February 2022: Local Board Member Report

It’s been an extremely busy couple of months. Firstly, an update on some big items that I worked on for our first board meeting back for the year (17 Feb).

Please note that the minutes have yet to be published, so the motions passed below while technically correct, are not formatted correctly and don’t include some minor things such as nominating members to represent the feedback at appropriate meetings.

Response to the unlawful holiday campers over summer: My Notice of Motion passed with unanimous support

The East Coast Bays is the best place in Auckland to live with some of the most beautiful family-friendly beaches around. We share our special place, with arms open, to all visitors. Unfortunately over the Christmas and New Year break, we had a significant issue with people holiday camping and parking cars over our beach reserves – which is unlawful under the Reserves Act 1977.

Julia Parfitt and I were contacted daily by residents with a long list of issues going on, including helpful photos of number plates which we were able to pass on to compliance staff we could get hold of. We worked with the relevant teams to increase staff capacity over the two long weekends which proved successful as camping groups were moved on quicker. The last item we needed to address was the bigger organisational issue of lack of compliance resource (across a number of matters). To this end, we’ve worked hard on a Notice of Motion (NoM) for our February Local Board meeting, We worked closely with other Local Boards (Devonport-Takapuna Local Board and Kaipatiki Local Board) to develop the NoM and this was copied in to their February meetings too (with supplementary information specific to their Local Boards).

I’ll keep you updated on the outcome.

Recommendations:

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

1. Express their view that enforcement of its many bylaws, including enforcement responsibilities under a range of legislation, is a core and essential function of Auckland Council.

2. Request that the relevant compliance enforcement teams be urgently provided sufficient resources to effectively carry out their roles.

3. Request that customer call centre staff are provided updated training and instruction in the city’s bylaws to enable them to carry out their roles accurately and effectively.

4. Request that the Chief Executive give direction for a compliance enforcement review across Auckland Council and Council-Controlled Organisations to take place before Easter, for the purpose of identifying the challenges and obstacles in enforcement and recommend solutions to overcome them.

5. Ask that the review investigates and reports back on resourcing options including, but not limited to, an increase in employed compliance enforcement officers; routinely contracting work out to third parties during peak times; warranting staff of relevant teams and Auckland Council contractors who are present in areas where bylaw breaches may occur; overcoming delineation issues between council departments and between Auckland Council and Auckland Transport; and/or the re-introduction of educative approaches by unwarranted employees at peak times.

6. Acknowledge that there will be an opportunity to provide this feedback via the Annual Budget 2022/23 consultation but consider that, given the wide range of problems reported by residents and elected members across Auckland and dissatisfaction that it is often not possible for these to be responded to and resolved, that this must be addressed and planned for with urgency.

7. Wish to thank the staff in the Compliance and Community Facilities teams who are doing an outstanding job under the circumstances of being severely under-resourced to deal with the sheer volume and variety of compliance breaches across the region.

8. Note that the attached Appendix should be read alongside this Notice of Motion which outlines the extent of the issues as they relate to our Local Board.

9. Request that we be provided the opportunity to speak to the contents of this Notice of Motion at the next meeting of the Regulatory Committee.

10. Ask that this Notice of Motion be forwarded to all Local Boards, Councillors, Mayor, and Chief Executive for their information.

11. An amendment was moved at the meeting to include “Request that Local Board Services staff investigate options for greater compliance enforcement within the local board area and to include this in the draft 2022/2023 work programme.”

[NoM signed by myself, Julia Parfitt, Gary Holmes and Janet Fitzgerald and received unanimous support]

Appendix A

As representatives of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board, one of the recurring pieces of feedback we receive is the frustration and disappointment residents have with Auckland Council’s inability to efficiently undertake compliance enforcement. Our residents see this as a core function of Auckland Council and the sentiment is very much a dejected ‘what’s the point of having bylaws if they’re not enforced’.

Across the spread of Auckland Council’s various bylaws and legislative enforcement responsibilities, the most common enforcement issues raised in our Local Board are:

1) Holiday camping in our beach reserves (including vehicles parking on reserves and beaches);

2) Sedimentation controls on building sites; and

3) Dog control on beaches, reserves, and parks.

For the purpose of this Appendix, we will focus on the issues relating to the enforcement of camping on our beach reserves as it is the best example to illustrate the systemic problems that exist. It also demonstrates immense opportunity there is in undertaking a review to identify and resolve those challenges to have more cohesive and efficient capability across Auckland Council and Council-Controlled Organisations (CCOs).

Context

Between Christmas Day and New Year’s Day 2021/22 we fielded countless complaints from residents about holidaymakers camping in tents on beach reserves all across our Local Board area including Browns Bay, Waiake, Waiwera, Hatfields, Arundel Reserve, Stanmore Bay, Manly, Tindalls, Matakatia, Arkles Bay and Gulf Harbour Hammerhead. For the sake of clarity, these were well-organised camping groups, not people who were homeless.

The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has the most beautiful, family-friendly beaches in Auckland. We welcome and encourage everyone to enjoy our special places. High visitor numbers, particularly over the peak summer period, is also the lifeline for so many of our small business owners in those beach towns who rely on visitors spending money in the vicinity.

The influx of unlawful camping on our beach reserves (breaching the Reserves Act 1977), and the sheer volume, was overwhelming and something that we had never seen before. While many were quiet campers, others brazenly drove and parked multiple vehicles over the Reserve, had noise complaints laid throughout the night, had multiple Public Safety and Nuisance bylaw complaints, and left unsanitary and hazardous waste in the area. In the Browns Bay example, holidaymakers broke into and used Auckland Council’s power supply and cut a bollard down to drive over our new near-million-dollar timber boardwalk.

Many of these campers understood that they were not permitted to camp in the reserves and ignored signage and advice given to them. A discussion between a local business owner with one camping group ended with the holidaymakers noting “They won’t do anything to stop us camping here. We’re coming back next weekend and there’s nothing they can do to stop us”.

Compliance response

Residents correctly reported these bylaw and illegal camping issues to Auckland Council via phone or the ‘Report It’ online form as well as contacting us as elected members. We received numerous complaints from residents, who when contacting Auckland Council, were told some of the following:

· ‘There are not enough staff members available to attend’.

· ‘It is not deemed to be a priority’.

· ‘The matter will be attended to within three to five days’.

· ‘Open fires in Beach Reserves are a permitted activity’ [incorrect information provided in reference to an open drum fire roasting whole animals].

· ‘[Auckland Council] will only take action after two consecutive nights camping or an immediate threat to people or property’.

· ‘Auckland Council are unable to enforce compliance matters involving cars parking on beaches – that is Auckland Transport’. [When then speaking with Auckland Transport (AT) people were told that it is not within their jurisdiction, and it is the responsibility of Auckland Council].

As elected members we followed these matters up and were in regular contact with any available staff we could get hold of in the Community Facilities, and Compliance Response teams. We also liaised with our Acting Area Commander and we wish to thank the efforts of Police and the staff who were available during the holiday period for their efforts in responding to illegal camping and other relevant bylaw breaches. The bylaw enforcement officers and warranted officers to enforce the Reserves Act were doing the very best job they could in the circumstances of being severely under-resourced to deal with the sheer volume of issues in our Local Board area, let alone the wider region.

Issues

In this example of illegal camping, it became apparent that there are some substantial, systemic issues that need to be addressed.

By their own admission, senior staff members were apologizing for being unable to respond due to having a ‘skeleton staffed team’. Staff were prioritising complaints, as they normally would, however, issues that would normally be a priority were not being attended to in a timely manner, or at all, due to the sheer volume of call-out requests. It is clear that these teams are severely under-resourced to undertake their roles, particularly in the peak summer period.

There also appeared to be some unnecessary complexities with teams and staff who deal with bylaw breaches versus the staff who are warranted to enforce legislative compliance issues. There was a mix of bylaw and Reserves Act compliance issues happening at the same time and it appeared to be unnecessarily complicated to enforce all the matters at the same time or for other staff who are present in parks and reserves already undertaking other jobs, to be able to enforce bylaws at the same time.

It was unfortunate to learn of the extent of misinformation that was being provided to residents by customer service centre staff. We appreciate that to train customer service centre staff to have a working knowledge of all Council bylaws and relevant legislative enforcement responsibilities would be difficult, though we do think there are some practical steps that could be taken to support staff, so they are providing correct information to residents.

Residents were left feeling frustrated and angry throughout this example. They were disappointed that some people are purposefully breaching bylaws and legislation and ruining the area for all to enjoy, and they were incredibly upset at the misinformation and lack of response when doing the right thing and calling it into Auckland Council. Residents were particularly frustrated in being told of the convoluted issues within Council departments to respond to certain matters, whose responsibility in Council something is, and passing the buck on to another CCO. Residents, rightly so, see Auckland Council as the all-encompassing organisation of the CCOs. They do not care whose responsibility particular issues are (i.e. a disagreement between Auckland Council and AT over who will deal with cars on beaches) – they just want the matter dealt with and resolved. Our residents expect better when it comes to a core function of Auckland Council like compliance enforcement.

Opportunities

We believe that there is significant opportunity for Auckland Council to lead a review (that would also include CCOs) to identify where problems exist across compliance enforcement and what actions could be taken to improve compliance outcomes, resident satisfaction, and staff well-being. We also believe that in taking a whole of Council and CCO approach, compliance enforcement in certain areas could be undertaken far more efficiently.

It is apparent to us that staff in compliance enforcement teams are stretched thinly trying to manage their immense workload at the best of times, and it is impossible for them to attend to all priority issues in peak season. We are concerned for the well-being of these staff members and believe that a compliance enforcement review would also be an appropriate way to investigate and resolve any possible well-being, and health and safety issues for staff in these teams.

We would like to see the review taken from an organisation (including CCOs) wide perspective and consideration given to it being undertaken by an independent reviewer. We do not think it would be appropriate for such a review to be given to the Managers of the relevant compliance teams, mainly due to the resource it would take away from undertaking their current roles.

Covid19 has and continues to be, the most challenging few years that Auckland Council has ever faced. Extremely difficult decisions have had to be made by the Governing Body and Local Board members. We fully appreciate the financial constraints Auckland Council is in, the savings and efficiencies required and projects on hold in order to maintain our essential functions and important responsibilities. Finding further resources to undertake a review of the core function of compliance enforcement and to equip our teams and staff to be able to respond to matters will be an initial challenge. We do see there to be substantial cost savings longer term though when this service can be operated more efficiently and particularly in cost-recovery with fines issued.

Providing feedback on bylaws: Freedom Camping in Vehicles, and Stormwater

The first board meeting back for the year, and we were hit with a number of opportunities to provide feedback on bylaw reviews. I did the Stormwater one, Julia and I did the Freedom Camping, and Julia and Janet Fitzgerald did the Signs Bylaw. I know that the Freedom Camping in Vehicles one is cause for some concern for some people, so here is what was passed:

Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw feedback/resolutions

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) tūtohi / receive public feedback on the proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Noho Puni Wātea ā-Waka 2022 / Auckland Council Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw 2022 in this agenda report.

b) whakarato / provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

Endorse the proposal to make a Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw 2022
Do not support proposal 2.2 outlining a maximum of two nights in the same road or off-road parking area. We believe one night is more appropriate.
Endorse proposal 3.12 that freedom camping in vehicles be prohibited at Metro Park (East)
Endorse Proposal 4.5 that Gulf Harbour Marina Hammerhead Reserve should be a restricted area, where freedom camping is allowed subject to site-specific conditions
Request that the number of freedom camping vehicles allowed in Schedule 2 of the designated area at Gulf Harbour Marina Hammerhead Reserve be increased from 10 to 20 and seek regional funding to increase the size of the proposed carpark in this area to accommodate this.
Note that support for proposal 4.5 is made with concern about the proposed freedom camping area being adjacent to the only all-weather boat launching ramp in the area, and therefore needs some investment to investigate and construct a freedom camping area that avoids conflict between campers, boat users and their trailers, and ferry commuters.
Recommend that urgent attention is paid to ensuring that one simplified set of rules for freedom camping, whether in vehicle or not, are made for the Auckland region, in order to prevent confusion, and aid in enforcement.
Note that the current range of legislation used for monitoring and enforcement of freedom camping in Auckland is confusing and difficult to enforce and can have the unintended consequence of a more permissive attitude towards breaches of statute and bylaws than is desired by the community
Request that Auckland Council make requests to the government to recommend bylaw infringement regulations for selected Auckland Council Bylaws via the provisions in the Local Government Act 2007 and by order in Council with the Governor General, in relation to the Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaws
Recommend that work progress quickly on defining which reserve lands of Auckland Council are held under the Reserves Act .
Recommend that the “no return” rule contain a more specific range than currently, and be measured in kilometres such as a diameter of 2 kilometres.
Recommend that camping on reserves and other council owned lands which is be covered by a similar enforcement and public notification approach as to the proposed Freedom Camping Vehicles Bylaw, in order to provide clarity and ease of use for the public and to those enforcing the rules.
Recommend that the monitoring of this bylaw be recognised as firstly and principally a council function, rather than a community responsibility, therefore ensuring that resource is allocated to this monitoring
Endorse any extra resourcing needed to assist with monitoring measures needed to enforce this bylaw.

Stormwater Bylaw feedback/resolutions

The resolutions I put up and that were passed were:

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) tūtohi / receive the public feedback, and thank the submitters, on the proposal to amend Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Wai Āwhā 2015 / Auckland Council Stormwater Bylaw 2015 in this report

b) whakarato / provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations

Proposal 1: Controls on public stormwater network and private stormwater systems
Endorse proposal 1 to introduce revised controls
Proposal 2: Additional requirements for vesting of public assets and approvals
endorse Proposal 2, as having additional regulations and controls is important to improve water quality
Proposal 3: Approving modifications or new engineered wastewater overflow points
endorse proposal 3 as a principle should be that new wastewater overflow points should not adversely affect the quality of our waterways.
Proposal Four: Restricting of excluding activities for parts of the stormwater network
Do not endorse a full exclusion of activities in parts of the stormwater network, rather, if they are navigable, well-sign posted and with no immediate risks to public health and safety, activities should be allowed for.
Recommend that activities that are primarily supporting volunteer ecological restoration work have a clear and simple method of applying for usage in all areas of the network, taking into account health and safety risks

Other feedback

Recommend that Auckland Council advocates for the ability to issue infringement notices under the Local Government Act 2002 as the process of using the Resource Management Act 1991 is a lengthy and time-consuming process that would warrant only the most serious offences to be worthy of taking court action.

Note that if the Resource Management act 1991 continues to be used as an enforcement framework for monitoring illegal discharges, the enforcement needs further resource, as the damage of illegal sedimentation is permanent in our harbours and estuaries.