Agenda of Council meeting - Wednesday, 22 September 2021

Council Meeting Agenda

22 September 2021

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

1 Dunorling Street, Alexandra
ON Wednesday, 11 August 2021 COMMENCING AT 10.30 am

PRESENT: His Worship the Mayor T Cadogan (Chairperson), Cr N Gillespie, Cr T Alley, 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), J Muir (Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services), L van der Voort (Executive Manager - Planning and Environment), A Rodgers (Principal Policy Planner), D Rushbrook (General Manager, Tourism Central Otago), D Shaw (Property and Facilities Officer – Cromwell), T Bates (Property Officer), N Lanham (Economic Development Manager), Q Penniall (Environmental Engineering Manager), C Green (Infrastructure Finance Officer), A McDowall (Finance Manger), G Robinson (Property Manager), M De Cort (Communications Coordinator) and R Williams (Governance Manager)

1 Apologies

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Jeffery

That apologies from Cr S Calvert be received and accepted.

Carried

2 Public Forum

Brent Nicolson from Rural Networks South Island Ltd spoke about the rent review for Rural Networks South Island Ltd before responding to questions.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Alley

That the public minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 30 June 2021 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. Cr Alley declared an interest in item 21.6.2 and withdrew from discussion and voting on that item.

Note: Edward Guy and Emily Walker from Rationale and Tim Church and Stephanie Griffiths from Boffa Miskell joined the meeting for item 21.6.2.

Note: Cr Gillespie assumed the Chair as the Planning and Regulatory portfolio lead.

Note: Cr Alley declared an interest and withdrew from discussion and voting on this item.

5 Reports for Decisions

21.6.2 Draft Vincent Spatial Plan Engagement Document

To consider and approve the Vincent Spatial Plan preferred option engagement document for release.

Emily Walker from Rationale and Tim Church from Boffa Miskell spoke to a presentation about the process undertaken to date and how the options had been developed, incorporating the public feedback received before responding to questions.

Following discussion it was agreed that the consultation document would be circulated to councillors for input prior to public distribution.

Resolution

Moved: McKinlay

Seconded: Laws

That the Council

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

B. Approves the draft Vincent Spatial Plan preferred option.

C. Directs staff to develop a preferred option engagement document for release to stakeholders

Carried

Note: Cr Paterson left the meeting at 11.40 am and returned at 11.42 am.

21.6.3 Central Otago District Council Submission on Proposed Otago Regional Policy Statement

To consider and endorse Council’s submission on the Proposed Otago Regional Policy Statement.

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Alley

That the Council

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

B. Approves the lodging of the submission on the Proposed Otago Regional Policy Statement on behalf of the Central Otago District Council.

C. Directs staff to finalise the submission and lodge with the Otago Regional Council.

Carried

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

Note: Cr Duncan left the meeting at 11.54 am.

21.6.4 Cromwell Bike Park Shelter Construction

To consider granting consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, permission for the Cromwell Bike Park Incorporated to construct a shelter over the existing starting ramps at the facility on the Neplusultra Recreation Reserve.

Resolution

Moved: Gillespie

Seconded: McKinlay

That the Council

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

B. Agrees to consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation to Council granting approval for the Cromwell Bike Park to erect a shelter over the existing starting ramps subject to necessary consents being sought as per Clause 7.2 of the lease.

Carried

Note: Cr Duncan returned to the meeting at 11.56 am.

21.6.5 Request for approval to locate a Container at Cromwell Golf Club

To consider a granting consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, permission for the Cromwell Golf Club to site a 40 foot storage (shipping) container on the area as identified on the Recreation Reserve.

Resolution

Moved: Gillespie

Seconded: McKinlay

That the Council

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

B. Authorises the Cromwell Golf Club to locate a container within the area currently used for storage as indicated in Appendix 2 of the report.

C. Agrees to consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation to Council granting approval for the Cromwell Golf Club to locate a container within the area used for storage as indicated in Appendix 2 of the report.

Carried

21.6.6 Cromwell Aerodrome - Refueling Facility

To consider a proposal from RD Petroleum to establish an aviation refuelling facility at Cromwell Aerodrome.

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Alley

That the Council

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

B. Agrees in principle to approve the issuing of a licence to occupy to RD Petroleum for refuelling facility at Cromwell Aerodrome comprising two 10,000 litre tanks for avgas and Jet A1 fuel.

C. Authorises the CEO to confirm approval of final location and design of refuelling facility to include safe and secure access for all potential users.

D. Authorises the CEO to approve acceptable terms and conditions for the Licence to Occupy similar to the Licence for the refuelling facility at Alexandra Airport and do all that is necessary to give effect to the resolutions.

Carried

21.6.7 WoolOn 2021 Event Request for Grant

To consider an application from WoolOn Creative Fashion Society Inc for a grant of $10,000 for the 2021 year event.

The Mayor and Cr McPherson noted their previous involvement with the event and noted they did not have a conflict of interest in the matter given the time that had lapsed since then.

During discussion, the potential of the event and its ability to showcase one of the district’s key industries was noted. However concern was expressed at the quality and timeliness of the application and that it had to be considered outside of the grants process.

Following discussion it was agreed adherence to the correct grant application processes would be a requirement for future applications and that assistance from staff for the event’s organising committee and the possibility of Council having a liaison position at the Board table may be considered.

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Claridge

That the Council

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

B. Approves a grant of $10,000 to the WoolOn Creative Fashion Society Incorporated for WoolOn creative fashion events 13 – 15 August 2021. The approved grant to be applied to venue costs, master of ceremonies, event marketing and communication only and is to be funded from district general reserves

Carried With Crs McKinlay, McPherson and Cooney recording their vote against.

21.6.8 Economic Recovery Plan Progress Report

To provide an update on the implementation of the 2020/2021 Economic Recovery Plan and provide the Economic Work programme for 2021/22.

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Alley

That the report be received and Council notes the work programme for 2021/2022.

Carried

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

21.6.9 Waste Services Review

To review public information prepared for community feedback on Council’s waste and recycling services.

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: McPherson

That the Council

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

B. Approves the ‘Have Your Say on Our Waste Services’ document for community feedback.

Carried

Note: The meeting adjourned at 12.57 pm and reconvened at 1.32 pm.

Note: Cr Claridge returned to the meeting at 1.39 pm.

21.6.10 Appointment of Consultants for Water and Wastewater Technical Support for 2021-24

To consider the direct appointment of consultants for technical support for water and wastewater during the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period.

During discussion it was noted that the proposed recommendations were in line with Council’s procurement policy.

Resolution

Moved: Paterson

Seconded: Cooney

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance and notes that resolutions B-G are consistent with Council’s procurement policy

B. Approves the direct appointment of Stantec for the provision of technical services for water and wastewater for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period for Cromwell, Vincent and Maniototo areas.

C. Approves the direct appointment of Fluent Solutions for provision of technical services for water and wastewater for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period for the Teviot area.

D. Approves the direct appointment of Beca for provision of technical services for water and wastewater for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period for the Maniototo area, and reticulation renewals and operational support as required.

E. Approves the direct appointment of Beale Consulting for the provision of technical services for resource consent applications for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period.

F. Approves the direct appointment of Rationale for the provision of strategic planning support for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period.

G. Approves the direct appointment of Mott MacDonald for hydraulic modelling for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period.

Carried

21.6.11 Naseby Water Supply

To consider upgrading of the Naseby treatment plant to provide service during climatic events which affect the quality of the source water.

Resolution

Moved: Claridge

Seconded: Alley

That the Council

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

B. Agrees to proceed with construction of a clarifier, pH correction, and flocculation tank to be funded from tranche 1 of the water stimulus funding.

C. Directs staff to investigate options for an alternative water source for the Naseby water supply, including consideration of a single Maniototo water treatment site.

Carried

Note: Cr Duncan assumed the Chair as the Roading portfolio lead.

21.6.12 Appointment of Consultant for Bridge Structural Advice for 2021‑24

To consider the direct appointment of a consultant for advice for bridges during the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period.

During discussion it was noted that the proposed recommendations were in line with Council’s procurement policy.

Resolution

Moved: Jeffery

Seconded: Paterson

That the Council

A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance and notes that resolutions B is consistent with Council’s procurement policy.

B. Approves the direct appointment of Beca for the provision of structural advice for bridges for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period.

Carried

21.6.13 Road Renaming Approval Report - Portion of Watson Road

To ratify the Vincent Community Board’s recommendation to rename a portion of Watson Road to Pīhoihoi Road.

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Alley

That the Council

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

B. Rename a portion of Watson Road to Pīhoihoi Road.

Carried

Note: The Mayor assumed the Chair.

21.6.14 Rural Networks South Island rent review

To provide further information for the purpose of reassessing the licence fees and power charges payable by Rural Networks South Island (the Company) for the licences and leases held over various Council reserves.

This item had been considered at the 24 March 2021 Council meeting (item 21.2.3) and left to lie on the table.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Alley

That the Council

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

B. Agrees to:

1. Reduce the licence fee for the Gilligans Gully site from $6,000 to $4,800 per annum plus GST.

2. Reduce the licence fees for the Clyde Lookout, Earnscleugh Road, and Sugarloaf sites from $5,000, to $1,900 per annum plus GST.

3. Reduce the rental for the Alexandra Airport site from $5,000 to $1,900 per annum plus GST, subject to the lessee continuing to provide free internet services to the Airport Terminal.

4. Charge a flat fee of $600 per annum plus GST (per tenant as applicable) for power at the Gilligans Gully and Clyde Lookout sites with that fee being subject to adjustment (increase) by 10% on renewal.

5. Backdate the revised fees and charges to the commencement of the new licences and leases being 01 July 2020.

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

Carried

21.6.15 Register of Delegations

To consider a change to the “Register of Delegations to Community Boards, Portfolios, Committees, and the Chief Executive Officer” in respect to the delegations to staff and to adopt the Delegated Authorities Operating Schedule – Resource Management Act, contained in the Staff Delegations Manual.

Resolution

Moved: Gillespie

Seconded: Jeffery

That the Council

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

B. Approves the deletion of sections 82 - 84 from the Register of Delegations and approves the following change to the Register of Delegations;

· Add the paragraph to section 81 as follows:

Council has approved the Resource Management Act (RMA) delegations, as outlined in the Statutory, Regulatory and Other Delegations to Officers section of the Staff Delegations Manual.

C. Adopts the Delegated Authorities Operating Schedule – Resource Management Act delegations

.Carried

21.6.16 Audit New Zealand Interim and Final Report of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan and Consultation Document

To receive Audit New Zealand’s Report on the audit of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document and supporting documentation, along with the final audit report of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Gillespie

That the report be received.

Carried

21.6.17 Financial Report For The Period Ending 31 May 2021

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

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Jeffery

That the report be received.

Carried

21.6.18 Remuneration Authority Determination 2021

To provide an update from the Remuneration Authority regarding the 2021/22 Local Government Members Determination and to consider changes to the Elected Members’ Allowances and Reimbursement Policy.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: McPherson

That the Council

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

B. Notes the Local Government Members (2021/22) Determination 2021 which took effect from 1 July 2021.

C. Approves the changes to the Elected Members’ Allowances and Reimbursement Policy as attached as Appendix 2 of the report.

Carried

6 Reports for Information

Nil

7 Mayor’s Report

21.6.19 Mayor's Report

The Mayor provided an update on issues and events since the previous meeting. The Deputy Mayor congratulated the Mayor for his interview on the Q+A talkback show.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Gillespie

That the Council receives the report.

Carried

8 Status Reports

21.6.20 August 2021 Governance Report

To report on items of general interest, receive minutes and updates from key organisations, consider Council’s forward work programme and the legacy and current status report updates.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Duncan

That the Council

A. Receives the report.

B. Ratifies both the Central Otago District Council’s and the Otago - Southland Councils’ joint submissions on the Natural and Built Environment Act (Exposure Draft).

Carried

9 Community Board Minutes

21.6.21 Minutes of the Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 20 July 2021

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Jeffery

That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 20 July 2021 be noted.

Carried

21.6.22 Minutes of the Maniototo Community Board Meeting held on 22 July 2021

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Jeffery

That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Maniototo Community Board Meeting held on 22 July 2021 be noted.

Carried

21.6.23 Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 29 July 2021

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Jeffery

That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 29 July 2021 be noted.

Carried

21.6.24 Minutes of the Teviot Valley Community Board Meeting held on 30 July 2021

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Jeffery

That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Teviot Valley Community Board Meeting held on 30 July 2021 be noted.

Carried

10 Date of Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 22 September 2021.

11 Resolution to Exclude the Public

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Duncan

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
21.6.25 - Private Plan Change 16 - Molyneux Lifestyle Village	s48(1)(d) - that a right of appeal lies to any court or tribunal against the decision of the Central Otago District Council in these proceedings	s48(1)(d) - that the exclusion of the public from the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting is necessary to enable the local authority to deliberate in private on its decision or recommendation in any proceedings to which this paragraph applies
21.6.26 - Major Event Funding	s7(2)(b)(ii) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information	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
21.6.27 - Council's role in affordable housing: Policy direction	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
21.6.28 - Gair Avenue, Cromwell	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
21.6.29 - August 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
21.6.30 - Confidential Minutes of the Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 20 July 2021	s7(2)(b)(ii) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information 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
21.6.31 - Confidential Minutes of the Maniototo Community Board Meeting held on 22 July 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
21.6.32 - Confidential Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 29 July 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

Carried

The public were excluded at 2.44 pm and the Meeting closed at 4.04 pm.

22 September 2021

5 Reports for Decisions

21.7.2 Council Community Grant Applications 2021-24 Financial Year

Doc ID: 549365

1. Purpose of Report

To consider round one of applications to the 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24 Council general grants fund and to determine the grant allocation of each applicant.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Considers the following applications:

i. Central Otago Health Inc to cover administration costs

2021/22 Requested: $7,556 Recommend Decline: $0

2022/23 Requested: $7,556 Recommend Decline: $0

2023/24 Requested: $7,556 Recommend Decline: $0

ii. Central Otago Heritage Trust to cover operational costs

2021/22 Requested: $40,000 Recommend Approve: $40,000

2022/23 Requested: $45,000 Recommend Decline: $0

2023/24 Requested: $50,000 Recommend Decline: $0

iii. Central Otago District Arts Trust to cover operational costs

2021/22 Requested: $47,488.10 Recommend Approve: $31,250

2022/23 Requested: $67,926.47 Recommend Decline: $0

2023/24 Requested: $63,458.16 Recommend Decline: $0

iv. Life Education Trust Heartland to cover operational costs in Central Otago

2021/22 Requested: $5,000 Recommend Approve: $3,000

2022/23 Requested: $5,000 Recommend Decline: $0

2023/24 Requested: $5,000 Recommend Decline: $0

v. Sport Otago for Sport Central operational costs in Central Otago

2021/22 Requested: $48,000 Recommend Approve: $41,549

2022/23 Requested: $48,960 Recommend Decline: $0

2023/24 Requested: $49,960 Recommend Decline: $0

vi. Sport Central for annual sports awards

2021/22 Requested: $1,000 Recommend Decline: $0

2022/23 Requested: $1,000 Recommend Decline: $0

2023/24 Requested: $1,000 Recommend Decline: $0

2. Background

A new grant policy was adopted by Council in 2019, which has resulted in all grants now going through a contestable and transparent application process. Through the 2021-2031 Long-term Plan, Council approved $151,000 per annum for district-funded community grants. This budget was to be allocated via two annual funding rounds. The current round is the first for the 2021/22 financial year and the second round will occur in the third quarter. Council may wish to consider any allocations in this round will have on its budget for the second round and any opportunities that come up then.

A hardship grant was introduced for groups who historically received money from Council to ensure that these groups did not experience financial hardship as a result of the new grants process. The Council received hardship grant requests from Central Otago District Arts Trust (CODAT) and Alexandra District Museum Inc. Through this process, CODAT was granted $8,750 to keep them going until the September round of funding. Therefore, the total amount of funding available for 2021-22 is $142,250. The 2022-23 and 2023-24 financial years both have $151,000 available.

All applicants who have historically received grants from Council and community boards through the Long-term Plan received correspondence in February 2021 advising them of the new process and when applications would be open. This included an initial email, followed by a phone call and final email, to ensure that the information was understood. Applications to grants, via the Council website, opened on 1 July 2021 and closed on 1 August 2021.

According to the grant policy, applicants can submit for up to three years of funding during year 1 of the Long-term Plan, and Council and community boards are able to allocate funding in advance on a recurring basis for up to three financial years. Seven applications have been submitted to the Council for community grants, as detailed below, and all applicants have applied for three years of funding.

A matrix evaluation has been completed to assist the Council in assessing applications against the grant policy and criteria for funding. Staff have completed a matrix for each financial year, assessing the applications against the policy. These matrices also demonstrate the availability of grant funds for the second funding round in this financial year, plus funding rounds in future years, should new applicants wish to apply (Appendix 1).

3. Discussion

Community grants support community-driven initiatives which enhance the well-being of residents. They fund projects which fall outside of the promotions grant criteria and demonstrate a clear connection to one or more aspects of community well-being (social, economic, environmental and cultural). These grants are funded through ward and Council rates.

Any grants approved for future years cannot be uplifted until the applicants have reported back on their previous year’s grant, including how the funds were used and outcomes that were delivered. If applicants are approved multi-year grants, they are still eligible to put in a second application for something else if they wish.

The total amount of funds requested in this first funding round for the 2021/22 financial year is higher than the entire year’s grant budget, as are the requested funds for 2022/23 and 2023/24. If Council chooses to fully allocate the community grants budget for the current year, plus years two and three of the Long-term Plan, this would result in no further opportunity to facilitate contestable community grant funding rounds.

The assessment matrices for 2022/23 and 2023/24 demonstrate a match with the current purpose and eligibility grant criteria for some applicants, and multi-year grants would provide greater financial security for projects that run over multiple years. However, staff advice is to be circumspect at committing grant funds from future years’ budgets:

· The majority of the contestable grant budgets will be used in this first round, leaving little opportunity for future applicants.

· Applicants receiving annual grants may not be incentivised to seek out alternative funding sources.

· Council’s grant policy is to be reviewed in November 2021 with the intent of providing clearer direction for applicants and decision-makers; this review may alter future eligibility criteria.

· Fully committing grant budgets in advance will mean there is less flexibility to respond to adverse financial situations, such as when Council agreed to reduce contestable grant budgets to zero for 2020/21 to reduce the impact of a rates rise during the COVID-19 pandemic.

· Multi-year funding may impact decision-making abilities for elected members voted into office at the next local authority elections, in 2022.

Staff have reviewed each of the applications and provided comment below to assist Council with their decision-making.

Application: Central Otago Health Inc Trust GRA10749852 (App. 2)

Project: Administration of Incorporated Society

Amount Requested: 2021/22 $7,556

2022/23 $7,556

2023/24 $7,556

· Council has been providing financial support to the Trust since 2000, with an annual grant of $7,556 introduced in the 2016/17 financial year.

· The Trust administers the assets of Dunstan Hospital on behalf of the community.

· Funding from Council is used toward administration costs, secretarial services, advertising and associated costs for director recruitment, accounting costs, and applying for grants.

· If Council does not continue to fund the Trust, funds will have to be used from income received from Dustan Hospital, which would decrease the amount of funds available to purchase equipment for the hospital.

· Not a clear alignment with community well-being, community outcomes or Council strategies.

Application: Central Otago Heritage Trust GRA210707636 (App. 3)

Project: Central Otago Heritage Trust (COHT)– Programme Coordination

Amount Requested: 2021/22 $40,000

2022/23 $45,000

2023/24 $50,000

· Central Otago Heritage Trust (COHT) was established in 2008, with a working heritage strategy in place since 2012.

· The Trust was awarded $40,000 per annum through the 2018-28 Long-term Plan process, and has uplifted the full amount for the past three years.

· COHT is made up of a large amount of member groups, and represents the collective interest of the groups in protecting, preserving, and celebrating local heritage.

· The applicant has included seven letters of support from Trust members, including four community-led museums, as well as other local Trusts and a local historian.

· COHT provides an important connection between various heritage related groups across the district, and provides ongoing facilitation and support in this space, including to the museum sector.

· Funding from Council is used to pay a part-time coordinator and some administration costs. This includes: a quarterly newsletter which is circulated electronically, as well as in hard copy format to members; the hosting and updating of two websites; the printing of a heritage trails brochure (in the 2021/22 financial year).

· The application aligns with the purpose and criteria for Council’s community grants, with the sole exception of becoming self-sustaining.

Application: Central Otago District Arts Trust GRA210739079 (App. 4)

Project: Central Otago District Arts Trust (CODAT) Operational Costs

Amount Requested: 2021/22 $47,488.10 (pro rata for nine months)

2022/23 $67,926.47

2023/24 $63,458.16

· Central Otago District Arts Trust (CODAT) has been receiving an annual grant of $35,000 from Council since 2011. This has been used for the salary costs of the part-time coordinator (25 hours/week).

· CODAT works towards ensuring Central Otago arts and artists are well resourced, promoted, supported, and fully integrated into the local community.

· CODAT’s work is guided by the Central Otago Arts Strategy, which it refers to on a regular basis to ensure it is achieving the outlined objectives. It revises this strategy annually and ticks off high-priority tasks as they are fulfilled and creates a new focus document for the year going forward.

· CODAT works with artists, art organisations, event organisations and the community, as required, and continues to seek feedback to ensure the services offered continue to be relevant and achieve positive outcomes.

· If CODAT does not receive funding from Council, it will not be able to continue to operate. While it does seek funding for additional projects, Council funds all of the core operational costs of the Trust.

· The application aligns with the purpose and criteria for Council’s community grants, with the sole exception of becoming self-sustaining.

Application: Life Education Trust Heartland Otago Southland GRA210707797 (App.5)

Project: Costs towards delivery of the Life Education programme

Amount Requested: 2021/22 $5,000

2022/23 $5,000

2023/24 $5,000

· The Trust runs a health and wellbeing programme in schools covering topics such as: respect for yourself and others; reinforcing the ability to resist peer pressure through building self-esteem; developing strategies and resilience to cope with bullying; healthy living and eating; drug, alcohol, and nicotine use.

· The Trust develops lesson overviews and provides teachers with teaching resources to create a continuous learning experience. Schools choose which areas they want to focus on.

· A fully qualified specialist is employed and travels around the region with a mobile classroom to each of the schools.

· The programme is available to around 1,510 young people across Central Otago; it reaches 90% of children between the ages of 5 years and 13 years.

· The programme reaches all primary and intermediate schools across the district on a biennial schedule. The Trust has a goal to scale up resources to be able to offer more services.

· The Trust was awarded a three-year grant through the 2018-28 Long-term Plan process and has received $2,500 for the past three years.

· In 2020/21 other council contributions were as follows:

o Clutha District Council: $5,133

o Gore District Council: $2,500

o Dunedin City Council: $3,000

o Queenstown Lakes District Council: $0

· The Trust’s application meets all funding criteria, with the exception of becoming self-sustaining, and some of the grant purposes.

Application: Sport Otago GRA210739299 (App. 6)

Project: Sport Central – Operational Funding

Amount Requested: 2021/22 $48,000

2022/23 $48,960

2023/24 $48,960

· Sport Otago has received an annual grant from Council since 2001, and this has remained at $41,549 per annum since 2015.

· In addition to this grant application, Council’s Parks and Recreation budget funds $9,890+GST to cover the cost of renting office space at the Cromwell Pool. This could arguably be considered as additional grant funding, albeit non-contestable.

· The requested funding contributes to salaries for three staff based in Central Otago, and includes human resources, programme delivery resources, general operational costs and travel costs.

· Central Otago based staff also work across Queenstown Lakes, and Queenstown Lakes District Council contributes towards Sport Central’s operating costs.

· The Community and Schools Advisor focuses on children ages 0-13 years through Wriggle and Rhyme, On Your Marks, Physical Activity Leaders programmes and potentially some new ‘Play’ based initiatives. The Sport and Active Recreation Coordinator works with youth aged 12-18 years to facilitate opportunities for them to engage in sport and active recreation. They also play a role working alongside sport and recreation clubs to build their capability and increase and enhance the quality of physical activity opportunities (including facility and hub development).

· Sport Otago manages the Central Lakes Swim Safe programme from Dunedin.

· Sport Central staff promote three community funds to support active recreation.

· Sport Otago works with Council’s Parks and Reserves team annually to adjust work plans and set priorities.

· The application aligns with the purpose and criteria for Council’s community grants, with the sole exception of becoming self-sustaining.

Application: Sport Central GRA210756824 (App. 7)

Project: Central Otago Sports Awards

Amount Requested: 2021/22 $1,000

2022/23 $1,000

2023/24 $1,000

· The Central Otago Sports Awards were first held in 2021, and the intention is now to make it an annual event.

· Council funding will be used to attract an inspiring public speaker, who would be available to speak at Council or a community event.

· The Sports Awards are about inspiring, sharing, and empowering the sporting community, as well as encouraging connections.

· The event has wide community sponsorship.

· Candidates from the Central Otago Sports Awards go on to compete in the Otago Sports Awards.

· The 2021 annual awards were held in Wanaka, and the application indicates that the 2022 awards may be held in Queenstown. Grant funding is specifically for activities within the Central Otago District area.

· Community grants have not previously been used to fund speakers.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

That Council considers the applications received and reviews the recommended grant amounts as specified in the grant assessment matrix for each of the three years of the 2021-2031 Long-term Plan.

That the Council allocates grants for the following applicants:

Name of Applicant	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24
Opening balance	$151,000	$151,000	$151,000
Less hardship grant (CODAT)	$8,750	-	-
Proposed applicant funding:
· Central Otago Heritage Trust	$40,000	-	-
· Central Otago District Arts Trust (CODAT)	$31,250*	-	-
· Life Education Trust Heartland Otago and Southland	$3,000	-	-
· Sport Otago	$41,549	-	-
Total amount allocated in this round:	$115,799
Total 2021/22 grants budget remaining:	$26,451	$151,000	$151,000

* Reduced amount in lieu of the hardship grant paid earlier this financial year.

That the Council declines grants for the following applicants:

Name of Applicant	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24
Central Otago Health Inc Trust	$7,556	$7,556	$7,556
Central Otago Heritage Trust	-	$45,000	$50,000
Central Otago District Arts Trust (CODAT)	$16,238	$67,926	$63,926
Life Education Trust Heartland Otago and Southland	$2,000	$5,000	$5,000
Sport Otago	$6,451	$48,960	$48,960
Sport Central Sports Awards	$1,000	$1,000	$1,000
Total applied for but not allocated:	$33,245	$180,442	$181,442

Advantages:

· The recommended allocation is within community grant budgets: $33,245 remains in the 2021/22 budget and the full budget allocation remains in the 2022/23 and 2023/24 financial years.

· Most applicants receive all or a partial amount of what they asked for, which will allow them to carry out their projects.

· Arts and heritage are all being funded at an equivalent amount, reflective of the similar value that they contribute to the community.

· While not receiving the amount requested, Sport Otago’s operational grant will be consistent with previous years.

· The Council is declining applicants whose projects do not clearly align with the 2019 Grant Policy.

· Remaining funds are available for a second funding round in 2021/22 and full budgets are available for future years.

Disadvantages:

· The recommended grant amounts are insufficient to allow those applications seeking operational support to increase staff wages as budgeted.

· Two applicants will not receive any funding, which may compromise the quality of their service delivery.

· Limiting grant funding to a single year reduces financial stability for applicants running longer term projects and may jeopardise their ongoing functionality.

Option 2

The Council consider allocating different amounts of funding to applicants, in line with the grants criteria and available budget, taking into consideration the following:

· Alignment with the grants criteria.

· Total budget and available funds.

· Ongoing functionality of well-performing community organisations.

· A second funding round to be advertised in the third quarter of the 2021/22 financial year, and two funding rounds per year in the 2022/23 and 2023/24 financial years.

Advantages:

· Council has the discrepancy to allocate grants of a lesser or greater amount, in line with the 2019 Grant Policy and assessment matrix, and within the set budgets.

Disadvantages:

· Recommendations have been made with consideration to the available budgets, and the 2019 Grant Policy and assessment matrix.

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 providing financial support for community-led projects and initiatives.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	Yes
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes, consistent with the 2019 Grant Policy.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	None
Risks Analysis	There is a risk that some applicants may not be able to carry out their projects as outlined due to insufficient funding.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	None required

6. Next Steps

The Council agrees on and resolves the grant amount for each applicant.

The applicants are advised in writing of the Council’s decision, with information about any conditions applied to the approved grant, and the process for uplifting the grant if relevant.

If approved, payment of the approved grant is made once an accountability form has been submitted for any previous grants, and an invoice is received.

7. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Council Community Grant Assessment Matrix 21-24.pdf ⇩

Appendix 2 - Central Otago Health Inc Grant Application.pdf ⇩

Appendix 3 - Central Otago Heritage Trust Grant Application.pdf ⇩

Appendix 4 - Central Otago District Arts Trust Grant Application.pdf ⇩

Appendix 5 - Life Education Trust Heartland Otago Southland Grant Application.pdf ⇩

Appendix 6 - Sport Otago Grant Application.pdf ⇩

Appendix 7 - Sport Central Grant Application.pdf ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Nikki Aaron	Sanchia Jacobs
Community Development Officer	Chief Executive Officer
3/09/2021	15/09/2021

22 September 2021

21.7.3 District Museum Function

Doc ID: 547712

1. Purpose of Report

To consider options on the sector-led delivery of the district museum function following deliberations and direction from councillors on the Long-term Plan 2021-31.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Notes eight sector-led models were considered and analysed to provide the delivery of the district museum function.

C. Notes a sector-led trust model is likely to be the most effective mechanism to deliver the district museum function.

D. Endorses the establishment of a new sector museum trust to deliver the district museum function.

E. Approves a portion of the $50,000 allocated to this function is retained for staff to facilitate the establishment of the trust by paying legal fees to review the trust deed and establishing the new trust.

F. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to enter into a performance agreement with the new entity upon which overall delivery will be measured against.

G. Approves on the evidence of the establishment of the trust and the signing of the performance agreement the remaining balance of the $50,000 is transferred to this new entity.

H. Approves that council will have active involvement in the trust with the appointment by the Chief Executive Officer of one staff member as a council representative on the trust.

I. Approves that the district museum function will be delivered by the new trust for a trial period of two years with regular reporting to council on progress and delivery.

J. Notes that any decision regarding funding beyond the two-year period will be considered under the museum investment framework soon to begin.

2. Background

In 2019 council staff led a series of workshops with the sector to initiate work on the development of a museum strategy. Among other issues, a key issue that came from these workshops was the need for better sector collaboration. Council has historically provided funding to the Alexandra District Museum Incorporated to deliver a district museum function. For various reasons over the years this has proven challenging. Given both the sector and council see this as a key priority, the mechanism to deliver this function was considered and consulted on in the Long-term Plan 2021-31.

Four options for delivering a district museum function were put out for consultation:

1) An in-house museum function

2) Status quo

3) No funding

4) Expanded heritage/museum role

Feedback from the community during the consultation favoured option one. However, an alternative proposal put forward by a united sector to establish an independent trust to deliver the district museum function was considered during deliberations.

Following the deliberations and evidence of strong collaboration and willingness by the sector, councillors believed there was merit in this proposal and asked for further scoping work to be carried out. Council, therefore, chose to adopt option one, an in-house museum function delivered by council, but delay implementation to enable sector feedback on alternative options to be worked through.

The alternate option was to be worked up and reported back to Council within three months for final determination whether Council will apply the funding to an in-house role or to a sector led model.

3. Discussion

Process and consultation with the sector

The sector consists of five main museums from across Central Otago: Alexandra District Museum Incorporated, Clyde Historical Museums Incorporated, Cromwell Museum Trust, Maniototo Early Settlers Association, and the Teviot District Museum. The Central Otago Heritage Trust have also been actively involved.

Staff have worked in collaboration with the sector to work through alternative sector-led models, including three meetings with the wider sector, two meetings and ongoing correspondence with representatives from both the museum and from the heritage sector. These meetings have included discussions on a range of models for sector delivery, as well as discussions on council involvement in the preferred model.

Legal structure

The following structures for the new entity were considered and analysed:

· Unincorporated group

· Incorporated society

· Registered charitable trust (trust based)

· Registered charitable trust (society based)

· Company

· Industrial and provident society

· Council Controlled Organisation

· Umbrella group

Each legal structure was considered against the objectives of both the sector and council requirements. Criteria included limiting legal liability to members, enabling the sector to apply for and access other sources of funding, ensuring transparency in the use of council funding, and ensuring reporting requirements were reasonable and were not too onerous for both the sector and council.

Each legal structure has been analysed and this is contained in appendix 1. On balance, staff consider the establishment of a trust entity is the most effective structure to deliver the district museum function. Such a structure will enable the sector independence while still ensuring transparency for spending ratepayers’ money. Given this is a new entity and to ensure delivery of the function as council has intended it is recommended that a performance agreement be entered into between the new entity and council.

The sector felt the registered charitable trust (trust based) best met their needs and have worked together to develop a draft trust deed (appendix 2). It is proposed the new entity would appoint a contractor to assist and this is primarily where the funding would be spent (see appendix 3 for a draft job description).

Relationship with Council

To ensure effective communication between the new trust entity and council, it is proposed that there be a council representative on the trust. Two options were considered by staff: an elected member or a member of staff. The Central Otago Heritage Trust has a model whereby a senior staff member sits as a representative without voting rights. Such a model enables communication and facilitates relationships while protecting elected members from any real or perceived conflicts. This model has been working effectively for the Central Otago Heritage Trust. As such, it is proposed to replicate this arrangement in the new museum trust. The sector are supportive of having a council representative on this new entity and the attached draft trust deed has been drafted to include provision for a staff member representative.

Sector Strategy and funding objectives

The primary objective of the district funding is to deliver on the district museum function. The sector has worked in collaboration to develop a sector strategy (appendix 4). This strategy clearly articulates the strategic objectives of the sector and their goals. While this document originally began its origin as a council-led document with council functions and responsibilities within, during the course of this work council has been separated out. This document not only is important for the sector but is pivotal for the next stage of the museum work (investment framework). The next stage of this work will articulate council’s roles and functions as well as deliver on the investment model for museum funding.

The delivery of a district museum function is central to the attached sector strategy document, and it is recommended that the delivery of this strategy becomes the primary measure upon which success of this function is measured in any performance agreements.

Funding period

Staff recommend Council consider a trial period for the operation of the new trust as the provider of the district museum function. There are three key reasons for this approach that are related to ensuring Council meets its financial prudence obligations.

The core consideration for Council is how to balance the needs of the sector with the responsibility of financial prudence under the Local Government Act 2002. The sector would prefer the funding be provided as an ongoing line item in the budget. The certainty in future funding is important for their business planning, particularly in attracting and giving certainty to the contracted employee.

On the other hand, Council is responsible for the use of ratepayer funds. It is expected that funding is transparent, purposeful, outcome driven, and in line with community expectations.

Council had previously provided funding for a district function that had been challenging to deliver. Although the new body is not accountable for previous funding, it does reflect a need for a higher level of scrutiny to ensure the funding is now purposeful and aligned with council objectives.

Similarly, this new trust was proposed through the long-term plan consultation period and had not existed prior. With full confidence in the sector and in the new trust, an initial ‘settling in’ period ensures the trust forms and operates in line with financial expectations before committing to funding long term.

The final reason for this recommendation is due to the public consultation that already took place, and the potential for further consultation at the end of the trial period. Of the options given, the community opted for an in-house model at a cost of $50,000 annually. The sector lead trust model was not part of the consultation, as it was proposed through the process. While no further consultation is required at this point (as there is no rates impact) it would be prudent to implement a trial period in the event further consideration of the delivery model is required.

Council will receive updates on progress against the performance agreement from the new trust at the following intervals (subject to finalisation of the Council meeting schedule for 2022 and 2023):

- March 2022

- September 2022

- March 2023

Through these updates, it is expected that the requirements for financial prudency will be satisfied. Following the March 2023 update, Council would consider the following decision points:

- Continuing to provide funding for a district museum function and delivery of the sector strategy

- Whether the funding is contestable or rolls over (to be considered under the museum investment framework piece of work)

- If further consideration of the mechanism to deliver the district function is required

- Council involvement in the next strategic planning process (sector strategy)

Combining with other sector trust bodies

At the Long-term Plan 2021-31 deliberations meeting in June 2021, Council asked for advice on whether a combined model with the existing Heritage and Arts Trusts to form one group would work. On reviewing the purposes of these groups, while connected they do have independent goals and purposes (and given the independent nature of the current trusts in existence this would require their buy-in and is likely a significant piece of work). Further, to give this new museum trust entity the greatest chance of success, their focus needs to be on the museum sector. While this could be a future state to combine some/all of these trusts’ functions staff recommend for the near future that independence is maintained.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Support implementing a sector lead trust model, with the following:

· staff supporting the establishment of the trust (facilitating obtaining legal advice)

· the Chief Executive Officer entering into a performance agreement for the delivery of the district function with the new entity

· the balance of the $50,000 after legal costs transferred to the new entity on proof of establishment and execution of a performance agreement with council

· the Chief Executive Officer appointing a staff representative on the new entity

· an initial two-year trial period with regular reporting to council as outlined in this report

· ongoing funding to be considered as part of the museum investment framework piece of work.

Advantages:

· Enables the new trust to begin delivering immediately after establishment

· Analysis reveals a trust model is likely to be the most effective sector-led delivery method

· Ensures transparency of ratepayers’ funds

· Balances the needs of the sector and the responsibilities of Council

· Ensures further decision making is aligned with the overall museum funding approach and considerations.

Disadvantages:

· None identified.

Option 2

To implement another one of the seven sector led models analysed in this report with the same conditions as outlined in option 1.

Advantages:

· None identified.

Disadvantages:

· Likely to create additional reporting and governance dependent on what model is preferred

· Will likely delay the appointment of a contractor to undertake the district function

· Will delay action and delivery of the sector strategy

· Is not the preferred option of the sector.

Option 3

Do not adopt the sector lead trust model and proceed with in-house model that was proposed as the preferred option in the Consultation Document for the 2021-31 Long-term Plan.

Advantages

· Was the preferred option from the community.

Disadvantages

· The sector has collaborated in recent months on a model that is likely to be more effective than an in-house function

· The analysis showed the alternative model proposed by the sector has merit

· Not the referred option for the sector.

Option 4

Endorse the establishment of a sector led trust model (outlined in option one) with the appointment of a councillor as a representative on the new trust rather than a staff member.

Advantages

· Greater level of elected member involvement, oversight and accountability

Disadvantages

· Elected member time constraints

· May create real or perceived conflicts if decisions need to be made in the future on the funding to this trust and the relationship with council.

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the cultural and social wellbeing of communities, both in the present and for the future by celebrating museums contribution to cultural and social wellbeing
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	The funding has been allocated as part of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	This is consistent with the approach to Heritage and the Arts. It is generally consistent with the Long-term plan and is consistent with the direction Council gave staff following Long-term plan deliberations.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	T There are no direct environmental or sustainability links.
Risks Analysis	The financial prudence obligation under the local Government Act 2002 seeks the appropriate and transparent use of funds. The recommendations in the paper are consistent with these requirements.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The decision arose through the consultation process and was championed by the sector collectively. While it does diverge from the option preferred by the community as a whole, for an in-house function the recommendations allow opportunities for further consultation if and as required.

6. Next Steps

Pending endorsement by Council, staff will work with museum sector representatives to establish the trust and implement the agreed recommendations.

7. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Further detail on potential legal structures of new entity ⇩

Appendix 2 - Draft Central Otago Museum Trust Deed ⇩

Appendix 3 - Draft Central Otago Museums Coordinator Job Description ⇩

Appendix 4 - 2021 Sector-led District Museum Strategy.pdf ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Alix Crosbie	Saskia Righarts
Senior Strategy Advisor	Chief Advisor
8/09/2021	13/09/2021

Council meeting

22 September 2021

· Museum District Function

Further detail on potential models for new sector body

The legal structure of the new representative body was a key consideration.

For the sector, the chosen structure needs to:

· Provide opportunities for input from all museums, rather than focus on one or two voices as representative

· Allow museums to source and access other sources of funding

· Limit the level of personal liability that members face

· Minimise reporting requirements to ensure sole employee is able to focus on core role

For Council, the chosen structure needs to:

· Provide visibility and transparency on the use of council funding

· Be consistent with the public position consulted on through the Long-term plan

· Enable the sector to deliver on strategic objectives

· Facilitate a relationship between council and the sector

· Work for the sector

· Limit reporting requirements to ensure funding can deliver on strategic objectives

The following legal structures were considered:

Unincorporated group	An unincorporated group is any group of people that gets together for some purpose. It includes groups set up for socialisation or providing a service, and groups gathering to change something in the community. Unincorporated status tends to suit social groups or those formed to address an urgent, short term issue. Unincorporated groups have no legal identify or legal status and members are able to join or leave at will. Rules and processes should exist and be recorded, however there is no legal requirement to do so. Resolving disputes can, therefore, be problematic. There are few legal or administrative requirements and a flexible structure with few rules or restrictions. This does reduce the reporting requirements and associated costs, however Council is likely to require a higher degree of reporting to meet financial prudency obligations under the Local Government Act 2002. It also presents a significant disadvantage to the sector as an unincorporated group has no legal standing to enter into contracts, own property, or borrow money. Consequently, all members may be personally liable for debts and other obligations. Surplus assets are able to be distributed among members. It was decided by both the sector and council staff that the unincorporated model is unsuitable for an on-going group employing staff and receiving external funding from Council.
Incorporated society	An incorporated society is made up of individuals (15), corporate bodies (5), or a mix of both. Decision making is by members at general meetings or by committee. As an unincorporated group, members of an incorporated society are personally liable for debts and other obligations. Reporting requirements include notifying the Register of Incorporated Societies of changes of rules and office annual financial statements (unless registered under the Charities Act 2005). It has a democratic, membership-based structure and is seen as an easy and efficient structure for a smaller non-profit organisation. Finding and maintaining the required 15 members can be difficult and there is a risk of committees being overturned annually at each AGM, which can lead to short-term decision making. Both the sector and Council staff were less keen on this model due to the personal liability on members.
Registered charitable trust (society-based)	A registered charitable trust (society based) requires 5 individuals or an existing society to register with the Registrar of Incorporated Societies. Decision making is made by members at general meeting or by board. In general, there is limited personal liability for members of a registered charitable trust. The Registrar of Incorporated Societies requires notice of changes of rules and office. A registered charitable trust (society based) is considered good for most not-for-profit groups with a charitable purpose. It provides a better framework for governance than incorporated societies and only requires five members to incorporate charitable status. Groups need to have a charitable purpose and cannot distribute profits to members. The registered charitable trust model (society based) is one the sector strongly considered, particularly as it would enable applications for other sources of funding.
Registered charitable trust (trust-based)	A registered charitable trust (trust-based) is similar to the society-based model, with some notable differences. It would require just two or more trustees to form and decisions would be made by trustees/a trust board. Control is kept in a few hands (those of the trustees) with limited liability. This provides longer term stability, however control remains with the trustees and there is no formal accountability to a wider membership base. Trustee succession is usually by Trustee appointment. The registered charitable trust model (trust based) is a model favoured by the sector. It also enables the sector to apply for further funding by other agencies.
Company	Forming a company would require providing the Companies Office with: annual return and changes of name, office, rules, and directors. It is easier to obtain loans and undertake commercial activities, however generally too complex for charitable community organisations as the reporting requirements are more onerous than other structures and Directors may be liable if they fail to meet obligations. It would exclude the sector from applying for additional funding as a charity.
Industrial and provident society	A minimum of seven individual members can form an Industrial and Provident Society. Decisions are made my members at general meeting or by committee. It is a model generally good for co-operatives with a business or commercial purpose. They work (industrial) and receive benefits (provident) as a collective. A co-operative taxi society is a good example, with independent operators benefitting from group car insurance schemes and radio booking systems. Industrial and provident societies are relatively rare and there are limited professionals with a full understanding how they work. The reporting requirement is an annual return to the Registrar of Industrial and Provident Societies and some may need to file financial statements.
Council controlled organisation	Council controlled organisations are public companies in which the council has the responsibility to appoint at least 50 per cent of the board of directors or trustees. A council controlled organisation would require: - Appointing directors for the new entity - Managing an effective relationship with the CCO - Setting an appropriate monitoring framework - Accountability and reporting documents prepared under the Local Government Act There is a concern that the reporting requirements of a council controlled organisation will be too onerous for this level of funding.
Umbrella group	An umbrella group allows groups to work successfully without incorporation by going under the wing of an umbrella group. The umbrella group is usually a larger organisation that is an incorporated body and can provide resources and backing to smaller groups that work in similar areas and/or share similar goals. There are multiple benefits in saving on costs and working in partnership in the community, depending on the set up of the group. Limitations can include limiting eligibility for grants, confusing employment arrangements, full disclosure of financial information to the umbrella group, complexity in how assets will be managed when problems arrive, and potential issues with liability. There is a potential future state where the heritage, museum, and arts trusts may formally align, whether under an umbrella or other model. Presently, it was determined that there needs to be a focus on the museum sector and operating without the additional complexity would give the best chance of success. Over time, particularly as networks are built between the various organisations, opportunities for sharing resources or collaborating for stronger results should be considered.

Following this review, the sector determined that the registered charitable trust (trust-based) model best met their needs. This is consistent with council requirements.

Reference and further detail on the models:

NZ Navigator Trust, Characteristics of different organisational legal structures, Community Net Aotearoa, viewed June 2021. https://community.net.nz/resources/community-resource-kit/characteristics-of-different-organisational-legal-structures/

Council meeting

22 September 2021

DRAFT POSITION DESCRIPTION

Central Otago Museums Trust Coordinator

The Central Otago Museums’ Trust (the Trust) is looking for a part-time coordinator to support the Trust in implementing its Museum Sector Strategy.

Museums play an important role in preserving, protecting, and celebrating community stories and artifacts for current and future generations. There are five museums in Central Otago, each with their own unique stories to tell. The Central Otago Museums’ Trust brings the sector together to:

· Support the success of achieving goals and actions agreed to in the Central Otago District Museums Strategy

· Strengthen individual museum’s unique point of difference within the sector

· Foster greater sharing of resources

· Improve consistent policy development, particularly collections policies

· Support connectivity with community resources

Purpose of role

The Central Otago Museum Sector Coordinator will assist the Trust in achieving the goals and tasks set out in the Central Otago Museum Sector Strategy (2021 – 2024). This strategy will engage the five Central Otago Museums to work as a cohesive network.

Working from a museums network perspective:

· Supports the success of achieving goals and actions agreed to in this Strategy.

· Acknowledges that each museum has a unique point of difference that can be clearly used to promote their “World of Difference” within the network

· Fosters greater sharing of resources – human and physical

· Improves consistent policy development, particularly collections policies

· Supports connectivity with community resources

Key Relationships

Internal

External

Central Otago Museums’ Trust

· Staff and volunteers from the five Central Otago Museum:

i. Central Stories Museum and Art Gallery

ii. Clyde Museum

iii. Cromwell Museum

iv. Maniototo Early Settlers Museum

v. Teviot District Museum.

· Otago Museum

· Te Papa - National Services Te Paerangi

· Central Otago Heritage Trust

· Central Otago District Council

Key Accountabilities

· In consultation with the Trust, develop and implement a two-year schedule for achieving the tasks set out in the Central Otago Museum Sector Strategy (2021 – 2024)

· Work with museum staff and volunteers to identify training and skills development to enhance and promote best practice in relation to governance and collections policies, customer service and relationships with communities

· Establish a series of practical workshops for museum staff and volunteers based on the identified needs of the sector

· Build and maintain positive relationships Te Papa National Services Te Paerangi and the Otago Museum to develop training and collaborative programming opportunities

· Build and maintain a positive working relationship with relevant Central Otago District Council staff

· Encourage museums to be used as a place for the community to gather (including schools and other community groups)

· Assist the volunteer museums in Central Otago in preparing grant applications for ongoing collection and programming needs as well as special projects.

· Assist in the development of museum collections, including deaccession, to align with each museum’s point of difference

· Develop a sector wide marketing plan and associated collateral to promote the Central Otago museums as a network

· Develop strong relationships with museum staff and volunteers within the district.

· Research and develop timely reports to the Trust within the areas of shared resources, collection and conservation material and storage requirements, museum and exhibition display and the identification of key Southland stories

· Researching and drafting submissions on behalf of the COMT as and when required

· Maintaining the Trust's relationships with funding bodies and actively seeking funding for projects related to the tasks set out in the Central Otago District Museum Sector Strategy

· Other administrative duties as required by the position

· Provide accountability reports to Central Otago District Council as and when required

Knowledge, Experience and Skills

· Ability to think at a strategic level and to design and implement new programmes necessary to meet the goals and tasks set out in the Central Otago Museum Sector Strategy

· Working with community groups and volunteers

· Knowledge of and experience in working from a matauranga Māori perspective

· Ability to work independently as a contractor

· Experience in project management

· Demonstrated practical leadership

· Be highly motivated, creative, flexible and an innovative thinker

· Experience with completing grant applications

· Excellent organisational and multi-tasking skills

· Strong computer skills

· A willingness to work flexible hours including weekends and evenings

· Collection management and conservation principles

· Experience with working with community groups in museum outreach or in the context of cultural

· Demonstrated confidence in working with high profile projects which may attract media interest

· Holder of a current and valid NZ Driver's licence

Working for Central Otago Museums’ Trust means being part of a caring, dynamic and effective customer-focused team who is committed to making a positive difference in the community we serve. If you'd like to be part of this team, contact us now.

Enquiries about this position should be directed to XXX

Please note you must be eligible to work in New Zealand.

Location: XXX

Closing Date: XXX

DRAFT CONTRACT FOR SERVICES

Contract for Services

1. PARTIES

This contract is made between:

the Central Otago Museums Trust, (‘COMT’), (‘the Trust’),

AND

NAME, (‘the Contractor’),

together, ‘the parties’.

2. TERM

This contract shall commence on XXX and shall continue until XXX unless terminated by either party giving one month’s notice.

The contract is an annual contract renewable for three years subject to the receipt of an annual grant to the COMT from the Central Otago District Council.

3. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR

The relationship between NAME and the COMT is that of an independent contractor and nothing expressed or implied herein shall constitute the relationship of employer and employee between the parties.

4. SERVICES

The Contractor will deliver the Services set out in the position description (‘the Services’), and any services incidental to the Services, on the terms set out in this contract.

5. CONTRACTOR’S OBLIGATIONS

The Contractor will, in the performance of the Services:

(a) at all times promote and protect COMT’s interests and reputation;

(b) comply with all reasonable and lawful directions;

(d) carry out the Contractor’s obligations under this contract in a prompt, efficient, and diligent manner consistent with professional practices and standards, and use all reasonable care, attention and skill in the performance of those obligations.

6. REMUNERATION

The Contractor will be renumerated monthly, based on XXX hours per week, to a total of XXX hours per annum, at the rate of $XX per hour.

The Contractor will also be reimbursed for travel, internet, telephone and all other reasonable expenses incurred in relation to the performance of the Services. The Contractor will provide receipts and any other supporting documentation associated to the claiming of expenses.

The Contractor’s travel via vehicle will be calculated at the Inland Revenue 2020 rate of XX cents per kilometre.

The Contractor acknowledges that there is no entitlement to payment from the COMT for injury, sickness, Kiwisaver, holidays or redundancy.

7. PAYMENT FOR DELIVERY OF SERVICES

The Contractor will provide the COMT with an invoice that details the Services delivered during the time period stated on the invoice. The Contractor will also provide a monthly progress report with the invoice that sets out a record of hours and expenses to the COMT, summarising the progress of agreed projects.

8. WORKING ARRANGEMENT

The Contractor will perform the Services from their home office or other such locations as required by the Contractor.

The Contractor proposes to provide the Services during the hours of XXX each week, however the Contractor will also provide the Services outside of these hours, as and when required.

It is the Contractor’s responsibility to fulfil the requirements of XXX hours per week.

9. PERFORMANCE REVIEW

The Contractor agrees for the COMT to conduct a performance review of the Contractor at the end of the term of this contract.

10. TAX

The Contractor is responsible for paying the Contractor’s income tax and any other tax obligations associated with the Contractor.

11. EQUIPMENT

The Contractor shall provide her own equipment at her own cost in providing the Services.

12. ASSIGNMENT

This contract is between the COMT and NAME and may not be assigned or sub-contracted unless with the prior written approval of the parties.

13. TERMINATION

Either party may terminate the contract by providing one month’s notice of termination in writing.

The COMT may terminate this contract with immediate effect by providing written notice if the Contractor:

(a) breaches this contract, fails, is negligent in the performance or is unable to perform the Services;

(b) commits any act or is subject to any proceeding, which, in the reasonable opinion of the COMT, has brought or may bring, the COMT into disrepute; and

14. CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The Contractor, will not, without the COMT’s prior written consent, provide services to any other person or entity or be involved in any employment, activity or business that conflicts or may conflict with the interests of the COMT or interferes or may interfere with the Contractor’s ability to perform the Services.

15. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

The terms of this contract shall remain confidential to the parties.

In the course of this contract, it is acknowledged that the Contractor may acquire confidential information relating to the COMT and its member groups. The Contractor shall keep this confidential information strictly confidential at all times, including both during and after the termination of this contract.

The Contractor agrees never to use the information or attempt to use it for its own personal gain or that of any other person.

Upon termination of this contract, or upon request, the Contractor will promptly deliver to the COMT all COMT property and documentation, records or papers in the Contractor’s possession (in hard copy or electronic).

Upon termination of this contract, the Contractor will stop using the email address associated with this contract indefinitely and provide access to this email account to the COMT.

16. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

The Contractor acknowledges that any work and intellectual property created or arising during the term of this contract is, and shall remain, the property of the COMT.

17. DISPUTE RESOLUTION

If a dispute arises, the parties will meet in good faith to try and resolve the dispute informally.

If the dispute has not been resolved within 14 days after the dispute has been notified by a party in writing, either party may give the other written notice requiring the parties to try and resolve the dispute at mediation. The parties will agree on a mediator and the costs of the mediation will be shared equally (excluding each parties’ costs).

18. VARIATION

It is agreed by both parties that this contract constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and replaces any previous agreements and understandings. Any variation of this contract must be agreed and signed by both parties in writing.

Contractor name:

Signed:

Date:

Central Otago Museums’ Trust representative:

Signed:

Date:

22 September 2021

21.7.4 Next Stages of Three Waters Service Delivery Reform

Doc ID: 552213

1. Purpose of Report

To update Council on the Government’s 30 June 2021 and 15 July 2021 Three Waters Reform announcements, which change the reform process previously outlined in 2020, the specific data modelling Council has received to date, the implications of the revised Three Waters Reform proposal for Council alternative service delivery options and next steps (including uncertainties).

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Notes the Government’s 30 June and 15 July 2021 Three Waters Reform announcements

C. Notes officer’s advice on the accuracy of the information provided to Council in June and July 2021 as a result of the RFI and WICS modelling processes.

D. Notes officer’s analysis of the impacts of the Government’s proposed three water service deliver model on the Central Otago community and its wellbeing, including the impacts on the delivery of water services and water related outcomes, capability and capacity, Central Otago District Council’s sustainability (including rate impact, debt impact, and efficiency).

E. Notes the analysis of three waters service delivery options available to Council at this time provided in this report.

F. Notes that a decision to support the Government’s preferred three waters service delivery option is not lawful (would be ultra vires) at present due to section 130 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA), which prohibits Council from divesting its ownership or interest in a water service except to another local government organisation, and what we currently know (and don’t know) about the Government’s preferred option.

G. Notes that Council cannot make a formal decision on a regional option for three waters service delivery without doing a Long-term plan amendment and ensuring it meets section 130 of the LGA.

H. Notes that the Government intends to make further decisions about the three waters service delivery model after 30 September 2021.

I. Notes hat it would be desirable to gain an understanding of the community’s views once Council has further information from the Government on the next steps in the reform process.

J. Requests the CEO to give feedback to the Government on the following changes to the Government’s proposal:

· Entrenching protections against privatisation in legislation in such a manner that these cannot be overturned by a simple majority of parliament.

· Requirements for entities to develop strong relationships with councils in respect to planning for growth

· Legislative requirements to use growth projections and spatial plans as a basis for planning for future growth, with 30 year plans which demonstrate that capacity requirements for growth have been incorporated into forward work planning.

· That the entities be required to implement a funding mechanism similar to development contributions to enable cumulative effects of growth to be funded in an equitable manner across the entity area.

· Establishment of a water ombudsman, as well as further legislative mechanisms that ensure consumer rights.

· Legislative requirement for standardised pricing for baseline services that is a level of service that meets minimum compliance requirements irrespective of location.

· That service levels higher than baseline could be paid for by the specific community who receives that benefit

· Government review the rating legislation around the 30% uniform annual charges cap. This will need to be reviewed with consideration given to increasing the cap to possibly 40%. Alternatively, Central Government may need to consider funding rating reviews for all councils that will breach the 30% cap under the current regime.

· That certainty be provided to local providers and contractors to ensure there is no negative financial or economic impact on local economies.

· Competency-based non-iwi appointments to the representative group should reflect the community in which they deliver services to (such as rural and urban representatives). Individuals who have local government experience (such as former mayors and local government staff) should be eligible for appointment.

K. Notes that the Chief Executive will report back once they have received further information and guidance from Government, LGNZ and Taituarā on what the next steps look like and how these should be managed.

L. In noting the above, agrees it has given consideration to sections 76, 77, 78, and 79 of the Local Government Act 2002 and in its judgment considers it has complied with the decision- making process that those sections require (including, but not limited to, having sufficient information and analysis that is proportionate to the decisions being made).

2. Executive Summary

Over the past four years central and local government have been considering the issues and opportunities facing the system for regulating and managing the three waters (drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater) – Three Waters Reform. The background is provided in Appendix 1 including information on Taumata Arowai (which became a new Crown entity in March 2021 and will become the dedicated water services regulator later this year).

The Government has concluded that the case for change[1] to the three waters service delivery system has been made [please see Appendix 2 for further information] and during June and July 2021 it released information and made announcements on:

· the direction and form of Three Waters Reform, including the proposed four new Water Service Entities their indicative boundaries, their governance arrangements and public ownership.

· individual Council data based on the information supplied under the RFI process, and analysed by the Water Industry Commission of Scotland (WICS), on behalf of the New Zealand Government.

· a $2.5b package of investment for councils to invest in the future for local government, urban development, and the wellbeing of communities, ensuring no council is worse off as a result of the reforms, and funding support for transition.

· an eight-week process for councils to understand the implications of the reform announcements, ask questions and propose solutions and for Government to work with councils and mana whenua on key aspects of the reform (including governance, integrated planning and community voice).

Central Otago District Council has been placed in Entity D and our better-off funding allocation is $12,835,059. If Council proceeds with the reform process a quarter of this funding would be available from 1 July 2022, with the remainder available from 1 July 2024.

While the Government and LGNZ consider that national case for change has been made, each council will ultimately need to make a decision based on its local context if the process to join one of the proposed entities remains voluntary.

This report provides Council with the staff analysis of the information provided and assesses the Government’s proposal and currently available service delivery options. The Local Government New Zealand, Taituarā, and Te Tari Taiwhenua Internal Affairs guidance[2] has been used to prepare information to assist Council to understand the information that has been provided to date and enable Council to prepare for future decisions and consultation and engagement with communities.

Key risks considered are documented in the report and Appendices 5 and 7.

In summary,

· Whilst unable to accurately confirm the forecast costs for either Council delivered service, or Entity D in 30 years time, the trend in a higher cost for Council delivered service compared to the cost of service delivered by Entity D looks broadly correct.

· Given the peer reviews of the modelling and underlying assumptions (which always carry a degree of uncertainty) no further analysis of this work has been done or is proposed and staff have focussed on the reasonably practicable options and their implications for Council and the community. It is worth noting that in addition to the peer reviews of the Government’s proposed model by Beca and Farrierweir, Morrison Low have been engaged specifically by the Otago and Southland Councils to undertake analysis of the data on our behalf, and believe the cost of service if it were continued to be delivered by Council relative to Entity D could be higher by at least 40%.

· Doing nothing is not an option as Council must continue to deliver services within a new regulatory framework which will require consistently meeting the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards, and expected higher environmental standards for all three waters services.

· Under all options except the Government proposal, Council bears the risk of meeting the new water standards, environmental requirements and achieving compliance. There are also implications and challenges for non-council supplies to meet water quality requirements, with the risk that these supplies might default to council in the future.

· Other Government reforms (Resource Management Act, Future of Local Government) pose opportunities and challenges for each option.

· If the Government’s proposal were to proceed, effective management of the transition by Council, Government and partners will be critical, and present significant challenges.

· The law currently prohibits Council’s deciding to opt-in to the current proposal (given section 130 of the Local Government Act 2002 and what we know about this option at present). Current decision-making requirements, including the need to take account of community views and strategic nature of the assets involved, would also preclude Council deciding to opt-in at this time without consultation.

· Similar requirements apply if the Council wishes to consider alternative arrangements that involve asset transfers, divestment, change in ownership and or the setting up of a Council Controlled Organisation (CCO) to deliver water services in the future.

· There are a number of issues, concerns and uncertainties for the Government and councils to work through before a robust Council decision (and decision-making process) can be produced, including whether legislative change will enable or require the Water Services Entity approach to be adopted. Therefore, there is no expectation that councils will have had to make a decision to opt-in (or out) or commence community engagement or consultation over the eight-week period.

Councils have been specifically asked to provide solutions to three outstanding issues during the next eight weeks:

o ensuring all communities have both a voice in the system and influence over local decisions

o effective representation on the new water service entities’ oversight boards, including preventing future privatisation

o ensuring integration between growth planning and water services planning.

Staff therefore request Elected Members consider the issues that arise from the Government’s proposal and any potential solutions so these can be raised with Government and LGNZ before the end of September 2021.

Government decisions on entity boundaries, governance and transition and implementation arrangements will occur after the eight week-process ends (30 September 2021) however there is no certainty on how this will occur.

On the assumption that the reform goes ahead, it is anticipated that councils will continue to deliver water services until at least early 2024 and council involvement in transition will be required throughout.

3. Background

Following the serious campylobacter outbreak in 2016 and the Government’s Inquiry into Havelock North Drinking Water, central and local government have been considering the issues and opportunities facing the system for regulating and managing the three waters (drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater).

The focus has been on how to ensure safe drinking water, improve the environmental performance and transparency of wastewater and stormwater network and deal with funding and affordability challenges, particularly for communities with small rating bases or high-growth areas that have reached their prudential borrowing limits.

The Government’s stated direction of travel has been for publicly-owned multi-regional models (with a preference for local authority ownership). The Department of Internal Affairs (DIA), in partnership with the Three Waters Steering Committee (which includes elected members and staff from local government) commissioned specialist economic, financial, regulatory and technical expertise to support the Three Waters Reform Programme and inform policy advice to ministers.

The initial stage (Tranche 1 - MOU, Funding Agreement, Delivery Plan and Request For Information (RFI) process) was an opt in, non-binding approach. It did not require councils to commit to future phases of the reform programme, to transfer their assets and/or liabilities, or establish new water entities. The 2020 indicative reform programme and then anticipated next steps can be found in Appendix 1.

Council completed the RFI process over Christmas and New Year 2020/21 and the Government has used this information, evidence, and modelling to make preliminary decisions on the next stages of reform and has concluded that the case for change has been made Appendix 2.

4. Governments June and July 2021 Announcements and Information Release

In June 2021 a suite of information was released by Government that covered estimated potential investment requirements for New Zealand, scope for efficiency gains from transformation of the three waters service and the potential economic (efficiency) impacts of various aggregation scenarios.[3]

In summary the modelling indicated a likely range for future investment requirements at a national level in the order of $120 billion to $185 billion, an average household cost for most councils on a standalone basis to be between $1910 and $8690 by 2051. It also estimated these average household costs could be reduced to between $800 and $1640 per household and efficiencies in the range of 45% over 15-30 years if the reform process went ahead. An additional 5,800 to 9,300 jobs and an increase in GDP of between $14b to $23b in Nett Present Value, (NPV) terms over 30 years were also forecast.

As a result of this modelling, the Government has decided to:

· establish four statutory, publicly-owned water services entities that own and operate three waters infrastructure on behalf of local authorities

· establish independent, competency-based boards to govern

· set a clear national policy direction for the three waters sector, including integration with any new spatial / resource management planning processes

· establish an economic regulation regime

· develop an industry transformation strategy.

The newly established entities are designed to remain fully and purposefully in public ownership in perpetuity and protection mechanisms would be built through the entity design approach and through legislation to ensure this. The proposed safeguards against privatisation can be found on page 26 of the DIA’s summary of the case for change.

Both DIA and LGNZ have produced two page national overviews, available on the DIA website[4] and LGNZ websites[5] respectively. Appendix 2 contains more detail on the national context and Appendix 3 provides the DIA/LGNZ overviews.

Central Otago District Council have been placed in Water Services Entity D, which follows the Ngāi Tahu Takiwa boundary, although the precise boundaries are still up for discussion.

Funding for Councils

On 15 July, in partnership with LGNZ under a Heads of Agreement[6], the Government announced a package of $2.5 billion to support councils to transition to the new water services entities and to invest in community wellbeing. This funding is made up of a ‘better-off’ element ($500 million which will be available from 1 July 2022 with the investment funded $1 billion from the Crown and $1 billion from the new Water Services Entities) and a ‘no council worse off’ element (available from July 2024 and funded by the Water Services Entities). The “better off” funding can be used to support the delivery of local wellbeing outcomes associated with climate change and resilience, housing and local placemaking, and there is an expectation that councils will engage with iwi/Māori in determining how to use their funding allocation.

Under the proposal Central Otago would receive a better-off funding allocation of $12,835,059. The detail of the funding (including expectations around the use of reserves) and the full list of allocations can be found in Appendix 4. Conditions associated with the package of funding have yet to be worked through.

The Reform Process Now

In addition to the funding announcements, the Government has committed to further discussions with local government and iwi/Māori on:

· the boundaries of the Water Service Entities

· how local authorities can continue to have influence on service outcomes and other issues of importance to their communities (eg chlorine-free water)

· ensuring there is appropriate integration between the needs, planning and priorities of local authorities and those of the Water Service Entities

· how to strengthen the accountability of the Water Service Entities to the communities that they serve, for example through a water ombudsman.

As a result, the original timetable for implementing the reform (outlined in Appendix 1) and for councils to consult on a decision to opt-in (or not), no longer applies. Further advice on the difficulties and risks of making a decision to opt-in or not is included at section 10 of this report.

Next steps are expected to be announced after 30 September 2021, which would include the timeframes and responsibilities for any community or public consultation.

It is also important to note that the Government has not ruled out legislating for an “all-in” approach to reform to realise the national interest benefits of the reform.

In the interim the DIA continues to engage with council staff on transition matters on a no regrets basis should the reform proceed. These discussions do not pre-empt any decisions about whether to progress the reforms or whether any individual council will transition.

5. Central Otago District Council Specific Information and Analysis

While the Government and LGNZ consider that national case for change has been made, each council will ultimately need to make its own assessment of the pros, cons and risks of reform based on its own unique local context.

Councils do not have a national interest test for their decision making. Councils are required to act in the interests of their communities and the community’s wellbeing (now and into the future), provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to their decision-making processes, ensure prudent stewardship and the efficient and effective use of its resources in the interests of the district or region (including planning effectively for the future management of its assets) and take a sustainable development approach[7].

Council currently delivers three waters as a mix of inhouse and contracted out service. These teams have built an understanding of Council’s asset base, service delivery challenges and opportunities, and community needs and expectations over an extended period of time.

The Government’s case for change is largely premised on the outcomes of economic modelling completed by the DIA and WICS. This modelling considered the current and future investment needs of Councils to deliver services and compared there to expected costs under a reformed model. The outputs of this modelling/analysis are presented neatly in publicly available dashboards that can be found on the DIA website. Central Otago District’s dashboard looks like this:

22 September 2021

The number of full time equivalent staff presented on the dashboards is incorrect, or not comparable as it has not been reported in the same manner by the councils. There are 13 full time equivalents employed directly by Council for three water activities, and 28 full time contracted staff. These staff work on both operations and capital work.

The reason for the difference in the number on the dashboard is that each of these staff were entered into the RFI separately under water, wastewater, and stormwater, with the same person often working across two or three of the activities. The dashboard then adds these together resulting in double, and in some cases triple counting of these roles.

The Central Otago District, and the dashboards of other councils can be accessed on this site[8].

The key aspects Council should note are detailed below

Average cost of three waters per household

	Government modelling / Analysis	Council’s own figures / projections
Current cost for 3 waters per household in Central Otago	$1,070	$639
Future costs for 3 waters per household in Central Otago (without reform)	$6,466 (at 2031) $7,790 (at 2051)	$988 (at 2031 uninflated)
Future costs for 3 waters per household in Central Otago (with reform)	$1640 (at 2051)	Not calculated

Note that the Council’s own figures do not include projections for increased regulatory compliance and necessary investment in infrastructure that reforms will require.

Debt

Council has a maximum debt to revenue ratio of 175%. This differs to the 250% used in the DIA modelling, as Central Otago is not a shareholder of the Local Government Funding Agency. The following graph shows the forecast council debt to income including three waters, based on the expenditure planned in the 2021 Long-term plan.

*Average headroom $40.6M

The following graph below shows the forecast debt to income excluding three waters, based on the expenditure planned in the 2021 Long-term plan. Council’s capacity to raise debt for work other than three waters would increase significantly if council was not responsible for three waters.

*Average headroom $65M

The graph above, and below demonstrate that three waters disproportionally consumes Council’s debt capacity.

*Breaches Debt covenant

In addition to having a maximum debt to revenue ratio of 175%, council can also only borrow up to 10% of its asset value. The following graph shows the forecast of Council debt to asset value including three waters, based on the expenditure planned in the 2021 Long-term plan.

The graph above, and below demonstrate that council leverages the value of other asset groups, such as roading, to ensure that debt required for three waters is within the 10% asset value limits.

*Average headroom $33.6M

*Average headroom $59.8M

*Breaches Debt covenant

Capital Expenditure Forecast

The Government modelling forecasts $572 million over the 10 years between 2022 and 2031 (excluding cumulative depreciation on new assets). Our own information demonstrates that there is significant investment required over the next 10 years of our Long-term Plan ($133 million excluding cumulative depreciation on new assets) and out across 30 years in our infrastructure strategy.

Capital investment planned in the 2021 Long-term Plan and 30 Year Infrastructure Strategy is shown on the graphs below:

Recently received information indicates that treatment upgrade costs for the smaller water schemes, at Naseby, Patearoa, Ranfurly, and Omakau are likely to be significantly higher than allowed for in Council’s budgets which make no provision for the management or upgrading of private water supplies or the assumption that regulatory standards will tighten and there will be more monitoring and enforcement in the future. There has also been no provision made in Councils budgets for changing existing wastewater discharges to water, or for providing treatment for stormwater discharges. Further monitoring of discharge quality is required before any estimates of the level of investment in stormwater treatment can be made.

Council has only programmed to undertake renewals at the rate of depreciation of the stormwater assets. No provision has been made for treatment of stormwater that discharges to waterways.

Our confidence levels for asset data, condition, performance for

· Water, wastewater, and stormwater pipe assets is medium

· Water and wastewater plant assets is low

· Non-pipe assets is low

Council officers believe that the valuation and depreciation costs for three waters will increase once the current project to improve asset data relating to above ground assets is completed.

Our maintenance budgets are adequate for this year. Our Long-term plan included an assumption that approximately $700,000 of operational improvements would continue to be funded from stimulus grant funding beyond year 1, for year 2 and 3. This assumption has now been shown to be incorrect, and will result in rates increases in years 2 and 3 of the Long-term plan. Future operation costs for the upgraded, more complex treatment plants may be understated in Councils budgets.

Council officers acknowledge that with more investment in asset management, and increased resource capacity and capability in asset management potential cost efficiencies could be gained from more accurate forecasting of renewal requirements. There is a national shortage of these skill sets within the workforce and council has been unable to recruit staff to fill these roles.

Sustainability

Three waters greenhouse gases contribute to 20% of Council’s total gas emissions. Treatment of Central Otago’s wastewater accounts for 73% of emissions from three waters.

Council’s emissions management and reduction plan sets a target of reducing Council’s gross emissions by 52% by 2024/25.

There are no projects in the Long-term plan which will result in lowering emissions from three waters. In fact, the increased treatment processes being implemented through capital upgrades will result in higher energy use in the future which will increase greenhouse gas emissions for three waters. In order for council to reduce greenhouse gas emissions beyond 2025, additional investment would need to be made in carbon reduction projects for three waters.

The impacts of climate change on three waters infrastructure includes:

· Higher intensity and more frequent extreme rainfall events in the headwaters of the Otago lakes and rivers will lead to increased frequency of flooding in the Clutha and Manuherekia River catchments. This will impact on water supplies due to dirtier water needing to be treated, and flooding of vulnerable bore sites. Affected treatment sites are located at Roxburgh, Alexandra, Clyde, Omakau and to a lesser extent, Cromwell. The Omakau wastewater treatment site is also at risk of flooding from extreme events in the Manuherekia catchment.

· Higher intensity and more frequent extreme rainfall will lead to increased recurrence of damage from alluvial fans in the Teviot area which damage the water and wastewater reticulation in Roxburgh and Lake Roxburgh Village.

· Increased frequency of drought, particularly in the Maniototo are which has significant implications for the resilience of water supply for its towns.

· Storm events during winter may result in very high snowfall which has implications for road availability and management, and access to treatment plants.

Growth

The growth projections that were prepared in 2020 for forecasting in the 2021 Long-term plan project that the district population will increase by 55% between 2018 and 2050. This equates to an average annual growth rate of 1.3%. The average annual growth rate between 2006 and 2019 was 2.3%, and ranged from 0.6% in the Teviot Ward to 4.4% in the Cromwell Ward.

	2020 Usual Resident Population	2020 Peak Population	2050 Usual Resident Population	2050 Peak Population
District	23,528	45,696	34,474	65,591
Cromwell	9,036	17,375	15,350	27,173
Maniototo	1,697	3,294	1,663	3,873
Teviot Valley	1,225	3,399	1,926	4,943
Vincent	10,938	20,996	15,536	29,604

Projects within the Long-term plan include capacity to meet longer term future growth where it is most cost effective to include this at the time of construction (for example pipe sizes). In many cases provision has been made for increased capacity to be added in the future when this is needed, rather than building it too soon and not using it (for example booster pumps, additional bores and water treatment membranes).

There is likely to be further growth-related infrastructure requirements in addition to those identified in the Long-term plan if growth occurs faster than the annual average forecast.

Other Considerations

Council has budgeted to comply with the legal requirements, and any applicable standard, rules or enforcement undertakings that were in place at the time of preparing the Long-term Plan budgets in 2020.

It is likely that staffing levels, and contract costs will increase as a consequence of changes in management requirements that are being introduced through the Water Services Bill. Given the difficulty to predict these at this stage, operational budgets were not increased to allow for these in the Long-term plan.

Council has a number of significant capital upgrades occurring to treatment processes on water supplies across the district, as well as the Alexandra wastewater treatment upgrade. While provision was made for increased operational costs as a consequence of these projects, more recent data indicates that this has been under-estimated.

The current three waters operations contract is a traditional contract model that has a combination of lump sum, and unit rates. This contract expires on 30 June 2022. The current market conditions would indicate that a significant increase on the cost of this contract is likely due to a lack of resources within the industry, and increased material costs. No provision has been made for increased contract, or material costs in the Long-term plan, other than normal inflation provisions.

Against the above information, the significant increased annual cost for three waters shown on the Dashboard is considered to be broadly accurate when compared with councils own information, Long-term plan and 30 year Infrastructure Strategy.

While prepared at the national level, the Government modelling has been peer reviewed by Farrierswier and Beca to ensure that both the modelling and underlying assumptions are reasonable in the New Zealand context. Morrison Low have also undertaken specific and targeted reviews of the Government modelling and found directional consistency without any noted significant concern with the direction or approach of the reform programme based on the numbers. It therefore provides a reasonable indication of the “order of magnitude”[9] of the gains that can be delivered though the new system and the level of future investment Council is likely to need to make over the next 30 years.

At this stage it is not possible to fully test the projections as the standards for Aotearoa New Zealand out to 2051 are not known, although it is reasonable to assume that there will be greater community and mana whenua expectations around environmental performance and quality, tougher standards to meet for water quality (drinking and receiving environment) and that monitoring, compliance and enforcement will be greater than it is now. This affects both operational and capital expenditure (costs will go up), including the number of staff (or contractors) that council will need to ensure Council outcomes for water and community and legal requirements are met.

There is always a level of uncertainty and therefore risk around assumptions and forecasts, whether prepared by council officers for the Long-term plan or by others such as Government to facilitate policy decisions, such as the current Three Waters Reform process.

Council has limited resources to undertake a revised forecast of three waters cost across the Long-term plan period during September, when feedback is only required to be provided on the current government proposal. A review of the budgets and the assumptions for the Long-term plan can be undertaken after the 8 week period to provide council with updated future cost estimates for the next stage of the reform process.

Council staff have used the above dashboard and additional information, and Council plans and studies (as described above) to define the status quo option below.

To assess whether the proposed better-off ($12,835,059) and no worse-off funding to Council is sufficient further information is needed on the conditions that will be associated with that funding. For the purposes of the following analysis it is assumed that this funding would provide Council with an opportunity to address a range of issues and opportunities to improve community wellbeing in partnership with mana whenua and the communities Council serves.

6. Options

In line with section 77[10] of the LGA the following section presents reasonably practicable options for three waters service delivery in order to assess the advantages and disadvantages of each option. Council is not being asked at this time to decide on any option.

Option 1 – Status Quo

Council currently delivers three waters services itself through a mixed model of in-house and contracted services.

In continuing to deliver its water, wastewater and stormwater responsibilities council is required to respond to the changing legislative environment related to the safety of drinking water, and environmental standards. The status quo is therefore not a practicable option and is not assessed further.

Option 2 – Modified Status Quo - Council continues to deliver three waters but at a higher level of compliance and investment

This option is a modified version of Council continuing to deliver services to reflect the anticipated regulatory environment for three waters delivery.

This option requires making assumptions about the future regulatory requirement (potentially using the assumptions underpinning the WICS modelling and the Government’s proposal and draft/emerging standards and compliance regimes e.g. those coming from Taumata Arowai) and the ability of non-Council water supplies to meet standards and requirements and the risks to Council and would ideally include the production of business cases for investment and enhanced activity and asset management planning to be robust.

Council staff have assessed our ability to do this work in the current operating environment (delivering business as usual, stimulus projects, other Government reform workloads, consultant availability etc) and concluded that only a very high level of analysis of this option could be done in the available timeframe. This is included in section 8 below.

Option 3 – Government Proposal

Under this option, Central Otago District is in entity D, a publicly owned water services entity that owns and operates three waters infrastructure on behalf of councils, mana whenua and communities.

The ownership and governance model is a bespoke model, with councils listed in legislation as owners, without shareholdings or financial interests, but an advocacy role on behalf of their communities. Iwi/Māori rights and interests are also recognised and representatives of local government and mana whenua will sit on the Regional Representative Group, issue a Statement of Strategic and Performance Expectations and receive a Statement of Intent from the Water Services Entity. Entities must also consult on their strategic direction, investment plans and prices / charges.

The law currently prohibits Council deciding to opt-in to the current proposal (given section 130 of the LGA, which prevents councils from divesting their ownership or interest in a water service except to another local government organisation such as a Council Controlled Organisation) and what we know about this option at present.

7. Risk Analysis

A high level analysis of the relative risks for Option 2 – Modified status quo (Council continues to deliver three waters but at a higher level of compliance and investment), and Option 3 – Government proposal is shown on the table below.

Risk	Option 2 - Modified Status Quo	Option 3 - Government Proposal
Financial capacity and funding	Higher risk	Lower risk
Financial sustainability	Higher risk	Lower risk
Underestimating the investment required	Similar risk	Similar risk
Community push-back on funding of increased costs	Higher risk	Lower risk
Compliance failure	Higher risk	Lower risk
Cost of works	Higher risk	Lower risk
Workforce, skills, technical capability	Higher risk	Lower risk
Economies of scale	Higher risk	Lower risk
Council plan implementation and integration	Lower risk	Higher risk
Household ability to pay	Higher risk	Lower risk
Long term outcomes and wider wellbeing outcome	Higher risk	Lower risk
Gaps in service delivery and funding responsibilities	Lower risk	Higher risk
Research and development funding opportunities	Higher risk	Lower risk
Increased incident response time	Lower risk	Higher risk
Additional water capacity (water source)	Similar risk	Similar risk
Reduction in the local contractor capacity	Lower risk	Higher risk
Partnerships (ineffective)	Similar risk	Similar risk
Compliance monitoring	Similar risk	Similar risk
Industry support	Similar risk	Similar risk
Value of council services	Lower risk	Higher risk
Community perception; loss of interest in council – effect on candidacy	Lower risk	Higher risk
Regional investment (lack of additional in the district due to current asst condition)	Higher risk	Lower risk
More efficient water use (within wider entity area)	Higher risk	Lower risk
Reduced ability to promote sustainable resource use	Similar risk	Similar risk
Failure to recognise cultural knowledge in design	Higher risk	Lower risk
Entity priorities differ to council goals	Lower risk	Higher risk
Loss of community engagement	Lower risk	Higher risk
Lack of service integration	Lower risk	Higher risk
Lack of understanding of growth requirements	Lower risk	Higher risk
Unclear responsibility for environmental impacts	Similar risk	Similar risk
Gaps in infrastructure data	Similar risk	Similar risk
Procurement outcomes	Higher risk	Lower risk
Litigation	Higher risk	Lower risk
Reduced levels of service / optional service level increases	Lower risk	Higher risk

8. Discussion

Option 2 - Modified status quo (Council continues to deliver three waters but at a higher level of compliance and investment)

In summary, the potential benefits of this option include greater Council control and more certainty over local infrastructure integration (planning and delivery) with land use plans and council objectives.

However, Council faces significant risks over the medium to long term including potentially high costs, in meeting the new water standards, environmental requirements and achieving compliance. In addition, contractor availability is limited, the construction pipeline is already substantial and inflationary pressures are growing, meaning costs are rising.

The ability of non-Council water supplies to meet standards and requirements also poses a high risk to Council and the community. Default of any non-Council water supplies would exacerbate Council’s risk profile and financial position.

These present affordability challenges for households in the future, exacerbating our current affordability challenges.

Council is also experiencing workforce challenges to meet the current requirements of three waters service delivery, Government reforms and an enlarged investment programme created by stimulus funding. This is exacerbated by an aging workforce, and a shortage of qualified and experienced people within the infrastructure and construction industries. These challenges would be further exacerbated if Councils neighbouring districts joined Entity D.

This option becomes less sustainable if those around us move to some form of aggregated model. This will adversely affect our ability to retain and attract workers, access technical, financial or construction support, and procure cost effective contracts to deliver services and capital works.

Without an adequately resourced, qualified, and experienced workforce there are significant risks to Council’s ability to deliver the services and work programs.

The causes of most of these risks are not within Council’s control. This makes mitigation difficult, and many potential mitigation options (such as greater investment, larger costs than currently planned, lower levels of service, compliance risk) may not be palatable to Council or the community.

Given the Government has rejected this as a sustainable solution for three waters service delivery there should not be an expectation that the Government would be willing to financially support councils to meet the new regulations beyond existing Tranche 1 stimulus funding.

There may also be broader implications for our relationship with Government, iwi/Māori and key stakeholders.

Given the analysis to date, Council continuing to deliver the three waters as a standalone entity is unlikely to be sustainable in the medium to long term.

Option 3 – Government Proposal

In summary, the greater financial capability, efficiency, affordability and community/water benefits (published by Government) of delivering three waters to the community are likely to be of significant value if they can be realised.

The key opportunities our own analysis identifies include reducing the Council’s current risk profile (when considered against the status quo) including compliance risk and the risk of not meeting standards. The proposed reform programme also presents opportunity for a meaningful role for iwi/Māori in decision making.

Risks that need to be mitigated include integration with spatial, growth and local planning and transparent prioritisation, households’ ability to pay, and Council’s financial sustainability.

Our analysis suggests that the key risk theme for this option is the loss of community/local voice in decision-making and subsequent reduced outcomes for local connected water users.

Further risks that need to be mitigated are:

· Protection from privatisation by future governments.

· Meeting the needs of growth.

· Consumer protections.

· Standardised charging for a baseline level of service, with communities who want a higher level of service (e.g no chlorination) paying for the costs of that increased level of service.

· Review of local government rating legislation and the 30% uniform annual charges cap

· Supporting procurement from local businesses

· Governance provisions to reflect the diversity of the communities within the entity (i.e rural, provincial, and urban)

These are explained in more detail in Appendix 7 – Three Waters CODC feedback.

Transition risks are dealt with in section 9 below and Appendix 5.

9. Transition

If the Government’s proposal were to proceed, effective management of the transition by Council, Government and partners will be critical. Transition will require considerable effort and resourcing.

Transitioning to a modified status quo option (council continues to deliver three waters but at a higher level of compliance and investment) also carries inherent risk.

Key risks relating to transition include retention of staff, workloads on staff to facilitate transition, contract management and transfer, data and institutional knowledge transfer and loss, and management of development and subdivisions, speed of change, community uncertainty, asset valuations returning a different value than expected and affecting Council’s financial position and poor transition management.

10. Council Decision Making and Consultation

Part 6 of the LGA, sections 76 to 90, provide the requirements for decision making and consultation, including the principles of consultation and information that needs to be provided including the reasons for the proposal and the reasonably practicable options.

In particular, section 76 requires that in making a significant decision, which a decision on the future management and or ownership of three waters assets will be, councils must comply with the decision-making provisions. This is a ‘higher bar’ than the “promote compliance with” that applies for ordinary decisions.

Section 77 states that councils must seek to identify all reasonably practicable options and then assess the advantages and disadvantages of each option.

Section 78 requires that in the course of making a decision a Council must consider community views but section 78(3) explicitly says that consideration of community views does not require consultation, which is reinforced by case law.

Section 79 gives Council discretion to decide how the above Part 6 requirements are met including the extent of analysis done etc. Therefore, while a decision could be challenged, a judicial review is unlikely to be successful unless the decision made by council was manifestly unreasonable, the process was flawed or the decision was beyond its powers (as given in law, ie the council did not act within the law).

However, despite section 79 of the LGA, a decision to transfer the ownership or control of a strategic asset from the council (or to it) must explicitly be provided for in the council’s Long-term plan (and have been consulted on specifically in its consultation document).

Council’s existing Long-term plan and the consultation information and process used to develop it will not suffice to meet this test, as Council did not itself have adequate information on the options and the implications earlier this year when it consulted on the Long-term plan. A Long-term plan amendment and commensurate consultation process on the ownership and governance arrangements and asset transfers proposed would be necessary.

There are also provisions in the LGA that relate to unlawful decisions to sell or dispose of assets, which can be investigated by the Auditor-General.[11]

A decision to opt-out would also be affected by the consultation and decision-making requirements set out in this report, including the need to follow a robust process that could survive a judicial review, as well as make a final decision that was not manifestly unreasonable in the circumstances.

Given the Government’s:

· 8 week period of engagement with mana whenua and councils

· commitment to explore issues such as council and community influence of service outcomes, integration with other reform proposals, spatial and local planning

· request for councils to give feedback on the proposal, identify issues and solutions, and

· uncertainty around next steps, including whether the reform may become mandatory or legislative change will remove legal barriers to opting in

it would be premature to make a decision to opt in or out of the reform process and may expose the Council to litigation risk.

A Government Bill to progress the reforms could address the issues raised above, for example removing the section 130 requirements has explicitly been raised.

At this stage no decision is required on future delivery arrangements. Based on the analysis in this report, Council should wait until it has further information before consulting on and/or making a decision on the Government’s proposal.

It is recommended that the Council therefore notes the options canvassed in this report, the high-level analysis of them and the information and decisions that are yet to be made.

If reform is not made mandatory, to ensure sufficient information is available to meet the moral and legal requirements of Council decision-making staff will further develop the analysis of options (based on further information from the Government, advice on next steps, and regional discussions) prior to Council decision making and consultation on future water services delivery. Whether this is ultimately required will be dependent on where the Government gets to with the reform process and the decisions it makes after 30 September 2021.

11. Conclusion

While there is uncertainty about the future steps in the Government’s reform proposal, and current legislative impediments to it, the current eight-week period gives Council the opportunity to understand the information it has received (and will continue to receive) from the RFI and modelling processes.

It also provides an opportunity for Council to understand its potential options, including the financial, workforce and sustainability impacts for Council and the wider economic, social and cultural implications of each option, using the guidance that has been issued. It also provides an opportunity to engage in discussions with other councils in its entity grouping, share information and ask questions and propose solutions to issues it sees to Government and LGNZ.

All of this information will be useful to inform future decision making by both council and Government and consultation and engagement with mana whenua and communities.

12. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	Compliance with the Local Government Act 2002 is discussed in section 10.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in Long-term plan/annual plan?	At this point council is not making a decision that will have financial implications. Council may wish to provide feedback to the government on the need for a review of rating legislation if the reforms were to proceed.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	This report however does not commit the council to a decision.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	Climate considerations (both mitigation and adaptation), resilience and environmental impacts are drivers of the reform process. While there are no specific impacts arising from this report the decisions that occur post September 2021 will have an impact on climate and environmental issues. Some of these impacts have been included in this report within the risk/options analysis that can be done with currently available information. Further consideration of sustainability, and climate change impacts of three waters specific to Central Otago are outlined in section 5.
Risks Analysis	Significant risks, legal responsibility and financial implications have been identified in analysing reform proposals and completing analysis in this report. A high level analysis of the relative risks of the options is outlined in section 7. It is important to note that no decision is required, other than to note those issues and to request further information from Government if the Council wishes to do so to reduce the risks and implications to Council and its communities.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The future of water services delivery is a significant issue. A decision to transfer the delivery of the three waters network as a whole would be a significant decision, and require public consultation. This report however does not commit the council to a decision relating to transfer of delivery of three waters activities. Instead it provides initial analysis of the reform proposals for Council’s information and highlights the uncertainties around information and next steps. As such the significance of this report does not trigger public engagement requirements. Further advice regarding any future consultation requirements will be provided after September 2021. In the interim Council has made information regarding the reform process and background available to the public through its website, Facebook page, and media articles.

13. Next Steps

There are still several issues that need to be resolved, including:

· the final boundaries

· protections from privatisation

· consultation with communities and mana whenua

· how will community voice be heard and what influence will local authorities have (and what can the community realistically expect the council to influence particularly if it is not on the regional Representation Group)

· representation from and on behalf of mana whenua

· integration with other local government reform processes

· integration with spatial and local planning processes and growth

· prioritisation of investment

· workforce and capability – we don’t have enough of the right people now to deliver three waters and we need to retain our people through the transition

· what will a Government Bill cover and whether the reform will be mandatory

· conditions associated with the Government’s package of funding for local government

· transition arrangements, including our own workforce challenges (without transition challenges on top) and due diligence for asset transfers etc.

Staff will stay engaged on these issues as they develop and provide further advice on next steps after the 8 week period.

Council is invited to discuss whether there are specific information needs, issues or solutions that the Council would like staff to convey to the DIA or LGNZ, An initial list of questions is contained in Appendix 6. Suggested feedback on the proposal is contained in Appendix 7.

14. Attachments

Appendix 1 - 2020 Background (including Taumata Arowai information and Indicative Reform Programme) ⇩

Appendix 2 - The Government’s conclusion ⇩

Appendix 3 - DIA two-page summary ⇩

Appendix 4 - Funding to invest in the future of local government and community wellbeing ⇩

Appendix 5 - Transition ⇩

Appendix 6 - Questions from Central Otago District Council for DIA and LGNZ ⇩

Appendix 7 - Three Waters CODC feedback ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Julie Muir	Sanchia Jacobs
Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services	Chief Executive Officer
13/09/2021	16/09/2021

22 September 2021

21.7.5 Ripponvale Water Supply

Doc ID: 551499

1. Purpose of Report

To gain approval to undertake the necessary works on the Ripponvale Water Supply Scheme in order to improve its long-term resilience and ensure it complies with any requirements of the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Notes the revised programme of work on the Ripponvale Water Supply Scheme.

C. Agrees that Fulton Hogan are engaged to undertake the work as a variation to the maintenance contract.

D. Notes that $300,000 of the upgrade is funded through Stimulus Funding.

E. Notes that stimulus funded work must be complete by 30 March 2022.

2. Background

In November 2020 Council agreed to take over responsibility for the ownership and operation of the Ripponvale Community Water Supply scheme. At that meeting the following was resolved:

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

B. Agrees that properties on the Ripponvale Community Water Scheme pay half the $600,000 costs of upgrading the Ripponvale network to meet the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards, and minimum engineering standard requirements.

C. Agrees that the Council share of $300,000 be funded from the water stimulus fund allocation.

D. Agrees that Ripponvale Community Water Scheme accumulated $100,000 funds can be used to contribute to the $300,000 to be funded by properties on the Ripponvale Community Water Scheme.

E. Agrees that existing properties on the Ripponvale Community Water Scheme will have the option of paying their share of the $300,000, less any contribution by the Ripponvale Community Water Scheme, by either a lump sum payment or as a targeted rate.

F. Agrees that transfer of the scheme will occur on 30 March 2021, and that Council will not meet any costs accrued prior to 30 March 2021.

G. Agrees that properties on the Ripponvale Community Water Scheme be charged the standard rates for a council water connection from 30 March 2021.

H. Agrees that properties within the Ripponvale Community Water Scheme supply area be included within the Cromwell Water Supply Area, and that development contributions be applied to all properties that connect to this supply from 30 March 2021.

The Ripponvale Community Water Scheme provides water to more than 100 people and is required to meet the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards for small supply.

Central Otago District Council received a request to take over the management and operation of the Ripponvale Community Water Scheme in 2019.

Council agreed to this in principle and commissioned a review of the assets, the asset condition, and improvements required to meet the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards and Council’s level of service. This assessment identified critical upgrades of various parts of the scheme that are necessary to meet compliance requirements to:

· Ensure that the water in the zone meets New Zealand Drinking Water Standards requirements.

· Allow testing of the scheme water at appropriate locations to meet the Drinking Water Standards requirements.

· Enable efficiency with telemetry controls consistent with council requirements to enable remote monitoring of the scheme.

· Ensure operational condition and appropriate level of service for restricted rural water supplies.

There are also issues regarding capacity of the supply to meet potential future development demand. The scheme currently operates as a low-pressure supply, with onsite tanks and it is anticipated this will remain the case once future upgrades are implemented. Hydraulic modelling to identify the most appropriate way of managing future demand will be included as part of the Cromwell water investigation project this financial year.

Since taking over the scheme Council along with contractors and consultants have undertaken more thorough asset investigations and have found a number of issues that have altered the priority of some of the upgrade works previously identified. These are largely based around the ability of the scheme as a whole to cater for potential future demand and the urgent need to replace an overland section of pipework extending into the Kawarau Gorge which regularly freezes over the winter period and results in loss of supply to customers at the end of the scheme. Significant leakage has also been identified on pipework prior to this overland section. It is therefore proposed that the previously approved budget of $600,000 be used to deliver this work as well as provide basic telemetry capability at two pump stations on the scheme.

3. Discussion

Recent history and scheme summary

The Ripponvale water supply has been run as a private network for many years. The network is supplied water via an 80mm bulk meter on Waenga Drive. A booster pump takes water from the supply main and boosts it up to three tanks on private land. These tanks provide water pressure to much of the scheme (main pressure zone). A second small booster pumpstation provides water to tanks on a hill on the western edge of Ripponvale and this supplies water to about 10-15 properties (upper pressure zone). The whole scheme is a trickle feed supply, meaning that all connections have a restrictor in place before private tanks.

The scheme operators handed over responsibility of the scheme to Central Otago District Council in March 2021.

Problem statement

The water supply has not been constructed, operated or maintained as a normal Council supply, with numerous physical and legal/landowner issues which need addressing. Council has undertaken to upgrade the supply to ensure expected levels of service are met. This includes ensuring that the water is always safe to drink and limiting outages that could result in ‘no-water’ requests for service.

Some of the upgrades require investigation before they can be implemented.

Funding is available to carry out some upgrades in 2021/2022. The best way to allocate this money in the short term has been considered and is presented below. Further ongoing investigation will allow the long-term future of the scheme to be decided whilst this work is being carried out.

After taking over the scheme, some previously unknown problems became evident.

In summary, the main scheme issues are:

· Some of the assets are in a poor state of repair and need replacing. Some also need upsizing. The assets do not always meet council’s standards and of insufficient diameter to cater for potential future demand.

· The as-built drawings are not accurate and are missing details of some key assets (including some pipe locations).

· Some assets, such as valves, have been lost (buried) over time.

· The location of the lateral to each customer and the location of their restrictors is not documented.

· It is considered possible that they may be some unrestricted connections on the supply that need to be resolved.

· The size of individual storage tanks is unknown at certain properties but considered to be less than appropriate.

· The water main along Kawarau Gorge was found to have been laid above ground and is subject to freezing in the winter. This leads to supply outages to customers in this area on cold days and has resulted in 2021 for the need to tanker water to these properties on a number of occasions. The original buried supply pipe in this area it is understood was leaking very badly and was abandoned by the previous operator.

· Some of the assets are on private land, in particular the pumpstations and reservoirs with no landowner agreements or easements in place to allow appropriate access.

· There is no telemetry in place at the scheme, meaning that the reservoir levels, flows or pump operation cannot be monitored remotely. When there is a pump outage, Fulton Hogan will likely not know about it until a customer runs out of water and calls for assistance.

· There is only a single pump in each of the pumpstations, meaning that if it fails, the scheme stops supplying water. There are no spares or standby pumps.

· The supply only has one connection to the Cromwell supply, though the Waenga Drive connection. This means that supply to the scheme is currently restricted, limiting any potential growth in the future.

Initial proposals for scheme upgrade

Initial scheme upgrade proposals were presented in an October 2020 Stantec report and they included: replacement of key assets (mains and tanks), chlorine dosing, installation of duty/standby pumps and telemetry.

After some initial investigation, the chlorine level in the scheme appears to be acceptable, although further monitoring is required after extra sample taps are installed. Chlorine booster dosing is therefore not being considered further at this stage.

A quote for adding telemetry to the main assets was previously gained and was being considered. A site investigation found that addition of duty/standby pumps to the pumpstations would be possible and was being considered as an appropriate upgrade.

Previous plan for short term upgrade

The report approved by Council in November 2020 highlighted the following work to be undertaken:

· New connection to Cromwell network to improve water pressure and reduce depreciation costs

· Replace two leaking tanks, and install tank isolation valves

· Flushing valves

· Property connections (to reduce backflow risk and provide metering)

· Additional chlorine dosing

· Minor works not included in above, and contingency

· Investigation and management costs

Total cost of these work was estimated at $600,000. This excluded two further packages of work to install a telemetry system to the pump stations and a ring feed from Bannockburn.

Current plans for short term upgrade

The current plan for upgrade involves replacement of water mains and connections to the main in Ripponvale. This work can be undertaken now with less risk that any future plan/modelling will mean the work is superseded and so won’t be money well spent.

Fulton Hogan have recently provided pricing for what is now proposed to be highest priority options:

1. Replacement of the main along the full length of Ripponvale Road with an option to upsize (from 20mm and 50mm) to 100/ 150mm to accommodate future demand and provide surety of supply. As part of this replacement, the following would be included:

- replacement of laterals to the boundary (and possible beyond if in poor shape)

- replacement of restrictor units at the boundary. Including installation of proper meter boxes

- replacement of valves, air valves, hydrants and other assets where necessary, including proper surface marking

2. Replacement (and potential upsizing) of part or all of the main in Kawarau Gorge. Works in this area are difficult due to the nature of the road; being a state highway, having a constant traffic of fast- moving cars and a narrow verge to work in. There is also potential increase in demand along this supply line due to the existence of workers accommodation that needs to be confirmed

3. Temporary, low- cost telemetry at the key sites (PSs) which can alert Fulton Hogan to key water supply issues in the short term. This also includes the possible reinstatement of existing audible/visual alarms at the pumpstations which could alert the nearby homeowners of a problems so that they can call Council.

4. Purchasing spare pumps/critical spares to match the existing so that in a failure they can be quickly plumbed in and minimise risk of unplanned outages.

Estimates indicate that this work can be delivered within the currently approved $600,000 budget.

Reasons for change of priority

The following section detail some of the reasons why it is now proposed to change the priority from what was proposed previously to what is currently being proposed.

· A more detailed site inspection of the main assets has led to re-evaluation of some priorities.

· The tanks will not need replacing if a pumped system can work, as they will be decommissioned. If that is found to not be possible/the best option, we will go back to replacing the tanks as proposed. This will depend on the outcomes of future modelling to help determine longer term needs for the scheme.

· The above ground pipe in the gorge was only identified after the scheme was handed over to Council.

· Water quality has been found to be better than anticipated, but needs more monitoring, and so extra chlorine dosing is not required at this stage.

· Council didn’t know how much the scheme struggled with high water use and small assets (small pumps, tanks and pipes). As Fulton Hogan have not operated the scheme through a summer yet, and no detailed flow monitoring has been done there remains a level of uncertainty. Also, any over-use found could be due to removed restrictors and /or leaks (a common scenario across rural water supplies).

· Flushing valves will be installed as the mains are replaced, which will be as proposed.

· The ‘minor works’ stated included all sorts like sample taps, new valves, leak repairs and new pipework. One sample tap has already been added, and a couple of valves.

· Telemetry will be needed in the scheme.

· The other ‘deferred’ option of a link to Bannockburn Road is still being considered but relies on an updated Cromwell water model and some bigger thinking around what the long term plan for this area is.

Funding of current proposed works

The current proposed works will be funded through the same mechanism as previously approved i.e. that Council would fund $300,000 through the Stimulus funding with the remaining balance ($300,000) paid for by the Ripponvale users. It is considered that this funding mechanism is still the most appropriate to cover the current work.

Procurement and delivery of current upgrades

It is noted that $300,000 of the approved budget is Stimulus funding and needs to be spent by the end of March 2022. It is proposed to award the work to Fulton Hogan as a variation to the maintenance contract. This approach is consistent with the current Procurement Policy given the specialist nature of the work and the need to complete in a restricted timeframe.

Investigation of future long term upgrades

After discussion between Council and Fulton Hogan about long term options for the supply, a new long term-proposal is being considered that will require modelling as part of the Cromwell hydraulic model. This involves the possible addition of a new booster pumping system which could supersede the requirement to maintain the existing main reservoirs and pumpstation.

Some development is ongoing/proposed in the area between Ripponvale and Cromwell/Bannockburn. The possibly of more water being required in this area in the short or long tern needs to be considered. There is also an option to loop the Ripponvale extension by connecting it to the Bannockburn supply line at the end of Pearson Road which will add considerable resilience to the scheme.

The model and proposed spatial plan for the area need to be checked to ensure that the existing scheme can cope with increased flows and whether growth/change of use in the area between Ripponvale and Cromwell/Bannockburn will see increased demand for water. It is understood that some further works will need to be carried on the model before this work can be complete.

If the existing Cromwell supply will not be adversely affected by a new booster pumpstation, the possible location of this new pumping station building needs to be investigated (hydraulic requirements/land ownership/power supply) and a design progressed so that an estimate of costs can be sought.

Further site and customer investigations will be carried out to determine the condition and location of customer connections.

Extra sample lines and flush points at strategic locations will also be considered if appropriate.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Approve the variation to Fulton Hogan’s contract and approve the current plans for the proposed short term upgrade these being:

· Replacement of the main along the full length of Ripponvale Road

· Replacement (and potential upsizing) of part or all of the main in Kawarau Gorge.

· Temporary, low-cost telemetry at the key sites

· Purchasing spare pumps/critical spares

Advantages:

· Can be delivered within the previously approved budget

· Adds significant resilience into the Ripponvale scheme

· Caters for future development and subdivision within the current network area

Disadvantages:

· None

Option 2- (Not Recommended)

Do not approve the variation to Fulton Hogan’s contract and continue to undertake the scope of work as previously outlined these being:

· New connection to Cromwell network to improve water pressure and reduce depreciation costs

· Replace two leaking tanks, and install tank isolation valves

· Flushing valves

· Property connections (to reduce backflow risk and provide metering)

· Additional chlorine dosing

· Minor works and contingency

Advantages:

· Programme will remain as per the previous scope

Disadvantages:

· Will not deliver optimum outcome based on additional information since the scheme was taken over

· Will not cater for future demand

· Not replacing the Kawarau Gorge line will result in further costs associated with trucking water to customers when the overland line freezes each winter

· Lack of telemetry in pumping stations continues to be a key vulnerability

· Lack of critical spares will also remain a key vulnerability

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the (social, economic and environmental) wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by ensuring the supply of safe drinking water.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	The decision has financial implications outlined in previous reports. Funding the Council share from Stimulus funding has minimal implications. The remaining $300,000 will be funded from the water renewal budget in the short term.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	Meets Council’s sustainability objectives for affordable and equitable provision of services to promote wellbeing, and appropriate infrastructure.
Risks Analysis	The decision to take over the Ripponvale scheme has risk implications as highlighted in previous reports. Undertaking the currently proposed work is seen as a step towards mitigating those risks.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	This decision does not trigger Council’s significance threshold. No further engagement is required.

6. Next Steps

· Design work will be completed on the key immediate upgrades as proposed through this report

· Fulton Hogan will be instructed to undertake the work

· Council and Fulton Hogan will undertake further investigation across the Ripponvale network to identify other areas that may require future attention.

· Continue to consider long term future options to provide a greater level of resilience across the network including a potential ring feed from the Bannockburn Road main.

7. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Ian Evans	Julie Muir
Water Services Manager	Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services
9/09/2021	9/09/2021

22 September 2021

21.7.6 Procurement for Three Waters Stimulus Projects

Doc ID: 550649

1. Purpose of Report

To receive an update on the procurement of three waters projects and consider a change in procurement approach for the remainder of the work under the Three Waters Stimulus programme.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Notes the update on the Three Water Stimulus programme of work.

C. Rescinds the decision to run an open tender for the stimulus funded falling main project and Manuherekia pipe crossing (Part of Resolution 21.2.15B).

D. Agree that remaining work to be funded with water stimulus funding be undertaken as a variation to the Water Services Maintenance Contract.

2. Background

Council approved the following projects for the Three Waters Stimulus programme up to the value of $9.46 million on 26 August 2020:

· Separating Alexandra pump station and new Manuherekia river crossing

· Cromwell pump station capacity and resilience upgrades

· Falling water main replacements

· Omakau water pressure upgrades

· Flood protection of Roxburgh water treatment plant

· Additional Alexandra northern water reservoir

· Data collection

· Additional staff to deliver the program

· Regional work program contributions.

On 24 March 2021 Council approved the procurement process for construction of:

· Cromwell pumpstation upgrades

· Alexandra northern water reservoir

· Manuherekia river pipe crossing

· Falling water main replacements - Roxburgh and Bridge Hill

· Clyde wastewater pumpstation.

All this work except for the Clyde wastewater pumpstation is funded under the Three Waters Stimulus funding which requires the work to be completed by 31 March 2022. The status of the construction projects is shown on the following table:

Project	Number of tenders	Status
Cromwell pumpstation upgrades	2	Awarded, construction commencing September.
Alexandra Northern Reservoir	2	Awarded, construction commencing in October.
Manuherekia Pipe Crossing	0	Alternative option designed.
Clyde Wastewater Pumpstation		Delayed due to pump being withdrawn from market. Tenders close on 14 September.
Falling water main replacements		Design completed September.
Flood protection of Roxburgh water treatment plant		Complete.

Council staff have discussed the Manuherekia Pipe crossing tender with two large local contractors. The reason there were no tenders received for this work was due to the complexity of constructing a piped river crossing, the risks associated with this, and limited capacity to undertake this work.

3. Discussion

The Clyde wastewater pumpstation construction was tendered in April but had to be withdrawn after the manufacturer withdrew the pump from the market due to a defect. An alternative pump of the same capacity was unable to be found. This has required re-design of the pumping of wastewater from Clyde to Alexandra. This is now being managed by using a smaller pump at Clyde and bringing the Clyde main pipe into the Alexandra network at the Wrightson pumpstation.

Increased storage capacity needs to be provided at the Wrightson pumpstation to achieve this. It is proposed to re-allocate the funding for the Manuherekia pipe crossing project to fund the Wrightson pumpstation capacity upgrade. This will increase the resilience at the Wrightson pumpstation, and manages wastewater flows better to improve operational management at the Alexandra treatment site. The Clyde wastewater will be connected into the Wrightson pumpstation and then transported with Alexandra wastewater. This will reduce surges at the treatment plant.

The Clyde pumpstation is currently being tendered, and the tender period was extended from 7 September to 14 September due to the second COVID-19 lockdown.

Council staff have spoken to another two small to medium sized contracting companies who advised that they were unlikely to tender for pipe replacements that had tight construction periods or were in challenging terrain. There is currently significant work available, particularly in the Queenstown area, and on subdivision developments.

The Bridge Hill falling main is a complex project, which requires significant design. Design and construction will not be able to be completed by 31 March. This has been replaced with the Clyde falling main replacement, and the bridge hill work will now be funded from the renewal budget that existed for the Clyde falling main. There is no change to the overall pipe renewal program, this just enables management of delivery risks for the Three Waters Stimulus programme.

The end date of the Funding Agreement between the Department of Internal Affairs and Central Otago District Council is 31 March 2022. There is no guarantee that there will be an extension of time if the money is not spent, though the Department of Internal Affairs has the discretion to extend this date.

An exemption from open advertising is available under the current Procurement Policy with approval where there is limited time for the procurement process, and it is not practical or cost-effective to conduct an open tender or proposal.

Due to the lack of market interest in tendering for work that needs to be completed by the 31 March 2022, it is proposed that the Roxburgh and Clyde falling mains, and Wrightson pumpstation upgrade be undertaken as variations to the current Water Services Maintenance Contract.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Rescind the decision to run an open tender for the stimulus funded falling main project and Manuherekia pipe crossing and agree that remaining water stimulus funded work be undertaken as a variation to the Water Services Maintenance Contract.

Advantages:

· Reduces time risk for delivery of the Three Waters Stimulus program.

· All construction contracts for the stimulus programme will be awarded.

· Work can start straight away.

· Ensures delivery of essential work within a resource constrained market.

Disadvantages:

· Reduces the opportunity for new players to access the local market.

Option 2

Tender the work and do not agree the remaining water stimulus funded work be undertaken as a variation to the Water Services Maintenance Contract.

Advantages:

· Would enable other contractors to tender if they have capacity.

Disadvantages:

· High risk that the Three Waters Stimulus program will not be completed by 31 March 2022.

· Increased risk that all the stimulus funding will not be spent, and this funding will be lost to Central Otago.

· There is a high risk that we will receive no tenderers for this work making the tender process an ineffective use of time.

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the social and economic wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by providing good quality infrastructure in a way that is most cost effective for households and businesses.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	Yes. This work will be undertaken within the Three Waters Stimulus Grant budget.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes. Variations to existing contracts is in accordance with the Procurement Policy. An exemption from open advertising is permitted, when supported by special circumstances, including where there is limited time for the procurement process, or it is not practical or cost-effective to conduct an open tender or proposal.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	This decision will enable work which will contribute to improved climate resilience and sustainability to be undertaken.
Risks Analysis	There is a risk to Council if we are unable to deliver the Three Waters Stimulus programme by the end of March 2022.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	This decision is not significant and does not meet the thresholds of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

6. Next Steps

If Council agrees to the variation to the existing Water Services Maintenance Contract the work will commence immediately. If not, then a tender process will be initiated.

7. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Chantal Green	Julie Muir
Infrastructure Finance Officer	Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services
6/09/2021	10/09/2021

22 September 2021

21.7.8 Appointment of a consultant for the development and tender of Council's Waste Contract

Doc ID: 551688

1. Purpose of Report

To consider the direct appointment of a consultant to support the development and tender of all stages of Council’s new waste services contract.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Approves the direct appointment of Morrison Low for the development and tender of Council’s waste services contract.

2. Background

All of Council’s contracts for waste services (kerbside refuse and recycling collections, resource recovery centres and transfer stations) expire in June 2023, except waste disposal to landfill which expires in 2029. Council has the opportunity to amalgamate the contracts into a single, long‐term waste services contract, with the aim of delivering value for money for residents whilst supporting Council’s objectives for waste management and minimisation.

Morrison Low are familiar with waste services in the Central Otago and neighbouring Queenstown Lakes district, having supported both Councils on several waste projects in recent years including bylaw development, transfer station review and previous waste contract development.

Morrison Low has recognised specialists in providing strategic advice to local and central government in New Zealand and Australia on waste management and procurement. Morrison Low have been involved in almost all of the waste service changes implemented by New Zealand councils in the last five years.

3. Discussion

Subject to approval, the current Procurement Policy allows an exemption from open advertising under certain circumstances. Some of these circumstances include:

· Where the services required are specialist technical or professional services.

· When it is not practical or cost-effective to conduct an open tender or proposal.

· Where there is limited time for the procurement process.

The proposed programme of work to be completed by Morrison Low is as follows:

· Stage 1: Waste Services Review (April 21 to November 21)

· Stage 2: Procurement Planning (September 21 to January 22)

· Stage 3: Evaluation and award (January 22 to June 22)

· Stage 4: Mobilisation (July 22 to June 23)

When an exemption from open advertising is recommended, approval is on a one-up basis.

The total amount of the professional services for stages 1 - 3 of the work is $180,000. Additional support from Morrison Low may be required through the mobilisation process and coordination with other Council’s for facility access and operation. This is estimated to be $25,000

As the total of all stages is in excess of $200,000, Council approval is required to use direct appointment as the alternative procurement method.

There is a time and cost requirement for tendering work. A tender process for this work is expected to take 12 weeks, and preparation of tender documents and evaluation is expected to take approximately 80 hours of senior staff time. This means that while the tender process will add time and cost to progressing work, it is unlikely to deliver any added value.

The contracts for technical services are usually awarded on qualities relating to experience with little to no weighting given to price. The expertise, experience and innovation of the individual people who work on the project have more of an impact on the cost than the differences in the fees charged for the work.

There is a shortage of experienced consultants to undertake the work that is currently planned and consultants are now in the position where there is more work than capacity to deliver. Building on existing strategic relationships is likely to be more effective in ensuring delivery of Council’s work programme than tendering will be.

Given Morrison Low’s positive history of work with Council on solid waste, their technical expertise and the constraints mentioned above, it is recommended to make a direct appointment of Morrison Low for the waste services review and procurement instead of going through an open tender process.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Make a direct appointment to Morrison Low for all stages of the waste services review and procurement.

Advantages:

· Will fast-track consultant engagement, resulting in reduced staff and consultant input being required.

· Will utilise the knowledge that Morrison Low have gained through waste projects to be carried through to option analysis and development of the tender.

· Will enable our waste service contract to be tendered and awarded with enough time for mobilisation.

Disadvantages:

· Reduces opportunity for other players to access the local market.

Option 2

Tender the work.

Advantages:

· Open transparent and competitive process.

Disadvantages:

· Will create cost for consultants to tender in a market where there is more work than resource available. This could result in no tenders being received.

· Will require staff time which will result in lost opportunities to progress other items of work.

· If a different consultant was selected then the benefits of work undertaken to date could be lost.

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the social and economic wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by providing good quality infrastructure in a way that is most cost effective for households and businesses.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	Yes. The work will be undertaken within existing budgets provided for this work.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes, with approval an exemption from open advertising can be used in certain circumstances. These include when the services required are specialist technical or professional services, where it is not practical or cost-effective to conduct an open tender or proposal and where there is limited time for the procurement process.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	This decision will enable development of a new waste contract which promotes more efficient and effective waste management.
Risks Analysis	There is a risk in managing peak workload with limited resources if the recommended option is not approved. There are risks to Council if appropriate technical expertise is not included in the development and delivery of Long-Term Plan programmes. There are minimal risks to Council in undertaking direct appointment for the scale of work that is proposed.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	This decision is not significant and does not meet the thresholds of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

6. Next Steps

If Council approves the recommendation Morrison Low will be appointed for all stages of the waste services review and procurement.

7. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Quinton Penniall	Julie Muir
Environmental Engineering Manager	Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services
9/09/2021	9/09/2021

22 September 2021

21.7.9 Maniototo Bridges and District Wide Bridge Strategy Update

Doc ID: 551311

1. Purpose

To provide an update for the three Maniototo Bridges currently closed to traffic, along with an update on the development of a district wide bridge strategy.

Recommendations

That the report be received.

2. Maniototo Bridges

After the significant weather event in January 2021, three bridges in the Maniototo were closed to traffic. This was due to damage caused by the weather event accelerating pre-existing deterioration on the old timber structures that were already nearing the end of their useful life.

The bridges are:

§ Bridge no. 121 - Scott Lane, Kyeburn River

§ Bridge no. 145 - Maniototo Road (Halls Ford), Taieri River

§ Bridge no. 160 - Linnburn Runs Road, Taieri River

The three bridges were closed in early January 2021. Council do not have in-house staff that can undertake structural inspections and outsource this work to specialist engineering consultants.

Beca were engaged to undertake general inspections on bridges that had likely suffered damage as a result of the significant weather event in January.

A general inspection involves a visual check of everything that a structural engineer can assess from either the bridge itself or any areas that are easily accessible around the structure. A general inspection is a good starting point to determine if there is any obvious damage or issues that need a more detailed principal inspection.

Due to the issues found on the Maniototo Road (Halls Ford) and Linnburn Runs Road structures during their general inspections, Council have engaged Beca to undertake a more detailed principal inspection of them.

The principal inspections of these two structures will involve specialty access (ropes, boat access and physical material sampling). This will determine the overall existing condition of the structure by assessing all of its structural components. Having the information of its current condition will aid to determine what loading (if any) each structure may be able to withstand.

Scott Lane had four sections physically swept away during the January weather event, so there was no point in undertaking a principal inspection at this location. This bridge was in poor condition and weight restricted prior to the January weather event.

The structural inspections have taken longer to complete than originally anticipated. This has been due to vacancies within the roading team and demand on a small resource pool of structural engineers in the South Island. This has been further impacted by the significant weather events in Canterbury and Marlborough in recent times.

Principal inspections were programmed in July but had to be delayed due to high flow in the Taieri River and then the second COVID-19national lockdown.

Inspections are programmed to resume on 20 September.

Scott Lane

The 13-span timber bridge at Scott Lane was significantly damaged in the weather event, with four of its 13 spans being physically swept away.

The Scott Lane timber bridge is 91 years old and was at the end of its economic life. It was heavily restricted to heavy vehicles prior to this weather event and subsequent closure and repair of the existing bridge is not a viable option.

Beca are investigating more cost-effective options that may service this area. While the bridge has been closed, road users have been utilising an existing ford crossing point. Council’s contractor has been undertaking basic maintenance on the ford crossing point and this has provided access under the normal low flow conditions of the Kyeburn.

A more permanent option is being investigated for this location, and it is possible that a concrete wash over box culvert may be able to service Scott Lane users - with the exception of high flooding situations when an alternative route is available.

A concrete wash over box culvert would be a much more cost-effective and resilient solution compared to a new replacement bridge. Although the investigation phase is well underway, it is too early to estimate costs involved.

A report will be provided to Council outlining available options and the costs involved when the investigation is completed.

Scott Lane bridge damage

Maniototo Road (Halls Ford)

This bridge was closed to traffic because at least one of the primary load bearing timber beams is showing significant longitudinal cracking. It was also noted that other timber components were in poor condition due to their age (warped primary load carrying beams, deep cracking, bowed beams etc.).

At 91 years of age, the Maniototo Road bridge was nearing the end of its useful life and was already heavily restricted to large vehicles prior to this flood event. There was already existing deterioration occurring in most of its structural timber components.

This bridge will have a principal inspection undertaken by Beca in September, from which will determine what loading this bridge is capable of in its current condition or if moderate repairs (if possible) were made.

There is a possibility this bridge could be opened to light vehicles (<3500kg) with moderate repairs, but this cannot be confirmed until the principal inspection and site testing have been undertaken. The overall deterioration of this structure (due to its age) may also make reopening challenging if further significant issues are found during the inspection.

This location is also known as Halls Ford, and there are suggestions this was historically a ford crossing point on the Taieri River. Assessment on site has determined a ‘deep ford crossing’ (600mm depth approx.) may be possible to construct on site.

Construction of a deep ford crossing would involve excavating suitable approaches on each side of the riverbank and placing rock stabilised platform across the bed of the river, to an estimated overall cost of $15,000. This would only be suitable for the likes of farm equipment that is capable of crossing such a depth.

Maniototo Road bridge damage

Linnburn Runs Road:

This bridge was closed because it has unsupported beams at two locations resulting in an unsafe load path through the deck members. There was also severe decay present at various beam ends and visible sag on one span.

There is no definite age for this bridge recorded, but old plans suggest it is at least 70 years of age and is primarily constructed from timber with steel tramway rail piles.

It is anticipated that this bridge may be possible to open to light vehicles (<3500kg) with moderate repairs, but this cannot be confirmed until the principal inspection and site testing have been undertaken. The overall deterioration of this structure (due to its age) may also make reopening challenging if unexpected results are found during the inspection.

This site was not deemed appropriate for a ford crossing due to the depth of the river. Cost-effective bridge alternatives are not considered favourable for this site, however Council will discuss this in more detail with the Structural Engineer when on site for the principal inspection.

Linnburn Runs Road bridge damage

3. District Wide Bridge Strategy Update

The Maniototo bridge closures, among other known bridge related issues have highlighted the importance of progressing an overall district wide bridge strategy.

Council has 179 maintained bridges within the district.

These bridges greatly vary in terms of:

§ Condition

§ Age

§ Historical significance

§ Type of structure

§ Utilisation (i.e. current traffic volumes, are there alternative routes that could be/are used in lieu of the structure)

§ Maintenance and renewal requirements going forward

§ Physical location of structure (i.e. some extent of network bridges are not even on Council land or serve only one property)

Since March 2021, Council’s Roading team have been putting together the early stages of an overall district wide bridge strategy.

This is a large piece of work and will take time to fully complete. There has never been an overall bridge strategy of this detail to date for the district and this will be a very comprehensive document.

Known issues relating to the bridge network include:

§ There are many bridges coming to the end of their economic life or have significant component replacement imminent.

§ Council do not know what will be needed in terms of renewals across the entire network for the next 1-30 years (or the priorities).

§ There are some clear priority bridges that Council don’t have enough information on to understand what future renewal cost and implications may apply.

§ Council know about the short term/immediate bridging issues – such as the current Maniototo bridge closures – but do not have an understanding on how they should be prioritised against the remainder of the bridges in the district.

§ Some bridges are not maintained, are not even located on legal road reserve or only serve one property.

§ Expectation that total network costs to maintain the existing level of service for our bridges will exceed the community (and possibly Waka Kotahi) willingness and/or ability to fund.

A bridge strategy will provide Council with a plan for the replacement, renewal and disposal for all bridges in the district. This will include consideration of required levels of service and potential replacement of some bridges with wash-over structures.

Analysis will include:

§ General inspection of all bridges – essentially a line in the sand of their current condition and immediate/upcoming maintenance requirements (to date approx. 45 of 179 bridges have had a general inspection since March 2021).

§ Understanding the full renewal requirements, timing and costs

§ Knowing what the absolute network need is from a public access and loading requirement. What bridges are essential lifelines, what bridges have alternative options/routes to consider.

§ Knowing the options for bridges that require replacement

§ Knowing what component renewals will provide a long period until the next significant renewal on each bridge is required (striving for value for money)

§ A level of service statement – where, when and what.

§ Inspection schedule – how often for each bridge (i.e. determine if/what historical bridges may need more detailed and frequent inspections)

Next Steps:

§ Completion of full network inspections – Early/Mid 2022

§ Draft Bridge Strategy – Late 2022

§ Consultation – Early 2023

§ Development of 2024 Long Term Plan funding requests – July-October 2023

§ Final Bridge Strategy approved – Mid 2023

4. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

James McCallum	Julie Muir
Roading Manager	Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services
9/09/2021	9/09/2021

22 September 2021

21.7.11 Proposed Road Stopping - Unnamed Road off Tarras-Cromwell Road

Doc ID: 551527

1. Purpose of Report

To consider a proposal to stop the end of an unnamed unformed road off Tarras-Cromwell Road in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1974.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Approves the proposal to stop approximately 430 square metres (the western end) of the unnamed unformed road off Tarras – Cromwell Road as shown in figure 4, subject to:

- Public notification and advertising in accordance with the Local Government Act 1974.

- No objections being received within the objection period.

- The land being exchanged for an easement (in gross) in favour of the Central Otago Queenstown Trails Network Trust over the area marked “1” in figure 2.

- The land being amalgamated with Record of Title OT365/40 (Section 1636R Block III Tarras Survey District).

- The Central Otago Queenstown Trails Network Trust paying all other costs associated with the stopping.

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

2. Background

The Central Otago Queenstown Trails Network Trust (the Trust) is working to create a world class cycling network. The Trust’s work includes extending, upgrading, and creating new trails. Once completed, the trial network will span more than 500 kilometres of the Central Otago and Southern Lakes areas.

Among the Trust’s first projects is the recently completed Lake Dunstan Trail. The Lake Dunstan Trail links Cromwell to Clyde, and to the Otago Central Rail Trail. Other plans include upgrading 17 kilometres of existing trails around the Cromwell basin. New trails include linking Bannockburn to the Gibbston Valley, and Cromwell to Wanaka via Tarras.

While many trails traverse conservation or reserve land, some trails pass over private land. Where this occurs, the Trust must negotiate access agreements or easements from landowners. The final design of each new trail is subject to rights which the Trust is able to negotiate.

The Trust is currently working on the trail through Lindis Crossing. Much of the trail through this area will pass over conservation land. A plan of the trail through Lindis Crossing is mapped in red below in figure 1. Other existing trails are mapped in blue.

Figure 1 – Plan of new trail through Lindis Crossing mapped in red. (Existing trails are shown mapped in blue).

To construct the track legally, the Trust has negotiated easement agreements with three private landowners. Plans of the three easements (which are not to scale) are highlighted and numbered in pink below in figure 2.

Figure 2 – Plans of the three private easements required at Lindis Crossing

While designing the trail and negotiating the easements shown in figure 2, the Trust noted that the dwelling on Section 1636R Block III Tarras Survey District (Section 1636R) encroaches onto an adjacent unnamed unformed legal road.

The unnamed unformed road (the Road) adjoins the western side of the Tarras – Cromwell Road approximately 350 metres south of the Lindis River Bridge. It is a short no exit road which is about 370 metres long. It has an area of just over 8000 square metres.

The Road is shown highlighted in red below in figure 3.

Figure 3 – Overview of the unnamed unformed road off Tarras – Cromwell Road

On its northern boundary, the Road adjoins Part Section 1 Survey Office Plan (SO) 24921 (Part Section 1). Part Section 1 is conservation land. The conservation land stretches from the Tarras – Cromwell Road in the east, to the Clutha River Mata-Au in the west. A parcel of marginal strip lies to the western end of the Road.

The majority of the southern boundary adjoins Section 31 Block III Tarras Survey District (Section 31). While this means Section 31 can be legally accessed from almost anywhere along the Road, it has sealed access from the Tarras – Cromwell Road.

The last 20 metres of the Road adjoins Section 1636R. Section 1636R is a narrow elongated parcel of land about 260 metres long by 20 metres wide. The landowner accesses the dwelling on Section 1636R from the Road. Access to the southern end of Section 1636R can also be gained from the Tarras – Cromwell Road.

To assist with the construction of the trail, the landowner has granted the Trust an easement over the southern half of Section 1636R. In return, the Trust have agreed to apply to stop the western end of the unnamed unformed road on behalf of the landowner.

To legalise the encroachment the Trust have applied to stop an area of 430 square metres of the Road. A plan of the area to be stopped is shown below in figure 4.

Figure 4 – Plan of the Road which the Trust have applied to stop

3. Discussion

Evaluation of Application

An evaluation of the proposal to stop the Road is shown in the table below.

Item	Criteria to be considered	Evaluation
District Plan	Has the road been identified in the District Plan for any specific use or as a future road corridor?	The Road is shown on District Plan Map 48. It is not identified for any specific purpose or as a future road corridor.
Current Level of Use	Is the road used by members of the public for any reasons?	The Road may be used to access the marginal strip that described as Crown Land Block III Tarras Survey District, however. The marginal strip is generally accessed via the various tracks on the neighbouring conservation land which is described as Part Section 1 SO Plan 24921. Section 31 Block III Tarras Survey District can be accessed from the Road. Section 31 also has existing sealed access off the Tarras – Cromwell Road. Stopping the end of the Road will not impact any access options which are currently available to Section 31. The owner of Section 31 supports the proposal.
	Does it provide the only or most convenient means of access to any existing lots?	The Road terminates at the marginal strip which is immediately adjacent to the northern end of the applicant’s property. The applicant’s property is the only property which is most conveniently accessed from the Road.
	Will stopping the road adversely affect the viability of any commercial activity or operation?	No commercial activity is located on land adjacent to, or accessed from, the Road.
	Will any land become landlocked if the road is stopped?	No.
Future Use	Will the road be needed to service future residential, commercial, industrial, or agricultural developments?	The land to the north of the Road is conservation land. This means it is protected and will not be developed. The property immediately to the south of the Road, Section 31 Block III Tarras Survey District, can be accessed from the Road but has sealed access from the Tarras – Cromwell Road. Stopping the end of the Road will not affect any access options which are currently available to Section 31.
Future Use	Will the road be needed in the future to connect existing roads?	The Road is a no exit road. It does not offer any level or possibility of connectivity.
Non-traffic Uses	Does the road have current or potential value for amenity functions, e.g., walkway, cycleway, recreational access, access to conservation or heritage areas, park land?	The Road has no existing or future recreational or amenity potential functions. The area is currently serviced by a variety of informal cycling and walking tracks through the adjacent conservation land. The proposal to stop the end of the Road is subject to the granting of an easement in favour of the Trail Network. The easement will enhance public access. This enhancement is recognised by Walking Access New Zealand, Central Otago Recreational Users Forum, and Fish & Game New Zealand, who all support the proposal.
	Does the road have potential to be utilised by the Council for any other public work either now or potentially in the future?	The Road does not have the potential to be used for any other public work.
	Does the road have significant landscape amenity value?	The Road does not have any significant landscape amenity value.
Access to Waterbody	Does the road provide access to a river, stream, lake or other waterbody?	The Road does not provide access to any waterbody.
Access to Waterbody	If so, there is a need to consider Section 345 of the Local Government Act, which requires that after stopping the land be vested in Council as an esplanade reserve	N/A (refer above).
Infrastructure	Does the road currently contain any services or other infrastructure, such as electricity, telecommunications, irrigation or other private infrastructure?	No.
Infrastructure	Can the existing services or infrastructure be protected by easements?	N/A.
Traffic Safety	Does the use of motor vehicles on the road constitute a danger or hazard?	There is no danger or hazard associated with using a motor vehicle on the Road.

As shown in the evaluation table, the Road is not identified or required for any other roading purpose. The proposal to stop the western end of the Road will have no effect on the existing roading network.

The Road does not provide access to a waterbody or to any public or other land that cannot be otherwise accessed via the adjacent conservation land. In fact, stopping the western end of the Road in return for the easement in favour of the Trust, will enhance public access.

Legislation and Policy

Council’s Roading Policy determines the appropriate statutory procedure for stopping a legal road or any part thereof. The policy for selecting the correct statutory process is as follows:

The Local Government Act 1974 road stopping procedure shall be adopted if one or more of the following circumstances shall apply:

a) Where the full width of road is proposed to be stopped and public access will be removed as a result of the road being stopped; or

b) The road stopping could injuriously affect or have a negative or adverse impact on any other property; or

c) The road stopping has, in the judgment of the Council, the potential to be controversial; or

d) If there is any doubt or uncertainty as to which procedure should be used to stop the road.

The Local Government Act process requires public notification of the proposal. This involves erecting signs at each end of the road to be stopped, sending letters to adjoining owners/occupiers and at least two public notices a week apart in the local newspaper. Members of the public have 40 days in which to object.

The Public Works Act 1981 road stopping procedure may be adopted when the following

circumstances apply:

e) Where the proposal is that a part of the road width be stopped and a width of road which provides public access will remain.

f) Where no other person, including the public generally, are considered by the Council in its judgment to be adversely affected by the proposed road stopping;

g) Where other reasonable access will be provided to replace the access previously provided by the stopped road (i.e. by the construction of a new road).

As the full width of the road is to be stopped and public access removed, it is proposed that Local Government Act 1974 procedure be adopted for this application.

An application to stop a road under the Local Government Act 1974 requires public consultation with the members of the public having a right to object to proposal.

Council’s Roading Policy states that:

If an objection is received then the applicant will be provided with the opportunity to consider the objection and decide if they wish to continue to meet the costs for the objection to be considered by the Council and the Environment Court.

If an objection is received and it is accepted by the Council then the process will be halted and the Council may not stop the road.

If the objection is not accepted by the Council then the road stopping proposal must be referred to the Environment Court for a decision. The applicant is responsible for meeting all costs associated with defending the Council’s decision in the Environment Court.

Financial

The applicants are required to pay all costs associated with the proposal to stop the Road. Costs include legal and consultancy fees, and having the land surveyed and valued.

Having the land valued carries a fee of approximately $1,500. Using a recent comparable valuation report, the land is estimated to have a value of around $35,000 - $45,000 per hectare. This means the parcel of stopped road would have a value of around $1,500 to $2,000. This means it is not considered economical to obtain a valuation.

Instead, it is proposed that an equality of exchange approach be adopted with the land being gifted to the landowner in return for the easement in favour of the Trust.

As this stopping will be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act, costs will also include those associated with public advertising. These include:

· creating and erecting signs at each end of the road to be stopped;

· sending letters to adjoining owners/occupiers; and,

· publishing the two public notices in a local newspaper.

Community Board Recommendation

A report on this matter was presented to the Cromwell Community Board (the Board) for consideration at their meeting of 07 September 2021.

On consideration the Board resolved (Resolution 21.7.7) as follows:

B. Recommends to Council to approve the proposal to stop approximately 430 square metres (the western end) of the unnamed unformed road off Tarras – Cromwell Road as shown in figure 4, subject to:

- Public notification and advertising in accordance with the Local Government Act 1974.

- No objections being received within the objection period.

- The land being exchanged for an easement (in gross) in favour of the Central Otago Queenstown Trails Network Trust over the area marked “1” in figure 2.

- The land being amalgamated with Record of Title OT365/40 (Section 1636R Block III Tarras Survey District).

- The Central Otago Queenstown Trails Network Trust paying all other costs associated with the stopping.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

To approve the proposal to stop approximately 430 square metres (the western end) of the unnamed unformed road off Tarras – Cromwell Road as shown in figure 4, subject to:

o Public notification and advertising in accordance with the Local Government Act 1974.

o No objections being received within the objection period.

o The land being exchanged for an easement (in gross) in favour of the Central Otago Queenstown Trails Network Trust over the area marked “1” in figure 2.

o The land being amalgamated with Record of Title OT365/40 (Section 1636R Block III Tarras Survey District).

o The Central Otago Queenstown Trails Network Trust paying all other costs associated with the stopping.

Advantages:

· The landowner’s occupation of the Road will be legalised.

· Public access to the Clutha River Mata-Au and to the surrounding conservation land will be enhanced.

· The exchange recognises the contributions and benefits to all parties.

· All costs associated with the stopping will be paid by the applicants.

Disadvantages:

· None.

Option 2

To not approve the proposal to stop approximately 430 square metres (the western end) of the unnamed unformed road off Tarras - Cromwell Road.

Advantages:

· None.

Disadvantages:

· The landowner’s occupation of the Road will not be legalised.

· The Central Otago Queenstown Trails Network Trust will not be granted an easement over Section 1636R Block III Tarras Survey District.

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the economic wellbeing of the community by enabling the construction of a trail from Cromwell to Wanaka and enhancing access to the Clutha River Mata-Au and other conservation land in Lindis Crossing area.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	No negative financial implications for are related to the recommended option. The applicants are required to pay all costs associated with the stopping.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Council’s Road Stopping Policy applies to this application. Consideration of this policy has ensured that the appropriate statutory process, being to stop the road in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1974, has been chosen.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No sustainability, environmental or climate change impacts are related to the decision to stop this short unnamed unformed road.
Risks Analysis	No risks to Council are associated with the recommended option.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The Significance and Engagement Policy has been considered, with none of the criteria being met or exceeded. Public notices and advertising in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1974 will be posted. Notice of the completed road stopping will be published in the New Zealand Gazette.

6. Next Steps

The following steps have been/will be taken

1. Community Board approval September 2021

2. Council approval September 2021

3. Survey October/November 2021

4. Survey plan approved Late 2021

5. Public notification commences Late 2021

6. Public notification ends Early 2022

7. Gazette notice published Early 2022

7. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Linda Stronach	Julie Muir
Statutory Property Officer	Executive Manager – Infrastructure Services
8/09/2021	9/09/2021

22 September 2021

21.7.12 Plan Change 18 Cromwell Industrial Resource Area Extension

Doc ID: 546603

1. Purpose of Report

To consider a plan change to extend the Industrial Resource Area in Cromwell.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Recommends that Plan Change 18 be notified and processed in accordance with the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991.

2. Background

On 24 March 2021 Council approved the District Plan review programme. The extension of the Industrial Resource Area in Cromwell to reflect the Cromwell Masterplan was indicated as one of the priority plan changes in the review programme.

The Cromwell Masterplan commenced in 2018 and included a number of workstreams. One of those works streams was the development of a spatial plan for Cromwell (the Spatial Plan).

The proposed plan change will give effect to the outcome of the Cromwell Spatial Plan by extending the industrial area in Cromwell, zoning approximately 50.9 hectares of land on Bannockburn Road to Industrial Resource Area. The area has since been extended to include an additional area fronting onto State Highway 6 between Cemetery Road and McNulty Road, connecting with the existing industrial land on McNulty Road. The latter was identified in the Cromwell Masterplan “Let’s Talk Options” consultation document but was not included in the final Spatial Plan as approved in 2019 (see Figure 1 below).

The “Let’s Talk Options” survey was consulted on from Friday 19 October until Monday 19 November 2018. A total of 477 responses were received, analysed and published in “Let’s Talk Options: Survey Analysis” in November 2018. No submissions or feedback were received regarding the extent of the extension to the industrial land identified in the consultation document.

Advice received at that time was that the land adjacent to the State Highway provided more industrial yield that was considered necessary and was subsequently removed from the final Spatial Plan.

Since 2019 there has been a considerable increase in demand for industrial zoned land in Cromwell. Land previously identified for industrial use adjacent to State Highway 6 is now considered appropriate for inclusion in the industrial plan change, to ensure future demand is met.

Figure 1 - Extension to Cromwell Industrial Resource Area as identified in the Cromwell Masterplan “Let’s Talk Options” consultation document

Plan Change 18 amends Maps 15 and 44 to include approximately 50.9ha of land described as Lots 3-4 DP 526140 and Section 2 SO 526035, as contained in OT 894762 from Rural Resource Area to Industrial Resource Area. The Plan Change also proposes amending Map 44 to include a further area of approximately 11ha described as Lot 1 DP 390710 and Lot 2 DP 390710 and part Lot 3 DP 505292.

The proposed plan change seeks to extend and consolidate land zoned for industrial activity in Cromwell.

The land is located between Bannockburn Road and Cemetery Road, north of the Schaffer Beetle Reserve, and will extend the existing Industrial Resource Area and fronting onto State Highway 6 between the intersections of Cemetery Road and McNulty Road (see Figure 2 below).

Council land to the west of the cemetery has not been included in the plan change, other than a small strip along the boundary that will provide access opportunities to the proposed industrial land adjacent to the State Highway. This area west of the cemetery will be maintained for future expansion of the cemetery, consistent with the Cemetery Management Plan.

Figure 2 - Proposed Extension to Cromwell Industrial Resource Area

3. Discussion

Plan Change 18 gives effect to the outcome of the Cromwell Masterplan process and the significant engagement and consultation both in the community and with key stakeholders undertaken as part of that process.

Cromwell’s Industrial Resource Area is an important and strategically located transportation, processing and distribution hub for Central Otago and the wider Otago region. The industrial sector is also a significant employer in Cromwell and for the Central Otago District. It is strategically important to take the opportunity to ensure there is sufficient supply to meet future demand, and to consolidate land zoned for industrial activity to assist with management of effects such as transportation and noise.

Currently, opportunities for industrial expansion are limited, and the proposed plan change provides an opportunity to consolidate industrial zoned land in Cromwell.

The current plan change seeks to re-zone land as industrial, proposing only minor changes to the District Plan provisions in relation to access onto Bannockburn Road and State Highway 6 and a requirement for a buffer along the Bannockburn Road frontage. Access to Bannockburn Road will also be limited to a single intersection designed to be suitable for light vehicles only. All heavy traffic to the industrial extension will be through the Cemetery Road and McNulty Road intersections. No accesses or new intersections will be permitted onto State Highway 6.

Transport and noise reports have been commissioned and discussions have been initiated with Waka Kotahi in relation to transport routes and intersections with State Highway 6 at Cemetery Road and McNulty Road.

The Council is not being asked to consider the merits of the plan change, as these will be fully considered and assessed through the statutory process under the provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA).

A comprehensive review of the Industrial Chapter of the operative District Plan is underway and is expected to be notified in the latter part of this year.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Approve notification and processing of Plan Change 18 in accordance with Clause 5 of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991.

Advantages:

· The enable the release of additional industrial land reflecting the Cromwell Masterplan

· Provide for future economic growth

Disadvantages:

· No obvious disadvantages

Option 2

Not approve notification and processing of Plan Change 18 in accordance with Clause 5 of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991.

Advantages:

· No obvious advantages

Disadvantages:

· Lack of availability of land for industrial use in Cromwell

· Lack of consolidation of industrial land in Cromwell

· Not meeting community expectation to give effect to the Cromwell Masterplan outcomes

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	The plan change process under the Resource Management Act is a statutory process and requires an assessment of the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being, which will be included in the section 32 analysis.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	The costs associated with the processing of the plan change including technical expertise will be accommodated in existing budgets. Any appeals to the Environment Court would result in additional costs in terms of legal advice.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Approving that the plan change be processed reflects the outcome of the Cromwell Spatial Plan. It is consistent with the Cemetery Management Plan.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	Approving that the plan change be processed does not impact on these matters, and the merits of the plan change are considered against the RMA framework.
Risks Analysis	There are no risks associated with this request.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The plan change will be publicly notified in accordance with the First Schedule to the RMA, which provides a right of submission and further submission.

6. Next Steps

If approved, Plan Change 18 will be publicly notified in accordance with the First Schedule and be publicly notified as soon as practicable following the Council’s decision.

The Hearings Panel/appointed commissioners is/are delegated to hear submissions to requests for plan changes in Council’s Register of Delegations.

7. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Ann Rodgers	Louise van der Voort
Principal Policy Planner	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
8/09/2021	9/09/2021

Council meeting

22 September 2021

Dog Control Policy and Practices Report

1 July 2020 to 30 June 2021

Section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996 requires the Council to report on its dog control policies and practices for the financial year.

PART 1 – DOG CONTROL POLICY

The current policy was adopted in December 2020 and outlines the Council’s requirements regarding controlling dogs. This policy and the dog control bylaw are currently under review.

Key Aspects of the policy are:

• The requirement for all dogs classified as menacing to be neutered

• When taking dogs out in public, owners must use or carry a leash at all times

• Specific dog exercise areas have been identified in Alexandra, Clyde, Cromwell, Ranfurly, Naseby, Roxburgh and Pisa Moorings

• A maximum of three dogs are permitted to reside on a private property, unless granted a licence

• Specific on-leash areas have been identified around town centres and sports ground playing surfaces

PART 2 – DOG CONTROL PRACTICES

Dog Control functions were carried out by All Pest from 1 July 2020 to 9 June 2021 and by Cougar Security under contract from 10 June 2021, along with Central Otago District Council staff.

There were 6563 dogs registered during the 2020/2021 financial year, reflecting a 5.2% increase of 341 dogs. There has also been an increase to 3750 dog owners, a 7.5% rise. Dog registrations were carried out using the online Reg the Dog system, which was purchased by Council in 2021.

Service Requests

The service requests received through the year related to roaming/wandering, barking dogs, aggressive behaviour and dogs worrying stock. Roaming dogs remains the main issue reported, with a slight increase. However, there has been a significant decrease (80%) in complaints relating to aggressive dog behaviour such as worrying stock and aggressive behaviour towards people.

These areas will continue to be a focus for the team for communications, education, patrols and enforcement for the coming year.

Dog Registration Fees

Dog control and enforcement activity is funded through dog registration and impounding fees. The registration fees for the 2020-2021 registration period remained the same as the previous year:

• Working dogs $12.00

• Pet dogs $55.00

Non-payment of registration fees within the required timeframe incurs a 50% penalty added to the initial registration fee, followed by issue of infringement notices. Unpaid infringement fines are referred to the Courts for collection.

298 deceased dogs were reported in the Central Otago District over this registration period.

Microchipping

All dogs registered for the first time on or after 1 July 2006 and all dogs classified as dangerous or menacing since 1 December 2003 are required to be microchipped.

Council has been working with dog owners throughout the year to microchip dogs as required by legislation, which resulted in an 8% increase (294) in dogs being microchipped:

• 3684 dogs are microchipped

• 2580 dogs are not microchipped or no microchip number recorded in Reg the Dog

1104 of the dogs not microchipped are required to be, with the remainder currently registered as working dogs and are exempt from microchipping. This is an area of focus for 2021 – 2022, as it appears some dogs have been previously registered as working dogs by the owners incorrectly, in that they do not appear to meet the statutory definition of a working dog.

Disqualified and Probationary Owners

There was one disqualified owner issued during this period. However, this is currently subject to an appeal to the district court and is ongoing.

There are no probationary owners in the Central Otago District.

Menacing and Dangerous Dogs

There are no dogs classified as dangerous for the 2021-2022 registration period.

There are 8 dogs classified as menacing under Section 33A (observed or reported behaviour) and no dogs identified as menacing under Section 33C (based on type or breed) of the Dog Control Act in 2021/2022.

PART 3 – STATISTICAL INFORMATION

This section describes the number and type of complaints received, and the manner in which Council has responded to address the complaints and general issues regarding dogs over the last year.

Dog Control is a high area of focus for the Central Otago District Council, which strives to undertake the following key factors:

a. To have all dogs that live in the district registered

b. Ensure all dogs are kept under control at all times

c. Ongoing education of dog owners regarding their responsibilities and obligations


Category of Complaint	2020-2021	2019-2020


Public Safety related complaints

Dog attack on people - minor	1	5
Dog attack on people - serious	0	5
Dog attack on animal - minor	2	8
Dog attack on animal - serious	4	5
Dog attack on stock (worrying)	2	10
Dog rushing	20	29
Wandering/roaming dogs	204	197
General concern	0	3

Non-safety Concerns

Barking	64	60
Fouling	5	4

Attacks

When an attack occurs on a person or animal, the incident can be extremely distressing to all parties involved.

There has been a significant decrease in the number of dog attacks over the last year.

Dog control officers are continuing to educate, patrol and enforce as required.

Wandering and Roaming Dogs

The number of roaming dogs remains the largest issue for dog control officers. Roaming dogs can frighten, intimidate and annoy the community in addition to potentially attacking people and other dogs. Additional patrols and communications on responsible dog ownership were undertaken through the year.

Barking Dogs

There was a slight increase in the number of complaints received relating to barking dogs during the 2020-2021 registration period.

The Council has leaflets to raise owners’ awareness of the effects of boredom on dogs, and the nuisance aspects of barking dogs. In addition to a bark-box to use for properties with multiple complaints, bark collars are also available for owners to use at no cost.

Impoundings

There were 11 dogs impounded during the 2020-2021 registration period in the Central Otago District, which were either united with their owner or re-homed. This is a 62% reduction compared to the previous year.

Prosecutions

There were no prosecutions undertaken during the 2020/2021 financial year.

Infringements

There has been large reduction in the number of infringements issued for failure to register dogs, as officers worked through the education and enforcement process to ensure dogs are registered.


OFFENCE	2020-2021	2019-2020

Failure to Comply with classification	0	0
Failure to register dog	22	126
Failure to keep dog controlled or confined	10	12
Failure to keep dog under control	4	4
Failure to comply with any bylaws authorised by the section	0	0

22 September 2021

21.7.14 Cromwell Town Centre Project Structure

Doc ID: 551519

1. Purpose of Report

To consider the project structure and proposed high-level timeline for the planning and design phase of the Cromwell Town Centre upgrade development.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Approves the project structure and programme.

C. Approves appointment of recommended Cromwell Community Board member to the Advisory Group.

D. Appoints a councillor to the Advisory Group.

2. Background

The establishment report for the “Cromwell “Eye to the Future” Masterplan” contained a workstream for the Cromwell Town Centre. An investment logic map (ILM) was subsequently prepared for the Town Centre which identified the aim of more attractive town centres and improving commercial diversity, economic output and visitation. The ILM is attached as Appendix 1.

The Masterplan process incorporated significant community engagement throughout, including e-Updates, static displays, social media, online surveys of residents, Council’s website, public drop-in sessions, stakeholder workshops and further public survey.

In September 2018, a report was presented to the Cromwell Community Board (the Board) which identified a number of shortlisted options for the Town Centre being:

1. Upgrade existing mall

2. Mixed-use town centre

3. Commercial town centre

The Board agreed to the options and authorised community consultation. The “Let’s Talk Options” survey was consulted on from Friday 19 October until Monday 19 November 2018. 477 responses were received. In summary, 43% of respondents supported Option 3 and 36% supported Option 2. The results for the Cromwell Town Centre are attached as Appendix 2.

The Cromwell Masterplan capital projects were included in the Consultation Document for the Long-Term Plan (LTP). The Town Centre projects included demolition of some existing buildings, construction of new buildings including library, service centre and resource centre, plus hard and soft landscaping. The approximate capital cost of all Town Centre Project elements was $42 million.

The community had the opportunity to comment on three options for timing of the capital projects being:

1. Hybrid Option (Council’s preferred) - progress both the Arts and Culture Precinct and the Town Centre projects at the same time.

2. Arts, Culture & Heritage Precinct First Option.

3. Town Centre First Option.

852 submissions were received, with Option 1 - Hybrid Option receiving the most submissions (285 submitters), followed by Option 2 - Arts, Culture and Heritage Precinct First option (235 submitters).

One of the themes that came through in the comments was questioning as to whether there was a need for a new service centre. A summary of submissions relating to the Town Centre is attached as Appendix 3.

At the meeting to consider submissions to the LTP, on 1 June 2021, the Council noted the recommendation from the Cromwell Community Board on the draft 2021-31 Long Term Plan consultation document for the town centre. Council approved the funding for the town centre projects to enable further design work, noting that the library and service centre building will not be demolished. Following completion of design work, Council will review district costs in the 2023/24 annual plan.

The Council also approved the hybrid option to progress both the Arts and Culture Precinct and the Town Centre projects at the same time, and adopted the LTP on 30 June 2021.

On 8 September 2021, a report proposing the project structure and programme was presented to the Cromwell Community Board. The Board resolved:

21.7.6 Cromwell Town Centre Project Structure

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Approves the project structure.

C. Appoints Werner Murray to the Advisory Group.

D. Recommends to Council to approve the project structure and programme.

E. Recommends to Council to appoint a Councillor to the Advisory Group.

The full report is attached as Appendix 4.

3. Discussion

The Cromwell Masterplan and LTP Consultation Document provided high level concepts for capital projects. An excerpt from the LTP Consultation Document is attached as Appendix 5 outlining some of the concept ideas. No further design work has been completed to date.

A number of relevant actions/events have occurred since consultation on the Cromwell Masterplan, which may impact on how the planning for town centre progresses.

7A, 7B and 9 Murray Terrace

During 2020, Council purchased 7A, 7B and 9 Murray Terrace to give effect to the Cromwell Spatial Plan (Stage 1 of the “Eye to the Future” Cromwell Masterplan) and enable opportunity for additional commercial and retail development. The Cromwell Spatial Plan, adopted by the Board in May 2019, introduces a precinct approach to the Town Centre development in Cromwell, including a Northwest Precinct and The Mall Precinct, to encourage mixed-use development in the town centre. Included is the development of a link road within an existing carpark, enabling consolidation of “front and back” development either side of the link road within Murray Terrace. Purchasing the properties adjacent to the car park, being 7A, 7B and 9 Murray Terrace, is key to ensuring the success of the Northwest Precinct.

Commercial development

The Wooing Tree Estate has lodged an application for resource consent via the Fast Track consenting route seeking approval to develop a commercial centre across State Highway 8B, adjacent to the highway within the 30-metre buffer area. The Cromwell Spatial Plan seeks to focus commercial and retail development within the town centre precinct. Council has lodged a submission to the Fast Track consent to this effect. The Fast Track Panel has not determined when a decision will be made on the resource consent.

Stakeholder Engagement Group

A Mall Upgrade Group (MUG) comprising owners of businesses in the Town Centre was

formed in 2021 following adoption of the LTP. This group offers an opportunity to act as external stakeholder group in the Town Centre upgrade work. Council staff have attended one meeting of the group.

Further design work is now needed for the high-level concepts including incorporating changes to the Mall layout, building or upgrading the civic buildings and enlarging and upgrading public areas. The aim is to deliver a vibrant town centre that encourages people to visit and stay longer and attracts businesses, bringing greater commercial diversity and more economic development.

The LTP approved on 30 June 2021 provides for 24 months of planning (commencing 1 July 2021) to design and develop full detailed plans. Council will also need to approve the project team structure and timeline.

The project needs to be fully scoped and external parties engaged with in the development of the design. There will be a number of decision points for the Board and the Council to finalise the scale and design.

Projects of this nature require a clear and well-structured governance and decision-making arrangement, particularly as engaging the parties, scoping the project, and delivering detailed design in a 24-month timeframe is ambitious. Figure 1 (below) indicates the proposed structure for the town centre projects.

Diagram

Description automatically generated

Figure 1: Project Group structure

It is proposed that the Project Advisory Group would comprise the Project Sponsor, the Programme Manager, one councillor and one member of the Cromwell Community Board. The advisory group as well as the external stakeholder group (MUG) would consider the proposed scope developed by the architect, provide feedback, and generally be a sounding board for the project.

The Advisory Group would ensure the project is developing in the right manner and timeframe and provide a helpful discussion/advisory forum for Council staff. Establishment of the group will enable work to progress in a more timely manner than reporting back in the normal meeting cycle. Updates will be provided, and decisions referred to Cromwell Community Board and Council as appropriate.

It is important to take the community on the journey through the design phase of the project. An external stakeholder group will provide advice and feedback to the project team. As well as advice they have vested interest and need to be working in conjunction with the project team to attain a favourable outcome for all.

The project has had a high level of community interest and attracted a large number of submissions through the Masterplan and LTP processes. There has already been significant community engagement and many submitters told Council to “get on with it”.

The programme is outlined below:

Phase 1 – Design

· Engage with external stakeholder group

· Confirm project architect

· Engage and scope project (Project team and architect)

· Finalise scope with Project Advisory Group

· Develop detailed concept plans for town centre and Council buildings (Architect)

· Adopt detailed concept plan (Community Board/Council)

· Appoint construction partner (RFP)

· Early engagement with construction partner (Architect, programme manager, project manager)

· Develop detailed design for Council buildings

· Approve detailed design for Council buildings (Community Board/Council)

Phase 2 project – Construction

· From 1 July 2023

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

To approve the Cromwell Town Centre project structure and outline programme, approve Cromwell Community Board member appointment to the Advisory Group, and appoint a councillor to the Advisory Group.

Advantages:

· Enables Cromwell Town Centre project to progress

· Allows for community engagement through an External Stakeholder group

· The programme delivers the Town Centre Upgrade to the community in accordance with the Cromwell Masterplan and the LTP

· The project advisory group is an efficient way to interface with Council and the project team

Disadvantages:

· None

Option 2

To not approve the Cromwell Town Centre project structure and outline programme.

Advantages:

· Allows the Council to request alternative project structures and programmes

Disadvantages:

· Delays progressing the Cromwell Town Centre project despite significant community desire and impetus to move the project forwards

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the social and economic wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by delivering an upgrade to Cromwell town centre.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	There are no financial implications inherent in adopting a project structure.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	This decision is consistent with the “Eye to the Future” Cromwell Masterplan and the Long-Term Plan.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	The upgrade of the town centre within Cromwell’s existing developed area will not negatively impact on sustainability.
Risks Analysis	Risks will be managed by project planning and close project management.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	There has been significant consultation through the “Eye to the Future” Cromwell Masterplan and the project and funding was included in the consultation document for the 2021-31 Long-Term Plan. Engagement will continue through the External Stakeholder Group.

6. Next Steps

Implement the approved project structure and follow the outlined programme

7. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Investment Logic Map for Cromwell Town Centre ⇩

Appendix 2 - Town Centre excerpt from Cromwell "Let's Talk Options" survey analysis ⇩

Appendix 3 - Summary of submissions on Cromwell Town Centre to the Long-Term Plan ⇩

Appendix 4 - Cromwell Town Centre Project Structure - Report to Cromwell Community Board ⇩

Appendix 5 - Cromwell Town Centre excerpt from Long-Term Plan Consultation Document ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Garreth Robinson	Louise van der Voort
Property and Facilities Manager	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
6/09/2021	8/09/2021

22 September 2021

21.7.15 Request for Minister of Conservation's consent to granting of easement over Local Purpose Reserve [PRO 61-2067-E1]

Doc ID: 550576

1. Purpose of Report

To consider granting the consent of the Minister of Conservation (under delegated authority) to the granting of an easement (in gross) over Section 1 Survey Office Plan 496959 and Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town of Alexandra (Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserve) to Aurora Energy Limited.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Agrees to grant the consent of the Minister of Conservation (under delegated authority) to the granting of an easement (in gross) over Section 1 Survey Office Plan 496959 and Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town of Alexandra (Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserve) to Aurora Energy Limited.

2. Background

At its meeting of 31 August 2021, the Vincent Community Board (the Board) considered an application for an easement over Section 1 Survey Office Plan 496959 and Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town of Alexandra (Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserve.

A copy of the report to the Board dated 31 August 2021 is attached as Appendix 1.

On consideration the Board resolved (Resolution 21.7.3) as follows:

B. Agrees to grant an easement (in gross) to Aurora Energy Limited to convey electricity over Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town of Alexandra and Section 1 Survey Office Plan 496959, being Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserve, for $1, subject to:

- Aurora obtaining all consents, permits, and other rights associated with installing the cable between Dunstan Road through to Letts Gully Road.

- The easement area having a maximum width of 3 metres and being immediately adjacent to the northern boundary as shown in figure 2.

- All costs associated with preparing and registering the easement being met by Aurora Energy Limited.

- Aurora clearing the northern boundary to the satisfaction of the Parks and Recreation Manager.

- The Minister of Conservation’s consent.

As noted in Resolution 21.7.3, the granting of the easement over Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town of Alexandra and Section 1 Survey Office Plan 496959 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)(d) of the Reserves Act 1977 (the Act) authorises the granting easements over a reserve or any part thereof 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 or work 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”. Accordingly, the granting of an easement for the purpose of extending and upgrading the existing network is consistent with the Act.

Section 1 Survey Office Plan 496959 and Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town of Alexandra are Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserves. Both Sections are held subject to the Reserves Act 1977 by Council as the administering body. While installing an unground cable may appear to be at odds with the reservation of the land, the cable is being installed outside the burial area. This means the purpose of the land will not be affected by the installation of the proposed cable.

While public notice can be required when easements or other rights are granted over reserves, section 48(3) of the Act 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.

An underground cable will not materially alter the reserve or affect the rights of the public. Therefore, public consultation is not required in this instance.

Minister of Conservation’s Consent

Under the Reserves Act 1977, the Minister of Conservation’s consent is required by the administering body when granting an easement over recreation reserve. The purpose of the Minister’s consent is to ensure due process under the Act has been followed by 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 the consent of the Minister of Conservation (under delegated authority) to the granting of an easement (in gross) over Section 1 Survey Office Plan 496959 and Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town of Alexandra (Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserve) to Aurora Energy Limited.

Advantages:

· The granting of the easement will not materially alter the reserve or compromise the use of the land.

· Recognises that the purpose of the easement is consistent with the Reserves Act 1977.

· Recognises the provisions of the Instrument of Delegation dated 12 June 2013.

· Recognises that due process has been followed.

Disadvantages:

· None.

Option 2

To not grant the consent of the Minister of Conservation (under delegated authority) to the granting of an easement (in gross) over Section 1 Survey Office Plan 496959 and Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town of Alexandra (Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserve) to Aurora Energy Limited.

Advantages:

· None.

Disadvantages:

· Does not recognise that the purpose of the easement is consistent with the Reserves Act 1977.

· Does not recognise the provisions of the Instrument of Delegation dated 12 June 2013.

· Does not recognise that due process has been followed.

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 the Reserves Act 1977, and 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 and with the “Instrument of Delegation to Territorial Authorities” 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 as the legalising the existing 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)

The Significance and Engagement Policy has been considered, with none of the criteria being met or exceeded.

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 have/will be undertaken in association with having the easement registered:

1. Community Board Approval 31 August 2021

2. Consent of the Minister of Conservation 22 September 2021

3. Applicant advised of outcome Late September 2021

7. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Copy of Report to the Board dated 31 August 2021 ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Linda Stronach	Louise van der Voort
Statutory Property Officer	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
1/09/2021	7/09/2021

Council meeting

22 September 2021

21.7.3 Application for easement in favour of Aurora Energy Limited

Doc ID: 535518

1. Purpose of Report

To consider granting an easement (in gross) over Section 1 Survey Office Plan 496959 and Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town of Alexandra (Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserve) to Aurora Energy Limited.

Recommendations

That the Vincent Community Board

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

· Aurora obtaining all consents, permits, and other rights associated with installing the cable between Dunstan Road through to Letts Gully Road.

· The easement area having a maximum width of 3 metres and being immediately adjacent to the northern boundary as shown in figure 2.

· All costs associated with preparing and registering the easement being met by Aurora Energy Limited.

· Aurora clearing the northern boundary to the satisfaction of the Parks and Recreation Manager.

· The Minister of Conservation’s consent.

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

2. Background

Aurora Energy Limited (Aurora) proposes to upgrade and reinforce its existing 11kV overhead line circuits which feed the Letts Gully and Springvale Road areas.

To enable the upgrade, Aurora proposes to connect its existing Dunstan Road and Letts Gully overhead networks via an underground cable. The underground cable will be an express feeder. Installing an express feeder will allow Aurora to increase the capacity of the Letts Gully and Springvale networks.

Approximately two kilometres of underground cable will be required to link the two networks. A rough plan showing the path of the proposed cable is shown below in figure 1.

Figure 1 – Rough Plan of Proposed Cable

The proposed cable will pass through approximately eleven different parcels of land. The final cable route will depend upon the outcome of negotiations with the owners of the various parcels.

Aurora proposes to install the first 345 metres of the cable along the northern boundaries of Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town of Alexandra (Section 1 Block XXXVIII) and Section 1 Survey Office Plan (SO) 496959. A plan of the proposed cable in the two Sections is shown in red below in figure 2.

Figure 2 – Plan of the Proposed Cable in Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town of Alexandra & Section 1 SO 496959

Section 1 Block XXXVIII and Section 1 SO 496959 are Crown derived reserves. Both Sections are held subject to the Reserves Act 1977, by Council as the administering body.

Section 1 Block XXXVIII is the Alexandra Cemetery. It is Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserve. Section 1 SO 496959 is also Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserve. Section 1 SO 496959 was reclassified from Recreation Reserve to Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserve in 2017 to allow for the future expansion of the Alexandra Cemetery.

Because the cable is a new asset, its installation is not covered by the Electricity Act 1992. To install the cable, Aurora will require easements (in gross) from all affected landowners between Dunstan Road and Letts Gully.

Aurora have now applied to Council for an easement (in gross) over the area outlined in red below in figure 3.

Figure 3 – Plan of proposed easement (not to scale)

3. Discussion

Existing Occupations and Infrastructure

The Salvation Army hold a Licence to Occupy part of Section 1 SO 496959. Historically the group occupied the area marked by rapid number 105 in figure 4. The group’s new area of occupation is immediately adjacent to Dunstan Road. The group will not be affected by the proposed works, the cable, or the granting of the easement.

The Mountain Bikers of Alexandra hold a licence over a track running through the Alexandra Town Belt. The licence includes a track over Section 1 Block XXXVIII and SO 496959. This part of the track links the Town Belt to Dunstan Road. While the proposed cable is being installed the group may have to enter and exit the track from an alternate point. Once installed, the cable will have no effect on the group’s ability to use or access their track.

Section 1 Block XXXVIII and Section 1 SO 496959 sit below the Alexandra Town Belt and the town’s northern water reservoir. A rising main runs from the reservoir, along the northern boundary of the two sections, and out into Dunstan Road. A length of this pipeline runs very close to where Aurora proposes to install its cable. A plan of the pipeline is shown below in figure 4.

Figure 4 – Northern Reservoir and Associated Infrastructure

Aurora have used ground penetrating sonar to identify and peg the exact location and depth of rising main. Aurora have advised that they can work around the rising main to install their cable. The Lake Dunstan Water Supply main and the cemetery’s water supply will not be affected by the installation of the proposed cable.

Cemetery Requirements

As noted previously, Section 1 Block XXXVIII and Section 1 SO 496959 are both Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserves. Section 1 Block XXXVIII contains the Alexandra Cemetery. In the future, the cemetery will be expanded into Section 1 SO 496959.

Expansion plans include a buffer zone and plantings down the northern boundary of the two sections. This will create separation between the cemetery and the adjacent industrial activities.

The boundary is currently littered with rubbish, scrubby trees, and weeds. If the easement is granted, Aurora will be asked to clear the boundary and dispose of the debris to the satisfaction of the Parks and Recreation Manager.

As the proposed cable will be installed immediately adjacent to the northern boundary, it will not affect the future expansion of the cemetery.

Council Policy

Section 1 Block XXXVIII and Section 1 SO 496959 are identified on District Plan Map 2 of Council’s Operative District Plan.

Section 1 Block XXXVIII is designated as being for cemetery purposes. The underlying zoning is rural resource area. Section 1 SO 496959 is currently designated as being for recreational purposes. This designation is planned to be updated to cemetery purposes as part of the current District Plan review. The underlying zoning of Section SO 496959 is residential resource area.

The proposed works are permitted under rule 13.7.7 of the Operational District Plan as shown below:

13.7.7 Operation, maintenance, repair, upgrading and removal of network utilities

(i) The operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, reconstruction and upgrading of network utilities including the transmission network (including existing network utilities and earthworks to maintain the utility’s function) is a permitted activity.

Aurora would be responsible for obtaining, and complying with, all consents and permits associated with the installation of the proposed cable.

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 express feeder cable meets 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.

The granting of an easement (in gross) to lay underground cable along the northern boundaries of Section 1 Block XXXVIII and Section 1 SO 496959 will not materially alter the land, nor compromise its use.

Financial

Historically, easements of this nature are exchanged for a nominal rate of $1, with all costs associated with preparing and registering the easement being payable by the grantee.

As installing the cable will enable Aurora to enhance existing services it is not proposed that a fee be charged in this instance.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

To agree to grant an easement (in gross) to Aurora Energy Limited to convey electricity over Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town Of Alexandra and Section 1 Survey Office Plan 496959, being Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserve, for $1, subject to:

· Aurora obtaining all consents, permits, and other rights associated with installing the cable between Dunstan Road through to Letts Gully Road.

· The easement area having a maximum width of 3 metres and being immediately adjacent to the northern boundary as shown in figure 2.

· All costs associated with preparing and registering the easement being met by Aurora Energy Limited.

· Aurora clearing the northern boundary to the satisfaction of the Parks and Recreation Manager.

· The Minister of Conservation’s consent.

Advantages:

· Aurora will be able to install an express feeder cable and to upgrade its Letts Gully and Springvale networks.

· An easement for electrical installations is permitted under the Reserves Act 1977.

· The northern boundary will be cleared of scrubby trees, weeds, and other rubbish.

· The granting of the easement is consistent with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.

Disadvantages:

· None.

Option 2

To not grant an easement (in gross) to Aurora Energy Limited over Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town of Alexandra and Section 1 Survey Office Plan 496959.

Advantages:

· None.

Disadvantages:

· Aurora will not be able to install an express feeder cable or upgrade its Letts Gully and Springvale networks.

· The northern boundary will not be cleared of scrubby trees, weeds, or other rubbish.

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

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the economic wellbeing of the community by enabling Aurora to upgrade their Letts Gully and Springvale networks.
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 Aurora Energy 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 Operative 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 related to the decision as 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)	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 31 August 2021

2. Consent of the Minister of Conservation 22 September 2021

3. Applicant advised works approved Late September 2021

7. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Linda Stronach	Louise van der Voort
Property Officer - Statutory	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
16/08/2021	20/08/2021

22 September 2021

21.7.16 Request for Minister of Conservation's consent to the granting of a grazing lease over recreation reserve [PRO: 65-7040-L10]

Doc ID: 550601

1. Purpose of Report

To consider granting the consent of the Minister of Conservation (under delegated authority) to the granting of a grazing lease over part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Agrees to grant the consent of the Minister of Conservation (under delegated authority), to Council granting a grazing lease over 4500 square metres of Part Section 181 Block II Teviot Survey District being part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve.

2. Background

Resolution 21.3.3

At its meeting of 22 April 2021, the Teviot Valley Community Board (the Board) considered a report recommending the granting of lease over part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve.

A copy of the report to the Board dated 22 April 2021 is attached as Appendix 1.

On consideration, the Board resolved (Resolution 21.3.3) as follows:

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

B. Agrees to grant a lease over 4500 square metres of Part Section 181 Block II Teviot Survey District (recreation reserve) to the Applicant on the following terms and conditions:

· Term Five (5) Years.

· Right of Renewal One (1) of Five (5) Years.

· Rent $1 (plus GST) per annum, if demanded.

Subject to:

· The Applicant paying all costs associated with the public advertising in the Central Otago News.

· The Applicant fencing the perimeter of the lease area and using the land in conjunction with his own.

· The lease complying with the provisions of Schedule 1 of the Reserves Act 1977.

· The Minister of Conservation’s consent.

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

Consultation and Submission Process

In accordance with Resolution 21.3.3 and pursuant to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977, Council publicly advertised their Notice of Intention (to grant a grazing lease) in the Central Otago News edition of 29 April 2021.

The public notice advised that a Statement of Proposal was available in hard copy at the Alexandra Council Office or online via Council’s website.

The notice invited the public to make submissions on the proposal to grant a grazing lease over part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve.

One email referencing the public notice was received prior to the closing date of 31 May 2021.

Matter 21.7.4

In accordance with the “Register of Delegations to Community Boards, Portfolios, Committees and the Chief Executive Officer” dated 14 April 2020, Council’s Hearings Panel considered the proposal and the submission at its meeting of 10 August 2021.

A copy of the report to the Hearings Panel, dated 10 August 2021, is attached as Appendix 2.

Following deliberation, the Hearings Panel resolved (Motion 21.7.4) as follows:

21.7.4 Consideration of Submissions to Proposal to Grant Lease over Roxburgh Recreation Reserve

A report to consider submissions to a proposal to grant lease over Roxburgh Recreation Reserve and been circulated.

Also circulated was the report of the Property Officer in relation to the proposal.

RESOLVED that the report of the Property Officer be approved.

Jeffery/McPherson

3. Discussion

Due Process

For the purpose of confirming due process, the following steps have been undertaken in consideration of the proposal to grant a grazing lease over part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve:

Step Date

1. Resolution of the Teviot Valley Community Board 12 April 2021

2. Notice of Intention and Statement of Proposal Advertised 29 April 2021

3. Submission Period Closed 31 May 2021

4. Submission heard (by Hearings Panel under Delegation) 10 August 2021

The Role of the Minister of Conservation

When an administering body proposes to grant a new grazing lease over a reserve (or any part thereof) in accordance with section 73 of the Reserves Act 1977, they must obtain the consent of the Minister of Conservation.

The role of the Minister is to ensure that the provisions of the Reserves Act are applied appropriately. Those provisions include the Minister of Conservation:

· being satisfied that the reclassification or easement conforms with the provisions of the Reserves Act,

· ensuring that due process under the Reserves Act has been followed,

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

Section 10 of the Reserves 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 following rights to Council:

· The right to grant the approval of the Minister to the administering body granting a lease of recreation reserve for the purposes specified in section 73(1).

· The right to exercise all the powers of the Minister as referred to in the First Schedule that pertain.

Summary

In summarising the discussion points above, due process under the Reserves Act 1977 has been confirmed as being followed.

Accordingly, the Minister of Conservation’s consent may now be granted to the proposal outlined in Resolution 21.3.3, being to:

Grant a lease over 4500 square metres of Part Section 181 Block II Teviot Survey District (recreation reserve) to the Applicant on the following terms and conditions:

§ Term Five (5) Years.

§ Right of Renewal One (1) of Five (5) Years.

§ Rent $1 (plus GST) per annum, if demanded.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

To grant the consent of the Minister of Conservation (under delegated authority) to Council granting a grazing lease over 4500 square metres of Part Section 181 Block II Teviot Survey District being part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve.

Advantages:

· Recognises that the proposal to grant the grazing lease conforms with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.

· Recognises that due process as outlined in the Reserves Act 1977 has been followed.

· Recognises the provisions of the “Instrument of Delegation to Territorial Authority’s” dated 12 June 2013.

Disadvantages:

· None.

Option 2

To not grant the consent of the Minister of Conservation (under delegated authority) to the proposal outlined in Option 1.

Advantages:

· None.

Disadvantages:

· Does not recognise that the proposal to grant the grazing lease conforms with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.

· Does not recognise that due process as outlined in the Reserves Act 1977 has been followed.

· Does not recognise the provisions of the “Instrument of Delegation to Territorial Authorities” dated 12 June 2013.

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 the Reserves Act 1977, and 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 and with the “Instrument of Delegation to Territorial Authorities” 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 recommendation.
Risks Analysis	There are no risks to Council associated with the recommended option.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The Significance and Engagement Policy has been considered, with none of the criteria being met or exceeded. The proposal to grant a grazing lease has already been publicly advertised and consulted upon in accordance with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.

6. Next Steps

1. Resolution of Council 22 September 2021

2. Lease agreement drafted and executed October 2021

3. Lessee takes up occupation of the land November 2021

7. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Copy of Report to the Board dated 22 April 2021. ⇩

Appendix 2 - Copy of Report to the Hearings Panel dated 10 August 2021. ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Linda Stronach	Louise van der Voort
Statutory Property Officer	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
26/08/2021	7/09/2021

Council meeting

22 September 2021

21.3.3 Application to Lease Part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve

Doc ID: 527197

1. Purpose of Report

To consider an application to lease part of Part Section 181 Block II Teviot Survey District, being part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve, for grazing purposes.

Recommendations

That the Teviot Valley Community Board

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

B. Agrees to grant a lease over 4500 square metres of Part Section 181 Block II Teviot Survey District (recreation reserve) to the Applicant on the following terms and conditions:

· Term Five (5) Years

· Right of Renewal One (1) of Five (5) Years

· Rent $1 (plus GST) per annum, if demanded

Subject to:

· The Applicant paying all costs associated with the public advertising in the Central Otago News

· The Applicant fencing the perimeter of the lease area and using the land in conjunction with his own.

· The lease complying with the provisions of Schedule 1 of the Reserves Act 1977.

· The Minister of Conservation’s consent.

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

2. Background

Lease request

An application to lease part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve has been received from Kyle Ellison (the Applicant). The Applicant is an adjoining property owner. He would like to lease an area of approximately 4500 square metres of the reserve to use in conjunction with his own property.

The area of that the Applicant proposes to lease is rocky and hilly. It is overgrown broom and other noxious weeds. The Applicant plans to eradicate the broom and other weeds then fence the perimeter of the lease area. This will enable the Applicant to manage the vegetation and regrowth by running goats.

An overview of the Applicant’s property and the proposed lease area are shown below in figure 1.

Figure 1 – Overview of the Applicant’s Property and the Proposed Lease Area

Land Status

The Roxburgh Recreation Reserve has an area of approximately 87.7654 hectares. It is made up of 5 parcels of land being Lot 13 Deposited Plan (DP) 6674 and Sections 179, 190, 191, and Part Section 181, Block II Teviot Survey District. The parcels are held together in Record of Title OT15C/974.

The majority of the land is contained in Part Section 181 Block II Teviot Survey District (Part Section 181). The northern end of Part Section 181 is shown below in figure 2, thatched in blue.

Figure 2 – Northern end of Part Section 181 shown thatched in blue

The land is a Crown derived reserve. The reserve was originally granted to the Superintendent of Otago by the Crown in accordance with the provisions of the Public Reserves Act 1854. It was then vested in Council, in trust, in accordance with the Roxburgh Reserves Management Ordinance in 1875.

3. Discussion

Reserves Act

The purpose of the Reserves Act 1977 is to provide for and to protect reserves for the benefit of the community.

Section 73 of the Reserves Act 1977 (the Act) provides for the leasing of recreation reserves for farming or grazing purposes. In particular, section 73(1) states:

Where any recreation reserve or any part of such a reserve is not for the time being required for the purpose for which it was classified, or where the Minister considers it in the public interest, or where the administering body of any recreation reserve has decided under section 53(1)(a)(ii) that it is necessary or desirable to farm or graze the reserve or any part thereof, leases of the reserve or of any part thereof may be granted by the administering body with the prior consent of the Minister in cases where the reserve is vested in such a body, or by the Minister in any other case.

The granting of a lease for grazing purposes over the area identified in figure 1 is consistent with section 53(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. Section 53(1)(a)(ii) of the Act provides for leasing of recreation reserve by the administering body for the following purposes:

to farm or graze or afforest as a part of a development, improvement, or management programme.

As the lessee, the Applicant will be required to manage and maintain an unoccupied area of the reserve that is not currently required for recreation purposes. This will also improve the general state of the unused area of the reserve.

Section 73(3A)(a) of the Act states that every lease granted under section 73(1) shall be subject to the provisions of Schedule 1 of the Act. The provisions of Schedule 1 as the relate to section 73(1) include:

· The term: May not exceed 33 years.

· Rent: As approved by the Minister of Conservation.

· Termination: The land must be used for the purpose of grazing. If at any time the lessor is of the opinion that the land leased is not being used or is not being sufficiently used for the purpose specified in the lease, or if the lessor considers the land is required for the purpose of public recreation, the lease may be terminated.

· Compensation for improvements On termination, surrender, or expiry, the land and all improvements shall revert to the lessor without compensation being payable to the lessor.

· Erection of buildings The lease shall prohibit the erection of any building without the written consent of the Minister of Conservation.

· Protection of natural features The lease shall be required to prevent the destruction of or damage to any natural, scenic, historic, cultural, archaeological, biological, geological, or other scientific features, or indigenous flora and fauna.

· Other terms and conditions As approved by the Minister of Conservation.

Before granting any lease under subsection 73(1) the administering body must advertise their intention to grant the lease in accordance with section 119 of the Act. The public then has the right to object to or make a submission on the proposal.

All objections or submissions relating to the proposal that are compliant with section 120 of the Act must then be considered prior to the granting of any lease.

In this instance the proposal to grant the lease will be advertised in the Central Otago News. By delegated authority, Council’s Hearings Panel will consider any objections or submissions received. The Hearings Panel will then make a recommendation to the Minister of Conservation.

Effect on the Reserve

Leasing the unused area of the reserve to the Applicant will provide for its ongoing care and maintenance. The land in its current state could pose a fire hazard or result in noxious weed liabilities for council.

While granting the lease and fencing the area will exclude the public, the lease area equates to about 0.5 percent of the overall reserve. On that basis, the benefits of the proposal far outweigh any perceived loss to the public.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

To grant a lease over 4500 square metres of Part Section 181 Block II Teviot Survey District (recreation reserve) to the Applicant on the following terms and conditions:

· Term Five (5) Years

· Right of Renewal One (1) of Five (5) Years

· Rent $1 (plus GST) per annum, if demanded

Subject to:

· The Applicant paying all costs associated with the public advertising in the Central Otago News

· The Applicant fencing the perimeter of the lease area and using the land in conjunction with his own.

· The lease complying with the provisions of Schedule 1 of the Reserves Act 1977.

· The Minister of Conservation’s consent.

Advantages:

· An overgrown area of the reserve will be managed and maintained by the Applicant.

· Having a third party manage the unused area will reduce costs to Council.

· The peppercorn rental recognises the lessee’s investment in the land.

· The lease may be cancelled should the land be required for recreational purposes.

· The proposal is consistent with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.

Disadvantages:

· There are no apparent disadvantages.

Option 2

To not grant the Applicant a lease over part of Part Section 181 Block II Teviot Survey District (recreation reserve).

Advantages:

· The land would remain accessible to the public.

Disadvantages:

· The unused area would remain over overgrown and unmaintained.

· The costs associated with managing the fire risk and noxious weeds would fall to Council.

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

Option 3

To approve the granting of a lease on other terms and/or conditions determined by the Board.

Advantages:

· The Board may determine that alternative terms and or conditions are appropriate.

Disadvantages:

· Alternate terms may not be as anticipated or acceptable to the applicant.

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	While the decision does not relate to a Council service or activity, Council does have a responsibility to manage and maintain the reserve in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977. The proposed lease relates to an unused overgrown area of reserve land. The lessee will become responsible for reducing the fire hazard and managing the noxious weeds on the land.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	No negative financial implications are related to this decision. The Applicant is required to pay all costs associated with the public advertising. As responsibility for reducing the fire hazard and managing the noxious weeds will fall to the lessee there are potential savings for Council associated with the recommended decision.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	The proposal to grant the lease is consistent with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977. The proposal to publicly advertise Council’s intention to grant the lease is consistent with both the Reserves Act 1977 and with the Teviot Valley Ward Reserves Management Plan 2014.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No sustainability, environmental or climate change impacts are related to the decision as the associated works will have no material effect on the land. As the Applicant plans to eradicate the broom and other weeds and manage the vegetation and regrowth, there could also be environmental benefit.
Risks Analysis	There are no risks to Council associated with the recommended option. However, the land in its current state could pose a fire hazard or result in noxious weed liabilities.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The Significance and Engagement Policy has been considered, with none of the criteria being met or exceeded. The granting of the lease will be subject to public consultation in accordance with the sections 119 and 120 of the Reserves Act 1977.

6. Next Steps

The following steps will be taken to implement the road stopping:

1. Community Board approval 22 April 2021

2. Public Notification Period May 2021

3. Consideration of Submissions by Hearings Panel 08 June 2021

4. Application for consent of Minister of Conservation 30 June 2021

5. Lease drafted and executed July 2021

7. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Linda Stronach	Louise van der Voort
Property Officer - Statutory	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
10/03/2021	9/04/2021

Council meeting

22 September 2021

Hearings Panel

10 August 2021

Report for Decision

PROPOSAL TO GRANT LEASE OVER (PART) ROXBURGH RECREATION RESERVE

(PRO: 64-7040-00) (DOC ID: 504207)

PURPOSE OF REPORT

To consider the submissions to the proposal to grant a lease (for grazing purposes) over part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve.

BACKGROUND

At its meeting of 22 April 2021, the Teviot Valley Community Board (the Board) considered a report recommending the granting of lease over part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve.

A copy of the report to the Board dated 22 April 2021 is attached as Appendix 1.

On consideration, the Board resolved (Resolution 21.3.3) as follows:

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

B. Agrees to grant a lease over 4500 square metres of Part Section 181 Block II Teviot Survey District (recreation reserve) to the Applicant on the following terms and conditions:

· Term Five (5) Years.

· Right of Renewal One (1) of Five (5) Years.

· Rent $1 (plus GST) per annum, if demanded.

Subject to:

· The Applicant paying all costs associated with the public advertising in the Central Otago News.

· The Applicant fencing the perimeter of the lease area and using the land in conjunction with his own.

· The lease complying with the provisions of Schedule 1 of the Reserves Act 1977.

· The Minister of Conservation’s consent.

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

STATUTORY PROCESS

Reserves Act 1977

The purpose of the Reserves Act 1977 is to provide for and to protect reserves for the benefit of the community.

Section 73 of the Reserves Act 1977 (the Act) provides for the leasing of recreation reserves for farming or grazing purposes. In particular, section 73(1) states:

Where any recreation reserve or any part of such a reserve is not for the time being required for the purpose for which it was classified, or where the Minister considers it in the public interest, or where the administering body of any recreation reserve has decided under section 53(1)(a)(ii) that it is necessary or desirable to farm or graze the reserve or any part thereof, leases of the reserve or of any part thereof may be granted by the administering body with the prior consent of the Minister in cases where the reserve is vested in such a body, or by the Minister in any other case.

The granting of a lease for grazing purposes is consistent with section 53(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. Section 53(1)(a)(ii) of the Act provides for leasing of recreation reserve by the administering body for the following purposes:

to farm or graze or afforest as a part of a development, improvement, or management programme.

Before granting a lease under subsection 73(1), subsection 73(4) states that the administering body must publicly advertise the intention in accordance with section 119 of the Act with the public being invited to submit or object to the proposal.

All objections or submissions that are compliant with section 120 of the Act must then be considered prior to the granting of any lease.

In this instance the proposal to grant the lease was advertised in Council’s ‘Noticeboard’ in the Central Otago News edition of 29 April 2021. A copy of the public notice as extracted from the digital version of the edition dated 29 April 2021 is shown below in figure 1.

Figure 1 – Public Notice as extracted from digital edition of the Central Otago News dated 29 April 2021

PROVISIONS FOR CONSIDERING SUBMISSIONS

Section 120 of the Reserves Act 1977 outlines the provisions for making, receiving, and considering submissions to a proposal by the administering body to exercise its powers under section 73 of the Act.

Specifically, sections 120(1)(a – d) which are as follow:

1) Subject to sections 13 and 47, where pursuant to any requirement of this Act (except sections 24, 24A, and 41) the Minister or any administering body gives public notice of his or her or its intention to exercise any power conferred by this Act—

a) any person or organisation may object to the Minister or administering body, as the case may be, against, or make submissions with respect to, the proposal; and

b) every such objection or submission shall be made in writing, and shall be sent to the Minister or administering body at the place specified in the notice and before a date specified in the notice, being not less than 1 month after the date of publication of the notice:

provided that, where the date of publication of the notice falls within the period commencing with 10 December in any year and ending with 10 January in the next succeeding year, the date before which objections and submissions shall be made shall be not earlier than 10 February next following that period; and

c) where the objector or person or organisation making the submission so requests in his or her or its objection or submission, the Minister or administering body, as the case may be, shall give the objector or that person or organisation a reasonable opportunity of appearing before the Commissioner (in the case of a notice given by the Minister) or, as the case may be, before the administering body or a committee thereof or a person nominated by the administering body in support of his or her or its objection or submission; and

d) the Minister or the administering body, as the case may be, shall give full consideration to every objection or submission received before deciding to proceed with the proposal; and

e) where the action proposed by an administering body requires the consent or approval of the Minister and is recommended to the Minister for his or her consent or approval under any provision of this Act, the administering body shall send to the Minister with its recommendation a summary of all objections and comments received by it and a statement as to the extent to which they have been allowed or accepted or disallowed or not accepted.

SUBMISSION(S)

One email referencing the public notice was received prior to the closing date of 31 May 2021.

The respondent makes no objection to the proposal to grant the lease, nor does he note any support.

Instead, the respondent offers to occupy the said land for an alternate purpose being “to grow Ultra High density crops at 10,000 fruit poles/ha”.

A copy of the email and the response to his proposal are attached as Appendix 2.

By its nature, the email is an enquiry with an alternate proposal. This is because the respondent mistakenly thought Council for advertising for expressions of interest.

As such, the enquiry does not form a submission to the proposal and does not require the consideration of the Minister of Conservation.

RECOMMENDATION

As noted under Compliance in the report dated 22 April 2021 the granting of the lease is subject to public consultation (and consideration) in accordance with the sections 119 and 120 of the Reserves Act 1977.

That condition has since been met with no objections or other submissions compliant with section 120 of the Reserves Act 1977 being received.

Therefore, in accordance with Resolution 21.3.3 and in consideration of the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977, I recommend that Hearings Panel recommends to Council, and to the Minister of Conservation, that a grazing lease be granted over part of the Roxburgh Recreation Reserve, subject to the conditions outlined in Resolution 21.3.3.

SCHEDULE OF ATTACHMENTS

Appendix 1: Report to Teviot Valley Community Board dated 22 April 2021

Appendix 2: Copy of Electronic Submission with Response

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:
Linda Stronach	Louise Van der Voort
Statutory Property Officer	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
22/07/2021	22/07/2021

22 September 2021

21.7.17 Carry-forwards from 2020/21 and Forecast Changes for the 2021/22 Financial Year

Doc ID: 549974

1. Purpose of Report

To consider a revised budget for the financial year 2021/22 including carry-forwards from the 2020/21 financial year and forecast budget changes.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Authorises carry-forwards to complete 2020/21 capital projects of $23.3 million, as per Appendix 1 in the report.

C. Authorises Health and Safety to use $15,305 of District Reserves, being funding received in 2020/21 financial year, as per Appendix 2 in the report.

D. Authorises $30,223 use of District Reserves arising from the Libraries Partnership Programme Grant of $50,138 received in the 2020/21 financial year, as per Appendix 3 in the report.

E. Authorises $44,365 use of District Reserves from funding received in 2020/21 financial year across the four libraries to complete this year’s planned works, as per Appendix 4 in the report.

F. Authorises the Roading activity to use $600,000 of District Reserves from funding received in 2020/21 for the Clyde River Park access road and to support the Tourism Infrastructure Funding (TIF) as per Appendix 5 in the report.

G. Authorises the use of $8,000 from the Maniototo General Reserves to complete the oval irrigation as per Appendix 6 in the report.

H. Authorises $11,702 of Vallance Cottage Reserves be used to complete 2020/21 programme of work as per Appendix 7 in the report.

I. Authorises $40,000 of Central Stories Reserves to complete 2020/21 maintenance programme as per Appendix 8 in the report.

J. Authorises the CEO to use $180,000 of District Reserves from funding received in 2020/21 financial year, to continue with the organisational and cultural leadership as per Appendix 9 in the report.

K. Authorises $35,000 from District Reserves to progress the museum sector work from funding not used in 2020/21 that transferred into district reserves as per Appendix 10 in the report.

L. Authorises the use of $37,500 of District Reserves for an already externally funded shared resource of an Inland Economic Development Advisor as per Appendix 11 in the report.

M. Authorises the use of $50,000 of district reserves, required to meet the Welcoming Communities position expenditure, as per Appendix 12 in the report.

2. Background

Since setting year one of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan, there have been a number of changes to both operational and capital budgets as a result of changes in timing of the commencement or completion of projects, cost increases, or more clarity of information for Council business requirements. As in prior years, this report has combined the identified capital carry-forwards from the 2020/21 financial year, along with proposed changes to operational budgets and created a 2021/22 revised budget.

i. Carry-forwards relate to capital programmes of work that have already commenced or been committed to be undertaken in 2020/21, and approval will allow for completion of these programmes of work.

ii. The capital budget carry forwards from 2020/21 total $23.3 million of which the two most significant carry-forwards are Three Waters capital projects at $16.3 million, followed by Property at $2.9 million. A high-level breakdown of the total list of capital projects is included in Appendix 1.

iii. Revisions to operational programme of work in year one of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan includes an increase to income of $6.8 million with a corresponding decrease in expenditure of $3.9 million. This income includes an increase of $8.4 million additional grant funding from the water stimulus fund, $1.145 million in Tourism Infrastructure Funding from Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment and $265k additional income in unsubsidised roading. This increase in income is partially offset by decreased in Land Sales of $2.6 million and $436k Waka Kotahi funding.

iv. Cost of Sales related to land sales which reduced by $6.6 million. This is offset by an increase in tourism projects $853k, water supply contracts $876k, professional fees $568k related to district plan, $180k related to organisational culture, $89k across People and Culture, $58k economic development and $35k strategic projects relating to museum. Details of these key changes can be found in Appendix 1 and Appendices 2-12.

3. Discussion

COVID-19 and subsequent varying degrees of lockdown levels has not only delayed work but has also had an impact on supplies and contractors. Each level of lockdown creates a bow wave effect on work programmes. Carry-forwards requests from 2020/21 into 2021/22 year total $23.3million, resulting in a projected capital budgeted spend of $63m.

Carry-forwards have not been factored into the Annual Plan cash-flow as they did not form part of the budget. As a result, should the full $63 million of project capital works take place, Council may need to approve change in the timing of debt provisions. In such an event a separate paper will be brought to council seeking approval.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Approve carry-forwards from 2020/21 financial year into 2021/22 financial year (Appendix 1-12) along with the changes to the 2021/22 revised budget as a result of the use of reserves to meet operational and capital work programmes.

Advantages:

· Carry-forwards relate to work that has already commenced or been committed to be undertaken in 2020/21, and approval will allow for completion of these programmes of work.

· This will meet the community’s expectation of projects being completed as identified in annual or long-term planning documents.

· Revising budgets allows Council the ability to track revised income and expenditure for both operational and capital budgets and monitor the progress.

· Authorising the revised budgets allows staff the delegation to proceed with the required activities of Council.

Disadvantages:

· Significant carry-forwards in capital budgets may cause new work to be pushed out to outer years.

· Potential increases in Council debt in order to fund the additional 2021/22 capital works.

· Decrease in the updated Council reserves.

Option 2

Do not accept the proposed changes detailed in Appendices 1-12.

Advantages:

· Would allow staff to commence all the 2021/22 planned capital projects or use the 2021/22 budgets to complete the work commenced in 2020-21.

· The year one Long-term Plan budget is not revised.

· No decrease in Council reserves, or possible increase in Council debt would be required.

Disadvantages:

· Future year programmes of work are impacted creating further delays and /or non-completion of projects.

· Council staff would not have the financial delegations to continue with the required works, if there is no authority to spend last year’s budget under-spend, which have been transferred to reserves.

· Council is not meeting the intended purpose the income (rates and external funding) has been collected for.

· Potential community concern with delays in council meeting their expectations.

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities. The carry-forwards reflect work programmes already included in previous annual and long-term plans. Communities have been consulted on these programmes of work. Changes to the revised budget and use of reserves is reflecting allocating funds received in a prior year to the activity the funds were collected for initially.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	This is consistent with the programmes of work included in previous annual and long-term plans.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes, this reflects work Council has approved in the prior years and the public have been consulted on these programmes through annual and long-term planning processes.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	Already considered in previous annual and long-term planning documents.
Risks Analysis	The impact of capital budgets carry-forwards of $23.3 million into financial year 2021/22 brings the combined capital budget total for the year to $63 million. This amount of capital expenditure in one year is significantly higher than previous years and there is a possibility that it may not be achievable. Total budget expenditure of $63 million would put significant strain on Council’s cashflow.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	Not applicable as the significant programmes of work have been consulted with the community as part of previous long-term and annual plans processes.

6. Next Steps

If approved the carry-forwards and forecast will form the new revised budget and will be included in all financial reports and reported on through-out the year.

7. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Forecast 1 2021/22 Financial year ⇩

Appendix 2 - People and Culture - Health and Safety ⇩

Appendix 3 - People and Culture - Libraries Partnership Programme ⇩

Appendix 4 - People and Culture - Libraries ⇩

Appendix 5 - Infrastructure Services (Roading) Forecast ⇩

Appendix 6 - Planning and Environment Maniototo Park ⇩

Appendix 7 - Property Forecast - Vallance Cottage ⇩

Appendix 8 - Property Forecast - Central Stories ⇩

Appendix 9 - CEO - Organisational and Culture Leadership ⇩

Appendix 10 - Strategy and Policy Forecast - Museum Sector ⇩

Appendix 11 - Economic Development Forecast - Shared Resource ⇩

Appendix 12 - Community Development Forecast - Welcoming Communities ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Kim McCulloch	Leanne Macdonald
Management Accountant	Executive Manager - Corporate Services
1/09/2021	9/09/2021

Council meeting

22 September 2021

Meeting	Report Title	Resolution No	Resolution	Officer	Status
3/02/2021	Minister of Conservation's Consent - Lease to Puna Rangatahi, Alexandra and Districts Youth Trust over Roxburgh Recreation Reserve	21.1.10	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.	Property and Facilities Officer (Vincent and Teviot Valley)	11 Feb 2021 Action memo sent to Property and Facilities Officer (Vincent and Teviot) 24 Feb 2021 The lease agreement is with the Youth Trust for signing. 16 Apr 2021 Scouts Association have signed their agreement. Awaiting the Youth Trust signatories. 16 Jun 2021 Scouts have signed the agreement. Awaiting Youth Trust. A meeting has been set with the Youth Trust representative to discuss where they are at with signing the documents. 28 Jul 2021 Meeting with Youth Trust representative completed. The representative reported that the building has had new maintenance issues: a heat pump and toilet stopped working. The Youth Trust has funding application in with external funders to help with maintenance of this building and the results of these applications will determine if they will proceed or not with taking over the building ownership and ground lease. 08 Sep 2021 Awaiting the outcome of the Youth Trust's application with external funder, Transpower. Application outcome due end of September.
24/03/2021	Rural Fire Land and Buildings	21.2.6	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	Property and Facilities Officer (Vincent and Teviot Valley)	30 Mar 2021 Action memo sent to report writer. 16 Apr 2021 Documentation for the asset transfer and ground leases are in draft and under review by both parties. 16 Jun 2021 Draft documentation is with FENZ for review. Awaiting their response. 28 Jul 2021 Millers Flat Depot - agreements executed. Tarras Depot - draft documentation under review. Omakau Depot - draft documentation under review. 08 Sep 2021 Tarras Depot - lease document with Council's lawyer to under take a final review. Omakau Depot - awaiting FENZ's review of draft documentation.
24/03/2021	District Plan Review Programme	21.2.10	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approve the District Plan review programme as outlined in Appendix 1	Principal Policy Planner	30 Mar 2021 Action memo sent to report writer. 21 Apr 2021 Review of Industrial Chapter underway; RFP for Residential section review being drafted; GIS mapping project progressing; e-Plan contract approved 16 Jun 2021 Expert noise and transportation reports to support the Industrial Chapter review have been commissioned. RFP for the Residential section of the Plan closes 18 June. 28 Jul 2021 RFP for Residential Chapter Review released and contract awarded - initial workshop with stakeholders completed and review underway; GIS mapping plan change notified; ePlan contract awarded and operative District Plan in ePlan and being tested by planners; Industrial zone plan change for Cromwell (reflecting Cromwell Spatial Plan) being finalised; Industrial Chapter Review underway 08 Sep 2021 Issues and Options for review of Residential Chapter drafted; submissions on GIS mapping plan change closed - 3 in support so no hearing required; ePlan testing complete with mapping being updated and incorporated; engagement with affected landowners is upcoming as part of Industrial Chapter Review.
1/06/2021	Submissions on the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document	21.4.3	C. Adopt Council’s preferred option contained in the consultation document for the district museum function but delay implementation to enable sector feedback on alternative options to be worked through and reported back to Council within three months for final determination.	Chief Advisor	11 Jun 2021 Action memo sent to Chief Advisor. Memo sent to Executive Manager Corporate Services for information. 29 Jul 2021 Museum staff met with the sector on 17 June 2021 to discuss various options for sector-led delivery. These options are being analysed and a further sector meeting is planned for 12 August 2021. This project is on track for a decision paper being presented to the 22 September 2021 Council meeting. 07 Sep 2021 A paper is being presented to the September Council meeting. CLOSED
1/06/2021	Submissions on the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document	21.4.3	E. Agrees to the recommendation from the Cromwell Community Board on the draft 2021-31 Long-term Plan that staff are requested to investigate the request for a toilet from the Cromwell Bike park further and provide a report for consideration in a future annual or long-term plan.	Property and Facilities Officer (Cromwell)	11 Jun 2021 Action memo sent to Property and Facilities Officer Cromwell. Memo sent to Executive Manager Corporate Services and Chief Advisor for information. For action following final adoption of the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021. 06 Jul 2021 Email sent to Cromwell Bike Park committee to request an extensive survey of usage be carried out to determine what toilet facility may be required in the future. 08 Sep 2021 Cromwell Bike Park committee to undertake a usage study of the toilet facilities at the site in summer to reflect peak usage - ON HOLD
1/06/2021	Submissions on the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document	21.4.3	H. That Council notes the recommendation from the Cromwell Community Board on the draft 2021-31 Long-term Plan consultation document for the town centre. Council approves the funding for the town centre projects to enable further design work, noting that the library and service centre building will not be demolished. Following completion of design work, Council will review district costs in the 2023/24 annual plan.	Property and Facilities Manager	11 Jun 2021 Action memo sent to Property Manager. Memo sent to Executive Manager Corporate Services, Chief Advisor, Finance Manager and Corporate Accountant for information. For action following final adoption of the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021. 28 Jul 2021 Report being written, intended to be presented at Cromwell Community Board's 7 September meeting. 08 Sep 2021 Cromwell Community Board resolved in support of the report's recommendations. A report will be presented to Council at its September meeting. CLOSED
1/06/2021	Submissions on the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document	21.4.3	J. Agrees to the recommendation from the Vincent Community Board on the draft 2021-31 Long-term Plan that staff are requested to investigate a request for an extension of the junior playground at Pioneer Park and provide a report for consideration in a future annual or long-term plan.	Parks and Recreation Manager	11 Jun 2021 Action memo sent to Parks and Recreation Manager. Memo sent to Executive Manager Corporate Services and Chief Advisor for information. For action following final adoption of the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021. 28 Jul 2021 Preparatory work that will support further investigation and underpin a report for consideration is being undertaken. Funding to be considered for 2022-2023 Annual Plan. 08 Sep 2021 No further progress.
1/06/2021	Submissions on the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document	21.4.3	K. Agrees to the recommendation from the Vincent Community Board on the draft 2021-31 Long-term Plan that staff provide a report regarding a request Ice Inline for future consideration.	Parks and Recreation Manager	11 Jun 2021 Action memo sent to Parks and Recreation Manager. Memo sent to Executive Manager Corporate Services and Chief Advisor for information. For action following final adoption of the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021. 28 Jul 2021 Background data for report being collated. 08 Sep 2021 No further progress.
1/06/2021	Submissions on the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document	21.4.3	L. Agrees to the recommendation from the Vincent Community Board on the draft 2021-31 Long-term Plan that staff convene a meeting of Central Otago District Council, Central Otago Hockey Association, Central Lakes Trust and Molyneux Turf Incorporated to discuss a way forward on the proposed multi-use turf and facilities at Molyneux Park.	Parks and Recreation Manager	11 Jun 2021 Action memo sent to Parks and Recreation Manager. Memo sent to Executive Manager Corporate Services and Chief Advisor for information. For action following final adoption of the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021. 28 Jul 2021 Meeting convened on 5 July 2021. Molyneux Turf Incorporated (MTI) preparing additional information. 08 Sep 2021 Additional information not yet received from MTI.
1/06/2021	Submissions on the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document	21.4.3	N. Agrees to the recommendation from the Vincent Community Board on the draft 2021-31 Long-term Plan to proceed with the preferred option in the consultation document for the Omakau Hub.	Community and Engagement Manager	11 Jun 2021 Action memo sent to Communication and Engagement Manager. Memo sent to Executive Manager Corporate Services and Chief Advisor for information. For action following final adoption of the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021. 29 Jul 2021 A community collective is progressing the hub project. Financial input from Council is programmed for year three of the 2021-24 of the Long-term Plan. 09 Sep 2021 No further update until July 2022, when funds are due to be released.
1/06/2021	Submissions on the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document	21.4.3	P. Agrees to the recommendation from the Teviot Valley Community Board on the draft 2021-31 Long-term Plan to proceed with the preferred option in the consultation document for the Roxburgh Pool.	Parks and Recreation Manager	11 Jun 2021 Action memo sent to Parks and Recreation Manager. Memo sent to Executive Manager Corporate Services and Chief Advisor for information. For action following final adoption of the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021. 28 Jul 2021 Funding allocated pending request from Pool Committee. 08 Sep 2021 Funding not yet requested.
1/06/2021	Submissions on the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document	21.4.3	R. Agrees to the recommendation from the Maniototo Community Board on the draft 2021-31 Long-term Plan that Council request staff to consider the suggestion of filling in the ice rink with water, add planting and creating walkways and report back to the Board.	Parks and Recreation Manager	11 Jun 2021 Action memo sent to Parks and Recreation Manager. Memo sent to Executive Manager Corporate Services and Chief Advisor for information. For action following final adoption of the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021. 28 Jul 2021 Request under consideration. 08 Sep 2021 No further progress.
1/06/2021	Submissions on the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation Document	21.4.3	S. That Council requests staff progress discussions around the scope of a partnership agreement with Kā Rūnaka, via Aukaha, and report back to Council for consideration in the 2022-23 Annual Plan.	Chief Executive Officer	11 Jun 2021 Action memo sent to Chief Executive Officer. Memo sent to Executive Manager Corporate Services and Chief Advisor for information. For action following final adoption of the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021. 29 Jul 2021 The CEO has been in correspondence with Aukaha to begin discussions. 07 Sep 2021 Due to COVID-19 alert level restrictions, the planned meeting in early September did not go ahead. Staff are currently working with Aukaha to reschedule and an update will be provided once this meeting has occurred.
30/06/2021	Plan Change 17 - Operative District Plan Mapping to GIS	21.5.11	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Recommends that Plan Change 17 be notified in accordance with Clause 5 of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991	Principal Policy Planner	05 Jul 2021 Action memo sent to Principal Policy Planner. 28 Jul 2021 Plan Change 17 notified 08 Sep 2021 As this work forms part of the District Plan Review Programme, updates are being provided under Resolution 21.2.10. MATTER CLOSED.
30/06/2021	Cromwell Menz Shed - New Lease	21.5.12	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Agrees to lease the proposed area to the Cromwell Menz Shed C. Agrees to a lease over 1000m² (more or less) of land (shown in Figure 1) located on the Cromwell Transfer Station/Closed Landfill site, being part of Lot 3 DP526140. D. Authorise the Chief Executive to do all that is necessary to give effect to this resolution.	Property and Facilities Officer (Cromwell)	05 Jul 2021 Action memo sent to Property and Facilities Officer - Cromwell. 06 Jul 2021 Cromwell Menz Shed updated on resolution., Meeting arranged between property and infrastructure for 9 July to discuss actions required. 26 Jul 2021 Meeting scheduled with Menz Shed for 30 July to review and discuss Draft Lease. 17 Aug 2021 Working alongside the Menz Shed to prepare an appropriate lease 08 Sep 2021 Lease document being finalised.
30/06/2021	Cromwell Aerodrome Licence to Occupy	21.5.15	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Agrees to grant a new licence to occupy to the Central Lakes Equestrian Club over a reduced area of 7.3 hectares on the Cromwell Aerodrome Reserve for a period of five 5 years commencing from 1 July 2021. C. Approves that the licence will be under the same terms and conditions as the previous licence with the following amendments and additional conditions. I. Annual rental of $525 plus GST II. Remove requirement for the Club to mow Aerodrome runways in lieu of rental. III. Allowance for either party to terminate the licence to occupy with 6 months written notice. D. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to do all that is necessary to give effect to the resolutions.	Property Officer	05 Jul 2021 Action memo sent to Property Officer for action and finance staff for noting. 28 Jul 2021 Licence to Occupy (LTO) being prepared for Central Lakes Equestrian Club 09 Sep 2021 LTO being prepared.
30/06/2021	Revocation of Part of Greenway Reserve off Waenga Drive	21.5.4	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Agrees to progress the revocation of the Local Purpose (Amenity) Reserve classification from the specified 619m² (subject to survey) area from Lot 201 DP 359519. C. Agrees public notification of the proposed revocation in accordance with section 24(2)(b) of the Reserve Act 1977. D. Agrees (following the successful completion of the public notification process, and decision) that the Minister of Conservation is notified in writing of the Council decision and request that the specified part of Waenga Drive Greenway Reserve be approved for revocation and notified in the Gazette. E. Agrees that if reserve status of the specified Part of Waenga Drive Greenway Reserve is successfully revoked via Gazette notice, that all affected parties are notified and the underlying land is disposed of, subject to subdivision, to the adjoining landowner being Foodstuffs South Island Properties Limited on behalf of Cromwell New World. F. Agrees that the remainder of Lot 201 DP 359519 of the Waenga Drive Greenway Reserve (excluding the relevant part of Waenga Drive Greenway Reserve in recommendation B above) remain as Local Purpose (Amenity) Reserve.	Parks and Recreation Manager	05 Jul 2021 Action memo sent to Parks and Recreation Manager 19 Jul 2021 This is now progressing through the public submission stage which closes in August, with Council's Hearings Panel to hear submissions in September. 08 Sep 2021 Hearings Panel to meet remotely on 14 September.
30/06/2021	Community Grants Policy	21.5.6	That the Council A. Approves the updated grants policy. B. Agree to a formal review of the policy in late 2021.	Senior Strategy Advisor	05 Jul 2021 Action memo sent to Senior Policy Advisor for action and grants staff for noting. 08 Sep 2021 Policy updated on the website – CLOSED
30/06/2021	Roxburgh Aerodrome - Request for hangar site	21.5.16	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approves a lease for a hangar only site at Roxburgh Aerodrome to Central Heliwork Ltd for 841m2 of land described as part of Lot 3 DP 8420 situated at Teviot Road, Roxburgh. C. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to do all that is necessary to give effect to the resolutions.	Property Officer	05 Jul 2021 Action memo sent to Property Officer 28 Jul 2021 Lease document being prepared for Central Heliwork Ltd. 08 Sep 2021 Applicant informed of decision. Site pegged by surveyor. Lease document being prepared.
11/08/2021	Draft Vincent Spatial Plan Engagement Document	21.6.2	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approves the draft Vincent Spatial Plan preferred option. C. Directs staff to develop a preferred option engagement document for release to stakeholders	Principal Policy Planner	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 08 Sep 2021 Public consultation currently underway.
11/08/2021	Central Otago District Council Submission on Proposed Otago Regional Policy Statement	21.6.3	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approves the lodging of the submission on the Proposed Otago Regional Policy Statement on behalf of the Central Otago District Council. C. Directs staff to finalise the submission and lodge with the Otago Regional Council.	Principal Policy Planner	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 08 Sep 2021 Response lodged on 3 September.
11/08/2021	Cromwell Bike Park Shelter Construction	21.6.4	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Agrees to consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation to Council granting approval for the Cromwell Bike Park to erect a shelter over the existing starting ramps subject to necessary consents being sought as per Clause 7.2 of the lease.	Property and Facilities Officer (Cromwell)	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 17 Aug 2021 Cromwell Bike Park updated on the Board's resolution 08 Sep 2021 Works to be undertaken by applicant. MATTER CLOSED.
11/08/2021	Request for approval to locate a Container at Cromwell Golf Club	21.6.5	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Authorises the Cromwell Golf Club to locate a container within the area currently used for storage as indicated in Appendix 2 of the report. C. Agrees to consent (under delegated authority), on behalf of the Minister of Conservation to Council granting approval for the Cromwell Golf Club to locate a container within the area used for storage as indicated in Appendix 2 of the report.	Property and Facilities Officer (Cromwell)	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 17 Aug 2021 Cromwell Golf Club updated on Board's resolution 08 Sep 2021 Works to be undertaken by applicant. MATTER CLOSED.
11/08/2021	Cromwell Aerodrome - Refueling Facility	21.6.6	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Agrees in principle to approve the issuing of a licence to occupy to RD Petroleum for refuelling facility at Cromwell Aerodrome comprising two 10,000 litre tanks for avgas and Jet A1 fuel. C. Authorises the CEO to confirm approval of final location and design of refuelling facility to include safe and secure access for all potential users. D. Authorises the CEO to approve acceptable terms and conditions for the Licence to Occupy similar to the Licence for the refuelling facility at Alexandra Airport and do all that is necessary to give effect to the resolutions.	Property Officer	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 08 Sep 2021 Applicant informed of decision. Site meeting upcoming to finalise fuel tank position. Licence to Occupy (LTO) being drafted.
11/08/2021	WoolOn 2021 Event Request for Grant	21.6.7	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approves a grant of $10,000 to the WoolOn Creative Fashion Society Incorporated for WoolOn creative fashion events 13 – 15 August 2021. The approved grant to be applied to venue costs, master of ceremonies, event marketing and communication only and is to be funded from district general reserves.	Media and Marketing Manager	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 06 Sep 2021 Correspondence including details on discussion points, resolution, and invoicing instructions emailed 6 Sept 2021 to applicant.
11/08/2021	Waste Services Review	21.6.9	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approves the ‘Have Your Say on Our Waste Services’ document for community feedback.	Environmental Engineering Manager	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 09 Sep 2021 Consultation Underway. MATTER CLOSED
11/08/2021	Appointment of Consultants for Water and Wastewater Technical Support for 2021-24	21.6.10	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance and notes that resolutions B-G are consistent with Council’s procurement policy B. Approves the direct appointment of Stantec for the provision of technical services for water and wastewater for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period for Cromwell, Vincent and Maniototo areas. C. Approves the direct appointment of Fluent Solutions for provision of technical services for water and wastewater for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period for the Teviot area. D. Approves the direct appointment of Beca for provision of technical services for water and wastewater for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period for the Maniototo area, and reticulation renewals and operational support as required. E. Approves the direct appointment of Beale Consulting for the provision of technical services for resource consent applications for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period. F. Approves the direct appointment of Rationale for the provision of strategic planning support for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period. G. Approves the direct appointment of Mott MacDonald for hydraulic modelling for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period.	Infrastructure Finance Officer	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 08 Sep 2021 Procurement Plans being implemented as per resolution. CLOSED
11/08/2021	Naseby Water Supply	21.6.11	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Agrees to proceed with construction of a clarifier, pH correction, and flocculation tank to be funded from tranche 1 of the water stimulus funding. C. Directs staff to investigate options for an alternative water source for the Naseby water supply, including consideration of a single Maniototo water treatment site.	Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 09 Sep 2021 Clarifier being tendered. Investment Logic Map workshop for Maniototo water supplies scheduled for October.
11/08/2021	Appointment of Consultant for Bridge Structural Advice for 2021-24	21.6.12	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance and notes that resolutions B is consistent with Council’s procurement policy. B. Approves the direct appointment of Beca for the provision of structural advice for bridges for the 2021-24 Long Term Plan period.	Infrastructure Finance Officer	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 08 Sep 2021 Procurement Plans being implemented as per resolution. CLOSED
11/08/2021	Road Renaming Approval Report - Portion of Watson Road	21.6.13	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Rename a portion of Watson Road to Pīhoihoi Road.	Roading Administration Assistant	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 16 Aug 2021 Road renaming information has been passed to LINZ, affected parties notified and rapid numbers updated. CLOSED.
11/08/2021	Rural Networks South Island rent review.	21.6.14	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Agrees to: 1. Reduce the licence fee for the Gilligans Gully site from $6,000 to $4,800 per annum plus GST. 2. Reduce the licence fees for the Clyde Lookout, Earnscleugh Road, and Sugarloaf sites from $5,000, to $1,900 per annum plus GST. 3. Reduce the rental for the Alexandra Airport site from $5,000 to $1,900 per annum plus GST, subject to the lessee continuing to provide free internet services to the Airport Terminal. 4. Charge a flat fee of $600 per annum plus GST (per tenant as applicable) for power at the Gilligans Gully and Clyde Lookout sites with that fee being subject to adjustment (increase) by 10% on renewal. 5. Backdate the revised fees and charges to the commencement of the new licences and leases being 01 July 2020. C. Authorises the Chief Executive to do all that is necessary to give effect to the resolution.	Property Officer - Statutory	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 08 Sep 2021 Company invoiced in accordance with resolution. Agreements forwarded to lessee for execution.
11/08/2021	Register of Delegations	21.6.15	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approves the deletion of sections 82 - 84 from the Register of Delegations and approves the following change to the Register of Delegations;  Add the paragraph to section 81 as follows: Council has approved the Resource Management Act (RMA) delegations, as outlined in the Statutory, Regulatory and Other Delegations to Officers section of the Staff Delegations Manual. C. Adopts the Delegated Authorities Operating Schedule – Resource Management Act delegations	Risk and Procurement Manager	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 19 Aug 2021 The Staff Delegations manual will be published on the staff intranet and staff newsletter next week. The Register of Delegations to Community Boards, Portfolios, Committees, and the Chief Executive Officer will be updated on the Central Otago District Council website early next week. 07 Sep 2021 The staff delegations manual has been published on the staff intranet and been distributed via the staff newsletter. The register of delegations to community boards, portfolios, Committees, and the chief executive officer has been updated on the Central Otago District Council website. CLOSED
11/08/2021	Remuneration Authority Determination 2021	21.6.18	That the Council A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Notes the Local Government Members (2021/22) Determination 2021 which took effect from 1 July 2021. C. Approves the changes to the Elected Members’ Allowances and Reimbursement Policy as attached as Appendix 2 of the report.	Governance Manager	16 Aug 2021 Action Memo sent to report writer. 16 Aug 2021 Elected Members' Allowances and Reimbursement Policy updated. MATTER CLOSED.

Council meeting

22 September 2021

Status Report on Resolutions – Planning and Environment

Resolution 20.5.4 – July 2020

Lease of Kyeburn Reserve – Ratification

That the Council:

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

B. Agrees to grant the Kyeburn Committee a lease pursuant to Section 61(2A) of the Reserves Act 1977, on the following terms:

1. Permitted use: Community Hall

2. Term: 33 years

3. Rights of Renewal: None

4. Land Description Sec 20 Blk V11 Maniototo SD

5. Area: 0.4837 hectares

6. Rent: $1.00 per annum if requested

Subject to the Kyeburn Hall Committee

1. Becoming an Incorporated Society

2. Being responsible for all outgoings, including utilities, electricity, telephone, rubbish collection, rates, insurance and ground maintenance

STATUS ON HOLD

August – On hold until meeting able to take place

July 2021 – Meeting request to the Committee for July 2021 was declined by the Committee citing workloads and health issues of committee members. The Committee will make contact when their schedule allows.

June 2021 – May meeting was postponed until July 2021

February – April 2021 – Property and Facilities Officer - Ranfurly to meet Committee in May 2021 and discuss next steps.

January 2021 – Waiting for confirmation of their status as an Incorporated Society before issuing the lease.

September – December 2020 – Kyeburn Hall Committee to follow up progress on getting their status as an Incorporated Society, in response to email sent to them September 2020.

August 2020 – Advised Kyeburn Hall Committee of Council’s resolution and waiting for confirmation of their status as an Incorporated Society before issuing the lease.

July – Action memo sent to Property and Facilities Officer – Maniototo

Resolution 18.4.7 – April 2018

Omakau Waste Water Treatment (PRJ 04-2018-01, PRO 61-6020-00)

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

B. AGREED to enter into enter into negotiations to acquire an easement for Council over the existing gravel road described as Part Section 54 Block I Tiger Hill Survey District for right of access, and power infrastructure.

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

STATUS CLOSED

September 2021 – Easement instruments registered. MATTER CLOSED.

July 2021 – Negotiations nearing completion.

April–June 2021 – Negotiations ongoing.

March 2021 – MOU signed by CEO and returned to lawyers. Negotiations with landowner regarding easements are ongoing.

February 2020 – MOU received and with Infrastructure to review.

January 2021 – Lawyers still hope to secure additional right to convey water. MOU being drafted in interim.

December 2020 – Possibility of power being provided via MOU with Aurora being researched.

November 2020 – Landowner’s lawyer has been asked to provide an update on status –response not yet received.

September 2020 – Paperwork for power easement drafted and will be presented to property owner at the end of September.

August 2020 – Alternate options for securing access for Aurora are being investigated as the landowner has objected to the proposal.

July 2020 – Aurora have asked to be added to the agreement as a grantee as this will enable them to access and maintain network infrastructure that is located at the plant.

May 2020 – Landowner has signed & returned the amended documents, survey plan lodged with LINZ for approval, additional A & I (to cover registration of the right to convey water) being prepared.

February 2020 – Landowner has now agreed to the agreement being varied to include the right to convey water. Amended documents forwarded for execution at the end of January. No response received as yet.

January 2020 – Water Services Manager writing to the landowner to advise that the works to install power to the treatment plant are to commence later this month. If the landowner does not respond, neither the plant or the landowner will be connected to water. Refer to June 2019 update.

November 2019 – Water Services have advised that the additional right to convey (water) is on hold while a waterless option is investigated.

October 2019 – Landowner is declining to negotiate, options under PWA to be discussed.

September 2019 – Negotiations underway with Grantor regarding the proposed variation to the easement.

July 2019 – Negotiations still in progress regarding the amendment to the agreement. An offer has been made. Awaiting response.

June 2019 – New negotiations underway to have the right to convey water added to the existing agreement – registration of existing document on hold in the interim.

May 2019 – Signed Authority and Instruction Certificate returned to GCA Legal for registration.

April 2019 – With CEO for signature. Registration to follow.

March 2019 – This now sits with Property Officer – Statutory. Waiting on survey to be approved, then the Easement documents can be registered.

January 2019 – Owners have been contacted and are still reviewing documentation. Update to be provided once the documentation has been signed.

October 2018 – Awaiting owner to return the signed documents.

September 2018 – The owner has reviewed the documentation and an onsite meeting has occurred. The document has been amended where appropriate. The agreement is now with the owners to sign.

August 2018 – Owner is reviewing documentation. Extra time required, as owner had a family bereavement.

July 2018 – Easement agreement sent to owner. Owner is currently reviewing documentation.

June 2018 – Meeting with landowner has occurred. Lawyer drafting agreement for owner to review.

May 2018 – Meeting with the landowner set for late May.

April 2018 – Action memo sent to the Property and Facilities Officer – Vincent and Teviot Valley.

Resolution 17.9.9 – October 2017

Council Owned Land, Pines Plantation Area North of Molyneux Park Netball Courts, Alexandra – Consider Sale/Development by Joint Venture of Residential Land (PRO 61-2079-00)

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

B. AGREED to the sale of part of Lot 25 DP 3194 and part of Lot 6 DP 300663, located south of the Transpower corridor at the north end of Alexandra and adjacent to the Central Otago Rail trail.

C. APPROVED the Vincent Community Board’s recommendation for sale of the land by way of a joint venture development and sale of Lots, the minimum terms and conditions including:

• The joint venture partner funding development with no security registered over the land.

• Council receiving block value.

• Council receiving 50% of the net profit, with a minimum guaranteed of $500,000.

• Priority order of call on sales income:

First: Payment of GST on the relevant sale.

Second: Payment of any commission and selling costs on the relevant sale.

Third: Payment to the Developer of a fixed portion of the estimated Project Development Costs per lot as specified in the Initial Budget Estimate and as updated by the Development Costs Estimate breakdown.

Fourth: Payment of all of the balance settlement monies to Council until it has received a sum equivalent to the agreed block value.

Fifth: Payment of all of the balance settlement monies to Council until it has received an amount equivalent to the agreed minimum profit share to Council.

Sixth: Payment of all of the balance to the Developer for actual Project Costs incurred in accordance with this Agreement.

Seventh: Payment of all of the balance amounts (being the Profit Share) to be divided 50 / 50 (after allowance for payment of the Minimum Profit to Council.

D. AGREED to delegate to the Chief Executive the authority to select the preferred joint venture offer and negotiate “without prejudice” a joint venture agreement.

E. AGREED that the Chief Executive be authorised to do all necessary to achieve a joint venture agreement.

STATUS

September 2021 – Construction work progressing, although slightly behind due to COVID-19 alert level restrictions.

March–July 2021 – Work progressing according to contract.

February 2021 – 3910 contract executed. Detailed update was emailed to the board separate to this Status Report.

January 2021 – Construction has commenced. Work programme to be fully finalised in coming weeks.

December 2020 – Lawyer is drafting variation to agreement for discussion with developer.

November 2020 – Due to one of the shareholders passing away in late June the developer AC/JV Holdings has been working on a succession plan which should be finalised in early November. The need to agree succession has meant recent delays to the development but Staff are in regular contact with the contractor to ensure that works begin as soon as possible.
Once succession arrangements are confirmed it will enable construction to progress and sections to be put on market as soon as possible. To further ensure this outcome a variation to the development agreement will be prepared which will confirm stages and tighten progress requirements.

September 2020 – Work expected to start on site in October for Stage 1 and some sections will be marketed. Stage 1 completion scheduled for April 2021.

May – August 2020 – Due to Covid 19, engineering design and construction start date delayed. As of May, engineering design mostly complete and work on site expected to start soon with a staged approach. Also awaiting outcome of Shovel Ready Projects application which may affect how this development progresses.

February 2020 – The developer is working on engineering design for subdivision to be approved by Council. Work expected to start on site for subdivision in approximately 6 weeks.

January 2019 – Subdivision consent granted 18 December 2019.

November 2019 – Subdivision consent was lodged on 22 November 2019.

September – October 2019 - The affected party consultation process with NZTA, Transpower and DOC for the application to connect Dunstan Road to the State Highway is almost complete. The developer is also close to finalising the subdivision plan to allow for the resource consent to be lodged.

July 2019 – Subdivision consent expected to be lodged in August.

June 2019 – Tree felling complete. Subdivision consent expected to be lodged in July or August.

May 2019 - Tree felling commenced 20 May and is expected to take up to 6 weeks to complete. Subdivision scheme plan close to being finalised before resource consent application.

April 2019 – Security fencing has been completed. Felling of trees expected to commence in the next month. Concept plan is in final draft. Next step is for the surveyor to apply for resource consent.

March 2019 – Concept plan is in final draft. Next step is for the surveyor to convert to a scheme plan and apply for resource consent. The fencer is booked in for March.

January 2019 – Development agreement was signed by AC & JV Holdings before Christmas. Subdivision plan now being developed for resource consent application and removal of trees expected to start mid to late January.

October 2018 – The development agreement is with the developer’s accountant for information. Execution imminent.

September 2018 – The development agreement is under final review.

August 2018 – Risk and Procurement Manager finalising development agreement to allow development to proceed.

June 2018 – Preferred developer approved. All interested parties being advised week of 11 June. Agreement still being finalised to enable negotiation to proceed.

March – April 2018 – Staff finalising the preferred terms of agreement.

February 2018 – Requests received. Council staff have been finalising the preferred terms of agreement to get the best outcome prior to selecting a party, including understanding tax implications.

December 2017 – Request for Proposals was advertised in major New Zealand newspapers at the end of November 2017 with proposals due by 22 December. Three complying proposals received.

November 2017 – Council solicitor has provided first draft of RFI document for staff review.

November 2017 – Action Memo sent to the Property Officer.

Vincent Community Board Minutes

31 August 2021

Unconfirmed

MINUTES OF A mEETING OF THE Vincent Community Board
HELD REMOTELY ON MICROSOFT TEAMS AND LIVE STREAMED
ON Tuesday, 31 August 2021 COMMENCING AT 2.00 pm

PRESENT: Cr M McPherson (Chairperson), Mr R Garbutt (Deputy Chair), Dr R Browne, Cr L Claridge, Cr I Cooney, Ms A Robinson, Ms S Stirling-Lindsay

IN ATTENDANCE: T Cadogan (Mayor), S Jacobs (Chief Executive Officer), L Macdonald (Executive Manager - Corporate Services), J Muir (Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services), L van der Voort (Executive Manager - Planning and Environment), S Righarts (Chief Advisor), L Webster (Regulatory Services Manager), D Rushbrook (General Manager, Tourism Central Otago), A Mason (Media and Marketing Manager), L Stronach (Property Officer – Statutory), F Somerville (Roading Administration Assistant), M De Cort (Communications Coordinator), R Williams (Governance Manager) and W McEnteer (Governance Support Officer)

1 Apologies

There were no apologies

2 Public Forum

Karen Jefferson – Ahipara

Ms Jefferson from Ahipara spoke in support of their application for a promotional grant before responding to questions.

Jan Bean – Central Otago District Arts Trust

Ms Bean from Central Otago District Arts Trust spoke in support of their application for a promotional grant before responding to questions.

Nigel Smellie – Alexandra Blossom Festival

Mr Smellie from Alexandra Blossom Festival spoke in support of their application for a promotional grant before responding to questions.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

Committee Resolution

Moved: Garbutt

Seconded: Robinson

That the public minutes of the Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 20 July 2021 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. Mr Garbutt declared that he is a member of the Vallance Cottage working group. Cr McPherson declared an interest in item 21.7.2, Dr Browne declared in an interest in the Central Otago District Arts Trust portion of item 21.7.2, Ms Robinson declared an interest in the Winterstellar portion of item 21.7.2 and Ms Stirling Lindsay declared an interest in the Alexandra Blossom Festival portion of item 21.7.2.

5 Reports for Decisions

Note: Cr McPherson declared an interest in item 21.7.2. He left the live stream and did not take part in the discussion and did not vote on the item. Also note other conflicts for this item where declared as noted below

Note: Mr Garbutt assumed the Chair.

21.7.2 Promotion Grant Applications 2021 - 22 First Round

To consider promotion grant applications received to the first publicised round for year one of the contestable grants programme for the Long-term Plan 2021 – 2031.

After wide-ranging discussion, staff advised that the total amount of money available for promotional grants was $31,000 for the current financial year. It was agreed that each application would be considered separately.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Garbutt

Seconded: Browne

That the Vincent Community Board

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

Carried

Committee Resolution

Moved: Stirling-Lindsay

Seconded: Claridge

B. Declines a promotions grant application from the Central Otago A & P Show for Children’s Entertainment

GRA210733815 Central Otago A & P Show – Children’s Entertainment

Year 1 LTP 2021/22 applied $7,500 $0 Declined

Year 2 LTP 2022/23 applied $5,000 $0 Declined

Year 3 LTP 2023/24 applied $5,000 $0 Declined

Carried

Note: Ms Robinson declared an interest in the Winterstellar portion of this item. She did not discuss or vote on this portion of the item.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Claridge

C. Approves a promotions grant for Year 1 and Year 2, but declines a promotions grant for Year 3 for Winterstellar Matariki and Night Sky events and exhibitions.

GRA210740149 Winterstellar Matariki and Night Sky events and exhibitions

Year 1 LTP 2021/22 applied $20,000 $4,000 approved subject to establishment of appropriate entity.

Year 2 LTP 2022/23 applied $25,000 $10,000 approved subject to satisfactory report back year 1.

Year 3 LTP 2023/24 applied $15,000 $0 Declined

Carried

Note: Dr Browne declared an interest in the Central Otago Arts Trust portion of this item. He did not discuss or vote on this portion of the item.

After discussion it was agreed that the amount should be larger in the first year to make it more likely that the event would go ahead in its first year. Therefore a larger amount of $2,500 should be granted for the first year and a lesser amount of $1,000 in year two

Committee Resolution

Moved: Robinson

Seconded: Stirling-Lindsay

D. Approves a promotions grant for Year 1 and Year 2, but declines a promotions grant for Year 3 for the Central Otago District Arts Trust – Cover to Cover event.

GRA210739572 Central Otago District Arts Trust – Cover to Cover events

Year 1 LTP 2021/22 applied $4,261 $2,500 Approved
Year 2 LTP 2022/23 applied $7,218 $1,000 Approved

Year 3 LTP 2023/24 applied $9,055 $0 Declined

Carried

Committee Resolution

Moved: Claridge

Seconded: Browne

E. Declines an application for a promotions grant from Ahipara for the Ahi Festival of Light.

GRA210714507 Ahipara – Ahi Festival of Light

Year 1 LTP 2021/22 applied $25,000 $0 Declined

Year 2 LTP 2022/23 applied $10,000 $0 Declined

Year 3 LTP 2023/24 applied $5,000 $0 Declined

Carried

Note: Ms Stirling-Lindsay declared an interest in the Alexandra Blossom Festival portion of this item. She did not discuss or vote on this portion of the item.

After discussion there was majority agreement that the Blossom Festival should receive a grant in year two of its application, but not year one or three. It was noted that the Blossom Festival had been granted money to cover year one via the hardship grant application process already.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Garbutt

Seconded: Browne

F. That given the $26,000 allocation through the hardship fund process, that no additional allocation is provided for the 2021/22 FY and that $24,500 is allocated for the 2022/23 FY.

GRA210749634 Alexandra Blossom Festival Inc. Event Infrastructure Costs

Year 1 LTP 2021/22 applied $24,500 $0 Declined

Year 2 LTP 2022/23 applied $24,500 $24,500 Approved

Year 3 LTP 2023/24 Applied $24,500 $0 Declined

Carried with Cr Cooney and Ms Robinson recording their vote against

Note: Cr McPherson resumed the Chair.

21.7.3 Application for easement in favour of Aurora Energy Limited

To consider granting an easement (in gross) over Section 1 Survey Office Plan 496959 and Section 1 Block XXXVIII Town of Alexandra (Local Purpose (Cemetery) Reserve) to Aurora Energy Limited.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Garbutt

Seconded: Stirling-Lindsay

That the Vincent Community Board

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

· Aurora obtaining all consents, permits, and other rights associated with installing the cable between Dunstan Road through to Letts Gully Road.

· The easement area having a maximum width of 3 metres and being immediately adjacent to the northern boundary as shown in figure 2.

· All costs associated with preparing and registering the easement being met by Aurora Energy Limited.

· Aurora clearing the northern boundary to the satisfaction of the Parks and Recreation Manager.

· The Minister of Conservation’s consent.

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

Carried

21.7.4 Amendment to Road Name - Dunstan Park, Alexandra

To consider an amendment to road name from Hewitt Crescent to Williams Crescent.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Robinson

Seconded: Garbutt

That the Vincent Community Board

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

B. Approves amendment to road name from Hewitt Crescent to Williams Crescent.

Carried

21.7.5 Road Renaming Report - Portion of Ferraud Street

To consider a request to rename a portion of Ferraud Street, Clyde to Seaton Street.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Claridge

Seconded: Browne

That the Vincent Community Board

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

B. Recommends to Council that a portion of Ferraud Street be renamed Seaton Street.

Carried

6 Reports for Information

21.7.6 Vincent Financial Report for the Period Ending 30 June 2021

To consider the financial performance overview as at 30 June 2021.

Committee Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Browne

That the report be received.

Carried

7 Mayor’s Report

21.7.7 Mayor's Report

His Worship the Mayor gave an update on his activities since the last meeting:

· Reflected on his work with the Manukerekia Reference Group. Noted that he had addressed the recent Otago Regional Council meeting to clarify comments that had been mistakenly attributed to him regarding minimum flows in the Manuherekia River.

· Discussed Aurora Energy’s reporting requirements to the Commerce Commission. He noted that reporting requirement were not set in stone and could be updated if it was discovered that they were inadequate. Also commented that Aurora would be obliged to share complaints it received from social media to the Commerce Commission.

· Discussed the ongoing Three Waters reforms and updated members on current developments.

Committee Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Claridge

That the Vincent Community Board receives the report.

Carried

8 Chair's Report

21.7.8 Chair's Report

The Chair gave an update on activities and issues since the last meeting:

· Attended the Three Waters workshops. He noted that there was a lot of information missing about central government’s plan and that it was difficult to inform the public when that was the case.

· Noted that the information for the Vincent Spatial Plan has gone out for public consultation.

· Lamented that there were uncertainties for the ability to hold events at the moment and that this was an extra stress for organisers.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Garbutt

Seconded: Browne

That the report be received.

Carried

9 Members' Reports

21.7.9 Members' Reports

Members gave an update on activities and issues since the last meeting:

Ms Stirling-Lindsay reported on the following:

· Attended the Youth Expo in Alexandra and noted that it was very well received.

· Attended meetings for the upcoming Blossom Festival.

Ms Robinson reported on the following:

· Attended several workshops on the Three Waters reforms.

· Attended a Vallance Cottage working group meeting by Zoom.

· Attended the Jesus Christ Superstar performance in Clyde.

· Noted a recent visit to Stewart Island.

Councillor Cooney reported on the following:

· Sat in on the August Hearings Panel meeting.

· Attended a Vincent Spatial Plan workshop.

· Attended the recent Three Waters workshops.

· Noted the additional work for residential care workers during lockdown.

Councillor Claridge reported on the following:

· Attended a Council meeting.

· Attended the recent Three Waters workshops.

· Noted her attendance at the Wool On festival.

· Noted that from tomorrow funeral services would return to a maximum of ten people under Level 3 restrictions.

Dr Browne reported on the following:

· Attended the recent Three Waters workshops.

· Attended an ADMI Board meeting. Mentioned a discussion with Andy Dvay from Winterstellar around possible ideas for future events.

· Attended a session of the Creative Writers Circle.

· Planning for U3A sessions, noted the Mayor’s recent session on Three Waters reform

· Noted that he was to play at Dunedin Town Hall, but it was cancelled due to the lockdown.

Mr Garbutt reported on the following:

· Attended a meeting of the Vallance Cottage working group.

· Attended a gathering of the Alexandra Musical Society.

· Attended the LGNZ meeting on Three Waters reform.

· Has been working with the Heritage Trust to put a case together for the district museum function.

· Attended the Three Waters workshops.

Committee Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Stirling-Lindsay

That the report be received.

Carried

10 Status Reports

21.7.10 August 2021 Governance Report

To report on items of general interest, receive minutes and updates from key organisations and consider the legacy and current status report updates.

Committee Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Claridge

That the report be received.

Carried

11 Date of The Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 11 October 2021.

12 Resolution to Exclude the Public

Committee Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Robinson

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

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
Confidential Minutes of Ordinary Board Meeting	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
21.7.11 - August 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 4.17 pm and the meeting closed at 4.19 pm.

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

CHAIR / /

Maniototo Community Board Minutes

2 September 2021

Unconfirmed

MINUTES OF A meeting of the Maniototo Community Board
HELD REMOTELY VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS AND LIVE STREAMED ON Thursday, 2 September 2021 commencing AT 2.02 pm

PRESENT: Mr R Hazlett (Chair), Mr M Harris (Deputy Chair), Cr S Duncan, Ms S Umbers

IN ATTENDANCE: L Macdonald (Executive Manager - Corporate Services), J Muir (Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services), L van der Voort (Executive Manager – Property and Environment), S Righarts (Chief Advisor), I Evans (Water Services Manager), P Bain (Water Services Team Leader), M De Cort (Communications Coordinator), R Williams (Governance Manager) and W McEnteer (Governance Support Officer)

1 Apologies

Committee Resolution

Moved: Harris

Seconded: Umbers

That apologies from Mr D Helm be received and accepted.

Carried

2 PUBLIC FORUM

There was no public forum.

3 CONDOLENCES

The Chair referred to the deaths of Trevor Lowien, Frances Peattie and Gaynor Gilchrist. Members stood and observed a moment’s silence as a mark of respect.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

Committee Resolution

Moved: Umbers

Seconded: Harris

That the public minutes of the Maniototo Community Board Meeting held on 22 July 2021 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

5 Declaration of Interest

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

6 Reports for Information

Note: Cr Duncan joined the meeting at 2.04 pm.

21.6.2 Naseby Water Supply

To provide the Board with an update regarding the Naseby water supply.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Harris

Seconded: Duncan

That the report be received.

Carried

21.6.3 Maniototo Financial Report for the Period Ending 30 June 2021

To consider the financial performance overview as at 30 June 2021.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Umbers

That the report be received.

Carried

7 Mayor’s Report

21.6.4 Mayor's Report

His Worship the Mayor was not present at this meeting.

8 Chair's Report

21.6.5 Chair's Report

The Chair gave an update on activities and issues since the last meeting:

· Had meetings with people in Naseby concerned about the water. Noted the clarifier project was underway. Mentioned the water tanks that were brought in during the boil water notice. The outlet was on ground level, so it was hard to put a container under it, particularly for older folks.

· Met with Stuart Patterson regarding the demolition of the old hospital. Reported that it had passed with no objections from the heritage section and would move to the next phase in its demolition.

· Reported that there had been a lot of discussion about bridges in the Maniototo in recent times, but that nothing could be done until decisions from Council were made.

· Reported a walk round Naseby with Hawkdun Irrigation to look at potential dam sites in the area.

· Attended the opening of the new technology block at Maniototo Area School.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Harris

Seconded: Duncan

That the report be received.

Carried

9 Members' Reports

21.6.6 Members' Reports

Members gave an update on activities and issues since the last meeting:

Ms Umbers reported on the following:

· Attended a meeting of the Maniototo Arts Council. Noted that they have a full committee at this time and that their space is used by a mixed range of community groups.

· Noted that Chorus had been around to fix some of the asphalt that had been dug up during fibre cable installation.

· Mentioned that she has been urging people to engage with the current consultation on recycling and was encouraging people to watch the Mayor’s videoclips regarding Three Waters.

· Noted the repair of the entrance to the Council building in Ranfurly. She mentioned that the ramp was shabby with plaster coming away, making it look sandy. She enquired when that might be fixed. Staff agreed to follow up.

Mr Harris reported on the following:

· Attended the recent Three Waters workshops.

Councillor Duncan reported on the following:

· Attended the recent Three Waters workshops. Reflected on current issues in that space.

· Reflected on current issues with irrigation and the Otago Regional Council.

· Discussed the issue of roading work in the Maniototo and the low road shoulders. Staff would follow up on what work was programmed for any repairs.

· Mentioned the roading work being done in Clyde for the development below Miners Lane.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Harris

Seconded: Umbers

That the report be received.

Carried

10 Status Reports

21.6.7 September 2021 Governance Report

To report on items of general interest, receive minutes and updates from key organisations and consider the legacy and current status report updates.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Umbers

Seconded: Duncan

That the report be received.

Carried

11 Date of the Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 14 October 2021.

12 Resolution to Exclude the Public

Committee Resolution

Moved: Harris

Seconded: Duncan

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

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
Confidential Minutes of Ordinary Board Meeting	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
21.6.8 - September 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 2.54 pm and the meeting closed at 2.56 pm.

Cromwell Community Board Minutes

7 September 2021

Unconfirmed

MINUTES OF A mEETING OF THE Cromwell Community Board
HELD REMOTELY ON MICROSOFT TEAMS AND LIVE STREAMED ON Tuesday, 7 September 2021 COMMENCING AT 2.00 pm

PRESENT: Ms A Harrison (Chair), Mr W Murray (Deputy Chair), Mr T Buchanan, Cr N Gillespie, Cr C Laws, Cr N McKinlay, Mr B Scott

IN ATTENDANCE: T Cadogan (Mayor), S Jacobs (Chief Executive Officer), L Macdonald (Executive Manager - Corporate Services), L van der Voort (Executive Manager - Planning and Environment), S Righarts (Chief Advisor), D Rushbrook (Manager, Tourism Central Otago), G Bailey (Parks and Recreation Manager), A Mason (Media and Marketing Manager), L Stronach (Property Officer – Statutory), M Gordon (Parks Officer – Projects), M De Cort (Communications Coordinator), R Williams (Governance Manager) and W McEnteer (Governance Support Officer)

1 Apologies

There were no apologies.

2 Public Forum

Jan Bean – Central Otago District Arts Trust

Ms Bean from Central Otago District Arts Trust spoke in favour of their application for a promotions grant before responding to questions.

Carolyn Murray and Mary Jones – Cromwell Promotions Group

Ms Murray and Ms Jones from Cromwell Promotions Groups spoke in favour of their application for a promotions grant before responding to questions.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

Committee Resolution

Moved: Gillespie

Seconded: Laws

That the public minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 29 July 2021 be confirmed as a true and correct record with the following amendment to the commentary for item 21.6.4: Members sought clarification on a number of matters relating to the proposal particularly around the role of any external stakeholder group and after these discussions agreed that Ms Harrison and Cr McKinlay would be appointed as the Board’s representatives on the Advisory Group.

Carried

4 Declaration of Interest

Members were reminded of their obligations in respect of declaring any interests. Mr Murray declared an interest in item 21.7.2. He withdraw from discussion and did not vote on the item. He also declared an interest in item 21.7.3 and did not vote on the item.

5 Reports for Decisions

Note: Mr Murray declared an interest in item 21.7.2. He withdrew from discussion and did not vote on the item.

21.7.2 Promotion Grant Applications 2021 - 22 First Round

To consider promotion grant applications received to the first publicised round for year one of the Long Term Plan 2021 – 2031.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Gillespie

Seconded: McKinlay

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Approves a promotions grant to Cromwell and Districts Promotions Group and declines a promotions grant to Central Otago District Arts Trust:

1.   GRA210739436 Cromwell and Districts Promotions Group – Operational, Staff, Marketing and events as outlined in the application
Year 1 LTP 2021/22 applied $87,143    Approved Total $64,270 as detailed
                                                                $17,760 Contractor – Media and                                                                              Communications
                                                                $17,760 Contractor – Community Relations
                                                                $11,250 Advertising
                                                                $9,000 Operating Expenses (excl bad debts                                                           and donations)
                                                                $3,000 Christmas Parade traffic management
                                                                $2,000 Cherry Festival 2021
                                                                $3,500 Street Party and Fireworks 2021

Year 2 LTP 2022/23 applied $104,000 $0 declined

Year 3 LTP 2023/24 applied $106,000 $0 declined

2. GRA210750451 Central Otago District Arts Trust – Cover to Cover events

Year 1 LTP 2021/22 applied $1,600 $0 declined

Year 2 LTP 2022/23 applied $3,200 $0 declined

Year 3 LTP 2023/24 applied $4,800 $0 declined

Carried

Note: Mr Murray declared an interest in item 21.7.3. Although he joined the discussion for clarification purposes he did not vote on the item.

Note: Ms Georgie Affleck from Connect Cromwell joined the meeting for item 21.7.3.

21.7.3 Cromwell Greenway Reserves Disc Golf Proposal

To consider a proposal from Connect Cromwell to install an eighteen-hole disc golf course into Anderson Park and the associated greenway.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Scott

Seconded: Gillespie

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Agrees to the development of a disc golf course on Anderson Park and accepts the donation of the course assets from Connect Cromwell.

C. Authorises the Parks and Recreation Manager to negotiate an appropriate nine-hole course layout with Connect Cromwell.

D. Require that the facility be completed by 30 June 2023, or the approval is relinquished.

Carried with Mr Buchanan recording his vote against

21.7.4 Notice of Intention to Prepare a Reserve Management Plan

To request that the Cromwell Community Board resolve to notify its intention to prepare a Reserve Management Plan for the Bannockburn Recreation Reserve.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Buchanan

Seconded: Murray

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Agrees to notify its intention to prepare a Reserve Management Plan for the Bannockburn Recreations Reserve legally described as Section 164 Block 1 Cromwell Survey District, S O Plan 19606 – 3.5365 hectares.

Carried

21.7.5 Cromwell Memorial Hall External Stakeholder Group

To consider a recommendation from the Advisory Group for the Cromwell Town Hall/Events Centre project to proceed with a closed expression of interest for an external stakeholder group.

After discussion it was agreed that the Cromwell RSA should also be invited to form part of the stakeholder engagement group as they were a party with a significant interest in the current memorial hall.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Buchanan

Seconded: Laws

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Approves the Advisory Group’s recommendation to carry out a closed expression of interest for the stakeholder engagement group, appointing one person from each of the following groups:

· Fine Thyme Theatre Company

· Cromwell Town and Country Club

· Cromwell Cultural Centre Trust

· Cromwell Museum

· Cromwell RSA

Carried

Note: His Worship the Mayor left the meeting at 3.30 pm.

21.7.6 Cromwell Town Centre Project Structure

To consider the project structure and proposed high-level timeline for the planning and design phase of the Cromwell Town Centre upgrade development.

After discussion it was agreed that Mr Murray would join the proposed Advisory Group for the town centre project on behalf of the Board.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Laws

Seconded: Scott

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Approves the project structure.

C. Appoints Werner Murray to the Advisory Group.

D. Recommends to Council to approve the project structure and programme.

E. Recommends to Council to appoint a Councillor to the Advisory Group.

Carried

21.7.7 Proposed Road Stopping - Unnamed Road off Tarras-Cromwell Road

To consider a proposal to stop the end of an unnamed unformed road off Tarras-Cromwell Road in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1974.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Murray

Seconded: Laws

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Recommends to Council to approve the proposal to stop approximately 430 square metres (the western end) of the unnamed unformed road off Tarras – Cromwell Road as shown in figure 4 in the report, subject to:

- Public notification and advertising in accordance with the Local Government Act 1974.

- No objections being received within the objection period.

- The land being exchanged for an easement (in gross) in favour of the Central Otago Queenstown Trails Network Trust over the area marked “1” in figure 2 in the report.

- The land being amalgamated with Record of Title OT365/40 (Section 1636R Block III Tarras Survey District).

- The Central Otago Queenstown Trails Network Trust paying all other costs associated with the stopping.

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

Carried

6 Reports for Information

21.7.8 Cromwell Financial Report for the Period Ending 30 June 2021

To consider the financial performance overview as at 30 June 2021.

Committee Resolution

Moved: McKinlay

Seconded: Gillespie

That the report be received.

Carried

7 Mayor’s Report

21.7.9 Mayor's Report

His Worship the Mayor left the meeting before this item.

8 Chair's Report

21.7.10 Chair's Report

The Chair gave an update on activities and issues since the last meeting:

· Had a radio interview on Radio Central.

· Attended a conference in Rotorua for the New Zealand Principals Federation.

· Attended a meeting of the Advisory Group for the memorial hall.

· Reported her first COVID-19 vaccination in August.

· Contributed a column in the Cromwell and Districts News.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Harrison

Seconded: Murray

That the report be received.

Carried

9 Members' Reports

21.7.11 Members' Reports

Members gave an update on activities and issues since the last meeting:

Councillor Gillespie reported on the following:

· Weekly his weekly interview on Radio Central

· Attended a meeting of the Hearings Panel. Noted items in that session including consents in the Ida Valley and in Queensberry.

· Mentioned that the Hearings Panel would meet again next week. Noted that the item about the greenway in Waenga Drive would be considered at that meeting.

· Attended a Council meeting. Noted that the draft Vincent Spatial Plan was approved for public consultation. He also noted a number of Cromwell issues were considered including the proposed container at the Cromwell Golf Course and the proposed shelter at the Bike Park.

· Gave a submission to the Environment Select Committee regarding the proposed RMA reform.

Mr Murray reported on the following:

· Attended a Zoom meeting with Guardians of Lake Dunstan. Noted that they had employed a manager for the planting project between Deadmans Point and Lowburn.

Mr Scott reported on the following:

· Attended the August Cromwell business breakfast meeting

· Attended the recent workshops on Three Waters.

Mr Buchanan had nothing to report.

Councillor Laws reported on the following:

· Attended a Project Governance meeting. Noted that both the Lake Dunstan water supply and the Clyde water reticulation projects costs were projected to be higher than estimated.

· Attended a recent Council meeting.

· Attended a Historic Precinct meeting. Noted that the committee for the historic precinct had agreed to reduce rent for tenants by 50% for September and commented a similar thing was done during lockdown last year.

· Attended the recent workshops on Three Waters.

· Attended a pre-agenda meeting this morning for the upcoming council meeting.

Councillor McKinlay reported on the following:

· Attended the recent Council meeting. Among the items discussed at that meeting he noted the appointment of consultants in infrastructure and water spaces and mentioned problems with getting people to tender for projects in the current environment. He also mentioned items regarding the upgrade to the water supply at Naseby and the current consultation on waste services in the district.

· Attended the recent workshops on Three Waters.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Murray

Seconded: Laws

That the report be received.

Carried

10 Status Reports

21.7.12 September 2021 Governance Report

To report on items of general interest, receive minutes and updates from key organisations and consider the legacy and current status report updates.

Committee Resolution

Moved: McKinlay

Seconded: Laws

That the report be received.

Carried

11 Date of The Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 19 October 2021.

12 Resolution to Exclude the Public

Committee Resolution

Moved: McKinlay

Seconded: Scott

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

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
Confidential Minutes of Ordinary Board Meeting	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
21.7.13 - September 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 4.13 pm and the meeting closed at 4.23 pm.

Teviot Valley Community Board Minutes

9 September 2021

Unconfirmed

MINUTES OF A mEETING OF THE Teviot Valley Community Board
HELD IN THE Roxburgh Service Centre, 120 Scotland Street, Roxburgh
ON Thursday, 9 September 2021 COMMENCING AT 2.00 pm

PRESENT: Mr R Gunn (Chair), Ms S Feinerman (Deputy Chair), Ms C Aitchison, Mr N Dalley, Cr S Jeffery

IN ATTENDANCE: T Cadogan (Mayor), L Macdonald (Executive Manager - Corporate Services) (via Microsoft Teams), L van der Voort (Executive Manager - Planning and Environment), S Righarts (Chief Advisor), K McColloch (Corporate Accountant), L Stronach (Property Officer – Statutory) (via Microsoft Teams) M Gordon (Parks Officer – Projects) and W McEnteer (Governance Support Officer)

1 Apologies

There were no apologies.

2 Public Forum

There was no public forum.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

Committee Resolution

Moved: Dalley

Seconded: Aitchison

That the public minutes of the Teviot Valley Community Board Meeting held on 30 July 2021 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.

5 Reports for Decisions

21.7.2 Application for easement in favour of Aurora Energy Limited

To consider granting an easement (in gross) over Part Lot 42 Deposited Plan 21135 (part Lake Roxburgh Village Green) to Aurora Energy Limited.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Feinerman

Seconded: Jeffery

That the Teviot Valley Community Board

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

B. Agrees to grant an easement (in gross) to Aurora Energy Limited containing the right to convey electricity over Part Lot 42 Deposited Plan 21134 for $1, subject to:

· Aurora Energy Limited (or their agents) obtaining all consents, permits, and other rights associated with installing the cable between poles 5186 and 5185 as shown in figure 4.

· All costs associated with preparing and registering the easement being met by Aurora Energy Limited (or their agents).

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

Carried

6 Reports for Information

21.7.3 Teviot Valley Financial Report for the Period Ending 30 June 2021

To consider the financial performance overview as at 30 June 2021.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Jeffery

Seconded: Aitchison

That the report be received.

Carried

7 Mayor’s Report

21.7.4 Mayor's Report

His Worship the Mayor gave an update on his activities since the last meeting:

· Discussed Aurora Energy’s reporting requirements to the Commerce Commission. He noted that reporting requirement could be updated any time if it was discovered that they were inadequate. Also commented that Aurora would be obliged to share complaints it received on its social media pages to the Commerce Commission.

· Gave an update to members on current issues in the Three Waters space.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Gunn

Seconded: Jeffery

That the Teviot Valley Community Board receives the report.

Carried

8 Chair's Report

21.7.5 Chair's Report

The Chair gave an update on activities and issues since the last meeting:

· Attended a number of workshops concerned with Three Wates.

· Attended a site visit at the medical centre and rest home with Decarbonised Energy Solutions regarding options for replacing the current boiler.

· Attended a meeting NZ Battery Project Technical Reference Group meeting.

· Attended a meeting of the Roxburgh Pool committee.

· Attended a Zoom meetings for the Medical Services Trust.

· Attended a Zoom meeting for the Teviot Valley Rest Home.

· Updated members on a recent LGOIMA request regarding an old Ettrick reserve account.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Dalley

Seconded: Aitchison

That the report be received.

Carried

9 Members' Reports

21.7.6 Members' Reports

Members gave an update on activities and issues since the last meeting:

Ms Feinerman reported on the following:

· Attended a meeting of the Roxburgh Pool Committee. She noted a successful outcome in the grant application from Otago Community Trust and that the committee were waiting for an outcome from one further grant application. She also noted that in light of increasing prices for materials, there was a recosting exercise underway to understand any increase in costs.

· Had meeting with staff to discuss walking tracks and reported that they were looking at some upgrades.

· Attended the Three Waters workshops.

Mr Dalley reported on the following:

· Attended the Three Waters workshops.

· Attended a Series of Teviot Valley rest home meetings.

· Mentioned that he had been approached regarding rumours about possible land subdivisions in Roxburgh East. He noted that he was not aware of anything.

Councillor Jeffery reported on the following:

· Attended the weekly meetings of the Regional Labour Chairs. Also gave an update to members on the Recognised Seasonal Employer worker space.

· Attended the pre-agenda meeting for the Economic Development and Community Facilities portfolio.

· Attended a Council meeting.

· Attended a meeting of the Hearings Panel.

· Attended a number of workshops regarding Three Waters.

· Attended a meeting of the Roxburgh Medical Services Trust.

· Attended the Teviot Valley business breakfast meeting.

· Mentioned a visit to the Horseshoe Bend approach track and reported that the track was currently in poor condition. Noted a plan to improve the track.

Ms Aitchison reported on the following:

· Noted that most meetings during the lockdown period had been cancelled.

· Noted two recent service requests. One regarding potholes in Millers Flat and another regarding a culvert in Moa Flat Road.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Feinerman

Seconded: Aitchison

That the report be received.

Carried

10 Status Reports

21.7.7 September 2021 Governance Report

To report on items of general interest, receive minutes and updates from key organisations and consider the legacy and current status report updates.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Jeffery

Seconded: Aitchison

That the report be received.

Carried

11 Date of The Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 21 October 2021.

The Meeting closed at 2.54 pm.

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

CHAIR / /

[1]https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Three-waters-reform-programme/$file/transforming-the-system-for-delivering-three-waters-services-the-case-for-change-and-summary-of-proposals-30-june-2021.pdf

[2] https://www.lgnz.co.nz/assets/Three-Waters-Guidance-for-councils-over-the-next-eight-weeks-FINAL.pdf

[4] https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Three-waters-reform-programme/$file/three-waters-reform-programme-overview-a3-30-june-2021.pdf

[5] https://www.lgnz.co.nz/assets/Three-Waters-101-Infographic.pdf

[6]https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Three-waters-reform-programme/$file/heads-of-agreement-partnering-commitment-to-support-three-waters-service-delivery-reform.pdf

[7] See for example sections 5 and 14 of the LGA

[9]https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Three-waters-reform-programme/$file/farrierswier-three-waters-reform-programme-review-of-wics-methodology-and-assumptions-underpinning-economic-analysis-of-aggregation-released-june-2021.pdf

[10] Section 77 states that councils must seek to identify all reasonably practicable options and then assess the advantages and disadvantages of each option.

[13] https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Three-waters-reform-programme/$file/briefing-three-waters-review-release-of-second-stage-evidence-base-released-june-2021.pdf

[14] https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Three-waters-reform-programme/$file/transforming-the-system-for-delivering-three-waters-services-the-case-for-change-and-summary-of-proposals-30-june-2021.pdf

[15]https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Three-waters-reform-programme/$file/heads-of-agreement-partnering-commitment-to-support-three-waters-service-delivery-reform.pdf

[16] Please note that any allocation to Greater Wellington Regional Council (the only regional council affected by the proposed changes) is not clear at this stage.

[17] Due to their size and in the case of Wellington Water and Auckland’s WaterCare having already transferred water service responsibilities (to varying degrees).

[18] 15 July 2021 FAQ https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Three-waters-reform-programme/$file/three-waters-reform-programme-support-package-information-and-frequently-asked-questions.pdf


AGENDA Ordinary Council Meeting Wednesday, 22 September 2021
Date:	Wednesday, 22 September 2021
Time:	10.30 am
Location:	Ngā Hau e Whā, William Fraser Building 1 Dunorling Street, Alexandra Due to COVID-19 restrictions and limitations of the physical space, public access will be available through the livestream and Microsoft Teams. The link to the livestream will be available on the Central Otago District Council’s website.
Sanchia Jacobs Chief Executive Officer

Name	Member’s Declared Interests	Spouse/Partner’s Declared Interests	Council Appointments
Tamah Alley	Manuherikia Irrigation Co-operative (shareholder) Cromwell Youth Trust (Trustee) Blue Light Central Lakes (Chair) NZ Police (Sworn Constable) Oamaru Landing Service (OLS) (family connection) Cliff Care Ltd (family connection)	Manuherikia Irrigation Co-operative Society Ltd (shareholder) Emergency Management Otago Group Controller (employee)
Tim Cadogan	Alexandra Musical Society (member) Otago Chamber of Commerce Central Otago Advisory Group member Dunstan Golf Club (member) Alexandra Squash Club (member)	Two Paddocks (employee) 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 (Specialist - Community Relations and Environment) 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	The Message (Director) Wishart Family Trust (Trustee) Wooing Tree (Assistant Manager - Cellar Door) Daffodil Day Cromwell Coordinator	Otago Regional Council (Deputy Chair) 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) 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

Processing Charge (from 1 Aug)	Previous processing charge	Difference ($)
$195.00 / tonne	$165.00 / tonne	$30 / tonne

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the environmental well-being of communities in the present and for the future by ensuring that recycling is processed in a manner which manages environmental effects.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	Costs from Financial Year 2021/22 will result in increased expenditure of $30,000 for recycling processing charges.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	The following Council polices were considered: · Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018. · Sustainability Strategy. · Long Term Plan. · Annual performance measures.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	Considerations of transportation effects were considered in the options analysis.
Risks Analysis	There is financial risk if this request is not approved as the current budget for recycling charges will not cover the increased processing costs.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	A decision to continue to dispose of recycling at an estimated increased cost of $30,000 does not meet the significance threshold.

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Faye Somerville	Julie Muir
Roading Administration Assistant	Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services
1/09/2021	8/09/2021

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Lee Webster	Louise van der Voort
Regulatory Services Manager	Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
1/09/2021	7/09/2021

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Rebecca Williams	Sanchia Jacobs
Governance Manager	Chief Executive Officer
1/09/2021	13/09/2021

Area of work and Lead Department	Reason for work	Council role (decision and/or direction)	Expected timeframes Highlight the month(s) this is expected to come to Council in 2021
Area of work and Lead Department	Reason for work	Council role (decision and/or direction)	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
Long-term Plan 2021/31
Long-term Plan Chief Advisor/Chief Executive Officer	Legislative requirement under the Local Government Act 2002.	Decisions required: Direction on key strategic issues and budget direction required in workshops and decisions required on the Consultation Document and key supporting documentation.	W		D		D	D			W
Vincent Spatial Plan
Vincent Spatial Plan Executive Manager: Planning & Environment	Vincent Community Board and Council priority.	Decision required: Workshops and decisions required as the work progresses.								D
Cromwell Masterplan
Cromwell Masterplan Executive Manager: Planning & Environment	Cromwell Community Board and Council priority.	Decision required: Workshops and decisions required as the work progresses.			D		D	D			D
Three waters reform
Water reform Water Services Manager/Executive Manager Infrastructure	Key central government legislative priority.	Decision required: Workshops and decisions required as the reform progresses.			D		D	W			U
Council’s role in housing
Housing Chief Advisor	Key Council priority.	Decision required: Agree council’s role in the housing.		D	W	W		D					D
District Plan review
District Plan Review Planning Manager/Executive Manager Planning & Environment	Legislative requirement under the Resource Management Act 1991.	Decision required: Workshops and decisions required as this work progresses.			D			D		D				D
Lake Dunstan Water Supply and Clyde Waste Water projects
Major projects Capital Works Programme Manager; Executive Manager Infrastructure	Key Council priority (Long-term Plan 2018-28)	Decision required: Key decisions as required as the work progresses, including approval of tenders. Regular updates will be provided via the Project Governance Group.			D		D	D			U		D
Sustainability Strategy Action Plan
Sustainability Strategy Environmental Services Manager/Executive Manager Infrastructure	Key Council priority	Decision required: Updates and decisions required as this action plan is implemented.						D					U