Archive for Auckland City Council

Grey Lynn 2030’s Presentation on the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill

Here is the transcript of Pippa Coom’s

Presentation on the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill

on behalf of Grey Lynn2030

9 July 2009

My name is Pippa Coom I am on the steering committee of Grey Lynn 2030.

Thank you for this opportunity to talk to our submission.

I would like to go into more detail about who we are so that I can highlight practical examples of why it is so vital for community groups like Grey Lynn 2030 to have a working relationship with Local Boards that have a real and meaningful role with adequate resources and funding

I would like to be brief to allow time for questions.

The transition town movement came out of a response to the twin challenges of an energy-constrained world and climate change. However rather than focus on the doom and gloom it has been a catalyst for practical positive initiatives that respond to local issues. What we have found is that a majority of our 500 supporters are drawn to Grey Lynn 2030 because of the opportunity to be involved with a group promoting and engaging in building neighbourhood spirit and cooperation while working towards a vision of a self –reliant, positive, connected and sustainable community.

I would also like to emphasise that there are now estimated to be over 2 million groups around the world working towards complimentary objectives borne from concern for the environment. We are not in any way a fringe group that is unique to trendy Grey Lynn.

So I hope I have now set the scene to provide a couple of practical examples.

Grey Lynn 2030 supports initiatives as simple as a group of neighbours getting together to transform a vacant section into a community garden or clean up a local stream and undertake tree planting. We can make a lot of progress relying on the enthusiasm of volunteers but to make meaningful progress at some point we need to interact with a local board. For example the Grey Lynn Farmers market which came out of GL2030 and is starting in September in a temporary location at the community hall needs to work with a board with powers to decide location and funding.

The local board should be able to make decisions wherever possible on local issues such as parks, roads, street design, community development, events, recreational facilities, footpaths, resource recovery options, food production and water management. These are the issues that get people excited and engaged at a local level and should be encouraged to develop community identity.

Yes there are aspects of regional governance that will benefit from a unified structure but it is critical that local communities are sustainable, resilient, positive and able to engage on a meaningful level with local boards. The bill provides an excellent opportunity to correct the mistakes of previous restructuring by giving an appropriate number of boards the ability to act locally, with real funding to support grass roots initiatives, set their own policies and have a meaningful say over their own governance.

1

Comments off

How to organise a Street BBQ

An Auckland group  Massey Matters has put together a guide for organising a BBQ or party in your street.  The rules and regulations for working with the council etc This guide is available for download from the Inspiring Communities website.

So what are you waiting for? How about organising a spring BBQ in your street?

Bunting
And from the home of the Street Party – Have a look at how the Brits do it with bunting http://www.streetparty.org.uk/

Steet Party

or check out this  Very Big Lunch  – http://www.thebiglunch.com/

The idea was to have a party in your street,and  in everyone’s street.

On 19th July 2010, Britain is being asked to stop what they’re doing and sit down to lunch together. Wonder how they will get on?

Comments off

Great Urban Rides Update

We are really pleased with the amazingly positive response we received to the idea for creating Great Rides in Auckland (which we like to call Great Urban Rides).

Everyone we have shared the concept with have been able to appreciate the huge potential in making Auckland part of the NZ Cycleway Project and a cycle friendly city for tourists and locals.

For your information here is a link to the proposal that went to the Ministry of Tourism.

We already know it is not going to be picked up as part of the first announcement of initial rides to receive funding (expected any day) but we have taken significant steps towards developing routes and gaining support.

We will next be seeking the official support of Auckland City Council as a potential co-funder and key stakeholder so we are ready to make an application once the Ministry announces the proposed funding criteria.

Thank you for support, interest and feedback

We will keep in touch as we make progress.
Regards
Pippa & Julian
Pippa Coom
Membership secretary
Cycle Action Auckland
ph    021 926 618
www.caa.org.nz
Julian Hulls
Director
Nextbike New Zealand Ltd
021 154 8371
www.nextbike.co.nz

Comments (1) »

Enviroschools make the press

Western Leader 26 June
Council cash saves schools’ green scheme

A council cash injection of $90,000 will keep the Enviroschools programme going in Waitakere city for another two years.

Twenty-six west Auckland schools take part in the nationwide scheme funded by councils and the government.

But the scheme, set up to promote recycling, sustainable living and to teach how to grow food, looked set to falter after the Education Ministry announced plans to slash funding.

The ministry says the programme doesn’t teach core skills like literacy or numeracy.

“Naturally we were concerned that without our support the programme may well fall over,” Waitakere deputy mayor Penny Hulse says.

The council will give the EcoMatters Environment Trust, which delivers the programme, $30,000 in 2009/10 and another $60,000 in 2010/11.

That’s on top of the $30,000 it already pumps into the scheme.

“Obviously we hope the government will see sense and reconsider its decision but we want to ensure the programme’s survival in the west for the next two years at least,” Mrs Hulse says.

Whether it extends beyond that is up to the new Auckland Council to decide, she says.

Education Ministry spokeswoman Mary Chamberlain says the programme is worthy but the ministry has to focus its resources where they will make the most difference.

She says raising achievement, particularly among Maori students, lifting literacy and numeracy levels and reducing the number of young people who leave school without worthwhile qualifications, are priorities.

The ministry would continue to provide support materials for schools that looked at topics such as sustainability.

2 July 2009 Taranaki Daily News



TARANAKI’S environmental watchdog won’t provide funding for a leading educational green scheme because it is fearful of ‘‘double-dipping’’.

Regional council chief executive Basil Chamberlain told a council meeting on Tuesday that it needed to be mindful of giving money to programmes already supported by the district councils.

The Ministry of Education announced last month an early withdrawal from its $4.6 million contract with the nationwide enviroschools programme.

The New Plymouth District Council has provided $15,000 over each of the past three years while councils in South Taranaki and Stratford allocate $7000 and $2500 respectively. The ministry had been giving the local programme $32,500.

The three district councils are not committing themselves to a funding boost for enviroschools, and say the programme will need to apply for extra money and its application will be considered.

Councillor Neil Walker said he would like to see the TRC support the scheme.

‘‘We do have a particular interest in this area.

‘‘It’s a valuable programme – it teaches students about the environment, the kids work in the community and do practical things like growing fruit trees and looking after waste,’’ Mr Walker said.

‘‘We need to make an effort to get the Government to look at this again.’’

Mr Chamberlain argued that education was the role of central government and the TRC needed to be mindful of the Government’s decision to cut the programme.

‘‘If the Government has decided to cut this, for whatever reason, does this mean the council authorities should stand up? ‘‘We’re all aware of double dipping.’’ Council chairman David MacLeod said the council had sent a letter in support of the scheme to central government and was happy to support them in that way.

A quarter of the country’s schools belong to enviroschools. In Taranaki 19 schools take part.

The programme sees students taught environmental sustainability and ecological issues in practical lessons often held outside the classrooms.

Schools say it will be harder to educate students about sustainability issues without the external support.

Meanwhile, national enviroschools representatives met with the ministry last Monday to thrash out details of the transitional funding between now and December. Negotiations were continuing.


Waikato Times 1 July 2009 (Editorial)


By any standards the Enviroschools programme has been a stunning success. Started in the Waikato over a decade ago, it now boasts a quarter of New Zealand schools as part of its network with hundreds more waiting to join. No-one makes them do that – they can see the merit in the scheme and the benefit to pupils. Enviroschools has met none of the resistance and angst associated with introducing the likes of new assessment standards or a new curriculum. Instead it has grown organically – and is now even being exported.

The Enviroschools Foundation, which is based in Hamilton, also makes the point that for every dollar of government funding, it secures another two dollars from regional partners and supporters.

That’s not good enough, according to Education Minister Anne Tolley, who has abruptly pulled next year’s funding, apparently without warning, leaving a shortfall of more than $1 million annually which the foundation must scramble to replace if it is to continue functioning at the same level.

If it can’t, 16 jobs may be lost, seven of them based in Hamilton, but that is not the point. The point is the pupils. The foundation assists schools in providing education that suits students who don’t flourish in a classroom environment, and stretches those who do. The innovative programme is based on the children themselves identifying what they want and going about getting it. That may involve working with budgets, making presentations, writing funding applications and so forth, along with the practical aspect of perhaps digging and maintaining a vege garden if that is what the school has decided it wants. The minister has put the spotlight on standards of numeracy and literacy – she should be able to see just how valuable the Enviroschools programme would be in contributing to that. The scheme will also be setting up students for the future in other ways. As we bemoan the loss of traditional values, it doesn’t get much more traditional than learning how to grow vegetables or plant trees or conserve energy. But these are not just skills of the past, as our future is about to develop a much greener tinge. The eco sector is set to be one of the major growth industries of the next 20 years, and those who are well schooled in it will have a head start.

Enviroschools is likely to be able to find alternative funding sources, since the government only started chipping in 21⁄2 years ago. Going cap in hand to possible

2 funders will be difficult during a recession, though, and there is another problem around the corner. Councils have been happy to continue their funding, but Local Government Minister Rodney Hide’s planned scaling back of council activities may put a squeeze on them and at that stage the programme really does face uncertainty.

To diminish the programme’s effectiveness would be a shame; to lose it altogether would be disastrous.

The Government’s axing of funding is short-sighted and mean spirited. It should reconsider.

Waikato Times 27 June

Enviroschools’ staff are lobbying the Government in an effort to stop their funding being cut and save 16 jobs – seven of them in Hamilton.



Photo: IAIN McGREGOR.

Education Minister Anne Tolley announced this month the Government would no longer contribute $1.6 million a year to the popular Enviroschools programme.

The programme, in which dozens of Waikato schools are involved, sees students taught environmental sustainability and ecological issues in practical lessons often held outside the classrooms.

The concept, developed in the Waikato in the 1990s, has since been extended to schools across New Zealand.

Heidi Mardon, Enviroschools Foundation’s Hamilton-based national director, has been in Wellington this week lobbying the Education Ministry to continue the Enviroschools funding.

Enviroschools directly employs 16 people, seven of them based in Hamilton.

‘‘We’d all be gone if the cut goes through,’’ Ms Mardon said.

They would know next week if their lobbying had been successful.

Ms Mardon said that through local councils, funding at grassroots level remained secure, but the Government’s funding cut would affect facilitator training and development work and presented the programme with a major problem.

‘‘We didn’t see it coming quite as quickly [as this]. We had a contract until mid next year, and we expected that contract to be honoured . . . we did not expect to be cut right now.

‘‘It’s very hard to understand why they’re doing it.’’

The cut in funding has been called shortsighted by Waikato principals, who have hailed the benefits of the scheme.

Most schools have specific Enviroschool teachers and are regularly visited by Enviroschools co-ordinators.

Tirau School principal Leo Spaans was ‘‘fairly much devastated’’ by the ‘‘shortsighted’’ funding cut announcement which, he felt, was not well thought through.

‘‘I was quite disappointed. As part of the new curriculum, we’re looking at giving back to the community, sustainability, environmental issues, etc, and then funding gets cut – it doesn’t make things any easier for the school.’’

He believed the Government’s decision to cut Enviroschools funding was at odds with its

Te Miro School’s flourishing vegetable garden is a product of the newly-pruned Enviroschools programme which has had its funding axed as part of Government cost-cutting because it is not a ‘‘core spending’’ priority. messages about New Zealand’s Te Aroha Primary School prinneed to plan for a more cipal Kevin Johnson was sustainable future. unhappy about the funding cut,

Enviroschools had engaged the and felt it was strange for the entire community. Government to promote sustain

‘‘We’ve done quite a bit in the ability in the curriculum when it two years we’ve been involved in was pulling money from the the project – we’ve got sustainEnviroschools programme which able gardens which provide food helped achieve the sustainability for the foodbanks, we’ve planted goal. ‘‘It has come as a shock. the native gardens throughout There are all kinds of programthe schools with the support of mes which have been axed, and the Enviroschools team, and this is just another cost-saving we’re working to replant bush. measure.’’

‘‘It’s a big initiative. The imMr Johnson said Te Aroha Pripact (of funding cuts) will be mary was a very keen Envirohuge in small rural schools.’’ school, and he pledged to press ahead with the school’s environmental work because it benefited the wider community.

Enviroschools lessons were particularly beneficial for students who struggled with conventional learning, or had special needs, a point also made by Nick Quinn, principal at Hamilton’s St Peter’s Chanel Catholic School.

‘‘It’s absolutely practical learning at its best,’’ Mr Johnson said. ‘‘It’s not a one-off learning thing, we’re teaching kids a way of life.’’

Teachers and students thrived on the Enviroschools learning, Mr Johnson said, praising a ‘‘wonderful’’ Enviroschools coordinator who regularly visited Te Aroha Primary.

Education Minister Anne Tolley did not respond to specific Times questions, but a statement from her office said: ‘‘The decision was taken because in tough economic times, the Government is focusing on its core spending priorities for the education system of raising literacy and numeracy and increasing the numbers of pupils leaving school with educational qualifications. This programme does not contribute directly to these priorities.’’

Prime Minister John Key, who visited the lower Coromandel this week, also defended the decision to cut the Enviroschools funding, saying his administration had redirected the money to literacy and numeracy.

‘‘Obviously, no-one likes cutting programmes,’’ Mr Key said.

He said he believed a lot of what was taught in the Enviroschools programme would be picked up by teachers, and said its website would continue to offer on-line learning.






Comments off

Living Green – Handy book for New Zealanders

Green issues are hot, and they are here to stay. But where can New Zealanders find an authoritative yet neutral voice that is packed with the facts they need to make informed life-changing decisions? Living Green is a ‘bible’ for every New Zealand family: an assiduously researched and effortlessly readable manual that operates on two levels to appeal to all readers. Part One gives 10 simple steps to greening your life. Part Two contains 21 chapters that provide the factual back-up behind each of the 10 steps, in doing so covering a comprehensive spectrum of ecological issues, all of which are tailored to New Zealand readers. Topics include: Babies and children; Personal care products; Healthy eating; Primary foods; Processed foods; Water and other drinks; Shopping wisely; Heath care at home; Pets; Cleaning your home; Clothing, fabric and furnishings; Building and renovation; indoor air quality; air pollution; electromagnetic fields; re-using and recycling; GM; hormone disrupters; sustainability; sustainable business; climate change. Appendix, glossary and index included.

Format: PB
ISBN – 10:
ISBN – 13:   978-1-86966-245-5
RRP: $34.99

Untitled-1 copy.jpg Untitled-1 copy.jpg
5

Comments off

GL2030 Submission on the Supercity

As a member of Grey Lynn 2030 I would like to submit a submisssion on the following:

Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill

Grey Lynn 2030’s submission


1. Structure of the Submission

This submission sets out:

  • what Grey Lynn 2030 is and does;
  • why Grey Lynn 2030 strongly opposes the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill (the “Bill); and
  • Grey Lynn 2030’s specific submissions on the Bill.
  • Our general concerns about the lack of consultation and cost of implementing a Super City structure.

2. About Grey Lynn 2030

Grey Lynn 2030 is a participatory community organisation aimed at facilitating and supporting focus groups working towards creating a positive, connected, sustainable, resilient community through practical action.

We take our terms of reference from the Transition Initiative and core principles from the world wide Transition Towns movement which encourages local communities to take charge of their own production and consumption. The Transition Town movement helps people to reskill and take more responsibility. There are currently 55 Transition Towns throughout New Zealand.

Grey Lynn 2030 is based in Grey Lynn, Auckland, encompassing the surrounding neighbourhoods that form part of the Western Bays Community Board area (including Westmere, Ponsonby, Freeman’s Bay, Herne Bay and St Mary’s Bay). We have over 500 supporters.

We have monthly meetings at the Grey Lynn Community Centre with a speaker and a report back from our focus groups. Presently these groups are:

  • Gardening (Community Gardens such as the Wilton St community Garden, projects to encourage urban food production and seed sharing);
  • Green Screen – monthly screenings of DVDs at the Grey Lynn Community Centre for those who want to be entertained and learn more about sustainability and the environment;
  • Community Planning (people who liaise with the Auckland City Council);
  • Traffic (calming of traffic, and the promotion of cycling);
  • Waste Away Group (this group recently ran a successful eWaste Action Day); and
  • Water Group (working on regenerating local streams)

The contact details for me are……..

I wish to speak to the committee in person in support of this submission.

3. Why Grey Lynn 2030 opposes the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill

The approach taken by the Bill fails to recognise the desire and ability of local communities to look to their own resources and creativity to live sustainably and positively. It also ignores the benefits of developing a distinct community identity under a more localised structure. We support the Royal commission view that Community Engagement is just as important as Regional Unity.

We are concerned with the manner in which the Royal commission report has been largely cast aside after it considered 3500 submissions and took 18 months of deliberations. It is essential that further consideration must be given to the Commission’s well researched carefully considered findings. We agree that Auckland’s governance must allow for a coordinate regional approach but Mr Hide’s model rejects most of the most effective and forward thinking proposals of the Royal Commission, such as a social issues board, a Minister for Auckland, Maori representation and wider ranging powers for local councils.

The wider context in which the Bill is being debated also cannot be ignored. We are in a recession, moving to an energy-constrained era where cheap and easy access to oil cannot be taken for granted.  By focusing on the positive aspects of community and participative democracy we have an opportunity to put in place a local government structure that responds to the challenging global environment.

Grey Lynn 2030 initiatives directly benefit from our ability to work closely with the Auckland City Council with access to local decision making and resources. Although we appreciate the support we receive from our local community board the current structure is inadequate. Real power and resources must be made available at a local level and not concentrated in a centralised council that is cut off from local communities.

We oppose the Bill in its current state.

Local boards must be able to act locally, support grass roots initiatives, set their own policies and have a meaningful say over their own governance.

More broadly Grey Lynn 2030 is concerned that the proposed structure of representation will result in a loss of the democratic voice, including that of Maori. With councillors elected at large, constituents will have little or no chance of being granted an audience with a councillor. Members of local boards are familiar with and live alongside their constituents and so are familiar with the pressing issues of their communities. In addition, the Mayor is granted too much power and is disconnected from the local boards.

We oppose the Bill in its current state.

4. Grey Lynn 2030’s submissions in respect of the Local Government (Auckland

Council) Bill

4.1 Representation (Clause 8)

All councillors should be elected by wards and not at large. Those wards should be from single member wards [why not multi- member wards]. There should be no councillors at large as such councillors are unable to represent their constituents properly.

The number of Councillors should be increased for fairer representation. Twenty Councillors cannot properly represent 1.4 million Aucklanders. If the Auckland Council has just twenty Councillors on it, Councillors will have even larger electorates than MPs currently have.

The Mayor and Councillors should be elected by proportional representation for example the more democratic Single Transferable Vote (STV) system in multi-councillor wards to ensure proportional and democratic representation, as well as better representation of ethnic groups and minorities.

The only at large representation should be the Mayor. [why not elect the mayor by PR too?]

Maori representation is crucial: the Royal Commission’s recommendation of two Maori seats elected from the Maori roll and one from the mana whenua should be implemented.

4.2 The Mayor and his or her Powers (Clause 9)

We oppose the concentrated amount of power given to the Mayor under the Bill.

The Mayor should appoint the Deputy Mayor. The Committee chairs should be elected by the Council. [should the Council also elect the Deputy Mayor?].

If the Mayor is able to elect the Chairs he or she would have a disproportionate amount of power and control over the Council.

The Mayor should be required to meet regularly with the local boards. This would ensure a reasonable level of communication between the local boards and the councillors.

4.3 Local Boards (clauses 10 -17)

The functions, duties and powers of local boards must be strengthened so that they have a real and meaningful role in the governance of Auckland. As recommended by the Royal Commission Report a model must be put in place that provides local bodies with real power and control over local issues. Grey Lynn 2030 believes that This this would mean that the local boards:

  • Make are able to make the decisions wherever possible on local issues such as parks, roads, street design, community development, events, recreational facilities, footpaths, roads, resource recovery options, food production and water management. Only those activities that must be governed by the Council should be governed by the Council;

  • Are are guaranteed a minimum level of funding to set their own budget to ensure that they can operate effectively and efficiently, deliver local services and support local initiatives; and

  • Range range in number from 10 to 20. [20 – 30?] with boundaries based on communities of interest and geographical identity.

Local Boards should collectively vote on any Auckland Council proposal to: make a rate, pass a bylaw, adopt an Annual Plan or Long Term Community Council Plan (LTCCP), and purchase or dispose of assets if such a proposal is not included in the LTCCP.

4.4 Public ownership of public assets

We support public assets, in particular Auckland’s water and wastewater, remaining in public ownership.

4.5 New concept for the Bill: Sustainability

If we place any value in the future generations of Auckland, sustainability must be a core objective of the governing body. The greatest challenges facing Auckland, and indeed the world today are
related to environmental quality and sustainability. No measure of
economic success will allow the Auckland region or New Zealand to avoid
dealing with environmental sustainability issues. The result of any review of
Auckland governance must be designed to tackle the growing resource and
environmental issues that we will be facing in future years, not be focused
on the issues or politics of the past. Any future governance structure for
Auckland should be tailored towards implementing original, small scale and
distributed solutions for sustainability. Similarly, it will need to effectively
deliver small scale, empowered governance for sustainable communities.

5. Further concerns

5.1 Lack of consultation

There is no indication of wide support for a super city structure and no evidence to suggest that local communities will benefit directly from the proposed changes. We ask that the government stick with the national party commitment made in October 2008 to “consult with Aucklanders once the findings of the commission are known. A public referendum must then be held to determine the true wishes of Aucklanders.

We are also concerned that a new structure is being implemented with undue haste without any clear reason for such urgency. The economic climate has altered considerably since Auckland governance was first considered by the Royal Commission. We ask that sufficient time be given to allow for thorough consultation and that any new structure is implemented over a reasonable time frame.

5.2 Implementation costs

There has been inadequate work done to determine the likely costs of implementing a super city structure. All indications point to it being an extremely expensive exercise that is likely to result in a huge cost blow out that will have to be met by substantial rates increases and the sale of public assets. To give one example; a super city structure will require the amalgamation of seven different IT systems. This is an enormous undertaking that has rarely been successfully achieved, on budget, anywhere in the world and certainly not in New Zealand.

We ask that any changes only be implemented after adequate cost analysis has been carried out and then only taken forward if it can be demonstrated that there are tangible economic benefits for local communities.

Comments off