Tamaki Drive/Ngapipi Road intersection works

Tamaki Drive was built during the Depression era and with over 33,000 traffic movements a day, is one of the busiest roads that directly enters Auckland’s CBD. The vision shown by our city forefathers to build a road along the Waitemata coastline to open up settlements between the city and St Heliers was quite outstanding. You have to admit even after 80 years its holding up pretty well considering the huge increase in vehicle movements and public use over that time. However there are sections that are showing great need of reinvestment.

The Tamaki Drive/Ngapipi intersection is one of those. In its current configuration, this intersection has significant safety flaws. There have been 21 crashes in the past five years, over 60% of which resulted in an injury. For an intersection that is unavoidable for many Orakei commuters as well as being the gateway to the eastern beaches and the CBD, statistics this bad are unacceptable and whilst there still remains the debate on roundabout or lights within our community Auckland Transport have confirmed the intersection will be signalized. This year works will start on delivering a major revamp of the intersection.

Vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists will be separated with safety the key driver for that decision. The separation of those modes of transport also meets the Tamaki Drive master plan direction which our community inputted into so well. Many wanted a roundabout as they (correctly) identified that lights will delay vehicle movements, but  an independent panel approved a design that will increase the space available for all road users including vehicles as well as controlling movements so that everyone is kept safe. The traffic signals will be connected to Auckland Transport’s operation centre so that signal phases are kept optimized and synchronized with the wider network.

In a perfect world Auckland Transport would do this work in conjunction with raising the section of Tamaki Drive before the intersection which regularly floods, but sadly, Auckland Transport’s prioritization logic and money didn’t follow that train of thought.

Value for Money in our Parks and Community facilities

Ensuring our town centres are clean, our parks mowed satisfactorily, our community centres well presented is core Council business and important for all communities. There has been ‘significant criticism’ of the levels of service in this area since amalgamation (don’t start me on losing our berm mowing). Local Boards have responsibilities for parks and community facilities but not the budget or oversight to monitor and improve the delivery of their maintenance. We have had different contractors responsible for different service tasks that specified the frequency of each activity but not necessarily the outcome. For example a lawn mowing contract might be to mow a park every two weeks. This would occur regularly throughout the year even though at times in summer, the grass hadn’t grown at all.   In the same park there potentially was one contract for mowing, another for weeding and another for tree maintenance. Each contractor would work independently and all ratepayers would see is days of orange cones!.

At our 30 March meeting I voted to change that. Now local boards will be able to work with communities to set the standard of outcomes and have those outcomes reported on every month.

This way the grass will be mowed when its need to be mowed not just because a set time has passed since it was last mowed and rubbish bins will be emptied before they are full. Contracts will be also grouped together so a visitation to one park will cover mowing, weeding tree maintenance all at the same time.

Its more efficient and effective. There are also added environmental and ecological benefits.

Mechanical edging for paths and playgrounds within parks has been negotiated as the standard service level within these contracts with year on year glyphosate reduction included. Monthly reporting on any herbicide use on a site by site basis will be provided to local boards too.

Suppliers and subcontractors will also be required to establish and document an environmental management system. At a minimum, this will monitor and measure energy conservation, water conservation, waste management and recycling.

Our beaches are beautiful, but how do you know they are clean?

A significant upgrade of Auckland’s Safeswim beach water quality monitoring programme will be delivered by Auckland Council in time for the 2017/18 summer swimming season.

Monitoring programmes have been in place at beaches in various parts of Auckland for the past 18 years but are now being updated. I seconded the motion to upgrade the Safeswim programme at the Environment and Community Committee meeting, using existing budget, to give Aucklanders not only current but forecasted information about water quality.

Although the water quality of our beautiful Ōrākei bays and beaches is generally good, there are still times that due to rainfall, tides and water temperature, the bacteria levels in the water make it unadvisable to swim in certain areas.

The new system uses sophisticated technology using information on rainfall, wind, tides and bacteria levels, enabling us to not only ‘read’ the water’s safety but to also to predict it.  The current system only reports the water quality that has already occurred and obviously that’s too late to be helpful.

Information gathered will be able to be promoted across multiple communication channels such as SMS and social media. The public can easily access water quality information in advance, allowing them to make informed decisions on when and where to go swimming.

This upgrade is an advanced tool to complement confirmed council projects such as the Central Interceptor Programme which will ultimately improve water quality as it will increase the capacity and resilience of central Auckland’s storm and wastewater networks so that wastewater overflows are much less frequent.

Putting the ‘control’ back into the Council Controlled Organisations

Since starting as a councillor for the Orakei Ward at the end of last year there has been some good progress towards the improved accountability and transparency of Auckland Council and the Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs).

CCOs are given a degree of independence from the Council by design, making it easier for them to operate commercially and to dedicate themselves to the task that they are focused on delivering for Auckland, be it Auckland Council Investments Ltd getting the best possible return on council’s commercial investments and shareholdings or Panuku Development Auckland’s role in making the most out of Council’s property assets. This freedom has at times created a source of tension between public expectations of CCOs to be transparent and accountable.

Late last year, after consultation with councilors at the Finance and Performance Committee, the Mayor sent detailed letters of expectation to each of the CCOs. This was an important first step in setting the tone for the relationship with the CCOS. These letters emphasised the need for CCOs to be accountable to the elected representatives and responsive to ratepayers and to transparently reflect their performance. Later in the year, the CCOswill respond to these letters with Statements of Intent, saying how they will operate in the coming year. Improving accountability in this area of Council operations will be an ongoing piece of work and a review of CCO Accountability is currently underway to ensure that Council is effectively and appropriately exercising control over the CCOs.

Some early steps taken include some good work by Auckland Transport and Panuku to improve the transparency of their organisations. Auckland Transport has recently published a list of its contracts, allowing the public to scrutinize the contracts that they have awarded. Auckland Council itself has been doing this for a number of years periodically publishing contract lists on the council website. Panuku has opened some its board meetings and is publishing the open board papers to improve its transparency. Given the nature of much of their work involves negotiating commercial deals this is something that can only be done in certain cases.

Transparency and Accountability: Victoria Ave Road Works

Business owners in Remuera contacted me recently,  concerned that the combined effects of several pieces of road works occurring on Victoria Ave would cause significant loss of revenue, and in some cases, threaten the viability of their business. Auckland Transport and their contractor had not followed the correct practice of informing affected parties and had neglected to tell the Remuera Business Association that works impacting on the footpath were even coming. On top of that they did not design the works in such a way that would allow normal business to continue.  To Auckland Transport’s credit, once alerted, the mistake was quickly admitted and corrected; the works were postponed and were split into two sections to minimise the effect on businesses with footpaths and carparks remaining open at all times.

As an elected representative I have a dual role in making the high level direction for the council and then in holding the council organisations to account in performing its duties. When this happens against a background of low trust and scepticism towards the organisation's ability to deliver there are additional challenges. Receiving an email that says that Auckland Transport will be responsible for putting shop owners out of business through failure to communicate is the sort of thing that can never be acceptable from an organisation that serves the public.  

Easter Trading- Should we allow shops to trade on Easter Sunday?

In August 2016 the Shop Trading Amendment Act 2016, came into effect giving Councils the power to decide whether shops in all or part of their district could trade on Easter Sunday from 2018.

At present some areas are allowed to trade over Easter while others are not. This creates variability which is potentially unfair, prescriptive and allows for lack of transparency on variation decisions.

I don’t believe Councillors should determine Easter trading rules without asking Aucklanders for their opinion. To that end I spoke in favour of council’s resolution to:

“…approve community engagement on whether to:

i)   retain the status quo so that only shops currently able to trade on Easter Sunday will continue to be able to do so, or

ii)  adopt a policy that will allow shops in all or parts of Auckland to trade on Easter Sunday from 2018.”

Easter means different things to different people. For some it is valuable family time, others it has strong Christian meaning, others see it as a holiday; one of only three and a half days a year some workers have (the others are Christmas Day, Good Friday and the morning of Anzac day). For others it is an opportunity for a busy day of trading.

The act protects the individual choice of shop workers and so that they can refuse to work on Easter Sunday and can bring a personal grievance if they are compelled to work or treated adversely for their choice. The Act also states that Councils cannot require shops to be open so on an individual and business level, freedom to observe Easter or spend time away from work is protected.

Consultation will start in April 2017 with a report on findings brought back to Councillors in August 2017 for a decision on whether to retain the status quo or adopt a policy.

Look out for the community engagement which will start in April. I will update via our residents associations.

How do I know it's safe to swim?

A significant upgrade of Auckland’s Safeswim beach water quality monitoring programme will be delivered by Auckland Council in time for the 2017/18 summer swimming season.

Monitoring programmes have, without change, been in place at beaches in various parts of Auckland for the past 18 years.  Councillors voted to upgrade the Safeswim programme at the last Environment and Community Committee, using existing budget, to give Aucklanders not only current but forecasted information about water quality. 

Ōrākei Councillor Desley Simpson seconded the motion and is in support of the upgrade.

"Although the water quality of our beautiful Ōrākei bays and beaches is generally good, there are still times that due to rainfall, tides and water temperature, the bacteria levels in the water make it unadvisable to swim in certain areas”, says Simpson.

“The new system uses sophisticated technology providing information on rainfall, wind, tides and bacteria levels, enabling not only read the water’s safety but to also to predict it.  The current system only reports the water quality that has already occurred.”

“The information is then able to be promoted across multiple communication channels.  The public can easily access water quality information in advance, allowing them to make informed decisions on when and where to go swimming.”

This upgrade is an advance tool to complement confirmed council projects such as the Central Interceptor Programme which will ultimately improve water quality as it will increase the capacity and resilience of central Auckland’s storm and wastewater networks so that wastewater overflows are much less frequent.

Relationship documents with Mana Whenua

Interactions with Māori and Auckland Council and consideration of their views in decision making is a principle and requirement of several pieces of legislation including the Local Government Act (2002). In addition, Auckland Council is a member of several co-governance decision making bodies with iwi, for example the Ngāti Whātua Orākei Reserves Board and Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority both of which are set up by acts of parliament.

At the Governing Body Meeting on February 23, 2017staff sought support for a governance relationship agreement template for relationships with mana whenua in the greater Auckland area. I’m told that some legacy councils used similar relationship agreements that both elected members and mana whenua found useful.

I questioned the process around developing the template as local boards had only been presented with a broad approach in 2015.

Consequently an amendment was put up which made the whole thing a choice as opposed to a ‘must do’

The amendment read as follows:

Note that mana whenua and local board parties will ultimately decide for themselves whether they are comfortable with the template and/or whether they will be party to any particular agreement.

Accountability and Transparency?

At its meeting on February 16, the Community and Safety Committee struck a number of problems. The first wasn’t so bad, having to wait for a quorum, but the next was. The purpose of Item 12 was to approve grants to regional community development organizations through the 2016/17 Regional Grants Scheme.

Officers assessed applications for ‘one off grants’ and put up their recommendations to the Committee. The Committee had no opportunity to workshop the applications ( which is what has, under my experience, as a former local board chair, happened with local board grants)

What surprised me is the report recommended the Committee grant money to organizations without any financial reporting or any project reporting as to numbers influenced, success of programmes/activities and the like.   

Further to this, apart from Rape Crisis Auckland who applied for $13,000 and will receive $13,000,  the 7 other organizations will not get the full amount they applied for. The organization however, has no idea which part of their application Council requires their money to be spent on.

I tried very hard to explain that by not being clear, we were not being transparent or accountable to ratepayers or the organizations

 Incredulously I only managed to get half the committee to agree with me, and the vote was lost with chairs casting vote

Art versus Event sustainability

Sculpture in the Gardens is a wonderful free event. Last event it attracted just under 350,000 visitors ( 2015/16) . It has grown exponentially over the 10 years since the first exhibition took place in 2007.

Part of the terms and conditions of the Friends Garden Art License Agreement( first entered into with the former Auckland Regional Council in 2005) was that ‘Friends will retain the revenue received from the sale of artworks, for the express purchase of purchasing artwork for permanent placement at the Gardens’

A collection of  21 significant sculptures is now on permanent display. Many of these permanent works were purchased by the Friends during previous Sculpture in the Gardens exhibitions and subsequently donated to the Botanic Gardens

The Friends, asked the Environment and Community Committee to allow them to utilize $74,000 of the funds held in their artwork acquisition account, to cover operational expenses associated with the 2017/18 event.

I put up an amendment against this, not because I don’t support the event, quite the contrary, but because by allowing capex to be spent as opex we are not encouraging sustainability of the event nor are we allowing the current purpose to ensure more art can be bought for the enjoyment of Aucklanders and visitors.

The manager of the Botanic Gardens Jock Hobbs said in the meeting, the event wasn’t currently sustainable. It was my desire to ensure the Friends of Auckland Botanic Gardens work with Council staff to find a sponsor for the event long term. I didn’t get majority support for this. Instead the resolutions passed were as follows

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)         approve the use of $74,000 of the funds held in the   Friends of Auckland Botanic Gardens artwork acquisition account to cover operational expenses associated with the 2017/2018 Sculpture in the Gardens exhibition.

b)        agree that the Friends of Auckland Botanic Gardensretain earnings from commissions on sculpture sales during future Sculpture in the Gardens exhibitions, and can utilise this funding for the general purposes of running the exhibitions.

c)         delegate the General Manager Parks, Sport and Recreation authorisation to negotiate with the Friends of Auckland Botanic Gardens updated licence and conditions to supportoperation of future Sculpture in the Gardens exhibitions.

CARRIED

My amendments below whilst supported by some councilors, was lost on voices

That the Environment and Community Committee

a)      Grant Friends of Auckland Botanic gardens approval to utilise $74,00 of the funds held in their artwork acquisition account to cover operational expenses associated with the 2017/2018 Sculpture in the Gardens exhibition on the condition this is repaid after the 17/18 event, back into the art acquisition fund

b)      request the GM Parks, Sport and Recreation to work with Friends of Auckland Botanical   Gardens to ensure sponsorship is in place to ensure future events from 18/19 onwards are self- funding and meet agreed art licence agreements.

Sadly in my opinion allowing the use of capex for opex  will erode acquisition of more public art, lessen the urgency to look for a corporate sponsor and/ or mechanisms to ensure event sustainability, and will not honour the original intent of the agreement.

So what do you think?

Auckland Councillors have started the year by confirming the material that will go to all Aucklanders on the Annual Plan and Budget for 2017/2018

In his opening statement, the mayor acknowledges not all councilors currently agree with everything in the material, but what we all do agree on, is that we should ask Auckland their opinion before deciding on how we spend ratepayers money.

There are 5 key regional issues we are asking your feedback on:

1.       Rates increases. Currently the LTP has a projected 3.5% increase scheduled for 17/18.

We have worked hard to offer Auckland the choice of keeping this or going even lower to 2.5%

 ( the mayors preference) or with some  re-prioritisation  2%

2.       Rating stability. Current policy has residential ratepayers receiving a higher percentage of  rates increases to business ratepayers. Should we change that policy so that business and residential ratepayers have the same increase?

3.        Paying for tourism promotion. Currently general rates money is used to help pay for tourism promotion and major events. Should we continue to do this or target those ratepayers who benefit more directly from tourism promotion ie accommodation sector which would free up more general rates to be spent on transport infrastructure ?

4.       Paying for housing infrastructure. All houses require drains, roads, water supply and sewerage. Should we continue to reply on the current funding tools we have, change our funding policy to allow for the use of targeted rates to fund infrastructure of new houses or request central government to provide more tools for growth infrastructure?

5.       Paying Council Staff a Living wage. Should we keep with current policy which in 2016 saw those over $40,000 receive a 1% increase and those under a 2.5% increase, or phase in the Living wage for Council staff and our substantive CCOs, which will cost $7 million by the end of this Council term.

The consultation period for the Annual Budget opens on 27 February and runs to 4pm on 27 March.
Your opinion is very important and I look forward to discussing these with you further and reading your submissions.

There are several ways to have your say. Information and submission forms will be provided to households with the March edition of the Our Auckland magazine. Residents and ratepayers can also find out more and make submissions by looking for the annual budget on www.shapeauckland.co.nz. There will also be opportunities for the public to have their say in person at a range of events around the Auckland Region.

 I will be holding a public meeting in the Orakei Ward and will update on my website when  th date, time and location are confirmed.