Draft intensification plans released

The Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) is our city's zoning planning rule book. It's governed by the Resource Management Act (RMA) and allowed for approximately 900k new homes.

Under the previous government, the council was required to make widespread changes to the AUP to enable even greater levels of intensification. The resulting changes to the AUP were included in Proposed Plan Change 78: Intensification (PC78) notified in August 2022.

The very recently enacted Resource Management (Consenting and Other System Changes) Amendment Act enables the council, if it chooses, to withdraw in part, PC78, provided the council notifies a replacement plan change that satisfies new requirements. The council had previously been unable to withdraw PC78 (in whole or in part).

On 21 August 2025 the Policy and Planning Committee endorsed a draft replacement plan change to enable staff to consult on it with iwi authorities, government ministries and adjoining councils, and to request local board views on the draft replacement plan change and a corresponding withdrawal in part of PC78.

Due to the timeframes set by central government in the Act, the council will need to decide in September 2025 whether or not to withdraw from PC78 and, if so, to proceed with a replacement plan change.

What does this mean for East Auckland? Because of the short time frames, we have limited information available to us. Staff have prepared maps that show the new zoning that is proposed and I've taken the current AUP zones, PC78, and the replacement maps to compare them. These are subject to change, but hopefully this helps show the differences between the three plans. In PC78 intensification is spread across the area, while in the replacement plan, intensification is being focused around town centres and transit routes.

The choice before council is PC78 or the replacement. Local Boards are not the decision-makers but we do have an opportunity to provide input.

The Howick Local Board is meeting on Thursday 28 August 2025 at 1pm to consider our feedback. While there is no formal public consultation prior to notification, we've agreed to accept public input at this meeting so we can better convey what the community thinks. People or groups wanting to speak are encouraged to register via howicklocalboard@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

You can find more in our agenda published here:
https://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Open/2025/08/20250828_HW_AGN_13699_WEB.htm

Transparency is vital to our democracy

Being an elected member for Auckland Council is a privilege. But it also comes with responsibilities and we're remunerated for our time. We're not volunteers and it's reasonable to expect that we turn up to do our job.

As part of providing transparency, Auckland Council publishes the attendance for elected members at business meetings and workshops. For Local Boards, these are published every quarter and available online for the whole term.

For some reason, Auckland Council reports and publishes this information differently for the Governing Body (Mayor and Councillor) with only the past 3 months showing. There also appears to be some gaps in the data, so I've asked for the information for the full term.

In the meantime, I've collated the Howick Local Board data for the last term (January 2023 to June 2025). Over this period we had a total of 36 business meetings and 92 workshops.

View fullsize

View fullsize

Absences may be due to leave, illness, bereavement or attending other council business - we don't record the reasons for members being away, you'd need to ask them. We also don't record any difference between online or in-person attendance - I've asked staff if we can do this but I'm told it's not current practice.

You'll note I was absent for two workshops - for one (May 2023) I was on leave (for my partners significant birthday) and another I was at the Governing Body trying to advocate for our community. I also attended one workshop online as I was sick, and we've had two workshops entirely online due to technology issues. Otherwise I have been present in the room for every workshop and business meeting this term.

You can see more (including the source data, other local boards and councillors) on the Auckland Council website: https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/about-auckland-council/performance-transparency/Pages/attendance-governing-body-meetings.aspx

Fixing funding of local boards

We need $216.5M to maintain our assets over the next 10 years, but we’ve only been allocated $114.1M.

At our workshop last week, the Howick Local Board received an update about our asset portfolio and it was pretty confronting. Over the next 9 years, we need $216.5M to maintain our existing assets (like playgrounds, libraries, and leisure centres). But Auckland Council has only allocated us $114.1M, leaving a 47% gap!

We've got enough funding to cover our priority renewals (those in the worst shape), but if we don't maintain all assets they will degrade, reducing their ability to serve the community. Deferring maintenance leads to higher costs in the future as parts break.

We're looking at all options to help close this gap, including changing how we deliver services to rely less on physical assets, optimising the assets we do have, and working with partners to deliver outcomes. But the scale of the challenge means none of this will be easy.

Council have two main funding sources for our assets:
🛠 operational expenses (like day-to-day maintenance, utilities) are covered by rates ($3B), fees ($1.9B) and other revenue ($1.3B).
🏗 capital expenses (like major renewals, new assets) are funded through operating revenue ($1.1B), subsidies ($0.9B), and debt ($1.7B) which is paid off over the lifetime of the asset (like you would a mortgage). To keep the interest manageable, council tries to keep the debt below 250% of revenue (270% absolute max).

New assets can also get funding from development contributions ($0.2B) which is a charge that properly developers pay to help fund assets in the area they're building. These funds cannot be used for anything other than the asset they were collected for.

The good news for Howick Local Board is that our venues for hire (valued at $4.5M) are generating enough revenue from hirage to cover their own day-to-day expenses. But as these buildings need more significant renewal, we need capital funding. And our libraries (valued at $32M), pool and leisure centres (valued at $15.6M) need upgrading so they can keep pace with our growing, changing population as well as shifts in technology and demands. And we know our playgrounds aren’t delivering what our communities need, with gaps especially in Flat Bush.

It’s important to note that Local Boards don't determine what our budget is, we only get (some) control over where our allocated budget goes. How much money each Local Board gets is decided by the Governing Body made up of the Mayor and 20 Councillors. Funding used to be based on what assets we had plus some discretionary funding, but this year we’ve moved to a different formula (known as fairer funding) which is based on population (80%), deprivation (15%), and land area (5%). For example, Howick has the largest population (160k), but lower deprivation (11%) and land area (69.7km2).

The Governing Body decides how much money they want Local Boards to have, then staff allocate it using this formula. Local Boards get less than 10minutes every year to present our feedback and beg for the resources we need to serve our communities. And not all the Councillors even bother to turn up to listen.

Auckland Council group OPEX from Long Term Plan 2024-2034

While the 21 local boards have a huge impact on their communities, they represent a small part of a large complex organisation. To put this into context:
🛠 Auckland Council operating budget for this year is $5,133M – all local boards are $491M (5%) and Howick is $37M (0.7%, 3rd highest).
🏗 Auckland Council’s capital budget for this year is $4,274M while all local boards are $212M (5%) and Howick is $10M (0.2%, 6th highest)

The cause of these issues go back before the creation of Auckland Council, with legacy councils building assets that they couldn’t afford to maintain. But even since the amalgamation, decisions have compounded the issues – like not fully funding depreciation until now so debt has ballooned. And in 2020, Auckland Council passed an emergency budget which slashed the capital spending. For Howick Local Board, the capital funding for 2021 went from a planned $20M to $1.5M. While it’s slowly increased over time, it’s never come back to the previous levels and never enough to compensate for the deferred maintenance.

Some budget pressure can be helpful - it makes us challenge decisions and focus on prioritising what’s important. The Howick Local Board has achieved significant savings over the past few years AND managed to deliver more value for our communities. But the growing gap is leaving our assets in a poor state and forcing us to make short-term decisions to balance our budgets.

This is a challenge across Auckland so there's a regionwide portfolio review underway to provide quality advice to local boards. We're expecting staff to come back to us in November and December with more information for the newly elected Board, with the intention of putting in place a plan by July 2026. This will be a major challenge for the new Howick Local Board to tackle.

Fixing the underlying issues will take longer but is essential for a thriving city. In my opinion:
💰 our budgeting process needs more focus on the outcomes – what do we need, not just what we’ve always done
👥 local boards need more opportunities for genuine involvement in regional decisions – we know our communities, help us serve them better
🏘 council needs to be more agile and responsive – we’re too slow and cumbersome, weighed down by complex structures
📑 staff need to provide more quality advice to elected members so we’re making the right decisions – 15 years to develop asset management plans is too slow
🏛 government needs to provide councils more funding sources so they’re not relying on debt and rates – portion of GST would be a good start

Because our workshop are open to the public, the materials are published online: https://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Open/2025/07/20250724_HLBWC_ATT_13171_WEB.htm

Howick Local Board attendance at meetings April to June 2025.

As part of providing transparency, Auckland Council publishes the attendance for elected members at business meetings and workshops.

Here is the Howick Local Board result for April to June 2025.

Absences may be due to leave, illness, bereavement or attending other council business.

You can see more (including previous reports, other local boards and councillors) on the Auckland Council website: https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/about-auckland-council/performance-transparency/Pages/attendance-governing-body-meetings.aspx

Fairer and more effective representation for Flat Bush!

I’m really happy to see that the Local Government Commission has approved the proposed changes for the Howick Local Board.

This will mean from October 2025:

• 3 members for Howick (unchanged)

• 3 members for Pakūranga (unchanged)

• 2 members for Botany (one less member and smaller area)

• 3 members for Flat Bush (new area)

This brings the total members to 11, making it the largest Board (which matches the largest population).

Flat Bush is a growing community with unique needs and deserves its own recognition and representation. The proposal was strongly supported by both locals and Aucklanders, as well as the Howick Local Board.

With over 150,000 residents to serve, it’s important that we have enough elected representatives to listen and act on their behalf. Even with the additional members, we’ll still have one of the highest ratios of residents per elected representative.

We look forward to welcoming new members in October.

Annual declaration for 2024

Transparency is critical to a functioning democracy. Our democracy is representative, meaning we elect representatives to make decisions on our behalf. Therefore we need transparency on what might be influencing the decisions made by our representatives. To help with this, elected members are required to declare any financial and other interests they may have.

Elected Members are required to declare property, companies, employment and other sources of income. Auckland Council publishes our declarations online which anyone can search:
https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/about-auckland-council/how-auckland-council-works/elected-members-remuneration-declarations-interest/Pages/elected-members-declarations-search.aspx

None of this removes the need to declare or act on conflicts of interest. If we have an interest (financial or otherwise) in a discussion or decision we're making, then we should declare it. Depending on how significant the interest is, we may not vote or even leave the room. If it's less significant it may be appropriate to continue to be involved in the decision. Although this can lead to people questioning whether the decision we made was in the best interests of the community we represent or our own personal interests.

Sometimes the potential perception is enough to require us to step back, even if we're not conflicted. Often this is the best approach to protect the integrity of the decision, elected member and the organization involved. Ultimately this has to be handled on a case-by-case basis because there are so many variables. It can be challenging, especially for local government representatives who are often deeply involved in their community.

But the first step is transparency.

You can search for anyone's declaration (including mine) but to make it easier I've attached mine here.

• I work part-time for AsureQuality

• I don't own any property or benefit from any trusts (we rent)

• I have a single (unpaid) governance role outside of the Local Board, with some memberships in other groups and volunteer work.

Happy to answer any questions on this, my declaration or anything else.

Local Government Reform cannot forget localism!

Yesterday the government announced their plans for local government reform, including the removal (again) of the four wellbeings (“promoting the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of their communities, taking a sustainable development approach”). They were created by Labour in 2002, removed by National in 2012, then out back by Labour in 2019. So here we go again.

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/government-getting-local-government-back-basics

There’s some good ideas in here - I’m pleased to see some modernisation of the rules “including removing requirements for newspaper notices, to drive efficiency and cost savings.”

I'm interested in the benchmarking as greater transparency and accountability is always welcome. However it will need to cope with the fact that not all local government is the same - Auckland is a unitary council (both local and regional) with multiple levels of governance (as imposed by Parliament). Very different to most of the other councils who have a very different scale and scope.

There’s a lot of talk of “pursuing expensive extras that burden ratepayers” but most of Auckland Council's increases are due to storm response, wage increases, and inflation. It’s also worth remembering that in Auckland only 40% of the council’s revenue comes from rates, with the rest coming from fees and charges, user pays, and return on investments. We’ve also already banked $337M in savings over the past three years, by making tough calls on what we continue and what we stop. I’m not suggesting there isn’t still waste or savings to be found but we’re already working on this with another $66M planned for this year. I don’t believe we need Parliament to tell us how to do what we’re already doing.

I'm a strong believer in localism - our community should determine what they want, not Parliament dictating from afar. Every year we consult with our residents on our annual budget based on our strategy (also consulted with the public). In fact local government consults with residents far more than Parliament does, which seems to rely on broad “electoral mandates” which are questionable at times.

More importantly I worry about the impact on our “non-core” activities like our significant environmental programmes, community grants, and support for arts and culture. This is what our community told us they wanted. But does our critical funding for the Howick Historical Village make the cut? What about UXBRIDGE? Or the local volunteer Coastguard? It’s too early to tell, but are these the “nice-to-haves” the Minister is referring to?

I'd rather the reform focused on addressing the real issues with local government - the awful legislation enforced upon Auckland by Parliament that creates massive inefficiencies and prevents us from doing what our communities want. Or the lack of funding tools available that force an over reliance on rates and have created massive infrastructure deficits. Or the three year terms that (once you take into account election years) effectively means we get 18 months to achieve anything.

It's still early days and there's promises of more reform which I welcome. But it needs to be driven by the right reasons and include local government so we get what we need.

Local Water Done Well succeeded where the previous government's Three Waters failed largely because the government listened to what Auckland needed, working together with local government to deliver positive change.

I hope we see that same approach here.

Should we continue to rely on postal voting?

It's no secret that the turnout for local government elections is low and continues to drop. With a heavy reliance on postal services (which are declining), we must do something to address the gaps.

Local Government New Zealand has released an interesting discussion paper with the challenges and some suggestions on what we could do to address them. This includes:
👥 How well the public understands local government and why it matters
👤 Understanding the candidates and their policies
✅ Voting methods
📣How elections are run and promoted
4️⃣ The possibility of moving to four-year terms (including how this would work)

Feedback on the issues paper will help shape the group’s position paper. You can have your say until Sunday 19 January 2025.

Check out their website for more information: https://www.lgnz.co.nz/policy-advocacy/key-issues-for-councils/local-electoral-reform/

Fair and effective representation for Botany and Flat Bush

Based on recent population growth, the Howick Local Board needs more elected members to ensure we maintain fair and effective representation. Local authorities are required by the Local Electoral Act 2001 to review their representation arrangements at least once every six years.

Howick Local Board is currently made up of 3 subdivisions: Pakuranga, Howick and Botany, with 3 elected members from each subdivision. However, due to the exponential growth of the Flat Bush area, the representation of the Botany subdivision needs a total of 5 elected members, bringing the overall total of 11 elected members for the Howick Local Board.

There are some options on how this could be achieved:

1. 1. Leave Botany with 3 members and create a new subdivision for Flat Bush of 2 members;

2. 2. Reduce Botany to 2 members and create a new subdivision for Flat Bush of 3 members; or

3. 3. Increase Botany to 5 members.

No decisions have been made and it’s still very early in the process. However, given the significant increase in the population in Flat Bush, it’s unlikely that no change would be an acceptable outcome.

There is also the option of changing the local board’s name (currently Howick Local Board) to better reflect the areas that it covers. We only get the option of doing this once every 6 years so we’re interested in what your views on this are as well as any suggestions.

The Howick Local Board has been asked to provide its feedback on the options in March. There will then be a formal public notification process later in the year before coming into effect for the 2025 elections.

Before we provide our view, we want to hear from the community on how you would like to be represented. Consultation boards are up in the Botany Library and we’ll be at local events to get some feedback.

We’re also co-hosting a meeting with the Flat Bush Ratepayers and Residents Association on Saturday 9 March at 2pm at the Ormiston Junior College. Come along to hear more about the options, ask questions and provide your feedback.

Questions to consider:

1. 1. Which option for Botany / Flat Bush do you think best serves the community?

2. 2. Would you support a name change?

3. 3. If so, do you have any suggestions for a new name?

Email your thoughts to HowickLocalBoard@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz before Thursday 14 March 2024.

Meri Kirihimete / Merry Christmas!

As we wrap up for the holidays, we wanted to take a moment to thank our community for their continued support throughout the year. It’s been wonderful to have the opportunity to attend so many community activities and events across the year.

It hasn’t been without its challenges – the extreme weather events of early 2023 continue to impact communities across Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland. We’ve faced some tough financial challenges with rising costs and a growing population so are very grateful for the massive response to our annual budget consultation. Thousands of locals told us what their priorities were for our limited funding which enabled us to make the tough choices while ensuring we could continue to meet the needs of the community. On top of this, we received input into our new Local Board Plan that sets out the strategic direction for the next few years. Thank you for taking the time to provide your input, it was invaluable to us. We heard the community tell us to focus on protecting the environment, celebrating arts and culture, and supporting youth.

Our environmental programmes have achieved great things this year - the support we provide Pest Free Howick enabled them to run the most successful moth plant competition ever removing 133,507 pods containing an estimated 93 million seeds! We’re delivering on our urban ngahere action plan to increase the tree canopy by enabling volunteers to plant 16,420 trees in the 12 months to June. And we continue to focus on reducing pollution and waste with dedicated educational programmes for local construction, industry, and schools.

We provided funding for the community to deliver events like the Birt & Euro Classic Car Show, 70th Howick Santa Parade, and the Pakuranga Rotary Community Carnival & River Festival. Volunteers are at the heart of many of the successful activities and organisations that make our community such a great place, so we recognised them with a special ceremony in June. Our Celebrating Cultures event in March was a huge success and we look forward to its return as an annual event in 2024.

We’re very proud of the ongoing success of the Howick Youth Council, who’ve delivered a wide range of self-directed programmes and activities throughout the year. We’re also pleased to have secured funding for the long-awaited dedicated Youth Space that is due to open early next year.

2024 will bring new and familiar challenges, as our new Local Board Plan takes effect in July along with continued pressure on our limited budget. We’ve already stepped up our advocacy for the Flat Bush Community Centre and Library as part of the early discussions around the Long Term Plan (LTP). After a short break, we look forward to continuing to deliver for the residents of the Howick Local Board area.

We wish you and your whānau a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Auckland Council decision to ignore STV

I am disappointed to see that the Governing Body of Auckland Council today yet again decided to not shift our city to Single Transferable Vote (also known as ranked voting) for the next election.

This goes against the Future of Local Government report and further entrenches the old systems that have created poor voter engagement.

I find the suggestion that voters aren't smart enough to handle more than a single tick insulting. Similarly if the suggestion that STV requires voters to know the candidates better has any validity, then it seriously calls into who is being elected under FPP.

I'd like to thank Councillor Chris Darby for raising the issues with the report and suggesting a more thorough analysis of the options, even if the amendment was ultimately withdrawn.

For the record, the Howick Local Board unanimously voted to change to STV, along with a campaign to educate the public (Howick Local Board minutes for 20 July 2023)

We weren't alone, with a total of three local boards supporting a move to STV and a further four requesting other options (including public consultation). Less than half of Local Boards supported remaining with FPP (despite comments that suggested it was "an overwhelming majority").

The next decision date is 2026, although there should be more work completed on this beforehand - it was suggested this might be handled by one of the working parties, although nothing formal has been recorded to ensure this happens or establish scope etc.

East Auckland Tourism celebrates successes despite challenging year

Monday night was the AGM and networking event for East Auckland Tourism - one of the local community organisations I volunteer my governance skills and experience.

We were hosted by Turanga Creek who hold weddings and events, an incredible venue in East Auckland that provides the whole package - great food, wine and location. Owner and operator Rochelle gave us a great overview of the venue as well as being an amazing host for the evening.

Annual general meetings can be a dry, formal event but this was really enjoyable. I’m really proud of what we’ve achieved over the last year. It’s been a tough few years for businesses, especially those who rely on tourism and hospitality so it was good to reflect on our successes.

We’ve invested heavily in our website and digital promotions, bringing East Auckland to a wider audience, together with practical suggestions for things to do, while our new map is providing visitors with an up to date guide to the region. Despite the challenges we’ve managed to pull off some events, including an activation linked to our growing Art Trail. And we’ve partnered with expert providers to create specialised tours of the area that has brought new people into the region.

We heard from both Jacqui Wilkinson from White Glove Experiences and Ceillhe Sperath from TIME Unlimited Tours who provided some great insights into tourism in East Auckland.

As treasurer, I spoke to our financial performance which was solid and set us up nicely for the new year. I was proud to announce our increased budget for the year, thanks to the gracious support of Auckland Unlimited, Howick Local Board and Franklin Local Board. With this extra funding we can supercharge our efforts to grow tourism and support local businesses in meaningful and practical ways.

It was also great to network with others and see local businesses owners connecting with others. Another big lesson from the pandemic has been the importance of buying local and based on the conversations last night, we can expect to see more local partnerships!

Upskilling my governance with Company Directors Course

Certificate for the Course

I’ve spent the last week on a professional training course for Company Directors. Run by the NZ Institute of Directors, the course covered best practice corporate governance, including strategy, finance, risk and culture. We participated in board simulation exercises where we put what we’d learned into practice.

Led by some of New Zealand’s most experienced directors, we learned from the best. With so much to cover in a week, we only had two spare evenings and even then we had homework to do (and one of those evenings was the fundraising quiz for the Howick Santa Parade). It’s always challenging being away from work and home for a week, but really glad I took the time out to upskill.

It was also good spending time with other professionals who are involved or interested in good governance. We had a really diverse mix of people which added to the experience, learning from each other’s skills and experience.

I highly recommend the Company Directors Course for anyone who is interested in increasing their skills in governance. Also joining the New Zealand Institute of Directors (NZ IoD) who act as the professional body for directors, providing best practice, training and networking opportunities, I joined the Institute of Directors few years ago and really appreciated the support. While Directors have historically been largely unseen by the organisations, their role has changed to be more active role in leadership especially around strategy and culture. NZ IoD defines the four pillars of good governance as determining purpose, driving culture, executive performance and ensuring compliance.

I’ve been involved in company director roles for many years as Board Secretary to a commercial board (AsureQuality) for four years and chairperson of our two Australian subsidiaries the last 18 months. This in addition to my numerous volunteer roles on the boards of not-for-profits (Botany Crime Watch Patrol, East Skate Club and East Auckland Tourism). I was also on the Board of UnitedFuture for eight years including as chair for three. I’ve learned a great deal from these positions but membership in the Institute of Directors and this course have helped lift my understanding of best practice.

Next step is moving down the Chartered Membership pathway.

Auckland's outdated election system hurts our democracy

The chief executive of Auckland Council will be sleeping easier after being relieved of one item on his contractual list of “must-dos”.

Jim Stabback no longer holds the responsibility of lifting voter turnout in the October 8 elections by more than 3%, from a dire record-low of 35.2% in 2019.

Councillors struck-off that requirement from a list of performance yardsticks that Stabback must meet over the coming year, though avoided stating the obvious – that maybe they should carry that burden.

- Who shoulders the burden of lifting Aucklanders' voting habits? Stuff 2 August 2022

Leaving oversight of elections to those the current, flawed system put into power is significant conflict of interest. Out sourcing the operations to commercial businesses is hardly better.

Local government elections for councils should be managed by very capable and independent Electoral Commission. They run the central government elections for parliament extremely well and could easily take over council elections. They’ve proven that they’re capable of moving with the times, unlike Auckland Council.

Instead of modernising our voting to the more democratic STV (Single Transferable Vote) system that ensures that your views are considered, Auckland's elected representatives continue to support the archaic FPP (First Past the Post) system that the public stopped Parliament from using in the 90s. Why have councillors kept the same, out dated system? Because it works for them.

We've known since before the super city that voting in local elections has been declining. We've know for over a decade that postal voting is becoming less practical. We've known for long enough that most Aucklanders don't understand council or why their vote matters.

But our councillors and mayor have sat on their hands, done nothing. Democracy isn't just voting in elections, but turnout is good indication of public's faith in the system. Will modernising our voting fix everything? No, but it would be sign to the public that their views matter.

STV isn't radical, it's used by councils across NZ. Dunedin, Hamilton, Wellington, New Plymouth, Nelson and Gisborne to name a few. Auckland's outdated voting system is bad for democracy.

It has to change.

If elected I will do everything to ensure it does so your voice is heard.

We can all do more to support our local not-for-profit

“Civil society sits at the heart of our daily activities. We rely heavily upon the vital and often invisible work of the not-for-profit (NFP) sector.

"New Zealand has the highest number of charities per capita in the OECD – over 28,000. This is undoubtedly too many, however their contribution is colossal and not always properly valued.

If we are talking dollar value, in 2018 the charity sector was worth over $12b per annum to our GDP."

Pru Etcheverry, ONZM, Stuff

From sports clubs to environmental groups, residents associations to animal rescue, support groups to community patrols - the list goes on. Not-for-profits do incredible work across New Zealand, delivering an enormous range of services that are critical to our communities.

Some are fortunate to have enough financial support that they have paid employees, but most rely heavily on volunteers. I’ve had the pleasure of serving on a number of Boards for not-for-profits and I’m always impressed with the dedication and passion of the people involved.

For good reasons there is a lot of transparency and accountability reporting that these groups must undertake. On top of the constant hunt for funding, the administration burden is significant. I’d like to see local and central government support this sector more by reducing the bureaucratic demands and focusing more on enabling these groups to thrive.

I’d also encourage anyone who is looking to do something rewarding to seriously consider helping out one of their local groups. Find one that connects with a passion you share, or that might need your skills. Even sports clubs need accountants, you don’t have to be an athlete.

Check out https://seekvolunteer.co.nz/ for groups looking for volunteers or for governance roles head to the NZ Institute of Directors vacancies page.

Howick Councillors change of heart on park sales too late to save Fortyfoot

While it’s good to see our councillors accept they had previously made the wrong decision and try to save Fortyfoot Park it has been too late. I welcome their recent efforts but today's outcome is the unfortunate but inevitable result of poor decisions they made two years ago.

On Tuesday 26 July 2022, a motion before council to prevent the sale of the public reserve at 9R Fortyfoot Lane in Sunnyhills failed to get sufficient support, losing 8-13.

The park was put up for sale as a result of the Asset Recycling programme initiated under the 2020/2021 Emergency budget which both Howick-ward Councillors Paul Young and Sharon Stewart voted for. The target for asset sales was set at a record $224 million and the list of initial target properties in the Howick ward included 34 Moore Street, 16 Fencible Drive and 28R Simon Owen Place. On the potential target list were 14 properties in Howick, including 9R Fortyfoot Lane, 76R Aberfeldy Avenue and 111R Golflands Drive. After intense public pressure the Golflands reserve has been withdrawn from the list, but both Aberfeldy and Fortyfoot remain as targets for sale.

I was there in the council chambers in July 2020 as our councillors both voted in full support of the Emergency Budget. I was stunned to see both of our elected representatives vote to sell hundreds of millions in community assets, knowing full well that beloved local parks were in the firing line.

The community feedback was clearly against selling these parks and the Howick Local Board were strongly opposed to the sales. My own submission on the budget criticised the asset sales, noting that the timing was extremely poor and Eke Panuku Development Auckland (the Auckland Council CCO responsible for the Asset Recycling programme) had a bad record of community engagement.

Asset recycling is a dreadful euphemism used to disguise what this really is - a firesale of community assets to cover poor financial management. Decades of poor governance, haphazard prioritisation and no financial discipline have left Auckland with record debt, endless rates rises and reduced services. To make matters worse, local parks are being sold to cover the shortfall.

I’ve been a vocal critic of the programme to sell parks and reserves since it was proposed in 2020.

“While I'm not ideologically opposed to asset sales, selling our reserves and greenspaces is something else entirely. As our city continues to grow and housing is intensified, these spaces become more important. Once gone, we'll never get them back. It's short sighted and fails to address the issues of waste and misspending.”

- Damian Light, February 2021 after attending a community meeting in Aberfeldy Park where both Howick-ward councillors failed to show up.

Sometimes it makes sense to sell some unused land to fund something better and more useful for the community. 2R Ti Rakau Drive is a good example of a small parcel of land that served little community use.

However when council does sell community assets, all revenue generated must be reinvested into the communities whose assets were sold. Putting the revenue into the general revenue pool is dishonest and robbing communities a second time.

Today's outcome is a sobering reminder that decisions made by council have serious, long term impacts on communities. I feel for the locals who have been forced to fight for their community park and been let down. I'm also fearful for the other parks whose fate we don't yet know, such as Aberfeldy.

East Auckland deserves better - we need councillors who will listen and act in the best interests of their community at all times, not just during an election year.

Council's failure to manage commercial assets costs Aucklanders again and again

“The lack of expertise and experience in monitoring commercial entities was made clear.”

John Crawford, former chief executive of Auckland Council Investments Ltd (ACIL), NZ Herald 12 July 2022

Last week, there was an article in the NZ Herald describing the failures of Auckland Council to manage its largest commercial assets. John Crawford was the former CEO of Auckland Council Investments Ltd (ACIL), which managed these assets until was removed in 2018 (ironically to save money). He is an assistant Commerce Commission commissioner and former head of Treasury’s Crown Ownership Monitoring Unit which monitored entities with a combined value of more than $100 billion so he knows a bit about this issue.

The Ports of Auckland and Auckland Airport are important gateways for both the region and country. The Ports of Auckland dominates our city harbour, importing and exporting cargo and people to the world. Auckland Airport is the third busiest in Australasia, with ¾ of all international visitors to New Zealand arriving through the terminal. They're also both strategic assets for Auckland Council who is the sole shareholder of the port and largest shareholders of the airport.

To reduce our reliance on rates and put a stop to endless rises, we need Auckland Council to diversify its income streams. This means better utilisation of the commercial assets that they own on behalf of Auckland. Both of these assets should represent key pillars in this approach - however, we've seen too many examples of poor oversight from Auckland Council. John Crawford believes that this is the result of a lack of experience at Council by staff and elected representatives - based on what I’ve seen, it’s hard to argue.

In April 2020, Auckland Airport blindsided its largest shareholder with a massive $1.2B capital raising. Auckland Council who, despite owning ⅕ of the company doesn’t have anyone on the Board or even actively monitoring the company. Caught short of cash and with little options, Auckland Council found its control diluted from 21.9% to 18% as well as a significant devaluation of the shares. Council staff reported that they’d lost an immediate $18m and missed a $70m gain from the subsequent rise in the airport's share price. As Auckland Council struggles with a lack of funding, its largest commercial asset was devalued and undermined, and some councillors still voted against any action. Councillor Chris Darby argued but failed to convince councillors to write to AIAL's board, or to review council policy on its airport shareholding. Instead they agreed to a commission a report.

Meanwhile the Ports of Auckland have poured millions of dollars into an automation project that has ended in failure, with $65M in software written off plus a further $70M on upgrading equipment to cope without automation. Not only has the project wasted eye watering amounts of money (approximately 60% of their annual revenue), but it has distracted the organisation while their poor safety record that has claimed too many lives.

Mayor Goff and his council have responded by conducting yet another review. I wish I could believe that council will learn from this costly mistake, but given its recent history I’m not expecting much. John Crawford notes that back in 2018 “the lack of expertise and experience in monitoring commercial entities was made clear to the mayor’s office, the council executive and a number of councillors.” Yet here we are, once again highlighting the need for people around the council table who have the focus and discipline to drive good outcomes for Auckland.

Auckland Council isn’t a business, but it owns significant commercial assets and has the ability to drive incredible economic growth. Done poorly, it will continue to cost us again, and again.

Delivering transparency safely - my submission on Local Electoral (Advertising) Amendment Bill

The Local Electoral (Advertising) Amendment Bill “would amend the Local Electoral Act 2001 to address concerns around candidate safety by loosening the requirement that candidates attach either their residential or business address to electoral advertising. It would allow email addresses, PO box or phone numbers, or links to an internet page to be used instead.“

The following is my submission on the Bill:

I support the intent of this bill - to help protect the privacy of candidates standing for local government.

While transparency and accountability of election advertising is critical to a fair and open democracy, we must also acknowledge the significance of requiring candidates to print their personal address on all advertising materials. 

As someone who has stood as a candidate for both local and central government, I know from experience the potential pitfalls of printing personal information on election materials. I also know that this is one of the many barriers that deter people from standing as candidates for their community. I commend parliament for resolving this issue.

The requirement to have contact information displayed ensures that there is accountability. The changes to allow these contact details include alternatives to a private residential address will still achieve this.

I encourage Parliament to consider how a similar change could be made for central government candidates and parties during general elections. While the larger, more established parties are able to use Parliament or other offices, this isn't always an option for those with less resources. Providing transparency and accountability could still be delivered by providing an identification number upon registration with the Electoral Commission that must be printed on materials.