Auckland Governance Reorganisation - How will it unfold?

We had a workshop at ARC this week to consider the ARC's submission in regard to the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill 2009 - which is still a Bill. (As opposed to Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau Reorganisation) Act - which was forced through under urgency a couple of weeks ago.)

I can't say what will be in ARC's submission, because it's not finalised and not public yet. But out of the discussion I was able to tease a few glimmers of understanding as to what has to happen over the next wee while.

Submitters and potential submitters have already been informally advised by Government officials that: "submissions should stick to what's in the Bill. Don't use your submission to raise broader issues. Time is limited. Not here to canvass the broader issues....."

Much of ARC's discussion was about Community Boards. What would they do? What powers would they have? What could legislation say? What about the fact that Community Boards will be very different: you've got established ones (like Devonport), and you might have 3 in Rodney when its District Council is abolished - but they haven't existed there before....

The Bill, and Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau Reorganisation) Act - enacted under urgency a couple of weeks ago - provides some detail as to how Auckland Council itself will be established. The transition process for that Council and so on.

What emerged in our discussion is that the Community Boards (20 - 30) are actually a part of Auckland Council. They may be separate, but they are a part of Auckland Council.

If that definition is accepted - and I'm sure it has to be - there needs to be a transition plan for each and every one of those 20-30 community boards, and it has to be well underway by 1st November next year. Otherwise there is the prospect in Rodney (and many other parts of Auckland), of Community Boards being elected, but having nowhere to meet, and little in the way of administrative backup on the ground locally.

You may appreciate that I get some peace fishing from time to time. This man's kingfish caught my eye at the Sculpture on Takapuna Point exhibition. Bigger than mine...

So. With that in mind, how might the next year pan out? Here's a possible timetable:

1) Submissions to Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill 2009 will be required by 26th June. Many of these will relate to Community Boards. However, it seems unlikely, if not impossible, for the Bill to prescribe exactly what Community Boards can and cannot do. For a start they are all different - and some don't even exist at the moment. There will be temptation for Government to run with the statutory arrangements that exist now - ie that Councils have the power to delegate functions and responsibilities to Community Boards. There will be submissions calling for some sort of generic process, whereby Auckland Council must engage with Community Boards, and bulk fund them. This should not be a blank cheque. So there will be pressure for criteria to be established in legislation, which must be met by a Community Board, before it can expect funding. There will be pressure for there to be a list of the sorts of activities that Community Boards (meeting the criteria) can expect to be responsible for, and funded for. This funding formula could change over time.

2) Government will need to decide how to provide for Community Boards in the legislation, based on submissions and its own programme, and bring the Bill into law sometime in September. It is bound to be some sort of generic and empowering legislation, which requires Auckland Council to formally engage with and fund Community Boards. It is likely that this Act will also state how many Community Boards there are, and broadly where they are, and how many members each would have, but without stating their exact boundaries. That comes later.

3) I believe it will then be down to the Transition Agency to design the Transition and Establishment plan for each of those Community Boards. It seems there will be 20 to 30 of them. As I have noted, they are all different from each other. There is not a generic Community Board. It is not a case of "one size fits all". So what might an establishment plan look like for a Rodney Community Board? Just guessing here:

3.1) Physical infrastructure requirement: Building (with rooms for meeting, admin staff, service delivery staff offices, public point of contact); telephone systems; computer systems and backup with appropriate links to central computer system at Auckland Council; appropriate carparking - public and staff.
3.2) Staff requirement: Office Manager appointed; basic admin staff; local projects engineer; public liaison person.
3.3) Basic transition plan and startup resources: Print; preliminary meeting schedule; initial delegations; decision time table (first 6 months say); letterhead; branding
3.4) Budget: To cover the above, salaries and office running costs.

That's the what - in outline - and then there's the when. Much of the above will need to be in place well before 1st November 2010, so Community Board members hit the ground running, and slot into their roles and responsibilities.

4) The Local Government Commission must finalise boundaries for Community Boards "no later than 1st March 2010". So, if the above Bill slows down going through Parliament, that will mean the LGC gets a late start. Potential for problems there. Getting the LGC to define boundaries for just a few community Boards is a challenge - let along 30!

5) 2010 will see the implementation of the Establishment and Transition Plans designed by the Transition Agency. One for the Auckland Council, and 20-30 Plans (as estimated above) for the Community Boards. These will need to be in place for 1st November 2010. So that elected members can smoothly do their jobs.

6) Meanwhile, in 2010, right up to October 31st 2010, all of the existing councils and community boards have to keep functioning and delivering services. During this overlap period there will be substantial duplication of staffing. That will be inevitable with this scale of reorganisation.

With this in mind, I believe there is every reason for the Transition Agency to expect public input and interest in key decisions like: where the community board building is located; how it addresses the local community; and so on.

To leave all this detail about such significant local government institutions, with such an important function, to five members of an unaccountable Transition Agency is inappropriate.

However Community Boards are at the sharp end of this reorganisation.
It's where it's impact will be felt most keenly.
It has to be right, or it's not worth doing.