We have submitted feedback to the Auckland Transition Agency in relation to Local Boards and CCO's.

"We thank the ATA for the opportunity to give feedback on the two discussion documents.

North Shore Community & Social Services (NSCSS) has a membership base of over 150 community groups on Auckland’s North Shore including arts, environment, health, and migrants, Maori, Pacific peoples, seniors, family, education, community, youth and disability sectors. This feedback is from the Executive of NSCSS and does not claim to represent all our membership views. It is informed by many discussions with community agencies over 2009 and continuing workshops and meetings in 2010.

The primary concern of NSCSS is to ensure, through the local government reforms, that the social issues and structures established in North Shore City remain to support community agencies. NSCSS wants to ensure that the voice of community remains intact and is indeed strengthened where possible. The restructuring of Auckland local government has promulgated anxiety for many throughout the North Shore for the future of community agencies."

Click the Read More link to read the rest of the document.

On the positive side in any change there are opportunities and we do see this as a positive time for effecting and shaping change in ways that will support and sustain community. There has been a shift in thinking as people grasp the concept of one city and, begin to forge new cross-regional connections. The spirit of co-operation is alive and well. However busy workloads and minimal resources prevent agencies from committing the time required to come to grips with the potential changes, let alone make feedback and submissions. NSCSS endeavours to present community agencies’ views where it has been possible to ascertain those views.

North Shore Community and Social Services is a part of the establishment group of Auckland Community Development Alliance, which is an emerging, informally constituted alliance of Auckland region agencies, formed in the context of the new governance arrangements.

We fully endorse the feedback of the alliance.

Roles and responsibilities of Local Boards

The document says that Local Boards are intended to have “a significant and wide-ranging role; they will make decisions on local matters, provide local leadership, and build strong communities. The local Boards will also provide important local input into region-wide strategies and plans, including those of CCO’s. In allocating responsibility to local boards, the ATA has focused on the local components of decision-making (Page 6).

· We support the ATA’s approach of making an allocation on non-regulatory activities to local boards and believe that local decisions are best made at the local level to ensure local knowledge and community input.

· There should be opportunity for sub regional organisations such as ours to relate to the local Boards. The relationship will be beneficial to the continuation of healthy and supportive community relationships. This relationship requires formal recognition.

· Local Boards may reflect their specific community’s views, but how will this work for organisations domiciled in a Local Board area but work across the region or in several Local Board areas? NSCSS work spans across more than one Local Board area. Having to engage with each individual Local Board would be very time consuming, cost prohibitive and inefficient. Having to submit multiple funding applications and meet the accountability requirements of several Local Boards would not be an efficient use of time. This clearly needs some thought.

· Local Boards should play a key role in relationship building within the Local Board areas. Key community agencies should also be mandated to play a role of brokering relationships. It shouldn’t be seen to be only the domain of Local Boards. The brand new Ward and Local Board boundaries mean that different communities will now be required to begin talking and working together, many for the first time. The important role of brokering and nurturing these conversations and the building of new relationships will require some formal and informal mechanisms locally and across the region.

· It is still unclear how the local Boards will connect with the Council and the CCO’s. We support the development of effective connecting mechanisms that proactively and purposely link the Auckland Council and Local Boards. It is unclear what the linkages will be between the new Ward councillors and Local Board members?

· The discussion document says “Effective working relationships will be essential to the success of this governance model” (page 3). We agree with this statement as a high degree of collaboration will be required to make it work. However, this will require some formal communication structures in place to ensure this will happen. What mechanisms will be put in place to ensure that the proposed CCO’s are responsive to local needs and processes? Clear reciprocal commitments, expectations, accountabilities and reporting need to be built into Local Board Plans as in CCO’s ‘statement of intent’.

· Local Boards are best placed to understand the specific needs of the communities they serve. To do this adequately they need meaningful powers, funding and support which we believe should be provided for in legislation.

· It could be difficult for Local Boards to get objective and comprehensive support from Auckland Council employees, particularly if, for example the Local Boards and Auckland Council staff disagree on issues. We understand that Local Boards will not have their own staff, but will work closely with Auckland council local board staff who will be skilled bureaucrats. Currently local organisations have established strong relationships with local Council officers who are dedicated and experienced specialists e.g. in the area of community development. It will be important for Local Boards and community agencies to have access to these resourced specialists from the Auckland Council to assist in informing planning and shaping delivery in each Local Board area.

· In preparation of Local Board plans every three years, discussion and consultation with communities will form part of the Auckland Council’s, Long Term Council Community Plan (LTCCP). The ‘Local Board plans’ will be the basis of for ‘local board agreements’ over the next three years. The Local Board agreements are agreed to and funded annually. There is a concern that community agencies providing services to their community, will find themselves under resourced in a given year and less able to deliver on their three year plan. Perhaps the ATA could revisit the Local Boards three year planning and the annual agreement decision, so that community service providers working through Local boards as well as delivering to their local communities, have greater certainty around continuity of service from year to year.

· Most people are concerned about what happens in their own street e.g., traffic is too fast; parking restrictions etc....... these things will be determined by Auckland Transport and will not be in the domain of public scrutiny. It appears that the ‘person on the street’ will have little influence over what is happening under the current proposed structure. This is why formalised mechanisms of engagement are crucial.

Council Controlled Organisations

· In principle we support the idea of a CCO where properly structured, tasked and monitored can deliver services more efficiently than a Council. The Royal Commission argued for a strong council and subservient CCO’s, not the other way around.

· The Council Controlled organisations appear to be taking away from the elected representatives the work that they are elected to do. It is also difficult to understand where the control from the Council will come in as the CCO’s are directed by unelected people who have no onus to report to the Council, the local boards or to the public who will be funding them. They are not required to provide agendas or minutes to the public, or provide a public forum section of their meetings.

· We believe that the Council should set the strategy and have adequate power over the CCO’s so that they are publicly accountable and will deliver effectively to the residents of the region.

· The discussion document talks about a robust, comprehensive land use plan “one plan” for Auckland. The document talks of CCO’s “giving effect” to the plans and the “Statements of Intent” as tools for keeping them on track. This statement needs to be ‘must give effect to’ otherwise the CCO’s will be autonomous bodies with no requirement to take into account the spatial plan or statements of intent. To link the CCO’s back to Council and the political structure there needs to be a more substantial arrangement than reliance on the future spatial plan. A mechanism such as an operating plan for the CCO open to public submission could be an effective arrangement.

We thank the Auckland Transition Agency for the Opportunity to submit our feedback, thoughts and recommendations.

Yvonne Powley

Executive Officer