Auckland Restructuring - Papering Reform Cracks - Bill 3

The current Auckland Local Government Law Reform Bill was released 10 December 2009, and had its first reading in Parliament 15 December, where it was referred to Select Ctte.This Ctte is likely to call for submissions....

This Bill is complex and large - 179 pages. It reads like a set of patches to cover over the holes that are graduallyemerging in this ship of reform. The Bill asks as many questions as it answers. I feel some sympathy for ATA - the Auckland Transition Agency - it ends up with a bucketload of more work to do - as we cruise toward abolition and relaunch November 1st 2010.

This table lists some of the provisions in the Bill - and my concerns about them. And some suggestions as to what fixes might help....
The table is not comprehensive, and if you want chapter and verse, I suggest you get a copy of the Bill yourself. But it is not - by any means - plain sailing....

Local Govt (Auckland Law Reform) Bill	My Criticism of provisions	Fixes I think are needed
ATA must amalgamate the region's LTCCPs to create a bunch of plans one for each Local Board. These plans must list the non-regulatory activities the Boards will do. It will also give Board budgets for 2011/12.	This seems sensible. But it will likely take until September 2010 before this work is done. Only then will prospective candidates have any idea of the magnitude and type of work that Local Boards will actually do. ATA's task is complicated by the fact the Local Govt Commission will only finalise Boards by end of March 2010.	Hard to know what to suggest here. Get it done as soon as possible though - I'd say by June to be of use in helping candidates decide their future. This is a good example of a repair patch needed to define - very roughly- the functions of Local Boards.
Transport Auckland established as a "non-standard" CCO. Exempt from many LGA provisions. Potential for its Board to be appointed by Ministers of Transport & Local Government. No mention about who/how it will be funded.	This is -in effect - a Crown controlled organisation. (See my blog about this a couple of entries ago). Would the Crown deny itself powers to control SOE's or other Authorities it owns? Would Govt fail to state in legislation the rules for SOEs to negotiate with Govt in regard to activities, objectives & budgets? I don't think so. Most SOE budgets are heavily tagged. Not so for Auckland Transport....	Government needs to learn from the 2004 transport and local govt reforms for Auckland. This was when ARTA was established to run Auckland public transport and other services. The checks and balances in place - about funding, activities, objectives - were decided in partnership with ARC. This model worked well for Auckland. It should be replicated for Transport Auckland.
Watercare will NOT do stormwater, and Auckland Council will NOT be able to change Watercare's SOI until 2012.	There are no provisions in the Bill for how Watercare will charge for water and wastewater services. Extraordinarily, it seems likely that Watercare will charge ratepayers for water services in a Bill separate from their rates bill. What a waste of a reform@! Also, appears to be no public process whereby transition in water/wastewater charges occurs. Apparently Auckland Council will be able to fire the Board. Now there's a blunt governance tool!	Auckland Council needs to be able to govern Watercare through its SOI immediately. Total nonsense otherwise. It also seems a nonsense that stormwater infrastructure and its use and management is to be separated from water and wastewater. Backward. Some sort of transition duty should be required as wastewater charges move from Uniform Charges to volumetric charges. These are major policy and public interest issues. Policy control should come via SOI.
Whole bunch of CCO's to be established by the ATA - many before the end of October 31st. Boards may be appointed also. Boards to appoint their own Chairs!	What Govt SOE or Authority exists where the Minister has NOT appointed the Board Chair? Why should Auckland Council not have the power to appoint the Chairs of CCOs it is supposed to control? This is crazy.	What is good for the goose, should be good for the gander. This Bill demonstrates a real failure on the part of Government to understand the need for independent local government. Is it so afraid of failure? Has it so little confidence in these reforms?
Mana Whenua and Maori Statutory Board set up with 9 members, that can appoint 2 people to Auckland Council Ctte dealing with resource management decisions. Option to sit on other cttes.	This is the fallback option instead of maori seats. I understand this option is likely to be unwieldy and expensive. However does have the benefit of ensuring the right mana whenua people serve on the Auckland Council cttes. That voice will be there.	Suggest a costs & benefits assessment is done for this option vv Maori seat option. Need to be better informed about this.
Auckland Council will be required to prepare a comprehensive Spatial Plan - with a lot of detail. Intended to provide a 20-30 year direction for Auckland. This will replace the Growth Strategy.	This sort of specific plan has long been needed. But this provision "drips with insincerity". It has no relationship with any of the other implementation plans. No relationshipwith Regional Policy Statement, District Plans, Regional Transport Strategy... In short, just another time-consuming strategy that won't stand a chance of getting implemented.	In my view, the Spatial Plan is an opportunity to do something good for Auckland planning, and its implementation. But Govt needs to take it seriously, for the Spatial Plan to be taken seriously by Auckland Council. The Spatial Plan lacks credibility when there is no obvious connection between it, and Auckland Council planning, and the infrastructure projects needed from Watercare and Auckland Transport....
Rating. A revaluation of the whole region is to be completed by 1 July 2010. ALL rates are to be based on capital value. Auckland Council must set a transition rate for each rating unit for 2011/12.	This is a doozy of a provision. For example, North Shore rates are based on Land Value (Capital Value includes Land Value PLUS improvements value.) This means there will be BIG losers,and BIG winners in this transition. Even a revaluation using the same rating system causes huge upheaval. Let alone changing the basis of rating itself@!	While the Bill provides for Auckland Council having a 3 year transition period - the scale of change will be very large for some rating units - too large to be safely absorbed across 3 years. I think work is required - ahead of Select Ctte - s0 there is better info about the impact of this change. Also, I think the rating Bill should include water as well as rates.
ATA "Planning Document". This is an interesting new planning document required of ATA (intro'd above). It must deal with initial allocation of decision-making responsibility between council and ALL Boards.	A necessary document. This needs to be planned for. But there are so many things that need to be planned for,for each Local Board: Building; staff requirement; budget; divisions... and think of this: that Waitakere Local Board is as big as Waitakere City Council...! Again- this won't be ready till Sept 2010, almost after the date candidates need to declare their hands...	When you look at this one - the sheer scale of it - you wonder about the sense of forcingall this to be done by Oct 31 next year. Maybe a better option would be to legislate for the current arrangements to run for another year - or maybe 6 months. Anything to avoid the patched reform ship from sinking through having too many unfixed holes....