CBRRA's Submission to HLB 3 Year Plan
The Howick Local Board has developed a Draft 3 Year Plan, which is now open for submissions. The closing date for submissions is Thursday 23 July 2026.
The Howick Local Board has developed a Draft 3 Year Plan, which is now open for submissions. The closing date for submissions is Thursday 23 July 2026. The Plan and submission details are here: https://akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/local-board-plans-2026/howick-local-board-plan-2026/.
In essence, the Plan has 5 components, as outlined below.
Community – with 9 goals/objectives and 32 initiatives, 6 of which relate to Māori
Natural Environment – with 10 goals/objectives and 24 initiatives, 3 of which involve supporting Māori groups
Built Environment – with 9 goals/objectives and 13 initiatives
Economic Development – with 5 goals/objectives and 14 initiatives, 5 of which reference Māori initiatives
Transport – with 10 goals/objectives and 17 initiatives, a number of which are advocacy.
It also has 3 cross-cutting themes of Māori outcomes (8 themes); climate outcomes (linked to Ngā Hapori Momoho / Thriving Communities Strategy); and Equitable Outcomes, targeting investment; access to services, inclusion and fairness.
For the 2026/27 year operating HLB funding amounts to $33.9 million, 85% of which comes from rates. Operating Expenditure matches funding. 92% of operating expenses is attributable to community services, with the vast majority of this ($15.69 million) being maintenance costs. Capital funding (increases in debt, rises considerably from $15.09 million in the current financial year to $27.98 million in 2029/30. “Other community expenses” – which presumably includes a number of the 3 Year Plan goals – is $4.42 million, but falling to $$4.338 million by 2029/30. “Natural Environment” expenditure commences at $452,000, rising to $489,000 by 2029/30.
The publication of the 3 Year Plan was after our last committee meeting, and the closing date is before our next meeting. The Chairperson of the committee is reluctant to hold a special meeting to discuss the topic, but we will endeavour to reach a consensus on a submission by email. We will publish our conclusions on the website before 23 July.
For the record, our analysis of the objectives and the references to Māori is not intended to be racist. But the proposed plan refers only to Māori (6.3% of Howick Ward), with no reference to Asian (52.5% of the local population); European New Zealanders (38.1%) or Pacifica (8.0%).
Costs of increases in infrastructure capacity to support housing intensification
One of CBRRA’s concerns about the housing intensification proposals required by central government has been how Auckland Council can afford to fund increases in infrastructure capacity necessary to support increases in housing density. For CBRRA’s immediate area, where sewerage infrastructure is near capacity, this is no longer such an important issue now that Council is proposing much of the area to revert to Single House Zone and Watercare have given assurances that they will no longer require installation of sewage holding tanks. For Auckland as a whole it remains an issue.
We have raised our concerns with Chris Bishop, the Minister for Housing and Minister for Infrastructure, and with Simeon Brown, in whose electorate Cockle Bay now falls. Chris Bishop states that “housing is typically delivered gradually, enabling infrastructure upgrades to be delivered alongside growth”. Such a belief is a major worry. Major upgrades in capacity for something like an area-wide sewer network cannot be made gradually. It leaves many of us wondering whether central government truly understands the full picture and is capable of sound economic management.
On a more positive note, Simeon Brown’s office has sent us information on Central Government’s Incentives for Growth Fund – worth some $400 million over 4 years. Infometrics have calculated that Auckland Council will receive only $39 million from the fund, with only 8 other Councils receiving $1 million or more. Water and wastewater (sewerage) are excluded from the scheme – but this a major shortfall in the Cockle Bay area, which is at, or close to, capacity. We have a number of concerns on the impact of the fund, and have raised these with Simeon’s office. We will keep you updated.
