3.1
In this Part, we discuss issues that are commonly encountered by local authorities in implementing the principles and requirements in the Act. We present an overview of setting the strategic framework and then look at:

• decision-making responsibilities;
• ensuring that Māori have the opportunity to participate in decision-making;
• linking decision-making and community outcomes, the LTCCP, and performance;
• considering community views;
• engaging with other organisations;
• working with central government agencies; and
• linking with requirements under other legislation.

3.2
For each topic, we set out the issue, note the legal requirement, discuss the issue, and provide examples from local authorities in New Zealand or overseas.

Overview - setting the strategic framework

3.3
This part of the guide focuses on setting the strategic framework for decision-making or the decisions about how decisions will be made. For instance, setting this framework is particularly important when working with Māori, with neighbouring local authorities, or with central government departments.

3.4
It is a challenge to develop local authority processes that take appropriate account of all the matters that influence decision-making. A local authority will make decisions, particularly strategic and major infrastructure decisions, in the context of past decisions, current strategies, regional agreements, future goals and objectives, community outcomes and political views, current community views, available technology, and the capacity¹ of the community and the local authority to implement the decision. It is important that the local authority has a decision-making process that enables all decision-makers to consider the wider context.

3.5
Advice from our working party suggests that a strategic framework that shows how a local authority approaches decision-making would make these processes clearer to elected members, staff, and the community. Decision-making involves a number of common elements for a local authority. Figure 2 sets out the common influences and levels of decision-making active in a local authority at any one time. This guide does not discuss every element in Figure 2.

3.6
We expect that local authorities will have considerably different approaches to such a decision-making framework. A local authority could take a very high-level approach and adopt a number of sustainable development principles to use as a strategic thinking and analysis tool. Other local authorities have adopted international standards and specific local government tools to use in their decision-making processes.²

Figure 2
Common influences in decision-making for local authorities

3.7
Sometimes the framework will include regional or subregional agreements. For example, SmartGrowth³ is a programme aimed at developing and implementing a plan for managing growth in the western Bay of Plenty up to 2050. The programme is being led by Environment Bay of Plenty, Tauranga City Council, Western Bay of Plenty District Council, and tangata whenua on behalf of the community. It has involved substantial community engagement, including setting up various community forums. The participating councils’ decisions and LTCCPs have reflected the agreements reached in this subregional plan.

Decision-making responsibilities Issue

3.8
Governance arrangements affect who is given responsibility for making decisions, which kinds of decisions they are responsible for, and who is accountable for those decisions.

Legislative requirements

3.9
The responsibilities of elected members and the delegations of committees are set out in the governance sections in the Act.⁴ Section 39 sets out the governance principles, and section 40 sets out the requirement for a local governance statement, which provides information to the community about how the local authority is governed. Schedule 7 contains further relevant requirements - for instance, the member’s declaration (clause 14), code of conduct (clause 15), and standing orders (clause 27).

3.10
The Act does not cover explicitly the relationships between governance and decision-making processes, although it does set out which decisions cannot be delegated to a committee or other subordinate decision-making body.⁵ These are:

• setting and assessing rates;
• adopting an LTCCP, annual plan, or annual report;
• adopting a policy in the LTCCP or local governance statement;
• borrowing money, or purchasing or disposing of assets, other than in accordance with the LTCCP;
• appointing a chief executive; and
• making a bylaw.

3.11
The chief executive is the only employee employed by elected members.⁶ Section 42 sets out the chief executive’s responsibilities. To be able to implement the decisions of the local authority, the chief executive has responsibilities delegated to them. These are often further delegated to senior or specialist staff.

3.12
The chief executive is responsible for briefing elected members on legislation affecting them. They must arrange for this to occur at the first meeting of a local authority after each triennial election. The briefing must cover the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, the Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act 1968, relevant sections of the Crimes Act 1961, the Secret Commissions Act 1910, and the Securities Act 1978.⁷

3.13
The establishment and role of community boards is addressed in the Act in sections 49 to 54. A community board is not a local authority and not a committee of the relevant local authority.

3.14
A local authority can choose to delegate responsibilities and powers to community boards (section 53), except for those decisions only a local authority can take (see paragraph 3.10) and owning property or managing staff(section 53(3)). There is wide variation in the roles and powers of community boards across the country. A community board is entitled to make local authority decisions only on those matters delegated to it by the local authority, which could, for example, include allocations for community board discretionary funding. In practice, a community board will make decisions about its own activities, such as the advice it wishes to provide to the local authority through such processes as submissions to a draft LTCCP or an annual plan.

Discussion

3.15
Governance includes decisions about delegations of authority and about how a local authority will make decisions (such as its committee structure). Governance arrangements will also affect how much access managers have to important decision-makers.

3.16
Local authorities use a variety of governance structures and processes to support informed debate and timely decision-making. Some have a number of committees that each include all elected members. In this case, elected members often have a specific portfolio of interest. Other authorities have smaller committees with specialist functions such as planning or regulatory matters. Informed debate is helped by regular briefings for committee chairpersons or by holding joint working parties or steering groups that could include elected members, staff, and local people.

3.17
Many local authorities offer briefings to new members. This can be in the form of workshops, away days, or specially prepared information. The form of induction is a matter of judgement on the part of the elected members. In addition, some councils offer briefings to those intending to stand for local elections to provide information about how a local authority operates under relevant legislation.

3.18
It is possible that elected members will have priorities for action that may not be in the adopted LTCCP or that would require an amendment to the LTCCP. In this case, senior managers should be able to advise elected members on how to proceed. Depending on the issue, the appropriate decision-making process could involve a variation to the annual plan, a special consultative procedure on a specific issue, an amendment to the current LTCCP, or the elected members getting involved in work on the next LTCCP.

Example

3.19
Southland District Council has 30 townships surrounded by farms. The council has, since 1989, operated with a large number of community boards, with considerable devolution of powers. Roading and libraries are provided to a certain level of service at district level, but community boards can choose to increase their local level of service using funding allocated to them for this purpose. Community boards recommend a local rate, and there is also a district rate. As a rule, the council does not change the recommendations from the community boards, but they are at times modified by agreement.

3.20
Southland District Council has a population of 28,000 and a high proportion of elected members (12 councillors and 12 community boards of six people each). It also has 16 community development area subcommittees⁸ of six appointed members each. These subcommittees play a role in local concept planning, consider budgets prepared by staff, and consider recommendations from the community boards to Southland District Council. In addition, staff provide information to a number of local water boards, which are also subcommittees of the council and which provide recommendations to the council.

3.21
The comparability of services provided to local areas does not appear to be an issue, although staff do take this into account when preparing the first draft of the district budget (which includes separate, and sometimes quite substantial, budgets for each community board).

Ensuring that Māori have the opportunity to participate in decision-making

Issue

3.22
It can be a challenge for local authorities to work with local Māori to set up appropriate processes for Māori to participate in decision-making.

Legislative requirements

3.23
The Act requires a local authority to ensure that Māori have the opportunity to contribute to decision-making (section 14(1)(d)), particularly when the local authority is making a significant decision about land or water (section 77(1)(c)). Section 81 requires a local authority to set up and maintain processes to provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to the decision-making processes of the local authority. Section 82(2) requires a local authority to ensure that it has a process in place for consultation with Māori.

Discussion

3.24
Many local authorities have set up formal and informal mechanisms to provide methods for interacting with Māori communities in their area. We consider that it is consistent with the Act for there to be a wide variety of local responses to these requirements. We have provided two different examples below.

Examples

3.25
Kapiti Coast District Council works with tangata whenua through its partnership group Te Whakaminenga o Kapiti. Te Whakaminenga includes two councillors and representatives from each of the three iwi. It has a strategic work programme covering a number of projects. An example is the development of the coastal strategy. The council worked with iwi to develop the framework and then held a series of community workshops that involved coastal visits and “walkshops”. It also sponsored a series of coastal hikoi⁹ where members of each iwi identified ideas and concerns. The coastal strategy included an annual coastal forum jointly governed by iwi and elected members, and hosted by tangata whenua and the council. Local stewardship groups and forums will contribute to this district forum, which will make recommendations to relevant agencies and groups on a range of issues such as coastal restoration and protection, harvesting of resources, the effects of climate change, and coastal management generally.

3.26
In Southland, local Māori have four rūnanga, which have a joint committee (funded by the four territorial local authorities - Southland District Council, Environment Southland, Invercargill City Council, and Gore District Council). The work of this joint committee, Te Ao Marama, is focused on Resource Management Act consents. More recently, Te Ao Marama and the four local authorities have developed a charter that provides the basis for an ongoing relationship between Māori and the local authorities, and a foundation for consultation. It also expresses the willingness of Te Ao Marama to assist all four local authorities with consultation. Te Ao Marama and the authorities have set up a collaborative structure, Te Roopu Taiao, to give effect to the charter. Te Roopu Taiao meets quarterly.

Linking well-being, community outcomes, decision-making, the Long-Term Council Community Plan, and performance

Issue

3.27
It is important for local authorities to ensure that their decisions support progress towards the community outcomes identified in their LTCCPs. From our work in the local government sector, we have observed that local authorities have struggled to link the performance measures or framework contained in their LTCCPs with their decision-making processes to the four aspects of community well-being and to community outcomes.

Legislative requirements

3.28
The process for identifying community outcomes should inform and guide a local authority in the setting of its priorities (section 91(2)(e)). An LTCCP is the reflection of many decisions and must be able to demonstrate how local authority activities contribute to community outcomes (clause 1(c) of Schedule 10). A local authority must also be able to report the results of any measurement of achieving community outcomes, and on the effects of its activities on the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of its communities, in its annual report (clauses 15(c) and 15(d) of Schedule 10).¹⁰

Discussion

3.29
Performance frameworks should provide a coherent and logical flow from wellbeing and community outcomes to performance measures and targets. We expect this logical flow to be reflected in the LTCCP.

3.30
In the decision-making process, local authorities are required to identify and consider how options affect the four aspects of community well-being, community outcomes, and future generations. Recording this process appropriately and linking it to the local authority’s performance management framework substantially enhances a local authority’s ability to identify how its strategies and decisions support well-being and the community outcomes and to report on the effects of its activities.

3.31
Decision-making will have taken place in preparing current and historical plans and strategies, and through other processes under other legislation such as preparing District Plans or Land Transport Plans. Those decisions (or their effects) are then incorporated into the LTCCP. A number of local authority decisions have very long-term effects, such as planning for transport infrastructure or stormwater provisions. The LTCCP sets out the effects of decisions made now over the next 10 years. The LTCCP also signals future intentions and acts as a plan for implementing a local authority’s various activities. Once adopted, it also informs subsequent decisions made by elected members and staff.

3.32
In our view, if a local authority does not have a performance framework that links well-being, community outcomes, and performance monitoring to its decision-making, that decision-making is at risk of not being fully informed by either community outcomes or information on current performance. In addition, the passage of time, staff turnover, and staff focus on “their” area of local authority activity and expertise could expose a local authority to the risk that decisions for some activities are not consistent with community outcomes or the LTCCP.

Examples

3.33
Some local authorities have developed a set of sustainable development principles to guide their decision-making, including for the LTCCP. Some use prompts in report templates to guide staff, and others have adopted international principles and decision-making processes.

3.34
For example, Waitakere City Council provides regular training for all staff on the strategic objectives of the city and of the council. This is to ensure that all staff are aware of community outcomes, and the council’s strategic thinking that underpins the LTCCP. In addition, a group of senior managers reads all agenda items, and particularly the accompanying resolutions, for consistency with the council’s strategic direction, policies, and LTCCP objectives. The council also runs city bus tours for all new staff so they get a practical understanding of the strategic issues for the city and of progress in meeting the strategic objectives.

Considering community views in decision-making

Issue

3.35
Local authorities must consider community views during the course of the decision-making process, and they must use their judgement to assess the level to which they engage with communities to ensure that they have considered community views. Local authorities can seek community views in a variety of ways, including “pre-consultation”, referenda, and various informal methods, as discussed in paragraphs 3.38 to 3.50.

Legislative requirements

3.36
Section 78 of the Act states that a local authority must consider the views and preferences of persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in, the matter under discussion. This consideration must be given at each of four stages:

• when problems and objectives are defined;
• when reasonably practicable options are identified;
• when reasonably practicable options are assessed and proposals developed; and
• when such proposals are adopted.

3.37
Section 79 states that it is the responsibility of the local authority to make judgements on how to comply with these requirements, subject to the significance of the matters affected by the decision.

Discussion

3.38
The sections of the Act that set out the requirements for the consideration of community views and for consultation do not explicitly require local authorities to consider the effects on both current and future generations. However, the Act does explicitly require local authorities to consider current and future community well-being when considering the costs and benefits of options (section 77(1)(b)(i)), identifying community outcomes (section 91(2)(a)), and making financial management decisions (section 101(1)). In our view, this means, in practice, that the effects of decisions on future generations should be included when considering community views and in consultation processes. A local authority needs to consider how it will assess the effects of its decisions on future generations.

3.39
A local authority is required to consider community views. This does not mean that it must be bound by them. We discuss what constitutes community views and how a local authority should consider the results of consultation feedback in paragraph 5.27.

3.40
A local authority can use its judgement as to how it informs itself of community views. Formal consultation is one of the ways a local authority can do this, but it is not always required.

3.41
In practice, most local authorities interpret community views as the views of those communities that exist within its area, including out-of-district ratepayers.

3.42
Small local authorities generally feel that they know their community, often through elected member and staff networks. Some use e-technology to assist community interaction and engagement, particularly where communities are spread over a large area. Bigger local authorities usually use more formal methods and often have ongoing relationships or formal partnerships with ethnic or interest groups.

3.43
There is a difference between gathering community views and elected members having appropriate mechanisms to be able to consider those views during the course of their decision-making. These mechanisms for elected member consideration will vary according to the size of the local authority, the issue under consideration, and the general circumstances.

Examples

3.44
Several local authorities have open forums on their websites for members of the public to raise issues and concerns for the local authority to respond to directly. Tauranga City Council (population 104,000) has an open forum for the public to discuss any issue and have any questions or queries answered. Similarly, Dunedin City Council (population 120,000) has a “Soapbox” that allows members of the public to have their say and receive a council reply.¹¹

3.45
Hauraki District Council (population 17,000) has set up a community feedback forum that is made up of a group that is representative of the community. The forum is used to explore concepts, draft policies, and seek reactions to current issues. The forum does not make any decisions, but the information gathered helps the council to further understand community views before it holds wider consultation.

3.46
Kaipara District Council (population 18,000) consults twice a year. These regular exercises include all the issues on which the council wants feedback or on which it is required to consult. This provides the council with a mechanism for considering community views as well as a vehicle for formal consultation on the statements of proposal for the draft annual plan or the draft LTCCP and District Plan issues.

3.47
Wanganui District Council (population 44,000) has used annual (non-binding) referenda since 2005 to ask its electorate to either accept or reject a particular community proposal. Important topics are identified, the issue for each is briefly outlined, and the advantages and disadvantages discussed. Topics in Wanganui’s referendum in 2006 were whether to use Wanganui or Whanganui as spellings for the city, water softening, water fluoridation, and electoral representation.¹²

3.48
Many local authorities in the United Kingdom have citizens’ panels to provide community feedback on specific issues and how a local authority’s services could be improved. Citizens’ panels are made up of local people selected randomly to reflect the age, gender, and ethnicity of the local community. The citizens’ panel of Bristol City Council (2001 population 381,000) is made up of 2000 people, and those on the panel are required to complete up to four questionnaires a year (typically containing a number of different sections covering different issues). They are also invited to attend group discussions or workshops on particular issues.¹³

3.49
Wyndham City Council (2006 population 122,000), in Victoria, Australia, has set up a household panel consisting of 400 Wyndham households, matched to the entire municipality, who have agreed to be surveyed by the council every six to eight weeks. The council uses the panel for many purposes, including getting a quick response on urgent issues. Each year, panel residents complete a “life events” survey that looks at changes in their life over the year - in jobs and income, family structure, home ownership, community activities, and so on. The council adds the information to a growing database, allowing it to build up a longitudinal picture of changes in attitude and lifestyle in Wyndham and incorporate them into organisational planning.¹⁴

3.50
Some Australian local authorities facilitate community forums open to all members of the community. The City of Melbourne (population 67,000)¹⁵ operates regular community forums to discuss issues of particular relevance to specific communities, based on geographical location in the city. Brisbane City Council (population Brisbane City 874,000) has a “Your City, Your Say Community Reference Panel” made up of more than 12,000¹⁶ residents, who receive information on local issues and are invited regularly to meet council decision-makers and participate in consultation.

Engaging with other organisations

Issue

3.51
Many local authorities are working closely with a range of other entities - such as other local authorities, central government agencies (discussed in paragraphs 3.64 to 3.74), iwi and Māori organisations, the community and voluntary sector, and local businesses and other partners - as part of working towards achieving community outcomes. As other agencies are autonomous bodies, this can present particular challenges for decision-making. The issues include negotiating different values, different ways of working and decision-making, different decision-making roles, and conflicting priorities and objectives.

Legal requirements

3.52
Section 91(3) sets out that a local authority may decide for itself how it will identify community outcomes. Before deciding on the process, the local authority must identify other organisations and groups capable of influencing the outcomes and gain their agreement to the process and the way it will relate to other existing and related plans.

3.53
Section 92 sets out the obligation for a local authority to monitor and report on progress towards community outcomes with other organisations identified according to section 91. However, this guide does not discuss working with others for reporting purposes. The guide provides some examples of how local authorities have engaged with others as part of the preparation of community outcomes.

3.54
Clause 1(e) of Schedule 10 states that an LTCCP must outline how a local authority will work with other local and regional organisations, Māori, central government, non-government organisations, and the private sector.

Discussion

3.55
Many local authorities are exploring or using collaborative processes with a range of other organisations that are capable of influencing the achievement of community outcomes. These collaborative processes are intended to provide better services and planning for local authorities’ communities. Section 14(1)(e) states that a local authority should collaborate and co-operate with other local authorities and bodies as it considers appropriate. The local authority will need to make its own decisions about the implications of any collaborative processes for decision-making. It is possible that collaborative processes will mean that a local authority chooses to share the role of decision-maker. However, in terms of its capacity, it can be a challenge for a local authority to participate in shared decision-making or collaborative processes, especially, for instance, with iwi, Māori, and community sector organisations.

3.56
Engaging with service providers in the development of community outcomes can identify long-term planning ideas, including potential joint projects. However, because a number of viewpoints must be considered in the decision-making process, skills in collaborative problem solving - for example, negotiation, conflict resolution, and relationship management - are critical to successful outcomes.¹⁷ This process of preparing and reporting on community outcomes, particularly those for local areas within a local authority area, can help make the community’s priorities clear to local authority members and other decision-makers.

3.57
However, there can be a great deal of variation in the ways other agencies engage in both the community outcomes process and any subsequent activities.

3.58
Decision-making with other organisations often raises issues of accountability and what constitutes good processes. Sometimes, it is more a matter of reaching agreement than making a formal decision.¹⁸ However, local authority accountability for decisions requires that such agreements are recorded.

3.59
In addition, decision-making that evolves over time, which is common for large projects or programmes involving many stakeholders, has implications for the timing and the level of engagement with community and partners. Processes to manage these issues should be jointly agreed.¹⁹

3.60
Decision-making can be place-based (such as local area planning) or sector-based (such as district-wide issues of transport or health). In either case, a local authority needs to ensure that the process includes all community and stakeholder interests, as well as direct sector interests. Involving a wide range of stakeholders, such as social, environmental, business groups, and iwi and Māori organisations, will help to identify all the issues and such an inclusive process can support gaining a consensus.

3.61
Joint steering committees that include political and technical representation is a common process for resolving issues that are highly politicised and technically complex. In our view, such a committee should have terms of reference and should follow, as closely as possible, standard good practice for matters such as recording minutes and making recommendations to parent entities.²⁰

Examples

3.62
With Choosing Futures²¹ (an example of LTCCP regional planning), Environment Waikato began working with the 13 councils in its region in 2001. By 2004, it had an agreement to co-fund the community outcome identification process and work towards achieving those identified goals. This agreement is now built into the triennial agreement.²²

3.63
A Waikato strategic planners’ network (accountable to chief executives and mayors) that involves all 13 local authorities in the region, the Waikato District Health Board, and central government agency representatives has been meeting regularly to share information and consider the requirements of the Act. This network considered an option to prepare local then regional outcomes. However, the region’s local authorities jointly decided to prepare district and regional community outcomes at the same time. They are now preparing a timeline for the regional and district councils to work collaboratively on the regional and district outcomes for the next 20 years. Environment Waikato considers that this promotes a collaborative, regional approach while still allowing individual organisations and communities to plan local outcomes.

Working with central government agencies

Issue

3.64
Local and central government agencies are working together more closely, driven in part by the Act. This has highlighted typical issues that arise between organisations that try to work together. These include (but are not limited to) the level of access to the information held by each agency; potential conflict between local, regional, and national priorities; the level of operational flexibility to address local and regional issues; different organisational practices, cultures, and perspectives; resourcing; and different geographical boundaries.

Legislative requirements

3.65
Sections 91 and 92 of the Act require local authorities to identify other organisations that can influence community outcomes and to get those organisations to agree to the process of developing and reporting on community outcomes, if practicable. Although central government is not required to facilitate community outcomes as identified in the Act, in practice, local authorities do engage with many central government agencies, usually through regional representatives. This can help identify opportunities to work towards community outcomes and to provide efficient and effective services to (and sometimes with) the local community.

Discussion

3.66
The level of interaction between local authorities and central government agencies varies. Local authorities have experienced some difficulties in working with central government. These difficulties are usually associated with getting access to decision-makers and sometimes with reconciling local outcomes with regional or national objectives. It can also be difficult to integrate, or at least connect, local and central government budget cycles. Local and central government use different decision-making and policy development processes, and this can lead to issues of access to information and timing of reports.

3.67
Central government has designated certain departments to work with local government. These are the Department of Internal Affairs, the Ministry for the Environment, the Ministry of Economic Development, the Ministry of Social Development, and the Ministry of Culture and Heritage. They all have information on their websites for local government. In addition, Statistics New Zealand has information for local government on its website, and is increasing its regional and local information.

3.68
New Zealand research on partnerships between local and central government is now developing. In 2006, the Department of Internal Affairs and Waitakere City Council jointly sponsored a guidance document for central and local government, Putting Pen to Paper.²³ It proposes that new kinds of agreement frameworks are needed to better support partnering objectives and approaches, and that top-down contracting models do not easily fit with partnering. A companion report of case studies will be issued later in 2007.

3.69
The Department of Internal Affairs leads a team that helps connect local and central government agencies so they can work together on implementing and reporting on community outcomes. In addition, central government has set up a working group that connects central government representatives with local government representatives. At a political level, a Central Government and Local Government Forum, led by the Prime Minister, meets regularly. Local government elected representatives have also set up a number of ways to work together, such as mayoral task forces and mayoral forums that meet with central government representatives on specific issues.

Examples

3.70
The Milford Community Trust is a council-controlled organisation set up by Southland District Council in consultation with the Department of Conservation. It will carry out tasks usually done by a territorial authority, such as strategic and operational planning, financial management, water quality testing, rubbish collection, toilet maintenance, contract performance monitoring, and leadership. To enable the Milford Community Trust to carry out its tasks, it will enter into a contract with the Director-General of Conservation to provide community services, benefits, and facilities for the benefit of concessionaires (who hold Department of Conservation concessions to operate in Milford), which may also benefit the general public visiting the area. It will be funded by rates, user pays charges, and community contribution fees.²⁴ The Milford community is defined as concessionaires, iwi, and the residents of the Milford area.

3.71
There are a number of accountability mechanisms, including the trust presenting a statement of intent to the council annually. The Milford Community Trust will also be required to submit an annual plan each year to the Director-General of Conservation.

3.72
The Porirua Healthlinks Trust aims to achieve better health and well-being for everyone in Porirua through inter-sectoral action, improved equity and fairness, providing the services sought by the community, better access to services, and better integration of services. The partners within Porirua Healthlinks are Porirua City Council, Ngati Toa, Pacific Communities, the Ministry of Health, the Porirua Healthy Safer City Trust, the Porirua Community Health Group Forum, and the Porirua Health Partnership.

3.73
Kaipara District Council participates in the Northland Intersectoral Forum, which is composed of local government chief executives in the region and regional chief executives of central government agencies. The forum provides a regional whole-of- government approach to mutually agreed issues. As well as being a member of the Northland Intersectoral Forum, Kaipara also has a Kaipara Community Outcomes Steering Group, which is attended by approximately 40 central and local government and non-government agencies as well as iwi. This group was set up to assist with the facilitation and identification of community outcomes and now has a role in monitoring the achievement of those outcomes.

3.74
Waitakere Wellbeing Collaboration is an initiative to help government and community agencies and Waitakere City Council identify priority areas and projects, and facilitate joint action and planning. The initiative is focused on social well-being and has a jointly funded collaboration project manager who is based at Waitakere City Council. Governance is provided by a collaboration strategy group made up of 12 representatives from the council, and government and community agencies.

Linking with legislation other than the Local Government Act 2002

Issue

3.75
Timing and overlap between different consultative legislative processes can present problems for decision-making and consultation management.

Legislative requirements

3.76
Section 79(3) states that a local authority can take account of consultation carried out under other legislation. Section 83A states that a special consultative procedure under the Act can be carried out at the same time as, or combined with, a special consultative procedure required under the Act or other legislation.

Discussion

3.77
Decision-making is increasingly done in association with other local, regional, and national organisations. It is important to consider and plan for the range of legislative requirements that will affect any joint decision-making or that is affected by a number of different statutes.

3.78
Increasingly, consultation is not seen as a series of one-off disconnected exercises. Many local authorities want to link their consultation into direction-setting exercises such as the LTCCP and annual plan processes. However, it can be difficult to integrate this work with other legislative requirements for consultation on specific projects, such as those required under the Land Transport Management Act 2003 or the Resource Management Act 1991.

3.79
Providers of services that affect the achievement of community outcomes are often working under different legislation and priorities, such as central government planning for land transport or for services such as police stations, hospitals, or schools. Engaging in joint planning and consultation exercises can help resolve these issues.

Examples

3.80
Tauranga City Council carried out joint planning and consultation with Transit for a roading project called HarbourLink, an additional bridge linking Tauranga and Mount Maunganui. The estimated cost is about $255 million, one of the largest transport projects constructed in New Zealand and the largest in the Bay of Plenty. The formal consultation process was designed to meet the consultation requirements for both Transit, under the Land Transport Management Act 2003, and Tauranga City Council, for the special consultative procedure under the Act. However, such joint planning does not necessarily ensure community acceptance of such projects. In this case, there was considerable controversy over a proposal to fund it by tolling the users of the bridge. The tolling proposal was no longer required when central government agreed to fund the project.

3.81
Auckland City Council, Manukau City Council, and the Auckland Regional Land Transport Authority have carried out joint studies and community engagement on long-term transport planning for passenger transport, roading, rail, walking connections, and getting children to school. This is called the Auckland-Manukau Eastern Transport Initiative (AMETI).²⁵

3.82
AMETI’s improvements are designed to take place over the next 20 years, providing appropriate funding and approvals are in place. It is expected to cost around $1,500 million in today’s dollars, spread over 15-20 years. Each part of the package is integrated. This means that, if one part is omitted or substantially modified, the benefits expected may not be realised.

3.83
The consultation exercises are designed to meet the requirements of the Act, the Resource Management Act, and the Land Transport Management Act 2003.

1: “Capacity” in this context includes financial and non-financial capabilities over time.

2: For example, International Councils for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), Triple bottom line toolkit, www.iclei.org.

3: More information is available at www.smartgrowthbop.org.nz.

4: See also the KnowHow Guide to Governance, available from Local Government New Zealand, www.lgnz.co.nz.

5: Clause 32 of Schedule 7 of the Act.

6: See our report Managing the Relationship between a Local Authority’s Elected Members and its Chief Executive, 2002.

7: Clause 21 of Schedule 7 of the Act.

8: They were formerly committees, but the requirements (clauses 23(3)(b)(ii) and 31(4) of Schedule 7) that committees have a councillor as a member and that at least one councillor attend each committee meeting proved difficult.

9: Māori noun or verb meaning to step or march.

10: See our reports Local government: Results of the 2004-05 audits - parliamentary paper B.29[06b], and Local government: Results of the 2005/06 audits - parliamentary paper B.29[07b].

11: Tauranga City Council, www.tauranga.govt.nz, and Dunedin City Council, www.cityofdunedin.com.

12: Wanganui District Council, www.wanganui.govt.nz.

13: Bristol City Council, www.bristol.gov.uk.

14: Department of Transport and Regional Services, www.dotars.gov.au.

15: Melbourne City has 67,000 people, but the whole metropolitan Melbourne area has 3,700,000. See www.melbourne.vic.gov.au.

16: Brisbane City Council, www.brisbane.qld.gov.au.

17: See, for instance, Collaborative Public Management: Public Administration Review (December, 2006) (a special issue on this topic).

18: See the distinction drawn by Robert Agranoff, “Inside Collaborative Networks”, Collaborative Public Management: Public Administration Review (December 2006), page 61.

19: This could include, for instance, infrastructural projects, social development programmes, or local planning processes.

20: See our report Local Authorities Working Together, 2004.

21: For more information, see www.choosingfutures.co.nz.

22: The triennial agreement is an agreement between all local authorities in a region under section 15 of the Act.

23: For more information, see www.dia.govt.nz/COPwebsite.nsf.

24: Community contribution fees are the same as rates, but are paid by concessionaires (businesses not resident in the area and therefore not eligible to pay rates but who will receive benefit from any services provided by the Milford Community Trust).

25: See www.ameti.co.nz.