Agenda of Council meeting - Wednesday, 24 March 2021

Council Meeting Agenda

24 March 2021

MINUTES OF A Meeting OF THE Central Otago District Council
HELD IN Ngā Hau e Whā, William Fraser Building,

1 Dunorling Street, Alexandra
ON Wednesday, 3 February 2021 COMMENCING AT 10.30 am

PRESENT: His Worship the Mayor T Cadogan (Chairperson), Cr N Gillespie, Cr T Alley, Cr S Calvert, Cr L Claridge, Cr I Cooney, Cr S Duncan, Cr S Jeffery, Cr C Laws, Cr N McKinlay, Cr M McPherson, Cr T Paterson

IN ATTENDANCE: S Jacobs (Chief Executive Officer), L Macdonald (Executive Manager - Corporate Services), Q Penniall (Acting Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services), L van der Voort (Executive Manager - Planning and Environment), S Righarts (Chief Advisor), J Kasibante (Finance Manager), D McKewen (Accountant), N Lanham (Economic Development Manager), M Adamson (Policy Advisor), C Martin (Property and Facilities Officer – Vincent and Teviot Valley), L Stronach (Property Officer - Statutory), Paula Penno (Community and Engagement Manager), Nikki Aaron (Community Development Advisor) and R Williams (Governance Manager)

1 Apologies

There were no apologies.

2 Public Forum

There was no public forum.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

21.1.1 Confirmation of Minutes from the Previous Meeting

Resolution

Moved: Alley

Seconded: Cooney

That the minutes of the public part of the meeting of the Central Otago District Council held on 9 December 2020 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

4 Declaration of Interest

Members were reminded of their obligations in respect of declaring any interests. There were no further declarations of interest.

Note: Cr Jefferies assumed the Chair as the lead of the Economic Development and Community Facilities portfolio.

5 Reports for Decisions

21.1.3 Community Leasing and Licensing Policy

To consider the further feedback gathered on the amended Community Leasing and Licensing Policy.

Resolution

Moved: Jeffery

Seconded: Duncan

That the Central Otago District Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

Carried

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Paterson

That the Central Otago District Council

B. Notes the further feedback gathered on the subscription income definition.

C. Adopts the amended Community Leasing and Licensing Policy.

Carried

21.1.4 Economic Recovery Plan Progress Report

To provide an update on the implementation of the Economic Recovery Plan.

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Alley

That the report be received.

Carried

21.1.5 Otago Museum's Draft Annual Plan 2021-2022

To present Council with the 2021/2022 draft Annual Plan from the Otago Museum Trust Board for review and feedback, and to consider their request for a 6.5% increase on the annual levy charged to this Council.

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Alley

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Declines a levy increase of 6.5% in 2021/22 for the Otago Museum.

C. Recommends that Council funds a 2% CPI adjusted levy increase to the Otago Museum, in line with 2021/21 budgeted expenditure (an additional $617.69, which will increase the payment from $30,884.34 to $31,502.03).

Carried

Note: Cr McKinlay assumed the Chair as lead of the Three Waters and Waste portfolio.

21.1.6 Cleanfill and Hardfill Acceptance at Cromwell Transfer Station

To consider changes to the management of cleanfill and hardfill at Cromwell transfer station.

Resolution

Moved: Jeffery

Seconded: Paterson

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Agree that cleanfill and hardfill not be accepted at Cromwell transfer station from 1 March 2021 with alternative facilities available to the public at Parkburn Quarry.

Carried

Note: The Mayor assumed the Chair.

Note: With the agreement of the meeting item 21.1.17 was taken at this point.

6 Mayor’s Report

21.1.17 Mayor's Report

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Gillespie

That the Council receives the report.

Carried

Note: The Chief Executive of the Queenstown Lakes Community Housing Trust (Julie Scott) joined the meeting for item 21.1.7. Mary Flannery from the Central Otago Housing Trust was also in attendance for this item.

21.1.7 Council's role in housing: A market data update and direction on council's role in providing affordable housing

To consider the updated housing market analysis and provide direction on council’s role in providing affordable housing.

Ms Scott spoke to a presentation about the Queenstown Lakes Community Housing Trust and their work before responding to questions.

Ms Flannery from the Central Otago Community Housing Trust spoke about the work of the Trust to date and also responded to questions.

The Mayor thanked both Trusts for their work to date and for attending the meeting.

Resolution

Moved: Alley

Seconded: Calvert

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Notes the updated housing market analysis

Carried

Following discussion it was agreed to change resolution C by removing the word “providing.”

Resolution

Moved: Alley

Seconded: Cadogan

That the Council

C. Agrees in principle that council has a role in affordable housing.

Carried

Staff spoke to the two different recommendations (D and E) contained in the report. Following discussion, an amended recommendation D was put, along with a new resolution E to request staff to explore inclusionary zoning as part of the District Plan work programme.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Calvert

That the Council

D. Agrees to progressing work on developing an affordable homes model in Central Otago (including discussions with the Central Otago Community Housing Trust) based on the Queenstown Lakes Community Housing Trust Secure Home model

E. Request staff to include the provision of inclusionary zoning as part of the work programme for the District Plan.

Carried with Cr McKinlay recording his vote against.

Attachments

1 Presentation from Queenstown Lakes Community Housing Trust.

21.1.8 Grants Programme 2021-22

To consider the process for grant applications following the adoption of the 2021-31 Long Term Plan, and to establish a one-off hardship grant.

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: McPherson

That the Central Otago District Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Notes that the Grants Policy 2019 established that grant applications would no longer be accepted as submissions to the Long Term Plan.

C. Notes that transitioning to a fully contestable process may create a one-off funding gap for some groups, potentially causing financial hardship.

D. Agrees to establish a temporary hardship fund for the first quarter of the 2021-22 financial year, to be funded from the agreed Council allocated grant pot for the 2021-31 Long-term Plan.

Carried

Note: The meeting adjourned at 12.45pm and reconvened at 1.15pm.

21.1.9 Community Outcomes for Central Otago District

To seek approval from Council to adopt new community outcomes and well-being indicator measures for this district, based on work undertaken to gather current community sentiment and reporting data for the 2021 Long-term Plan.

Resolution

Moved: Calvert

Seconded: Cooney

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Adopts the revised community outcomes within the report included with the agenda for the 2021 Long-term Plan and ongoing Council strategic processes.

C. Approves the use of the Central Otago well-being indicator measures as a benchmark tool for assessing ongoing well-being in Central Otago district.

Carried

21.1.10 Minister of Conservation's Consent - Lease to Puna Rangatahi, Alexandra and Districts Youth Trust over Roxburgh Recreation Reserve

To consider granting consent (under delegated authority) on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to the issuing of a lease over part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve, to the Puna Rangatahi, Alexandra and Districts Youth Trust.

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Jeffery

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Agrees to grant consent (under delegated authority) on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to Council issuing a lease over part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve to the Puna Rangatahi, Alexandra and Districts Youth Trust as set out in resolution 20.6.4 of the Teviot Valley Community Board meeting held on 12 November 2020.

Carried

21.1.11 William Fraser Office Renovation - Project Update

To consider an update on the William Fraser Office Renovation Project.

Resolution

Moved: Claridge

Seconded: McKinlay

That the report be received.

Carried

21.1.12 Minister of Conservation's Consent - Easement over Sugarloaf Scenic Reserve [PRO: 62-3006-00]

To consider granting consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to Council granting an easement (in gross) to Aurora Energy Limited, over Lot 16 Deposited Plan 418764, being part of the Sugarloaf Scenic Reserve.

Resolution

Moved: Gillespie

Seconded: McKinlay

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Agrees to grant consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to the granting an easement (in gross) over Lot 16 Deposited Plan 418764 (scenic reserve), in favour of Aurora Energy Limited.

Carried

21.1.13 Minister of Conservation's Consent - Extension of Easement Rights over Roxburgh Recreation Reserve [PRO: 65-7040-00]

To consider granting consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to the extension of the rights contained in an existing easement over part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve.

Resolution

Moved: Jeffery

Seconded: Duncan

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Agrees to grant consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to Council granting an extension to the rights contained in the existing easement over Part Section 181 in favour of Section 175 Block II Teviot Survey District and Lot 1 DP 450706 to include:

· the right to drain sewerage; and,

· the right to convey water, power, and telecommunications.

Carried

21.1.14 Minister of Conservation's Consent - Easement over Pines Recreation Reserve [PRO: 61-2134-00]

To consider granting consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to Council granting an easement (in gross) to Aurora Energy Limited, over Lot 1 Deposited Plan 355061, being part of the ‘Pines’ Recreation Reserve.

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Calvert

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Agrees to grant consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to Council granting an easement (in gross) over Lot 1 Deposited Plan 355061 (recreation reserve), in favour of Aurora Energy Limited.

Carried

21.1.15 Minister of Conservation's Consent - Easement over Golf Park Recreation Reserve [PRO: 62-3048-00]

To consider granting consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to Council granting an easement (in gross) to Aurora Energy Limited, over Section 4 Block XCII Town of Cromwell, being part of the Cromwell Golf Park Reserve.

Resolution

Moved: Calvert

Seconded: Alley

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Agrees to grant consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to the granting an easement (in gross) over Section 4 Block XCII Town of Cromwell (recreation reserve), in favour of Aurora Energy Limited.

Carried

7 Reports for Information

21.1.16 Financial report for the period ending 31 December 2020

To consider the financial performance for the period ending 31 December 2020.

Resolution

Moved: Jeffery

Seconded: Claridge

That the report be received.

Carried

8 Community Board Minutes

21.1.18 Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 18 January 2021

Resolution

Moved: Jeffery

Seconded: Cooney

That the unconfirmed minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 18 January 2021 be received.

Carried

21.1.19 Minutes of the Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 19 January 2021

Resolution

Moved: Jeffery

Seconded: Cooney

That the unconfirmed minutes of the Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 19 January 2021 be received.

Carried

21.1.20 Minutes of the Maniototo Community Board Meeting held on 20 January 2021

Resolution

Moved: Jeffery

Seconded: Cooney

That the unconfirmed minutes of the Maniototo Community Board Meeting held on 20 January 2021 be received.

Carried

21.1.21 Minutes of the Teviot Valley Community Board Meeting held on 21 January 2021

Resolution

Moved: Jeffery

Seconded: Cooney

That the unconfirmed minutes of the Teviot Valley Community Board Meeting held on 21 January 2021 be received.

Carried

9 Status Reports

21.1.22 February 2021 Governance Report

To report on items of general interest and receive minutes and updates from key organisations.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Duncan

That the report be received and the changes to the 2021 meeting schedule be noted.

Carried

10 Date of Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 24 March 2021.

11 Resolution to Exclude the Public

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Jeffery

That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject matter of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under section 48 for the passing of this resolution
21.1.23 - Confirmation of Non-Public Minutes	s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
21.1.24 - Confidential Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 18 January 2021	s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
21.1.25 - Confidential Minutes of the Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 19 January 2021	s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
21.1.26 - Confidential Minutes of the Maniototo Community Board Meeting held on 20 January 2021	s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
21.1.27 - February 2021 Confidential Governance Report	s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7

Carried

The public were excluded at 1.36pm and the meeting closed at 1.39pm.

...................................................

CHAIRPERSON

24 March 2021

5 Reports for Decisions

21.2.2 Minister of Conservation's Consent - Easements over Local Purpose (Road) Reserve [PRO: 62-3116-E1]

Doc ID: 526103

1. Purpose of Report

To consider granting consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to Council granting easements over Lot 101 Deposited Plan 490721 (Local Purpose (Road) Reserve).

Recommendations

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Agrees to grant consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to Council granting the following easements over Lot 101 Deposited Plan 490721 being Local Purpose (Road) Reserve:

- over Lot 101 DP 490721 (Local Purpose (Road) Reserve) in favour Lot 1 DP 505292 for the purpose of conveying water, sewage, electricity, and telecommunications.

- (in gross) in favour of Aurora Energy Limited.

- (in gross) in favour of Chorus NZ Limited.

2. Background

At their meeting of 08 March 2021, the Cromwell Community Board (the Board) considered an application for easements over Lot 101 Deposited Plan 490721, (Local Purpose (Road) Reserve), and over Lot 1 Deposited Plan 505292.

A copy of the report to the Board dated 08 March 2021 is attached as Appendix 1.

On consideration the Board resolved (Resolution 21.2.4) as follows:

B. Agrees to grant an easement (in gross) to Aurora Energy Limited for $1, over Lot 16 Deposited Plan 418764 (being part of the Sugarloaf Scenic Reserve), to provide for the upgrading and reinforcement of the existing network, subject to:

· The applicant meeting all costs associated with preparing and registering the easement agreement.

· The Minister of Conservation’s consent.

As noted in the report dated 08 March 2021 the granting of the easements over Lot 101 Deposited Plan 490721, which is a Local Purpose (Road) Reserve, is subject to the consent of the Minister of Conservation.

The role of the Minister of Conservation in this matter is to:

· be satisfied that the granting of the easement conforms with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.

· ensure that due process under the Act has been followed.

· consider submissions resulting from public notification (when required if applicable).

3. Discussion

Due Process – Easements over Reserve Land

Section 48(1) of the Reserves Act 1977 (the Act) authorises the granting of rights of way and other easements. Subject to the Resource Management Act 1991, and with the consent of the Minister of Conservation, an administering body may grant rights of way or other easements over a reserve for the following purposes:

(a) any public purpose; or

(b) providing access to any area included in an agreement, lease, or licence granted under the powers conferred by this Act; or

(c) the distribution or transmission by pipeline of natural or manufactured gas, petroleum, biofuel, or geothermal energy; or

(d) an electrical installation or work, as defined in section 2 of the Electricity Act 1992; or

(e) providing or facilitating access or the supply of water to or the drainage of any other land not forming part of the reserve or for any other purpose connected with any such land.

Prior to granting any right of way or easement under section 48(2) of the Act requires an administering body to give public notice of their intention to grant the rights over the reserve, however. Section 48(3) states that public notification is not required where:

· the reserve is vested in an administering body and is not likely to be materially altered or permanently damaged; and,

· the rights of the public in respect of the reserve are not likely to be permanently affected.

As noted in Appendix 1, Lot 101 Deposited Plan 490721 vested in Council on deposit. It is a Local Purpose (Road) Reserve which is expected to become legal road.

The granting of the easements for the purposes of conveying water, sewage, electricity, and telecommunications recognises:

· the provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 whereby the easements are a condition of the associated resource consent;

· that utility operators are legally entitled to install services in legal road as a matter of right; and;

· the installation of the services will not materially alter the reserve or affect the rights of the public.

Accordingly, public consultation under section 48(2) of the Act is not required in this instance.

Minister of Conservation’s Consent

In accordance with section 48(1) of the Act, the Minister of Conservation’s must consent to an administering body granting rights of way or other easements over a reserve. The purpose of the Minister’s consent is to ensure due process under the Act has been followed by Council as the administering body.

Pursuant to section 10 of the Act, and in accordance with the ‘Instrument of Delegation to Territorial Authorities’ dated 12 June 2013, the Minister of Conservation has delegated the granting of that consent to the Council.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

To grant consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to Council granting the following easements over Lot 101 Deposited Plan 490721 being Local Purpose (Road) Reserve:

- over Lot 101 DP 490721 (Local Purpose (Road) Reserve) in favour Lot 1 DP 505292 for the purpose of conveying water, sewage, electricity, and telecommunications.

- (in gross) in favour of Aurora Energy Limited.

- (in gross) in favour of Chorus NZ Limited.

Advantages:

· The purpose of the easements are consistent with the reservation of the land

· The granting of the easements are consistent with section 48 of the Reserves Act 1977.

· The works will not materially alter the land.

· Granting the rights will not compromise the use of the land.

· Recognises that due process has been followed.

Disadvantages:

· None.

Option 2

To not grant consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to Council granting an easement (in gross) over Lot 101 Deposited Plan 490721.

Advantages:

· None.

Disadvantages:

· Does not recognise that due process has been followed.

· The applicant will not be able to undertake the proposed works.

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	The Local Government Act 2002 does not apply to this decision. The Minister of Conservation’s consent is delegated to Council in accordance with section 10 of the Reserves Act 1977 and with the ‘Instrument of Delegation to Territorial Authorities’ dated 12 June 2013.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	There are no financial implications related to the recommendation.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	The recommendation is consistent with the Reserves Act 1977. The proposed works are consistent with the provisions of the Council’s District Plan and with the Resource Management Act 1991.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No sustainability, environmental or climate change impacts are related to the decision as the granting of the rights and the associated works will have no material effect on the land.
Risks Analysis	There are no risks to Council associated with the recommended option.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	Pursuant to section 48(3) of the Reserves Act 1977, public advertising of the intention to grant of an easement over a reserve or any part thereof is not required where the reserve is not likely to be materially altered or permanently damaged; and the rights of the public in respect of the reserve are not likely to be permanently affected.

6. Next Steps

The following steps will/have been undertaken in association with having the easement registered:

1. Community Board Approval 08 March 2021

2. Consent of the Minister of Conservation 24 March 2012

3. Applicant advised of outcome Late March 2021

7. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Copy of Report dated 08 March 2021 ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Linda Stronach	Louise van der Voort
Property Officer - Statutory	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
9/03/2021	10/03/2021

Council meeting

24 March 2021

21.2.4 Application for easements over Lot 101 DP 490721 and Lot 1 DP 505292

Doc ID: 525944

1. Purpose of Report

To consider an application for easements over Lot 101 Deposited Plan 490721, (Local Purpose (Road) Reserve), and over Lot 1 Deposited Plan 505292.

Recommendations

That the Cromwell Community Board

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Agrees to grant easements for $1:

- over Lot 101 DP 490721 (Local Purpose (Road) Reserve) in favour Lot 1 DP 505292 for the purpose of conveying water, sewage, electricity, and telecommunications.

- (in gross) in favour of Aurora Energy Limited over Lot 101 DP 490721 and Lot 1 DP 505292.

- (in gross) in favour of Chorus NZ Limited over Lot 101 DP 490721 and Lot 1 DP 505292.

Subject to:

· The Minister of Conservation’s consent to the easements being granted over Lot 101 DP 490721.

· The Applicant, AC/JV Holdings Limited, meeting all costs associated with preparing and registering the easement agreements.

C. Authorises the Chief Executive to do all that is necessary to give effect to the resolution.

2. Background

Harvest Road (the Road) runs south off McNulty Road. It is a short road with a legal length of about 210 metres. The Road resulted from an industrial subdivision that was undertaken in 2015. There is a parcel of Local Purpose (Road) Reserve at the southern end of Harvest Road.

The Local Purpose (Road) Reserve vested in Council on deposit of the 2015 industrial subdivision. The associated resource consent notes that the reserve will later become legal road. As legal road, Harvest Road will then provide through access to other industrial land including Lot 1 Deposited Plan (DP) 505292.

AC/JV Holdings Limited (the Applicant) hold building and resource consents over Lot 1 DP 505292. The building consent provides for the construction of a workers’ housing complex on the upper northern corner of Lot 1 DP 505292 as shown below in figure 1.

Figure 1 – Site of Workers’ Accommodation on Lot 1 DP 505292

The resource consent provides the Applicant with approval to subdivide Lot 1 DP 505292 into three lots.

Lot 1 will contain the workers’ housing complex, Lot 3 will vest as legal road, and Lot 2 will contain the balance of land. An extract of the subdivision plan is shown below in figure 2.

Figure 2 – Extract of Subdivision Plan

On 09 February 2021 the subdivision plan was approved by Council. The subdivision plan may now be lodged with Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) for approval. On approval a number of easements will be created. These are shown below in an extract from the Schedule of Easements attached to subdivision.

Figure 3 – Extract of Easements to be created on approval of LT Plan 556781

The Applicants have completed the majority of the works associated with the construction of the workers’ housing complex. It is ready to be connected to the power and other service networks. Once connected to the services the complex will be ready for habitation.

Having a plan approved by LINZ can take approximately 2 months. Until the plan is approved, and the various rights created, Aurora Energy Limited and Chorus NZ Limited cannot install their services to the complex. This would cause significant delays to completion and habitation of the complex.

Alternatively, the Applicants are now applying for private easements over Lot 101 DP 490721, being the access and servicing corridor, in favour of Lot 1 DP 505292. The easement rights requested include the right to convey water, sewage, electricity, and telecommunications.

The Applicants are also applying for easement in gross in favour of Aurora Energy Limited and Chorus NZ Limited over Lot 101 DP 490721 and Lot 1 DP 505292. This would enable the installation of all services and completion of the workers’ accommodation.

3. Discussion

Lot 1 DP 505292

Lot 1 DP 505292 is Council freehold land. It is the land that the worker’s accommodation facility is being constructed on and that will later be subdivided. The Applicants have an agreement to purchase this land. Any easements granted over Lot 1 DP 505292 for the purposes of Lot 1 DP 556781 will carry over on subdivision and apply accordingly.

Lot 101 DP 490721

Lot 101 DP 490721 is a Local Purpose (Road) Reserve. Lot 101 DP 490721 vested in Council on deposit in 2015 and is subject to the Reserves Act 1977, however. It is expected to vest as legal road at a later date.

Utility operators are legally entitled to install services in legal road as a matter of right.

Granting rights to convey water, sewage, electricity, and telecommunications over Lot 101 DP 490721 are consistent reservation of the land. It is also consistent with the future intention to vest the reserve as road. Accordingly, the granting of easement will not materially alter the land, nor compromise its use as a reserve.

Legal

Section 48 of the Reserves Act 1977 states that in the case of reserves vested in an administering body, the administering body, may with the consent of the Minister (of Conservation) and on such conditions as the Minister thinks fit, grant easements over any part of a reserve for an electrical installation or work, as defined in section 2 of the Electricity Act 1992.

Section 2 of the Electricity Act 1992 defines an electrical installation as “all fittings beyond the point of supply that form part of a system that is used to convey electricity to a point of consumption”. The poles, voltage regulators, transformers and cables meet this definition.

The purpose of the Reserves Act 1977 is to provide for and to protect reserves for the benefit of the community. Therefore, the issuing of rights over a reserve is generally accepted as being a last resort in the absence of other practical alternatives, particularly where there is likely to be a material effect on the reserve.

Financial

Historically, easements of this nature have been exchanged at the nominal rate of $1. As the easements are provided for on deposit of the subdivision plan, and as Lot 101 DP 490271 is expected to become legal road it is proposed that the nominal rate of $1 also be levied in this instance.

All costs associated with the works, and with the preparation and registration of the easement agreement will be paid by the Applicants.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

To agree to grant easements for $1:

- over Lot 101 DP 490721 (Local Purpose (Road) Reserve) in favour Lot 1 DP 505292, for the purpose of conveying water, sewage, electricity, and telecommunications.

- (in gross) in favour of Aurora Energy Limited over Lot 101 DP 490721 and Lot 1 DP 505292.

- (in gross) in favour of Chorus NZ Limited over Lot 101 DP 490721 and Lot 1 DP 505292.

Subject to:

· The Minister of Conservation’s consent to the easements being granted over Lot 101 DP 490721.

· The Applicant, AC/JV Holdings Limited, meeting all costs associated with preparing and registering the easement agreements.

Advantages:

· Will enable the Applicant to install services to the workers’ accommodation facility prior to depositing the subdivision plan and applying for the new titles.

· The rights being granted are provided for in in the Schedule of Easements attached to the subdivision plan.

· The work will not materially alter the land or compromise the Road.

· Recognises the provisions of Section 48 of the Reserves Act 1977.

Disadvantages:

· None.

Option 2

To not grant easements over Lot 101 DP 490721 (Local Purpose (Road) Reserve or Lot 1 DP 505292.

Advantages:

· None.

Disadvantages:

· Will not enable the Applicant to install services to the workers’ accommodation facility prior to depositing the subdivision plan and applying for the new records of titles.

· Will delay completion and inhabitation of the workers’ accommodation facility.

· Does not recognise the provisions of the Section 48 of the Reserves Act 1977.

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	While not relating directly to any Local Government purpose there is a shortage of workers’ accommodation in the district, so completion promotes the economic wellbeing of the district in the present and for the future. This decision promotes the social wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by enabling power to be supplied to light a path through a Council reserve.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	There are no financial implications for Council relating to this decision as all costs associated with the works and the creation of the easement will be met by AC/JV Holdings Limited.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	The electrical works are a permitted activity under rule 13.7.7 of Council’s Operational District Plan, with the recommended option also being consistent with the Electricity Act 1992.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No sustainability, environmental or climate change impacts are foreseen.
Risks Analysis	There is no risk to Council associated with the recommended option as the rights requested now will be created in due course as part of the resource consent process.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The Significance and Engagement Policy has been considered, with none of the criteria being met or exceeded.

6. Next Steps

The following steps will be undertaken in association with having the easement registered:

1. Community Board Approval 08 March 2021

2. Minister of Conservation’s Approval 24 March 2021

3. Applicant advised and works authorised Late March 2021

7. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Linda Stronach	Louise van der Voort
Property Officer - Statutory	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
28/02/2021	5/01/2021

24 March 2021

21.2.3 Rural Networks South Island rent review.

Doc ID: 521469

1. Purpose of Report

To consider reviewing the licence fees and power charges payable by Rural Networks South Island for the leases held over various Council reserves.

Recommendations

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Agrees Council agrees to:

1. Reduce the licence fees on the Rural Networks South Island’s Clyde, Earnscleugh, Sugarloaf and Alexandra Airport sites from $5,000, to $2,400 per annum, plus GST.

2. Reduce the licence fee on the Rural Networks South Island Gilligans Gully site from $6,000 to $4,800 per annum, plus GST.

3. Adopt a simple doubling (or tripling if applicable) of the annual rental with a provision for the licence holder to recover a maximum of the 75% (per annum) of the total fee from the subtenant(s) as the methodology for determining licence fees.

4. Reduce the power charges at the Clyde and Gilligans Gully sites from $750 per annum to $600 per annum plus GST per occupation.

C. Authorises the Chief Executive to do all that is necessary to give effect to the resolution.

2. Background

At their meeting of 26 August 2020 Council resolved to grant five licences to occupy to Rural Networks South Island (the Company). The licences legalised the Company’s four existing occupations on Council reserves, and one at the Alexandra Airport.

A copy of the report dated 26 August 2020 is attached as Appendix 1.

The associated resolution (Resolution 20.7.18) included a number of terms and conditions including a formula for assessing licence fees and the on-charging power (where applicable).

A copy of the Resolution 20.7.18 is attached as Appendix 2.

As noted in the report dated 26 August 2020, the Company disagreed with the valuation advice received from QV and ruralvalue relating to licence fees for Wireless Internet Service Provider (WISP) sites. The Company also disagreed with the advice received from the electrical engineer regarding the estimated power consumption and costs.

In December 2020 the Company provided Council with a letter from Ernie Newman. Mr Newman is the secretariat of the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association of New Zealand Incorporated (WISPA.NZ).

Mr Newman’s letter advises that WISPA.NZ members have found that typical licence fees range from zero to $1,500 per annum, with free internet services often provided to the landowner. The letter also advises that maximum licence fees would be in the $2,000 per annum range.

A copy of Mr Newman’s letter is attached as Appendix 3.

The Company has also provided copies of power accounts for their Earnscleugh site. The Earnscleugh antenna has its own connection to the electricity network. The power accounts indicate that a single antenna uses approximately $50 per month or approximately $600 of power per annum.

With the exception of the Gilligans Gully site, the Company have now asked for the licence fees and power charges to be reconsidered based on the information provided in December 2020.

The licence fee at the Gilligans Gully site was determined at $6,000 per annum. This is because the licence includes the right to sublet to 2 Degrees Mobile Limited. In late 2019 2 Degrees Mobile Limited (2 Degrees) entered into an agreement to collocate an antenna on the Company’s tower at Gilligans Gully. Since December 2019 2 Degrees have paid the Company a rental of $3,600 per annum and a contribution of $1,500 toward power charges.

By adjustment, the Company would then be responsible for $2,400 per annum of the licence fee for the Gilligan’s Gully site.

3. Discussion

To bring all licence fees into alignment with the Gilligans Gully site it is now proposed that the rental for the Clyde, Earnscleugh, Sugarloaf and Alexandra Airport sites be reduced to $2,400 per annum.

In recognition of the Company’s investment in the infrastructure, it is proposed that licence fee at the Gilligan’s Gully site be reduced to $4,800 per annum or double the standard licence fee. It is also proposed that the licence includes a provision enabling the Company to recover a maximum of 75% ($3,600) from the subtenant. By adjustment, the Company would then be responsible for $1,200 per annum of the licence fee for the Gilligan’s Gully site.

It is now proposed that future collocation charges are assessed by doubling the existing licence fee and providing the licence holder with the right to collect a maximum of 75% of the licence fee from the subtenant.

It is also recommended that the power charges for each tenancy at the Clyde and Gilligans Gully sites be reduced to $600 per annum.

It is proposed that the revised fees and charges apply retrospectively from the commencement date of 01 July 2020. It is not proposed that any other terms or conditions of Resolution 20.7.18 be reviewed.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

That the Council agrees to:

1. Reduce the licence fees on the Rural Networks South Island’s Clyde, Earnscleugh, Sugarloaf and Alexandra Airport sites from $5,000, to $2,400 per annum, plus GST.

2. Reduce the licence fee on the Rural Networks South Island Gilligans Gully site from $6,000 to $4,800 per annum, plus GST.

4. Reduce the power charges at the Clyde and Gilligans Gully sites from $750 per annum to $600 per annum plus GST per occupation.

Advantages:

· Aligns with the additional information provided by the licence holder.

· Provides a simple method of calculating fees payable for instances of collocating.

Disadvantages:

· Does not align with the information previously provided by QV and ruralvalue.

Option 2

That the Council does not agree to reduce the licence fees, the power charges, or to adopt the new methodology for determining licence fees.

Advantages:

· Aligns with the information previously provided by QV and ruralvalue.

Disadvantages:

· Does not align with the additional information provided by the licence holder.

· Does not provides a simple method of calculating fees payable for instances of collocating.

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	While infrastructure for internet services is not a Council activity, this promotes the social and economic wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by enabling Rural Networks South Island to continue to transmit wireless internet services in a sustainable manner.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	The income anticipated will be reduced in the interim, but sustainable in the longer term.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	The decision to reduce the licence fees and power charges gives consideration to the original advice and is consistent with the additional information since provided.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No sustainability, environmental or climate change impacts are related to the recommendation.
Risks Analysis	The licence holder may not be able to sustain his business if the fees and charge are not reduced.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The Significance and Engagement Policy has been considered with none of the criteria being met or exceeded.

6. Next Steps

1. Licences updated and sent to licence holder for execution April 2021

2. Licence fees and power charges invoiced April 2021

7. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Copy of report to the Board dated 26 August 2020 ⇩

Appendix 2 - Copy of Resolution 20.7.18.pdf ⇩

Appendix 3 - Copy of letter ex secretariat WISPA.NZ.pdf ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Linda Stronach	Louise van der Voort
Property Officer - Statutory	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
26/01/2021	10/03/2021

Council meeting

24 March 2021

Council

26 August 2020

Report for Decision

To consider legalising the existing Rural Networks South Island occupations (Doc ID: 449252)

1. Purpose of Report

To consider legalising the existing occupations by Rural Networks South Island, the granting (under delegated authority) of the Minister of Conservation’s consent, and the adoption of a standard for assessing site fees and other outgoings.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Recommendations

That the Council:

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Approves, subject to the Reserves Act 1977, the granting of licences to Rural Networks South Island for the purpose of locating telecommunications towers on sites on the following reserves:

· Gilligans Gully Road, being Part Lot 8 DP 429123,

· Clyde Lookout Road, being Part Town Belt of Clyde,

· Earnscleugh Road, being Part Section 149 Block I Fraser Survey District, and;

· Sugarloaf, being Part Lot 15 DP 418764

C. Agrees to the inclusion of terms in the Gilligans Gully licence providing for:

· the existing sub-tenancy to 2 Degrees Limited, and;

· the charging of a fee to cover power at $750 per annum per tenant, subject to adjustment by CPI on review.

D. Agrees to include a term in the Clyde Lookout Road licence providing for the charging of a fee to cover power at $750 per annum, subject to adjustment by CPI on review or renewal.

E. Agrees to grant consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to Council issuing licences over sites on the scenic and recreation reserves identified above in B.

F. Approves, subject to the Airport Authorities Act 1966, the granting of a lease to Rural Networks South Island for the purpose of locating a telecommunications tower at the Alexandra Airport, being Part Lot 2 DP 300842, subject to the Company continuing to provide free internet services to the Airport Terminal.

G. Agrees to the new licences and the lease being granted for a term of 5 years each, with one right of renewal, subject to adjustment by CPI on renewal, commencing 01 July 2020.

H. Approves the use of the Licence Fee Calculator (shown in Figure 6) for the purpose of determining current rentals and subrentals.

I. Agrees, subject to adjustment by CPI, to the Licence Fee Calculator being adopted as the standard for determining future rentals and subrentals for telecommunications sites on Council reserves.

J. Authorises the Chief Executive to do all that is necessary to give effect to the resolution.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2. Background

In June 2017, a report was presented to Council’s Waste and Infrastructure Committee (the Committee) recommending that leases be granted over the Gilligans Gully and Clyde water reservoir sites to Greenfields Internet Limited (Greenfields). Greenfields were noted as being an internet service provider that specialised in providing ultra-fast broadband primarily using wireless technology.

The report noted that the Alexandra, Clyde, Cromwell and Roxburgh townships would be included in the rollout of the Government’s Ultra-Fast Broadband programme. It also noted that the programme would not be extending into the surrounding rural residential areas, or the Earnscleugh basin.

With services already established in the Cromwell township and lower part of the Cromwell basin, Greenfields offered to provide its services to the residents of Alexandra, Clyde, Earnscleugh and surrounding rural areas. To do this, Greenfields proposed to lease sites at the Gilligans Gully and Clyde water reservoirs.

The Committee agreed with the proposal and resolved (Resolution 17.3.5) as follows:

B. AGREED that a lease be granted to Greenfields Internet to locate towers to transmit wireless ultra-fast broadband at the Gilligans Gully and Clyde reservoir sites at an annual charge of $1.00 per year until 30 June 2020 for each site.

During presentation of the 2017 report it was noted that a tower erected by Greenfields to serve the lower Cromwell basin, which was meant to have been located on an adjacent private property, had been built on the Sugarloaf Scenic Reserve. In addition, it was noted that Greenfields had a fourth tower on the Alexandra Waterfront Domain Reserve off Earnscleugh Road.

In an effort to legalise the additional sites, it was recommended that they be included when the licences under Resolution 17.3.5 were granted. Accordingly, the licence agreement identifies the following four 25 square metres sites:

1. Gilligans Gully Road, being Part Lot 8 DP 429123

2. Clyde Lookout Road, being Part Lot 1 27327

3. Earnscleugh Road, being Part Section 149 Block I Fraser Survey District and Part Lot 3 DP 27759, and;

4. Sugarloaf, being Part Lot 15 DP 418764

On issue, and at Greenfield’s request, those licences were granted in the name of Rural Networks South Island Limited (the Company). The Company, which has retained ownership of the towers, is no longer affiliated with Greenfields Internet Limited.

In recognition of the Company’s investment in the district, an initial peppercorn rental of $1.00 per annum plus GST per site was set for the first three years. A condition providing for review of the licence fee on 30 June 2020 was included in the agreement, with a market rental to apply thereafter.

On review it was noted that resolutions did not exist for two of the four sites. Further investigation also identified that the sites were Council reserves. This meant the original licences should have been granted in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977 and consented to by the Minister of Conservation. As the report was written outside of the Property Department it seems that this requirement was overlooked resulting in the licences granted under Resolution 17.3.5 being invalid.

3. Discussion

To legalise the existing occupations, it is proposed that new licences be granted in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977 (the Act).

Section 48A(1)(a) of the Act permits Council as administering body, to grant a licence over a reserve for the purpose of erecting and maintaining a communications mast, with the Minister of Conservation’s consent.

The role of the Minister of Conservation (the Minister) is to:

· be satisfied that the issuing of the lease conforms with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977 (the Act),

· confirm that the proposed lease complies with the purpose of the reserve,

· ensure that due process under the Act has been followed, and to;

· consider submissions resulting from public notification (when required).

Section 10 of the Act provides for delegation of the Minister’s consent in certain circumstances. In the “Instrument of Delegation to Territorial Authorities” dated 12 June 2013, the Minister delegated the granting of consent to leases issued under section 48A(1)(a) to Council.

The construction of antennas is a ‘permitted activity’ in the Rural Resource Area and requires resource consent in the Residential Resource Area pursuant to Rule 13.7.11(iii)(b) of the District Plan. Any licence granted would be subject to the applicant having obtained all permits and consents required for installation and construction.

The four sites and their details are shown below in Figures 1–4.

Figure 1 – Gilligans Gully Road, being Part of Lot 8 DP 429123 (Recreation Reserve)

Figure 2 – Clyde Lookout Road, being Part Town Belt of Clyde (Recreation Reserve)

Figure 3 – Earnscleugh Road, being Section 149 Block I Fraser Survey District (Recreation Reserve)

Figure 4 – Sugarloaf, being Part Lot 15 DP 418764 (Scenic Reserve)

In 2019, the Company applied to Council to vary the licence held over the Gilligans Gully site. This was to provide for a sub-tenancy to 2 Degrees Limited. As this would reduce proliferation of towers throughout the district, the Vincent Community Board resolved (Resolution 19.6.24) to grant that request.

It is proposed that the new licence over the Gilligans Gully site recognises that resolution and contains a provision to sublet.

The Company also has a tower on a fifth site at the Alexandra Airport as shown below in Figure 5. While the granting of the lease over the Airport was operational, it was done so on the proviso that the Company supplied the terminal with internet. It was also intended that the lease would contain the same provisions as those over the reserves.

An agreement was supplied for execution but has never been returned to Council.

Figure 5 – Alexandra Airport Site, being Part Lot 2 DP 300842

Section 6 of the Airport Authorities Act 1966 permits Council, as airport authority, to grant a lease over all or any part of any land vested in the airport authority, for any purpose that will not interfere with the safe and efficient operation of the airport. Section 6 also provides for the termination of the lease at any time should the land be required for airport purposes.

To validate the occupation, it is proposed that Council reissues the Company with a lease over Part Lot 2 DP 300842 in accordance the provisions of the Airport Authorities Act 1966. It is also proposed that the Company continues to provide the terminal with internet.

Valuation Advice for Rental Purposes

As noted previously, in recognition of the Company’s investment in the district a peppercorn rental was payable for each site with a commercial market rental being payable on review from 01 July 2020.

General Manager of Quotable Valuer Limited (QV), David Nagel, has advised that as many towers and antennas are located on private property under private agreement, the gathering of rental data has been challenging even for valuers. However, it is his understanding that rental rates range between $7,000 to $10,000 per annum and are usually for a 20–25 year lease term. Mr Nagel also advised that higher rentals might apply in locations close to urban areas where gaining resource consents is more challenging.

To gain more localised advice, the matter was further discussed with the Dunedin-based National Manager of ruralvalue (a subsidiary of QV), David Paterson. Mr Paterson advised that rentals are generally calculated using comparable rentals as a base. Where that data is not available, the alternative is to assess the land in question’s value and apply an appropriate rental rate to the land.

Mr Paterson noted that most cellular providers have a set rental which they offer for a site, with more recent rentals (late 2019) sitting around $8,000 per annum. He also noted that QV had records of sales of cell phone sites at around $100,000, with rentals depending on how strategic the site was.

Mr Paterson was not aware of any difference between the rentals for cellular towers versus those for wireless internet providers. In finishing, Mr Paterson’s advice to Council was to determine a standard rental for each site as this would keep it simple and limit the need to have a valuation completed for each application.

The Company has disagreed with the valuation advice received from QV and ruralvalue. The Company believes that the site rental for Wireless Internet Providers should be considerably less than that paid by cellular providers. No evidence in support of that belief has been provided.

Collocation Rentals

The industry standard for a single collocation scenario normally results in the landowner receiving an uplift of up to 20% on the existing rental. This provides the landowner with additional income while recognising that the tower owner needs to be compensated for the capital expenditure related to establishing the structure and for future maintenance costs.

Proposed Rental and Collocation Matrix and further terms

In accordance with the advice received from QV and ruralvalue it is proposed that a value of $5,000 per annum per site plus GST be applied. It is also proposed that the industry standard of a 20% uplift be applied for collocation.

To ensure that all parties – including the subtenant – benefit from collocating, it is proposed that the following table be adopted as the standard for charging for tower sites on Council reserves:

Figure 6 – Licence Fee Calculator

It is also proposed that the methodology for determining future rentals be to apply CPI to the Licence Fee Calculator shown in Figure 6.

Power

The Earnscleugh Road and Airport towers are connected to the electricity network in private supply agreements. The Sugarloaf tower, which is more remote, is solar-powered.

The Clyde and Gilligans Gully towers are both connected to Council’s reservoir supplies. While Council has not sought recovery the additional consumption, the subtenant at the Gilligans Gully site has paid the Company $1,500 toward power costs.

Discussions with an electrical engineer have identified several possible options for either assessing consumption or recovering a share of those costs. These include the Company:

· establishing their own connection to the network,

· installing a sub-meter,

· installing a solar powered system, or;

· making payment of a set fee for power in conjunction with the rent.

As noted by the electrical engineer, requiring the Company to establish their own connection to the electricity network is likely to be cost-prohibitive, making solar the Company’s likely preference. A sub-meter would enable Council to identify the Company’s actual consumption but is also likely to be cost-prohibitive and onerous to manage.

Given that the Company is already connected to Council’s power supply, for the sake of simplicity, the electrical engineer suggested that on-charging a flat fee would be a more practical solution. While he has not inspected the running system or capacity of the infrastructure, the electrical engineer estimated that each tenant would use somewhere around $2–$3 of power per day, or about $730–$1,095 per annum.

In accordance with that advice, it is proposed that power consumption be on-charged. It is also proposed that the charges be subject to adjustment by CPI on review and or renewal as applicable.

The Company has also disagreed with the advice received from electrical engineer regarding the estimated power consumption and costs. No evidence in support of that belief has been provided.

4. Options

Option 1 - (recommended)

That the Council:

1. Approves, subject to the Reserves Act 1977, the granting of licences to Rural Networks South Island for the purpose of locating telecommunications towers, on the following reserves:

· Gilligans Gully Road, being Part Lot 8 DP 429123,

· Clyde Lookout Road, being Part Town Belt of Clyde,

· Earnscleugh Road, being Part Section 149 Block I Fraser Survey District, and;

· Sugarloaf, being Part Lot 15 DP 418764

2. Agrees to the inclusion of terms in the Gilligans Gully licence providing for:

· the existing sub-tenancy to 2 Degrees Limited, and;

· the charging of a fee to cover power at $750 per annum per tenant, subject to adjustment by CPI on review or renewal.

3. Agrees to include a term in the Clyde Lookout Road licence providing for the charging of a fee to cover power at $750 per annum, subject to adjustment by CPI on review or renewal.

4. Agrees to grant consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to Council issuing licences over sites on the scenic and recreation reserves identified above in 1.

5. Approves, subject to the Airport Authorities Act 1966, the granting of a lease to Rural Networks South Island for the purpose of locating a telecommunications tower at the Alexandra Airport, being Part Lot 2 DP 300842, subject to the Company continuing to provide free internet services to the Airport Terminal.

6. Agrees to the new licences being granted for a term of 5 years each, with one right of renewal, subject to adjustment by CPI on renewal, commencing 01 July 2020.

7. Approves the use of the Licence Fee Calculator (shown in Figure 6) for the purpose of determining current rentals and subrentals.

8. Agrees, subject to adjustment by CPI, to the Licence Fee Calculator being adopted as the standard for determining future rentals and subrentals for telecommunications sites on Council reserves.

Advantages:

· The Company’s occupations over Council reserves will be legalised

· The licences will be granted in accordance with the relevant Acts, and with the Minister of Conservation’s consent

· The Gilligan’s Gully licence will provide for the sub-tenancy and the recovery of power charges

· The Clyde Lookout licence will provide for the recovery of power charges

· The Airport licence will be executed, and internet services secured

· The new licences will not need to be reviewed in 2022 as per the original licences

· The methodology for determining both current and future rents, sub-rents and power charges will be clarified

· A market rental will be received for each site

· Recognises the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977 and Airport Authorities Act 1966

· Recognises the intentions of the previous Resolutions

· Recognises that due process has been followed

Disadvantages:

· None

Option 2

That the Council:

1. Approves, subject to the Reserves Act 1977, the granting of licences to Rural Networks South Island for the purpose of locating telecommunications towers, on the following reserves:

· Gilligans Gully Road, being Part Lot 8 DP 429123,

· Clyde Lookout Road, being Part Town Belt of Clyde,

· Earnscleugh Road, being Part Section 149 Block I Fraser Survey District, and;

· Sugarloaf, being Part Lot 15 DP 418764

2. Agrees to grant consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, to Council issuing licences over sites on the scenic and recreation reserves identified above in 1.

3. Approves, subject to the Airport Authorities Act 1966, the granting of a lease to Rural Networks South Island for the purpose of locating a telecommunications tower at the Alexandra Airport, being Part Lot 2 DP 300842, subject to the Company continuing to provide free internet services to the Airport Terminal.

4. Grants the licences on different terms and conditions.

Advantages:

· The Company’s occupations over Council reserves will be legalised

· The licences will be granted in accordance with the relevant Acts, and with the Minister of Conservation’s consent

· The Airport licence will be executed, and internet services secured.

· Recognises the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977 and Airport Authorities Act 1966

· Recognises the intentions of the previous Resolutions

· Recognises that due process has been followed

· Licence fees could be determined individually

· A different methodology for determining and adjusting both current and future rents, sub-rents and power charges could be adopted

· The licensee’s concerns relating to the licence fee and the on-charging of power could be addressed

Disadvantages:

· Licence fees may not reflect the market or valuer’s advice

· The existing subrental paid by the sub-tenant at the Gilligans Gully site may be disproportionate to that paid by the licensee

· The methodology for determining and adjusting both current and future licence fees, sub-rents and power charges may not align with the advice of the valuers, the electrical engineers, or the industry standards

Option 3

That the Council does not:

· Approve the granting of new licences over the Council recreation reserve,

· Agree to the provision for sub-tenancy on the Gilligans Gully site, or the on-charging of power

· Agree to on-charge

· Grant the Minister of Conservation’s consent to the granting of licences over scenic and recreation reserves

· Approve the granting of a lease over the Alexandra Airport

· Agree to the new term of 5 years each with one right of renewal commencing 01 July 2020

· Adopt the Licence Fee Calculator or agree to adjustment by CPI

Advantages:

· None.

Disadvantages:

· The Company’s occupations over Council reserves will not be legalised

· The role of the Minister of Conservation will not be considered

· Internet services for the Airport terminal will not be secured

· The methodology for determining future rents, sub-rents, and power charges will not be clarified

· Rental will not be received for each site

· Valuations for rental purposes may be required and would be an additional cost

· Does not recognises the intentions of the previous Resolutions

· Does not recognises that due process has been followed

· The Company will be required to remove its infrastructure from each site

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	While infrastructure for internet services is not a Council activity, this proposal does facilitate improved internet services for the benefit of the wider rural community.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	From 01 July 2020 Council will collect a market rental from each of the five sites. Adoption of the Licence Fee Calculator as the standard methodology for determining both current and future rents and sub-rents clarifies the charges for all parties and will save on valuation costs. The adoption of a fee for power at the Gilligans Gully site will ensure that both the licensee and sub-tenant are responsible for their running costs.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies, such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy, etc?	The recommended option is consistent with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977, the Airport Authorities Act 1966, and the Operational District Plan. The Minister of Conservation’s consent is delegated to Council in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977, and the “Instrument of Delegation to Territorial Authority’s” dated 12 June 2013.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No sustainability, environmental or climate change impacts are related to the decision to legalise the occupations as the activities are already established on the land.
Risk Analysis	As the original licenses were not granted in accordance with the correct legislation or consented to by the Minister of Conservation due process has not been followed. Should the licenses not be legalised, the licensee would be required to vacate each site resulting in the withdrawal of internet services to many rural communities.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The Significance and Engagement Policy has been considered, with none of the criteria being met or exceeded. Pursuant to section 48A(5) of the Reserves Act 1977, public advertising is not required as the recommendation provides for the legalisation of existing occupations and does not include any additional rights of construction over any of the reserves. The existing tower footprints are two square metres and have little-to-no effect on the reserves and do not limit or impact the right of the public. In accordance with licence conditions, the licence holder will be required to remove all structures and remediate the land on cancellation or expiry of the of the licence. This will provide for the long-term protection of each reserve. The granting of leases under the Airport Authorities Act 1966 does not require public notification.

Next Steps

Licences Drafted and Executed August 2020

Attachments

None.

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Linda Stronach	Louise van der Voort
Property Officer – Statutory	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
4/08/2020	17/08/2020

24 March 2021

21.2.4 Consultation Document for the 2021-31 Long-term Plan and Supporting Information to the Consultation Document for the Draft 2021-31 Long-term Plan

Doc ID: 527299

1. Purpose of Report

To adopt the 2021-31 draft Long-term Plan as supporting information to the Consultation Document and then to adopt the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document for public consultation.

Recommendations

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Recommends the draft 2021-31 Long-term Plan be adopted as supporting information to the Consultation Document. This documentation includes:

(a) Infrastructure Strategy

(b) Financial Strategy

(d) Fees and Charges

(e) Significance and Engagement Policy

(f) Revenue and Financing Policy

(g) Rating Policy

(h) Liability Management Policy

(i) Investment Policy

(j) Prospective Financial Statements

(k) Prospective Funding Impact Statements

(l) Community Outcomes Development

(m) Significant Forecasting Assumptions and Risks

(n) Capital Expenditure for Activity Groups

C. Recommends that the Long-term Plan 2021-31 Consultation Document be adopted for public consultation.

D. Recommends that the Chief Executive Officer be authorised, in consultation with the Mayor, to make any necessary formatting or editorial changes, or other such final changes required by either Audit New Zealand or to ensure compliance with the Local Government Act 2002.

2. Background

The Local Government Act 2002 (S 93 and 93A) requires Council to prepare and adopt a Long-term Plan (LTP) every three years. This process requires that Council prepare a Consultation Document and supporting information that has been audited by Audit New Zealand. Both the Consultation Document and the draft LTP, containing all the supporting information, will be made available to the public.

Members of Council and the community boards have attended a number of workshops to identify the topics to be included in the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document. Community boards have reviewed their proposed budgets (that impact on the overall proposed rates increases) and recommend these proposed budgets be included in Council’s overall proposed rate increases. Community boards also reviewed their ward-specific fees and charges and recommended these fees and charges be included in Council’s draft Long-term Plan.

The Consultation Document is headlined “Framing Our Future – Ka Aka Whakamua.” This is an invitation for our community to take the time to look at the main issues faced by this council and to make a submission on the 10-Year Plan.

The supporting information, including any changes arising from the consultation process, will then form the basis of the final 2021-31 Long-term Plan which will be adopted and published on the council website and in printed matter once the consultation process is complete.

There are five key issues that will be the focus of the consultation.

I. District Museum Function

II. Cromwell Masterplan

III. Roxburgh Community Pool Upgrade

IV. Alexandra Riverside Park Development

V. Omakau Community Hub

I. District Museum Function

Museums in Central Otago play a critical role in the district’s identity. Council has been reviewing its role in the museum space. A series of workshops were held in 2019 with the museum sector and it was identified that the sector could benefit from greater coordination across the community-led museums across the district.

It is proposed as part of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan the funding for this function is reallocated in-house with the role working alongside the museum stakeholders with the district while collaborating with organisations such as Otago Museum and Te Papa. Funding for this proposal is $50,000 with no additional rates increase on ratepayers as this is already funded at $3.50 per ratepayer. There is a slight increase in service level.

II. Cromwell Masterplan

The Cromwell Masterplan has been in development since 2018 with a focus on three workstreams, being the spatial plan providing for growth and integrated planning for the next 30 years (adopted in May 2019 with plan changes currently underway); the Town Centre; and the Arts, Culture and Heritage Precinct. There was significant consultation with the community between March 2018 and early 2019.

This is the most significant topic in the Consultation Document. It spans across the full ten years. In today’s dollars it represents $73M in capital expenditure and will increase Council’s proposed debt by $51M. There are a number of options presented in the Consultation Document, with Council’s preference being to adopt the hybrid model, where Council progresses both the Arts and Culture Precinct (includes hall/events centre) and the Town Centre projects at the same time. This could increase the Cromwell Ward rates by $319.57 per rate-payer at the end of year ten, and increase the district-wide rates by a total of $85.24, across the ten-year period.

III. Roxburgh Community Pool Upgrade

With the existing Roxburgh pool aging, the Teviot Valley Community Board has proposed to help support this project by way of a one-off financial contribution of up to $500,000 towards construction, plus an annual operating grant. The preferred option for the one-off payment is by way $250,000 loan and a $250,000 grant. Once fully implemented this would increase the Teviot Valley rates by $40.60 per rate-payer.

IV. Alexandra Riverside Park Development

The Alexandra Riverside Park Trust has a vision to rejuvenate lower Tarbert Street in Alexandra, by creating a new public space development at the junction of the Clutha-Mata-Au and Manuherekia rivers.

The Trust plans to make it a staged development, with Stage 1 being a public space development. The Trust has requested $650,000 support from the Vincent Community Board to support this. The Community Board’s preferred option is to fund $50,000 through the operational (OPEX) budget and $600,000 through a 100% loan funded over a 25-year period.

V. Omakau Community Hub

The Omakau community wants to develop a purpose-built multi-use community facility at the Omakau Recreation Reserve to cater for the town and surrounding communities. It is proposed funding for the build will come from community fundraising, funding agency

grants and a Vincent Community ratepayer contribution of $1M. The Community Boards’ preferred option to fund this contribution is by way of a third funded through the Ward reserves contribution fund, a third through general reserves and the final third fund by way of a loan to be paid back over 25 years.

All preferred options form part of the financial model.

3. Discussion

Council is required to adopt a Consultation Document for the 2021-31 Long-term Plan. The Consultation Document outlines Council’s consultation ideas for the future and provides instructions to the public on the submission process. The Consultation Document and the supporting information has been made available to Audit New Zealand and they are currently being audited. It is anticipated that the Consultation Document will go to the Office of the Auditor General for a ‘hot review’ on March 16, 2021. It is anticipated that the Consultation Document should not require any significant changes as a result of the final review.

Council is required to adopt supporting information to the Consultation Document for the 2021-31 Long-term Plan. The supporting information is also available to the public. This information comprises the Infrastructure Strategy, Financial Strategy, Prospective Financial Information, Funding Impact Statement (Rates), Revenue and Financing Policy, Rating Policy, Investment Policy, Liability Management Policy, Significance and Engagement Policy, Significant Forecasting Assumptions and Risks, Development and Financial Contributions Policy and the Schedule of Fees and Charges. Changes may be made to these documents as a result of submissions and deliberations. These documents will also form the basis for the final 2021-31 Long-term Plan which is planned to be adopted by Council in June 2021.

In January 2021 the elected members were presented the draft budget numbers, which form the basis of the Long-term Plan budgets. At the time of presenting the financials it was believed that rates increase would breach the proposed rates cap of 6.9%, with a rate increase of 9.7%; table below.

During the audit process staff identified an error in the external interest rate calculation. This had been included in the district waters internal loan repayment schedule, which had been deferred temporarily. This is not feasible, as the reserve funded interest would simply increase interest in the reserve accounts that are already in deficit. This impacted on year two onwards and resulted in years three’s breach reducing, but year two and three now breach resulting in an increase of 7.2% and 7.7% respectively, although both breaches are less than initially proposed. Refer to table below.

Proposed growth adjusted rate increases for the ten year period are as follows:

Year one: 6.7% Year two: 7.2% Year three: 7.7% Year four: 5.6% Year five: 5.7%

Year six: 2.4% Year seven: 0.8% Year eight: 1.8% Year nine: 1.3% Year ten: 0.3%

Debt projections have reduced slightly from January 2021 report. Gross debt peaks at $130M however, in the same period, Council will be making principal payments, resulting in a net debt of $105M. By the end of year ten it is projected that Council’s net debt will be $94M, as opposed to $128M projected in January 2021.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Council adopts the supporting information to the consultation document for the 2021-31 Long-term Plan.

Council also adopts a Consultation Document for the 2021-31 Long-term Plan.

Advantages:

· The community is included in the framing of Council’s ten-year plan and receives the opportunity to engage with Council and submit on Council’s proposal.

· This meets the legislative requirements of the Local Government Act (2002) – S93 and 93A.

· This will translate Council adopting the 2021-31 Long-term Plan in June 2021 and therefore set the rates to generate future year’s income.

Disadvantages:

· Council cannot set its rates for 2021-31 nor consult with the community unless the consultative process is followed as per Section 93 and 93A of the Local Government Act (2002).

Option 2

Do not adopt the Consultation Document, and the relevant supporting information.

Advantages:

· There are no identified advantages.

Disadvantages:

· Council cannot set its rates and therefore generate the revenue required to mee the planned programmes of work across the ten-year period.

· Council may breach a key legislative act.

· The community will feel dissatisfied with the performance of Central Otago District Council and the role of the elected members as expectations have been set that consultation will commence 26 March 2021.

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the (social/cultural/economic/environmental) wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by creating a programme of work that ensures the community lives within a safe and viable district. It also ensures that Council has the funds to provide community resilience now and in the future by having the required infrastructure to live, work and play in a successful district.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	This decision is consistent with the requirements of the Local Government Act, and the supporting documentation (the draft LTP) details the activities and budgets Council requires to carry out the ten-year plan.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes this is consistent with all policies.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	Yes the supporting documents contain reference to these key areas.
Risks Analysis	A number of budget scenarios were investigated to ensure Council developed a financially prudent budget. There is a risk that the community will not wish to see rates increase. There is a risk that the community will not support the items listed in the Consultation Document as important. If Council does not follow the correct process of consultation, there is a risk that they cannot enforce payment of rates by the rate-paying community.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	This is a significant decision to adopt the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document for public consultation ensuring the community has a chance to be heard. When Council ultimately adopts the Long-term Plan a full consultative process has been followed and the community is aware of what Council is proposing to do over the next ten years, and how that affects them.

6. Next Steps

Once the draft LTP and 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document is adopted, the supporting documentation and the Consultation Document will be placed on the website. The Consultation Document will also be circulated to ensure the community is aware of what Council is proposing over the next ten years and a month-long public consultation will commence. There will be a number of opportunities for the community to meet with elected members and staff to discuss the content and understand how these decisions will impact on them and the future generations.

7. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Draft LTP 2021-2031.pdf ⇩

Appendix 2 - CODC - Framing Our Future Consultation Document 2021-2031.pdf ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Leanne Macdonald	Sanchia Jacobs
Executive Manager - Corporate Services	Chief Executive Officer
10/03/2021	11/03/2021

24 March 2021

21.2.5 Fees and Charges 2021-22

Doc ID: 525989

1. Purpose of Report

To approve the draft fees and charges schedule to be included in the fees and charges schedule of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan.

Recommendations

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Accepts the Fees and Charges Schedule for 2021-22 as detailed in Appendix 1.

C. Adopts the fees and charges as part of council’s annual fees and charges for the 2021-22 financial year.

2. Background

Each year the fees and charges are reviewed by staff. Required changes are put to the relevant community board or council. Approved changes will be updated in the Fees and Charges Schedule which in turn will be included in the 2021-31 Long-term Plan.

3. Discussion

A review of the Fees and Charges Schedule has been completed, with a number of changes from the 2020-21 schedule being identified for 2021-22 and detailed in Appendix 1. Once adopted by Council, the Fees and Charges Schedule will be updated and adopted as part of the long-term plan process for implementation from 1 July 2021.

The attached is a complete copy of the fees and charges schedule. Any changes to the schedule have been highlighted in Appendix 1. Each community board has had the opportunity to review their ward-specific fees and charges and each board has recommended that Council includes these as part of the full schedule of fees and charges.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Adopt the 2021-22 Fees and Charges Schedule.

Advantages:

· Allows changes to reflect current practices

· May lead to additional revenue

Disadvantages:

· Some users may feel dissatisfied if there is an increase.

Option 2

No changes to the 2021-22 Fees and Charges Schedule.

Advantages:

· Status quo remains

· End users remain pleased that there are no increases.

Disadvantages:

· May not reflect current practices

· May not lead to an unfair rates burden on the community

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities as these fees and charges schedule form part of the supporting documentation to the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation document.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	These changes may result in additional revenue and is consistent with proposed budgets for the 2021-31 Long-term Plan.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	This decision is consistent with the Revenue and Financing Policy and forms part of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	Consideration to the environmental, sustainability and climate change impacts have been given to the fees and charges schedule when determining charges.
Risks Analysis	There is no risk in considering this report. The risk is if Council does not consider the 2021-22 fees and charges schedule in conjunction with the draft 2021-31 Long-term Plan. A failure to adopt the fees and charges schedule would result in Council not being able collect any fees or charges during 2021-22.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The decision to adopt this report is significant as there are substantial fees and charges that can be collected as a result of adoption.

6. Next Steps

When approved by Council, the Fees and Charges Schedule in Appendix 1, will be updated and adopted as part of the supporting documentation to the 2021-31 Long-term Plan for implementation from 1 July 2021.

7. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Council - Fees and Charges 2021-22 ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Leanne Macdonald	Sanchia Jacobs
Executive Manager - Corporate Services	Chief Executive Officer
5/03/2021	11/03/2021

24 March 2021

21.2.6 Rural Fire Land and Buildings

Doc ID: 521063

1. Purpose of Report

To consider the disposal of the Tarras, Omakau, and Millers Flat Rural Fire Depots to Fire and Emergency New Zealand.

Recommendations

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Agrees to dispose of the Tarras Rural Fire Depot to Fire and Emergency New Zealand subject to the following conditions:

1 The building ownership is transferred for $1

2 A ground lease is granted for an area (as outlined in Appendix) for 30 years at $1 per annum, and upon termination of the lease any improvements on the land will revert to Council

3 Fire and Emergency New Zealand covers the legal costs associated with the sale and the preparation of the lease

4 Fire and Emergency New Zealand covers the costs associated with the installation of a power supply and a septic tank system to the depot

5 Fire and Emergency New Zealand covers the costs of relocating the Tarras Domain’s access gate and the recycling station

C. Agrees to dispose of the Omakau Rural Fire Depot to Fire and Emergency New Zealand on the following conditions:

1 The building ownership is transferred for $1

2 A ground lease is granted under Section 61(2) of the Reserve Act 1977 for 30 years at $1 per annum, and upon termination of the ground lease any improvements on the land will revert to Council

3 Fire and Emergency New Zealand covers the legal costs associated with the sale and the preparation of the lease

D. Agrees to dispose of the Millers Flat Rural Fire Depot to Fire and Emergency New Zealand on the following conditions:

1 Council’s ground lease is terminated upon which the building’s ownership transfers to Fire and Emergency New Zealand

2 Fire and Emergency New Zealand covers the legal costs

2. Background

In 2014, Central Otago District Council worked with other Otago councils to set up a regionally-based Otago Rural Fire Authority (ORFA). As part of the setup of ORFA, each council transferred ownership of its rural fire operational assets (machinery, plant vehicles, and miscellaneous) to the new entity. ORFA continued to use existing land and buildings under the conditions and agreements that were in place at the time it was established.

As of July 2017, in accordance with the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017, all operational assets of ORFA were transferred to Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ).

On 20 September 2017, Council considered options for the lease and/or sale of land and buildings, which had been occupied by OFRA, to FENZ.

Council resolved to proceed with negotiation on a commercial basis under resolution 17.8.15:

17.8.15

A. RESOLVED that the report be received and the level of significance accepted.

B. AUTHORISED the Chief Executive Officer under the financial delegations to negotiate leases and/or sales to New Zealand Fire Service Commission for the following properties:

• Omakau Rural Fire site: Section 1 SO 462989

• Tarras Rural Fire Depot: PT SEC 19 BLK I TARRAS SD

• Boundary Road Alexandra: LOT 1 DP 432084

• Millers Flat Rural Fire station: Part Section 167 Block III Benger SD

The Boundary Road property housed the Dunstan Rural Fire Depot. Property negotiations for that site have now concluded. FENZ agreed to relocate the brigade closer to the Alexandra Brigade. Council agreed to pay relocation compensation. The Alexandra Men’s Shed group agreed to purchase the building, and hold a long-term lease with Council for the land. This transfer was agreed to by Council in resolution 20.2.8, passed 11 March 2020.

Negotiations concerning the Boundary Road property were complex. As stated in the March 2020 report, these negotiations should not set a precedent for the remaining Omakau, Tarras, and Millers Flat properties which are less complicated.

Research into how other councils undertook property transfers to FENZ revealed great variation in approach. However, a common theme was that five areas of consideration needed to be weighed up before a decision being made. These are:

1. Land ownership

2. Building condition

3. Book value

4. Community use

5. Best community outcome

3. Discussion

Below, the five areas of consideration are discussed with regard to the Tarras, Omakau, and Millers Flat Rural Fire Depots.

TARRAS RURAL FIRE DEPOT

1. Land Ownership

· The legal description is Part Section 19 Block I Tarras Survey District, which encompasses the Tarras Domain

· The land is council freehold land

· The aerial map below indicates the land area in black and yellow, and the building location in the red circle

2. Building Condition

· A site visit by council staff and FENZ representatives was carried out on 3 September 2020

· The building appears to be in very good condition

· The building is currently connected to the Tarras Hall’s power and septic tank

· Power usage is metered and charged back to FENZ

A white car parked on a dirt road next to a red barn

Description automatically generated with medium confidence A picture containing indoor, cluttered, furniture, messy

Description automatically generated A group of yellow trucks in a warehouse

Description automatically generated with low confidence

3. Book Value

· As at 31 December 2020, the building’s estimated book value is $164,474

4. Community Use

· There is no other community use of this building

5. Best Community Outcome

· This brigade of local volunteers covers a wide area and a variety of emergencies c

· The brigade attends rural and residential property fires, motor vehicle accidents and medical emergencies

· FENZ has identified this area for development, and have allocated funds to develop this depot in their five-year plan. This development will allow housing of their equipment and improve the building for their volunteers

· A site plan of the works has been received. See Appendix 1. These plans have been reviewed by the Council’s Parks and Recreation Manager and Waste Environmental Manager, who both support the plans. However, the Environmental Enginering Manager will seek to relocate the recycling station, which is currently in front of the depot, to the right of the Tarras Hall

· The response area is shown on the map below:

Proposed transfer

· Council transfers the building for $1 with a peppercorn long-term ground lease containing a clause that upon termination of the lease, all improvements on the land will revert to Council

· FENZ to cover the legal costs

· FENZ to cover the costs associated with disconnecting and installation of a direct power supply and septic tank system to the depot separating it from the Tarras Hall

· FENZ to cover the costs of moving the Tarras Domain’s access gate and relocating the recycling station

OMAKAU RURAL FIRE DEPOT

1. Land Ownership

· The legal description is Section 1 Survey Office Plan 462989

· The land is Council reserve classified as Local Purpose (Rural Fire) Reserve

· The aerial map below indicates the land area in black and yellow. The building had not been constructed when the aerial photograph was taken

2. Building Condition

· A site visit of the exterior only was carried out by council staff on 22 June 2020

· FENZ provided photos of the interior

· The building appears to be in very good condition

3. Book Value

· As at 30 December 2020, the building’s estimated book value is $102,820

4. Community Use

· There is no other community use of this building

5. Best Community Outcome

· 23 members of the Blackstone Brigade are based out of this depot

· The brigade mainly attends vegetation fires, but they also assist with other types of calls such as motor vehicle accidents and structure fires when needed

· The building houses appliances and equipment

· The brigade shares ablution/meeting room facilities with the Omakau Brigade located on Leask Street

· FENZ’s intention for this building is to continue its current use. If the brigades in Omakau were to amalgamate, there would be insufficient space available in the Omakau fire station on Leask Street to house any extra appliances

· The brigade’s response area is shown on the map below:

Proposed Transfer

· Council transfers the building for $1 with a peppercorn long-term ground lease containing a clause that upon termination of the lease, all improvements on the land will revert to Council

· FENZ to cover the legal costs

MILLERS FLAT RURAL FIRE DEPOT

1. Land Ownership

· The legal description is Section 167 Block III Benger Survey District

· The land is owned by FENZ

· Council holds a ground lease with FENZ

Start date	1 October 2011
Term	10 years with one right of renewal for a further 10 years
Rent	$300 plus GST if demanded. *To date rent has not been invoiced by FENZ
Clause 6.6	If the Lessee does not remove the improvement on termination of Lease then any improvements will come to the Lessors with no compensation payable to the Lessee.

· The aerial map below shows the leased area in red

2. Building Condition

· Council built the depot for the Bridgade in 2012

· A site visit of the exterior only was carried out by council staff on 26 June 2020

· FENZ provided photos of the interior

· The building appears to be in very good condition

3. Book Value

· As at 30 December 2020, the building’s estimated book value is is $64,347

4. Community Use

· There is no other community use of this building

5. Best Community Outcome

· This brigade consists of 18 members.

· The brigade attends vegetation fires only

· The building houses their appliance and resources only

· Ablution and meeting room facilities are shared with the Millers Flat Brigade who are located on the same site

· FENZ’s intention for this building is to continue with the current occupation

· The brigade’s response area is shown on the map below:

Proposed Transfer

· Council terminates the lease, upon which the building transfers to the ownership of FENZ without compensation

· FENZ to cover the legal costs

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Council agrees to the disposal of the Tarras Rural Fire Depot (Part Section 19 Block one Tarras Survey District) to Fire and Emergency New Zealand on the following conditions:

· The building ownership is transferred for $1

· A ground lease is granted for an area (as outlined in Appendix 1 to this report) for 30 years at $1 per annum, and upon termination of the lease any improvements on the land will revert to Council

· Fire and Emergency New Zealand covers the legal costs associated with the sale and the preparation of the lease

· Fire and Emergency New Zealand covers the costs associated with the installation of a power supply and a septic tank system to the depot

· Fire and Emergency New Zealand covers the costs of relocating the Tarras Domain’s access gate and the recycling station

Council agrees to the disposal of the Omakau Rural Fire Depot (Section 1 Survey Office Plan 462989) to Fire and Emergency New Zealand on the following conditions:

· The building ownership is transferred for $1

· A ground lease is granted under Section 61(2) of the Reserve Act 1977 for 30 years at $1 per annum, and upon termination of the ground lease any improvements on the land will revert to Council

· Fire and Emergency New Zealand covers the legal costs associated with the sale and the preparation of the lease

Council agrees to dispose of the Millers Flat Rural Fire Depot to Fire and Emergency New Zealand on the following conditions:

· Council’s ground lease is terminated upon which the building’s ownership reverts to Fire and Emergency New Zealand

· Fire and Emergency New Zealand to cover the legal costs

Advantages:

· Completes the transfer of assets to align with the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017

· The $1 transfers help to facilitate Fire and Emergency New Zealand’s future investment into infrastructure in the region, which will improve local communities’ response to emergencies

· Provides continuity for the district’s rural fire services

· This option will help build resilient communities that can prepare, respond, and recover well from emergencies as their Fire and Emergency resources will be securely housed and readily available to them

· Removes Council’s maintenance liability and depreciation of these buildings

· Only buildings, not land, will be transferred. Any Council land remains in Council ownership

· The the building at Millers Flat would have transferred to Fire and Emergency New Zealand on expiry of the lease, regardless of Council taking any action now.

Disadvantages:

· Does not provide a commercial return

· Transferring these buildings for $1 will have a financial impact, by creating a loss on disposal of the asset at their book value. This will have an effect on the end of year balance. Although there is no cash transferring, there is still a financial loss that needs to be considered

· Council assets will be reduced

Option 2

To not dispose of the Tarras, Omakau, and Millers Flat Rural Fire Depots to Fire and Emergency New Zealand.

Advantages:

· Council assets will not be reduced

Disadvantages:

· Does not provide continuity for the district’s rural fire services

Option 3

To approve the disposal of the Tarras, Omakau, and Millers Flat Rural Fire Depot’s to Fire and Emergency New Zealand on terms and conditions as determined by the Council.

Advantages:

· The Council may determine alternative terms and conditions of the disposal

Disadvantages:

· Fire and Emergency New Zealand may not accept the alternative terms and conditions of the disposal

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the social wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by ensuring the fire and emergency resources are securely housed and readily available. This will help to build resilient communities and enable the surrounding communities to prepare, respond, and recover well from emergencies.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	Transferring the buildings for $1 will have a financial impact, by creating a loss on disposal of the asset at their book value. This will have an effect on Council’s end of year balance. While there is no cash transferring, there is still a financial loss that needs to be considered. Future depreciation for the buildings will become nil.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes. The function of rural fire fighting is no longer part of council operations. The ground lease does not fall under the criteria of the Community Leasing and Licensing Policy.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	This decision does not impact the sustainability, environment, or climate change of the district.
Risks Analysis	There is a reduction of risk to Council as the transfer of these assets removes Council’s future liability of these buildings.
Significance, Consultation, and Engagement (internal and external)	None of the thresholds/criteria in Significance and Engagement Policy have been met or exceeded by the proposal and so the proposal is not considered significant.

6. Next Steps

· Notify FENZ of the decision

· Execution of the property agreements

· Removal of assets from the Council’s assets register

7. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Tarras Development Plans ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Christina Martin	Louise van der Voort
Property and Facilities Officer (Vincent and Teviot Valley)	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
5/03/2021	10/03/2021

24 March 2021

21.2.7 Financial Report for the period ending 31 January 2021

Doc ID: 525844

1. Purpose

To consider the financial performance for the period ending 31 January 2021.

Recommendations

That the report be received.

2. Discussion

The presentation of the financials includes two variance analysis reports against both the financial statements, so Council can understand the variances against the ledger, and against the activities at a surplus/(deficit) value. The reason for the second variance analysis is to demonstrate the overall relationship between the income and expenditure at an activity level.

The third report details the expenditure of the capital works programme across activities. This helps staff track key capital projects across the year and understand the progress of these projects.

The fourth and fifth reports detail the internal and external loans balances. This is new information, that has typically only been shown in the Annual Report and at the Audit and Risk Committee. The internal loans report forecasts the balance as at 30 June 2021, whereas the external loans show the audited current balances.

A further paper (“February 2021 Forecast”) has been written for this Council meeting that details the second forecast for the 2020-21 financial year. This report relates to the proposed changes to the revised budgets for approval.

Financial Overview

Profit and Loss by General Ledger

Statement of Financial Performance for the period ending 31 January 2021

	7 MONTHS ENDING 31 JANUARY 2021				2020/21	2020/21
	YTD	YTD	YTD
	Actual	Revised Budget	Variance		Annual Plan	Revised Budget
	$000	$000	$000		$000	$000
Income
Development Contributions	444	1,369	(925)	˜	2,167	2,347
Interest & Dividends	153	234	(81)	˜	328	401
Rates	18,278	18,256	22	˜	29,439	30,437
Reserves Contributions	119	-	119	˜	-	-
User Fees & Other	4,514	4,326	188	˜	6,587	7,881
Profit on Sale of Assets	124	-	124	˜	4,015	-
Other Capital Contributions	278	-	278	˜	73	1
Regulatory Fees	1,350	681	669	˜	2,170	1,150
Land Sales	4,016	2,500	1,516	˜	-	4,000
Govt Grants & Subsidies	7,429	3,201	4,228	˜	4,714	5,084
Total Income	36,705	30,567	6,138	˜	49,493	51,301

Expenditure
Costs of Sales	2,027	1,250	(777)	˜	-	2,000
Contracts	5,079	4,772	(307)	˜	7,566	8,060
Grants	516	485	(31)	˜	716	699
Rates Expense	431	414	(17)	˜	406	414
Depreciation	5,965	5,965	-	˜	12,396	10,209
Loss on sale of Asset	-	-	-	˜	-	-
Cost Allocations	(9)	-	9	˜	-	-
Building Repairs & Mtce.	397	458	61	˜	799	778
Members Remuneration	315	373	58	˜	632	640
Technology Costs	494	560	66	˜	822	941
Insurance	389	481	92	˜	353	481
Refuse & Recycling Costs	1,810	1,941	131	˜	2,582	3,648
Electricity & Gas	680	815	135	˜	1,177	1,424
Staff	6,326	6,793	467	˜	10,935	11,770
Professional Fees	1,690	1,793	103	˜	1,360	3,061
Other Costs	2,379	3,049	670	˜	3,692	5,278
Total Expenses	28,489	29,149	660	˜	43,436	49,403

Operating Surplus / (Deficit)	8,216	1,418	6,798		6,057	1,898

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

Generally, variances of greater than $100k are reported on.

The financials for January 2021 show an overall favourable variance of $6.79M. Contributing to this large favourable variance includes funding from the Three Waters reform and the receipt of land sales.

Income is ahead of the revised budget by $6.13M. This is mostly due to revenue from the sale of land at Gair Avenue of $1.5M, along with the funding received from the Three Waters Reform of $4.73M.

Expenditure has a favourable variance of $660k. There is ($307k) increased costs in contracts which relates to ($500k) emergency works carried out on roading after the recent flooding event. Planned maintenance in property is underspent by $200k and will be reviewed as part of the forecast. The ($777k) increased spend in costs of sales is more than offset by the revenue received from the sale of land at Gair Avenue.

Income of $36.70M against the year-to-date budget of $30.56M

The main variances are:

· Development contributions of $444k has an unfavourable variance of ($925k). Lower than expected contributions are linked with the timing of developments in Cromwell ($579k) and Alexandra ($228k) with the balance in district roading.

· Government Grants and Subsidies revenue of $7.4M is $4.2M favourable against budget. This is due to a $4.73M grant received in November 2020 for the Three-Waters reform. This is 50% of the full grant amount. This grant offsets the unfavourable variance in roading due to the roading improvement work which is currently behind schedule, although this work is scheduled to be caught up within the next few months.

· Gair Avenue Land Sales of $4.0M has a favourable variance of $1.5M. This is in line with strong demand for property nationwide. All properties have been sold as of January.

· Regulatory fees of $1.35M is favourable against budget by $669k. This is due to the timing of income received from building consents of $567k, dog registrations of $77k and Land Information Memorandums (LIMs) of $54k.

· Other Capital Contributions has a favourable variance of $278k. This includes a Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) contribution of $159k for the Ophir Community Centre, and a cost share capital contribution from the Queenstown Lakes District Council for $75k for the Lake Dunstan Water Supply project.

· User Fees and Other of $4.51M is $188k favourable against budget. The favourable variance is due to the Strategic Tourism Assets Protection Programme (STAPP) of $700k (now included in the revised budget) and a MBIE tourism grant for freedom camping, fencing and toilets of $95k. Offsetting the favourable variance include transfer station income, metered water, swim school, camp fees and fuel taxes which are behind budget.

· Profit on Sale of Assets is favourable against budget by $124k. Making up this balance are vehicle sales as part of the replacement schedule and the sale of office furniture and equipment that is surplus to requirements.

· Reserves Contributions has a $119k favourable variance. These contributions are dependent on developers’ timeframes and therefore difficult to gauge when setting budgets.

Expenditure of $28.48M against the year-to-date budget of $29.14M

The main variances are:

· Costs of Sales of $2.0M is above budget by ($777k). This reflects the increased sales of the Gair Avenue sections.

· Contracts of $5.07M is ($307k) unfavourable against budget. This is due to emergency works carried out as a result of flooding in early January 2020, year to date cost of ($587k). While there is a budget for emergency works of $100k, there are more remedial costs to follow. It is important to note that this cost will be partially offset with a Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) subsidy for emergency works in weather events. Offsetting this overspend are favourable variances against planned maintenance of $235k and district-wide un-subsided roading work of $102k.

· Staff costs of $6.326M has a $467k favourable result against budget. This relates to the timing of vacant positions and positions that are in the process of being recruited.

· Refuse and recycling costs of $1.81M has a favourable variance of $131k. This is mainly due to the timing of green waste being processed. This is due to be carried out in March or April 2021.

24 March 2021

Profit and Loss by Activity

ACTIVITY	INCOME			EXPENDITURE				SURPLUS/(DEFICIT)
	Actuals	Revised Budget	Variance		Actuals	Revised Budget	Variance		Actuals	Revised Budget	Variance
	$000	$000	$000		$000	$000	$000		$000	$000	$000
Infrastructure	684	1,609	(925)		178	240	62		506	1,369	(863)
Roading	5,345	5,993	(648)		5,323	4,888	(435)		22	1,105	(1,083)
Waste Management	2,683	2,784	(101)		2,840	2,861	21		(157)	(77)	(80)
Parks Reserves Recreation	4,169	3,961	208		4,023	3,924	(99)		146	37	109
Corporate Services	103	53	50		48	175	127		55	(122)	177
People and Culture	784	776	8		682	839	157		102	(63)	165
CEO	246	256	(10)		(89)	231	320		335	25	310
Property	6,565	4,783	1,782		4,893	4,074	(819)		1,672	709	963
Governance and Community Engagement	3,115	2,838	277		2,421	3,067	646		694	(229)	923
Planning (Regulatory)	2,961	2,193	768		2,652	3,251	599		309	(1,058)	1,367
Three Waters	11,120	6,455	4,665		5,355	5,583	228		5,765	872	4,893

Total	36,705	30,567	6,138		28,489	29,149	660		8,216	1,418	6,798

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

* The funding activity has been removed from this table, as this is not an operational activity.

· Infrastructure – Development contributions are underbudget by ($925k), this is reduced by the reserves contributions. Lower than expected contributions are linked with the timing of subdivision developments in Cromwell and Alexandra. It is expected that development contribution income will remain lower than budget due to subdivision developments being pushed into the next financial year. Expenditure is under budget by $62k, mainly due to lower than budgeted management consultant fees.

· Roading –income is less than budget by ($648k). this is predominately due to the NZTA subsidy. Roading expenditure is higher than budget by ($435k). This is due to emergency works carried out after the flooding event in early January 2021. This is likely to increase further as more expenditure is yet to come in.

· Waste Management - income is less than budget by ($101k) due to lower than expected new wheelie bin charges and transfer station income. Expenditure has a slight favourable variance of $21k. This is mainly due to the timing of processing green waste, which will take place in March or April 2021.

· Parks and Recreation – favourable income variance relates to the MBIE tourism grants of $122k and $95k. Expenditure has an unfavourable variance of ($99k). Contributing is expenditure spent on freedom camping monitoring, and toilets as per the MBIE tourism grant.

· Corporate Services – income is higher than budget by $50k this is due to profit on the sales of vehicle assets. Expenditure is $127k lower than budget mainly due to the timing of audit fees and insurance costs.

· People and Culture – income is on track with a small favourable variance of $8k. Expenditure has a favourable variance of $157k. Driving this favourable variance are underspends in Libraries $71k, Health and Safety $36k and Human Resources $48k. A lot of the underspends are due to the requirements and timing of the expenditure needs in each area.

· CEO – has an overall favourable variance. Expenditure has a favourable variance of $320k, this is mainly due to Strategic Pay allocation which may be reflected in increased costs across the organisation, with the resolution of the strategic pay for staff across the organisation. On-charged overhead allocations and management charges are offsetting expenditure and leading to a credit expenditure balance. Cost allocations are carried out as per budget with an adjustment carried out at year end.

· Property – land sales revenue is favourable against budget due to more sections sold compared to expectations. There is a corresponding movement in the cost of land sold expense.

· Governance and Community Engagement – income has a favourable variance of $277k this is due to the Strategic Tourism Assets Protection Programme (STAPP) funding received post budget and has been adjusted for in the full year revised budget. The favourable expenditure variance is due to a timing lag of the tourism projects that are funded from the STAPP.

· Planning (Regulatory) – has a favourable income variance of $768k, this is mainly due to the timing of building permits issued, LIM fees and revenue received from dog registrations. The favourable expenditure variance of $599k is due to lower than expected staff costs and planning consultant (review) fees.

· Three Waters – the favourable income variance of $4.6M is due to 50% of the Three Waters reform grant funding being received. Expenditure has a favourable variance of $228k due to the timing of operational projects.

Capital Expenditure

Year-to-date, 29% of the total capital spend against for the full year’s revised capital budget, has been expensed. More information will be provided in the next Council report on the February 2021 forecast, to provide more insight on capital budgets.

CAPITAL EXPENDITURE	YTD Actual	YTD Revised Budget	YTD Variance		2020/21 Revised Budget	Progress to date
CAPITAL EXPENDITURE	$000	$000	$000		$'000
Council Property and Facilities	4,756	1,315	(3,441)	˜	6,167	77%
Waste Management	90	-	(90)	˜	859	10%
i-SITEs	-	-	-	˜	5	0%
Customer Services and Administration	16	54	38	˜	54	30%
Vehicle Fleet	229	260	31	˜	358	64%
Planning	-	143	143	˜	193	0%
Information Services	559	885	326	˜	1,992	28%
Libraries	74	440	366	˜	500	15%
Parks and Recreation	532	1,383	851	˜	2,562	21%
Roading	2,724	4,919	2,195	˜	7,359	37%
Three Waters	3,325	6,641	3,316	˜	21,801	15%

Grand Total	12,305	16,040	3,735		41,850	29%

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

Council Property and Facilities ($3.44M) unfavourable against budget:

This includes the purchase of Murray Terrace land approved by the Cromwell Ward in December 2020, which Council authorised as per resolution 20.40.3 in July 2020. This is countered by Elderly Persons Housing capital works which is behind budget by $609k.

Waste Management ($90k) unfavourable against budget:

This variance is due to the progression of the Glass Crushing plant project, which Council authorised as per resolution 20.7.31 in August 2020.

Planning $143k favourable against budget:

This is due to dog control projects that are yet to be started, including the final purchase of dog registration software and upgrading the dog pounds.

Information Services $326k favourable against budget:

Projects behind in budgets include Enhanced Customer Experience Digital Services $117k and Enterprise Resource Planning Information Services $141k.

Libraries $366k favourable against budget:

The Alexandra library building upgrade is yet to commence.

Parks and Recreation $851k favourable against budget:

Projects that are awaiting commencement and completion include resurfacing Anderson Park netball courts and the Cromwell Pool alterations and filter replacement.

Roading $2.19M favourable against budget:

Unsubsidised community roading projects are behind budget, these include district-wide footpath and carpark renewals of $524k. Subsided roading projects are behind $1.6M, this is mainly due to delays to the capital programme of work at the Clyde Historic Precinct Project of $594k and district-wide sealed road renewals of $374k.

Three Waters is $3.31M favourable against budget:

The main driver is the Clyde wastewater reticulation construction which is $2.15M behind budget. Other areas include water supply improvements across the district and district-wide wastewater treatment plant upgrades.

Internal Loans

Forecast closing balance for 30 June 2021 is $4.27M

OWED BY	Original Loan	1 July 2020 Opening Balance	30 June 2021 Forecast Closing Balance
Public Toilets - Roxburgh & Cromwell	670,000	513,510	491,239
Tarbert St Building	25,868	14,502	13,067
Alexandra Town Centre	94,420	54,766	49,759
Alexandra Town Centre	186,398	101,720	91,041
Alexandra Town Centre	290,600	170,912	155,412
Centennial Milkbar	47,821	24,252	21,284
Vincent Grants	95,000	28,500	19,000
Pioneer Store Naseby	21,589	12,236	10,949
Roxburgh Water	867,000	743,391	717,829
ANZ Bank Seismic Strengthening	180,000	154,337	149,030
Molyneux Pool	262,000	604,000	571,900
Maniototo Hospital	1,873,000	1,824,913	1,775,142
Alexandra Airport	218,000	211,407	204,485
Total	4,831,696	4,458,446	4,270,137

External Loans

Total amount of external loans at the beginning of the financial year 2020-21 was $241k and as at 31 January 2021 the outstanding balance was $211k. Council has received $29k in principal payments and $7k in interest payments.

OWED BY	Original Loan	1 July 2020 Actual Opening Balance	Principal	Interest	31 January 2021 Actual Closing Balance
Cromwell College	400,000	164,184	19,255	5,314	144,929
Maniototo Curling	160,000	48,743	7,551	1,328	41,192
Oturehua water	46,471	28,122	2,715	686	25,407
Total	606,471	241,049	29,521	7,328	211,528

3. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Kim McCulloch	Leanne Macdonald
Management Accountant	Executive Manager - Corporate Services
5/03/2021	11/03/2021

24 March 2021

21.2.9 Molyneux Park Reserve Management Plan 2021

Doc ID: 526457

1. Purpose of Report

To adopt the Molyneux Park Reserve Management Plan 2021.

Recommendations

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

B. Recommends that the Molyneux Park Reserve Management Plan 2021 be adopted.

2. Background

At its December 2019 meeting the Vincent Community Board (the Board) resolved the following:

Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

Agree to notify its intention to prepare a Reserve Management Plan for Molyneux Park.

The draft plan was prepared during the first half of 2020 and public submissions were sought over a two-month period between October/November 2020. Additionally, all regular users of Molyneux Park were sent documentation to enable them to make a submission. Fifty-six submissions were received and considered by the Board at its March meeting.

At its March 2021 meeting the Board resolved the following.

Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

Resolves that the submissions be received.

Recommends that the suggested amendments and changes be approved by the Board.

Recommends to Council adoption of the Molyneux Park Reserve Management Plan 2021

A copy of the Molyneux Park Reserve Management Plan 2021 is attached in Appendix 1.

3. Discussion

Under Section 41 of the Reserves Act 1977 (the Act), every recreation reserve must have an operative management plan. The purpose of a management plan is to ensure that the development and implementation of objectives and policies for a reserve enhances the long-term use of the reserve without compromising its existing use. A management plan consists of both historical and current information about the reserve, and a list of management statements to guide consistent decision-making regarding the future development and management of the reserve.

In addition, the plan must be regularly reviewed as stated under Section 41 (4) of the Act "so that the plan is adapted to changing circumstances or in accordance with increased knowledge; and the Minister may from time to time require the administering body to review its management plan, whether or not the plan requires the approval of the Minister".

Molyneux Park comprises 32.4816 hectares and is legally described as Part Section 1 SO 24662, Part Section 12 Block XXXVII Town of Alexandra, Section 13 Block XXVI Town of Alexandra, Lots 1 to 5 DP21404 and Part Lot 6 DP 300663, 3.553 hectares.

The Central Otago District Council is the administering body for Molyneux Park in terms of Section 40 of the Reserves Act 1977. The responsibility for administering and managing reserves including Molyneux Park has been delegated to the Vincent Community Board, with Council having the power to adopt the final plan under delegation from the Minister of Conservation.

The purpose of the Molyneux Park Reserve Management Plan is to provide Central Otago District Council with an effective guide for managing Molyneux Park.

The following table summarises Section 41 of the Reserves Act 1977 regarding management plans, and the process used to develop this management plan. The current step is highlighted in red.

Relevant Sections of the Reserves Act	Public Consultation	Description of Activity	Phase
Section 41 (5) Section 41 (5)c Section 41 (6) a-c Section 41 (6) d Section 41 (6) d	Optional Mandatory	Council notifies the public that it is preparing a management plan and calls for submissions (one month) ò Public submissions are received and incorporated into a draft management plan ò A draft management plan is made available to the public for further comment (two months) ò The draft management plan is edited to incorporate input from public submissions ò The final document is presented to Council for adoption		Management Planning
Section 41 Section 41 (4)		All policies come into effect and are enforceable by Council ò The management plan is continually monitored and reviewed		Implementation

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

To adopt the Molyneux Park Reserve Management Plan 2021.

Advantages:

· Meets statutory process as set out in the Reserves Act 1977.

· Considers the input from community and sports clubs, including corrections and suggestions to the draft plan and the management of the park, provided by way of submissions.

Disadvantages:

· There are no foreseeable disadvantages.

Option 2

Council does not adopt the Molyneux Park Reserve Management Plan 2021

Advantages:

· There are no foreseeable advantages with this option.

Disadvantages:

· If the Council do not adopt the plan, they may jeopardise their relationship with the community.

· Considerable time and resource have been spent on developing this reserve management plan.

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities. Section 11A of the Local Government Act 2002 states that “In performing its role, a local authority must have particular regard to the contribution [reserves, and other recreational facilities] make to its communities”. In addition, the Reserves Act 1977 states that “the administering body shall…prepare and submit to the Minister for his or her approval a management plan for the reserve under its control, management, or administration.”
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	There are no financial implications in recommending this plan for Council adoption.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	This decision is consistent with Councils plans and polices.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	The plan will have little or no negative environmental impact.
Risks Analysis	Every recreation reserve must have an operative management plan under section 41 of the Reserves Act 1977
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The plan is not significant in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Plan; however, the Reserves Act 1977 has its own requirements for consultation which were followed in the preparation of this plan.

6. Next Steps

· Council adopts the Molyneux Park Reserve Management Plan 2021.

· The adopted Molyneux Park Reserve Management Plan 2021 is forwarded to all submitters with a formal response relating to their submission and whether it was adopted or not.

· The Molyneux Park Reserve Management Plan 2021 is uploaded to council’s website.

7. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Molyneux Park Reserve Management Plan 2021. ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Gordon Bailey	Louise van der Voort
Parks and Recreation Manager	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
4/03/2021	10/03/2021


AGENDA Ordinary Council Meeting Wednesday, 24 March 2021
Date:	Wednesday, 24 March 2021
Time:	10.30 am
Location:	Ngā Hau e Whā, William Fraser Building 1 Dunorling Street, Alexandra
(Unless Central Government changes COVID-19 meeting restrictions before then, in which case it will be held electronically using Microsoft Teams and livestreamed) Sanchia Jacobs Chief Executive Officer

Name	Member’s Declared Interests	Spouse/Partner’s Declared Interests	Council Appointments
Tamah Alley	Tiger Hill Water Supply Company (shareholder) Cromwell Youth Trust (Chair) Blue Light Central Lakes (Chair) NZ Police (Sworn Constable) Oamaru Landing Service (OLS) (family connection) Cliff Care Ltd (family connection)	Tiger Hill Water Supply Company (shareholder) Emergency Management Otago (employee)
Tim Cadogan	Alexandra Musical Society (member) Otago Chamber of Commerce Central Otago Advisory Group member Dunstan Golf Club (member)	Victim Support Worker Blossom Festival Committee member FarmFresh (Family member sells for this entity)	Airport Reference Group Maniototo Curling International Inc Eden Hore Steering Group Tourism Central Otago Advisory Board Ministerial Working Group on Responsible Camping LGNZ Governance and Strategy Group
Shirley Calvert	Central Otago Health Services Ltd (Employee) Cromwell Rotary (member) Cromwell and District Community Trust Old Cromwell Town (subscription member)		Central Otago Wilding Conifer Group
Lynley Claridge	Affinity Funerals (Director) Central Otago Chamber of Commerce (Advisory Panel)	Affinity Funerals (Shareholder)	Alexandra Council for Social Services
Ian Cooney	Castlewood Nursing Home (Employee)		Omakau Recreation Reserve Committee Promote Alexandra
Stuart Duncan	Penvose Farms - Wedderburn Cottages and Farm at Wedderburn (shareholder) Penvose Investments - Dairy Farm at Patearoa (shareholder) Fire and Emergency New Zealand (member) JD Pat Ltd (Shareholder and Director)	Penvose Farms - Wedderburn Cottages and Farm at Wedderburn (shareholder) Penvose Investments - Dairy Farm at Patearoa (shareholder)	Otago Regional Transport Committee Patearoa Recreation Reserve Committee Design and Location of the Sun for the Interplanetary Cycle Trail Working Group
Neil Gillespie	Contact Energy (Project Manager) Clyde & Districts Emergency Rescue Trust (Secretary and Trustee) Cromwell Volunteer Fire Brigade (Deputy Chief Fire Officer) Cromwell Bowling Club (patron) Otago Local Advisory Committee - Fire Emergency New Zealand		Lowburn Hall Committee Tarras Community Plan Group Tarras Hall Committee
Stephen Jeffery	G & S Smith family Trust (Trustee) K & EM Bennett’s family Trust (Trustee) Roxburgh Gorge Trail Charitable Trust (Chair) Roxburgh and District Medical Services Trust (Trustee) Central Otago Clutha Trails Ltd (Director) Teviot Prospects (Trustee) Teviot Valley Community Development Scheme Governance Group Central Otago Queenstown Network Trust
Cheryl Laws	Fine Thyme Theatre Company (Committee) The Message (Director) Wishart Family Trust (Trustee) Wooing Tree (part-time, occasional employee) Daffodil Day Area Coordinator	Otago Regional Council (Councillor) The Message (Director)	Cromwell Resource Centre Cromwell Historical Precinct
Nigel McKinlay	Transition To Work Trust (Board member) Gate 22 Vineyard Ltd (Director) Everyday Gourmet (Director) Central Otago Wine Association (member) Long Gully Irrigation Scheme (member)
Martin McPherson	Alexandra Blossom Festival	CODC (employee) CODC (employee) (Daughter)
Tracy Paterson	Matakanui Station (Director and shareholder) Matakanui Development Co (Director and shareholder) A and T Paterson Family Trust (trustee) A Paterson Family Trust (trustee) Central Otago Health Inc (Chair) Bob Turnbull Trust (Trustee / Chair) John McGlashan Board of Trustees (member) New Zealand Wool Classers Association (board member) Primary Industry Training Organisation, Industry Partner Group for wool classing and harvesting (member) Central Otago A&P Association (member)	Matakanui Station (director and shareholder) Matakanui Development Co (director and shareholder) A Paterson Family Trust (trustee) A and T Paterson Family Trust (trustee) Federated Farmers (on the executive team) Omakau Irrigation Co (director) Matakanui Combined Rugby Football Club (President) Manuherikia Catchment Group (member) Omakau Domain Board	Central Otago Health Inc Manuherikia River Group

Other Costs breakdown	YTD Actual	YTD Revised Budget	YTD Variance		2020/21 Annual Plan	2020/21 Revised Budget
Other Costs breakdown	$000	$000	$000		$000	$000
Operating Expenses	206	147	(59)	˜	258	248
Minor Repairs & Maintenance	112	101	(11)	˜	160	176
Staff Expenses	20	24	4	˜	37	42
Valuation Services	91	99	8	˜	160	170
Water Costs	72	81	9	˜	179	210
Minor Equipment	179	198	19	˜	260	340
Retail	42	52	10	˜	108	90
Sludge Treatment	104	147	43	˜	260	252
Health & Safety	1	35	34	˜	48	58
Vehicles	64	101	37	˜	100	173
Advertising	104	177	73	˜	281	290
Office Expenses	363	446	83	˜	757	748
Administrative Costs	525	715	190	˜	832	1,239
Projects	496	726	230	˜	251	1,242
Total Other Costs	2,379	3,049	670		3,691	5,278