Agenda of Council meeting - Wednesday, 14 December 2022

Council Meeting Agenda

14 December 2022

MINUTES OF A Council Meeting OF THE Central Otago District Council
HELD AT Ngā Hau e Whā, William Fraser Building, 1 Dunorling Street, Alexandra AND LIVE STREAMED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON Wednesday, 9 November 2022 COMMENCING AT 10.31 am

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

IN ATTENDANCE: S Jacobs (Chief Executive Officer), Q Penniall (Infrastructure Manager), S Righarts (Group Manager - Business Support), L Fleck (General Manager – People and Culture), L van der Voort (Executive Manager - Planning and Environment), S Finlay (Chief Financial Officer), G Bailey (Parks and Recreation Manager), A Rodgers (Principal Policy Planner), G Robinson (Property and Facilities Manager), C Martin (Property and Facilities Officer – Vincent and Teviot Valley), N Aaron (Parks Officer – Strategy/Planning), D McKewen (Accountant), G Heal (Communications Officer), M De Cort (Communications Coordinator) and W McEnteer (Governance Manager)

1 Apologies

Apology

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Alley

That the apologies received from Crs Duncan and Paterson be accepted.

Carried

2 Public Forum

There was no public forum.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

Resolution

Moved: Alley

Seconded: Feinerman

That the public minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 26 October 2022 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

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

22.9.2 Proposed Plan Change 20 - Heritage

To consider the public notification of proposed Plan Change 19 in accordance with Clause 5 of the first Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991 and to consider the release of the Heritage Design guidelines for public consultation.

After discussion it was agreed that the references to specific properties should be removed before the document was sent out for public consultation.

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Browne

That the Council

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

B. Directs that Plan Change 20 be notified in accordance with Clause 5 of the first Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991 subject to amendments.

C. Approves the release of the draft Heritage Guidelines for public consultation.

Carried

Note: The meeting adjourned from 10:54 am and resumed at 10:56 am.

Note: Cr Alley assumed the Chair as the Community Vision and Experience portfolio lead.

22.9.3 Roxburgh Golf Club Lease - Rent Review

To consider the Teviot Valley Community Board's recommendation to set the rent payable under the lease held by the Roxburgh Golf Club at a reduced rate due to exceptional circumstances.

Resolution

Moved: Gillespie

Seconded: McPherson

That the Council

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

B. Declines the Teviot Valley Community Board’s recommendation to set the rent payable under the lease held by the Roxburgh Golf Club in accordance with the earlier version of the Council's Community Leasing and Licensing Policy 2019, at $772 per annum plus GST.

C. Agrees to exercise the exceptional circumstances clause of the Council’s Community Leasing and Licensing Policy 2021, and set the rent payable under the lease held by the Roxburgh Golf Club for the next five years commencing 1 July 2021 at $772 per annum plus GST.

Carried

22.9.4 Bannockburn Domain Reserve Management Plan 2022

To adopt the Bannockburn Domain Reserve Management Plan 2022.

Resolution

Moved: Gillespie

Seconded: Feinerman

That the Council

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

B. Recommends that the Bannockburn Domain Reserve Management Plan 2022 is adopted.

Carried

Note: His Worship the Mayor resumed the Chair.

22.9.5 Central Otago District Council Tree Policy renewal

To adopt the Central Otago District Council Tree Policy 2022.

Resolution

Moved: Alley

Seconded: McKinlay

That the Council

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

B. Adopts the Central Otago District Council Tree Policy 2022.

Carried

22.9.6 Future for Local Government Draft Report

To consider an update on the Future for Local Government review.

After discussion it was noted that the timeline for making a submission was short. Therefore the Chief Executive would report back to the December meeting with a plan to coordinate a submission before the closing date.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Alley

A. That the report be received.

B. Notes a report will come back to 14 December meeting with a plan for the way forward prior to Council submission.

Carried

Note: Cr McKinlay left the meeting at 11:32 am and returned at 11.35 am.

22.9.7 Register of Delegations

To adopt the updated Register of Delegations, to come into effect on 21 November 2022.

After discussion there were some clarifications required around some of RMA provisions, language regarding the staff delegations register and the template for the Hearings Panel and District Licencing Committee. It was agreed to bring the Register of Delegations back to Council within six months of this meeting with the clarifications addressed.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Gillespie

That the Council

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

B. Notes the decisions made in the interim Register of Delegations.

C. Adopts the updated Register of Delegations, to come into effect on 21 November 2022.

D. Notes the delegations register will be brought back within 6 months with clarifications addressed.

Carried

22.9.8 Development of the 2024-34 Long-term Plan

To consider the draft timeline for the development of the 2024-34 Long-term Plan.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Feinerman

That the Council

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

B. Approves the draft timeline.

Carried

22.9.9 Elected Members' Remuneration 2022-23

To consider the allocation of elected member remuneration for the 2022-23 year.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Browne

That the Council

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

B. Approves the annual elected member remuneration as set out in the report.

Carried

Note: The meeting adjourned at 11.53 am and returned at 12.40 pm.

22.9.10 Pecuniary Interests Register

To consider a new process for declaring pecuniary interests in response to the Local Government (Pecuniary Interests Register) Amendment Act 2022.

Resolution

Moved: Gillespie

Seconded: Laws

That the Council

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

B. Notes the requirement for elected members to complete and make publicly available their pecuniary interests in accordance with the Local Government (Pecuniary Interests Register) Amendment Act 2022.

C. Notes the Governance Manager is the registrar of the pecuniary interests register.

D. Notes the process for the collection of information for the register.

Carried

22.9.11 Residents' Survey 2022 - summary of results

To consider the summary report of the Central Otago District Council 2022 Residents’ Survey.

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Alley

That the report be received.

Carried

22.9.12 Financial Report For The Period Ending 30 September 2022

To consider the financial performance for the period ending 30 September 2022.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Alley

That the report be received.

Carried

6 Mayor’s Report

22.9.13 Mayor's Report

His Worship the Mayor spoke to his report.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Gillespie

That the Council receives the report.

Carried

7 Status Reports

22.9.14 November 2022 Governance Report

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

After discussion it was noted that a report on the museum strategy would be brought to the December meeting. It was also noted that there were some entries that might be closed as they were community board issues, not council issues and these would be looked at before the next meeting.

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Feinerman

That the Council receives the report.

Carried

8 Date of Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 14 December 2022.

9 Resolution to Exclude the Public

Resolution

Moved: Cadogan

Seconded: Cooney

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

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

General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under section 48 for the passing of this resolution
22.9.15 - November 2022 Confidential Governance Report	s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7

Carried

The public were excluded at 1.19 pm and the meeting closed at 1.21 pm.

14 December 2022

5 Reports

22.10.2 Private Plan Change 21 - Fulton Hogan, Parkburn

Doc ID: 602207

1. Purpose of Report

To consider the acceptance and processing of proposed Private Plan Change 21

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Agrees to accept and process the request as a private plan change and proceed to notify the request, under clause 26 of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991.

2. Background

Outline of Plan Change Proposal

Council has received a Private Plan Change request by Fulton Hogan Limited to re-zone a 118ha of land at Parkburn Quarry. The purpose of the plan change is to provide for a more efficient and appropriate use of the site, post quarrying activities, by providing for a range of urban zonings (residential, industrial and business).

The subject site adjoins the existing Pisa Moorings residential area. The proposal is to rezone and rehabilitate the subject site for urban development. The zoning has been predicated on the development of a Future Master Plan (FMP) which is attached to the application as Appendix 1. The FMP is not intended to be included into the District Plan as a form of Masterplan or Structure Plan. The FMP is a vision of how the applicant would like to develop their land, once quarrying activities is ceased, and thus a basis for the urban zoning requested by this plan change.

Proposed Residential Zoning

It is proposed to rezone subject site as shown in Figure 1 and as follows:

· 81.15ha of land to be rezoned Residential Resource Area (Low-Density Residential as per PC19);

· 0.09ha of land to be rezoned Residential Resource Area (Medium-Density Residential as per PC19);

· 4.72ha of land to be rezoned to Business Resource Area (3);

· 2.32ha of land to be rezoned Industrial Resource Area (2);

· 22.28ha of land to be rezoned to Industrial Resource Area (3)

Figure 1

Proposed changes to Business and Industrial Resource Area Provisions

The proposal adopts the provisions of proposed Plan Change 19 in terms of Low and Medium Density Zoning and includes amendments to the Business and Industrial Zones that will specifically apply to the Parkburn Site. The proposed changes to the Business and Industrial Zones are attached in Appendix 2 and 3.

The proposal creates a new Business Resource Area (3) shown as area 3 on Figure 1. The new zone will provide for convenience retail and limited travellers accommodation. There are proposed limits on floor area proposed as follows:

a) No more than 800m2 of the floor space at ground level shall be used for a convenience grocery store; and

b) No more than 1,400m2 of the floor space at ground level shall be used for cafés, restaurants or a bar; and

c) No more than 2,800m2 of floor space shall be used for travellers’ accommodation.

The proposal will create to new Industrial Resource Area zones – Industrial Resource Area (2) and Industrial Resource Area (3).

The proposed Industrial Resource Area (2) and (3) recognises the existing yard-based industrial nature of the area and proposes to ensure the area retains a yard-based nature that is not highly visible from outside the zone. The proposed provisions also limit the location, site coverage and nature of activity within these two zones along with limiting activity near the Lake or Parkburn Stream.

3. Discussion

Clause 25 of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991 outlines the options available to Council in relation to decisions on the processing of a private plan change.

Council can choose to accept the request in whole or part and process as a private plan change; adopt the request as if it were a plan change made by Council; deal with the request as if it were an application for a resource consent; or reject the request. These options are discussed below.

Clause 25 (4) of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991 limits the grounds under which Council can reject a request as follows:

The local authority may reject the request in whole or in part, but only on the grounds that

a) the request or part of the request is frivolous or vexatious; or

b) within the last 2 years, the substance of the request or part of the request—

i. has been considered and given effect to, or rejected by, the local authority or the Environment Court; or

ii. has been given effect to by regulations made under section 360A; or

c) the request or part of the request is not in accordance with sound resource management practice; or

d) the request or part of the request would make the policy statement or plan inconsistent with Part 5; or

e) in the case of a proposed change to a policy statement or plan, the policy statement or plan has been operative for less than 2 years.

In terms Clause 25 (4) (a) – (e), the proposal is not considered to be frivolous or vexatious; and there has been no consideration of the request or part of the request by the Central Otago District Council or the Environment Court, nor has it been given effect to by regulation made under section 360A.

In terms of Clause 25 (4) (c), the proposal utilises existing zoning and proposed Plan Change 19 residential zones. The proposed plan change has been accompanied by a significant amount of information demonstrating careful consideration in the development of the plan change and is not considered to be contrary to sound resource management practice.

The proposed plan change will not result in a policy statement or plan being inconsistent with Part 5 and does not affect a plan that has been operative for less than two years.

Given the above I consider there are no grounds to reject the proposed plan change.

Clause 25 (4) provides a number of options in terms of how the proposed plan change is processed as follows:

Deal with the request as if it were a resource consent

The proposed plan change is significant departure from the current rural zoning and scheduled activity notation and would not be successful if processed as a resource consent without the benefit of the proposed plan changes.

Adopt the request as if it were a plan change made by Council

A proposed plan change at the Parkburn site was not considered by Council or the community as part of the Cromwell Spatial Plan process and has not been developed through the Schedule 1 process required of Council initiated plan changes. Council has not undertaken any consultation or engagement in relation to the proposed plan change.

If Council were to consider adopting the plan change the costs associated with the plan change would be borne by Council.

Accept the request and proceed to notify as a private plan change

This would seem the most appropriate option for the processing of the proposed Plan Change 21. The proponent has expressed a preference for the plan change to be processed as a private plan change. All costs associated with the processing of a private plan change are to be borne by the proponent.

Conclusion

The proposed plan change provides for a range of urban zonings (residential, industrial and business), to be implemented through a master plan when quarrying activity ceases on the site at Parkburn.

Pursuant to Clause 25 (4) of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991 it is considered that there are no grounds to reject the proposed plan change. The matter for Council to decide at this time is how the plan change will be processed.

4. Financial Considerations

All costs associated with the processing of a private plan change are borne by the proponent.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Accept the request and proceed to notify the request as a private plan change under Clause 26 of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991.

Advantages:

· Future certainty of development on the Parkburn site post quarrying activity.

· Additional residential and commercial development opportunities in the Cromwell basin.

· All costs associated with the processing of the plan change will be met by the proponent.

Disadvantages:

· No obvious disadvantages.

Option 2

Accept the request and notify the request as if it were a Council initiated plan change.

Advantages:

· No obvious advantages.

Disadvantages:

· Costs associated with the plan change will be met by Council

· Additional resource would be required to process plan change

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	The Council has functions under the Resource Management Act 1991 and by carrying out these functions this decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities. This decision promotes the social, economic and environmental wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by providing for future residential growth.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes - The following Council Policies were considered: · Central Otago District Plan, which the applicant seeks to change through this process. · Community Outcomes in Ka Aka Whakamua Framing our Future Long-term Plan 2021-31: “Council’s purpose is to enhance well-being in our communities. Conversations and feedback about what well-being looks like for the people living in this district have defined our community outcomes.” The plan change is not inconsistent with this key action as it is for residential growth within the current District Plan rule framework but seeking a new zoning for the land
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	The plan change process does not impact on these matters and the merits of the plan change are considered against the RMA framework.
Risks Analysis	There are minimal risks associated with the recommendation to accept the request.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The plan change will be publicly notified in accordance with the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act, provides a right of submission and further submission.

7. Next Steps

Prepare Plan Change for public notification in accordance with Schedule 1 to Resource Management Act 1991.

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - PC00021 Attachment B - Future Master Plan by Baxter Design Group.pdf ⇩

Appendix 2 - PC00021 Attachment D - Proposed Amendments to Section 8 Business Resource Area.pdf ⇩

Appendix 3 - PC00021 Attachment E - Proposed Amendments to Section 9 Industrial Resource Area.pdf ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Ann Rodgers	Louise van der Voort
Principal Policy Planner	Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure
28/11/2022	6/12/2022

14 December 2022

22.10.3 Plan Change 22 - Dark Sky

Doc ID: 602206

1. Purpose of Report

To consider the notification of proposed Plan Change 22 in accordance with Clause 5 of the first Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Directs that Plan Change 22 be finalised following engagement with Aukaha and notified in accordance with Clause 5 of the first Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991.

2. Background

Naseby Vision Incorporated Society (Naseby Vision) is a community development group that formed in 2005 and currently represents 389 known members, comprising a mix of Naseby residents, holiday-home owners, farmers and business people.

Since its establishment Naseby Vision has worked closely with the Central Otago District Council, the Maniototo Community Board and numerous local and national groups and companies to improve services and facilities in the town and to promote the interests of its many members and the town in general.

Since early 2016, Naseby Vision has pursued the goal of protecting Naseby’s night sky from light pollution, to grow resident and visitor appreciation of the township’s pristine night skies, and ultimately to achieve International Dark Sky Accreditation as a Community, the first in the Southern Hemisphere.

Naseby Vision has worked with the community and the Council and the International Dark-Sky Association (IDA) towards achieving these goals, including a series of consultations about the preparation of a Private Plan Change Request (PPC request) and the process for this.

The Dark Sky Accreditation (Community) will be the first of its type in New Zealand and differs from other IDA Accreditations in New Zealand which are for “reserve” and “sanctuary” areas that don’t have urban development.

The Naseby Vision goals to achieve and maintain an IDA accredited town are:

· To grow a culture of “awe” of the Naseby and Maniototo pristine night sky creating active stewardship by residents to reduce night light pollution.

· To ensure outdoor lighting product advice is available and that downward light shaded angles are accepted descriptors for new builds and changes to established buildings via local government building approvals.

· That residents are clear that all residential current outdoor lighting is the accepted benchmark, and no changes would be required.

· To create opportunities for children, families, residents and visitors, global astronomers to view and learn about the night sky objects at 588m above sea level.

· To develop a strong and ongoing science curricula relationship with the Maniototo Area School with events, scholarships, travelling astronomers to grow the students’ identification with the night sky of their Maniototo living environment.

· To encourage new small businesses and services to underpin Naseby’s potential astronomical tourism.

· To audit the illumination within the boundary of Naseby township”.[1]

The Central Otago District Council has previously shown its support and commitment for the protection of the dark skies through the passing of two resolutions on lighting policies in 2018:

RESOLVED that Council commits to the development of a Lighting Policy for the Central Otago District owned and managed or administered building facilities and infrastructure which promotes lighting standards that comply with current International Dark Sky Association requirements.

RESOLVED that Council commits to promoting lighting standards, that comply with current International Dark Sky Association requirements, into the first draft of the new Central Otago District Plan.

The Council’s Transport Plan 2018 was also updated to include a maximum of 3000 Kelvin LEDs for street lighting.

The replacement of 4,000 K LEDs with 3,000K LEDs for Naseby’s street lighting led the IDA to confirm that Naseby is listed on the IDA website among the other cities in the world that have adopted the 3,000 K or lower lighting standard.

3. Discussion

Naseby Vision has been working in the community to enable changes to be made to the Central Otago District Plan that will enable an application to be made to the IDA for a dark sky reserve accreditation. The proposal is for a new section to the District Plan which sets provisions that have been designed to come into effect when new development is proposed to ensure the quality of the dark skies currently enjoyed by the Naseby Community and visitors to the area will be protected.

The proposed rules will not impact on existing lighting arrangements when new development is proposed to ensure the quality of the dark skies currently enjoyed by the Naseby Community and visitors to the area will be protected for the benefit of existing and future generations.

The plan change will also deliver benefits to the existing and future residents and visitors to Naseby as it will enable Naseby Vision to gain Dark Sky Community accreditation for the township. This will, in turn assist the community through the following initiatives:

· Championing the future establishment of lighting codes across the region;

· Maintaining community consciousness of light pollution and strengthening the culture of care for pristine night skies;

· Participating in local monitoring for compliant outdoor lighting codes;

· Initiating negotiations with Naseby residents or businesses, should that be necessary;

· Supporting modest economic development through astro-tourism and infrastructure appropriate to a village the size of Naseby;

· Creating opportunities for locals and school students to become more knowledgeable about the night sky; and

· Co-operating and working with New Zealand and overseas Dark Sky networks.

Members of the Royal Astronomy Society of New Zealand, under the banner of the Dark Sky New Zealand (DSNZ) team undertook a survey of the night skies of Naseby in 2018. Their report concluded that “the sky quality of Naseby is top tier” and noted Naseby sits well in comparison with the IDA accredited Aotea/Great Barrier Island Reserve, and the Aotaki Mackenzie/Tekapo Sanctuary.

The DSNZ team undertook an assessment of the night sky in Naseby and provide training on the community purchased telescope.

Night Sky Brightness (NSB) was measured in “magnitudes per square arc seconds (mpsas)”, where the higher the mpsas value is the darker the sky is and the better the visibility of the Milky Way and the number of stars visible to the naked eye; concluding the following:

·... “Naseby’s location within the sparsely populated Central Otago Region is one of relative isolation with no nearby well-lit cities. The lighting at night is limited just to the township with no lighting on out-of-town boundaries or roads with no light domes to be seen in any direction. The most lit place (relatively speaking) in the region is Ranfurly but given the distances between the towns, its lights are not visible from Naseby. As there are no sources of artificial lighting outside of any of the townships of the Maniototo Region, the night sky brightness outside of the townships are influenced only by natural night sky brightness factors and hence seem to exhibit a similar quality”

· “Naseby Township’s sky quality places it at the Silver tier of the International Dark Sky Reserve or Park designation which augurs well for Maniototo’s desire to have the whole area designated as an International Dark Sky Park at a later date”.

With assistance from Council, Naseby Vision has undertaken a comprehensive process with the community and the IDA and provided a considerable amount of information upon which to base a new chapter in the District Plan. Council staff have initiated engagement with iwi authorities through Aukaha.

A new chapter has been drafted from the material provided by Naseby Vision and is attached as Appendix 1. The provisions will apply to areas mapped as “Dark Sky Precinct”.

Initially that will apply to the Naseby township, (where Naseby Vision has been working with the community and IDA), and as shown in figure 1.

While Naseby Vision have undertaken considerable engagement and consultation with the community and IDA over a number of years, the proposed plan change, engagement with iwi authorities has not occurred as required by Council when undertaking a plan change. An initial discussion has occurred with Aukaha and will continue prior to the plan change being notified.

Map

Description automatically generated

Figure 1 – Proposed Naseby Dark Sky Reserve

4. Financial Considerations

The progressing of Plan Change 22 through the statutory process is funded from the existing District Plan review budget.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Approve notification of Plan Change 22 in accordance with Clause 5 of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991.

Advantages:

· Council meeting expectation of community following commitment to progress towards making provision for protection of night sky.

· Enable Naseby Vision to make an application to the IDA for a Dark Sky Community accreditation.

· Protection of the special character and quality of the night skies from light pollution.

Disadvantages:

· No obvious disadvantages

Option 2

Not approve notification of Plan Change 22 in accordance with Clause 5 of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991 Advantages:

· No obvious advantages.

Disadvantages:

· Community disappointment

· Special character and qualities of with the night skies would remain unprotected.

· IDA accreditation for the first Dark Sky Precinct (Naseby) would not be able to be granted.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by the Central Otago District Council. The Council has functions under the RMA to carry out these functions. The plan change process under the Resource Management Act is a democratic public process and requires an assessment of the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being. This decision promotes the social, cultural, economic and, environmental wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes – the Central Otago District Plan The proposed plan change makes amendments to the operative Central Otago District Plan
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	The plan change process does not impact on these matters and the merits of the plan change are considered against the RMA framework.
Risks Analysis	There are no risks associated with this request
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The plan change will be publicly notified in accordance with the First Schedule to the RMA, which provides a right of submission and further submission.

7. Next Steps

The Plan Change and section 32 analysis will be finalised for release to Schedule 1 parties then publicly notified in accordance Clause 5 of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991.

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Plan Change 22 - Dark Sky Chapter Provisions.docx ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Ann Rodgers	Louise van der Voort
Principal Policy Planner	Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure
28/11/2022	5/12/2022

Council meeting

14 December 2022

Welcoming Communities survey analysis

Welcoming Communities is a new programme supported by Central Otago District Council that aims to help newcomers feel more connected in their communities. Being new to town can be hard and Welcoming Communities want to make it that little bit easier.

The Welcoming Communities team is working towards creating a plan designed to suit the unique needs of people new to Central Otago. The feedback we received from 95 newcomers has been collated and these results will help inform that plan.

A bit about where you used to live

To understand a bit more about our newcomers, we wanted to know about where they came from prior to being in Central Otago.

Did you move to Central Otago from a different country?

Figure 1. n = 95

Respondents were asked whether they moved to Central Otago from a different country. Most newcomers have moved here from another part of New Zealand rather than internationally, with only 36% of respondents moving from another country.

Which country did you move from?

Figure 2. n = 33

Of those respondents who moved here from another country, there was an even number from Australia, England and the USA. ‘Other’ countries included Kenya (3), Singapore (1), Scotland (1), Netherlands (1), Asia (1) and Philippines (2).

Which region of New Zealand did you live in before moving to Central Otago?

Figure 3. n = 61

Elsewhere in Otago (26%) was the most common place newcomers had come from within New Zealand. The top of the North Island was the next most common place with 21% coming from Northland and Auckland. Newcomers had also come from Southland (16%) and Canterbury (11%).

Did you move from a large city or a small town/rural area?

Figure 4. n = 95

The majority of respondents (68%) came to Central Otago from a large city with a population of 20,000 or more. Only 32% moved from a small town or rural area similar to towns in Central Otago.

A bit about where you live now

Where do you currently live?

Figure 5. n = 95

Most newcomers now live in either of the two more populated areas in the district, Alexandra/Clyde (37%) or Cromwell/Pisa Moorings (41%). ‘Other’ places people mentioned included Arrowtown, Dunedin, Lauder and rural Clyde.

How long have you lived in your current community?

Figure 6. n = 95

Over half (56%) of respondents are very new to their current community having lived there for 2 years or less. Forty-four percent have been living in Central Otago for 2 years or more and 16 respondents have been here for at least 5 years.

What brought you to this community?

Figure 7. n = 95

Respondents were asked to select from a list of reasons why they moved to Central Otago. They were encouraged to select as many as were applicable.

Lifestyle was the most commonly selected reason for moving to this community, followed by work and family which were each selected 34 times.

‘Other’ reasons included housing affordability, a change of scene, free school fees, climate, study and marriage to a New Zealander.

What things helped you adjust the most to life in Central Otago?

Figure 8. n = 95

Respondents were asked to select from a list of things that helped them adjust to life in Central Otago. They were encouraged to select as many as were applicable.

Work and ‘friends & family’ helped most newcomers adjust to living here, followed by participating in personal past-time activities.

‘Other’ things that helped newcomers adjust included meeting neighbours, meeting other families through school, personal development, developing a routine and some people have arrived very recently and are still adjusting to living here.

When you first arrived did you feel welcomed into the community?

Figure 9. n = 95

The majority of respondents felt welcomed into the community most of the time or in some places (90%), with only 10% saying that they did not feel welcomed into the community. Respondents were asked to provide examples of why they felt welcomed, why they did not feel welcomed and why only in some places.

Why did you feel welcome?

Those who felt welcomed said that they found people friendly and welcoming. There was a sense of support many received from schools and businesses. Others who were new to the community were more open and accepting than those who had been in the community longer. Having family or friends in the area was noted as a factor in feeling welcomed into the community.

Why did you not feel welcome?

There were a variety of reasons why respondents did not feel welcome. Many cited the difficulty they had in developing meaningful friendships and felt like many residents were closed off and not interested in making new friends. Others felt isolated due to comments about where they had come from, whether that be somewhere else in New Zealand or from overseas. There were some who experienced racism, either open or subtle. Some respondents noted difficulty in finding employment and felt that their newcomer status contributed to that difficulty. Those who worked in one community and lived in another struggled more than those who worked and lived in the same community. A challenge that some respondents cited was the difficulty of getting involved in the community with structured 9-5 work hours as many groups met during the day.

Diversity in the community

Locally, who do you look to for guidance on life decisions?

Figure 10. n = 95

Respondents were asked who they looked to for guidance on life decisions and were given a list of options to select as many as applied. One important option was left off the list and the majority of respondents selected ‘Other’ and said that they rely on family, friends or themselves for guidance on life decisions. Employers and government/local government elected members are also looked upon locally for guidance.

Do you believe they address the needs of our diverse community, and do they include newcomers?

Figure 11. n = 95

This question was likely a difficult one to answer for many respondents given a large portion of them had mentioned that ‘family, friends or themselves’ were who they looked to for guidance in making life decisions. Therefore, it is understandable that 55% of respondents to this question said they were ‘unsure’ if those who they looked to for guidance address the needs of our diverse community.

Thirty respondents selected ‘yes’, they felt those they looked to for guidance on life decisions did address the needs of our diverse community and do include newcomers. These respondents had selected either ‘other’ (18) and predominantly mentioned family, friends or themselves, employers (10), church leaders (4), government / local government elected members (4) and school leaders (2).

Do you believe the community where you live is accepting of different cultures and beliefs?

Figure 12. n = 95

While 28% of respondents answered that they believed their community was accepting of different cultures and beliefs, 22% believed their community was not accepting and interestingly, 48% answered that they were unsure. Respondents were asked to provide an explanation as to why they felt the way they did.

Those who felt their community was accepting noted the presence of seasonal staff in the district as well as different religious and cultural groups that exist.

Reasons given for not being accepting of different cultures and beliefs include negative comments about people from different cultures and a general lack of diversity in the community. Some respondents felt that there was a perpetuation of negative stereotypes that filtered into lots of aspects of daily life. Many commented on the dynamics of a community whose demographics are shifting, with a community that may not be ready to embrace those changes.

How could our public spaces better reflect diversity and create a sense of community ownership?

Fig 13. n = 95

Respondents were asked to select from a list of ways that public spaces could better reflect diversity and create a sense of community ownership. All the suggestions were popular with respondents with a ‘community garden with an international focus’ being the most commonly selected.

‘Other’ suggestions including an international food festival, ensuring mana whenua narrative is built into design elements, inclusive events celebrating all cultures, readily available information about public spaces / walking tracks, more family friendly activities and facilities, more free or affordable activities, a safe gathering space for people of all ethnicities, community events centre for indoor sports, community gym and dog parks.

Your work

Do you work in full-time or part-time paid employment?

Fig 14. n = 95

Eighty-three percent of respondents were in full or part-time paid employment.

How likely are you to recommend your workplace to a friend or family member?

Fig 15. n = 78

Eighty-two percent of those who are in full or part-time paid employment were likely or very likely to recommend their workplace to a friend or family member. Only 5% of these respondents were unlikely or very unlikely to recommend their workplace.

Do you feel respected by your work team?

Fig 16. n = 77

Almost all respondents in paid employment (97%) said that they felt respected by their work team either some or all of the time.

Information and having your say

Where did you find information about clubs, community groups and council services when you first arrived?

Fig 17. n = 95

The most common place where respondents found information about clubs, community groups and council services when they first arrived was from a friend or neighbour or by reading the newspaper. The Central App and school newsletters were also places that newcomers found information. Sixteen respondents mentioned that it was difficult to find information on council services, clubs and community groups.

‘Other’ places that respondents found this sort of information included social media, local bulletins and newspapers, online community groups, search engines, libraries and council’s website.

When you see messages and images from Central Otago District Council do you think they reflect the diversity of the community you live in?

Fig 18. n = 95

Twenty-eight percent of respondents felt messages and images from Central Otago District Council were reflective of the diversity in their community and 20% felt they were not.

Over half of the respondents (52%) said they were unsure.

What do you think is missing from those messages and imagery?

Fig 19. n = 19

Respondents who answered this question were asked to tick as many options as applied. The most commonly selected thing that they felt was missing from messages and imagery from Council was that photos don’t reflect the ethnic diversity of the community and that the messaging is hard to understand for those whose first language is not English.

‘Other’ factors included that messaging is largely targeted at farmers rather than the wider community and that message was a bit ‘hit and miss’.

As a newcomer, are you aware of opportunities to voice your opinions about Central Otago District Council projects and decisions, such as improvements to parks and playgrounds or changes to policies and bylaws?

Fig 20. n = 95

There was an almost 50/50 split of respondents who are aware of opportunities to voice their opinions about Central Otago District Council projects and decisions and those who are not aware.

Adjusting to your new community

Which of the following do you enjoy most about your community?

Fig 21. n = 95

The natural environment, outdoors opportunities and seasons are the things respondents enjoy the most about their community and where they live. Also, the ability to walk many places, the small-town feel, low crime rate and connections with neighbours, family and friends are all reasons respondents enjoy living in Central Otago.

These results are unsurprising given the most common reasons respondents moved to Central Otago were lifestyle, family and friends.

What was the hardest part about moving here?

Fig 22. n = 95

The hardest part about moving to Central Otago for respondents was being accepted into groups and new friendships. The climate, access to affordable housing and isolation were also commonly selected reasons.

‘Other’ reasons included cost of living, finding it hard to find work, lack of public transport, limited arts opportunities and events, a decrease in income, limited access to health care, poor mental health support particularly for children, not many banks, limited retail options and services i.e. hairdressers.

Which of the following should the Welcoming Communities programme focus on to help make adjusting to this community a bit easier?

Fig 23. n = 95

A newcomer’s social group and better information about groups and organisations in the area were most commonly selected as things the Welcoming Communities programme could focus on to help make adjusting to the community easier for newcomers. ‘Invitation by a local for a cup of tea’ and ‘easier access to council services and information’ were also selected by respondents.

Demographics

This section was not compulsory. Ninety-one respondents completed this information.

Age

Fig 24. n = 91

There was a good spread of respondents across the age brackets with a relatively even number from 30 – 39, 40 – 49 and 50 – 59 age groups. The large majority (73%) are between the ages of 30 and 59. This result is unsurprising as people are likely to relocate during this time of their lives.

Gender

Fig 25. n = 91

The majority of respondents to this survey are female (73%), with 26% male and 1 respondent preferring not to say.

14 December 2022

22.10.5 Three Waters Depreciation Increase

Doc ID: 605152

1. Purpose of Report

To consider the increase in depreciation expense relating to three waters assets.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Notes the depreciation effect arising from the 30 June 2022 three waters asset valuation.

C. Approves adjusting the depreciation expense to ensure rate funded depreciation only covers the three waters renewals program in the Draft 2023-24 Annual Plan. This will reduce the rate funded depreciation by approximately $2.1M and is consistent with the 2021 Long-Term Plan.

2. Background

Revaluations of Three Waters assets occur regularly. The most recent revaluation was completed on 30 June 2022. The previous Three Waters valuation was completed on 1 July 2020. The 2022 revaluation has shown a large increase in the replacement cost of Three Waters assets. An increased revaluation impacts on Council’s operating expenditure by increasing the depreciation expense.

3. Discussion

Revaluation on 30 June 2022

The three waters network includes drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure. The Three Waters asset revaluation on 30 June 2022 showed a large increase in asset values compared to the previous valuation on 1 July 2020. The total increase in gross replacement cost was $102,134,392, an increase of 40.1%. This has led to a corresponding increase in the valuation annual depreciation of $1,639,467 per annum, an increase of 44.5%.

The increase in depreciation is also driven by the relative life of new assets that have been either constructed by council or by developers and vested in council.

	Gross Replacement Cost			Annual Depreciation
	2020	2022	% Change	2020	2022	% Change
Water	$118,935,515	$170,671,125	43.5%	$1,598,033	$2,368,557	48.2%
Wastewater	$100,329,465	$138,107,399	37.7%	$1,641,374	$2,352,109	43.3%
Stormwater	$35,560,968	$48,181,816	35.5%	$445,958	$604,166	35.5%
Total	$254,825,948	$356,960,340	40.1%	$3,685,365	$5,324,832	44.5%

Several factors have driven this overall increase, including:

· A plant asset data collection project was completed using the stimulus grant funding over the 2021/22 period. This caused an increase in the quantity and detail of plant assets data held in the asset register.

· Addition of new assets constructed over the period between 1 July 2020 and 30 June 2022.

· Addition of vested assets from new developments over the period between 1 July 2020 and 30 June 2022.

· Increased actual cost of replacing infrastructure assets based on recent construction costs.

This valuation excludes all projects that were still considered work in progress on 30 June 2022. Work in progress included some of the stimulus projects, Clyde wastewater, Clyde main wastewater pump station, and Lake Dunstan water supply. This will likely lead to a further increase for the next valuation on 30 June 2023.

Comparison to Long-Term Plan Depreciation Budgets

	30 June 2022 Revaluation Annual Depreciation	2022/23 LTP Budgeted Depreciation	2022/23 Depreciation Funding Shortfall	2023/24 Annual Plan (Draft) Budgeted Depreciation	2023/24 LTP Budgeted Depreciation	2023/24 Estimated Depreciation Funding Shortfall
Water	$2,368,557	$1,733,887	$634,670	$2,712,454	$1,793,891	$918,563
Wastewater	$2,352,109	$1,258,498	$1,093,611	$2,517,786	$1,307,244	$1,210,542
Stormwater	$604,166	$380,369	$223,797	$611,802	$380,369	$231,433
Total	$5,324,832	$3,372,754	$1,952,078	$5,842,042	$3,481,504	$2,360,538

The total depreciation expense funding shortfall in 2022/23 is $1.95 million and $2.36 million in 2023/24. As discussed previously, the shortfall in 2023/24 is expected to increase with the next valuation on 30 June 2023 and can only be estimated at this time.

The table below compares the 2023/24 Long-Term Plan against the Draft Annual Plan 2023-24 renewals program along with the rates funded depreciation. The Annual Plan model starting point for the depreciation expense is the 30 June 2022 valuation.

The depreciation funding provided in the Draft 2023/24 Annual Plan is higher than the Draft 2023/24 Annual Plan budget for renewals. This means that funding provided in excess of the renewals cost would fall into reserves. If reform of delivery of three waters proceeds, then this would result in a lower debt transfer to the new water entity.

Based on the analysis below, the draft 2023-24 Annual Plan renewals program less the depreciation funding results in an expected excess of rate funded depreciation of $2.19M. This additional funding is estimated to equate to a 7.31% rates increase.

Planned Renewal Activities	2023/24 Annual Plan (Draft)	2023/24 LTP
Water Supply Renewals	$2,049,519	$2,049,519
Less Depreciation Funding	($2,712,454)	($1,793,891)
Total unfunded/(funded)	($662,935)	$255,628
Wastewater Renewals	$1,217,359	$1,217,359
Less Depreciation Funding	($2,517,786)	($1,307,244)
Total unfunded/(funded)	($1,300,427)	($89,885)
Stormwater Renewals	$380,000	$380,000
Less Depreciation Funding	($611,802)	($380,369)
Total unfunded/(funded)	($231,802)	($369)
Total Planned Renewals	$3,646,878	$3,646,878
Less Depreciation Funding	($5,842,042)	($3,481,504)
Total unfunded/(funded)	($2,195,164)	$165,374

Funding Depreciation

Depreciation expense is an operating expense. It reflects the use of an asset over its useful life. Depreciation in most cases is fully rate funded with the rate funded depreciation being used to fund renewal capital works and for the repayment of loans used to fund capital works. Below are statements from the Local Government Act 2002 and the Council’s Financial Strategy 2021 that provide guidance on how this Council can address the increase in depreciation.

The Local Government Act 2002 section 100(1) states:

“A local authority must ensure that each year’s projected operating revenues are set at a level sufficient to meet that year’s projected operating expenses.”

Further in section 101(1):

“A local authority must manage its revenues, expenses, assets, liabilities, investments, and general financial dealings prudently and in a manner that promotes the current and future interests of the community.”

Council’s Financial Strategy 2021 states (pages 167-168 of the Long-term Plan 2021-2031):

“Assets Replacement - Investment in the current asset base will continue with replacement of assets funded through depreciation reserves. Council rates for the majority of its depreciation, which is held in reserve to spend on replacement assets and the payment of borrowings required to fund these assets. All renewals are funded by depreciation.”

“Assets Increased Levels of Service – Increased level of service for significant capital works is to be primarily funded by loans. To ensure that today’s ratepayers do not pay for the building and using of the asset, loan repayment will be rate-funded. Council will rate-fund the depreciation collected on the asset and use these funds to pay the loan principal.”

Three waters assets typically have long lives and do not require immediate replacement even though they will have an immediate impact on depreciation. Insufficient funding for replacing assets over the long term would increase the potential for failure or lead to a decline in the level of service provided.

Ability to Spend Additional Renewal Budget

The revised capital budgets for the Three Waters activities in the 2022/23 financial year is $34.33 million and the Long-Term Plan budget for the 2023/24 financial year is $12.17 million. This is a total of $46.5 million to spend before 30 June 2024 when the three waters are expected to transition to the new Water Services Entity.

2019/20	2020/21	2021/22	Average
$14,251,941	$7,171,235	$30,556,981	$17,326,719

Spending in 2021/22 was heightened by the Three Water Stimulus Grant funding of $9.46 million with tight deadlines for expenditure, alongside spending on two major capital projects (Clyde Wastewater and Lake Dunstan Water Supply). Both major capital projects had full investigations and designs completed prior to 2021/22.

It is normally very difficult to deliver this level of expenditure on water infrastructure projects in the short term. This is because the amount of time required to fully investigate, design and construct tends to be more than 12 months. This means that the additional depreciation funding is unlikely to be spent prior to 30 June 2024 on top of the existing $46.5 million capital work program.

Recent Spend on Renewal of Assets

A significant program of investment on renewing existing assets is already underway using existing budgets.

Recent key renewals include:

· Clyde falling main renewal ($1.08 million, stimulus funded)

· Roxburgh falling main renewal ($1.01 million, stimulus funded)

· Lake Dunstan Water Treatment Plant ($16.12 million, replacing existing Alexandra and Clyde Water Treatment Plants)

Upcoming key renewals include:

· Bridge Hill falling main renewal

· Cromwell Water Treatment Plant (replacing existing Cromwell Water Treatment Plant)

· Remaining water and wastewater pipe renewals program to be tendered in 2023

· Fixture renewals including meter replacements program

· Plant renewals program

4. Financial Considerations

The increase to fund the Three Waters depreciation shortfall is estimated to equate to a 7.31% rates increase. This comes at a time when the community is already facing increased living costs. A short-term rates reduction would promote the current interests of the community who are already facing increased living costs.

Council has already invested a large amount of money in the renewal or replacement of its aging assets and the short-term reduced depreciation funding is unlikely to have a significant impact on the Three Waters network. It should be noted that there is a risk to Council of not fully funding depreciation in the long term should Three Waters not transition as expected on 1 July 2024.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Fund depreciation to the same amount as the proposed renewals expenditure.

This would involve adjusting the depreciation expense to ensure rate funded depreciation only covers the three waters renewals program in the Draft 2023-24 Annual Plan. This will reduce the rate funded depreciation by approximately $2.1 million and is consistent with the 2021 Long Term Plan.

Advantages:

· Reduces the rate funded depreciation by approximately $2.1 million.

· Reduces the impact of a rates increase to the community at a time of increased cost of living.

· Consistent with the Long-Term Plan planned expenditure on renewals.

· Unlikely to have a significant impact on the three waters network in the short term.

Disadvantages:

· Insufficient funding for replacing assets over the long term would increase the potential for failure or lead to a decline in the level of service provided.

· Funding depreciation rather than the renewal program smooths the rates funding impact over the medium to longer term. If council were to continue with a renewals funding model longer term, then there would be no accumulated depreciation resulting in years when the funding requirements would spike when large expensive assets require replacement.

Option 2

Fully fund the depreciation expense.

Advantages:

· Council recognises the full depreciation cost which reflects the current cost to replace water infrastructure assets.

· Depreciation accumulates to mitigate the impact in years when replacement of large expensive assets is required.

Disadvantages:

· The ability to spend an additional $2.1 million on renewals is unlikely due to capital budgets already being significant.

· If the depreciation funding falls into reserves, it would result in a lower debt transfer to the new water entity if three waters reform proceeds.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the social wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by ensuring rates do not increase substantially at a time where the community is already facing a high cost of living.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes. It is consistent with the Council’s Financial Strategy 2021 and the 2021 Long-Term Plan planned expenditure on renewals.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	There are no considerations to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts for this decision.
Risks Analysis	There is minimal risk of not fully funding three waters depreciation in the short term. There is a risk to Council if it is not fully funded in the long term. Long-term insufficient renewal funding would increase the potential for failure or lead to a decline in the level of service provided.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	As the recommendation is to continue funding renewals with depreciation as planned for the 2021 Long-Term Plan period no further consultation is required. Consultation can occur as part of the 2024 Long-Term Plan process should Three Waters not transition as expected on 1 July 2024. This decision may require review by the Department of Internal Affairs
Water Services Entities Bill, Schedule 1, Sub-part 4	This decision relates to, or may affect, the provision of water services. The decision does not/is not: a) adopt an annual plan or amend a Long Term Plan; or b) adopt a policy required by the Local Government Act 2002; or c) is significantly inconsistent with, or is anticipated to have consequences that will be significantly inconsistent with, a policy or plan adopted by the local authority under the Local Government Act 2002 d) purchase or disposal of an asset other than in accordance with its long- term plan; or e) n/a (CCO); or f) or to enter into a contract. This decision therefore does not meet the definition of a decision subject to the Department of Internal Affairs oversight powers under subclause 22.

7. Next Steps

Council staff will continue to progress the renewals program based on the 2021 Long-Term Plan budgets.

8. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Chantal Green	Julie Muir
Infrastructure Finance Officer	Three Waters Director
30/11/2022	1/12/2022

14 December 2022

22.10.6 Roading Depreciation Increase Impact on Annual Plan 2023-24

Doc ID: 605021

1. Purpose of Report

To consider the increase in rate funded depreciation expense relating to roading assets.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Note the depreciation effect arising from the 30 June 2022 roading asset valuation.

C. Resolves to adjust the depreciation expense to ensure rate funded depreciation only covers the roading capital works programme in the draft 2023-24 Annual Plan as presented. This will reduce the rate funded depreciation by approximately $1.2M (and therefore reduce rates by 4.07%) which is consistent with previous years treatment.

2. Background

Revaluation on 30 June 2022

The roading network includes roading, Alexandra airport, bridges, carparks, footpaths and streetlighting infrastructure. The roading revaluation for 30 June 2022 showed an increase in the depreciable replacement cost (DRC) of assets by 14% to $589.16M and annual depreciation (AD) by 19% to $7.29M since the previous valuation on 1 July 2020.

The Annual Plan 23/24 model’s starting point for the depreciation expense is the 30 June 2022 valuation. Based on the draft 2023-24 Annual Plan capital works programme less the Waka Kotahi subsidies and the depreciation funding on the 30 June 2022 valuation there is an expected excess of rate funded depreciation of $1.22M. This additional funding is estimated to equate to 4.07% rates increase.

3. Discussion

Revaluation on 30 June 2022

The roading network includes roading, Alexandra airport, bridges, carparks, footpaths and streetlighting infrastructure. The roading revaluation for 30 June 2022 showed an increase in the DRC of assets by 14% to $589.16M and AD by 19% to $7.29M since the previous valuation on 1 July 2020.

The main reasons for the movement in this valuation are:

· A review of unit rates, resulting in large increases in unit rates for asphalt and eco seals.

· Inflation of 12.4%, in line with the road assessment and maintenance management (RAMM) road construction index for all other assets, except for bridges which have been inflated in line with Waka Kotahi’s bridge index, and land which has not been inflation-adjusted.

· Moderate asset quantity growth, primarily due to vested assets.

· Ongoing asset register updates.

Funding Depreciation

The Local Government Act 2002 section 100(1) states:

“A local authority must ensure that each year’s projected operating revenues are set at a level sufficient to meet that year’s projected operating expenses.”

Further in section 101(1):

Council’s Financial Strategy 2021 states (pages 167-168 of the Long-term Plan 2021-2031):

Comparison to the Long-term Plan and the draft Annual Plan 2023-24

	30 June 2022 Revaluation Annual Depreciation	2022/23 Annual Plan Budgeted Depreciation	2022/23 Depreciation Funding Shortfall	2023/24 Annual Plan Budgeted Depreciation	2023/24 LTP Budgeted Depreciation	2023/24 Estimated Depreciation Funding Shortfall
Depreciation Expense	$7,291,741	$3,876,107	$3,415,634	$7,773,666	$4,290,568	$3,483,098
Depreciation Funding (49%)*	$3,572,953	$1,899,282	$1,673,660	$3,809,096	$2,102,378	$1,706,718

*Subsidies roading activities are funded with a Waka Kotahi funding assistance rate (FAR) of 51%. This means that rate funding for the depreciation expense is set at 49% of the depreciation expense with the remaining funding for the capital expenditure program being 51% Waka Kotahi subsidies.

The total depreciation expense funding shortfall is estimated to be $1.67M in 2022-23 and $1.70M in the Annual Plan 2023-24. The shortfall in the Annual Plan 2023-24 can only be estimated as valuations for the roading assets are carried out annually, with the next valuation being 30 June 2023.

The below table compares the 2023-24 Long-term Plan against the Draft Annual Plan 2023-24 capital works programme along with the rate funded depreciation and the Waka Kotahi subsidies.

Roading Activity	2023/24 LTP	2023/24 Annual Plan (Draft)	Change
Renewals Local Roads	$4,520,000	$4,520,000	$0
Subsidised Improvements	$1,950,000	$250,000	($1,700,000)
Total	$6,470,000	$4,770,000	$0
Less Waka Kotahi Subsidies (51%)*	($3,299,700)	($2,432,700)	$0
Plus District Unsubsidised Roading	$250,000	$250,000	$0
Total depreciation funding required to meet Capital Programme	$3,420,300	$2,587,300	($833,000)
Less Depreciation Funding	($2,102,378)	($3,809,096)	$1,706,718
Total unfunded/(funded) Capital Programme	$1,317,922	($1,221,796)

4. Financial Considerations

Adjusting the depreciation expense to ensure rate funded depreciation only covers the roading capital works programme in the draft 2023-24 Annual Plan as presented above will reduce the rate funded depreciation by approximately $1.2M (and therefore reduce rates by 4.07%) which is consistent treatment to previous years.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Resolve to adjust the depreciation expense to ensure rate funded depreciation only covers the roading capital works programme in the draft 2023-24 Annual Plan as presented. This will reduce the rate funded depreciation by approximately $1.2M (and therefore reduce rates by 4.07%) which is consistent with previous years treatment.

Advantages:

· Reducing the rates impact in the 23/24 annual plan by consistently treating the depreciation funding to be in line with the roading capital works programme.

Disadvantages:

· Not recognising the replacement cost of the assets being depreciated based on the 30 June 2022 valuation. However, this is probably better considered in an LTP year.

Option 2

Phasing the increase from the valuation to bring the depreciation funding to be in line with the depreciation expense overtime and building a reserve for future large capital projects.

However, this is probably better considered in an LTP year.

Advantages:

· The surplus could contribute to future roading projects.

Disadvantages:

· Roading would be rated to build a surplus in reserves without proper consideration of the infrastructure and financial strategy which would take place through the LTP.

Option 3

Fully rate fund the depreciation expense arising from the 30 June 2022 roading asset valuation.

Advantages:

· The surplus could contribute to future roading projects.

Disadvantages:

· Roading would be rated to build a surplus in reserves without proper consideration of the infrastructure and financial strategy which would take place through the LTP. This will require consultation with the community and Waka Kotahi.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by being part of the 23/24 Annual Plan process. This decision promotes the social, cultural, economic and environmental wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by considering the effects on rates.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	The recommendation is consistent with Council’s financial policies.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	There are no implications.
Risks Analysis	Risks will be managed through the 23/24 Annual Plan process or 24/34 LTP process.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	Consultation will be managed through the 23/24 Annual Plan process or 24/34 LTP process.

7. Next Steps

The 23/24 draft annual plan will be updated to give effect to the Council’s decision.

8. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Donna McKewen	Saskia Righarts
Accountant	Group Manager - Business Support
1/12/2022	1/12/2022

14 December 2022

22.10.7 Insurance Programme Renewal

Doc ID: 605492

1. Purpose of Report

To consider Council’s insurance programme renewal and related increase in insurance premium of $212,466.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Approves to increase the budget for the current financial year through the reforecast process to accommodate the insurance renewal premiums as outlined in the attached reports up to a value of $212,466. The increase to be funded through rates.

C. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to continue negotiations with Aon to seek reductions in the premium prior to final payment date of 21 December 2022.

2. Background

Council’s insurance renewal date has changed in recent years from 30 June 2021 to 1 November 2022 to align with the liability program renewal of all councils managed by Aon New Zealand (Aon).

The 2022 insurance renewal has coincided with Council’s revaluations for the three waters and property assets. The three waters assets are effectively a two-year update on asset values and property is a three-year asset value update. These revaluations have resulted in significant uplift in asset values.

These increases in asset values along with the cost of recovery for a number of significant weather events has resulted in a substantial increase in the material damage and business interruption premium (refer to the attached Aon insurance renewal report 2022-23). Other areas of premium increase of note include commercial motor vehicle cover, professional indemnity cover and cyber risk insurance.

The current renewal programme has been put in place to ensure Council is fully covered. It will need to be signed off and paid by 21 December 2022 to be effective beyond this date.

3. Discussion

Material Damage – three waters above ground assets

The three waters network includes drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure. The three waters asset revaluation on 30 June 2022 showed a large increase in asset values compared to the previous valuation on 1 July 2020. Several factors have driven this overall increase, including:

· Addition of new assets constructed over the period between 1 July 2020 and 30 June 2022.

· Addition of vested assets from new developments over the period between 1 July 2020 and 30 June 2022.

· Increased actual cost of replacing infrastructure assets based on recent construction costs.

The three waters insurance renewal only relates to above ground assets and has been assessed by the water services team to be reasonable given current work programme.

The cover anticipates a significant inflation factor as the reinstatement value has to be set at a level that anticipates an event occurring on the last day of cover. This inflation factor has been interrogated and staff believe it is reasonable.

Material Damage – Property assets

Property includes Council owned buildings, service centres and community facility structures. The property asset revaluation on 30 June 2022 showed a large increase in asset values compared to the previous valuation on 30 June 2019. Several factors have driven this overall increase, including:

· The length of time between valuations, work programmes and the increase in construction costs.

· Increased actual cost of replacing assets based on recent construction costs.

The cover anticipates a significant inflation factor as the reinstatement value must be set at a level that anticipates an event occurring on the last day of cover. As above this value has been interrogated and appears to be reasonable.

A line by line assessment has been carried out by the property team on what properties should be insured for reinstatement versus indemnity value. This includes costs for clearing the site. Staff are still in the process of working through the property revaluation as of 30 June 2022. This includes reconciling this assessment against Council’s rate funding of depreciation criteria. There may be a reduction in the premium on completion of this analysis.

Staff have also been advised by Aon that current excesses are low at $5,000 in comparison to other councils. As a broad approach staff have been advised a change in excess to $100,000 which is more typical of other councils, could potentially save $37,000 in premium.

As part of the work outlined above, staff will work through potential excess changes to ensure the excess is not increased for those leased properties that would preclude Council from recovery up front.

Commercial Motor Vehicle Insurance

The motor vehicle insurance market is a difficult at present with several insurers opting not to quote as part of this renewal due to Council’s loss ratio. The claims are predominantly on windscreens. A major factor in the increase in this premium is the increase in technology in windscreens, with the costs for windscreen replacement increasing from approximately $500 to $3,000. Staff are working on fleet management improvements to ensure all chips are repaired in the first instance, avoiding claims for full windscreen replacement where possible.

Liability Insurance - Professional Indemnity

Staff have recently received options for a reduction in excess to $25,000 rather than the current $100,000. The excess was increased in 2021 to $100,000 and this is proving challenging based on current potential notified claims. The change in excess level would cause the premium to increase by $35,000. This would largely negate any reductions that can be made in the property material damage premiums outlined above.

Cyber Risk Insurance

This has been assessed by the Information Services Manager and deemed appropriate.

Life Insurance

There has been a minor increase in this year’s renewal (refer to appendix 2). The costs have remained the same per staff member, but the overall staffing level as at 1 November 2022 was slightly higher than the same date in 2021.

Renewal

Overall, the renewal has not been as streamlined as staff would prefer. This is in part due to resourcing changes and the work required to update the material assets register. It is anticipated processes will be reviewed well in advance of next year’s renewal.

4. Financial Considerations

Insurance premiums are currently rate funded. As this operational expenditure this is the recommended financing method and these costs should not be paid for via others means (eg from general reserves). There is currently $471,200 budgeted in this financial year for insurance costs. Adopting this renewal programme will require the need for additional budget of approximately $212,466 for this financial year. This will result in rates increases.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Approves to increase the budget for the current financial year through the reforecast process to accommodate the insurance renewal premiums as outlined in the attached reports up to a value of $212,466. The increase to be funded through rates.

Advantages:

· Adequate insurance cover will be in place which appropriately mitigates Council’s risk.

Disadvantages:

· There will be an increase in rates as a result.

Option 2

Do not approve to increase the budget for the current financial year through the reforecast process to accommodate the insurance renewal premiums as outlined in the attached reports up to a value of $212,466.

Advantages:

· The rates expense will not increase.

Disadvantages:

· Council will be increasing its risk profile.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by ensuring council’s risk profile is adequately managed. AND This decision promotes the (social/cultural/economic/environmental) wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by ensuring appropriate insurance cover is in place.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	It is consistent with the council’s Risk Profile and the 2021 Long-term Plan planned expenditure for insurance.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	There are no considerations to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts for this decision.
Risks Analysis	The risk profile for Council will be heightened if Council does not fully fund the renewal insurance premiums.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	Insurance premiums are already budgeted and funded within the Long-term Plan. Consultation will depend upon the overall Annual Plan changes and be agreed early in the New Year.

7. Next Steps

Management will continue to work through the property and professional indemnity insurance renewals and the renewals will be worked into budgets as agreed.

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Insurance Renewal Report 2022-23 ⇩

Appendix 2 - Life insurance summary 2022.pdf ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Susan Finlay	Saskia Righarts
Chief Financial Officer	Group Manager - Business Support
6/12/2022	6/12/2022

Council meeting Agenda

14 December 2022

I. Statement of Financial Performance for the period ending 31 October 2022

2022/23	4 MONTHS ENDING 31 OCTOBER 2022					2022/23
		YTD	YTD	YTD
Annual Plan		Actual	Revised Budget	Variance		Revised Budget
$000		$000	$000	$000		$000
	Income
36,238	Rates	12,068	12,000	68	˜	36,238
6,062	Govt Grants & Subsidies	1,883	2,189	(306)	˜	6,552
8,161	User Fees & Other	2,157	2,807	(650)	˜	8,729
14,930	Land Sales	-	-	-	˜	14,930
2,233	Regulatory Fees	1,053	744	309	˜	2,233
2,192	Development Contributions	2,326	731	1,595	˜	2,192
500	Interest & Dividends	58	167	(109)	˜	500
-	Reserves Contributions	320	-	320	˜	-
-	Profit on Sale of Assets	169	-	169	˜	-
40	Other Capital Contributions	83	10	73	˜	41
70,356	Total Income	20,117	18,648	1,469	˜	71,415

	Expenditure
13,876	Staff	4,719	4,677	(42)	˜	14,207
603	Members Remuneration	182	201	19	˜	603
8,918	Contracts	3,548	3,008	(540)	˜	9,185
2,735	Professional Fees	1,057	1,045	(12)	˜	3,304
10,857	Depreciation	3,619	3,619	-	˜	10,857
11,232	Costs of Sales	4	1,339	1,335	˜	11,232
4,182	Refuse & Recycling Costs	1,167	1,394	227	˜	4,182
-	Cost Allocations	(2)	-	2	˜	-
1,799	Repairs & Maintenance	672	629	(43)	˜	1,911
1,433	Electricity & Fuel	402	470	68	˜	1,421
-	Loss on Sale of Asset	146	-	(146)	˜	-
636	Grants	1,041	379	(662)	˜	763
1,118	Technology Costs	411	378	(33)	˜	1,095
378	Projects	176	441	265	˜	1,289
658	Rates Expense	511	219	(292)	˜	658
474	Insurance	158	158	-	˜	474
526	Interest Expense	57	101	44	˜	526
2,133	Other Costs	577	729	152	˜	2,243
61,558	Total Expenses	18,445	18,787	342	˜	63,950

8,798	Operating Surplus / (Deficit)	1,672	(139)	1,811		7,465

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

The financials for October 2022 show an overall favourable variance of $1.811M. Development and reserve contributions are higher than budget. This is predominately due to the timing of subdivisions in Cromwell and when the invoicing of contributions occurs. Grants and subsidies are ($306k) behind budget. This is due to the timing of Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) subsidies ($714k), which is offset by $489k of Strategic Tourism Assets Protection Programme (STAPP) funding that has been carried over from the prior financial year. User fees and charges are ($650k) behind budget. This is due to the timing of metered water sales ($561k) and ($125k) relates to the contributions for the Otago/Southland Three Waters Director position.

Income of $20.117M against the year-to-date budget of $18.648M

Overall, income has a favourable variance against the revised budget by $1.469M. This is being driven by the timing of development contributions with a variance of $1.59M (F), offset by the timing of Waka Kotahi subsidies (U) and metered waters sales (U).

The main variances are:

· Government grants and subsidies ($306k) U - This is mainly due to the timing of the Waka Kotahi roading subsidy contributing an unfavourable variance of ($714k). Subsidies are claimed for both the operational and capital roading work programmes and fluctuate based on the work programme. Tourism Central Otago has brought forward from the prior year $489k of Strategic Tourism Assets Protection Programme (STAPP) funding from Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) funding.

· User fees and other ($650k) U – Metered water sales have a variance of ($561k) and ($125k) relates to the contributions for the Otago/Southland Three Waters Director position. The first meter readings of the financial year have been carried out over October, November, and December 2022. This budget is split out over twelve months and will even out as the financial year progresses.

· Land sales no variance – These are programmed for later in the financial year and are recognised in tandem with costs of sales.

· Regulatory fees $309k F – The majority of the dog registration revenue has been received in July 2022 creating a favourable variance of $143k. This is due to the budget being spread over 12-months rather than the dog registration period. Building permit fees are also higher than budget by $154k.

· Development Contributions $1.59M F - This variance relates to the timing of development contributions which are dependent on the resource consent process and developer timeframes. Cromwell development contributions in wastewater, water and roading are higher than budgeted.

· Interest and dividends revenue ($109k) U - Large project costs are being managed within current cashflows rather than uplifting additional loan funding (this includes subdivision development costs which are held on the balance sheet). This results in less interest revenue due to low term deposits.

· Reserves contributions $320k F -These are difficult to gauge when setting budgets and are dependent on developers’ timeframes. As with development contributions above, these are mainly for the Cromwell area.

· Profit on Sale of Assets $169 F – This relates to the exchange of roading land at Loop road at Bendigo. This transaction is for the portion of land that the Council has sold and is offset by the loss on sale of assets being the cost of the land purchased.

Expenditure of $18.445M against the year-to-date budget of $18.787M

Expenditure has a favourable variance of $342k. The main drivers behind this are cost of sales, Waste and recycling costs, other cost, and projects. Offsetting this favourable variance is contracts, staff, grants, and rates expenses

The main variances are:

· Contracts ($540k) U – Contract expenditure is determined by workflow and includes planned and unplanned maintenance. The outcome of this is that the phased budgets will not necessarily align with actual expenditure, meaning some work appears favourable, and some contract spends year-to-date appear unfavourable. Physical works contracts ($478k), roading contracts ($153k), contracts ($46k) and planned maintenance $174k are the key timing variances year-to-date. The physical works contracts related to water supply operations ($294k) and wastewater supply operations ($209k). Water supply operations have seen an increase in service requests and reactive repairs towards the end October, while wastewater operations variance is due to flooding expenses from the Omakau incident in July 2022.

· Costs of sales $1.34M F - Costs of sales is linked to the land sales mentioned earlier and reflect the development costs for subdivisions. The subdivision development costs are held on the balance sheet in ‘property intended for sale’ until each stage is complete and land sales are received. There have been no land sales in the first four months to allocate out development costs to costs of sales.

· Refuse and recycling costs $227k F – The waste management activity of $163k can fluctuate depending on the amount of waste being managed. The emissions trading scheme expense has a favourable variance of $112k with a total annual budget of $336k, this is due for payment in March 2023.

· Loss on Sale of Asset ($146k) U - This relates to the exchange of roading land at Loop road at Bendigo. This transaction is for the portion of land that the Council has purchased and is offset by the profit on sale of asset being the cost of the land sold.

· Grants ($662k) U – This is predominately due to the Roxburgh Pool grant of $500k. This grant was recognised in the 2021/22 Annual Plan. The remaining variance is due to the timing of the district, ward and promotional grants.

· Projects $265k F -This is due to the phasing schedule of Tourism Central Otago projects and the costs incurred for the Southland Otago Three Waters Director position. The Southland Otago Three Waters Director position is a cost share arrangement with other councils in the area to assist with the Three Waters reform.

· Rates Expense ($292k) U – Central Otago rates expenses for 2022/23 on council owned property has been recognised in full in July 2022, while the budget has been recognised over 12-months.

· Other costs $152k F - A detailed breakdown for other costs is tabled below.

Other costs breakdown

2022/23		YTD Actual	YTD Revised Budget	YTD Variance		2022/23
Annual Plan	Other Costs breakdown	YTD Actual	YTD Revised Budget	YTD Variance		Revised Budget
$000		$000	$000	$000		$000
625	Administrative Costs	163	218	55	˜	678
673	Office Expenses	215	226	11	˜	662
229	Operating Expenses	75	73	(2)	˜	229
352	Advertising	23	125	102	˜	415
178	Valuation Services	77	60	(17)	˜	178
76	Retail	23	28	5	˜	81
2,133	Total Other Costs	576	730	154		2,243

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

· Other costs include only need based costs which will fluctuate against budget from time-to-time. There are no significant variances of note to report on at present.

II. Profit and Loss by Activity for the period ending 31 October 2022

ACTIVITY	INCOME				EXPENDITURE			SURPLUS/(DEFICIT)
	Actuals	Revised Budget	Variance	Actuals		Revised Budget	Variance	Actuals	Revised Budget	Variance
	$000	$000	$000	$000		$000	$000	$000	$000	$000
Infrastructure	2,326	897	1,429	89		172	83	2,237	725	1,512	˜
Roading	3,235	3,785	(550)	3,349		3,027	(322)	(114)	758	(872)	˜
Waste Management	1,923	1,986	(63)	1,874		1,983	109	49	3	46	˜
Parks Reserves Recreation	2,523	2,553	(30)	2,985		2,485	(500)	(462)	68	(530)	˜
Corporate Services	71	69	2	111		61	(50)	(40)	8	(48)	˜
People and Culture	529	530	(1)	611		592	(19)	(82)	(62)	(20)	˜
CEO	329	335	(6)	79		383	304	250	(48)	298	˜
Property	1,604	1,453	151	1,522		2,880	1,358	82	(1,427)	1,509	˜
Governance and Community Engagement	2,058	1,693	365	1,924		1,811	(113)	134	(118)	252	˜
Planning (Regulatory)	2,218	1,888	330	1,973		2,112	139	245	(224)	469	˜
Three Waters	3,014	3,446	(432)	3,930		3,175	(755)	(916)	271	(1,187)	˜

Total*	20,117	18,648	1,469	18,445		18,787	342	1,672	(139)	1,811	˜

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

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

· Infrastructure $1.51M F – income has a favourable variance of $1.43M. This is due to the timing of development contribution revenue. Cromwell development contributions in wastewater, water and roading are higher than budgeted. This is offset by ($125k) that relates to the contributions for the Otago/Southland Three Waters Director position. Expenditure has a favourable variance of $83k. This department is fully on-charged as an overhead. This variance is due to the Southland Otago Three Waters Director position. This is a cost share arrangement with other councils in the area to assist with the Three Waters reform.

· Roading ($0.87M) U – income has an unfavourable variance of ($550k). This is predominately due to the Waka Kotahi subsidy and offset by profit on sale of assets $167k. The subsidy moves in conjunction with the subsidised roading operating and capital work programmes. Operating expenditure has an unfavourable variance of ($322k). This is mainly due to contracts ($149k), loss on sale of assets ($145k) and professional fees ($106k). The profit on sale of asset and loss on sale of assets relates to the land exchange at Loop road, Bendigo and has a net profit of $22k.

· Waste Management $46k F - income has an unfavourable variance of ($63k). User fees and charges are behind budget, these fluctuate based on transfer station users. Expenditure has a favourable variance of $109k. This is due to the waste and recycling costs, which fluctuate based on the volume of waste being processed.

· Parks and Recreation ($530k) U – income has an unfavourable variance of ($30k). This is mainly due to user fees being ($30k) lower than expected. The Clyde Recreation reserve has a budget for camp fee income of $148k. This was not removed from year 2 of the Long-term Plan 2021-31 when the camping ground changed to a leased management agreement. This will be adjusted in the mid-year re-forecast. Expenditure has an unfavourable variance of ($500k). The Roxburgh Pool grant of $500k was recognised in the 2021/22 Annual Plan and is creating the unfavourable variance.

· Corporate Services ($48k) U – Income has a small $2k favourable variance. Expenditure has an unfavourable variance of ($50k). This is due to the timing of valuation services ($17k), equipment hire ($15k) and computer maintenance and support ($25k).

· People and Culture ($20k) U – income has a small unfavourable variance. Expenditure has an unfavourable variance of ($19k). Driving these variances are service centres $53k, human resources ($15k) and administration ($53k). There is a misalignment in the actual staff expenses compared to the budgets, overall for this department they net off with a favourable variance of $9k. Professional fees are ahead of budget ($12k) and vehicle internal hire recoveries are lower than expected by ($10k).

· CEO $298k F – Income has an unfavourable variance of ($6k). Expenditure has a favourable variance of $304k. This is due to timing and requirement for professional fees of $57k, staff costs of $195k, strategic planning of $23k, and other expenses of $20k.

· Property $1.509M F – The favourable variance of income is $151k. User fees and other revenue is higher than budget by $120k. This is due to the timing of annual leasing payments. Additionally, the $30k Transpower contribution from the prior year has been carried over for the kitchen and bathroom renovation project at Clyde Hall. Expenditure has a favourable variance of $1.358M. A favourable variance of $1.33M is due to the timing of the cost of sales budgets for subdivisions.

· Governance and Community Engagement $252k F – income has a favourable variance of $365k. This due to the budget phasing of the STAPP funding carried over from the previous financial year. Expenditure has an unfavourable variance of ($113k). This is due to governance of ($27k), community development of ($72k), promotions and tourism of ($45k), economic development of ($15k) and regional identity of $53k. The governance variance is due to the 2022 local government election expenses and the budget timing. Community development and promotions and tourism are higher than expected due to the timing of district, ward and promotional grants to the budget.

· Planning (Regulatory) $469k F – has a $330k favourable income variance. This is mostly due to dog registration costs by $143k and building consent revenue of $152k. Expenditure has a favourable variance of $139k. This is primarily due to contracts of $57k, staff costs of $34k, and professional fees $43k.

· Three Waters ($1.187k) U – The income variance is unfavourable ($432k). Metered water sales have a variance of ($561k). The first meter readings of the financial year have been carried out over October, November, and December 2022. Expenditure has an unfavourable variance of ($755k) being the physical works contracts related to water supply operations ($294k) and wastewater supply operations ($209k). Water supply operations have seen an increase in service requests and reactive repairs towards the end of October, while wastewater operations variance is due to flooding expenses from the Omakau incident in July 2022 as indicated earlier in this report.

III. Capital Expenditure

Year-to-date, 14% of the total capital spend against the full year’s revised capital budget, has been expensed.

2022/23						2022/23	Progress to date against revised budget
Annual Plan	CAPITAL EXPENDITURE	YTD Actual	YTD Revised Budget	YTD Variance		Revised Budget
$000		$000	$000	$000		$000

16,190	Council Property and Facilities	865	6,802	5,937	˜	24,516	4%
400	Waste Management	26	302	276	˜	905	3%
50	Customer Services and Administration	9	32	23	˜	95	9%
481	Vehicle Fleet	-	128	128	˜	597	0%
58	Planning	4	136	132	˜	407	1%
260	Information Services	109	439	330	˜	1,493	7%
165	Libraries	22	133	111	˜	492	4%
1,482	Parks and Recreation	244	736	492	˜	2,551	10%
7,205	Roading	835	3,312	2,477	˜	9,937	8%
23,987	Three Waters	8,297	11,445	3,148	˜	34,334	24%

50,278	Grand Total	10,411	23,465	13,054		75,327	14%

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

Council Property and Facilities $5.937M F -This is mainly due to the timing of the Cromwell Town Centre Projects which is currently underspent by $5.2M. This includes the Memorial Hall, Cromwell Administration Buildings, grounds, paths and fences projects around the Town Centre. Other areas behind budget include airports $475k, community buildings $230k, and elderly person housing $34k.

Waste Management $276k F – Green waste processing project along with the Cromwell transfer station upgrade project has not yet started.

Vehicle Fleet $128k F - Vehicle renewals and purchases are under budget. The vehicle renewals programme has started, however there are expected delays due to supply global issues.

Planning $132k F - This relates to the timing of the dog pounds and dog registration software projects. These were carried forward from the 2022/23 financial year and have not started yet.

Information Services $330k F - Information Services projects are behind budget. Projects include financial performance improvement $77k, geographic information systems $85k, Enterprise resource planning information systems $53k, and internet and network $43k.

Libraries $111k F – The Alexandra Library upgrade is behind budget by $79k, this project is in the design phase. Library book purchases are behind by $31k due to how quickly the publishers and authors complete their work. The books now scheduled to be published in January or February 2023 will be ordered in accordance with the financial year's budget commitment.

Parks and Recreation $492k F - This is driven by a mixture of the timing of project budgets, work programmes and contractor’s availability to perform the work. Parks and reserves are favourable by $289, with major projects including: Alexandra River Park $89k, John Street playground $70k, Omakau Tennis courts resurface $47k, Molyneux Pool $35k, Cromwell Pool $96k.

Roading $2.477M F - This is due to the timing of the budget and work programme. Roading projects include minor improvements $1.19M, gravel road renewals $540k, sealed road renewals $496k, footpath renewals $160k and drainage renewals ($70k). Minor improvements include Clyde Heritage precinct $889k, Alexandra cycle clip on $73k, Clyde bridge traffic lights $116k and LED lights ($95k).

Three Waters $3.148 F - This is due to the timing of construction projects. These can be ahead of budget or behind because of the project work programme. The main drivers include the Lake Dunstan water supply ($1.14M), Cromwell water treatment plant and capacity upgrades $1.63M, Clyde wastewater ($442k), Bannockburn pipeline $349k, Dunorling pumpstation upgrade $494k and Cromwell rising main $706k.

IV. Internal Loans

Forecast closing balance for 30 June 2023 is $4.14M.

OWED BY	Original Loan	1 July 2022	30 June 2023 Forecast
OWED BY	Original Loan	Opening Balance	Closing Balance
Public Toilets	670,000	468,048	443,899
Tarbert St Bldg	25,868	11,574	10,019
Alex Town Centre	94,420	44,545	39,117
Alex Town Centre	186,398	79,921	68,342
Alex Town Centre	290,600	139,137	122,048
Centennial Milkbar	47,821	18,192	14,973
Vincent Grants	95,000	9,500	-
Pioneer Store Naseby	21,589	9,609	8,213
Water	867,000	691,212	663,496
ANZ Bank Seismic Strengthening	180,000	143,504	137,750
Molyneux Pool	650,000	563,650	531,150
Maniototo Hospital	1,873,000	1,723,630	1,670,314
Alexandra Airport	218,000	197,216	189,584
Roxburgh Community Pool Upgrade*	250,000	-	241,384
Total	5,469,695	4,099,738	4,140,288

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

*The Roxburgh Pool loan has no opening balance as it has been uplifted in the 2022/23 financial year.

External Loans

The total amount of external loans at the beginning of the financial year 2022-23 was $134k. As at 31 October 2022, the outstanding balance was $114k. Council has received $20k in principal payments and $2.5k in interest payments.

Owed By	Original Loan	1 July 2022 Actual Opening Balance	Principal	Interest	31 October 2022 Actual Closing Balance
Cromwell College	400,000	95,351	12,272	1,767	83,079
Maniototo Curling	160,000	21,910	4,738	336	17,172
Oturehua Water	46,471	16,844	2,998	402	13,846
	606,471	134,105	20,008	2,505	114,097

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

Reserve Funds table

· As at 30 June 2022 the Council had an unaudited closing reserve funds balance of $281k. This reflects the whole district’s reserves and factors in the district-wide reserves which are in deficit at ($27.814M). Refer to Appendix 1.

· Taking the 2021-22 unaudited Annual Report closing balance and adding 2022-23 income and expenditure, carry forwards and resolutions, the whole district is projected to end the 2022-23 financial year with a closing deficit of ($32.026M). This is dependent of all capital funding being expensed, and based on year-to-date and current comments, this is not a realistic expectation, meaning the reserves should finish with a more favourable result than currently forecast.

3. Attachments

Appendix 1 - CODC Reserve Funds 2022-23 ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Donna McKewen	Saskia Righarts
Accountant	Group Manager - Business Support
24/11/2022	25/11/2022

14 December 2022

Logo, company name

Description automatically generated

22.10.9 Development of a District Vision and Wellbeing Framework

Doc ID: 602547

1. Purpose of Report

To provide an overview of the development of a district wide, 50-year vision and wellbeing framework.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Notes the update on the development of a district vision and wellbeing framework.

C. Appoints two members to act as liaison to the external advisory group.

2. Background

In 2019, the Local Government Act was amended to change the purpose of local government. Section 10 of the Local Government Act states:

10 Purpose of local government

(1) The purpose of local government is—

(a) to enable democratic local decision-making and action by, and on behalf of, communities; and

(b) to promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural wellbeing of communities in the present and for the future.

The New Zealand local government sector is also experiencing a significant reform programme, with reforms taking place in three waters, resource management and a review into the future for local government.

This reform programme is based on the premise that the traditional roles and functions of local government is in the process of change and the focus of local government’s role in the wellbeing of the communities it serves is at the forefront of this change.

In July 2021, Central Government announced the Three Waters Better Off Support Package. In July and August of 2022, Council considered reports about this support package and what projects should be included in a funding proposal for consideration by Central Government.

At its meeting held on 24 August 2022, Council approved the list of projects for inclusion in the funding proposal, which included a project to develop a community wellbeing framework and indicator dataset. The first step in this process is to articulate the vision for the district leading into the future.

The Central Otago district vision and wellbeing framework will include information on social, economic, environmental, and cultural wellbeing that spans beyond the scope of local authority functions. This provides a unique opportunity for the Central Otago District Council to lead the development of a 50-year vision, alongside other agencies, and stakeholders, to express the communities’ aspirations now, and into the future.

Once developed, the vision and framework will ensure that the Central Otago District Council is well placed to respond to the reform programme, and to ensure that as a district, Central Otago has a pathway for the future where all of its citizens were able to live enjoyable and meaningful lives.

The Central Otago District Council last led a project like this through the development and review of Central Prospects. During its creation, Central Prospects pulled together key stakeholders and held conversations across the district to provide a set of goals and actions that resulted in community outcomes that were important to them.

Central Otago’s Regional Identity is well established. Central Otago A World of Difference articulates a set of values that help represent Central Otago’s uniqueness and the kind of place we can be proud of now and into the future. Central Otago A World of Difference provides a solid foundation on which to build the 50-year vision for the district.

3. Discussion

The goal of this project is to create a district vision and a community well-being framework for the Central Otago district, followed by an indicator dataset matrix that will help to quantity and measure progress towards the four well-beings for Central Otago communities.

This work will be created through community conversations, engaging mana whenua, residents, local and central government agencies, place-based organisations, funders, and other stakeholders.

It will also draw on existing strategies and plans and the work being done in other parts of the region, such as the Otago Regional Council’s wellbeing framework as reported to their council on 28 September 2022.

Alongside the development of a district vision, will be the creation of a specific vision for the Central Otago District Council, to give effect to the council’s role in delivering on the vision. This work will result in a refresh of Council’s community outcomes as expressed in the Long-term Plan.

It should be noted that due to timing, it will be necessary to use the existing community outcomes for the development of the infrastructure strategy, and other key documents for the 2024-34 Long-term plan, with the work discussed in this report, providing the framework for future years. It is anticipated that the vision and framework will be developed in time to consult formally as part of the 2024-34 Long-term plan process. Some of the high-level information will be able to be used as pre-engagement for the Long-term plan.

The development of a district vision and community wellbeing framework will ensure that in the future, all projects are better able to articulate their strategic alignment and contribution towards the purpose of the Central Otago District Council, as defined in the Local Government Act. The creation of an indicator dataset will ensure Council is better able to report performance against agreed metrics and, ideally, demonstrate positive change.

An external advisory group will be established to help guide this work. The external advisory group will be made up of key stakeholders and will play an instrumental role in the development of the vision and framework. The advisory group will help to ensure that key stakeholders are involved in the development of the vision and framework from the outset. Two councillors are sought to act as liaison to this group. In addition to the advisory group, an internal project team has been established to champion this work. Final membership of the advisory group is yet to be finalised and will be informed by the internal project team.

4. Financial Considerations

A total of $90,000 was included in the Three Waters Better Off Support Package funding proposal for the creation of a wellbeing framework and indicator dataset.

At the time of writing, the Department of Internal Affairs was considering the funding proposals received from local authorities and advice was received on 1 December that the application for funding had been successful.

Preliminary discussions have begun with external organisations that could assist with the vision and framework development. Once funding has been approved, formal procurement processes will commence.

Other than internal staff resources, the Better Off Support Package funding is the only funding that has been earmarked for this work.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Notes the update on the district vision and wellbeing framework and appoints two members to act as liaison to the external advisory group.

Advantages:

· Central Otago has a 50-year vision and can articulate that to central and local government agencies.

· Central Otago District Council will work with key stakeholders to develop the vision and framework, building stronger relationships and connections.

· This work will clearly articulate the role Council in delivering a community wellbeing framework.

· Once developed, the vision and framework will ensure that all projects are better able to articulate their strategic alignment and contribution towards that.

· The creation of an indicator dataset will ensure Council is better able to report performance against agreed metrics and demonstrate positive change.

· There is high-level pre-engagement for the 2024-34 long-term plan.

· The Council is well positioned to meet the obligations of tranche two funding for the Better Off Support Package funding.

Disadvantages:

· The financial cost of the project, coupled with the staffing resource required.

· The project will not be completed in time to develop new community outcomes for key Council strategies that will inform the 2024-34 Long-term Plan.

Option 2

Notes the update on the district vision and wellbeing framework and decides not to appoint two liaisons to the external advisory group.

Advantages:

· Reduces the time burden place upon elected members for this project.

Disadvantages:

· Reduced elected member oversight on the project.

· Quality of output will be reduced.

· The advisory group would be less reflective of the community, resulting in the vision being less reflective of our community.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by articulating the vision the community has for the future and expressing that through a wellbeing framework.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes, the District Vision and Community Wellbeing Framework will draw on existing strategies and plans and will ensure that new polices and strategies can better articulate their strategic alignment.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	Council’s Sustainability Strategy will be considered as the vision and framework is developed. The framework will clearly articulate the district’s environmental wellbeing goals.
Risks Analysis	Risk analysis and mitigations have been considered as part of the project planning work. There are no inherent risks associated with the recommended option.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	This project has an impact across the council and district. It will include input from across the organisation and key stakeholders. Mana whenua will be a key partner in the project. There will be a range of opportunities for community engagement in the process, with formal consultation taking place as part of the 2024-34 long-term plan process.

7. Next Steps

Once funding approval has been received, a procurement plan will be competed and activated.

The project team will be finalised and the advisory board group established.

A comprehensive project plan will be finalised, with input from the advisory group.

8. Attachments

Nil

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Rebecca Williams	Dylan Rushbrook
Community Development Advisor	Group Manager - Community Vision
21/11/2022	28/11/2022

14 December 2022

Logo, company name

Description automatically generated

22.10.10 Future for Local Government Submission

Doc ID: 605256

1. Purpose

To consider the process for the Future for Local Government submission.

Recommendations

That the report be received.

2. Discussion

The Future for Local Government is a Ministerial Review into how our system of local democracy and governance in New Zealand should evolve over the next 30 years to improve the wellbeing of communities and the environment and actively embody the Treaty relationship. The review looks to address current, emerging and future challenges facing our sector and communities. The review’s primary focus is on how local government will be a key contributor to the wellbeing and prosperity of New Zealand and an essential connection to communities in the governance of New Zealand in the future.

Both the review and engagement initiatives have been underway throughout 2021 and 2022. The review panel over the last 18 months has talked with over 1000 people and received 5000 submissions which have fed into a draft report.

The draft report and recommendations on the future for local government, He mata whāriki, he matawhanui, was released on 28 October 2022.

The report is considered a ‘provocation’, intended to promote discussion through a number of concepts, principles, ideas, and outcomes. Submissions are invited to shape the final report and recommendations.

The report posits these considerations against the five key shifts for the future of local government:

· Strengthened local democracy

· Authentic relationship with hapū/iwi and Māori

· Stronger focus on well-being

· Genuine partnership between local and central government

· More equitable funding

The report contains 29 recommendations, and a series of questions. These can be broadly categorised into the following areas:

· Revitalising citizen-led democracy

· Tiriti-based partnership between Māori and local government

· Allocating roles and functions in a way that enhances wellbeing

· Local government as champion and activator of wellbeing

· A stronger relationship between central and local government

· Replenishing and building on representative democracy

· Building an equitable, sustainable funding and finance system

· Designing the local government system to enable the change

· System stewardship and support

A number of recommendations relate to more than one area.

A key concept adopted through the report is subsidiarity. Subsidiarity is a principle which means that roles and functions should be led and managed at the most appropriate local level, so that communities are empowered to shape their outcomes and take a leadership role in doing so. It indicates some areas where this could lead to an increased role for local government, and others where a shift towards greater central government involvement might be appropriate. The report emphasises that this is not a binary question, and that collaboration with differentiated focus will often be important.

Central Otago District Council formed a working group of both staff and an elected member representative to dissect the report and provide advice to elected members to assist in the submission process.

The working group is led by the Economic Development Manager. Membership includes:

· Councillor Tamah Alley

· Chief Executive

· Community and Engagement Manager

· Planning and Regulatory Services Manager

· Senior Strategy Advisor.

It is also supported by the Group Manager - Community Vision Executive Manager.

Members of the working group have undertaken an initial analysis of the report, attended sessions with Local Government New Zealand and met with neighbouring councils. The working group recommend a series of workshops with Council to develop the content of the submission. Key dates are as follows:

Date	Explanation
14 December 2022	Workshop One
25 January 2023	Workshop Two
17 February 2023	Draft Central Otago District Council submission circulated to councillors
28 February 2023	Submission deadline
TBD	Workshop Three

Given the tight timeframe to develop the submission, and the complexity of the topic, it is necessary to prioritise areas for discussion.

It is recommended that the first workshop focus on ‘what’ – what the report reflects, what Council wants to achieve, and what would best serve our community.

The second workshop would focus on ‘how’ – including how priority recommendations in the report would be best implemented or, how objectives could better be achieved.

A third workshop would follow, after the submission has been submitted. This workshop would discuss any ideas or initiatives raised through these discussions that Council could implement, regardless of any external process.

The following is a broad summary of the proposed prioritisation within the CODC submission structure.

In order of priority (highest to lowest)

Area

Explanation

Key topics

Replenishing and building on representative democracy

(Chapter 7)

This portion of the report addresses voter turnout, community engagement, and broader electoral structures.

Electoral Commission to oversee local elections.

Review of electoral legislation including electoral system, voter age, term limits, and chief executive employment provisions.

Elected member professional development.

Democratic health checks.

Māori wards

A stronger relationship between central and local government

(Chapter 6)

The central-local government relationship is strained with a lack of trust and confidence in both directions.

No recommendations were offered in the report. Two questions asked for merits of different relationship examples and made specific enquiry on existing barriers and how a new support system could be built.

Equitable, sustainable funding and finance

(Chapter 8)

The current funding system is not fit for purpose and needs redesigning.

Central government Regulatory Impact Statement assessments to include impacts on local government.

Mechanisms for co-investment.

Intergenerational funding for climate change.

Review and redesign funding system.

Central government agencies to pay rates and charges on properties.

Designing the local government system to enable the change

(Chapter 9)

Discusses how the system can be redesigned, and what principles would need to underpin the design.

The report includes five core design principles and gives three ‘example approaches.’ These are on pages 214-218 in the full report.

Local government as champion and activator of wellbeing

(Chapter 5)

This section discusses council’s role in championing and activating wellbeing. It discusses the role of council as an ‘anchor institution’.

Local and central government to explore funding and resources against several wellbeing areas.

Revitalising citizen-led democracy

(Chapter 2)

Discusses facilitating democracy and ensuring it reflects our increasing diversity, embodies Tiriti-based partnerships, and seeks innovative ways to ensure voices are heard.

Deliberative and participatory democracy.

Legislative provisions relating to engagement.

Engagement with Māori.

Allocating roles and functions in a way that enhances wellbeing

(Chapter 4)

Discusses the allocation of roles between central and local government as non-binary.

How to allocate functions, and the principles that underpin the approach.

Suggests areas where this could lead to change.

Tiriti-based partnership between Māori and local government

(Chapter 3)

Discusses frameworks for Tiriti-related provisions and a genuine partnership.

Partnership framework. Improving capacity and capability of council staff, systems, and processes. Transitional funding.

System stewardship and support

(Chapter 10)

Discusses how to embed, drive, and support the system of local government.

Discusses models of stewardship.

Community engagement

Council will undertake communications with the community to raise awareness about report and encourage people to submit. Although formal community engagement on Council’s submission would be preferred, it has not been recommended due to the following factors:

· The tight turnaround over the holiday period

· The complexity of the report and difficulty providing clear communications within the time constraint

· That the submission relates to government, rather than Council, decision-making.

3. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Future for Local Government Draft Report Oct 2022 Executive Summary ⇩

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Nick Lanham	Dylan Rushbrook
Economic Development Manager	Group Manager - Community Vision
1/12/2022	6/12/2022

Vincent Community Board Minutes

31 October 2022

Unconfirmed

MINUTES OF A mEETING OF THE
Vincent Community Board
HELD IN THE Ngā Hau e Whā, William Fraser Building, 1 Dunorling Street, Alexandra
AND LIVE STEAMED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON Monday, 31 October 2022 COMMENCING AT 2.00 pm

PRESENT: Cr T Alley, Dr R Browne, Mr J Cromb, Mr T Hammington, Mr D Johns, Cr M McPherson, Cr T Paterson

IN ATTENDANCE: T Cadogan (Mayor), S Jacobs (Chief Executive Officer), L van der Voort (Executive Manager - Planning and Environment), S Righarts (Group Manager - Business Support), D Rushbrook (General Manager – Tourism Central Otago), M De Cort (Communications Coordinator), M Tohill (Communications Support), W McEnteer (Governance Manager), J Harris (Governance Support Officer)

Note: The Chief Executive Officer assumed to Chair to begin the meeting.

1 Apologies

No apologies were received.

The Chief Executive Officer welcomed everyone to the first meeting of the triennium.

2 Reports

22.7.1 Declaration of Office

The Chief Executive Officer asked His Worship the Mayor to invite members to give their declaration of office. Each member then made their declaration of office.

22.7.2 Appointment of Chair and Deputy Chair

To select a voting system and to appoint the Chair and Deputy Chair.

Committee Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Paterson

That the Vincent Community Board

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

B. Selects System B for the appointment of the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Board, or a representative of the Board.

Carried

Cr Alley was nominated for Chair by Cr McPherson and seconded by Cr Paterson

Dr Browne was nominated for Chair by Mr Johns and seconded by Mr Hammington.

Cr Alley won the vote 4-3 on a show of hands

Note: Cr Alley assumed the Chair.

Mr Cromb was nominated for Deputy Chair by Cr Paterson and seconded by Cr McPherson

Dr Browne was nominated for Deputy Chair by Mr Hammington and seconded by Mr Johns

Mr Cromb won the vote 4-3 on a show of hands

22.7.3 Statutory Advice and Code of Conduct

To provide advice concerning legislation relevant to the role of members and to adopt a code of conduct.

Members were provided with information on the legislative framework for members and their responsibilities as members when they are acting in their official capacity.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Alley

Seconded: Cromb

That the Vincent Community Board

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

B. Notes the advice given on relevant legislation.

C. Adopts the Code of Conduct.

Carried

22.7.4 Adoption of Standing Orders

To adopt a revised version of Standing Orders.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Alley

Seconded: Johns

That the Vincent Community Board

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

B. Adopts the revised Local Government New Zealand Standing Orders with the following amendments:

i. Enable provisions for meetings by audio visual link

ii. Enable a casting vote for the chairperson

iii. Endorse option C (informal) as the default for speaking and moving motions.

Carried

22.7.5 Council Organisations and Policy on Appointment of Directors

To advise the Board of the effect of appointing members to serve on its behalf in outside organisations and for the Board to receive the Policy on Appointment and Remuneration of Directors to Council Controlled Organisations and Council Organisations.

Committee Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Paterson

That the Vincent Community Board

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

B. Makes appointments as recommended elsewhere in the agenda in light of the contents of this report.

C. Receives the Policy on Appointment and Remuneration of Directors to Council Controlled Organisations and Council Organisations.

Carried

22.7.6 Community Board Expenditure

To inform members of their responsibilities in relation to incurring expenditure on behalf of the Board.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Paterson

Seconded: Hammington

That the report be received.

Carried

22.7.7 Appointments to Sub-committees and Other Community Organisations

To appoint community board representatives to sub-committees and other community organisations where necessary.

After discussion it was noted that there was no need to appoint a liaison to Promote Alexandra as they were not an active organisation at that time.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Alley

Seconded: Browne

That the Vincent Community Board

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

B. Appoints representatives to community sub-committees as follows:

• Manorburn Recreation Reserve Committee – Dr Browne

• Omakau Recreation Reserve Committee – Cr Paterson

C Appoints representatives to community organisations as follows:

• Alexandra Community House Trust – Cr Alley

• Alexandra Council for Social Services – Mr Cromb

• Alexandra District Museum Inc (Central Stories) – Dr Browne

• Alexandra Blossom Festival Committee – Mr Hammington

• Alexandra and Districts Youth Trust – Cr McPherson

• Clyde Historical Museum Committee – Mr Hammington

• Keep Alexandra-Clyde Beautiful Society – Dr Browne

• Ophir Welfare Association Committee – Cr Paterson

• Promote Alexandra Inc – Not appointed

• St Bathans Area Community Association Inc – Mr Cromb

• Vallance Cottage Working Group – Mr Johns

Carried

22.7.8 Proposed Meeting Schedule for the Remainder of 2022 and 2023

To approve a schedule of meetings for the remainder of 2022 and 2023.

Committee Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Cromb

That the Vincent Community Board

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

B. Adopts the proposed meeting schedule.

Carried

3 Date of The Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 22 November 2022.

The Meeting closed at 2.48 pm.

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

CHAIR / /

Extraordinary Cromwell Community Board meeting Minutes

10 November 2022

Unconfirmed

MINUTES OF AN EXTRAORDINARY MEETING OF THE
Cromwell Community Board
HELD IN THE Cromwell Service Centre, 42 The Mall, Cromwell
AND LIVE STREAMED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON Thursday, 10 November 2022 COMMENCING AT 2.00 pm

PRESENT: Cr S Browne, Cr N Gillespie, Ms A Harrison, Cr C Laws, Ms M McConnell, Mr B Scott

IN ATTENDANCE: S Jacobs (Chief Executive Officer), L van der Voort (Executive Manager - Planning and Environment), S Righarts (Group Manager - Business Support), G Robinson (Property and Facilities Manager), R Williams (Community Development Advisor), M Tohill (Communications Support), W McEnteer (Governance Manager), J Harris (Governance Support Officer)

Note: The Chief Executive Officer assumed to Chair to begin the meeting.

1 Apologies

No apologies were received.

The Chief Executive Officer welcomed everyone to the first meeting of the triennium.

2 Reports

22.7.1 Declaration of Office

Each member will be required to take a declaration of office.

The Chief Executive Officer asked Cr Gillespie as Deputy Mayor to give his declaration. The Chief Executive Officer then asked the Deputy Mayor to invite members to give their declaration of office. Each member then made their declaration of office.

22.7.2 Appointment of Chair and Deputy Chair

To select a voting system and to appoint the Chair and Deputy Chair.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Harrison

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Selects System B for the appointment of the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Board, or a representative of the Board.

Carried

Ms Harrison was nominated for Chair by Cr Gillespie and seconded by Cr Laws.

Ms Harrison was unopposed in her nomination.

Note: Ms Harrison assumed the Chair.

Mr Scott was nominated for Deputy Chair by Cr Laws and Mr Scott seconded himself.

Mr Scott was unopposed in his nomination.

22.7.3 Statutory Advice and Code of Conduct

To provide advice concerning legislation relevant to the role of members and to adopt a code of conduct.

Members were provided with information on the legislative framework for members and their responsibilities as members when they are acting in their official capacity.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Laws

Seconded: Scott

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Notes the advice given on relevant legislation.

C. Adopts the Code of Conduct.

Carried

22.7.4 Adoption of Standing Orders

To adopt a revised version of Standing Orders.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: McConnell

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Adopts the revised Local Government New Zealand Standing Orders with the following amendments:

i. Enable provisions for meetings by audio visual link

ii. Enable a casting vote for the chairperson

iii. Endorse option C (informal) as the default for speaking and moving motions.

Carried

22.7.5 Council Organisations and Policy on Appointment of Directors

To advise of the effect of appointing members to serve on its behalf in outside organisations and to receive the Policy on Appointment and Remuneration of Directors to Council Controlled Organisations and Council Organisations.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Scott

Seconded: Laws

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Makes appointments as recommended elsewhere in the agenda in light of the contents of this report.

C. Receives the Policy on Appointment and Remuneration of Directors to Council Controlled Organisations and Council Organisations.

Carried

22.7.6 Community Board Expenditure

To inform members of their responsibilities in relation to incurring expenditure on behalf of the Board.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Laws

That the report be received.

Carried

22.7.7 Appointments to Sub-committees and Other Community Organisations

To appoint community board representatives to sub-committees and other community organisations where necessary.

After discussion it was noted that the Board appoints members of the Cromwell College Charitable Trust and Central Otago Sport Turf Trust, but does not sit on those groups themselves.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Gillespie

Seconded: Browne

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Appoints representatives to community organisations as follows:

• Bannockburn Community Centre Management Committee Inc – Ms Harrison

• Bannockburn Recreation Reserve Management Committee Inc – Mr Scott

• Cromwell and Districts Community Trust – Ms McConnell

• Cromwell District Museum – Ms Harrison

• Cromwell Resource Centre Trust (known as Cromwell Community House) – The appointment of 5 representatives as per the Trust Deed - Cr Laws

• Cromwell Youth Trust – Cr Browne

• Central Otago Sports Turf Trust – No appointee as this was made in the last triennium.

• Old Cromwell Incorporated – Cr Laws

• Lowburn Hall Committee – Ms McConnell

• Pisa District Community Group – Cr Gillespie

• Ripponvale Hall Committee – no appointee

• Tarras Community Plan Group – Cr Browne

• Tarras Hall Committee – Cr Gillespie

• Cromwell and Districts Promotions Group – Mr Scott

Carried

22.7.8 Proposed Meeting Schedule for the Remainder of 2022 and 2023

To approve a schedule of meetings for the remainder of 2022 and 2023.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Laws

Seconded: McConnell

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Adopts the proposed meeting schedule.

Carried

22.7.9 Appointments to Project Advisory Groups

To consider appointments of representatives for the project advisory groups for the Cromwell Memorial Hall and Cromwell Mall.

After discussion it was decided that Cr McKinlay should remain on the project group for the memorial hall, while Ms McConnell would be the Boards’ representative for the advisory group for the town centre.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Gillespie

Seconded: Laws

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Agrees that Councillor Nigel McKinlay remain on the Cromwell Memorial Hall Project Advisory Group, in his capacity as a Cromwell Ward Councillor.

C. Agrees that Community Board member Anna Harrison remain on the Cromwell Memorial Hall Project Advisory Group.

D. Agrees that Ms McConnell is the representative from the Cromwell Community Board to the Cromwell Mall Project Advisory Group.

Carried with Mr Scott recording his vote against resolution B.

3 Date of The Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 28 November 2022.

The Meeting closed at 3.18 pm.

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

CHAIR / /


AGENDA Ordinary Council Meeting Wednesday, 14 December 2022
Date:	Wednesday, 14 December 2022
Time:	10.30 am
Location:	Ngā Hau e Whā, William Fraser Building, 1 Dunorling Street, Alexandra (A link to the live stream will be available on the Central Otago District Council's website.)
Sanchia Jacobs Chief Executive Officer

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Deborah Beange	Dylan Rushbrook
Welcoming Communities Officer	Group Manager - Community Vision
15/11/2022	2/12/2022

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Paula Penno	Dylan Rushbrook
Community and Engagement Manager	Group Manager - Community Vision
28/11/2022	28/11/2022

Report author:	Reviewed and authorised by:

Wayne McEnteer	Saskia Righarts
Governance Manager	Group Manager - Business Support
30/11/2022	1/12/2022