Agenda of Teviot Valley Community Board meeting

Teviot Valley Community Board Agenda

21 October 2021

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 / /

21 October 2021

5 Reports

21.8.2 Promotion Grant Applications 2021 - 22 First Round

Doc ID: 551154

1. Purpose of the Report

To consider promotion grant applications received to the first publicised round for year one of the Long Term Plan 2021 – 2031.

Recommendations

That the Teviot Valley Community Board

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

B. Resolves to approve / decline a promotion grant to:

1. GRA210804641 Teviot Prospects Cherry Chaos Event Management and Marketing
Year 1 LTP 2021/22 applied $2,000 Recommend Approve: $500

For marketing / promotion costs only

Year 2 LTP 2022/23 applied $2,000 Recommend decline: $0

Year 3 LTP 2023/24 applied $2,000 Recommend decline: $0

2. GRA210750614 Central Otago District Arts Trust – Cover to Cover events – graphic design

Year 1 LTP 2021/22 applied $700 Recommend decline: $0

3. GRA210925282 The Cavalcade Host Town Committee Inc. - Millers Flat Cavalcade 2022

Year 1 LTP 2021/2022 applied $10,304 Recommend Approve: $1,500

For Marquee Hire

2. Background

A new grant policy was adopted by Central Otago District Council (Council) in 2019 resulting in all community board and Council promotion and community grants becoming fully contestable. Grant budgets were reviewed by each board for inclusion in the 2021 – 2031 Long Term Plan (LTP). The Teviot community board (the Board) promotion grant budget was set and approved at $2,000.

All previous grant applicants received correspondence in February 2021 advising them of the new process and when applications would be open. Print advertising and social media posts were also undertaken to ensure the community were aware of when and how to apply for grants. Applications to grants opened on 1 July 2021 and closed on 1 August 2021, utilising a new digital online application process.

Two applications were made to the Board for promotions projects as detailed below with the third application from the Miller Flat Cavalcade committee submitted outside the advertised timeframe.

The change in policy also agreed that in year one of an LTP, Council and boards have the discretion to allocate funding on a recurring basis for up to three financial years. Two applicants to this first round have requested funding for each of the three years. A criteria the Board may consider is whether or not early approval of future years funding is critical to the event or activity, or whether the decision can reasonably wait until accepting and assessing applications for the next financial year. For several reasons staff advise against multi-year grants. These reasons are covered in the discussion section of this report.

Consideration should also be given to retaining budget for future applications at the next round this financial year.

Applicant Details:

· GRA210804651 Teviot Prospects Cherry Chaos Events (Appendix 2)

Event Management and Marketing

$2,000 Year 1 – 2021/22 Recommend: $500

$2,000 Year 2 – 2022/23 Recommend: $0

$2,000 Year 3 – 2023/24 Recommend: $0

· GRA210750614 Central Otago District Arts Trust (Appendix 3)

Cover to Cover, Authors Talks – graphic design costs

$700 Year 1 – 2021/22 Recommend: $0

· GRA210925282 Cavalcade Host Town Committee Inc. (Appendix 4)

Marquee Hire – Millers Flat Cavalcade Host Town Hoedown

$10,304 Year 1 – 2021/22 Recommend: $1,500

It is noted that the Board is considering an application for funding to an event was scheduled to take place in September 2021. Due to ongoing alert level restrictions the event has been deferred till late November 2021, therefore the application is included for the Board’s consideration.

A late application was accepted from the Cavalcade Host Town Committee who has only recently tasked the seeking of grants / funding to a committee member. It was assessed that whilst this is outside the normal application deadlines, given the scale and significance of this event for the Teviot Valley, this opportunity met the grant policy criteria for ‘exceptional circumstances’ and that the Board should have the opportunity to assess the application alongside the others received.

A matrix evaluation is completed to assist the Board in measuring the applications against the policy and criteria for funding. Staff have completed the matrix indicating their assessment of the application against the policy and with consideration to the amount of funding available, and the grant policy principle to offer a second funding round within each financial year. (Appendix 1)

3. Discussion

Promotions grants provide funding that helps meet community needs / desires for events or activities that enhance the experience of locals and visitors. Funding is targeted to attracting people to visit, stay or reside in the area for the betterment of existing residents and ratepayers. Projects must align with the four well-beings and also with the district’s community outcome statements.

The grants policy gives Council and community boards the discretion to allocate funding on a recurring basis for up to three financial years. This must be done in year one of the LTP therefore the Board has received multi-year funding applications in this round. Grants approved for future years are not released until recipients have satisfactorily reported on progress and outcomes delivered from grant money already received. They do not have to reapply, however prior to approval of future year grants special consideration should be given as to whether it is critical for funding to be approved for the full three year period or not.

The funding recommendations take into account the budgeted amounts available, as well as future funding requests for year two and three of the LTP. Giving consideration to ongoing challenges as a result of the COVID 19 pandemic, financial prudence and the ability for the community to apply to the Board for grants, staff are recommending that no funding is pre-approved for years two and three of the LTP, thereby ensuring that a robust contestable round is possible. Current applicants may then reapply showing the success or otherwise of their project.

The applications received for the 2021/2022 financial year total more than the total unallocated funding available for distribution i.e. Total of all applications equals $13,004 vs total promotions budget available of $2,000. Should the Board wish to support and approve funding to applicants at a level that is greater than the existing budget, the overspend would need to be funded from the Board reserves but this is not financially prudent.

The requested dollar value of applications for the two following financial years, if approved in full, would fully commit the amount approved in the LTP budgets and therefore limiting the Board’s ability to offer a grant round again until the first round of the next Long-Term Plan in 2024. When assessing the applications for future years staff have remained cognisant of the principles of the grants programme which is to provide a robust contestable process enabling decision makers to compare the relative merits of the proposals and allocate grants as fairly as possible.

Should the Board choose to fully allocate the promotions budget for the current year plus years two and three of the LTP, this would result in no further opportunity to facilitate a publicised funding round for future years without adjusting budgets and having them approved in each year’s annual plan process. The risk being that a new project or event would be unable to seek the Board’s support through its normal grants programme. Fully committing the grants budgets in advance also creates less flexibility to respond to adverse financial situations, such as that experienced with COVID-19 where budgets were adjusted for the 2020/21 financial year.

Staff note that some components from applications made to each of our community boards promotions grant could be considered to have district wide benefits. However as there is no Council level events funding budgeted the applications have been made to the Board where the event will take place and/or seeking a contribution for a proportion of costs to a project with district wide benefit as in the Central Otago District Arts Trust application.

Staff have reviewed each of the applications and provide comments to assist the Board with their decision making:

Applicant: GRA210804651 Teviot Prospects Cherry Chaos

Project: Cherry Chaos event management, marketing and promotion

Amount requested: $2,000 2021/2022

$2,000 2022/2023

$2,000 2023/2024

· The Cherry Chaos event has sought and received grant funding from the Board since its early beginnings. The Board approved grants of $861 in 2016, $1576 in 2017, $1500 in 2019 and $1,000 to the last event held in January 2020. This will therefore be the fifth year a grant has been sought from the Board for this event.

· The event is designed to integrate the multi-cultural community of seasonal harvest workers and the local community in a fun way at the end of the summer cherry harvest.

· The event did not take place in January 2021, and staff consider that many of the reasons for the event not proceeding will still be impacting the horticulture sector for the upcoming harvest period.

· The applicant is seeking a grant as a ‘general contribution’ to the management and marketing of the event. Staff suggest that the most appropriate element to support should the Board agree is the marketing and promotion costs, with event management being funded through other funding sources.

· Staff determine that in its current format the event is unlikely to generate increased visitation to attend the event, however there is some potential for mainstream media coverage and ‘social media’ sharing.

· Central Otago District Council recently joined the Welcoming Communities Programme and now has a part-time Welcoming Communities Officer, Deborah Beange. The committee and event manager should engage with Deborah to further enhance the event and its community outcomes.

· The COVID-19 pandemic continues to change the way that many businesses and events operate, with the horticulture sector being amongst those affected. Staff suggest that it is prudent to defer approval of future years funding at this time. The applicant may reapply in future funding rounds if still appropriate.

Applicant: GRA210750650 Central Otago Districts Arts Trust

Project: Cover to Cover Authors Talks – graphic design costs

Amount requested: $700 Year 1 – 2021/22

· The application is for a new series of events with the first originally scheduled to be held in Clyde on 26 September 2021 featuring Fiona Sussman an internationally recognised writer and winner of a NZ Booklovers Award.

· Fiona is Auckland based and at the time of writing this report, the Level four COVID-19 response was ongoing. This event has now been deferred to late November 2021 which means the Board is able to consider the application prior to the event taking place.

· The applicant is seeking proportional funding from each of the district’s boards for this project as there is currently no district wide promotion grant fund to apply to. The Committee believes this will be an event that has wider benefits to the whole district in the future. The applicant has identified elements of the event budget it is seeking support from for each board. For Teviot they are seeking support for graphic design costs.

· The current plan is to hold one event in 2021, with two events in 2022 and three events in following years. Organisers are aware of a strong community of Central Otago writers who have either published or are working on publishing books, providing a range of choices for planning the future events.

· Professional advice and assistance is being provided by Ann Villiers who is a co-founder and Trustee of the popular and successful Dunedin Writers and Readers Festival, thereby increasing the confidence that this event could develop into a successful series of events on the Central Otago calendar.

· The September 2021 event is to be a ticketed event held at Olivers in Clyde. For subsequent years there will be at least one of the planned events held in the Vincent area, with other events in locations throughout Central Otago. The draft budget supplied indicates the anticipated ticket sales, plus in-kind support will not cover all expenses.

· The event as outlined aligns with aspects of the Central Otago Tourism Strategy priorities including: Connectivity – strengthening relationships, partnerships and collaborations; Targeting for Value – delivering the greatest overall benefit to Central Otago (community, commercial, visitor and environmental); Driving Value through outstanding Visitor Experience – authentic, high touch, high value experiences.

Applicant: GRA210925282 The Cavalcade Host Town Committee

Project: Millers Flat Cavalcade (30^th Anniversary) 2022 – Marquee Hire

Amount Requested: $10,304 Year 1 – 2021/22

· This application was submitted outside the advertised funding round, however it was determined that given the significance of the event for the Teviot Valley that it met the grant policy criteria of ‘exceptional circumstance’ and therefore it should be accepted and included to allow the Board to consider the funding application alongside the others received.

· The Committee has only recently appointed a person to the role of applying for and seeking sponsorship and funding. This late appointment has contributed to the application being lodged outside the advertised funding round.

· The Committee are seeking funding towards the costs of supplying the necessary sized marquee for the finale event which will see them host over 500 people to the final hoedown, with many staying at least one night if not two in the valley.

· The Cavalcade events at Millers Flat 2022 will celebrate 30 years of cavalcades. This event has developed a New Zealand wide reputation as an iconic back country event and now offers trails that include wagon and horse riding, tramping, walking, running and mountain biking. It is an event that celebrates Central Otago’s high-country landscapes, communities and lifestyles.

· More than 400 cavalcader’s plus their supporters are expected to be welcomed into Millers Flat for a street parade, market and a hoedown where the Topp Twins and two bands will provide entertainment.

· The Cavalcade event has a reputation for attracting positive news coverage which should deliver opportunities to showcase Millers Flat and the Teviot Valley in a positive way.

· This is considered a ‘one off’ event opportunity with the potential for long-lasting promotional outcomes for the area – word of mouth, social and traditional media.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

That the Board considers the applications received and reviews and agrees the recommended grant amounts as per the assessment matrix for each of the three years applied ensuring approved grants are within budget.

That the Board allocates grants to:

GRA210804651 Teviot Prospects Cherry Chaos

$500 year 1 LTP – 2021/22 marketing and promotional costs

GRA210925282 Cavalcade Host Town Committee Inc. Millers Flat Cavalcade 2022

$1,500 year 1 LTP for Marquee Hire

That the Board declines a grant to:

GRA210804651 Teviot Prospects Cherry Chaos:

Declined $2,000 for Year 2 LTP 2022/2023

Declined $2,000 for Year 3 LTP 2023/2024

GRA210750614 Central Otago District Arts Trust for Cover to Cover events – graphic design costs:

Declined $700 Year 1 LTP – 2021/22

Advantages:

· The Board is ensuring that approved grants are allocated within the budgets.

· Declining grants for years two and three of the LTP retains the Board’s ability to support new / other initiatives within budget and offer future funding rounds.

· Approving a grant, albeit at a reduced amount, shows the Board in principle supports the project, acknowledging there are insufficient grant funds to allow higher funding.

· A reduced amount is considered more appropriate when a grant policy criteria is to support projects that have the potential to become self-sustaining. This is the fifth year a grant has been sought by Teviot Prospects for Cherry Chaos.

Disadvantages:

· The approved grant amount is insufficient to allow the applicant/s to deliver the project as planned, therefore the event / project does not go ahead, the project is reduced in scale and benefit, and/or skilled staff are not retained.

· The Board will be unable to offer a second contestable funding round in year 1 of the LTP as the budget will be fully allocated for the 2021-22 financial year.

· Grants are approved and/or declined by the Board which have a wider district benefit, therefore funding decisions could be considered as being more appropriately made at Council level.

Option 2

That the Board considers the applications received and reviews the recommended grant amounts as per the assessment matrix, approving grants in full and/or at a higher level than the amount suggested for years one to three of the LTP (2021/24).

· The Board is providing grants that better meet the level of funding the applicant is seeking in order to deliver their project successfully.

· The Board is showing support for the applicant over years one to three of the LTP providing security for future year activities.

· The Board is supporting new opportunities thereby extending the local event calendar options with new events or activities, providing additional positive economic, social and cultural value for local businesses and residents.

Disadvantages:

· Approving grants to a higher level than what is available in the budget will result in an overspend and therefore need to be funded from Board reserves. If all three applications were approved in full the Board would overspend its 2021/22 budget by the amount of $11,004. This is not advised as it is not financially prudent.

· Approving grants at a higher level may result in the Board having insufficient unallocated grants budget to facilitate a robust contestable grant round in years two and three of the LTP. This would not allow it to consider any new opportunities that may present over that timeframe.

Option 3

That the Board considers the applications received and reviews the recommended grant amounts as per the assessment matrix for each of the three years applied to. And that the Board declines all applications to years one, two and three of the LTP.

Advantages:

· Applicants declined may reapply in future rounds and the Board will therefore be making a decision based on the most current information regarding the financial status and/or success factors of the project / event.

· The Board, by declining to approve the applications in years two and three of the LTP, will enable a fully contestable funding round to be offered for each of those years. This will allow it to consider any new opportunities that may present over that timeframe.

Disadvantages:

· By decline all requested grants the applicants will be unable to deliver the project as planned, therefore the event / project is unlikely to proceed and/or will be scaled back and limit the success of the proposed event/s.

· Applicants seeking security of funding, may consider that it is not feasible to progress their activities without confirmation of funding in advance, therefore projects / events may not proceed as planned and/or fail to reach their potential to become successful ongoing events on the local calendar.

· The Board has called for applications and has unallocated funds available for distribution to projects / activities that meet the grant policy criteria.

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 provision of funding that supports community priorities.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	Yes The recommended level of funding is within the unallocated promotions grants funds in cost centre 7033 for the 2021/22. Any pre-approved grant amounts to applicants for years two and three of the Long Term Plan may not be uplifted until the applicant has reported satisfactory progress and outcomes delivered from grant money already received. Grant recipients are required to meet the accountability requirements of Council’s grant policy.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Applications are being considered in line with the Central Otago District Council grant policy and measured against the principles and objectives of that policy. The Central Otago Tourism Strategy events project specifies the following approach: Advance Central Otago as a region that is capable of delivering superb events (especially in areas related to our unfakeable assets). The projects also support the economic development strategy, Central Otago Regional Identity and its values.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	Any recipient of an approved promotion grant is required to adhere to the principles within Councils policies including sustainability, waste minimisation, smokefree etc.
Risks Analysis	Public events carry a level of risk as they bring together in one place a number of people to participate in the activities associated with the particular event. Event organisers, community groups, organisations and contractors are required to meet the necessary legislative Health and Safety requirements for their activities. The applicants have not identified within their application that a plan is in place, however Central Otago District Council’s Health, Safety and Wellbeing advisor will seek a copy of and review the plan should they deem it necessary.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The projects do not meet or exceed any of the criteria thresholds in the policy requiring public consultation. Therefore they are not considered significant.

6. Next Steps

· Applicants will be advised in writing of the Board’s decision and resolution.

· Approved grant recipients will receive details as to when and how they may provide an invoice to uplift a grant together with the appropriate resolution details and a purchase order.

7. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Grant Assessment Matrix ⇩

Appendix 2 - Teviot Prospects Cherry Chaos Event 2022 application ⇩

Appendix 3 - Central Otago District Arts Trust Cover to Cover grant application ⇩

Appendix 4 - Cavalcade Host Town Committee Millers Flat Cavalcade 2022 application ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Alison Mason	Sanchia Jacobs
Media and Marketing Manager	Chief Executive Officer
22/09/2021	12/10/2021

21 October 2021

21.8.3 Teviot Valley Community Board Community Grant Applications 2021-24 Financial Year

Doc ID: 554799

1. Purpose of Report

To consider round one of applications to the 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24 Teviot Valley Community Board General Grants fund and to determine the grant allocation of each applicant.

Recommendations

That the Teviot Valley Community Board

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

B. Agrees to withhold any grant funding for years beyond year one until the conclusion of the Grant Policy Review in November 2021.

C. Considers the following applications:

i. Roxburgh Pioneer Energy Brass Band to cover power, insurance and rates

2021/22 Requested: $2,000 Recommend Approve: $1,500

2022/23 Requested: $2,000 Recommend Decline: $0

2023/24 Requested: $2,000 Recommend Decline: $0

2. Background

The Council adopted a new grant policy in 2019, and all grant applicants now go through a contestable and transparent application process. As included in the Register of Delegations, the Community Board has a responsibility to ensure that its actions and decisions are always within the policy guidelines adopted by the Council, otherwise the Board’s decision will be by way of a recommendation to the Council. Through the 2021-2023 Long-term Plan, Teviot Valley Community Board approved a budget of $5,000 per annum for community grants. Applicants can apply for up to three years of funding, and all three financial years have $5,000 available. While the current policy allows applicants to apply for three years of funding, the Board needs to be prudent and funding all three years now may prevent new initiatives being funded 2022-23 and 2023-24. For reasons outlined in the discussion, it is not recommended to approve funding beyond 2021-22. This is the first funding round for 2021-22, with a second funding round expected to take place in the third quarter of the financial year.

To accommodate the new grant policy, all applicants who have historically received grants from the Council and community boards through the Long-term Plan were contacted. Applicants received correspondence in February 2021 advising them of the new process and when applications would be open. This correspondence 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 on a recurring basis for up to three financial years.

One application has been submitted to the Community Board for community grants, as detailed below. A matrix evaluation has been completed to assist the community board in assessing the applicant against the Grant Policy and criteria for funding. Staff have completed a matrix for each financial year, assessing the applicant against the policy. This includes consideration of the availability of funds in future years, should new applicants wish to apply, as well as consideration for the second funding round in the third quarter of the financial year (Appendix 1). A total of $2,000 has been requested for this first 2021/22 funding round; 2022/23 and 2023/24 have also both received a request of $2000 per annum.

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 assessment matrices for 2022/23 and 2023/24 demonstrate some alignment with the current purpose and eligibility criteria for the applicant, who have requested a multi-year grant, which 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. It is therefore recommended to mirror Council’s decision and wait for its conclusion before committing future funds.

· Fully committing grant budgets in advance will mean there is less flexibility to respond to adverse financial situations. For example, the community board 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.

To assist the community board with their decision-making, staff have reviewed the application and provided comment below.

Application: Roxburgh Pioneer Energy Brass Band GRA210704603

(App. 2)

Project: Operational costs

Amount Requested: 2021/22 $2,000 Recommended: $1,500

2022/23 $2,000 Recommended: $0

2023/24 $2,000 Recommended: $0

· The Board have been providing a grant to the applicant since 1996, which increased from $500 to $1,500 in 2007.

· The Roxburgh Pioneer Energy Brass Band was founded in 1882 and has been part of the Roxburgh Community for nearly 140 years.

· The group relies heavily on a grant from the Board, and does not believe it would be able to continue operating without this financial support.

· The Band performs at community events such as ANZAC Day and Blossom Festival, and travels around the district if requested.

· The application does not have a strong alignment with the criteria, but it is a long- standing organisation that serves the entire district, and brings people to Roxburgh.

· Funding is available to allocate the full amount requested, but status quo is recommended due to the lack of alignment between the application and the grant criteria.

· No explanation has been provided for the increased request in funding, though the band has received the same amount of funding from the Board since 2007.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

That the community board consider the application received and review the recommended grant amount as specified in the assessment matrix for each of the three years of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan.

That the Teviot Valley Community Board allocates a grant to the following applicant:

Financial Year	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24
Opening Balance	$5,000	$5,000	$5,000
Name of Applicant
Roxburgh Pioneer Energy Brass Band	$1,500	-	-
Total amount allocated this round:	$1,500	-	-
Total budget remaining:	$3,500	$5,000	$5,000

That the Teviot Valley Community Board declines a grant to the following applicant:

Name of Applicant	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24
Roxburgh Pioneer Energy Brass Band	-	$2,000	$2,000
Total applied for but not allocated:	$0	$2,000	$2,000

Advantages:

· The recommended allocation is within the budgets for all three years of the 2021-2031 Long-term Plan. $3,500 remains in the 2021/22 budget; $5,000 remains in the 2022/23 budget; $5,000 remains in the 2023/24 budget.

· Remaining funds are available for further funding rounds over all three years of the Long-term Plan.

· The recommendation is in line with previous years’ funding.

· The Board is showing support for the applicant by continuing to fund a long-standing community group.

Disadvantages:

· The application does not have a strong alignment with the grant criteria

· The applicant is continuing to receive an annual grant from the board, and shows no indication of becoming self-sustaining.

Option 2

The community board considers allocating different amounts of funding to applicants, in line with the grants criteria and available budget, considering 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:

· The community board has the discretion 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 considering 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 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 community board agrees on and resolves the grant amount for each applicant.

The applicants are advised in writing of the community board’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 - TVCB Assessement Matrix 2021-24.pdf ⇩

Appendix 2 - Roxburgh Pioneer Energy Brass Band Application.pdf ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Nikki Aaron	Sanchia Jacobs
Community Development Officer	Chief Executive Officer
21/09/2021	29/09/2021

21 October 2021

21.8.4 Proposed Road Stopping - Unnamed Road off Roxburgh East Road

Doc ID: 555025

1. Purpose of Report

To consider a proposal to stop part of an unnamed unformed road off Roxburgh East Road in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1974.

Recommendations

That the Teviot Valley Community Board

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

- Agrees to approve the proposal to stop the unnamed unformed road, and to legalise the existing formation of Roxburgh East Road as shown in figure 4 (Legalisation Plan) by:

Subject to:

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

- No objections being received within the objection period.

- An easement (in gross) in favour of (and as approved by) Aurora Energy Limited being registered over the areas marked ‘A’ to ‘D’ in figure 4 (Legalisation Plan).

- Council and the applicant sharing the survey costs.

- The applicant paying for the land at valuation, and all other costs associated with the stopping.

- The final survey plan being approved by the Chief Executive Officer.

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

2. Background

Roxburgh East Road starts at the Jedburgh Bridge. It runs northward to the Roxburgh Dam, which it crosses before ending at an intersection with the Fruitlands – Roxburgh Road.

Figure 1 – Overview of Roxburgh East Road (intersection with Ladysmith Road circled in red)

Just past the intersection with Ladysmith Road an unnamed unformed road (the Road) adjoins the western side of Roxburgh East Road. The Road is a short no exit ‘stub’ which protrudes into Lot 1 Deposited Plan (DP) 315688. It has an area of approximately 930 square metres.

The owner of Lot 1 DP 315688 has applied to stop the road and have it amalgamated with Record of Title 61571.

The Road, which is highlighted in red, and Lot 1 DP 315688, are shown below in figure 2.

Figure 2 – The unnamed unformed legal road off Roxburgh East Road (shown in red).

3. Discussion

Evaluation of Application

An evaluation of the proposal to stop a portion of 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 34. No part of the Road 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 is not used by members of the public for any reason.
	Does it provide the only or most convenient means of access to any existing lots?	The Road is surrounded by Lot 1 DP 315688 which is owned by the applicant. The applicant accesses his property from Roxburgh East Road some 260 metres to the south of the Road. No other lots can be accessed from the Road. Due to its proximity to the intersection of Roxburgh East and Ladysmith Roads, the Road is not suitable for forming.
	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 Road is not suitable for forming due to its proximity to the intersection of Roxburgh East and Ladysmith Roads.
Future Use	Will the road be needed in the future to connect existing roads?	The Road is a no exit road. It does offer any level of connectivity to any other legal road.
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 does not provide access to any recreational area, conservation land, or to a heritage area. The following parties have been consulted and have provided their support of the proposal to stop the Road: · Walking Access New Zealand · Central Otago Recreational Users Forum · Fish & Game Otago · CODC Parks & Reserves Manager
	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 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 type of 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?	Yes. Aurora Energy Limited (Aurora) have advised that they have a power pole and a stay pole in the Road.
Infrastructure	Can the existing services or infrastructure be protected by easements?	Yes. Easements can be created to protect Aurora’s infrastructure. Aurora’s standard easement widths are 6 metres for overhead lines and associated support structure being three metres either side of the pole(s) or wires.
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.

Roading Network

As shown in the evaluation table, the Road is not identified in the District Plan as being required for any specific use or other roading purpose. The proposal to stop the Road will have no effect on the existing roading network or other parties right of access, however.

While the application was being assessed, it was noted that Roxburgh East Road encroaches over the western boundary of Lot 1 DP 315688. The encroachment is particularly significant at the corner above the intersection with Ladysmith Road.

It was also noted that the applicant is occupying approximately 900 square metres of legal road on the southern boundary.

The encroachments, occupation, and boundary fence are shown below in figure 3.

Figure 3 – Legal boundary shown in black with the fenced boundary shown in red.

It is proposed that the existing boundary fence between points one and two be surveyed to become the new legal boundary. The applicants land on the outside of the boundary fence would then be taken for legal road. The legal road on the inside of the fence would be stopped and amalgamated with Record of Title 61571.

This would legalise both the encroachment of Roxburgh East Road and the applicant’s occupation of legal road.

A plan of the legalisation is shown below in figure 4.

Figure 4 – Legalisation Plan

Parcels ‘A’ and ‘B’, land to be taken for road, have an area of approximately 755 square metres. Parcels ‘C’ and ‘D’, the road to be stopped, have a greater area of approximately 1710 square metres.

If approved, the stopping would result in an increase to the applicant’s land holding of approximately 955 square metres. This is effectively the same as if just the Road itself were to be stopped.

Public Access

The Road does not provide access to recreational or conservation land, to a heritage area or to a waterbody.

The Road does contain infrastructure belonging to Aurora Energy Limited (Aurora). Protection for this infrastructure is discussed next.

Easements

As noted in the evaluation table, Aurora have a power pole and a stay pole in the Road. These will be surveyed and protected by registration of an easement (in gross) in favour of Aurora on the Record of Title 61571.

Aurora also have an overhead line network running through the areas marked ‘A’ and ‘B’, and a pole and a low voltage conductor in the area marked ‘D’. This infrastructure will also be surveyed and included in the aforementioned easement.

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 end 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. Typical costs include valuation, survey, legal, and consultancy fees. As this stopping will be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1974, costs will include those associated with public adverting. These include:

· having signs printed and erected 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.

As the legalisation will benefit both parties, it is proposed that the survey fees, which are estimated to be approximately $5,000 be shared between Council and the applicant.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Agrees to approve the proposal to stop the unnamed unformed road, and to legalise the existing formation of Roxburgh East Road as shown in figure 4 (Legalisation Plan) by:

1. Stopping the parcels marked ‘C’ and ‘D’, and amalgamating these with Record of Title 61571, and;

2. Taking the parcels marked ‘A’ and ‘B’ and vesting them as legal (Roxburgh East) road.

Subject to:

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

- No objections being received within the objection period.

- An easement (in gross) in favour of (and as approved by) Aurora Energy Limited being registered over the areas marked ‘A’ to ‘D’ in figure 4 (Legalisation Plan).

- Council and the applicant sharing the survey costs.

- The applicant paying for the land at valuation, and all other costs associated with the stopping.

- The final survey plan being approved by the Chief Executive.

Advantages:

· The existing formation of Roxburgh East Road (as shown in figure 4) will be legalised.

· The applicant’s occupation of the legal road will be legalised.

· Provision has been made to protection of the existing utility networks.

· Sharing the survey costs is mutually beneficial.

· The income received will be used to address this and other public roading issues.

Disadvantages:

· None.

Option 2

To not approve to the proposal to stop the unnamed unformed road, and to legalise the existing formation of Roxburgh East Road, as shown in figure 4 (Legalisation Plan).

Advantages:

· None.

Disadvantages:

· The existing formation of Roxburgh East Road (as shown in figure 4) will not be legalised.

· The applicant’s occupation of the legal road will be not legalised.

· An opportunity to share the cost of legalisation will be lost.

· Additional income will not be available to address other public roading issues.

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions

This decision promotes the economic wellbeing of the community by generating income from the disposal of land that is held, (but not required) for roading purposes, and where it has limited other use.

Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?

There are no negative financial implications associated with the recommended option.

The applicants are required to pay market value for the land, and all other associated costs.

Sale of the land will cover the share of the survey costs which are payable by Council.

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 the unnamed unformed road or to legalise the existing formation of Roxburgh East 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 to implement the road stopping:

1. Community Board Approval October 2021

2. Council Approval November 2021

3. Survey Late 2021/Early 2022

4. Survey Plan Approved March/April 2022

5. Valuation April 2022

6. Public Notification Commences April 2022

7. Public Notification Period Ends May 2022

8. Gazette notice published Mid – Late 2022

7. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Linda Stronach	Julie Muir
Statutory Property Officer	Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services
5/10/2021	11/10/2021

21 October 2021

21.8.5 Proposed Road Stopping (Partial Width) - Adjacent to 56 Ladysmith Road

Doc ID: 555183

1. Purpose of Report

To consider a proposal to stop a portion of Ladysmith Road adjacent to 56 Ladysmith Road in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Act 1981.

Recommendations

That the Teviot Valley Community Board

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

B. To recommend to Council to approve the proposal to stop an unformed portion of Ladysmith Road, being approximately 340 square metres as shown in figure 4, subject to:

- The applicant paying for the land at valuation as prescribed in the Public Works Act 1981.

- The applicant paying all other costs associated with the stopping.

- The land being amalgamated with the applicant’s Record of Title.

- An easement (in gross) in favour of (and as approved by) Aurora Energy Limited being registered on the applicant’s Record of Title.

- The final survey plan being approved by the Chief Executive Officer.

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

2. Background

Ladysmith Road (the Road) adjoins the western side of the Roxburgh East Road, about 1.8 kilometres north of the Roxburgh township. For the majority, the road is formed and sealed with the last 200 metres being rough gravel. It is a no exit road which terminates at the Clutha River Mata-Au. An overview of the Road is shown below in figure 1.

Figure 1 – Overview of Ladysmith Road.

Lot 1 Deposited Plan (DP) 537543 (Lot 1) is located at 56 Ladysmith Road. On its southern boundary, Lot 1 has a road frontage of approximately 48 metres. It is otherwise surrounded by Lot 2 DP 537543 (Lot 2). Lot 1, which has a slightly irregularly shaped boundary, is outlined in yellow below in figure 2.

Figure 2 – Lot 1 DP 22562 outlined in yellow.

The owner of Lot 1 has an agreement to purchase 550 square metres of land from the owners of Lot 2. The two parties are in the process of effecting a boundary adjustment. Once complete the land, which contains Lot 1’s driveway, will be transferred. It will also regularise the mutual boundaries. An extract of the scheme plan showing the 550 square metres being transferred, is shown below in figure 2.

Figure 2 – Extract of Boundary Adjustment Scheme Plan.

While drafting the scheme plan the surveyor noted that approximately 15 square metres of the garage on Lot 1 is built over the property boundary and encroaches onto the legal road. He also noted that a further 175 square metres of gardens, lawns, and fencing, had been constructed over the legal road.

The total area of the encroachment, which is circled is pink below in figure 3, is approximately 200 square metres.

Figure 3 – Encroachment of garage and garden.

To resolve the encroachment, the owner of Lot 1 has applied to stop approximately 340 square metres of Ladysmith Road. A plan of the proposal is shown below in figure 4.

Figure 4 – Plan of the proposed stopping (approximately 340 square metres).

3. Discussion

Roading Network

As shown below in figure 5, Ladysmith Road has a legal width of approximately 22.5 metres. The formed carriageway, as shown in figure 6, is approximately 5.5 metres wide.

Figure 5 – The 22.5 metres of legal road width. Figure 6 – The 5.5 metre wide formed carriageway.

The parcel of road which the applicants propose to stop is approximately 6 metres wide. This would leave a clearance of 4 metres between the proposed new boundary and the formed carriageway. Overall, a legal road width of approximately 16.5 metres will be retained. This is sufficient for roading purposes.

Figure 7 – Legal roading corridor and formed carriageway.

Utility Networks & Provider Requirements

An electricity network passed through the parcel of road which the applicants propose to stop. The network belongs to Aurora Energy Limited (Aurora). The network infrastructure, which includes overhead lines and a power pole, are shown in red in figure 8.

Aurora have confirmed that their infrastructure can be protected by registration of an easement (in gross) in their favour on the new title.

Figure 8 – Aurora’s overhead line network and power pole.

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 outlined in section 8.5 of Council’s Roading Policy. The options are as follow:

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 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).

It is proposed that Public Works Act 1981 procedure be adopted for this application for the following reasons:

· The proposal is to stop part of the road width only.

· Public access will not be adversely affected.

The Public Works Act 1981 further provides for legal road to be stopped, sold, and amalgamated with an adjacent title. In this instance the stopped road would be amalgamated with the applicant’s Record of Title, OT14D/652.

Financial

Council’s Roading Policy determines that the applicant is responsible for all costs associated with the road stopping. This includes purchase of the land at valuation as prescribed in the Public Works Act 1981.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

To recommend to Council to approve the proposal to stop an unformed portion of Ladysmith Road, being approximately 340 square metres as shown in figure 4, subject to:

- The applicant paying for the land at valuation as prescribed in the Public Works Act 1981.

- The applicant paying all other costs associated with the stopping.

- The land being amalgamated with the applicant’s Record of Title.

- An easement (in gross) in favour of (and as approved by) Aurora Energy Limited being registered on the applicant’s Record of Title.

- The final survey plan being approved by the Chief Executive Officer.

Advantages:

· The applicant’s occupation (encroachment)of the legal road will be legalised.

· Provision has been made to protection of the existing utility networks.

· Income received will be used to address other public roading issues.

· Recognises the provisions of Council’s Roading Policy.

· The proposal is consistent with the Public Works Act 1981.

Disadvantages:

· None, as the stopping will not have any effect on the existing formation of the road, and a roading corridor approximately 16.5 metres wide will be retained.

Option 2

To not recommend to Council to approve the proposal to stop approximately 340 square metres of Ladysmith Road.

Advantages:

· None, as the stopping will not have any effect on the existing formation of the road, and a roading corridor approximately 16.5 metres wide will be retained.

Disadvantages:

· The applicant’s occupation (encroachment) of the legal road will not be legalised.

· Additional income will not be available to address other road encroachment or access issues.

· Does not recognise the provisions of Council’s Roading Policy.

· Does not recognise that the proposal is consistent with the Public Works Act 1981.

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the economic wellbeing of the community by generating income from the disposal of land that is held (but not required) for roading purposes which has limited other use.
Financial implications – Is this decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term plan/annual plan?	There are no negative financial implications associated with the recommended option. The applicants are required to pay market value for the land, as well as all other associated costs. Funds received from the disposal will then be available to address other encroachment or access issues.
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 Public Works Act 1981.
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. Notice of the completed road stopping will be published in the New Zealand Gazette.

6. Next Steps

1. Community Board approval October 2021

2. Council approval November 2021

3. Survey and LINZ Accredited Supplier engaged November 2021

4. Survey Plan approved Early to Mid 2022

5. Gazette notice published Mid 2022

7. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Linda Stronach	Julie Muir
Statutory Property Officer	Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services
6/10/2021	11/10/2021

21 October 2021

21.8.6 2022 Meeting Schedule

Doc ID: 554597

1. Purpose of Report

To approve a schedule of Teviot Valley Community Board meetings for 2022.

Recommendations

That the Teviot Valley Community Board

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

B. Adopts the proposed 2022 meeting schedule for the Teviot Valley Community Board.

2. Background

The Local Government Act 2002 Schedule 7 Clause 19 states that a local authority must hold the meetings that are necessary for the good government of its district. The Chief Executive must give notice in writing to each member of the time and place of a meeting not less than 14 days before the meeting or the local authority can adopt a schedule of meetings.

Council and the community boards have in the past adopted a schedule of meetings for the following year, as this provides certainty of dates to members and staff. Having a yearly schedule allows for good forward planning and significantly reduces the administrative workload of advising members for each meeting.

The meeting schedule reflects the terms of reference for committees, Council and boards as well as working towards legislative deadlines such as adopting the 2022-23 Annual Plan. It also enables scheduling of meetings and workshops to progress significant pieces of work that have elected member input and oversight.

3. Discussion

The proposed meeting schedule continues with a six weekly cycle of meetings where possible in the lead up to the 2022 local body elections. Dates following the elections in October 2022 will need to be endorsed by the incoming community boards and Council.

A meeting schedule, once adopted, can be amended so there is still flexibility to respond to a change of circumstances.

4. Financial Considerations

There are no financial considerations for this decision.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Adopt the proposed 2022 meeting schedule.

Advantages:

· Elected members and staff have certainty of dates for meetings in 2022.

Disadvantages:

· None.

Option 2

Hold meetings on an ad hoc basis.

Advantages:

· High degree of flexibility.

Disadvantages:

· Does not facilitate forward planning.

· May impact on members’ ability to attend meetings at shorter notice.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by having a known schedule of meetings.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	This is a procedural decision and therefore has no impact on other plans and policies and is consistent with them.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	There are no implications arising from this decision.
Risks Analysis	There are no risks arising from the recommended option.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The proposed meeting schedule was discussed with the Executive Team, Planning department and Corporate Services to ensure that the proposed dates accommodated different work plans.

7. Next Steps

Once the meeting schedule has been adopted, it will be published on the Central Otago District Council’s website and meetings will be publicly notified according to the Local Government Act and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - 2022 Meeting Schedule List ⇩

Appendix 2 - 2022 Meeting Schedule Calendar ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Rebecca Williams	Sanchia Jacobs
Governance Manager	Chief Executive Officer
24/09/2021	29/09/2021

Teviot Valley Community Board meeting

21 October 2021

Meeting Schedule 2022

Month	Day	Date	Time	Meeting
January	Wednesday	26	10.30am	Council

February	Tuesday	1	2.00pm	Vincent Community Board
	Thursday	3	2.00pm	Teviot Valley Community Board
	Tuesday	8	9.30am	Hearings Panel
	Tuesday	15	2.00pm	Cromwell Community Board
	Thursday	17	2.00pm	Maniototo Community Board
	Friday	25	9.30am	Audit and Risk Committee

March	Tuesday	8	9.30am	Hearings Panel
	Wednesday	9	10.30am	Council
	Tuesday	22	10.00am	Creative Communities Assessment Committee
	Tuesday	22	2.00pm	Vincent Community Board
	Thursday	24	2.00pm	Teviot Valley Community Board
	Tuesday	29	2.00pm	Cromwell Community Board
	Thursday	31	2.00pm	Maniototo Community Board

April	Tuesday	12	9.30am	Hearings Panel
	Wednesday	20	10.30am	Council

May	Tuesday	3	2.00pm	Vincent Community Board
	Thursday	5	2.00pm	Teviot Valley Community Board
	Monday	9	2.00pm	Cromwell Community Board
	Tuesday	10	9.30am	Hearings Panel
	Thursday	12	2.00pm	Maniototo Community Board
	Thursday (if required)	19	2.00pm	Cromwell Community Board (hearings and deliberations if required)
	Friday (if required)	20	2.00pm	Vincent Community Board (hearings and deliberations if required)
	Monday (if required)	23	2.00pm	Maniototo Community Board (hearings and deliberations if required)
	Tuesday (if required)	24	2.00pm	Teviot Valley Community Board (hearings and deliberations if required)

June	Monday	1	10.30am	Council (hearings and deliberations if required)
	Friday	3	9.30am	Audit and Risk Committee
	Monday	13	2.00pm	Vincent Community Board
	Tuesday	14	9.30am	Hearings Panel
	Thursday	16	2.00pm	Teviot Valley Community Board
	Tuesday	21	2.00pm	Cromwell Community Board
	Thursday	23	2.00pm	Maniototo Community Board
	Wednesday	29	10.30am	Council (to adopt LTP and set rates if not 1 June)

July	Tuesday	12	9.30am	Hearings Panel
	Wednesday	13	10.30am	Council
	Tuesday	26	2.00pm	Vincent Community Board
	Thursday	28	2.00pm	Teviot Valley Community Board

August	Tuesday	2	2.00pm	Cromwell Community Board
	Thursday	4	2.00pm	Maniototo Community Board
	Tuesday	9	9.30am	Hearings Panel
	Wednesday	24	10.30am	Council

September	Tuesday	6	2.00pm	Vincent Community Board
	Thursday	8	2.00pm	Teviot Valley Community Boad
	Monday	12	2.00pm	Cromwell Community Board
	Tuesday	13	9.30am	Hearings Panel
	Thursday	15	2.00pm	Maniototo Community Board
	Tuesday	20	10.00am	Creative Communities Assessment Committee
	Wednesday	28	10.30am	Council
	Friday	30	9.30am	Audit and Risk

October	Saturday	8		ELECTION DAY
	Tuesday	11	9.30am	Hearings Panel
	Wednesday	19	9.00am	Induction Day
	Wednesday	26	2.00pm	Inaugural Council Meeting
	Monday	31	2.00pm	Inaugural Vincent Community Board

November	Tuesday	1	2.00pm	Inaugural Cromwell Community Board
	Wednesday	2	2.00pm	Inaugural Teviot Valley Community Board
	Thursday	3	2.00pm	Inaugural Maniototo Community Board
	Tuesday	8	9.30am	Hearings Panel
	Wednesday	9	10.30am	Council
	Wednesday	16	9.00am	Council Workshop
	Tuesday	22	2.00pm	Vincent Community Board
	Tuesday	22	10.00am	Sport NZ Assessment Committee
	Thursday	24	2.00pm	Teviot Valley Community Board
	Tuesday	29	2.00pm	Cromwell Community Board

December	Thursday	1	2.00pm	Maniototo Community Board
	Friday	2	9.30am	Audit and Risk Committee
	Tuesday	13	9.30am	Hearings Panel
	Wednesday	14	10.30am	Council

Holiday Dates 2022
New Year’s Day Observance	Monday	3 January
Day After New Year’s Holiday Observance	Tuesday	4 January
Waitangi Day Observance	Monday	7 February
Otago Anniversary Day	Monday	21 March
Good Friday	Friday	15 April
Easter Monday	Monday	18 April
ANZAC Day	Monday	25 April
Queen’s Birthday	Monday	6 June
Matariki	Friday	24 June
Labour Day	Monday	24 October
Christmas Day Observance	Monday	26 December
Boxing Day Observance	Tuesday	27 December

Executive Committees are on an as required basis.


AGENDA Teviot Valley Community Board Meeting Thursday, 21 October 2021
Date:	Thursday, 21 October 2021
Time:	2.00 pm
Location:	Roxburgh Service Centre, 120 Scotland Street, Roxburgh
(Unless Central Government changes COVID-19 meeting restrictions before then, in which case it will be held electronically using Microsoft Teams and livestreamed) Sanchia Jacobs Chief Executive Officer

Name	Member’s Declared Interests	Spouse/Partner’s Declared Interests	Council Appointments
Cushla Aitchison	Roxburgh and District Lions Club (member)	Roxburgh and District Lions Club (member)	I and H McPhail Charitable Trust Roxburgh Entertainment Centre Improvement and Promotions Inc. Teviot District Museum Committee
Norman Dalley	Martel International Limited (Sole Director/Shareholder) Gilmour Development Limited (Sole Director/Shareholder) North Hill Limited (Sole Director/Shareholder) Teviot Valley Rest Home Incorporated (Chair) Roxburgh Entertainment Centre Improvement and Promotions Incorporated (Treasurer/Committee member) Dalley Family Trust (trustee) Teviot Prospects (member) Teviot Valley Rest Home Ltd (Director)	217 Scotland Street, Roxburgh (Property Owner) Gilchrist Town Orchard Limited (Shareholder/Director) Roxburgh and Districts Medical Services Trust (trustee) Roxburgh Entertainment Centre Improvement and Promotions Incorporated (committee member)	I and H McPhail Charitable Trust Roxburgh Cemetery Trustee Committee
Sally Feinerman	Feinerman’s Ltd, 109 Scotland Street (Owner / Director) New Zealand Motor Caravan Association (NZMCA) Member Roxburgh Pool Committee (Chair)	Breen Construction (employee / builder) NZMCA (member)	Teviot Valley Walkways Committee Ida MacDonald Charitable Trust Tuapeka County Bursary Fund Committee Teviot Prospects
Raymond Gunn	Stonehaven Limited (Director) Stonehaven Trust (Trustee) Roxburgh Gun Club (Secretary) Central Otago Wilding Conifer Control Group (member) Roxburgh Trotting Club (member) Roxburgh A&P Society (member) Coal Creek Cycleway Trust (Trustee) Teviot Valley Resthome Inc (Medical Services Trust delegate) Teviot Valley Water Care Group (Committee Member) NZ Battery Project Technical Reference Group (TRG) (member)	Stonehaven Trust (Trustee)	Ida MacDonald Charitable Trust Roxburgh and District Medical Services Trust Roxburgh Swimming Pool Redevelopment 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

Meeting	Report Title	Resolution No	Resolution	Officer	Status
22/04/2021	Roxburgh Entertainment Centre - Stage Upgrade Project	21.3.2	That the Teviot Valley Community Board A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approves the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre Stage Upgrade Project to proceed. Additional funding of $15,500 to be funded from the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre’s depreciated reserves account.	Property and Facilities Officer (Vincent and Teviot Valley)	28 Apr 2021 Action memo sent to the Property and Facilities Officer - Vincent and Teviot Valley 08 Jun 2021 Construction work to be coordinated with the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre Improvement and Promotions Group's install of the new cinema screen. Awaiting installation date from community group. 16 Jun 2021 Awaiting update from the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre Promotions Group in respect of when the screen will be installed so the balance of the work can be carried out at the same time. 19 Jul 2021 Awaiting update from the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre and Promotions Group. They are waiting on advice from the structural engineer with regards to fixings for the cinema screen. 25 Aug 2021 A meeting with the structural engineer and representative from the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre Improvement and Promotions Group (RECIP) has occurred. The Engineer is to provide drawings of the fixings required for the screen to RECIP by the end of August. 21 Sep 2021 RECIP has received the Engineer's drawings of the screen fixings and is planning installation of the screen. The newly purchased scaffolding was erected to access the auditorium bar. All lights were tested and found to be safe. Lights were weighed and bar dimensions taken. This information was provided to the Engineer to calculate whether the bar is safe as-is, now that it is shackled to the truss and accessed by scaffolding.
17/06/2021	Allocation of Teviot Valley Walkways Reserve Fund	21.5.2	That the Teviot Valley Community Board A. Receives the report and accepts the level of significance. B. Approves the proposed work programme and expenditure to come from the Teviot Valley Walkways Reserve. C. Agrees to retain the Teviot Valley Walkways Reserve account. D. Recommend to Council that the delegation from the Teviot Valley Community Board to the Teviot Valley Walkways Committee be reviewed as part of the next delegation manual update.	Parks Officer - Projects	21 Jun 2021 Action memo sent to Parks Officer - Projects and Finance 19 Jul 2021 Signage design being completed on a site-by-site basis, starting with the River Track. Improvements on Grovers Hill will wait until the wind-blown forestry damage is removed. 24 Aug 2021 Staff working with Walkways Committee to implement signage and track improvements 08 Oct 2021 Staff continue to work with Walkways Committee to implement signage and track improvements
9/09/2021	Application for easement in favour of Aurora Energy Limited	21.7.2	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.	Statutory Property Officer	13 Sep 2021 Action memo sent to Property Officer - Statutory and to Finance 27 Sep 2021 Applicants advised, contractors to action. MATTER CLOSED.

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Wayne McEnteer	Sanchia Jacobs
Governance Support Officer	Chief Executive Officer
8/10/2021	12/10/2021