyPath atthe Transport Committee meeting in February 2013 and indicated feedback from thecommunity was strongly supportive of the project.

30. Council officers presented to the Kaipatiki and Devonport-Takapuna Local Boards in lateFebruary 2013. Staff from Council and ATEED are currently in the process of briefing therelevant members of each Local Board on this report and reporting on progress since May2013.

31. The Trust has sent a deputation to each of these Local Boards in February and March 2013,as well as Kaipatiki Local Board and Waitemata Local Boards convening public meetings forresidents in their wards to comment on the northern and southern access points respectivelyin March, April and July. The Trust has held public meetings (with support from the NZTA)

with the residents of Princes Street in Northcote, St Marys Bay and Northcote PointResidents Associations in February, March and April 2013 to invite comment from localresidents. The Trust has also met with the Westhaven Marina Users Association on anumber of occasions, the Harbour Master, relevant stakeholder groups and TakapunaBeach Business Association. These meetings resulted in a number of concerns beingraised, as well as strong support for the SkyPath concept. The concerns relate to:

Safety for users on SkyPath and surrounding streets;

Reliability of patronage forecasts and business case;

Effects from large number of users on environment (impact on residents, marina users,Te Onewa Stokes Point Reserve and Pa, and availability of car parking); and

Anti-social behaviour.32. The Trust has taken these concerns on board and is currently revising their landing designs

for both Westhaven and Stokes Point taking into account feedback from the public, theCouncil family (including WA) and the NZTA. Feedback from the local residents groups wasthat they did not wish to be further consulted until after the Council decision in Decemberand this preference has been respected.

33. Council officers met with Westhaven Marina Users Association and St Marys Bay andNorthcote Point Residents Associations on 20 May 2013 and visited each landing locationwith these groups on 15 June 2013 to discuss their concerns and outline the Councils duediligence process. Council and ATEED officers have also had correspondence with thesegroups via email and letter since then. Council has willingly shared the recent patronage

work, once it was finalised, with these groups at their request.


15/250

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013


Mori Impact Statement

34. The Trust met with Mana Whenua groups (Ngai Tai Ki Tmaki, Ngti Whtua o Orkei, TeKawerau a Maki, Ngti Paoa) on 3 April 2013. The meetings were positive and, in principle,Mana Whenua groups are supportive of SkyPath. Mana Whenua expressed a desire tohave input at preliminary stages of design to ensure SkyPath does not impact on any of thephysical remnants at Te Onewa Pa, Northcote, and enhances the area with improved safety,

connection and light. In this regard, the Trust is working to achieve alignment with the NZTAprogrammed restoration work at Te Onewa Stokes Point Reserve which involves ManaWhenua and Councils Parks, Sports and Recreation department. The Trust also met NgaiTai Ki Tmaki, Ngti Whtua o Orkei and Te Kawerau a Maki, and representatives from theNZTA and Council at Te Onewa Pa on 13 June 2013 to discuss this restoration work (aNgti Paoa representative was invited but could not attend).

35. The Mana Whenua groups would like SkyPath to also reflect the values inherent in thesouthern side of the harbour, with respect for its cultural history and the guardian taniwhapresent adjacent to the southern abutment. Mana Whenua stated their belief in the value ofdeveloping a new architecture for Auckland which stimulates new values (the new bridge atResolution Point was cited as having positive outcomes).

General

36. The nature of the SkyPath project as local infrastructure falls within the amended purpose oflocal government under Section 10(2) of the Local Government Act 2002. It will achieve thecommunity outcome of improving pedestrian and cycle access within the region. However,any future decision on commitment to the project would be subject to the outcomes of thefurther investigations stated above and the Councils business case.

37. SkyPath would be of potential benefit to all Aucklanders and visitors to Auckland, howeverunder conventional funding arrangements it is unlikely this project could be funded in thenext 20 years or before an AWHC was in place. Therefore, the use of private sector fundingneeds to be considered, in line with the Auckland Plan requirement to investigate alternative

funding options for transport projects.

Implementation Issues38. Before Council can make a formal commitment to become involved in any project a

commitment of resources is required to undertake investigation work and negotiation.Council as a potential revenue underwriter requires a commitment of resources to undertakeinvestigation to give comfort in entering into this arrangement, and also resources tonegotiate and finalise the contractual arrangements with the relevant parties.

39. Were SkyPath to proceed, Council and its Council Controlled Organisations would need toagree their respective roles in relation to managing Councils risks in relation to the project.There are a variety of options of where this project could sit for implementation including

through ATEED. However, a decision on this matter is not being sought at this time.

Attachments

No. Title Page

A Detailed Information on the Auckland Harbour Bridge Pathway Project 17

B Patronage Projection Report for the Auckland Harbour Bridge PathwayProject - November 2013

29


16/250

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013


Signatories

Author Marguerite Pearson - Transport Planner

Authorisers Brett ORiley, ATEED Chief Executive

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning OfficerDoug McKay - Chief Executive


17/250

AttachmentA

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



18/250

AttachmentA

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



19/250

AttachmentA

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



20/250

AttachmentA

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



21/250

AttachmentA

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



22/250

AttachmentA

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



23/250

AttachmentA

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



24/250

AttachmentA

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



25/250

AttachmentA

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



26/250

AttachmentA

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



27/250

AttachmentA

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



28/250

AttachmentA

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



29/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



30/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



31/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



32/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



33/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



34/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



35/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



36/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



37/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



38/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



39/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



40/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



41/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



42/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



43/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



44/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



45/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



46/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



47/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



48/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



49/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



50/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



51/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



52/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



53/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



54/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



55/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



56/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



57/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



58/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



59/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



60/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



61/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



62/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



63/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



64/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



65/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



66/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



67/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



68/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



69/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



70/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



71/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



72/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



73/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



74/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



75/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



76/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



77/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



78/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



79/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



80/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



81/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



82/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



83/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



84/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



85/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



86/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



87/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



88/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



89/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



90/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



91/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



92/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



93/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



94/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



95/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



96/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



97/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



98/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



99/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



100/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



101/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



102/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



103/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



104/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



105/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



106/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



107/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



108/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



109/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



110/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



111/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



112/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



113/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



114/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



115/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



116/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



117/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



118/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



119/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



120/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



121/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



122/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



123/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



124/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



125/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



126/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



127/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



128/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



129/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



130/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



131/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



132/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



133/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



134/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



135/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



136/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



137/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



138/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



139/250

AttachmentB

Item1

1

Governing Body

19 December 2013



140/250

AttachmentB

Item11

Governing Body

19 December 2013



141/250

Item1

2

Governing Body

19 December 2013

Resolution from Orakei Local Board - Mission Bay streetscape upgrade targeted rate Page 141

Resolution from Orakei Local Board - Mission Bay streetscape upgradetargeted rate

File No.:CP2013/28069

Purpose1. To present a resolution of the Orakei Local Board regarding a targeted rate for the Mission

Bay streetscape upgrade to the Governing Body for inclusion in the draft Annual Plan2014/2015.

Executive Summary2. On 12 December 2013, the Orkei Local Board considered whether to support a proposal to

fund the Mission Bay footpath upgrade via the use of a targeted rate on local businessesand resolved as follows:

Resolution number OR/2013/264MOVED by Chairperson DEC Simpson, seconded by Member KH Baguley:

That the Orkei Local Board:

a) supports the use of a targeted rate to fund the upgrade of Mission Bay footpaths.

b) requests the Governing Body to fund Auckland Transport for the delivery of the footpathupgrade in Mission Bay to be funded from a targeted rate that will be consulted on viathe 2014/2015 Annual Plan process.

c) notes that this project aligns with the Tamaki Drive Masterplan, Mission Bay PrecinctPlan, the Orkei Economic Development Plan, the Orkei Visitor Strategy and theOrkei Local Board Plan priorities.

d) notes that Retail Holdings has received verbal support for the targeted rate from ownersrepresenting 92% of affected business owners while accepting that a full consultationprocess will take place as part of the 2014/2015 Annual Plan process.

e) notes that Retail Holdings has confirmed that it will not pass on any rates increase to itstenants.

3. A rate may only be adopted by the Governing Body and must be included for consultation inthe draft annual plan. If the Orakei Local Board supports the proposal, then the GoverningBody needs to consider whether it will agree to the inclusion of this rate in the draft AnnualPlan 2014/2015 at its 19 December 2013 meeting.

4. The report to the 12 December 2013 Orakei Local Board meeting is appended asAttachment A. It should be noted that the report contains the following officersrecommendations:

that the use of the targeted rate not be supported

that Retail Holdings deal directly with Auckland Transport

that Auckland Transport be directed to negotiate an arrangement with Retail holdingsto undertake the work.


a) consider the resolutions of the Orkei Local Board.


142/250

Item12

Governing Body

19 December 2013


Attachments

No. Title Page

A Report to 13 December 2013 Orakei Local Board - Mission Baystreetscape upgrade targeted rate

143

Signatories

Author Elaine Stephenson - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers Marguerite Delbet - Manager Democracy Services

Grant Taylor - Governance Director

Doug McKay - Chief Executive


143/250

AttachmentA

Item1

2

Governing Body

19 December 2013



144/250

AttachmentA

Item12

Governing Body

19 December 2013



145/250

AttachmentA

Item1

2

Governing Body

19 December 2013



146/250

AttachmentA

Item12

Governing Body

19 December 2013



147/250

AttachmentA

Item1

2

Governing Body

19 December 2013



148/250

AttachmentA

Item12

Governing Body

19 December 2013



149/250

AttachmentA

Item1

2

Governing Body

19 December 2013



150/250

Governing Body

19 December 2013



151/250

AttachmentA

Item1

2

Governing Body

19 December 2013



152/250

AttachmentA

Item12

Governing Body

19 December 2013



153/250

AttachmentA

Item1

2

Governing Body

19 December 2013



154/250

AttachmentA

Item12

Governing Body

19 December 2013



155/250

Item1

3

Governing Body

19 December 2013

Local Board Agreements 2014/2015 Page 155

Local Board Agreements 2014/2015

File No.:CP2013/28690

Purpose1. To provide an update on Local Board Agreements as part of the Annual Plan 2014/2015

process.

Executive Summary2. This report was not available at the time the agenda went to print and will be distributed

separately, prior to the meeting.

Recommendation/sThe report will contain the recommendations relating to this matter.

AttachmentsThere are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Author Elaine Stephenson - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers Doug McKay - Chief Executive


156/250


157/250

Item1

4

Governing Body

19 December 2013

Adoption of the draft Annual Plan 2014/2015 Page 157

Adoption of the draft Annual Plan 2014/2015

File No.:CP2013/28201

Purpose1. This report recommends that the Governing Body adopts the Draft Annual Plan 2014/2015

for consultation.

Executive Summary2. Volume 1 (attachment under separate cover) and Volume 2 (circulated on addendum

agenda) form part of the information provided publicly to support the Annual Plan 2014/2015consultation process, which commences on 23 January 2014.

3. Volume 1 contains an overview that includes the key consultation topics for this annual plan.It also sets out the activities and services of Auckland Council, detailed financial information,CCO information and proposed changes to fees. The key consultation topics are:

Living wage policy

Aucklands stadium strategy

Moving the Auckland Arts festival to an annual event

Rental charges for social housing

Health protection licence fees

Proposed rates for 2014/2015

4. Volume 2 contains draft local board agreements, consultation areas and other supportingcontext.

5. Volumes 1 and 2 will be finalised to reflect any agreed changes from this meeting. Asummary of the consultation topics and proposed plan for 2014/2015 will be produced anddistributed to households across the region as part of OurAuckland. The draft Annual Plan2014/2015 and summary information will also be available online and at local board offices,Auckland Council libraries, service centres and via the council call centre. The summary willbe available online in six other languages, large print and easy read format.

6. The submission period commences on 23 January 2014 and runs through to 24 February2014. This will be followed by local hearings (1728 March 2014) and regional hearings (7-11 April 2014). Governing body discussions will take place with local boards and CCOs lateApril to early May, prior to the Budget Committee meeting to make final budget decisions on

8 May 2014.7. Work on finalising budgets for 2014/2015 will continue through to 8 May next year. Key

areas of focus will include Auckland Transport operational funding, CCO capital expendituretiming the Auckland Airport return to stakeholders.

8. The final Annual Plan 2014/2015 documents will be presented to the Governing Body foradoption on 26 June 2014.


a) adopt the Draft Annual Plan 2014/2015 for consultation.


158/250

Item14

Governing Body

19 December 2013


Discussion9. The Mayor leads the process for the annual plan. On 7 November 2013, the Mayor set out

his proposal for the draft Annual Plan 2014/2015, which included a range of changes to theLong-term Plan 2012-2022 primarily focused on operating budget and fee changes.

10. The Budget Committee considered the Mayors proposal at its meeting on 21 November2013 and agreed the proposal in its entirety - approving the updated baseline budgetprepared by officers, which included efficiency savings and some additional costs. It wasagreed that the following areas be included in the draft budget for consultation, resulting in aproposed rates increase for 2014/2015 of 2.5%:

$1.6 million of operating expenses for the Tamaki Redevelopment Company, subjectto further discussions with the company and the Crown

$1.25 million of operating expenses for a staged implementation of the Living WagePolicy

5% increase in social housing for older persons rental charges

licence to occupy remission scheme to continue in its current form

the proposed health protection licence fees and building control and propertyinformation fees.

11. The Budget Committee also agreed a set of recommended changes to performancemeasures and targets for inclusion in the draft Annual Plan.

12. The decisions made on 21 November 2013 are reflected in the updated budgets anddocumentation set out in Volumes 1 and 2.

13. The key consultation areas for the draft Annual Plan 2014/2015 are:

Living wage policy

Aucklands stadium strategy

Moving to an annual Auckland Arts festival

Rental charges for social housing

Health protection licence fees

Proposed rates for 2014/2015.

14. A summary of each consultation topic is set out in the front section of Volume 1 of the draftAnnual Plan 2014/2015 and summarised in other material to support the consultationprocess.

Local board agreements and consultation

15. Each year a local board agreement is developed for each local board that sets out intendedprovision of local activities, and the capital and operating expenditure required to fund theseactivities. Local board agreements are agreed between the local board and the governingbody as part of the annual plan process, and the draft agreements must be included inAuckland Councils draft Annual Plan 2014/2015.

16. Consistent with last years approach, a consultation section has been included for each localboard to identify any proposed changes to local budgets and highlight any new areas ofadvocacy for 2014/2015.


159/250

Item1

4

Governing Body

19 December 2013


Proposed amendments to the LTP 2012-2022

17. Volumes 1 and 2 contain a small number of proposed changes to year three of the LTP2012-2022. Whether or not changes proposed in the annual plan are amendments to along-term plan depends on the extent or the significance of the proposed change.

18. Officers have assessed the proposed changes included in the draft Annual Plan 2014/2014and concluded that none of the changes are amendments to the LTP 2012-2022.

19. An audit review is not required for any changes proposed in the draft Annual Plan2014/2015.

Improvements to the document

20. A number of changes have been made to this years draft annual plan document in order toimprove the readability and accessibility of the draft plan. The changes include:

combining Volumes 1 and 3 into a single volume and removing any duplicated

information revising the front section of volume 1 to read more like a financial story to improve

accessibility

using the Annual Plan 2013/2014 performance targets as the comparator for the2014/2015 target, as it provides a more relevant and up to date comparison

producing a new simpler financial table for each group of activities.

21. Volume 2 remains dedicated to local board content, including the 21 draft local boardagreements and supporting information.

Further work on 2014/2015 budgets

22. Work on finalising budgets for 2014/2015 will continue through to 8 May next year. Somekey areas of focus will include:

Auckland Transport operational funding

23. Officers reported to the 21 November 2013 Budget Committee meeting on AucklandTransports request for an additional $18 million of operational funding relative to the2014/2015 projections in their Statement of Intent. Since then, discussions have been heldwith Auckland Transport to address their funding shortfall. It has been agreed that furtherscrutiny of Auckland Transports operating expenditure budgets is required. A joint group ofofficers will undertake this review over the next few months. Auckland Transport are also

reviewing the shortfall in parking revenue where current charges appear to be below market.

Capital expenditure timing

24. On 21 November 2013 the Budget Committee approved an ongoing review of the capitalexpenditure programmes of the CCOs to identify cost reductions and deferrals. This workwill be undertaken as part of the process of finalising 2014/2015 budgets by 8 May 2014.

Auckland Airport return to shareholders

25. As reported to the Finance and Performance Committee on 12 December 2013, AucklandAirport has announced its intention to return $454 million to its shareholders. If all approvalsare met, the expected return to Auckland Council Investments Limited (ACIL) would be $84million over and above the $18 million interim dividend budgeted for the current year.

Officers are currently assessing the full impact on the Auckland Council Group fromaccounting, taxation and financing policy perspectives, and will advise the council in duecourse on the impacts and options, and any governance decisions required.


160/250

Item14

Governing Body

19 December 2013


Next steps

26. Volumes 1 and 2 will be finalised to reflect any agreed changes from this meeting and willform part of the documentation supporting the Annual Plan 2014/2015 public consultationprocess. A summary of the consultation topics and proposed changes for 2014/2015 will beproduced and distributed to households across the Auckland region as part of OurAuckland.

The draft annual plan, supporting summary information and submission forms will also beavailable online, at Auckland Council libraries, service centres, local board offices and viathe council call centre.

27. This year an online sub-site (accessed via the council website) has been developed tosupport the annual plan process and provide enhanced online functionality and flexibility tomake it easier for people to make a submission. The sub-site will include a message fromthe mayor, regional and local board information, information on the council budget, thesubmission form and an overview of the key consultation areas.

28. The sub-site will also provide summary information that has been translated into sixlanguages (Samoan, Chinese, Hindi, Maori, Tongan and Korean) and large print and easyread format to support accessibility of information and engagement on the draft annual plan.

29. The submission period commences on 23 January and runs through to 24 February. Thiswill be followed by local hearings (1728 March) and regional hearings (7-11 April).Governing body discussions will take place with local boards and CCOs late April to earlyMay, prior to the Budget Committee meeting to make final budget decisions on 8 May 2014.

30. The final Annual Plan 2014/2015 documents will be presented to the Governing Body foradoption on 26 June 2014.

31. A separate report on todays agenda covers the submissions and hearings process.

ConsiderationLocal Board Views

32. Each local board is required to prepare a local board agreement every year (as agreedbetween the governing body and the local board). The draft local board agreements mustbe included in the Auckland Councils draft Annual Plan 2014/2015.

33. Volume 2 of the draft Annual Plan 2014/2015 includes the 21 draft local board agreements,along with a consultation section for each local board and supporting contextual information.

Mori Impact Statement

34. Some of the budget changes included in the draft Annual Plan 2014/2015 relate to Mori

and will have a direct impact on Mori outcomes or initiatives. In particular, the draft budgetincludes additional funding of $1 million for marae development and Mori housing initiativesand $770,000 for identification and protection of significant Mori sites.

35. At its meeting on 21 November 2013, the Budget Committee resolved that officers reportback to the Budget Committee on 27 March on the milestones and funding to progress the2013/2014 Maori priority projects in 2014/2015.

General

36. The proposed changes have been assessed against the significance policy. In all cases, theproposed change is considered either not material or not a significant change.


161/250

Item1

4

Governing Body

19 December 2013


Implementation Issues37. There are no issues with implementation at this stage. Adoption of the draft annual plan

documents today will enable Auckland Council to consult on what it plans to do in2014/2015, including its proposed budget.

AttachmentsNo. Title Page

A Volume 1 Our plan for 2014/2015(Under Separate Cover)

B Volume 2 Local board information and draft local board agreements (Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Author Tanya Stocks - Local Board Budget Process

Authorisers Matthew Walker - Manager Financial Plan Policy and BudgetingAndrew McKenzie - Chief Finance Officer

Doug McKay - Chief Executive


162/250


163/250

Item1

5

Governing Body

19 December 2013

Submissions and Hearings process for the 2014/2015 Annual Plan Page 163

Submissions and Hearings process for the 2014/2015 Annual Plan

File No.:CP2013/28221

Purpose1. This report outlines the proposed submissions and hearing processes for the 2014/2015

Annual Plan.

Executive Summary2. Auckland Council must use the special consultative procedure in adopting the Annual Plan.

The process allows some flexibility for operating the submissions and hearings processes..This report builds upon the successful operation of the 2013/2014 Annual Plan processesand recommends options that satisfy all legislative requirements.

3. We propose that submissions containing both regional and local content default to localhearings, with ward councillors present to hear regional issues.

4. Hearings can be run following the traditional hearing style, or a forum style. We recommendthat local hearings be traditional-style hearings, with the forum option available for localboards with large volumes of submissions. We also propose that regional hearings bepredominantly forum style (either stakeholder or topic-based), with very limited and tightcriteria for selecting key stakeholders for traditional hearings.

5. For the 2013/2014 Annual Plan, officers provided high level analysis for hearings reports,which was successful. We therefore propose to follow this same process for the 2014/2015Annual Plan.

6. For regional submitters, key stakeholders will be provided with a customised response letter.All other submitters will be provided with a generic response letter which includes key issues

and decisions. Local Board Services will prepare responses to local submitters (generic ortailored, decision to be made by each Local Board), with support from subject matter expertswhere required.

Recommendation/sThat the Governing Body agree:

a) that annual plan local hearings follow the traditional style hearing process, with theforum option to be assessed for Local Boards that have large volumes ofsubmissions.

b) that regional hearings predominantly use forum style hearings with very limited andtight criteria for selecting key stakeholders who will be heard in traditional style.

c) that forum style regional hearings are divided into days which are allocated tobusiness, community groups and individuals, with the individual hearing possiblyhaving some topic-based tables.

d) that the regional hearings panel divide into panels should the number of keystakeholders become too great for all to be heard in the time allowed for traditionalregional hearings, thereby allowing more key stakeholders to be heard in thetimeframe available.

e) that submissions containing both regional and local content will default to the localhearings panel to be heard, noting that if a significant volume of regional submissions

are received, they may also be allocated to local hearings.

f) that the ward councillor(s) be part of the local hearings panel, with other councillorsscheduled where appropriate to ensure a minimum of two councillors are present at


164/250

Item15

Governing Body

19 December 2013


each local hearing to hear regional issues. Other councillors will attend voluntarily asschedules allow.

g) that the following reporting requirements be approved:

i) One regional hearing report and 21 local board hearing reports be preparedcovering statistics on submissions received locally and regionally, with a briefhigh-level analysis of key themes and topics.

ii) Analysis of submissions be provided for one regional deliberation report to theBudget Committee, and 21 local board deliberation reports to the relevant localboards.

h) that subject matter expert comments are captured for inclusion in deliberation reportsif requested from the hearings process.

i) that response letters be provided as follows:

i) Key stakeholders are provided with a customised response letter signed by theChair of the Budget Committee.

ii) Other regional submitters are provided with a generic response letter, which

includes key issues and decisions.

iii) Local boards will prepare their own responses to local submitters, via LocalBoard Services, with support from subject matter experts where required.

j) that the Chair of each hearings panel decide on whether late submissions can beheard.

k) that the Deputy Chair of the Budget Committee be delegated to work with officers tomake further decisions on the operation of the hearings.

Discussion

Hearings

7. Submissions on the Annual Plan will be heard at a local or regional level depending onwhether the submission addresses local or regional issues. Submissions that contain bothlocal and regional content will default to the relevant local hearings panel to be heard, with asoft copy of the submission made available to the regional hearings panel for information.Local hearings panels include local board members and ward councillor(s).

8. As part of the submissions process, local hearing panels will be provided with hard copies ofthe local submissions that they will be hearing. Soft copies will also be made available forsubmissions from their local board area covering regional issues and that will not be heard.

9. Likewise, the regional hearings panel will be provided with hard copies of all submissionsthey will be hearing, with soft copies of all other submissions made available on the ElectedMembers drive.

10. The following options are available for hearing submissions:

Traditional style- each submitter who wishes to be heard is provided with a dedicatedamount of time (usually 510 minutes) to speak to the hearings panel on theirsubmission

Forum style- submissions will be grouped into different categories, for example,business, community groups and individuals, with hearings allowing submitters todiscuss their issues with other submitters, members of the hearings panel and afacilitator/subject matter expert.


165/250

Item1

5

Governing Body

19 December 2013


Forum style hearings have been preferred the last two years, enabling a greater numberof submitters to be heard in the same amount of time as traditional hearings. This styleis resource-intensive, requiring significant planning with attendance of subject matterexperts.

A mixture of both traditional and forum style

Regional Hearings

11. We recommend a mixture of traditional and forum style hearings.

12. Typically, a greater number of regional submissions are received, and the time constraints tohear these submissions are significant. The recommendation to have submissions thatcontain both local and regional content heard at local hearings (with regional representationfrom ward councillors) alleviates this concern.

13. A key stakeholder list will be prepared once all submissions have been received, identifyingthose submitters for which a traditional style hearing would be more appropriate. This

enables key stakeholders to address the entire hearings panel on their submission.

14. Other regional submitters will be grouped into forum-style hearings by category and/orthemes to facilitate wider discussion. This format will enable a larger number of submitters tobe heard in a smaller period of time.

Local Hearings

15. We recommend that the local hearings be traditional style hearings, with the forum optionavailable for local boards, depending on situation.

16. All Auckland Council Annual Plan and Long Term Plan local hearings to date have

Documents

Governing Body 12/2013