Viewpoint – Why change local board funding?

The existing funding model for local boards is broken. 

The current ‘asset-based services funding’ is a hangover from the formation of the ‘super city’. It has a narrow focus on asset management, namely renewals, based on which services were provided by Auckland’s previous councils before amalgamation in 2010.

As a result, local boards with a lot of community assets tend to receive more funding than those with fewer assets.

The lion’s share of local board funding is divided into two envelopes. Typically, more than 90 percent is allocated for asset maintenance and renewals, with less than 10 percent allocated for discretionary ‘locally driven initiatives’. There is also ‘other’ funding, which included storm-related assistance this financial year.

To further complicate matters, funding for maintenance and renewals can vary from year to year. The asset management plan is set at a regional level, not by local boards, and funding filters down when repairs and maintenance fall due.

To address these legacy imbalances, I am proposing to accelerate fairer funding for local boards through reallocation and additional investment of $50 million over the first three years of Auckland Council’s Long-term Plan (10-year Budget/LTP) 2024/34.

More equitable funding distribution would be based on population (80 percent), deprivation (15 percent), and land area (five percent).

If we adopt this model, it makes sense that there would be winners and losers; and nobody likes to lose. For some local boards, the initial funding percent changes may look harsh on paper, but can mostly be attributed to the aforementioned fluctuations in ‘renewals’ funding, which would occur regardless.

On the upside, discretionary funding for locally-driven initiatives would more than double for all but one local board in year-one. And, the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board stands to benefit from a 21 percent increase in funding overall.

I also want to empower local boards with greater decision-making around community assets and buildings.

We must be good kaitiaki of community assets, and renewals are essential, but only to a certain point. Too often we see ageing facilities and buildings that, even ‘as-new’, no longer serve the needs and aspirations of rapidly growing and changing communities. It is okay to drop some facilities – you don’t have to defend the existence of everything, especially those that not enough people actually use.

Ratepayers deserve better value for money. It’s time to review and consolidate council-owned community assets. Some difficult decisions need to be made about what to repair, replace or redevelop, and that decision-making should sit close to those most affected.

Have your say when the LTP 2024/34 goes to public consultation, February 28 to March 28: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/have-your-say/topics-you-can-have-your-say-on/Pages/default.aspx