Agenda of Maniototo Community Board - Thursday, 12 December 2024

Maniototo Community Board Agenda

12 December 2024

MINUTES OF A meeting of the
Maniototo Community Board
HELD IN THE Ranfurly Service Centre, 15 Pery Street, Ranfurly
AND LIVE STREAMED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON Thursday, 7 November 2024 commencing AT 2.00 pm

PRESENT: Mr R Hazlett (Chair), Mr M Harris, Cr S Duncan, Mr D Helm, Ms R McAuley

IN ATTENDANCE: T Alley (Mayor), P Kelly (Chief Executive Officer), Q Penniall (Infrastructure Manager), S Righarts (Group Manager - Business Support), D Rushbrook (Group Manager - Community Vision), D Scoones (Group Manager - Community Experience), J Remnant (Asset Management Team Leader), W McEnteer (Governance Manager), S Reynolds (Governance Support Officer)

The Chair welcomed Mayor Tamah Alley and noted that the Board looked forward to working with her.

1 ApologiES

There were no apologies.

2 Public Forum

There were no speakers for public forum.

3 Condolences

There were no condolences.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

Committee Resolution

Moved: Helm

Seconded: Harris

That the public minutes of the Maniototo Community Board Meeting held on 19 September 2024 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

5 Declarations of Interest

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

6 Reports

24.10.2 Proposed Partial Road Stopping – Unformed Legal Road Off John Street, Ranfurly

To consider a proposal to partially stop two areas of an unnamed and unformed road off John Street, Ranfurly.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: McAuley

That the Maniototo Community Board

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

B. Agrees to partially stop the unnamed and unformed legal road adjacent to Lot 1 DP 8520, in two sections as shown in figure 3, subject to:

· The provisions of the Public Works Act 1981

· Sections “A” and “B” total area of approximately 104.6 square meters being:

- Sold to the applicant at valuation

- Valued at the applicant’s cost

- Amalgamated with Lot 1 DP 8520

· The applicant paying the cost of the survey and LINZ fees, and those of the LINZ Accredited Supplier

· The applicant paying all legal fees

· The final survey plan being approved by the Chief Executive

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

Carried

24.10.3 2025 Meeting Schedule

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

Committee Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Helm

That the Maniototo Community Board

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

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

Carried

7 Mayor’s Report

24.10.4 Mayor's Report

Her worship noted that she was delighted to be able to attend her first Maniototo Community Board meeting and that following the recent Resident Opinion Survey results, whilst the Maniototo board scored highest she noted the challenges for board to liaise and communicate with their communities. She acknowledged the challenges with three waters and the tough decisions elected members are faced with and she thanked members for their ongoing commitment and dedication to the Maniototo ward.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Helm

Seconded: Harris

That the Maniototo Community Board receives the report.

Carried

8 Chair's Report

24.10.5 Chair's Report

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

· Had attended the dedication of the memorial at the burial site at Mt Nobbler completed by Kyeburn Diggings Cemetery Trust.

· Had met with the Maniototo Pony Club to discuss tree removal.

· Noted the issues following the recent rain event, culverts needing to be cleared and checked more readily.

· Noted the request from Oturehua group regarding the potential improvement of the tennis courts.

· Noted he had been liaising with Kristina Wills regarding town signage.

· Had attended a site visit to look at bore holes and potential divining sites.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Hazlett

Seconded: Duncan

That the report be received.

Carried

9 Members' Reports

24.10.6 Members' Reports

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

Mr Harris reported on the following:

· Noted some issues caused by flood damage following the recent rain.

Ms McAuley reported on the following:

· Called for year-round public toilet access at the Naseby swimming dam.

· Noted that tracks in the Naseby forest look really good and that they had gained popularity and were being well used.

· Reported that the planting and reserve areas on the main street were looking great, but that there was a dead tree that needed to be removed on Charlemont Street.

· Gave an update on the swimming pool, detailed that staff are being trained, the pool had been painted and that it could possibly be open earlier than planned.

· Reported that Styx Road is in a good condition.

Mr Helm reported on the following:

· Noted that fire brigade had received their new ute, stating that it will be well utilised especially on unformed roads.

· Noted that the ambulance had two new recruits.

Cr Duncan reported on the following:

· Gave an update on Council meetings and workshops and noted that he was pleased there was a unanimous decision to appoint Mayor Tamah Alley.

· Had visited Scott Lane bridge and had good discussions with users about alternative solutions for access.

· Noted the recent residents survey results and voiced his disappointment around low participation.

· Noted some issues with insufficient signage and GPS sending vehicles onto unsuitable roads.

· Noted the film crew on location at Hills Creek and the positive investment these groups make to the area.

· Attended a celebration of 100-years of primary school sports, noting the impressive talent in the area over the years.

· Had been in discussions about establishing a Menz Shed in the town and believed it would be a good service for some members of the community.

Committee Resolution

Moved: McAuley

Seconded: Harris

That the report be received.

Carried

10 Status Reports

24.10.7 November 2024 Governance Report

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

Committee Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Harris

That the report be received.

Carried

11 Date of the Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 12 December 2024.

The meeting closed at 2.52 pm

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

CHAIR / /

12 December 2024

24.11.4 Level of Service - Māniatoto Buildings

Doc ID: 1981813

Report Author:	Janice Remnant, Asset Management Team Leader - Property
Reviewed and authorised by:	Lee Webster, Acting Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure

1. Purpose of Report

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

Recommendations

That the Maniototo 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:

· Māniatoto Stadium and Rugby Clubrooms

· Māniatoto Arts Centre

· Ranfurly Railway Station

C. Recommends to Council that the following buildings are considered for divestment as part of the draft Long-Term Plan 2025/34 consultation document:

· Ranfurly Hall

· Patearoa Hall

· Naseby Hall

· Waipiata Hall

· Wedderburn Hall

· Wallace Memorial Rooms

· Fenton Library

· Naseby General Store

· Centennial Milkbar

· Ranfurly Service Centre

1. Background

The Māniatoto ward is home to a variety of community halls and facilities, each rich in history and integral to local identity.

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 $6 million 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 Māniatoto’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 Māniatoto'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 Māniatoto’s community halls and facilities meet modern requirements, respect their historical significance, and remain affordable for the community.

Where divestment is 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.

Māniatoto Park Stadium

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Strategic multipurpose facility supporting recreation and community services
Usage	Actively used by multiple groups, including the Maniototo Squash Club
Legal Status	Built on reserve land under the Reserves Act 1977, subject to the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act
Condition	Requires ongoing maintenance and is earthquake-prone
Recommendation	Retain as a critical community hub

Māniatoto Art Centre

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Dedicated art and cultural facility, held in trust for the Māniatoto Arts Council
Usage	Integral to the arts and cultural community, with significant restrictions on divestment due to the trust deed.
Legal Status	Restricted sale without permission from the Māniatoto Arts Council
Condition	Requires ongoing maintenance but suitable for continued use
Recommendation	Retain due to its unique role and legal constraints

Ranfurly Railway Station

Attribute	Details
Purpose	i-SITE activity, community built historic displays
Legal Status	Reserve land under the Reserves Act 1977, subject to the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act.
Condition	Not earthquake prone, requires further consideration of assessment for redevelopment
Recommendation	Retain as a strategic asset for administration purposes and tourism activity

A structural condition assessment has been received for the Ranfurly Railway Station Building.

The assessment revealed varying conditions across the building elements. Critical concerns related to:

· subfloor deterioration

· roofing iron over the station building

· cladding at north end of building

· corrosion at the base of steel platform posts

· asphalt deterioration on the platform

Remedial cost estimates have not yet been sought and further investigation will provide guidance on future redevelopment.

Rates Income, Rental Income and Expenditure:

Income
Rates Portion of Revenue - LTP Yr 1 - 9	357,497
Annual Income	0
Expenditure
Operational Costs 2023/2024	40,110
Operational Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	363,276
Capex Renewal Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	119,693

Ranfurly Hall

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Venue for performances and events, with a backstage area
Location and Proximity	700 metres from the Māniatoto Stadium and Clubrooms
Usage	Low bookings and minimal income
Legal Status	Not freehold; need to acquire land from the Crown and declassify
Condition	Earthquake-prone (NBS 15%), strengthening costs $757,820 scheduled in Year 4, 2028/29
Recommendation	Divest due to high costs, low use and proximity to alternative venue

Bookings and Income:

Rates Income and Expenditure:

Income
Rates Portion of Revenue - LTP Yr 1 - 9	508,539
Expenditure
Operational Costs 2023/2024	41,578
Operational Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	500,974
Capex Renewal Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	193,385

Patearoa Hall

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Community hall, public toilets attached
Location and Proximity	Golf and Bowling clubrooms in close proximity and 18.3km from Ranfurly
Usage	Low bookings and minimal income
Legal Status	Built on reserve land under the Reserves Act 1977
Condition	Significant structural issues and earthquake-prone (NBS 15%), structural and strengthening costs $905,595 scheduled in Year 4 2028/29
Recommendation	Divest/demolish due to poor structural condition, high costs, low use and proximity to alternative venues

Bookings and Income:

Rates Income and Expenditure:

Income
Rates Portion of Revenue - LTP Yr 1 - 9	281,698
Expenditure
Operational Costs 2023/2024	33,526
Operational Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	280,449
Capex Renewal Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	116,491

Naseby Hall

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Community hall
Location and Proximity	13.8km from Ranfurly, Naseby Adventure Park lounge and Volunteer Fire Brigade rooms provide alternate local venues
Usage	Low bookings and minimal income
Legal Status	Freehold, subject to a Section 40 Public Works Investigation Report
Condition	Earthquake prone building (NBS <20%) scheduled in Year 4, 2028/29 at a cost of $1,011,396
Recommendation	Divest due high costs and limited usage

Bookings and Income:

Rates Income and Expenditure:

Income
Rates Portion of Revenue - LTP Yr 1 - 9	401,882
Expenditure
Operational Costs 2023/2024	48,167
Operational Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	397,558
Capex Renewal Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	35,342

Waipiata Hall

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Community hall
Location and Proximity	11.5km from Ranfurly
Usage	Very low bookings and minimal income
Legal Status	Freehold, subject to a Section 40 Public Works Investigation Report
Condition	Earthquake prone building (NBS <20%) scheduled in Year 4, 2028/29 at a cost of $644,174
Recommendation	Divest due high costs and low usage

Bookings and Income:

A graph of a bar graph

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Rates Income and Expenditure:

Income
Rates Portion of Revenue - LTP Yr 1 - 9	325,548
Expenditure
Operational Costs 2023/2024	25,637
Operational Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	302,380
Capex Renewal Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	107,843

Wedderburn Hall

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Community hall
Location and Proximity	14.8km from Ranfurly; 2 alternative private venues available in the area
Usage	No official bookings or income
Legal Status	Built on reserve land under the Reserves Act 1977, subject to the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act.
Condition	Earthquake prone building (NBS 15%) strengthening works scheduled in Year 4, 2028/29 at a cost of $427,627
Recommendation	Divest due high costs and no usage

Rates Income and Expenditure:

Income
Rates Portion of Revenue - LTP Yr 1 - 9	195,072
Expenditure
Operational Costs 2023/2024	24,651
Operational Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	186,115
Capex Renewal Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9 (inflated)	34,858

Wallace Memorial Rooms

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Community facility, 2 small meeting rooms with a kitchenette and a self-contained rental unit (tenanted)
Usage	Meetings rooms are well used, the rental unit has an annual income of $6,760 p.a.
Legal Status	Freehold, subject to a Section 40 Public Works Investigation Report
Condition	Not an earthquake prone building in good condition and fit for purpose
Recommendation	Divest to reduce council operational costs

Bookings and Income:

A graph with blue and orange lines

Description automatically generated

Rates Income and Expenditure:

Income
Rates Portion of Revenue - LTP Yr 1 - 9	79,391
Annual Income	8,260
Expenditure
Operational Costs 2023/2024	14,791
Operational Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	158,344
Capex Renewal Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9 (inflated)	63,157

Fenton Library

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Broadcasting studio leased to Radio Charitable Trust Inc.
Usage	Generates a low income return to Council
Legal Status	Freehold, subject to a Section 40 Public Works Investigation Report
Condition	Earthquake-prone (NBS 20%) scheduled for strengthening works in Year 3, 2027/28 at a cost of $113,109
Recommendation	Divest to reduce operational and capex costs

Rates Income, Rental Income and Expenditure:

Income
Rates Portion of Revenue - LTP Yr 1 - 9	69,812
Annual Rental Income	750
Expenditure
Operational Costs 2023/2024	6,594
Operational Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	77,314
Capex Cost EQP Year 3 (2027/28) NBS Rating 20% (inflated)	113,109

Naseby General Store

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Leased as a general store and NZ Post Agency with post boxes
Usage	Provides local post agency and staple grocery supplies
Legal Status	Freehold; eligible for divestment
Condition	Earthquake-prone (NBS 20%) scheduled for strengthening works in Year 2, 2026/27 at a cost of $235,147
Recommendation	Divest to reduce operational and capex costs

Rates Income, Rental Income and Expenditure:

Income
Rates Portion of Revenue - LTP Yr 1 - 9	81,813
Annual Rental Income	2,600
Expenditure
Operational Costs 2023/2024	21,794
Operational Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	131,740
Capex Renewal Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9 (inflated)	8,458

Centennial Milkbar

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Multi-tenanted facility with an art deco gallery, second hand shop and a beauty treatment provider
Usage	Generates $3,665 annual rental income
Legal Status	Freehold, but checks for encumbrances are advised
Condition	Not earthquake prone, although ongoing maintenance is required
Recommendation	Divest to high costs and limited annual income

Rates Income, Rental Income and Expenditure:

Income
Rates Portion of Revenue - LTP Yr 1 - 9	35,955
Annual Rental Income	3,665
Expenditure
Operational Costs 2023/2024	40,648
Operational Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	392,300
Capex Renewal Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	80,746

Ranfurly Service Centre

Attribute	Details
Purpose	Council administration activity, archive storage and meeting rooms
Usage	Used for administrative purposes but could be consolidated elsewhere
Legal Status	Freehold with additional property that could be redeveloped; checks for encumbrances are advised
Condition	Earthquake prone (NBS <20%), strengthening works scheduled for Year 2, 2026/27 at a cost of $790,705
Recommendation	Divest, with options for sale or redevelopment into residential sections

Rates Income and Expenditure:

Income
Rates Portion of Revenue - LTP Yr 1 - 9	674,000
Expenditure
Operational Costs 2023/2024	94,844
Operational Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	783,472
Capex Costs LTP Yr 1 - 9	286,812

3. Financial Considerations

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

Feedback regarding the level of service for Māniatoto 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:

· Māniatoto Stadium and Rugby Clubrooms

· Māniatoto Arts Centre

· Ranfurly Railway Station

The following buildings be divested:

· Ranfurly Hall

· Patearoa Hall

· Naseby Hall

· Waipiata Hall

· Wedderburn Hall

· Wallace Memorial Rooms

· Fenton Library

· Naseby General Store

· Centennial Milkbar

· Ranfurly Service Centre

Advantages:

· Reduced operational costs

· Reduced capital costs

· Reduced rates contribution from ratepayers

Disadvantages:

· The community may feel aggrieved, but will have the opportunity to make submissions during the draft LTP public consultation process

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 Māniatoto 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 increased 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 Maniototo 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 Māniatoto 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 regarding level of service for buildings.

6. Next Steps

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

7. Attachments

Nil

12 December 2024

24.11.5 Managing Unreasonable Complainant Conduct

Doc ID: 1982742

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 - UCC Two pages.pdf ⇩

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

12 December 2024

24.11.6 Maniototo Financial Report for the Period Ending 30 September 2024

Doc ID: 1983546

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 $124k against the revised budget.

2024/25	3 MONTHS ENDING 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
198	User fees and other income	50	43	7	˜	198
149	Internal Interest Revenue	41	37	4	˜	149
1,201	Rates	372	372	-	˜	1,201
1,548	Total Income	463	452	11	˜	1,548

	Expenditure
56	Rates Expense	63	53	(10)	˜	56
54	Other Costs	3	11	8	˜	62
140	Staff	12	35	23	˜	140
330	Contracts	21	109	88	˜	330
23	Grants	10	14	4	˜	23
65	Fuel and Energy	9	16	7	˜	65
28	Building Repairs and Mtce	4	5	1	˜	28
270	Cost Allocations	66	69	3	˜	270
73	Internal Interest Expense	18	18	-	˜	73
6	Professional fees	13	1	(12)	˜	6
371	Depreciation	93	93	-	˜	371
19	Members Remuneration	4	5	1	˜	19
1,435	Total Expenses	316	429	113	˜	1,443
113	Operating Surplus / (Deficit)	147	23	124		105

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

Income for period ending 30 September 2024

Operating income reflects a favourable variance to the revised budget of $11k.

· User fees and other income has a favourable variance of $7k. This variance is due to the timing of rentals and hires being invoiced.

· Internal interest revenue has a favourable variance of $4k. Interest revenue is slightly higher than budget due to surplus reserve balances.

Expenditure for period ending 30 September 2024

Expenditure has a favourable variance of $113k 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 the Otago Regional Council rates still to be received.

· Staff has a favourable variance of $23k. This is due to the timing of the staffing costs for the Ranfurly pool, which is open during the summer months.

· Other costs at $8k and contracts at $88k are all favourable year-to-date. These expenses are more needs-based and therefore the variance is a timing issue only. The contracts variance relates to both buildings planned maintenance and parks and reserves open space contract.

· Professional fees has an unfavourable variance of ($12k). Legal opinion has been sort for earthquake prone community facilities, based on the certificate of title.

Capital Expenditure

Capital expenditure (CAPEX) for the period ending 30 September 2024 reflects that CAPEX spending is $246k favourable to the revised budget. The actual capital expenditure year to date is 1% of the total revised budget.

2024/25	3 MONTHS ENDING 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 & Reserves
30	Other Reserves	-	9	9	˜	39
7	Taieri Lake Reserve	-	5	5	˜	7
23	Patearoa Recreation Reserve	2	9	7	˜	23
131	Ranfurly Pool	-	132	132	˜	145
7	Naseby Dam Reserve	-	-	-	˜	7
43	Oturehua Domain	-	41	41	˜	43
15	Cemeteries	3	1	(2)	˜	18
256	Total Parks & Reserves	5	197	192		282

	Property
6	Property General	-	2	2	˜	6
43	Community Halls	-	12	12	˜	49
47	Maniototo Stadium	-	4	4	˜	47
12	Ranfurly Hall	-	9	9	˜	12
66	Centennial Milk Bar	-	11	11	˜	66
8	Ranfurly Railway Station	-	7	7	˜	8
5	Pioneer Store	-	-	-	˜	5
24	Ranfurly Arts Centre	-	9	9	˜	33
210	Total Property	-	54	54	˜	225
466	Total Capital Expenditure	5	251	246		507

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

Parks and Reserves has an overall favourable variance of $192k

· Capital work programmes are being prepared.

· Patearoa Recreation reserve fence replacement project has started with fencing supplies being purchased, along with Naseby Cemetery extension work.

Property has an overall favourable variance of $54k

· Capital work programmes are being prepared.

Reserve Funds table for Maniototo Ward

· As of 30 June 2024, the Maniototo ward had an audited closing balance in the Reserve Funds of $1.57M. 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.

· As at 30 June 2024 Maniototo ward had a surplus of $1.57M. This is offsetting deficits in: Maniototo Arts Centre ($11k), Community Halls Maniototo ($42k), Other Reserves Maniototo ($27k) and General Reserves Maniototo ($183k).

3. Attachments

Appendix 1 - 2023-24 Maniototo Reserve Funds ⇩


AGENDA Maniototo Community Board Meeting Thursday, 12 December 2024
Date:	Thursday, 12 December 2024
Time:	2.00 pm
Location:	Ranfurly Service Centre, 15 Pery Street, Ranfurly (A link to the live stream will be available on the Central Otago District Council's website.)
Peter Kelly Chief Executive Officer

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.

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