21.8.3 Vincent
Community Board Community Grant Applications 2021-24 Financial Year
Doc ID: 550623
1. Purpose
of Report
To
consider round one of applications to the 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24 Vincent
Community Board General Grants fund and to determine the grant allocation of each
applicant.
|
Recommendations
That the Vincent 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. Alexandra Community Advice Network
to cover administration costs
2021/22 Requested:
$5,000
Recommend Approve: $2,000
2022/23 Requested:
$5,000
Recommend Decline: $0
2023/24 Requested:
$5,000
Recommend Decline: $0
ii. Alexandra
District Museum Inc to cover operational costs
2021/22 Requested:
$125,000
Recommend Approve: $40,000
2022/23 Requested:
$125,000
Recommend Decline: $0
2023/24 Requested:
$125,000
Recommend Decline: $0
iii. Alexandra
and Districts Youth Trust to cover operational costs
2021/22 Requested:
$6,000
Recommend Approve: $6,000
2022/23 Requested:
$6,000
Recommend Decline $0
2023/24 Requested:
$6,000
Recommend Decline: $0
iv. Bolder
Inn to cover CCTV, uniforms and equipment
2021/22 Requested:
$10,003
Recommend decline: $0*
*Undertake a rent review
through the Community Leasing and Licensing Policy
v. Earnscleugh
Community Society Inc for operational costs
2021/22 Requested:
$1,500
Recommend Approve: $1,500
2022/23 Requested:
$1,500
Recommend Decline: $0
2023/24 Requested:
$1,500
Recommend Decline: $0
vi. Earnscleugh
Irrigation Company for Fraser River / Otewhata Riparian Enhancement Plan
2021/22 Requested:
$24,375
Recommend Approve: $5,000
2021/22 Requested:
$24,375
Recommend Decline: $0
vii. Galloway
Hall for operational costs and hall maintenance
2021/22 Requested:
$10,000
Recommend Approve: $5,000
2022/23 Requested:
$5,000
Recommend Decline: $0
2023/24 Requested:
$3,000
Recommend Decline: $0
viii. Haehaeata
Natural Heritage Trust to expand the nursery
2021/22 Requested:
$5,450
Recommended Approve: $5,450
ix. Historical
Clyde Inc for a public art sculpture
2021/222 Requested:
$28,500
Recommend Decline: $0
x. Keep
Alexandra Clyde Beautiful for beautification projects
2021/22 Requested:
$8,475
Recommend Approve:
$3,475*
*Include provision that an MOU
will be signed between Council and Keep Alexandra Clyde Beautiful for any
works carried out on Council land.
xi. Ophir
Welfare Committee for Ophir pool operational costs
2021/22 Requested:
$1,500
Recommend Decline: $0
2022/23 Requested:
$1,500
Recommend Decline: $0
2023/24 Requested:
$1,500
Recommend Decline: $0
xii. Otago
Country Cricket for an electronic scoreboard at Molyneux Park
2021/22 Requested:
$25,000
Recommend Approve: $10,000
xiii. Salvation
Army for Council resource consent costs
2021/22 Requested:
$297
Recommend Approve: $297
xiv. Shaky
Bridge Reserve Group for the Shaky Bridge Planting Project
2021/22 Requested:
$9,393
Recommend Approve: $9,393*
*To be included in the KACB
and CODC MOU
|
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, Vincent
Community Board approved a budget of $120,000 per annum for community grants.
The
new grant process did not align with previous funding arrangements, and a
hardship grant was introduced for groups who historically received money from
the community board. This grant ensured that groups did not experience financial
hardship as a result of the delayed timing of the first funding round in the
new grants process. The community board received and approved a hardship grant
request from Alexandra District Museum Inc (ADMI). ADMI was granted $18,242 to
keep them going until the September round of funding. Therefore, the total
amount of funding available for 2021-22 is $101,758. The 2022-23 and 2023-24
financial years both have $120,000 available. 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.
Fourteen
applications have 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 applications 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 $260,493 has been requested for this
first 2021/22 funding round; 2022/23 has received $168,375 in requests and 2023/24
has received $142,000 in requests.
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 the community board chooses to fully allocate
the community grants budget for all three years of the Long-term Plan, it will
not be possible to facilitate any further contestable community grant funding
rounds.
The
assessment matrices for 2022/23 and 2023/24 demonstrate a match with the
current purpose and eligibility 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. 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 each
of the applications and provided comment below.
Application: Alexandra
Community Advice Network GRA210716104 (App.
2)
Project: Operational
costs
Amount
Requested: 2021/22 $5,000 Recommended:
$2,000
2022/23
$5,000 Recommended:
$0
2023/24
$5,000 Recommended:
$0
· Alexandra
Community Advice Network (ACAN) has received an annual grant from VCB since
1996, which has been $4,000 since 2009.
· The
organisation maintains a database of social services, clubs, community services
and trade services; administers the Meals on Wheels roster and deliveries in
the Alexandra area (80 volunteer drivers); co-ordinates a Volunteer Driver
Scheme with 30 clients and 12 drivers; and arranges free legal advice and
availability of JPs.
· Not
a strong alignment with Grants Criteria; may be more suited to a specific project,
e.g. supporting the expansion of the Volunteer Driver Scheme.
Application: Alexandra
District Museum Inc. GRA210662030 (App. 3)
Project: Operational
Costs
Amount
Requested: 2021/22 $125,000 Recommended:
$40,000
2022/23
$125,000 Recommended: $0
2023/24
$125,000 Recommended: $0
· Alexandra
District Museum Inc (ADMI) manages Central Stories Museum and Art Gallery. The
application describes the functions of this community-run facility as being a
museum that houses and displays artifacts, art works and historical information
relating to Central Otago district; and as a community art gallery, which hosts
regular exhibitions.
· ADMI
provides educational opportunities for schools, the community and visitors, and
considers itself the hub of culture and heritage in Central Otago.
· ADMI
has received a grant from Vincent Community Board since 1996, increasing over
time to $73,452 plus GST per annum. Until 2021/22 ADMI also received a grant
from Council of $48,968 plus GST per annum. Council has now redirected this
funding to be used in the museum sector under a different model, and ADMI is
subsequently seeking these funds from the community board.
· Of
the $122,420 plus GST per annum received by ADMI from Council and the Board,
$117,600 went towards staff wages (2.06 FTE). ADMI did not apply to the Council
for any funding and this loss of funds will have a significant impact on
business as usual operations.
· This
request exceeds the available budget and is inconsistent with similar activities
across the district.
· As
a comparison, organisations doing similar work have received the following
grant contributions from the Council and community boards:
|
Cromwell Museum (CCB)
|
Until 20/21 $35,000
|
21/22 $40,000 (approved)
|
|
CO Heritage Trust (Council)
|
Until 20/21 $40,000
|
21/22 $40,000 (approved)
|
|
CO District Arts Trust (Council)
|
Until 20/21 $35,000
|
21/22 $40,000 (approved)
|
|
Sport Otago (Council)
|
Until 20/21 $41,549
|
21/22 $41,549 (approved)
|
|
Alexandra District Museum (VCB)
|
Until 20/21 $73,452
|
21/22 $40,000 (+ $18,242 allocated hardship grant)
(recommended)
|
· The
service that ADMI provides aligns similarly with the arts, heritage and sport
sectors across the district when assessed against the grant policy and
criteria.
· Reduced
funding may require the applicant to re-structure the way they operate (e.g.
museum opening hours and paid employees). ADMI would need to consider a revised
operating model and provide some detail to staff to ensure that any allocated
funds will be used for the operational purposes which they applied for.
· The
application specifies that if the full funding request is not granted, the
following alternatives will be considered:
o Try
and run the operation with volunteers which has become more difficult in recent
years.
o Reduce
opening hours.
o Charge
members of the public an entry fee.
o Commencement
of commercial activity (noting that this option has not found favour with CODC
in the past due to the nature of the ADMI Lease).
· Maintaining
the community board component of ADMI’s grant will provide the group with
a level of consistency, but it would use up a significant portion of the
contestable grant budget.
· The
application includes letters of support from Central Otago Heritage Trust and
Otago Museum.
Application: Alexandra
and Districts Youth Trust GRA210739853 (App. 4)
Project: Operational
Costs – rent contribution
Amount Requested: 2021/22
$6,000 Recommended:
$6,000
2022/23
$6,000 Recommended:
$6,000
2023/24
$6,000 Recommended:
$6,000
· The
Trust has received a grant of $6,000 per annum from the community board since
2012. This funding is specifically a rental contribution towards a commercial
lease.
· The
Trust provides regular programmes which run through the school terms, holiday
programmes, one-on-one coaching and multiple events through the year (including
blossom festival support, youth expo and youth week events).
· In
2020 the Trust expanded its services to Roxburgh, where it now has regular
engagement with young people.
· The
Trust also facilitates a Youth Council, who run a survey every two years to
determine the work programme of the Trust.
Application: Bolder
Inn GRA210749349 (App.5)
Project: Costs
towards CCTV, staff uniforms, equipment
Amount
Requested: 2021/22 $10,003 Recommended:
$0
· Bolder
Inn is an indoor rock climbing facility in The Molyneux Stadium squash courts.
Bolder Inn has charitable status.
· The
newly opened space runs as a membership model, with the goal of keeping costs
affordable and making the space accessible.
· As
this is a new charitable trust, outcomes are unknown making it difficult to
assess benefits to the community at this stage.
· $3,000
of the funding request is for CCTV cameras in Molyneux Stadium so that people
can access the facility when it is not staffed. Due to privacy and safety
concerns this is not recommended. Council staff are currently investigating the
development of a CCTV policy for Council-owned premises.
· The
remaining funding request is for staff uniforms and equipment. These are
one-off costs for the project, and it is not expected that the applicant will
return for further funding requests.
· As
Bolder Inn is in a Council-owned facility and the lease was signed before it
achieved charitable status, it is recommended that the community board approve
a lease review now instead of in 2025. The lease is currently set for
commercial rates, but Bolder Inn’s charitable status may reduce the
rental costs, in line with Council’s Community Leasing and Licensing
Policy.
Application: Earnscleugh
Community Society Inc GRA2107455966 (App. 6)
Project: Maintaining
and restoring the community hall
Amount
Requested: 2021/22 $1,500 Recommended:
$1,500
2022/23
$1,500 Recommended:
$0
2023/24
$1,500 Recommended:
$0
· The
hall committee has received a grant of $1,250 from the community board to
assist with running costs of the hall since 2007.
· Funding
from the community board will assist the committee to cover hall running costs
and apply any available excess funds into restoring the community-owned
building.
· The
hall provides a venue for gatherings of all age groups and cultures, to create
a sense of community and improve the well-being of individuals.
· The
committee receives some income from hall hire and holds two fundraising events
each year to assist with running costs.
· Some
funds can also be accessed through the Earnscleugh Amenity Trust, but this
funding is for everyone in the Earnscleugh community, not just the hall.
Previous projects that have received funding through the Trust include a
kitchen upgrade and heating installation.
Application: Earnscleugh
Irrigation Company GRA2107455966 (App. 7)
Project: Fraser
River / Otewhata Riparian Enhancement Plan
Amount
Requested: 2021/22 $24,375 Recommended:
$5,000
2022/23
$24,375 Recommended: $0
· Earnscleugh
Irrigation Company (EIC), wish to lead the restoration of public land along the
Fraser River/Ōtewhata to create a public amenity space.
· The
first stage of the project will focus on a 1.2 km-long stretch from Earnscleugh
Road, but the company has ambitions to continue this up to Laing Road and
beyond. This project in not on Council owned land.
· Implementation
of the plan includes extensive weed clearance, construction of an
access/walking/cycling track, site preparation, planting over 5,000 plants
(including rare/threatened species), plant maintenance, and installation of
signage providing information about the plants, Kai Tahu waahi taoka values and
the history of the area.
· EIC
has been providing a residual flow of 1 m3/s in the Fraser River/Ōtewhata
at all times since the late 1990s and this has resulted in the enhancement of
instream values in this river, particularly for juvenile trout. As part of a
recent consenting process, EIC volunteered to enhance the riparian habitat
further.
· Funding
from the community board will be used to cover the cost of the plants (to be
purchased from Haehaeata Natural Heritage Trust), as well as plant protectors,
weed mats and canes.
· The
applicant has included four letters of support, from Fish and Game, Department
of Conversation, Aukaha Ltd and Haehaeata Natural Heritage Trust.
Application: Galloway
Hall GRA210723656 (App. 8)
Project: Upkeep
of the Galloway Hall
Amount
Requested: 2021/22 $10,000 Recommended:
$5,000
2022/23
$5,000 Recommended:
$0
2023/23
$3,000 Recommended:
$0
· The
hall committee has received a grant from the community board since 2006 to
support running costs, this increased to $2,500 in 2018.
· The
committee also raises funds through voluntary membership fees and donations, as
well as charging for the hire of the hall.
· This
increased request in funding over the next three years is to assist with some
critical maintenance work that needs to be carried out, along with some future
proofing projects.
· 50%
of the roof needs to be replaced due to a leak; the bore pump needs to be
replaced and insulated. The toilets need to be insulated to avoid freezing in
the winter.
· The
hall committee plans to contribute some funds towards these upgrades, but any
funding from the community board will assist the project to happen faster and
avoid any further problems.
· The
hall is used for community gatherings, weddings, birthdays, meetings lunches,
etc, and dates back to 1890, when the building was first used as a school.
· The
hall holds the history of the local area and the committee see themselves as
custodians of this history for future generations.
Application: Haehaeata
Natural Heritage Trust GRA210723656 (App. 9)
Project: Clyde
Railhead Community Eco Nursery Improvements
Amount
Requested: 2021/22 $5,450 Recommended:
$5,450
· A
largely volunteer run organisation with two part-time employees; propagates
native plants to supply to the community with the vision “to create
corridors rich in habitats of indigenous flora and fauna”.
· Currently
cannot meet community demand for native plants due to lack of infrastructure.
· Seeking
funds to assist with expanding the nursery set up to increase propagation, with
a 1-2 year goal to be self-sustaining.
· After
four years of operation, budgets show that the group is becoming less reliant
on grants as propagation increases.
· The
group sells plants to make an income and gifts plants to community groups.
· This
is a one-off cost and it is not anticipated that the group will return for
further funding. As evidenced through other applications from Earnscleugh
Irrigation Company and Shaky Reserve Group, there is high community demand to
purchase plants from the Trust.
Application: Historic
Clyde Inc GRA210740872 (App. 10)
Project: Karearea
Sculpture
Amount
Requested: 2021/22 $28,500 Recommended:
$0
· Seeking
funding to erect a sculpture of a Karearea alongside State Highway 8 at the
western entrance to Clyde Township.
· The
chosen sculptor is Dan Kelly from Glenorchy and the sculpture will be made from
recycled materials, with a wingspan of 5 metres. The wing feathers will be made
from flat iron waratahs from the Maniototo and would require very little
maintenance.
· No
funds have been secured for the project, but two fundraising events are planned
to assist with raising money for the project.
· A
letter of support from the Central Otago District Arts Trust confirms that the
project aligns with the Central Otago Arts Strategy. No clear community
consultation has otherwise been carried out.
· It
is the group’s intention to expand on the concept in the medium term by
developing a sculpture walkway from the site of the Karearea down through the
township to the new Miner's Lane car park.
· It
is recommended that the group do some more work on a project plan to determine
details such as location of sculpture, landowner consent, and details on the
sculpture walkway, including location and approval by the landowner.
Application: Keep
Alexandra Clyde Beautiful GRA210745591 (App. 11)
Project: Beautification
Projects
Amount
Requested: 2021/22 $8,000 Recommended:
$3,475
· Keep
Alexandra Clyde Beautiful (KACB) has received an annual grant from the
community board since 1996, which has amounted to $4,500 per annum since 2014.
· An
increased funding request for the 2021/22 financial year includes $5,000 for a
seat, which is in addition to the funding required to maintain ongoing
projects.
· The
group of volunteers maintains several beautification projects around Alexandra
and Clyde, many on Council land.
· According
to the budget supplied, the community board is the only funder for the group.
If funding is approved, a Memorandum of Understanding should be put in place
between the group and Council for any works carried out on Council land.
· A
$5,000 request for a seat at Clyde Bridge is included in the application, but
details such as intended location, landowner authorisation and proposed design
have not been provided.
Application: Ophir
Welfare Committee GRA210802902 (App. 12)
Project: Ophir
Swimming Pool
Amount
Requested: 2021/22 $1,500 Recommended:
$0
2022/23
$1,500 Recommended:
$0
2023/24
$1,500 Recommended:
$0
· The
committee has received a $1,000 grant from the community board for pool
operations since 2017/18.
· This
is a Council-owned facility, and Council contributes $3,000 annually outside of
the grants round to the pool for operational costs. This funding has previously
sat with Property but now sits in Parks and Reserves.
· In
2020/21 Ophir pool received $60,000 through the Provincial Growth Fund to
upgrade the changing area and reticulation pipes. This work is now complete.
· According
to the application, the requested grant from the community board will provide 50%
of the funding required to keep the pool running without a loss. However, this
budget does not include the $3,000 contribution from Council.
· A
group of volunteers also give time to ensure that the pool can operate, and
members pay an annual subscription fee. An honesty box is set up for
non-members wishing to use the pool.
Application: Otago
Country Cricket GRA210749227 (App. 13)
Project: Electronic
Scoreboard for Molyneux Park
Amount
Requested: 2021/22 $25,000 Recommended:
$10,000
· The electronic
scoreboard is required to keep the Cricket warrant of fitness (WOF) for the
ground – if they lose the WOF they are unlikely to have first class
cricket at the ground.
· The Park is
the premier sports facility in the Central Otago District and regularly
attracts high quality events to the area. Some recent highlights include:
o • Super Rugby preseason
– Highlanders v Waratahs, January 2019
o • Super Rugby preseason
– Highlanders v Hurricanes, January 2021
o • Plunket Shield cricket
matches
o • T20 Cricket - Super
Smash double headers, December since 2018
o • The Pioneer Mountain
Bike Stage Race
o • Otago v Southland
representative rugby fixtures
o • Hawke Cup cricket
matches
o • Central Otago
athletics championships
o • Central Otago Premier
Rugby finals.
· The group
currently hires an electronic scoreboard when required (at an estimated cost of
$10,000-$13,000 per season).
· This request
is a partial contribution to the total cost. The cost of the scoreboard is a
one-off cost and it is not expected that the group will return for further
funding.
· The screen
can be hired by other groups for public events, such as movie screenings.
· Letters of
support from New Zealand Cricket and Otago Cricket are included in the
application.
Application: Salvation
Army (App. 14)
Project: Resource
Consent for tunnel house relocation
Amount
Requested: 2021/22 $297 Recommended:
$297
· The
Salvation Army community garden produces fresh vegetables for the Foodbank.
· It is
located on Council owned land, and recently the designation of the land was
changed, requiring the garden and all “fixtures” to be relocated.
· Relocation
of the tunnel house incurred a resource consent fee of $297.
· This is a
retrospective request to cover the cost of a consent fee.
· Due to the
urgency of needing to relocate the tunnel house and pay the fee, the applicant
could not wait until the funding round.
· This is an
exceptional circumstance and it is recommended that the fee is reimbursed by
way of a grant.
Application: Shaky
Reserve Group GRA210720923 (App. 15)
Project: Shaky
Reserve Planting Project
Amount
Requested: 2021/22 $9,393 Recommended:
$9,393
· This is a
group of volunteers who have formed a sub-group within Keep Alexandra Clyde
Beautiful.
· The group is
seeking funding to establish a new native planting area at Shaky Bridge
Reserve.
· Plants will
be purchased from the Haehaeata Natural Heritage Trust.
· The grant
being sought is specifically to establish a water connection and 3 solenoid
irrigation system. This will ensure the planting plan is successful.
· The asset
will sit with CODC and after three years all maintenance will revert to CODC.
· This is a
one-off cost which will have long-term benefits and if funding is granted, the
project will need to be included in the proposed Memorandum of Understanding
between KACB and CODC.
· The
application includes letters of support, from Haehaeata Natural Heritage Trust
and Mountain Bikers of Alexandra.
4. Options
Option 1
– (Recommended)
That the community board consider the
applications received and review the recommended grant amounts as specified in
the assessment matrix for each of the three years of the 2021-31 Long-term
Plan.
That the Vincent Community Board
allocates grants for the following applicants:
|
Financial
Year
|
2021/22
|
2022/23
|
2023/24
|
|
Opening
Balance
|
$120,000
|
$120,000
|
$120,000
|
|
Less
hardship grant (ADMI)
|
$18,242
|
|
|
|
Name of Applicant
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandra Community Advice
Network
|
$2,000
|
-
|
-
|
|
Alexandra
District Museum Inc
|
$40,000
|
-
|
-
|
|
Alexandra
and Districts Youth Trust
|
$6,000
|
-
|
-
|
|
Earnscleugh
Community Society Inc
|
$1,500
|
-
|
-
|
|
Earnscleugh Irrigation Company
|
$5,000
|
-
|
-
|
|
Galloway Hall
|
$5,000
|
-
|
-
|
|
Haehaeata
Natural Heritage Trust
|
$5,450
|
-
|
-
|
|
Keep
Alexandra Clyde Beautiful
|
$3,475
|
-
|
-
|
|
Otago
Country Cricket
|
$10,000
|
-
|
-
|
|
Salvation
Army
|
$297
|
-
|
-
|
|
Shaky
Reserve Planting
|
$9,393
|
-
|
-
|
|
Total amount allocated this
round:
|
$88,115
|
-
|
-
|
|
Total budget remaining:
|
$13,643
|
$120,000
|
$120,000
|
That the Vincent Community Board
declines grants for the following applicants:
|
Name of
Applicant
|
2021/22
|
2022/23
|
2023/24
|
|
Alexandra
Community Advice Network
|
-
|
$5,000
|
$5,000
|
|
Alexandra
District Museum Inc
|
-
|
$125,000
|
$125,000
|
|
Alexandra
and Districts Youth Trust
|
-
|
$6,000
|
$6,000
|
|
Bolder
Inn*
|
$10,003
|
-
|
-
|
|
Earnscleugh
Community Society Inc
|
-
|
$1,500
|
$1,500
|
|
Earnscleugh
Irrigation Company
|
-
|
$24,375
|
-
|
|
Galloway
Hall
|
-
|
$5,000
|
$3,000
|
|
Historic
Clyde Inc
|
$25,000
|
|
|
|
Ophir
Welfare Committee
|
$1,500
|
$1, 500
|
$1,500
|
|
Total applied for but not allocated:
|
$36,503
|
$168,375
|
$142,000
|
*Recommend
rent review now that Bolder Inn is a registered charity.
Advantages:
· The
recommended allocation is within the budgets for all three years of the
2021-2031 Long-term Plan. $13,643 remains in the 2021/22 budget; $120,000
remains in the 2022/23 budget; $120,000 remains in the 2023/24 budget.
· The
community board is showing support for mostapplicants.
· Funding
recommendations are promoting equitable allocations to sports, arts and
heritage, reflective of the similar value that they contribute to the
community.
· The
community board is declining applicants whose projects do not clearly align with
the Grant Policy.
· Remaining
funds are available for further funding rounds over all three years of the
Long-term Plan.
Disadvantages:
· Most
applicants are not receiving the full amount requested.
· Some
applicants may not be able to carry out their projects due to reduced or
declined funding; ADMI in particular is receiving significantly less than
requested, which will have an impact on the current operational model of the
museum. ADMI would need to consider a revised operating model and provide some
detail to staff to ensure that any allocated funds will be used for the
operational purposes which they applied for.
· Many
applicants continue to receive an annual grant from the board, despite not
indicating a goal to become less reliant on community board funding.
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 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 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 - VCB
Assessement Matrix 2021-24 ⇩ 
Appendix 2 - Alexandra
Community Advice Network Application.pdf ⇩
Appendix 3 - Alexandra
District Museum Inc Application.pdf ⇩
Appendix 4 - Alexandra
and Districts Youth Trust Application.pdf ⇩
Appendix 5 - Bolder
Inn grant application.pdf ⇩
Appendix 6 - Earnscleugh
Community Society Inc Application.pdf ⇩
Appendix 7 - Earnscleugh
Irrigation Company Application.pdf ⇩
Appendix 8 - Galloway
Hall Grant Application.pdf ⇩
Appendix 9 - Haehaeata
Natural Heritage Trust Application.pdf ⇩
Appendix 10 -
Historic Clyde Grant Application.pdf ⇩
Appendix 11 -
Keep Alexandra Clyde Beautiful Application.pdf ⇩
Appendix 12 -
Ophir Welfare Committee Grant Application.pdf ⇩
Appendix 13 -
Otago Country Cricket Application.pdf ⇩
Appendix 14 -
Salvation Army Grant Application.pdf ⇩
Appendix 15 -
Shaky Reserve Grant Application.pdf ⇩
|
Report author:
|
Reviewed and authorised by:
|
|
|
|
|
Nikki Aaron
|
Sanchia Jacobs
|
|
Community Development Officer
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
21/09/2021
|
29/09/2021
|
21.8.4 Proposal
to Reclassify Area of Alexandra Town Belt (PRO: 61-2000-00)
Doc ID: 555091
1. Purpose
of Report
To
consider reclassifying part of Lot 8 Deposited Plan 429123 being part of the
Alexandra Town Belt/Recreation Reserve as Local Purpose (Water Reservoir)
Reserve, to facilitate the construction of a new water reservoir.
|
Recommendations
That the Vincent Community Board
A. Receives
the report and accepts the level of significance.
B. Agrees
to:
1. Reclassify
approximately 250 square metres of Lot 8 Deposited Plan 492123 being part of
the Alexandra Town Belt/Recreation Reserve, as Local Purpose (Water
Reservoir) Reserve.
2. To
extend designation 20 (subject to the process under the Resource Management
Act 1991) to include the newly reclassified area.
Subject to:
· Public
consultation in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977.
· The
consent of the Minister of Conservation.
· The costs
being met by the Alexandra Northern Reservoir Capital Project.
· The Chief
Executive approving the final tank/reservoir design and survey boundaries.
C. Authorises
the Chief Executive Officer to do all that is necessary to give effect to the
resolution.
|
2. Background
The
Alexandra Northern Reservoir is located on Lot 1 Deposited Plan (DP) 27045
above the Alexandra Cemetery.
The
reservoir is a square concrete tank. It has a water storage capacity of 2200
cubic metres. It was built in 1998.
The
reservoir is accessed from Gilligans Gully via a right of way over Lot 8 DP
429123.
A
plan of the reservoir on Lot 1 DP 27045 (Lot 1) is shown below in figure 1.
Figure
1 – Alexandra Northern (Water) Reservoir on Lot 1 DP 27045
To
meet increasing demand, a new reservoir will be constructed adjacent to the
existing reservoir with funding from the Government’s Water Stimulus
Fund. Construction of the reservoir is required to be completed by 30 March
2022 to qualify.
The
new tank will be bolted steel with a domed roof. It will sit on a concrete
foundation and look similar to the tank shown below in figure 2. The new tank
will have capacity of 4000 cubic metres.
Figure
2 – Example of new bolted steel tank with domed roof.
An
outline plan of the new tank next to the existing reservoir is shown below in
figure 3.
Figure
3 – Outline plan of the new tank next to the existing reservoir on Lot 1
DP 27045 (not to scale).
The
capacity of the existing reservoir site needs to be increased to enable water
from the new treatment plant to be stored to meet demand during peak population
periods in Alexandra. This can be achieved most effectively by increasing
storage capacity at the existing reservoir site.
Lot
8 is approximately 70 metres long and approximately 33 metres wide. The new
tank has a diameter of almost 33 metres. For the tank to be connected to the
existing infrastructure in the most efficient manner, it will need to sit just
forward of the northern boundary of Lot 8 as shown in figure 3 This means a
small portion of the tank would be constructed on Lot 8 DP 492123.
Lot
8 DP 429123 forms part of the Alexandra Town Belt. It is recreation reserve
held subject to the Reserves Act 1977.
To
enable the tank to be constructed as planned approximately 250 square metres of
Lot 8 DP 429123, as shown in figure 4, would have to be reclassified as Local
Purpose (Water Reservoir) Reserve.
Figure
4 – Approximately 250 square metres of Lot 1 DP 492123 proposed to be
reclassified.
3. Discussion
Reclassification
of Recreation Reserve
Section
24 of the Reserves Act 1977 provides the mechanism for changing the
classification or purpose of a reserve. It also provides for the revocation of
reserve status.
The
proposal to reclassify part of Lot 8 DP 492123 as ‘Local Purpose (Water
Reservoir) Reserve’ is consistent with section 24(1)(b) of the Reserves
Act which states:
the
local authority within whose district a reserve is situated or the
administering body of any reserve notifies the Commissioner in writing that,
pursuant to a resolution of the local authority or of the administering body,
as the case may be, it considers for any reason, to be stated in the
resolution, that the classification or purpose of the whole or part of the
reserve should be changed to another classification or purpose, or that the
reservation of the whole or part of the land as a reserve should be
revoked,—
then,
subject to the succeeding
provisions
of this section, the Minister [of Conservation] may, in his or her discretion,
by notice in the Gazette, change the classification or purpose of the whole or
part of the reserve, which thereafter shall be held and administered for that
changed classification or purpose, or revoke the reservation of the whole or
part of the land as a reserve.
The succeeding
provisions which are applicable to a proposal to reclassify part of a recreation
reserve are found in sections 24(2)(a) – (h). These include:
· the
administering body being required to publicly notify their intention to change
the classification of a reserve or any part thereof and to specify the reason
or reasons for the proposal.
· the
requirement to invite every person claiming to be affected by the proposed
reclassification to give notice (make a submission) in writing of his or her
objections to the proposed change.
· having
the Minister of Conservation consider the proposed change of classification and
all objections received during the submission period.
Public
Notification
Section
119 of the Reserves Act 1977 outlines the process for public notification. In
particular section 119(1)(b) requires the administering body’s proposal
to reclassify part of a recreation reserve to be advertised once in a newspaper
circulating in the area in which the reserve is situated, and in any other
newspaper that the administering body sees fit.
In
this instance public notice will be placed in the Central Otago News, in the
Council’s ‘Noticeboard’ section.
Submissions
Sections
24(2)(c) – (h) of the Reserves Act 1977 in particular relate to the
making, receiving and consideration of submissions.
In
accordance with section 24(2)(c) of the Act every person claiming to be
affected by the proposed change of classification has the right to object. Objections
must be received within one month of the date of the first public notice.
Sections
24(e) – (f) gives the Minister of Conservation the power to receive
submissions and make any inquiries on the proposal as he or she thinks fit. The
proposal and the submissions must then be considered in terms of the Reserves
Act 1977 with anyone not making a submission deemed to have agreed with the
proposal.
By
the ‘Instrument of Delegation for Territorial Authorities’ dated 12
June 2013, the Minister of Conservation’s responsibilities under section
24 are delegated to Council. In accordance with that delegation and
Council’s delegation register, Council’s Hearings Panel will
consider the proposal and any submissions received.
The
Hearings Panel will then make a recommendation to Council as the Minister of
Conservation.
Minister
of Conservation
In
addition to the responsibilities outlined above, the Minister of Conservation
must also:
· be
satisfied that the reclassification conforms with the provisions of the
Reserves Act 1977.
· ensure
that due process has been followed.
If
the Minister of Conservation agrees that proposal conforms with the provisions
of the Reserves Act and can verify that due process has been followed, the
reclassification can proceed.
Financial
The
proposal to reclassify part of any reserve must be publicly advertised in
accordance with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1997. Submissions, if
received, would then be considered by the Hearings Panel.
If
the proposal to reclassify the site is approved, it will need to be surveyed
and a boundary adjustment effected.
Once
completion, the reclassification would then be published in the New Zealand
Gazette.
Approximate
costs associated with the exercise are shown below in figure 5.
|
Description
|
Approximate cost to Council
|
|
Public Notification
|
$ 500
|
|
Hearing Panel Fees
|
$ 500
|
|
Survey & LINZ Fees
|
$ 5,500
|
|
LINZ Accredited Supplier (Gazettal)
|
$ 4,500
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate total cost to Council
|
$11,000
|
Figure
5 – Approximate costs of reclassification and designation
These
costs will be funded as part of the Alexandra Northern Reservoir Capital
Project.
Designation
Lot
1 DP 27045 and Lot 1 DP 492123 are identified on District Plan Map 2 of
Council’s Operative District Plan. It is a Rural Resource Area. Lot 1 DP
27045 is marked D20. It is designated as being for ‘Water Reservoir and
Access Purposes’.
If
the reclassification is approved, it is proposed that the designation be
extended to include the additional reclassified area.
4. Options
Option 1 –
(Recommended)
To
agree to:
1. Reclassify approximately 250 square metres
of Lot 8 Deposited Plan 492123 being part of the Alexandra Town Belt/Recreation
Reserve, as Local Purpose (Water Reservoir) Reserve.
2. To extend designation 20 ( (subject to the
process under the Resource Management Act 1991) to include the newly
reclassified area.
Subject
to:
· Public
consultation in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977.
· The
consent of the Minister of Conservation.
· The
costs to be met by the Alexandra Northern Reservoir Capital Project.
· The
Chief Executive approving the final tank/reservoir design and survey
boundaries.
Advantages:
· Will
facilitate the construction of the new Alexandra Northern Reservoir.
· Will
enable Council to meet the communities’ future water demands.
· Will
enable Council to secure funding from the Water Stimulus Fund.
· Reclassifying
part of a reserve is consistent with section 24 of the Reserves Act 1977.
Disadvantages:
· None.
Option 2
To
not reclassify part of Lot 8 Deposited Plan 492123 or extend designation 20.
Advantages:
· None.
Disadvantages:
· Will
not facilitate the construction of the new Alexandra Northern Reservoir.
· Will
not enable Council to meet the communities’ future water demands.
· Will
not enable Council to secure funding from the Water Stimulus Fund.
· Does
not recognise that reclassifying part of a reserve is consistent with section
24 of the Reserves Act 1977.
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 facilitating the construction of a new tank at the Alexandra
Northern Reservoir.
While the Local Government Act 2002 does
not apply to the reclassification it is consistent with the provisions of the
Reserves Act 1977.
|
|
Financial implications – Is this
decision consistent with proposed activities and budgets in long term
plan/annual plan?
|
The financial implications are outlined in
figure 5.
Costs will be funded as part of the Alexandra Northern
Reservoir Capital Project which was included in the 2018 Long Term Plan.
|
|
Decision consistent with other Council
plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy
etc.
|
The recommended option is
consistent with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.
|
|
Considerations as to sustainability, the
environment and climate change impacts
|
No sustainability, environmental or climate
change impacts are related to the decision to reclassify part of the reserve
or to the granting of the easement.
Should the recommended option not be
approved, it will impact on Council’s ability to meet future demands
for potable water within the Alexandra township. This could have a negative
impact on the community.
|
|
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, and
none of the thresholds or criteria relating to public engagement are
considered to have been met.
Public consultation of the proposal to reclassify part of
Lot 1 DP 492123 will be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of the
Reserves Act 1977.
|
6. Next
Steps
1. Public consultation of proposal to reclassify October/November
2021
2. Consideration of Submissions (by Hearings Panel) 07
December 2021
3. Application for consent of Minister of Conservation 08
December 2021
4. Reclassification commences Late
December 2021
7. Attachments
Nil
|
Report author:
|
Reviewed and authorised by:
|
|
|
|
|
Linda Stronach
|
Louise van der Voort
|
|
Property Officer - Statutory Property Officer
|
Executive Manager - Planning and Environment
|
|
5/10/2021
|
5/10/2021
|
