Agenda of Cromwell Community Board - Monday, 9 December 2024

Cromwell Community Board Agenda

9 December 2024

MINUTES OF A mEETING OF THE
Cromwell Community Board
HELD IN THE Cromwell Service Centre, 42 The Mall, Cromwell
AND LIVE STREAMED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON Tuesday, 5 November 2024 COMMENCING AT 2.00 pm

PRESENT: Ms A Harrison (Chair), Cr S Browne, Cr N Gillespie (via Microsoft Teams), Cr C Laws, Ms M McConnell (via Microsoft Teams), Mr W Sanford

IN ATTENDANCE: T Alley (Mayor), P Kelly (Chief Executive Officer), S Righarts (Group Manager - Business Support), D Rushbrook (Group Manager - Community Vision), D Scoones (Group Manager - Community Experience), L Webster (Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure), G Robinson (Property and Facilities Manager), H Giles (Property and Facilities Officer – Cromwell), R Williams (Community Development Advisor), G Bailey (Parks and Recreation Manager), W McEnteer (Governance Manager), S Reynolds (Governance Support Officer)

1 Apologies

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Laws

That apologies from Mr B Scott and apologies for lateness from Ms McConnell be received and accepted.

Carried

2 Public Forum

Kate Seymour and Cheryll Sanders – Cromwell Cemetery

Ms Sanders spoke about the poor condition of the Cromwell Cemetery and referred to the Central Otago District Councils Cromwell Cemetery concept Development Plan which was published in January 2023. She reported on maintenance that had not been done, particularly referencing the damaged rabbit proof fence and lack of water on the reserve. They requested that past year maintenance budgets be made available to them so they could understand where money has been spent.

Ms Sanders then responded to questions.

Rob Van der Mark – Sustainable Tarras

Mr Van der Mark spoke to the proposed Santana gold mine and outlined concerns the group had regarding the scale, appearance and location of the potential development. He noted that he believed the community is not suitably informed about this project and detailed the list of impacts on the local surrounds and the impacts. He asks that links with Council and the Tarras community are strengthened as this proposal progresses through the consent process.

Mr Van der Mark then responded to questions.

Billie Marsh –Tarras voice

Ms Marsh spoke regarding the Santana mine development and noted uncertainty this potential development had created amongst the Tarras Community. She requested that Cromwell Community Board interaction with residents is strengthened so their local voice is heard. She expressed her concerns around the fast track resource consent process and believed it will not allow sufficient time for feedback on the development.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

Committee Resolution

Moved: Sanford

Seconded: Browne

That the public minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 17 September 2024 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

It was noted that Mr Sanford’s members report incorrectly stated that there were 160 people including supporters at the Lake Dunstan Marathon but it should have read 160 participants and supporters in attendance.

Carried

4 Declarations of Interest

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

5 Reports

24.10.2 Bannockburn Bowling Club - Grant Accountability Report

To note the accountability report from the Bannockburn Bowling Club for the grant towards their new kitchen.

The Chair congratulated the group for their work in raising funds and bringing the project to fruition.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Sanford

That the report be received.

Carried

Note: With permission of the meeting, item 24.10.8 was moved forward.

Note: Ms McConnell joined the meeting at 2.34 pm.

Note: Craig Gilchrist from Mayors Taskforce for Jobs joined the meeting for item 24.10.8.

9 Status Reports

24.10.8 November 2024 Governance Report

To report on items of general interest, receive minutes and updates from key organisations and consider the status report updates.

Craig Gilchrist joined the meeting and gave an update on the work that had been undertaken in the ward as part of ‘The Mayors Taskforce for Jobs’.

A verbal update was given on the build progress at the Cromwell Memorial Hall.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Laws

Seconded: Sanford

That the report be received.

Carried

24.10.3 Cromwell Golf Club - Funding Request

To consider a request from the Cromwell Golf Club for financial assistance with the removal of trees and site reinstatement, using funds held in the Club’s Fund Account.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Laws

Seconded: Sanford

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Recommends that the Board approves funding of $14,000 from the Cromwell Golf Club fund to assist with the removal of the trees.

C. Directs that this funding be subject to the provision of a copy of the invoice for the removal of the trees.

Carried

24.10.4 2025 Meeting Schedule

To approve a schedule of Cromwell Community Board meetings for 2025.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Laws

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Adopts the proposed 2025 meeting schedule for the Cromwell Community Board.

Carried

6 Mayor’s Report

24.10.5 Mayor's Report

Her Worship noted that she was delighted to be in the job and excited to be attending her first Cromwell Community Board meeting. She outlined the challenges that elected members had ahead particularly around water infrastructure and how decisions in this space will affect ratepayers. Her Worship acknowledged the work of board members in championing the ward as Cromwell faces opportunities and difficulties due to being one of the fasting growing populations in the country.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Laws

That the Cromwell Community Board receives the report.

Carried

7 Chair's Report

24.10.6 Chair's Report

The Chair will give an update on activities and issues since the last meeting.

· Had been lucky enough to enjoy an overseas trip to visit family so had been out of the district for much of the time since the last meeting.

· Had spoken on the districtisation at the September Council meeting and looked forward to further discussions on this matter.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Harrison

Seconded: Laws

That the report be received.

Carried

8 Members' Reports

24.10.7 Members' Reports

Members gave an update on activities and issues since the last meeting.

Cr Laws gave an update on the following:

· Gave an update on the LGNZ Zone 5/6 conference noting the good speakers and informative event.

· Updated the board on the September and October Council meetings.

· Attended a Cromwell Community House meeting.

· Attended a Council workshop on the Long-term Plan.

· Noted her excitement around the opening of the new Wooing Tree cellar door facility.

Cr Browne gave an update on the following:

· Had attended a session at Goldfields School with students who had undertaken a project on keeping water ways clean and enjoyed the students passion and engagement on civic issues.

· Attended a session on sports provision in Cromwell and the future projections and looks forward to this information being distilled and used in future planning.

· Attended the Cromwell Kāhui Ako.

· Attended the Cromwell Half Marathon event, noting the success of the event.

· Attended the Cromwell Fire Brigade Celebration of 150 years of service.

· Attended Polyfest in Queenstown.

· Attended the LGNZ Zone 5/6 conference.

· Attended the Building Better Confidence noting the work to be done to improve building standards to encourage sustainability and less waste in this industry.

· Had sat on the panel of the recent Assessment Committee meetings to disperse money for the arts and rural travel.

· Noted that she was regrettably an apology for the Tarras Community Action Plan meeting due to another meeting commitment.

Mr Sanford reported on the following:

· Attended the Highland Events and Webbs Orchard Rogaine

· Met with Friends of Cromwell Cemetery.

· Attended Cromwell Districts Community Trust Strategic workshop

· Attended the Cromwell Business Network breakfast.

· Attended the Business South ‘Beer n Yarn’ event.

· Attended the Race Day Event at Highlands

· Attended Goldfields School kids Duathlon

· Attended the Blossom Festival parade, followed by the Cromwell Speedway event.

· Attended the Cromwell Fire Brigade open day.

· Attended Cromwell Fireworks event at Old Cromwell Labour Weekend

· Noted that he is moving office space in the Mall.

· Noted the ceased publication of Crux, and noted their contribution to New Zealand media would be missed.

Ms McConnell gave an update on the following:

· Noted that she had travelled out of district and recently completed the Heaphy Track.

Cr Gillespie gave an update on the following:

· Gave an update on September and October Council meetings, specifically noting the passionate submissions in relation to museum funding and the progress of the decision making towards the consultation stage of the Long-term Plan.

· Attended the Cromwell Fire Brigade open day and acknowledged the support from the local community and the special evening event celebrating the 150 years of service to the community.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Sanford

Seconded: Laws

That the report be received.

Carried

10 Date of The Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 9 December 2024.

11 Resolution to Exclude the Public

Committee Resolution

Moved: Laws

Seconded: Browne

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	Plain English Reason

24.10.9 - Bannockburn Industrial Subdivision Recommendation for Funding	s7(2)(h) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities 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)	To enable commercial activities To enable commercial or industrial negotiations
24.10.10 - November 2024 Confidential Governance Report	s7(2)(b)(ii) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information	Commercial sensitivity

Carried

The public were excluded at 3.24 pm and the meeting closed at 4.07 pm

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

CHAIR / /

9 December 2024

24.11.3 Grant Budget Recommendations

Doc ID: 1982112

Report Author:	Dylan Rushbrook, Group Manager - Community Vision
Reviewed and authorised by:	Peter Kelly, Chief Executive Officer

1. Purpose of Report

To consider the provision of Community Board grants and confirm the value of relevant grant budgets.

Recommendations

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Recommends to Council a total of $50,000 be allocated through the LTP budget process for Community Grants in 2025/26.

C. Recommends to Council a total of $106,210 be allocated through the LTP budget process for Promotions & Event Grants in 2025/26.

2. Background

As part of the program of work towards the Long-term Plan Community Boards need to consider their Grants, how they are used and how much is available.

Through recent workshops with Community Boards changes to the Grant Policy have been recommended to Council.

Community Board Grants are provided to support community led initiatives, and through the workshops it was evident such grants are seen as a key mechanism for Community Boards to connect with their community in a meaningful way.

3. Discussion

The next step in the process is to recommend to Council the level of funding available to the Cromwell Community Board for both Community and Promotions & Events Grants.

Recommended levels of funding per annum are;

Community Grant - $50,000

Promotions & Event Grant - $106,219

Noting these will be inflation adjusted in the budgeting process each year.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Recommend to Council the budgeting of grants as noted in the recommendations of this report.

Advantages:

· Continues to provide the community with an avenue for funding community led initiatives

· Provides a link between the CCB and the community

Disadvantages:

· Has a rating impact on residents in the Cromwell Ward

Option 2

Recommend to Council values that differ from those noted in the recommendations of this report.

Advantages:

· Provide the Community Board with an avenue for funding community led initiatives

· Provides a link between the CCB and the community

Disadvantages:

· Has a rating impact on residents in the Cromwell Ward

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	The provision of grants provides opportunities for community led initiatives that can have a range of positive community outcomes attributable to Well-beings.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Aligns with the Grants Policy
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No known implications.
Risks Analysis	No known risks.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	Community Boards and relevant staff who administer grants and finance options have been engaged in this process.

6. Next Steps

Council to consider through the Long-term Plan budget process.

7. Attachments

Nil

9 December 2024

24.11.5 Naming of Reserve in Bannockburn

Doc ID: 1984660

Report Author:	Maria Burnett, Parks Officer - Planning and Strategy
Reviewed and authorised by:	David Scoones, Group Manager - Community Experience

1. Purpose of Report

To consider the naming of a Local Purpose (Recreation) reserve in Bannockburn.

Recommendations

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Approves that the local purpose (recreation) reserve land legally described as:

· Lot 1 DP 452123

· Lot 2 DP 452123

· Lot 3 DP 452123

· Lot 4 DP 452123; and

· The land and covered by easement instrument 10062755.1

is to be formally named “Campbell Lane”.

2. Background

At its June 2024 meeting, the Cromwell Community Board considered a submission to name an unnamed walking track located between Lynn Lane and Schoolhouse Road in Bannockburn.

In January 2007 under Section 52 Public Works Act 1981, Council acquired a parcel of Crown land in Bannockburn. The land was vested in Central Otago District Council as Local Purpose (recreation) Reserve. Council negotiated an exchange of land at Bannockburn to provide walking track access between Lynn Lane, off Hall Road and Schoolhouse Road. The land is subject to the Reserves Act 1977 and, being Crown derived, Part 9 Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998.

An annotated aerial map of the reserve is included below:

Key

· Outlined green: Reserve

· Red star: Lynn Lane

· Purple star: Schoolhouse Road

· Yellow star: Old Schoolhouse

Council owns majority of the walking track from the Lynn Road. The Council-owned part of the walking track is made up of four land parcels, which are legally known as:

· Lot 1 DP 452123

· Lot 2 DP 452123

· Lot 3 DP 452123

· Lot 4 DP 452123

The Ministry of Education owns the land at the Old Schoolhouse-end, over which Council has an easement. This land is located at 48 Schoolhouse Road and is legally known as:

· SEC 45 BLK I BANNOCKBURN SD

· PT SEC 4 BLK I BANNOCKBURN SD

Council has an easement (Easement 10062755.1) over these two parcels of land for a Right of Way (Pedestrian, Cyclist and Horse Riders).

The Campbell family proposed the name “Campbell Track” (first proposed “Campbell Track”, later proposed “Campbell Lane”) to commemorate Flight Lieutenant Colin Campbell who was lost in a raid over France during World War II. He attended primary school in Bannockburn and walked near this track with his schoolmate, James Lynn, who also died in the war and has a nearby street named after him. The family believes naming the track after Colin Campbell would appropriately honour his legacy and the area’s history. The track has existed for a number of years, and no alternative names have been suggested during that time.

The Cromwell Community Board moved that:

“…the Chief Executive Officer brings a report back to the Board to progress the naming of the walking /biking track between Lynn Lane and Schoolhouse Road, Bannockburn.

At its August 2024 meeting, the Cromwell Community Board agreed that:

“…the Open Spaces Naming Policy should be adhered to, but that the Board supported the name ‘’Campbell Lane’’.

The Board moved that:

‘…the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Approves the reserve to undergo the naming process set out in the Open Spaces Naming Policy 2024.

C. Notes that the Cromwell Community Board has received this request from a member of the public.

D. Note that the board supports the name “Campbell Lane”’.

The proposed name “Campbell Lane” has been formally assessed against the Open Spaces Naming Policy (The Policy). Council staff have engaged with Aukaha to determine whether the reserve was of significance. The community and neighbours have also been invited to provide their feedback on the proposed name.

3. Discussion

Mana whenua consultation

The Policy requires Council to engage with mana whenua to determine if an open space is ‘of significance to mana whenua’. If the site is ‘of significance’, mana whenua is invited to propose a te reo Māori name.

Council staff engaged with Aukaha, and it was established that while there are possible associations as a food gathering site in the wider area, there are no specific associations to Bannockburn. Consequently, mana whenua has not suggested a name for the open space.

Consultation with the community and neighbours

Council staff invited the community and neighbours to provide their feedback on the proposed name. Neighbours includes property owners of land adjacent to the reserve.

Feedback was open from 22 October to 29 November 2024. There were three responses received, all which were in support of the proposed name. Responses were from:

· A member of the wider community

· The Otago Outdoor Education Trust[1]

· The Ministry of Education[2]

It is noted that special effort was made to engage with the property owners (The Ministry of Education) of 48 Schoolhouse Road, because the reserve crosses over this land.

Unique (avoiding double-ups of names)

Avoiding duplicate names within the district is a key consideration. The name that was proposed in the original submission was “Campbell Track”. However, there is an existing road/walking track in Roxburgh that is named “Campbells Track”. The Community Board suggested “Campbell Lane” as an alternative. Council staff have confirmed that “Campbell Track” has not been used in the district, therefore this is preferred.

Suffix

It is important that the most appropriate suffix is chosen when naming an open space.

‘Lane’ is considered a suitable description of the open space.

Considerations

The Policy states that:

‘A recommendation to name an open space will include evidence that the proposed name meets one or more of the considerations set out below:

· Celebrates placemaking and belonging.

· Celebrates Central Otago’s history by commemorating individuals, associations and events (see policy below).

· Ensuring that under-represented groups that have played an important part in Central Otago’s history are given appropriate prominence.

· Aligns with name of an adjacent street or suburb.

· Reflects the local landscape, topographical features, flora or fauna (preference for appropriate te reo Māori names).

· Where an appropriate name is already in common use or has been published (for example New Zealand Gazette).’

The proposed name meets the following consideration:

· Celebrates Central Otago’s history by commemorating individuals, associations and events

The proposed name is considered a suitable name for the open space. The wider public have been consulted on the proposed name and all submissions received were in support of the proposed name. Council staff have engaged with Aukaha and confirmed the open space is not ‘of significance’ and therefore no te reo Māori has been provided. The proposed name has been assessed against The Policy and meets all elements of the Policy, including being Unique (no other open spaces called “Campbell Lane”), the suffix ‘Lane’ is appropriate, and it meets the Considerations. Therefore, the proposed name ‘Cambell Lane” is considered a suitable name.

4. Financial Considerations

There are no financial implications; signage costs are already budgeted.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Approves the name “Campbell Lane” for the open space.

Advantages:

· Provides a name for the open space that aids in wayfinding

· Tells a story about the history of Central Otago

· Strengthens relationship between Council and the Community by listening to community views.

Disadvantages:

· Leaving the open space unnamed will hinder wayfinding

· Missed opportunity to tells a story about the history of Central Otago

· Damages relationship between Council and the Community by not listening to community views.

Option 2

The Board does not approve the name “Campbell Lane” for the open space.

Advantages:

· There are no advantages in considering this option

Disadvantages:

· Damages relationship between Council and the Community by not listening to community views.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the social wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by allowing wayfinding and the telling of stories about the history of Central Otago through the naming of public open spaces.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	https://www.codc.govt.nz/publications/policies CODC Open Spaces Naming Policy 2024
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No implications.
Risks Analysis	Does not trigger Council’s Risk Register.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	Consultation with the public has been undertaken to confirm the proposed name is supported by the community. Consultation with Aukaha has been undertaken to ensure the open space is not of significance to mana whenua. Decisions around who to consult with and how were made with the Significance and Engagement Policy in mind.

7. Next Steps

Once approval of the name has been confirmed, Council staff will notify relevant agencies (for example, emergency services), install signage and communicate the decision to the community.

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Open Spaces Naming Policy 2024 Final.pdf ⇩

9 December 2024

24.11.7 Managing Unreasonable Complainant Conduct

Doc ID: 1982700

Report Author:	Alix Crosbie, Senior Strategy Advisor
Reviewed and authorised by:	Dylan Rushbrook, Group Manager - Community Vision

1. Purpose

To update the Board on the Unreasonable Complainant Conduct workstream and seek feedback before finalising the relevant policies in early 2025.

Recommendations

That the report be received.

2. Discussion

Council staff have had an increase in incidents of poor or unreasonable behaviour through the conduct of business. This aligns with a national trend, where councils across New Zealand report an increase in incidents and issues.

As part of the response, Council staff will seek to adopt a ‘Managing Unreasonable Complainant Conduct’ Policy in the first quarter of 2025. There are three elements to this workstream:

· Addressing the causes of complaints and continuing to improve our systems, processes, and information to provide the highest possible level of customer service;

· Implementing a Complaints Policy and processes to clarify and track how complaints are managed;

· ‘Managing Unreasonable Complainant Conduct’.

This report is primarily focused on the third item, Managing Unreasonable Complainant Conduct, with the first two underpinning this approach and helping to minimise the number of applicable incidents.

The Ombudsman handles complaints about the administrative conduct of public sector agencies. All individuals or groups who interact with Council are able to ask the Ombudsman to review the outcome. The Ombudsman also provides guidance to assist Council in dealing with complaints, including in situations where the conduct or behaviour from a complainant could be considered ‘unreasonable.’

The vast majority of complaints received by Council are able to be managed immediately by officers. A small number are escalated to a manager, and a smaller number again to a General Manager or the Chief Executive. Unreasonable Complainant Conduct applies to a minority of complaints where, due to the behaviour of the complainant, a bespoke approach is required.

Unreasonable complainant conduct, as defined by the Ombudsman, is:

A close-up of a blue and white background

Description automatically generated

Figure: Queensland Ombudsman ‘Managing unreasonable complainant conduct.’

Unreasonable conduct has negative impacts for the organisation, staff, external review bodies and agencies, the complainants themselves, the subjects of the complaint, and other people requiring Council services. These negative impacts have been documented by the New Zealand Ombudsman and include:

· Reducing Council’s ability to effectively and fairly allocate resources

· Unnecessary time and resources responding; or inequitable allocation of resources

· Increased staff turnover and significant wellbeing impacts

· Reduced productivity

· And, for the relevant complainants, stress, inability to achieve outcomes, loss of perspective, and an impact on wellbeing.

The Ombudsman has provided extensive guidance, including a link to a sample policy. This sample policy was developed by the New South Wales Ombudsman in Australia. Staff will present a report to Council in early 2025 recommending adoption of this approach. As the Policy is lengthy, a short two-page version will be developed as guidance for all staff and elected members; with the longer policy helping to step through the application in the various possible situations that may call for it in the future.

There are a series of objectives and principles that underpin the Policy, aimed to simplify what is a complex area to manage in practice.

The core objectives are:

· To ensure equity and fairness

· To improve efficiency

· Ensure health and safety.

The prevention principles are to:

· Manage complainant expectations at the outset

· Insist on respect and cooperation

· Implement policies and procedures.

And the management principles aim to:

· Exercise ownership and control over complaints

· Focus on specific, observable conduct – not the person as a problem

· Respond appropriately and with consistency to individual complainants and complaints

· Effectively communicate.

The Policy defines types of unreasonable behaviour, outlines how Council respond to those behaviours, and provides the ability to restrict contact when unreasonable behaviour is having an impact on either our staff and their wellbeing, or our resourcing and ability to serve the rest of the community. It cannot be used punitively as a punishment for poor behaviour – it is intended to manage the impact of the behaviour whilst keeping channels of communication open.

It does not replace the Trespass Procedure or other legal instruments or disputes resolution strategies.

The five categories of unreasonable conduct are:

Unreasonable persistence	Unreasonable persistence is continued, incessant and unrelenting conduct by a complainant that has a disproportionate and unreasonable impact on our organisation, staff, services, time, or resources.
Unreasonable demands	Unreasonable demands are any demands expressly made by a complainant that have a disproportionate and unreasonable impact on our organisation, staff, services, time, or resources.
Unreasonable lack of cooperation	Unreasonable lack of cooperation is when a complainant is unwilling or unable to cooperate with us, our staff, or our complaints process – resulting in a disproportionate and unreasonable use of our services, time, or resources.
Unreasonable arguments	Unreasonable arguments include any arguments that are not based on any reason or logic, that are incomprehensible, false, or inflammatory, trivial, or delirious, and that disproportionately and unreasonably impact upon our organisation, staff, services, time, or resources.
Unreasonable behaviours	Unreasonable behaviour is conduct that is unreasonable in all circumstances (regardless of how stressed, angry, or frustrated a complainant is) because it unreasonably compromises the health, safety and security of our staff, other service users or the complainant themselves.

Examples of conduct are given on pages 3-5 of the draft Policy.

UCC incidents will generally be managed by limiting or adapting the ways we interact with or deliver services to complainants by restricting:

Who they have contact with	limiting a complainant to a sole contact person or staff member in our organisation.
What they can raise with us	restricting the subject matter of communications that we will consider and respond to.
When they can have contact	limiting a complainant’s contact with our organisation to a particular time, day, or length of time, or curbing the frequency of their contact with us.
Where they can make contact	limiting the locations where we will conduct face-to-face interviews to secured facilities or areas of the office.
How they can make contact	limiting or modifying the forms of contact that the complainant can have with us. This can include modifying or limiting face-to-face contact, telephone, and written communications, prohibiting access to our premises, contact through a representative only, taking no further action or terminating provision of services altogether.

Further detail on these restrictions are outlined on pages 7-11 of the Policy.

Specific detail is also provided on the procedures to be followed before any restriction takes place – including ensuring a written warning is provided to give the complainant an opportunity to change their approach; and the review process to ensure that the restrictions are removed should a complainants behaviour improve. This is outlined on pages 12-14 and in the attachments.

Additional clauses address the impact on staff, including the support for officers dealing with unreasonable conduct, and how stress is managed.

All record keeping in relation to the approach is managed with Council’s Privacy Officer to ensure only relevant details are shared with staff.

3. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Draft Complaints Policy.pdf ⇩

Appendix 2 - Draft UCC Two pages.pdf ⇩

Appendix 3 - Draft Managing Unreasonable Complainant Conduct Policy.pdf ⇩

9 December 2024

24.11.8 Fast-Track Approvals Bill 2024

Doc ID: 1989688

Report Author:	Ann Rodgers, Principal Policy Planner
Reviewed and authorised by:	Lee Webster, Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure

1. Purpose

To inform the Board of the process regarding applications submitted for the Fast-Track Approvals Bill 2024 within the Central Otago district.

Recommendations

That the report be received.

2. Background

The Fast-Track Approvals Bill 2024 was introduced by the Government with the aim of making the approvals process faster and more efficient for a wide range of regionally and nationally significant infrastructure and development projects, including housing developments and renewable energy.

It’s similar to the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020, with eligibility and the types of authorisations that can be issued broadened, reflecting the emphasis of the Government on growth and development.

The Fast-Track Approvals Bill was released on 7 March 2024, when it had its first reading. Submissions closed 19^th April 2024, the Environment Committee received approximately 27,000 written submissions from individuals and organisations on the draft Bill. It had a second reading on 13 November 2024. The intention is for the Bill to receive Royal Assent by the end of the year following the third reading. There may be some minor changes to the Bill, however any substantive changes are not expected.

This briefing is based on the recommendation from the Environment Committee that informed the second reading.

3. Discussion

The purpose of the Fast-Track Approvals Bill 2024 is:

“… to facilitate the delivery of infrastructure and development projects with significant regional or national benefits”

The proposed system will be a ‘one-stop-shop’ for resource consents, notices of requirement, and certificates of compliance under the Resource Management Act (1991) and approvals required under the Wildlife Act 1953; Conservation Act 1987; Reserves Act 1977; Freshwater Fisheries Regulations 1983; Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014; Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012; Crown Minerals Act 1991; Public Works Act 1981; and the Fisheries Act 1996.

Panel

All decisions are made by an independent Panel. The Panel Convener role is an Environment Court or High Court Judge appointed by the Minister (Infrastructure) and appoints a Panel made up of up to four people including one person nominated by the local authority.

Members of the Panel must collectively have:

· Knowledge, Skills and Experience relevant to the approvals sought and

· Expertise in environmental matters, and

· At least one member must be suitably qualified in te ao Māori and Māori Development.

Applications

The list of accepted Fast-Track projects was released on 6 October 2024. In total 149 projects were accepted for inclusion, two in the Central Otago District:

Bendigo – Ophir Gold Mining Project: Matakanui Gold Limited (a wholly owned subsidiary of Santana Minerals Limited); Open Pit and underground gold mine on the Bendigo and Ardgour Stations.

Remarkables Ski Area Upgrade and Doolans Expansion Project: Upgrade the Remarkables existing infrastructure and expand the existing Remarkables Ski Area into the adjacent Doolans Basin.

Opportunities to Comment

Prior to the lodging of a substantive application for a project on the list, the applicant must consult with:

o Relevant Iwi authorities, hapu and treaty settlement entities

o Relevant local authorities

o Relevant administering agencies

Opportunity for Comments on an Application

Once the application is lodged the Panel is required to invite comments from the following that are to be provided within 20 working days (no extensions):

· The relevant local authorities; and

· The relevant iwi authorities; and

· A Treaty settlement entity relevant to the listed project,

· The owners of the land on which the project is to be undertaken and the land adjacent to that land; and

· The occupiers of the land on which the project is to be undertaken and the land adjacent to that land unless, after reasonable inquiry, an occupier cannot be identified; and

· Ministers of the Crown responsible for the following portfolios:

o Arts, Culture and Heritage; Climate Change; Conservation; Defence; Education; Housing; Energy and Resources; Infrastructure; Land Information; Local Government; Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti; Transport; Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations; Urban Development; The Director-General of Conservation; and any requiring authority that has a designation on land on which the project is to be undertaken, or on land that is adjacent to the land on which the project is to be undertaken.

· A panel may also invite written comments from any other person the panel considers appropriate.

Once comments have been received the applicant will have 5 working days to consider and respond.

Further Information

The Panel may at any time prior to making a decision direct the EPA to request further information from the applicant and other relevant parties including the local authority.

Draft Conditions

Before the Panel grants approval they must direct the EPA to circulate draft conditions to the local authority, inviting comments.

Panel Decision-Making

The Panel is required to consider the applications, and any written comments received giving weight to the following (in order, it’s a hierarchy):

1. The purpose of the Fast-Track Approvals legislation.

2. The purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991 set out in section 5 of that Act (“…to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources”).

3. Section 6 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (matters of national importance)

4. Section 7 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (other matters)

5. The provisions of any of the following, if relevant, made under the Resource Management Act 1991:

§ any national direction:

§ operative and proposed policy statements and plans (District Plan):

§ iwi management plans:

§ Mana Whakahono ā Rohe:

§ joint management agreements;

§ the relevant provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 or any other legislation that direct decision making under the Resource Management Act 1991.

The decision must be made within 25 working days.

Hearings/Appeal

There is no requirement to hold a hearing and no right of appeal other than to the High Court on points of law.

Cost Recovery

Local authorities may recover from an applicant the actual and reasonable costs incurred by the local authority in performing or exercising its functions, duties, or powers in relation to the relevant referral application or substantive application.

At this time we have limited information on the two projects in Central Otago. As indicated above the Bill is yet to be finalised and may be subject to further modifications prior to Royal Assent. Once the legislation has been enacted, we will have limited control over the process and timeframes other than to respond when requested.

4. Attachments

Nil

9 December 2024

24.11.9 Level of Service - Cromwell Buildings

Doc ID: 1990886

Report Author:

Janice Remnant, Asset Management Team Leader - Property

Helen Giles, Property and Facilities Officer (Cromwell)

Reviewed and authorised by:

Lee Webster, Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure

1. Purpose of Report

To consider the level of service for Cromwell buildings as part of the Long-Term Plan 2025/34 process.

Recommendations

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Recommends to Council that the following buildings are retained as budgeted in the draft Long-Term Plan 2025/34:

· Tarras Hall

· Cromwell Museum building

1. Background

The Cromwell district currently has limited community halls and facilities, although there are some privately owned venues and the new Memorial Hall will open mid-2026.

Changes in community mobility, evolving building standards, and financial constraints have created a need for careful evaluation of these facilities. Balancing community use, regulatory compliance, and responsible management of funds is essential to ensure these buildings continue to serve their purpose effectively.

To address this, a Level of Service Review has been undertaken, providing an assessment of each facility. This includes an evaluation of the legal and operational status, ongoing maintenance, and their current and potential future roles in the community.

Key factors considered in the review include:

· Proximity to Other Facilities: Analysing the accessibility and convenience of each building relative to others in the district.

· Operational and Capital Costs: Reviewing current costs alongside projected expenses outlined in the draft Long-Term Plan 2025/34 (LTP).

· Income and Usage: Examining booking numbers, income streams, and contributions from rates.

· Earthquake Strengthening: Assessing compliance with seismic risk legislation, with costs estimated at $953K for identified earthquake-prone buildings.

Legal and Land Status

The legal status of each property plays a critical role in decisions about retention or divestment. Key considerations include:

· Freehold Properties: Restrictions from historic gifting or acquisition under the Public Works Act may influence the divestment process, necessitating further investigation.

· Reserve Land: Properties on reserve land would revert to the Crown (LINZ) upon divestment, with Ngāi Tahu holding the first right of refusal under the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998.

· Council-Owned Earthquake-Prone Buildings: The Government's ongoing review of seismic risk legislation will influence compliance deadlines, with the Council prioritising essential emergency management buildings at 67% NBS and others at a minimum of 34% NBS.

Funding Opportunities

Securing funding for earthquake strengthening is a challenge, particularly for Council-owned properties. However, there are potential avenues for private owners or community groups which include:

· Lotteries New Zealand: Funding is contingent on high community use, multipurpose functionality, and a feasibility study demonstrating need and viability.

· Central Lakes Trust (CLT): While supportive of seismic strengthening, CLT excludes Council-owned buildings from eligibility.

· Otago Community Trust (OCT) & Aotearoa Gaming Trust: Neither organization provides funding for earthquake strengthening.

· Public-Private Partnerships: Collaboration with local businesses or community groups could support strategically important buildings.

· Community Contributions: Fundraising efforts or targeted rate increases could help finance specific projects.

· Revenue from Divestments: Proceeds from the sale of surplus buildings could offset strengthening and renewal costs for retained properties.

This approach ensures that decisions about Cromwell’s community halls and facilities are informed, equitable, and aligned with the long-term needs and priorities of the community.

2. Discussion

A detailed assessment of Cromwell’s facilities has been undertaken, guided by the following criteria:

· Legal status of the property.

· Proximity to other facilities and main service towns.

· Utilisation (e.g., booking numbers and income over the last five years).

· Operational costs (2023/2024 and projections for in the draft LTP 2025/34).

· Capital costs, including earthquake strengthening requirements and timelines.

The outcomes of this assessment are crucial for ensuring Cromwell’s community halls and facilities meet modern requirements, respect their historical significance, and remain affordable for the community.

If divestment was recommended, this could mean a community group acquiring the building to maintain the on-going operational maintenance or earthquake strengthening of the building as an alternative of ratepayers, which would follow the conclusion of the LTP process.

This analysis underpins recommendations on whether individual facilities should be retained, divested, or strengthened.

Tarras Hall

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Community Hall with stage, supper room and men’s communal shower facilities.
Location and Proximity	33km north of the Cromwell township Private halls in the Cromwell ward are: · Bannockburn Hall 38kms from Tarras · Lowburn Hall 34kms from Tarras
Usage	Regularly used by local golf club with other bookings throughout the year, low income
Legal Status	Freehold, subject to a Section 40 Public Works Investigation Report
Condition	Earthquake-prone (NBS 15%), strengthening costs of $952,849 to 67% scheduled in Year 2 2026/27
Recommendation	Retain - Tarras is an isolated community, and the hall may be used as a Community Led Centre in the event of an emergency.

Bookings and Income:

Rates Income and Expenditure:

Income
Rates Portion of Revenue - LTP Yr 1 - 9	478,114
Expenditure
/Operational Costs 2023/2024	29,867
Operational Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	656,560
Capex Renewal Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	192,165

Cromwell Museum Building

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Museum activity, exhibition and storage
Usage	Leased
Legal Status	Building is on two land parcels, both of which are freehold. The land parcel where the museum storage/exhibition room, library, service centre and car park is located is freehold, but not subject to the Public Works Act.
Recommendation	Retain as a strategic asset for administration purposes and/or commercial lease opportunity subject to decision on Cromwell Town Centre.

Rates Income and Expenditure:

Income
*Rates Portion of Revenue - LTP Yr 1 - 2	19,780
Expenditure
Operational Costs 2023/2024	45,141
Operational Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	167,225
Capex Renewal Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	108,826

*Rates portion of revenue income is budgeted for 2 years due to the expectation the museum activity will move to the new Cromwell Hall.

3. Financial Considerations

There are no financial considerations with this decision at this time.

Feedback regarding the level of service for Cromwell’s buildings is for Council’s consideration to determine what may be included in the public consultation document as part of the Long-Term Plan 2025/34 process.

4. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

The following buildings are retained:

· Tarras Hall

· Cromwell Museum Building

Advantages:

· Tarras Hall services an isolated community

· The Cromwell Museum building once vacated there are many commercial options available to either repurpose

· Disadvantages:

· The impact of ongoing capex and operational costs that could burden ratepayers might be unacceptable for many who are already struggling with the increase cost of living

Option 2

To retain or divest the buildings recommended by the Board and indicate a preferred timing of earthquake strengthening in the draft LTP 25/34.

Advantages:

· This will give the community some surety of the provision of Cromwell buildings

· The impact of the costs associated with earthquake strengthening could be deferred

· Reconsideration of these building can be undertaken during the draft LTP 2027/37

Disadvantages:

· The cost to defer the earthquake strengthening work will increase significantly

· Risk to users of continued use of earthquake prone buildings

Option 3

Status quo as proposed in the draft LTP 25/34

Advantages:

· There are no clear advantages with this option

Disadvantages:

· The burden on ratepayers may be unacceptable for many who are already struggling with the increase cost of living

5. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by the Cromwell Community Board. The recommendation promotes the social and economic wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by giving feedback to Council for a recommended level of service for Cromwell buildings.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	The decision is guided by the “Council – owned Earthquake – prone Building Policy” and the “draft Long-Term Plan 2025/2035” for budget requirements.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	There are no sustainability, environment or climate change impacts with this decision.
Risks Analysis	Under the current earthquake strengthening legislation outlined in the Building Act 2014, strengthening work must be carried out within a prescribed time frame. The cost of this work is significant and must be balanced with the frequency of use in the building.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The level of investment to proceed with earthquake strengthening of identified prone buildings is significant. The decision made by the Board will give formal feedback to Council. Council. Under the draft Long-Term Plan 2025/34 process Council will consult with the public on the costs and the implications for the community with regard to level of service for buildings.

6. Next Steps

18 December 2024 - Present report to Council with the Board’s feedback.

7. Attachments

Nil

9 December 2024

24.11.10 Cromwell Financial Report for the Period Ending 30 September 2024

Doc ID: 1983584

Report Author:	Donna McKewen, Systems and Corporate Accountant
Reviewed and authorised by:	Saskia Righarts, Group Manager - Business Support

1. Purpose

To consider the financial performance overview as at 30 September 2024.

Recommendations

That the report be received.

2. Discussion

These statements are designed to give an overview on the financial performance.

The operating statement for the three months ending 30 September 2024 shows a favourable variance of $750k against the revised budget.

2024/25	AS AT 30 SEPTEMBER 2024					2024/25
Full Year		YTD	YTD	YTD		Full Year
Annual Plan		Actual	Revised Budget	Variance		Revised Budget
$000		$000	$000	$000		$000
	Income
1,408	Internal Interest Revenue	406	352	54	˜	1,408
-	Land Sale Proceeds	1,781	1,780	1	˜	4,380
615	User Fees & Other	205	154	51	˜	615
-	Reserves Contributions	40	-	40	˜	-
2,500	Grants & subsidies	604	-	604	˜	2,500
3,956	Rates	1,137	1,137	-	˜	3,956
8,479	Total Income	4,173	3,423	750	˜	12,859

	Expenditure
191	Rates Expense	171	161	(10)	˜	191
272	Cost of Sale of Land	11	-	(11)	˜	957
20	Professional Fees	234	196	(38)	˜	480
1,246	Cost Allocations	314	320	6	˜	1,246
229	Fuel & Energy	31	57	26	˜	229
199	Grants	137	37	(100)	˜	212
263	Other Costs	25	61	36	˜	259
722	Contracts	98	187	89	˜	752
262	Internal Interest Expense	46	66	20	˜	262
127	Building Repairs and Mtce.	35	29	(6)	˜	127
818	Staff	218	205	(13)	˜	818
39	Members Remuneration	9	10	1	˜	39
810	Depreciation	203	203	-	˜	810
5,198	Total Expenses	1,532	1,532	-	˜	6,382
3,281	Operating Surplus / (Deficit)	2,641	1,891	750	˜	6,477

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

Income for period ending 30 September 2024

Operating income reflects a favourable variance to the revised budget of $750k.

· Land sales has a favourable variance of $1k. Land sales related to sales at Cemetery Road.

· User fees and other has a favourable variance of $51k. The favourable variance is being driven by the timing of rentals and hires of $25k and Cromwell pool and swim school $21k.

· Internal interest revenue has a favourable variance of $54k. Interest revenue is higher than budget due to surplus reserve balances

· Reserves contributions have a favourable variance of $40k. These are difficult to gauge when setting budgets and are dependent on developers’ timeframes.

· Grants and subsidies has a favourable variance of $604k. This variance relates to the timing of funding received from the Central Lakes Trust the Cromwell Memorial Hall.

2024/25	User Fees and Other Income					2024/25
Full Year		YTD	YTD	YTD		Full Year
Annual Plan		Actual	Revised Budget	Variance		Revised Budget
$000		$000	$000	$000		$000
7	Other Misc Income	7	2	5	˜	7
273	Rentals & Hires	93	68	25	˜	273
315	Cromwell Pool / Swim School	100	79	21	˜	315
20	Cemeteries	5	5	-	˜	20
615	Total User Fees Income	205	154	51		615

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

Expenditure for period ending 30 September 2024

Expenditure has an overall nil variance against the revised budget. The variances are detailed below:

· Rates expense has an unfavourable variance of ($10k). This variance will remain for the rest of the year, with Otago Regional Council rates to be received. This variance is offset in rental and hires income where investment properties are on charged the rates expense.

· Professional fees has an unfavourable variance of ($38k). This relates to the Cromwell Town Centre business case work being carried out and expenditure is ahead of the year-to-date budget.

· Grants has an unfavourable variance of ($100k). This is due to the timing of the grants rounds and the grants allocated. Grant funding allocated includes: Cromwell Promotions $95k and Cromwell Museum Trust $41.6k.

· Other costs have a favourable variance of $36k. These costs are needs-based and will vary against budget from time to time. Driving this variance is water charges of $21k, elected members meeting expenses $8k and pool chemicals $3k. Water meter charges will be invoiced in the second quarter of the financial year.

· Contracts has a favourable variance of $89k. These expenses are needs-based, and they will vary against budget from time to time. The contract variance is driven by timing of work carried out for planned maintenance work at Cromwell town centre, reserves and sport pavilion.

· Staff has an unfavourable variance of ($13k). This is predominately due to the Cromwell pool swim school salary, which is offset by increased swim school income.

Capital Expenditure

Capital expenditure (CAPEX) for the period ending 30 September 2024 has a year-to-date favourable variance of $9.52M. The actual CAPEX spent to date is 13.7% of the total revised budget.

2024/25	AS AT 30 SEPTEMBER 2024					2024/25
Full Year		YTD	YTD	YTD		Full Year
Annual Plan		Actual	Revised Budget	Variance		Revised Budget
$000		$000	$000	$000		$000
	Parks and Reserves
45	Cromwell Reserves - Playground equipment	-	37	37	˜	118
82	Cromwell Reserves - Irrigation	-	9	9	˜	82
72	Cromwell Reserves - Landscaping	1	18	17	˜	72
-	Cromwell Reserves - Recreation Equipment	-	5	5	˜	20
22	Cromwell Reserves - Fencing & Bins	2	6	4	˜	22
5	Cromwell - Fencing	-	1	1	˜	5
12	Cromwell Lighting	14	3	(11)	˜	12
31	Cromwell Cemetery	-	2	2	˜	38
-	Anderson Park - Playground equipment	-	16	16	˜	65
128	Anderson Park - Landscaping	2	32	30	˜	128
57	Anderson Park - Irrigation & Bins	-	14	14	˜	57
8	Bannockburn Recreation Reserve	-	8	8	˜	8
462	Total Parks & Reserves	19	151	132		627
	Cromwell Swimming Pool
172	Building upgrades	12	45	33	˜	181
11	Machinery & Plant	13	43	30	˜	51
20	Recreation equipment / furniture & fittings	8	5	(3)	˜	20
203	Total Cromwell Swimming Pool	33	93	60		252
	Property				˜
11	Cromwell Town Centre	-	3	3	˜	11
24,461	Cromwell Memorial Hall	3,391	12,719	9,328	˜	24,109
24,472	Total Property	3,391	12,722	9,331		24,120
25,138	Total Capital Expenditure	3,443	12,967	9,524		24,999

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

Parks and Reserves has an overall favourable variance of $132k

· Cromwell Reserves - The Lowburn Hall playground project will be starting in early 2025. Neplusultra reserve tree removal project is in planning phase. Tarras tennis court replacement is scheduled to start work in February 2025.

· Cromwell Cemetery – Plans are being prepared for kiosk, extension and additional beams.

· Anderson Park – tennis court surface rejuvenation programme is starting in early 2025. Irrigation sprinkler replacements will be carried out as they fail.

· Bannockburn Recreation reserve – playground shade sail is due for installation in November.

Cromwell swimming pool has an overall favourable variance of $60k

· Pool projects are progressing with the following projects being completed: Light replacement, gym change room painting, asbestos testing of building, pool vacuum and washing machine replacements.

· Further projects completed in October 2024 include the pool roof and pool assessment. Work on the changing room floor to start in November 2024.

Property has an overall favourable variance of $9.33M

· Cromwell Memorial Hall has a favourable variance of $9.33M. The Cromwell Memorial Hall is under construction. Slab reinforcement is continuing in readiness of the next concrete pour, steel framing has also started.

Reserve Funds table for Cromwell Ward

· As at 30 June 2024 the Cromwell Ward has an unaudited closing reserve funds balance of $25.23M. This is the ward specific reserves and does not factor in the district-wide reserves which are in deficit at ($24.09M). Refer to Appendix 1.

· Reserves balances adjusted for revised budgets are yet to be prepared to give an estimated 30 June 2025 balance and will be prepared once the 2023-24 Annual Report has been adopted.

· A significant portion of this reserve fund balance has been allocated to the Cromwell Memorial Hall project. This includes the property general Cromwell, endowment land Cromwell and industrial estate Cromwell reserves. This will be utilised in the 2024-25 Annual Plan for the beginning of this project.

· Other deficit reserve balances to be aware of include: Bannockburn Community Centre ($277k), Cromwell Pool ($980k), Cromwell Master Plan ($849k) and Cromwell Town Centre ($2.2M).

3. Attachments

Appendix 1 - 2023-24 Cromwell Reserve Funds ⇩


AGENDA Cromwell Community Board Meeting Monday, 9 December 2024
Date:	Monday, 9 December 2024
Time:	2.00 pm
Location:	Cromwell Service Centre, 42 The Mall, Cromwell (A link to the live stream will be available on the Central Otago District Council's website.)
Peter Kelly Chief Executive Officer

Report Author:	Alison Mason, Media and Marketing Manager
Reviewed and authorised by:	Dylan Rushbrook, Group Manager - Community Vision

Report Author:	Wayne McEnteer, Governance Manager
Reviewed and authorised by:	Saskia Righarts, Group Manager - Business Support

Report Author:	Sarah Reynolds, Governance Support Officer
Reviewed and authorised by:	Saskia Righarts, Group Manager - Business Support