Agenda of Teviot Valley Community Board

Teviot Valley Community Board Agenda

20 March 2025

MINUTES OF A mEETING OF THE
Teviot Valley Community Board
HELD IN THE Roxburgh Service Centre, 120 Scotland Street, Roxburgh
AND LIVE STREAMED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON Wednesday, 5 February 2025 COMMENCING AT 10.02 am

PRESENT: Mr N Dalley (Chairperson), Mr M Jessop, Ms G Booth, Cr S Feinerman, Mr C Pannett

IN ATTENDANCE: D Rushbrook (Group Manager - Community Vision), D Scoones (Group Manager - Community Experience), G Bailey (Parks and Recreation Manager), P Fleet (Roading Manager), C Webster (Communications Officer), S Reynolds (Governance Support Officer)

1 Apologies

There were no apologies.

2 Public Forum

Graeme Rae – Mowing of Berms

Mr Rae reminded the board that he had asked for feedback following the December meeting with regards to the berms issue. He requested that the board put a regular column in the Teviot Bulletin to communicate matters that the board are discussing. He noted that there is a meeting of the ratepayers group on 12^th February at the Ettrick Hall.

Mr Rae then responded to questions.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

Committee Resolution

Moved: Dalley

Seconded: Jessop

That the public minutes of the Teviot Valley Community Board Meeting held on 5 December 2024 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

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

25.1.2 Mowing of Individual Grass Verge Roxburgh

To consider mowing the verge on the corner of Smith and Scotland Street Roxburgh.

It was noted that the original report presented to the December 2024 meeting, item 24.8.3 was left to lie on the table. However following the Council adoption of the Grass Verges Policy the process for residents to apply to have their verges mown is now outlined in the policy. Applications would be considered on a case-by-case basis according to criteria.

It was noted that the application would apply for the ratepayer for the property at the time and should there be a sale of the property, the agreement would cease.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Dalley

Seconded: Pannett

That the Teviot Valley Community Board

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

B. Declines mowing of the grass verge on the corner of Smith and Scotland Streets, Roxburgh.

Carried with Ms booth recording her vote against.

25.1.3 Representation on External Committees

To consider replacing Russell Read on two external committees.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Dalley

Seconded: Feinerman

That the Teviot Valley Community Board

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

B. Appoints a Mr Pannett as a representative to the I and H McPhail Charitable Trust and the Tuapeka County Bursary Fund Committee.

Carried

6 Mayor’s Report

25.1.4 Mayor's Report

Her Worship the Mayor was not present at the meeting.

7 Chair's Report

25.1.5 Chair's Report

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

· Had attended and chaired an informal workshop in the Roxburgh Hall on 17 December, with good attendance.

· Attended the Council meeting in Cromwell and gave an update on the recent board matters.

· Had responded to more enquiries on berm mowing and on the potential divestment of Roxburgh pool Punawai Ora, along with many requests about what the rate increase percentage would be for Teviot ratepayers.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Dalley

Seconded: Jessop

That the report be received.

Carried

8 Members' Reports

25.1.6 Members' Reports

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

Mr Pannett reported on the following:

· Attended Teviot Irrigation AGM.

· Attended the public workshop held in December, that served to enhance public understanding around the reasoning for the potential divestment of the pool but also noted widespread concern around the cost of this process.

· Attended the Millers Flat coffee club, noted the unrest in the community about the Millers Flat hall being considered for divestment, and discussion around the proposed green waste facility.

· Noted that the public perception of the Long-term Plan consultation is that internal council decisions had been made rather that it being a topic for discussion and consultation.

Cr Feinerman reported on the following:

· Met with Cath Kelly at Grovers Hill cycle tracks, to discuss the creation of some biking ramps and jumps. Had been liaising with Ben from Sports Central to help start off this work. Parents and children are now involved and Sports Central are keen to set up a junior committee to help continue the formation of tracks in this area.

· Attended a Teviot Prospects meeting.

· Gave an update on December and January Council meetings and workshops, noted the inclusion of the Teviot Valley in the Alcohol Ban that is currently up for consultation.

· Attended a workshop with DIA representatives to discuss the Regional Deals concept and gave an update on this process.

· Will be attending the all of government Rural & Provincial sector conference.

Ms Booth reported on the following:

· Noted that she was an apology to the recent rest home and Medical Services meeting.

Mr Jessop reported on the following:

· Attended a Teviot Water Company AGM.

· Attended the public workshop held in the Roxburgh Hall in December.

· Teviot Prospects meetings, work has been completed on the living wall, and they are in planning looking at the seats and planter boxes and some murals on the wall need refreshing.

· Attended a Millers Flat coffee morning.

· Attended the Millers Flat committee meeting regarding the potential divestment of the hall, and the main issue is the liability around earthquake strengthening. And noted the issues with land ownership on the reserve.

· Noted similar discussions with the Millers Flat bowling club.

· Had received communication from ratepayers on the potential rates increase.

· Had been working on the Millers Flat Sports and Recreation Hub project, noting they had received letters of support from members of the community, and had already received some external funding. It was noted that there would be no cost the council, as they have indication from external funders they will support the project. The committee would maintain much of the area so that would reduce council maintenance costs. The total budget of $600,000 was all hoped to be received from external funders and local support. There would be another community meeting and it had been advertised in the Teviot Bulletin and once the final design plans are finalised they will go back to the community to seek feedback.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Dalley

Seconded: Booth

That the report be received.

Carried

9 Status Reports

25.1.7 February 2025 Governance Report

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

An update was given on the new Millers Flat Bridge Posting. The impact on local businesses and the increased volume of traffic on the Roxburgh East road was discussed, with this posting adding 40-minutes to journey time for trucks.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Dalley

Seconded: Jessop

That the report be received.

Carried

Note: Mr Dalley left the meeting at 11.26 am and did not return. Mr Jessop assumed the Chair.

25.1.8 Update - Play Strategy

An update was given via video presentation.

10 Date of The Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 20 March 2025. It was noted that the venue was to be confirmed.

The meeting closed at 11.47 am

20 March 2025

5 Reports

25.2.2 Proposed Millers Flat Sports and Recreation Hub

Doc ID: 2394351

Report Author:

Gordon Bailey, Parks and Recreation Manager

Janice Remnant, Asset Management Team Leader - Property

Reviewed and authorised by:

David Scoones, Group Manager - Community Experience

1. Purpose of Report

To consider a proposal to redevelop the Millers Flat Recreation Reserve.

Recommendations

That the Teviot Valley Community Board

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

B. Agrees to the redevelopment of the Millers Flat Recreation Reserve in line with the proposals put forward by the Millers Flat Recreation Reserve Steering Group depicted in plans attached to this report.

C. Notes that Council funding is not being sought for this project.

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

2. Background

A local steering group of residents of the wider Millers Flat area have been working to develop a plan to upgrade the Millers Flat Recreation Reserve. The reserve is classified for recreation purposes under the Reserves Act 1977.

The reserve currently consists of the local war memorial, children’s playground, 2 tennis courts, and the former bowling green. The former Bowling Clubrooms (the Clubrooms) sit on a section of unformed legal road which is not legally part of the reserve land.

The Teviot Valley Ward Reserve Management Plan 2014 mentions that future development opportunities exist for;

- Community upgrade of Tennis court facilities

- Close section of unformed road and classify as Recreation Reserve.

Under Councils District Plan the reserve has the following designation.

- Designation 112 – “Recreation purposes, recreation reserve”

- Heritage site 83 – War Memorial

As the land is Council owned any redevelopment requires Councils approval regardless of whether funding is sought or not.

3. Discussion

The steering group have provided additional information for their plans see Appendix 1.

In summary the group wish to develop new courts on the old bowling green site, a pump track on one of the old tennis courts and relocation and upgrade of the playground to the rear of the war memorial. Appendices 2 and 3 show the overall landscape plan options for the site.

The proposal is consistent with the Reserve Management Plan for this site and are essentially a redevelopment of existing assets within the reserve area.

There is a question mark over the old clubrooms. As shown below the clubrooms and part of the old Bowling green are on a section of unformed legal road. The adjacent land on the river side is Crown Land.

Construction of any recreational assets will need to be within the reserve land area and not cross the boundary.

Through the Long-Term Plan 2025/34 Council has included the Clubrooms in its consultation document as a potential asset to divest. The outcome of that process will not be known until June 2025.

Whatever the outcome of this consultation there are Council operated public toilets directly across the road from the reserve available for use should the Clubrooms be demolished.

Investigation have been undertaken to determine the process to stop the unformed legal road the clubrooms sit on.

The steering group have expressed an interest to potentially utilise the clubrooms as a pavilion and storage facility. However, the following issues have been identified should the building be retained.

Road Stopping

The clubrooms are built on unformed Legal Road. The road can be stopped and transferred to the Millers Flat Recreation Reserve at nil cost for the value of the land. But there will be costs incurred to survey the unformed legal road and amalgamate the titles.

If the clubrooms are demolished, then there will be no requirement to stop the road but it would be prudent to formally stop the road and add it to the reserve.

Retaining Wall

The geotechnical engineer has identified the existing retaining structure is not fit for purpose due to the following reasons:

· Lateral leaning of the posts

· Unsuitably spaced posts

· Potentially undersized posts

· Unsuitable rails

· The level of treatment of the existing timber

· Post embedment depth just upslope of a 2m height near vertical drop close to the Clutha River

For the reasons above, the retaining wall needs to be replaced to an engineered standard requiring a building consent.

The current estimated quote for the initial soil testing and reporting is $4,000. The retaining wall design and specification based on a construction methodology using timber poles is estimated at $4,000 (to be confirmed following soil testing).

Irrespective of the building being retained or not, the 2m drop off the retaining wall needs to be fenced to ensure the safety of the users of the reserve.

Until the design and specification report is funded and made available the cost to build the retaining wall and fence is unknown.

Stormwater

Currently water is being discharged onto the neighbouring Crown Land and needs to be redirected to comply with current building standards. No costings have been obtained to date for this work.

Clubrooms

In the draft Long-term Plan, a budget of $115k has been allocated for demolition costs but is subject to the consultation process.

The steering group have indicated that they may like to retain the use of the clubrooms. They propose to take responsibility for the internal maintenance costs of the building and the expectation that Council will undertake the exterior building maintenance work. It is noted that the clubrooms is not an essential element of the wider reserve redevelopment which will happen regardless of the clubrooms future.

It has been identified in the building inspection report that the wooden window frames are compromised and need to be replaced, it is unknown if the deterioration exceeds into the wall framing.

The report also identifies the spouting above the shed has rusted out effecting the end rafter in this area. There is also historic water damage as a result of the loose roofing iron over the changeroom and toilet area located beside the shed.

Should the building be retained a formal agreement between both parties will be required and associated costs budgeted for.

If the clubrooms are to be demolished, the steering group have indicated they would like to retain the storage shed changeroom and toilet.

The steering group have indicated that should the decision post consultation be to demolish the clubrooms they are committed to develop the reserve as proposed.

4. Financial Considerations

Reserve Development Proposal

The steering group have advised that the entire project will cost in the vicinity of $650,000. The majority of that will be sought from third part funding organisations. Council has not been asked for any funding towards this project as the group are confident, they can raise the money required.

Council under its Open Spaces contract currently maintains the reserve area Council will still need to undertake 2 weekly playground safety checks on the playground and will have mowing and spraying equipment doing the cemetery, lions park etc, so do not anticipate any great change in costs with your proposal.

A slight potential increase could be in maintaining the artificial court surface which from time to time requires specialist care specified by the manufacturer – Council contractors undertake this work on the other artificial surfaces across the district and have all the gear. In summary it is anticipated the proposal can be accommodated within existing budgets. If it can’t then a discussion on assistance from the community would be required.

The Millers Flat Recreation Reserve Fund has a balance of $88,000. This fund has come from depreciation of the Millers Flat Recreation Reserve. The depreciation has been levied against the tennis courts, war memorial, seats and playground.

Depreciation money cannot be used as a grant, but the Board could decide to use it to contribute directly to the purchase of required play equipment for example. Further

discussion with the group may be required depending on if funding targets are achieved or not.

Retention of the Clubrooms

A capex budget allocation will be required for inclusion in the Long-term Plan if Council resolves to retain the Clubrooms.

There is no budget allocated to:

· Stop the unformed road

· Design, build the retaining wall and fence

· Divert and dispose of the water discharge

The existing operational budget to demolish the clubrooms could be re-allocated to fund the road stopping and ongoing operational costs associated with the retention of the building.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Approve the re development of the Millers Flat Recreation Reserve.

Advantages:

· Funding potentially not required from Council

· Community group empowered to continue with the project

· Committed funding won’t be lost

· Community asset is enhanced and no direct cost to the ratepayer

Disadvantages:

· Uncertainty that all funding can be achieved

Option 2

Do not approve the re development of the Millers Flat Recreation Reserve Advantages:

· No advantages are identified from this option

Disadvantages:

· Third party funding options will be lost

· Community input will not be recognised

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by providing the local community with the support they required to enhance the local reserve.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Teviot Valley Ward Reserve Management Plan 2014 District Plan
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No impacts envisaged.
Risks Analysis	Risk identified is that if all the money is not sourced from third party funding agencies Council may be asked to fund the shortfall.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	Not significant and consistent with existing Reserve Management Plan that has been consulted on with the community.

7. Next Steps

Council will consider submissions on future of Millers Flat Bowling clubrooms.

Council staff to continue to work with the Steering group to ensure best outcomes are achieved.

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Millers Flat Reserve project background ⇩

Appendix 2 - Millers Flat Reserve Landscape option A ⇩

Appendix 3 - Millers Flat Reserve Landscape Option B ⇩

20 March 2025

25.2.3 Speed Management Consultation Proposal

Doc ID: 2403364

Report Author:	Holly Laverick, Roading Asset Engineer
Reviewed and authorised by:	Quinton Penniall – Infrastructure Manager

1. Purpose of Report

To consider and provide feedback on the updated speed limit proposals for the Central Otago District noting no proposed changes for the Teviot Valley.

Recommendations

That the Teviot Valley Community Board

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

B. Notes Council will be considering a report for speed limit changes for the district, with no local road changes in the Teviot Valley.

2. Background

In 2023-2024, Central Otago District Council (CODC) consulted on a draft Speed Management Plan (SMP). This was later approved by both Council and the New Zealand Transport Agency Waka Kotahi (NZTA). As discussed in the Report for Information to Council on 18 December 2024, the release of the Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2024 (the Rule) nullified the Speed Management Plan before the speed limit changes could be implemented. A copy of the report is attached.

3. Discussion

Due to the strong public support shown for the previous Speed Management Plan, Council will be presented with a proposal to re-consult with the community and stakeholders. Where possible, the new proposals match the previous. However, requirements under the new Rule have led to the amendment, removal or addition of some speed zones.

The new setting of speed limits rule takes a prescribed approach to permanent speed limits, by designating speed ranges for different road classes. The updated speed limit proposals align with these new standards. Please refer to Appendix 2: Speed Management Proposals – Maps.

Some changes from the previous Speed Management Plan include:

· Cambrians speed limit reduced to 30km/h, rather than 40km/h.

· St Bathans speed limits now ranging from 30-60km/h.

· Inclusion of the Pisa Moorings 40km/h speed zone (in part).

· Option to consult on both 60km/h or 80km/h on Maori Point Road.

· Inclusion of Munro Road, Church Lane and Jolly Road – proposed at 80km/h to align with State Highway 8 speed zone.

· Two partial reversals of existing speed limits: Shortening the previous 50km/h zones to match the road class on Earnscleugh Road and Ranfurly-Patearoa Road.

· Removal of some speed limits that are no longer compliant under the Rule, including Partridge Road, Sunderland Street (north end) and Fruitgrowers Road.

The new speed limit rule increases public consultation requirements. Despite the robust public consultation undertaken by Council for the previous SMP, the submission feedback will not be accepted by the NZTA. The consultation time frame has increased to six weeks (previously four). Additional information is also required, including cost-benefit disclosure statements, which is a breakdown of the travel time impacts, implementation costs and safety impacts of each individual road rather than the wider proposed speed area, as was previously allowed.

4. Financial Considerations

The consultation and subsequent signage installation costs will be met by existing roading budgets.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Recommend to Council the complete list of proposed speed limits.

Advantages:

· More efficient public consultation process, considering the increased timeframes under the new Rule.

· Better potential speed limit outcomes for the wider district.

· Reduced likelihood of service requests from communities with previously approved speed limit reductions.

· New plan includes additional speed proposals, highlighted by recent service requests.

Disadvantages:

· Negative public opinion – due to recent consultation on a broadly similar proposal.

· Higher preliminary workload than “do nothing” option. (Significant increase in information to support the consultation is now required.)

Option 2

Do nothing.

Advantages:

· No costs associated with preliminary work, consultation and implementation.

Disadvantages:

· Worse speed / safety outcomes for the district.

· Inconsistent speed zones near certain schools (Omakau and Tarras).

· Community dissatisfaction in areas where there has been strong advocacy for speed reductions.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by meeting the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002, Section 82 Principles of Consultation.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes - The proposed speed limits are aimed to align the requirements of the Land Transport Rule with the adjacent land use under the District Plan.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	A 2023 NZTA-commissioned report titled “Effect of speed on greenhouse gas emissions from road transport: a review” concludes that speed limit reductions in urban environments have a negligible impact to emissions. Reductions of higher speeds (i.e. 100km to 80km) slightly minimises emissions. The proposed changes are not expected to have any meaningful impact on greenhouse gas emissions. Overall, there are limited sustainability, environmental or climate change impacts related to the decision – the only material change is the installation of signs.
Risks Analysis	Lower speed limits can reduce the number and severity of crashes. Aligning speeds to match the hazards associated with certain traffic volumes, vehicle types and land uses will have safety benefits, particularly for vulnerable road-users (pedestrians and cyclists etc). The two proposed speed increases are intended to provide consistency across the network. The current extents are inconsistent with the hazards present. Correcting these lengths is anticipated to improve adherence in areas of higher overall risk.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The speed limit changes will affect many regular road users, including non-motorised users. It is important that affected parties are provided the opportunity to review the proposals and present their view. This includes communities, businesses and freight operators who will be able to provide comment through the consultation process.

7. Next Steps

· Community Board Feedback (March 2025 round)

· Report to Council (statement of proposal for consultation)

· Consultation period

· Speed Limit Hearing

· Report to Council (adoption of Alternative Method Proposal – equivalent to SMP under the Rule)

· Submission to NZTA

· Implementation

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Council Report 18 Dec 2024 ⇩

Appendix 2 - Speed Management Proposals - Maps ⇩

20 March 2025

25.2.4 Teviot Valley Financial Report for the Period Ending 31 December 2024

Doc ID: 2385473

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 31 December 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 six months ending 31 December 2024 shows a favourable variance of $16k against the revised budget.

2024/25	6 MONTHS ENDING 31 DECEMBER 2024					2024/25
Full Year		YTD	YTD	YTD		Full Year
Annual Plan		Actual	Revised Budget	Variance		Revised Budget
$000		$000	$000	$000		$000
	Income
59	Internal Interest Revenue	36	29	7	˜	59
33	User Fees & Other	15	18	(3)	˜	33
-	Reserves Contributions	1	-	1	˜	-
611	Rates	331	331	-	˜	611
24	Govt Grants & Subsidies	-	2	(2)	˜	24
727	Total Income	383	380	3	˜	727
	Expenditure
16	Rates Expense	21	16	(5)	˜	16
189	Cost Allocations	101	95	(6)	˜	189
37	Other Costs	15	13	(2)	˜	37
29	Building Repairs and Mtce	14	14	-		29
10	Staff	-	5	5	˜	10
17	Fuel & Energy	9	9	-	˜	17
149	Contracts	61	75	14	˜	149
42	Grants	42	41	(1)	˜	42
19	Members Remuneration	9	10	1	˜	19
27	Internal Interest Expense	7	14	7	˜	27
150	Depreciation	75	75	-	˜	150
685	Total Expenses	354	367	13	˜	685
42	Operating Surplus / (Deficit)	29	13	16		42

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

Income for period ending 31 December 2024

Operating income reflects a favourable variance to the revised budget of $3k.

· A small operating income surplus shows that overall income is aligned with budgets. Internal interest revenue is offsetting small variances in user fees and other and grants and subsidies.

Expenditure for period ending 31 December 2024

Expenditure has a favourable variance of $13k against the revised budget. The variances are detailed below:

• Rates expense, cost allocations and other costs have small unfavourable variances. The rates expense is higher than the full year budget and will remain for the rest of the year.

• Contracts has a favourable variance of $14k. These expenses are more needs-based and will vary against budget from time-to-time.

Capital Expenditure

Capital expenditure (CAPEX) for the period ending 31 December 2024 has a year-to-date favourable variance of ($17k). The actual CAPEX spent to date is 41% of the total revised budget.

2024/25	6 MONTHS ENDING 31 DECEMBER 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
11	Roxburgh Reserves - Bins, Signs, Structures	3	4	1	˜	11
12	Millers Flat Recreation Reserve - Tennis Courts	3	3	-	˜	12
23	Total Parks & Reserves	6	7	1	˜	23

	Property
68	Roxburgh Town Hall	264	280	16	˜	492
68	Total Property	264	280	16	˜	492
91	Total Capital Expenditure	270	287	17		515

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

Parks and Reserves has an overall favourable variance of $1k

Property has an overall favourable variance of ($16k)

· Unfortunately, due to the fire at the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre this work cannot proceed now. There are still a few invoices to be received for the work that has been carried out before the fire.

Reserve Funds table for Teviot Valley Ward

· As at 30 June 2024 the Teviot Valley Ward has an audited closing reserve funds balance of $1.09M. 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 forecasted to drop to $766k at year end, however, this will change now as a result of the fire at the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre. The Roxburgh Entertainment Centre is forecasted to finish the financial year with a deficit of ($152k). With capital expenditure as at January 2025 of $287k it will finish the year closer to ($53k) in deficit, subject to any remaining invoices.

· As at 30 June 2024 Teviot Vally ward had a surplus of $1.09M. This is offsetting deficits in: community halls ($16k), reserves Roxburgh (all) ($81k) and other property Roxburgh ($6k).

3. Attachments

Appendix 1 - 2024-25 Teviot Valley Reserve Funds ⇩


AGENDA Teviot Valley Community Board Meeting Thursday, 20 March 2025
Date:	Thursday, 20 March 2025
Time:	10.00 am
Location:	Roxburgh Service Centre, 120 Scotland Street, Roxburgh (A link to the live stream will be available on the Central Otago District Council's website.)
Peter Kelly Chief Executive Officer

Name	Member’s Declared Interests	Spouse/Partner’s Declared Interests	Council Appointments
Gill Booth			Teviot Valley Rest Home Roxburgh and District Medical Services Trust
Norman Dalley	Martel International Limited (Sole Director/Shareholder) Gilmour Development Limited (Sole Director/Shareholder) North Hill Limited (Sole Director/Shareholder) Teviot Valley Rest Home Incorporated (Chair) Roxburgh Entertainment Centre Improvement and Promotions Incorporated (Treasurer/Committee member) Dalley Family Trust (Trustee) Teviot Prospects (Member) Teviot Valley Rest Home Ltd (Director)	217 Scotland Street, Roxburgh (Property Owner) Gilchrist Town Orchard Limited (Shareholder/Director) Roxburgh and Districts Medical Services Trust (Trustee) Roxburgh Entertainment Centre Improvement and Promotions Incorporated (Committee Member)	I and H McPhail Charitable Trust Roxburgh Cemetery Trust Committee Roxburgh Swimming Pool Redevelopment Committee
Name	Member’s Declared Interests	Spouse/Partner’s Declared Interests	Council Appointments
Sally Feinerman	Feinerman’s Ltd, 109 Scotland Street (Owner / Director) Roxburgh Pool Committee (Chair) Sally Feinerman Trust (Trustee) Feinerman Family Trust (Trustee) MPI Teviot Valley Community Hubs group	Breen Construction (Employee / Builder)	Ida MacDonald Charitable Trust Teviot Prospects Teviot Valley Walkways Committee
Mark Jessop	Hillside Family Trust (Trustee) Sunny Days Trust (Trustee) Faigans Hospitality Ltd (director) Teviot Prospects (Trustee)	Hillside Family Trust (Trustee) Sunny Days Trust (Trustee) Faigans Hospitality Ltd (manager)	Teviot Museum Committee Ida MacDonald Charitable Trust
Curtis Pannett	Teviot Valley Irrigation Company Ltd (Director/ Shareholder) Teviot Valley Water Care Group (Member) Rabobank Client Council (Councillor) Hill Springs Farming Company Ltd (Sole Director/Shareholder) Roxburgh Golf Club (Member)		I and H McPhail Charitable Trust Tuapeka County Bursary Fund Committee

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