Agenda of Council meeting - Wednesday, 30 July 2025

Council Meeting Agenda

30 July 2025

MINUTES OF A Council Meeting OF THE Central Otago District Council
HELD AT Ngā Hau e Whā, William Fraser Building, 1 Dunorling Street, Alexandra
AND LIVE STREAMED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON Thursday, 10 July 2025 COMMENCING AT 10.30 am

PRESENT: Her Worship the Mayor T Alley (Chairperson), Cr N Gillespie, Cr S Browne, Cr L Claridge, Cr I Cooney, Cr S Duncan, Cr S Feinerman, Cr M McPherson, Cr T Paterson

IN ATTENDANCE: P Kelly (Chief Executive Officer), L Fleck (Group Manager - People and Culture, Acting Group Manager - Community Vision), J Muir (Group Manager - Three Waters), S Righarts (Group Manager - Governance and Business Services), D Rushbrook (Regional Deals Lead), D Scoones (Group Manager - Community Experience), Q Penniall (Acting Group Manager - Planning, Infrastructure and Regulatory), P Penno ( Community Engagement Manager), C Webster (Communications Officer) S Reynolds (Acting Governance Manager)

1 Karakia

Cr Gillespie gave a karakia to begin the meeting.

2 Apologies

Resolution

Moved: Alley

Seconded: Paterson

That apologies from Cr C Laws and Cr N McKinlay be received and accepted.

Carried

3 Confirmation of Minutes

Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Feinerman

That the public minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 25 June 2025 and the Extraordinary Council Meeting held on 30 June 2025 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 Resolution to Exclude the Public

Resolution

Moved: Alley

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

Confidential Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting

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

s7(2)(f)(ii) - the withholding of the information is necessary to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through the protection of Council members, officers, employees, and persons from improper pressure or harassment

s7(2)(g) - the withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege

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)

s7(2)(j) - the withholding of the information is necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage

Commercial sensitivity

To protect people from harassment

Legal professional privilege

To enable commercial activities

To enable commercial or industrial negotiations

To prevent use of the information for improper gain or advantage

25.14.3 - Offer for a Land Access Arrangement

s7(2)(c)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information, or information from the same source, and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied

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)

s7(2)(j) - the withholding of the information is necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage

Commercial sensitivity

Due to an obligation of confidence and to ensure the information avenue remains open

To enable commercial activities

To enable commercial or industrial negotiations

To prevent use of the information for improper gain or advantage

Carried

Note: The public were excluded at 10.33 am and re-admitted at 10.59 am.

Cr Duncan acknowledged the death of former Councillor Michael Dowling and Councillors stood for a minutes silence as a mark of respect.

6 Public Forum

Gerry Eckhoff – Consultation Process

Mr Eckhoff spoke with regards to the plans for water service delivery and noted the decision by Waitaki District Council. He stated that whilst he understood the requirements from central government he believed that local government politicians seemed to have forgotten that they serve their communities not the requirements of central government. He also observed that the consultation process did not appear to comply with the Local Government Act regarding providing individuals with an opportunity to give an oral submission as part of the consultation.

Mr Eckhoff then responded to questions.

Graeme Rae – Consultation Feedback

Mr Rae spoke on behalf of the ratepayers group in the Teviot Valley and detailed the strong support for an in-house business unit with in the Teviot Valley. He highlighted significant rate increases in the ward over the past two years and noted that through the Districtisation discussion, despite strong opposition from the ward, Councillors opted to move to district-wide funding.

Hemi Bedggood – Federated Farmers

Mr Bedggood, representing Federated Farmers, highlighted rural ratepayers' concerns about multi-council water services, emphasising their view that local councils are best suited to deliver and manage water infrastructure. He noted that members were anxious about the affordability of projected infrastructure spending and the anticipated increases in rates, and requested that rural stakeholders be considered in future decisions.

Mr Bedggood then responded to questions.

7 Reports

25.14.2 Southern Water Done Well

The Local Government (Water Services Preliminary Arrangements) Act 2024 (‘the Act’) requires all councils to submit a Water Services Delivery Plan (WSDP) to the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) by 3 September 2025.

The discussion addressed the regulatory framework governing water services delivery and noted that smaller councils had limitations on capital project investments because of their population size and borrowing capacity. It was noted that a joint CCO would provide procurement gains and economies of scale that would allow for more strategic investment in all areas.

Appreciation was expressed to everyone who contributed to the consultation and to those involved in preparing and sharing the detailed information on this matter over several years, supporting informed decision-making throughout the process.

It was discussed that the regulation and the financial implications were the most significant driver, and that ratepayers of the combined councils would be better off from the formation of a joint CCO than if the services remained in-house.

It was noted that a new set of analytics and financials would be provided to the remaining councils to reflect that Waitaki was no longer in the group and that these would be presented to Council.

Resolution

Moved: Alley

Seconded: Duncan

Recommendations

That the Council

1. Receives the report titled ‘Southern Water Done Well – Water Services Delivery Model.

2. Agrees to adopt

a) Option 1 of the report: being a jointly owned Council Controlled Organisation as the Council’s model for the delivery of water services in accordance with section 13(1)(k) of the Local Government (Water services Preliminary Arrangements) Act 2024, subject to receiving further analysis prior to adoption of a Water Service Delivery Plan.

3. Requests staff to prepare a Water Services Delivery Plan containing the matters set out in section 13 of the Local Government (Water Services Preliminary Arrangements) Act 2024 and the Council’s chosen proposed water services delivery model, to be brought back to Council for its approval, and certification by the Central Otago District Council Chief Executive prior to being submitted to the Department of Internal Affairs by 3 September 2025 for acceptance.

4. Requests staff to prepare further analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the Jointly Owned Council Controlled Organisation model included in the proposed Water Services Delivery Plan (as per recommendation 3), which is anticipated to include a combination of all or some of Central Otago, Clutha and Gore District Councils.

5. Notes the submissions received and thanks all submitters for their feedback.

Carried

8 Date of Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 30 July 2025.

The meeting closed at 12.16 pm.

30 July 2025

25.15.4 Ranfurly and Patearoa Boil Water Advisory Level of Service

Doc ID: 2540610

Report Author:	Julie Muir, Group Manager - Three Waters
Reviewed and authorised by:	Saskia Righarts, Acting Chief Executive Officer

1. Purpose of Report

To consider different level of service options and costs for supply of water to Ranfurly and Patearoa until treatment plant upgrades are completed.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Approves the installation of a temporary protozoa barrier loaned from Selwyn District on the Ranfurly Water treatment plant.

C. Agrees that installation of the temporary barrier, and provision of tankered drinking water while the treatment upgrades are completed be funded as a mix of operational and capital cost to the Ranfurly and Pateraroa Water Treatment Plant upgrades.

2. Background

This report provides an update to matters raised in a report for information to Council on 28 May 2025: Item 25.11.8 Ranfurly and Patearoa Water Supplies Protozoa Barrier Non-compliance. Doc ID:2478645

The Ranfurly Water Treatment Plant was constructed in 1984, and the treatment methodology is via sand filter and chlorine. Water is sourced from the East Ewe Burn. The plant has faced significant challenges, particularly with turbidity issues in the source water.

The Patearoa Water Treatment was constructed in 1980 and serves a small urban area of approximately 50 properties, and a rural water scheme of approximately 40 properties. Water is chlorination which treats bacteria. Water is sourced from the Sowburn River. The surface water source is vulnerable to turbidity following rainfall events.

Both of these plants are non-compliant for protozoa treatment. They are also occasionally non-compliant for bacteria treatment during high turbidity events requiring boil water notices to be put in place.

Upgrades of the Ranfurly and Patearoa Water Treatment Plants were included in the 2021 -2031 Long Term Plan. A number of options were considered which would meet the compliance requirements and be resilient to all weather events. These options were cost prohibitive.

Alternative options were then considered which would provide compliance with the drinking water standards and would significantly improve resilience, but may not withstand higher impact, infrequent events. An alternative, more affordable option for upgrading of both the Ranfurly and Patearoa treatment plants was approved by Council on 29 January 2025. Procurement has been undertaken and the new plants are programmed to be commissioned in December.

In October 2023, Central Otago District Council received direction from the government’s water services regulator Taumata Arowai regarding compliance deadlines for protozoa barriers to be installed on all water supplies.

For water systems that rely on surface water as the source, which includes Ranfurly, the installation and operation of a protozoa barrier was to be completed by 31 December 2024. This deadline was subsequently extended to 31 September 2025 following changes to legislation relating to Three Waters Delivery reform and provisions for deferring Long Term Plans for one year.

Taumata Arowai wrote to Council on 14 April 2025 requesting a risk mitigation plan which identified how Council intended to manage the risks presented by the absence of protozoa barriers for the Ranfurly and Patearoa until the treatment plant upgrades were completed.

Several iterations of risk mitigation plans were provided between 1 May and June. These plans outlined the real time monitoring in place for turbidity and conductivity, reducing the set points for shut down of the treatment plant and relying on stored water following rain events, and installation of conductivity monitoring on the Patearoa plant. Following extensive discussions with Taumata Arowai council staff were advised the only alternative to installation of ultraviolet (UV) treatment that would be accepted was a boil water advisory. The boil water advisory was subsequently implemented during the week of 14 July and is required to remain in place until a protozoa barrier (Ultraviolet) is installed.

3. Discussion

The boil water advisory expected that residents would boil water for drinking and store this for residential use, with the two small council owned tankers being located at the two Ranfurly schools for use by the schools.

This is similar to what occurs in other locations within New Zealand where long-term boil water advisories are in place. Unlike past boil water notices which have been installed when the water is too cloudy to treat, in this case the water is the same as has previously been used and is clear to the eye.

The Ranfurly and Patearoa communities have frequent experience of short-term boil water notices. These have been put in place following rain events, when the turbidity (cloudiness) of the water means that chlorination treatment for bacteria may be compromised. During these events, water tankers have been supplied to provide treated drinking water.

This has now set a minimum expectation from the community for tankered drinking water to be available within the community for use during boil water advisories. In order to respond to this, Gore District Council has loaned their small water tanker, which is now located in Patearoa, and a larger hired tanker is now located at the Maniototo Hospital with public access to this.

Council operations staff have been exploring other options to manage the implications of a long-term boil water advisory. Installing point-of-use treatment devises on food premises, the Maniototo Hospital, and a single publicly accessible water point has been investigated. We are waiting on information from a plumber regarding the practicality and detailed costs for this.

Selwyn District Council are replacing a containerised UV unit on one of their supplies. Staff have been in discussions with Selwyn regarding Central Otago District Council using this as a temporary barrier for Ranfurly until the new treatment unit is commissioned. The container will be available after 5 August, and could be decommissioned on the existing site, transported, installed and commissioned by the early September. This would enable the boil water advisory on Ranfurly to be lifted 3-4 months earlier.

If a temporary barrier is installed on Ranfurly then installation and commissioning of Patearoa could be prioritised over Ranfurly, resulting in earlier lifting of the boil water advisory on Patearoa.

4. Financial Considerations

The costs refilling and transporting the small tankers is estimated to be about $5,000 a month. The hire, filling and transport cost for the large tanker is estimated to be about $10,000 a month. This means the costs for tankers for Ranfurly is approximately $20,000/month and Patearoa is $5,000/month (increase to operating expenditure).

The estimated cost to install point-of use treatment on eight sites (Hospital, six food premises, and one public access site) is estimated to be approximately $70,000 (capital expenditure).

The estimated cost to transport and install a temporary UV unit from Selwyn is estimated to be approximately $150,000 (capital expenditure).

The total available budget for the Ranfurly and Patearoa water treatment upgrades is $4.2 million. The estimated costs for design, project management, construction and contingency for the upgraded plants is $3.92million. This leaves $280,000 of unallocated project budget.

Estimated cost breakdown for preferred option:

Operational expenditure

Two months providing water tankers $50,000

Capital expenditure

Transport and install temporary UV unit $150,000

Total estimated increase in expenditure $200,000

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Install Selwyn plant at Ranfurly to provide a temporary protozoa barrier, resulting in approximately a further six-week boil water advisory for Ranfurly. The estimated total cost for this is $200,000 (as per table above).

Tankered drinking water would be provided in Ranfurly for the two schools, the hospital and the public during the boil water advisory period and is included in the total cost.

Tankered drinking water would be provided to Patearoa until the new plant is commissioned. This could be provided from Ranfurly once the temporary barrier is in place, reducing costs for transport to Patearoa. The upgrade for Patearoa could then be prioritised over Ranfurly and potentially commissioned earlier.

Advantages:

· Shorter period (about a 6 weeks) of boil water advisory and high public dissatisfaction in Ranfurly.

· Earlier commissioning of Patearoa

· Less likely to have community alarm fatigue and resulting complacency to any future boil water advisories that may be required due to turbidity affecting bacteria treatment between September and December.

Disadvantages:

· Estimated total cost is $200,000 (as per table above).

· High internal workload in managing additional construction work, two updates to drinking water safety plan, and additional advisory and communications with Taumata Arowai.

Option 2

Residents boil their water until mid-December, with small tankers supplied for school use only, point of use treatment for food premises, hospital and a publicly accessible water tap.

Advantages:

· Hospital and food premises would not need to boil their water once the point of use treatment devices are installed (approximately $70,000).

· Large drinking water tanker would not be required for Ranfurly and Gore tanker for Patearoa once point of use is installed on a publicly accessible tap.

Disadvantages:

· All other properties would have boil water advisory until December (approximately 21 weeks) resulting in high level of public dissatisfaction in Ranfurly and Patearoa.

· Likely to have community alarm fatigue and resulting complacency if there is a high turbidity event which could reduce effectiveness of bacteria treatment between August and December. Potential for people to become sick as a result of complacency.

· Estimated total cost is $175,000

Option 3

All properties boil their drinking water until mid-December. Drinking water tankers are provided at Patearoa, the two schools in Ranfurly, and the hospital. The tanker at the hospital is available to the public.

Advantages

· Lower cost.

Disadvantages

· All properties would have boil water advisory in place until December (approximately 21 weeks)

· A very high level of public dissatisfaction in Ranfurly and Patearoa.

· Estimated total cost is $125,000

Option 4

All properties boil their drinking water until mid-December. Public drinking water fill points are available in Naseby and Alexandra.

Advantages

· Lowest cost.

Disadvantages

· All properties would have boil water advisory in place until December (approximately 21 weeks)

· Residents would need to travel to Naseby or Alexandra which have fully compliant water supplies to fill water containers.

· A very high level of public dissatisfaction in Ranfurly and Patearoa for a prolonged period.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by outlining the background to the current boil water advisories on Ranfurly and Patearoa water supplies, and options and costs to mitigate the duration of these.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Long duration boil water advisories will have economic impacts on the community and businesses. They will present a negative image of the district to visitors.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	Temporary installation of the Selwyn treatment container at Ranfurly will reduce transport of compliant water to Ranfurly and distance of cartage to Patearoa.
Risks Analysis	There is a risk of the community suffering alarm fatigue and not responding if there is an event which results in heightened risk to the water treatment process, such as high turbidity following rain events.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	This decision is not considered to be significant. The proposal will restore expected levels of service earlier. The costs of achieving this are not significant when compared to the provision of tankered water only.

7. Next Steps

Staff will proceed with arranging the Selwyn container to be decommissioned, transported to Ranfurly, installed and commissioned.

The Ranfurly Water Safety Plan will be updated to reflect the changes being made to the treatment processes and re-submitted to Taumata Arowai.

The boil water advisory can be removed from Ranfurly once the plant is commissioned.

Staff will work with Fulton Hogan to prioritise installation of the Patearoa Treatment Upgrade before Ranfurly.

A point of use device will be investigated for a publicly accessible tap to provide compliant water for Patearoa residents until the Patearoa plant is commissioned. If this is not achievable then a tanker will be located in Patearoa until the upgrade is completed.

Monthly updates on progress on the treatment upgrades will be provided to the Maniototo Community.

8. Attachments

Nil

30 July 2025

25.15.5 Remission of Excess Water Charges

Doc ID: 2524438

Report Author:	Paul Morris, Chief Financial Officer
Reviewed and authorised by:	Saskia Righarts, Group Manager - Governance and Business Services

1. Purpose of Report

To consider whether Council wishes to remit excess water charges.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Declines the application to remit 100% of excess water charges of $4,417.68 and applies the current remission policy relating to excess water charges of 50%.

2. Background

A leak was discovered at a property resulting in an invoice of $4,708.80 (inclusive of GST). The usage was 7,848 units. The average usage in the past 2 years is 459.5 units or $275.70.

Under current policy the water user would pay $2,206.84

The leak was discovered by the property owner and repaired promptly.

Council’s water bill was received post the repair and discussions occurred around the 50% standard remission that would apply in this case.

The property owner does not feel they are responsible for the bill as they did not know there was a leak and as such it is unreasonable to charge them.

3. Discussion

Council has a Rates Remission Policy (The Policy) in relation to excess water charges, which was reconfirmed in the most recent Long-Term Plan 2025-34.

The policy contains the following in relation to the remission of water rates attributable to leakage:

“From time-to-time water consumers experience a loss as a result of leaks or damage to their water supply system. It is the normal practice for the consumer to be responsible for the maintenance of the reticulation from the water meter to the property, and to account for any consumption of water supplied through the meter. This is currently enforced through the Water Supply Bylaw 2008.

Council has taken the view that some consumers may experience an occasional water leak without them being aware of the problem. They have therefore decided that it would be reasonable to allow for a reduction in charges to these consumers in certain circumstances.

This policy statement addresses that decision.

Objective of the Policy

To standardise procedures to assist ratepayers who have excessive water rates due to a fault (leak) in the internal reticulation serving their rating unit.

Whilst at the same time ensuring that consumers retain responsibility for the maintenance of their private reticulation, as required by the Water Supply Bylaw 9.15.

Conditions and Criteria

The Council may remit the excess water rates where the application meets the following criteria:

• The policy will apply to applications from ratepayers who have excess water rates due to a fault(s) in the internal reticulation

• That all applicants are requested to submit their application in writing before the due date of an invoice

• That a report from a registered plumber be supplied stating that the property has experienced a water loss as a result of a leak

• That proof of the repairs to the internal reticulation be submitted for verification (i.e. plumber’s repair account) within 60 days of the due date of an invoice

• That the ratepayer be charged the full charge for normal consumption

• The maximum relief that will be provided will be 50% of the difference between the normal consumption and the actual water consumption for that period any remission under this policy will be limited to one application within any two-year period for any particular rating unit

• The Group Manager – Governance and Business Services be delegated authority to consider applications for remission of excess water rates and, if appropriate, approve or decline them.

Notes

• “Internal reticulation” refers to the underground and indoor pipe work and specifically excludes irrigation and leaking toilets, taps etc

• The “normal consumption” will be calculated at Council’s discretion from the information available

• No adjustment shall be backdated beyond the current period invoiced

• This is a financial remission only based on the volumetric charge.”

In this case the ratepayer has complied with the policy to achieve a 50% remission.

The ratepayer is requesting a 100% remission on the excess water charges and to pay as they believe the problem wasn’t known by them, they fixed the problem immediately and feel it is an unreasonable charge that they shouldn’t have to pay for.

Council could remit the charge under extreme financial hardship, but staff have not pursued this avenue as the only argument put forward by the ratepayer is one of equity and fairness.

Council has always held to the idea of ratepayer vigilance in respect of water supply on private property. In that it is the responsibility of the property owner to ensure it is maintained appropriately. Water use becomes the responsibility of the property owner once it enters the property and given Council already contribute towards excess water charges by remitting 50% of the cost it is difficult to accept the arguments raised.

4. Financial Considerations

If the Council accepts the applicant’s argument, then the additional cost to Council would be $2,208.84

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Decline the applicants request and apply the remission policy as it currently stands

Advantages:

· Policy integrity remains intact and precedent is not created.

· Treats this applicant the same as all other previous applicants

Disadvantages:

· None

Option 2

Grant the applicants request and remit 100% of the excess charge

Advantages:

· None

Disadvantages:

· Compromises the integrity of the Remission Policy.

· Sets an unwanted precedent.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by ensuring Council has robust and equitable remission policies in place.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes. Consistent with the past application of the remissions policy
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	N/A
Risks Analysis	None
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	N/A

7. Next Steps

Inform the ratepayer of Council’s decision

8. Attachments

Nil

30 July 2025

25.15.6 Amendment to the Rates Remission Policy to allow for the remission of Water rates in certain circumstances

Doc ID: 2524762

Report Author:	Paul Morris, Chief Financial Officer
Reviewed and authorised by:	Saskia Righarts, Group Manager - Governance and Business Services

1. Purpose of Report

To consider amending the current rates remission policy to allow for the remission of water rates in certain circumstances.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Agrees that remissions of rates or volumetric charges is not required for ratepayers where Advisory Boil Water or Boil Water Notices are issued in relation to water supplies.

2. Background

A boil water advisory (The Advisory) has been issued for the Ranfurly and Patearoa area. This advisory is in place until December 2025.

Following discussion with the Water Services Authority – Taumata Arowai, (The authority) a boil water advisory was issued to safeguard public health. The advisory will continue until December 2025 (or earlier if temporary measures are put in place – refer to separate paper on this agenda) by which time Council will have completed work to upgrade the treatment plant to treat water for Protozoa.

It is important to note this is a precautionary measure. Water quality has not changed.

There has been public commentary around this advisory notice and how it impacts the service provided by Council with the argument being the service currently being provided (having to boil water) is less than what was provided prior to the advisory notice, effectively a perception exists that the service provided is somehow inferior.

Staff have been asked to prepare a report on how a rebate/remission of some description could be implemented to reflect ratepayer’s concerns.

3. Discussion

The boil water advisory has been issued for the Ranfurly/Patearoa supply due to the lack of Protozoa barrier at the water treatment plant. This is being remedied by the installation of such barriers at the treatment plant, and this is expected to be completed in December 2025.

This type of advisory may also be issued on other water supplies within the District.

Given there is increased scrutiny by the water authority the question is does Council see the need for an appropriate remission to cover these types of events?

Council’s water activity generates its revenue from rates and water charges. It recently rebalanced its income to generate more from water charges and less from rates. It delivers water through a significant network of assets.

The value proposition in relation to water is the protection of “public health… through the provision of safe reliable and trustworthy water supplies (CODC LTP 2025-34)” in exchange for the level of rates and water charges being paid.

Analysing the options available to Council two main options present themselves the first being to leave the remissions policy as it currently stands and the second is to amend the remission policy to give some remission through either water rates or volumetric charges to those impacted by these issues.

Council does not provide guarantees as to the safety of the water it provides through its supply network.

The case for not providing a remission.

If Council decided to not amend the remission policy, it would be doing so on the basis that it is still providing potable water to consumers. The boil water notice is an advisory and is due to Council not yet complying with the authority’s standards. There is no evidence of any degradation in the water from before the advisory notice.

If the Council amends its remission policy and applies a remission in this case, this will set a precedent for future advisories or notices that may apply to other Council schemes.

Remissions reduce revenue in the year the remission is applied. Rates are set based on the level of expenditure projected. If we reduce the level of revenue through remissions this will create an operating deficit that cannot effectively be recovered. The deficit cannot be added to the next years rates requirement as all water user ratepayers would end up paying the additional cost of the remission which is unfair.

Determining the basis to issue a remission is difficult. Is it a token amount decided by Council or is it based on the actual or perceived deprivation? If an advisory notice is in place for six months, should a six-month remission be applied?

The applications of a remission may have a wider unintended impact as it could set precedence for things like weather events where Council issues a boil water notice on its schemes.

Protozoa can be treated at source but there may be circumstances where protozoa may enter the network system which may trigger a boil water notice. Would this be differentiated from the type of event being contemplated here.

Not all users are ratepayers. Renters will not get any benefit of a remission while still paying increased power costs.

Unrelated to physical water provision this is new policy and may be construed as impacting the election process as it benefits blocks of ratepayers.

The case for providing a remission.

In council’s LTP it state’s that Council’s vision is to protect public health and the environment through the provision of safe, reliable and trustworthy water supplies. A boil water advisory whilst precautionary may not meet with the vision we espouse for water services. Therefore, some recognition of this could be made.

This is similar to the situation Council face in say resource planning where if Council do not meet the statutory timelines Council are required to refund/discount fees to an applicant.

There is an additional cost imposed on ratepayers because there will be additional power consumption. Some recognition could be made to reflect this.

The method to provide a remission

There are two methods to provide a remission if required. They are;

1) Remit all or part of the fixed targeted rate. Currently that rate is $684.66 and/or

2) Remit all or part of the water used volumetric charge. This currently sits at 60c per unit for the first read of the year (reflecting water used from the previous financial year, and $1.60 for the remainder of the year).

The Remission policy amendment

The wording of any policy adjustment is important. A potential draft may contain the following points.

“Remission of Rates where Boil Water Notices are Issued.

The objective is to recognise the extra costs associated with a long term (longer than 1 month in duration) Boil Water notice that is either issued by Council due to an event that prevents Council fulfilling its vision to protect public health and the environment through the provision of safe, reliable and trustworthy water supplies or an advisory boil water notice issued in conjunction with Taumata Arowai.

Council will determine the application of this remission at their discretion.

Council will either

i) apply up to 15% of the current targeted fixed water rate across the number of months the Boil water notice remains in place or

ii) apply a 50% remission to the volumetric charge applicable to water consumed in the months applicable to the issued boil water notice or issued advisory Boil water notice.”

4. Financial Considerations

The impact on Council’s finances would depend on the number of impacted properties and the level the Council wish to set the remission.

If it is assumed Council decides that the levels suggested above in the draft policy amendment are appropriate then a full year remission would be $102.70 per ratepayer or $10,270 per 100 ratepayers per year. Assuming the notice lasts for 6 months the cost to Council would be $51.35 per ratepayer or $5,135 per 100 ratepayers. Applying this level to the Ranfurly/Patearoa area (658 connections) the cost would be $33,788.3. This money would be lost as it could not be recouped in the current year, and it would be unfair to recover it in future years.

If this were to affect 3000 ratepayers for the same length of time, then the remission starts to escalate to $154,050 in this example.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Council does not amend the rates remission policy to allow for remission of rates on certain events impacting the quality of water

Advantages:

· The notice is advisory and there is currently no evidence that the water supply is an issue

· This avoids setting a precedent and having to define exactly when or how a remission policy may apply.

· Revenue reduction would not occur with no chance in the future to re-coup.

· Arbitrary determination rules are not applied.

· Providing a remission close to an election may be perceived negatively by candidates during the election process.

Disadvantages:

· Ratepayers perceive they are receiving a substandard service for the same cost

· Cost to ratepayers will increase as they must now treat the water by boiling it which will increase electricity costs.

· Does not alleviate the concerns of the safety of Council’s water supply.

Option 2

Council amends the remission policy to give relief in the case of issuance of boil water notices

Advantages:

· Provides financial relief for ratepayers incurring additional costs in boiling water.

Disadvantages:

· Sets precedents for not only application of Boil water notices but could be argued for other parts of Council.

· If the remission is applied to Volumetric charges it could result in unintended consequences of water usage going up as users recognise water will be cheaper.

· Creates perceptions from election candidates that the remission has had an impact on the election.

· Revenue reduction due to applying the remission would not be recovered.

· Policy may be created on the fly.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by continued provision of potable water that the cost is fairly distributed to all users.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes. It is consistent with Council’s Long-term plan.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	N/A
Risks Analysis	The decision has been made to put the advisory boil water notice on which protects the health of the community minimising the risks associated with untreated (protozoa) drinking water
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	N/A

7. Next Steps

Depending on Council’s decision, no further action is required. However if the decision is to provide a remission an amended Remission policy will need to be drafted including Council’s direction on level of remission.

8. Attachments

Nil

Council meeting Agenda

30 July 2025

25.15.8 Financial Report for the Period Ending 31 May 2025

Doc ID: 2489460

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

1. Purpose

To consider the financial performance for the period ending 31 May 2025

Recommendations

That the report be received.

2. Discussion

The presentation of the financials includes two variance analysis reports against both the financial statement and against the activities. This ensures Council can sight the variances against the ledger, and against the activities at a surplus/(deficit) value. The second variance analysis is to demonstrate the overall relationship between the income and expenditure at an activity level.

The third report details the expenditure of the capital works programme across activities. This helps track key capital projects across the year and ensures the progress of these projects remains transparent to Council.

The fourth and fifth reports detail the internal and external loans balances. The internal loans report forecasts the balance as at 30 June 2025, whereas the external loans show the year-to-date current balances due to payments throughout the year.

The sixth report details the external debt balances. External debt is managed using operating cashflows before being uplifted from the Local Government Funding Agency.

This report uses the below key to identify the favourable or unfavourable variances.

Abbreviation key for report

F = Favourable

U = Unfavourable

I. Statement of Financial Performance for the period ending 31 May 2025

2024/25	11 MONTHS ENDING 31 MAY 2025					2024/25
		YTD	YTD	YTD
Annual Plan		Actual	Revised Budget	Variance		Revised Budget
$000		$000	$000	$000		$000
	Income
50,445	Rates	46,529	46,359	170	˜	50,469
12,141	Govt Grants & Subsidies	10,058	12,439	(2,381)	˜	13,803
8,610	User Fees & Other	9,742	9,091	651	˜	9,801
-	Land Sales	2,640	4,012	(1,372)	˜	4,380
2,451	Regulatory Fees	2,467	2,460	7	˜	2,636
3,401	Development Contributions	2,034	3,152	(1,118)	˜	3,547
1,501	Interest & Dividends	1,946	2,378	(432)	˜	1,347
-	Reserves Contributions	330	208	122	˜	208
-	Profit on Sale of Assets	116	43	73	˜	43
-	Other Capital Contributions	-	4	(4)	˜	5
78,549	Total Income	75,862	80,146	(4,284)	˜	86,239

	Expenditure
14,847	Staff	14,589	13,731	(858)	˜	14,882
717	Members Remuneration	649	688	39	˜	753
12,993	Contracts	12,490	12,832	342	˜	13,983
2,984	Professional Fees	3,382	4,340	958	˜	5,067
20,507	Depreciation	18,413	18,798	385	˜	20,507
272	Costs of Sales	174	826	652	˜	958
4,438	Refuse & Recycling Costs	4,653	4,261	(392)	˜	4,622
-	Cost Allocations	(1)	-	1	˜	-
2,462	Repairs & Maintenance	1,738	2,096	358	˜	2,579
1,932	Electricity & Fuel	1,608	1,566	(42)	˜	1,710
-	Loss on Sale of Asset	10	-	(10)	˜	-
739	Grants	711	706	(5)	˜	756
1,772	Technology Costs	1,501	1,555	54	˜	1,728
337	Projects	759	645	(114)	˜	695
962	Rates Expense	804	980	176	˜	1,022
1,047	Insurance	821	807	(14)	˜	880
2,384	Interest Expense	3,349	2,998	(351)	˜	2,027
2,227	Other Costs	1,654	2,019	365	˜	2,296
70,620	Total Expenses	67,304	68,848	1,544	˜	74,465

7,929	Operating Surplus / (Deficit)	8,558	11,298	(2,740)	˜	11,774

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

The financials for May 2025 show an overall unfavourable variance of ($2.74M).

Income of $75.862M against the year-to-date budget of $80.146M

Income has an unfavourable variance of ($4.284M). User fees and other, rates, profit on sale of assets and reserves contributions are higher than budget. Development contributions, government grants and subsidies, land sale, and interest and dividend income are behind budget. Grants and subsidies are behind budget due to the timing of the NZTA subsidies for roading, funding to be received for the Cromwell Memorial Hall and Alexandra River Park projects and budgeted funding for organic collection capital projects (not confirmed). The revenue of land sale is lower than expected due to sections remaining unsold at Cemetery Road. Development contributions rely on the timing of development done by external developers. Interest is lower due to utilising cashflows before uplifting external debt and lower market interest rates on term deposits. The unfavourable variances discussed above will remain at 30 June 2025.

Expenditure of $67.304M against the year-to-date budget of $68.848M

Expenditure has a favourable variance of $1.544M. There are unfavourable variances on staff, refuse and recycling costs, electricity and fuel, projects, interest expense and insurance. This is offset by the favourable variances in professional fees, costs of sales, contracts, repairs and maintenance, and other costs. The unfavourable staff expense is contributed by staff remuneration for three water management, building control and swimming pools. Refuse and recycling costs are offset within the Environmental Services activity by contract underspends. The unfavourable variance in projects is due to Local Water Done Well costs (funding from DIA), transition of water asset data to national standards project (funding from Better Off Funding) and Mayor Taskforce for jobs (funding from LGNZ). Interest expense is higher than expected while interest rates are falling. The benefit from lowering market interest rates will not be realised until debt rolls over. External debt is being uplifted with the development of the Cromwell Memorial Hall.

Other costs $294k F - A detailed breakdown for other costs is tabled below

2024/25		YTD Actual	YTD Revised Budget	YTD Variance		2024/25
Annual Plan	Other Costs breakdown	YTD Actual	YTD Revised Budget	YTD Variance		Revised Budget
$000		$000	$000	$000		$000
634	Administrative Costs	376	549	173	˜	626
798	Office Expenses	683	751	68	˜	823
229	Operating Expenses	116	211	95	˜	233
275	Advertising	191	240	49	˜	321
206	Valuation Services	212	189	(23)	˜	206
85	Retail	76	79	3	˜	85
2,227	Total Other Costs	1,654	2,019	365		2,294

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

· There is no significant variance of note to report on at present.

II. Profit and Loss by Activity for the period ending 31 May 2025

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

· Community, Economic and Strategic Development $140k F – Income has a favourable variance of $35k. This is due to income received as contributions to the Collaborative Marketing project. Expenditure has a favourable variance of $105k. This is mainly due to timing of community grants being used, professional fees and projects for tourism and regional identity.

· Environmental Services ($191k) U – Income has an unfavourable variance of ($140k). Driving this variance is budgeted grants and subsidies of ($600k). This relates to organic collection projects. These projects have not started and the funding will flow with the project. Without the grants and subsidies budget there would be a favourable revenue variance of $400k from transfer station income of $320k and waste levy of $122k. Expenditure has an unfavourable variance of ($51k). Overall waste management is being managed within budget.

· Governance and Corporate Services ($90k) U - Income has an unfavourable variance of ($292k). Lower than expected interest revenue of ($863k) is being offset by financial reserves contribution of $121k, rates of $167k, and grants and subsidies of $227k. Interest revenue will not meet the budget this financial year as the Reserve Bank decreases the official cash rate. Grants and subsidies received relates to Local Water Done Well funding received from the DIA. Expenditure has a favourable variance of $202k. Driving this variance is the internal overhead recoveries of $199k. Additional resources have been required to support and deliver the Long-term plan, including the audit fees and consultants, which has been allocated to all other departments.

· Planning and Regulatory Services $886k F – Income has a favourable variance of $155k. This is mainly due to building control $130k and environmental health $33k. Building control LIM fees are higher than expected by $43k and building permit fees of $12k. Profit from the sale of vehicles are contributing $48k. Expenditure has a favourable variance of $711k. This is mainly contributed by resource management cost of $757k, building ($65k), environmental health $34k. The resource management favourable variance relates to the District Plan budget. This will be carried forward and utilised as required.

· Pools, Parks and Cemeteries ($73k) U – Income has a favourable variance of $4k. This is mainly due to the income from pools and swim school of $205k, internal interest revenue of $73k, and other revenue of $32k. Those variances are offset by the lower-than-budgeted grants and subsidies of ($368k) for Alexandra Riverside park. Expenditure has an unfavourable variance of ($77k). This is being driven by: swimming pools of ($198k), parks and reserves $98k and trails $23k. The overspend in swimming pools is due to increased staff costs and electricity, which is offset by an increase in pools and swim school income.

· Property and Community Facilities ($730k) U – Income has an unfavourable variance of ($1.96M). Driving this variance is land sales of ($1.3M) and subsidies and grants of ($652k). The land sales relate to the remaining sections for sale at Cemetery Road, with the subsidises and grants relating to the Cromwell Memorial Hall project. Expenditure has a favourable variance of $1.23M. This made up of variances for cost of land sales of $654k, professional fees $222k, contract work $126k, repair and maintenances cost $46k, cleaning of $55k, water charge $24k, and operating expense of $33k. Cost of land sales are linked with land sales and will be realised when the land is sold. Until then costs for the development of council land is held as property intended for sale (Inventory). Professional fees relate predominately to the Cromwell Town centre of $117k and Cromwell Memorial Hall of $83k for the projects being carried out.

· Service Centres and Libraries $156k F – Income has a favourable variance of $113k. $101k of this variance relates to the Better of Funding received for the Alexandra library refurbishment and the budget phasing. The remaining variance is brought by other sales, income, rates and fines for libraries. Expenditure has a favourable variance of $43k. Contributed to this is operating expenses of $48k, other employee costs of $18k and fuel and energy of $9k. This is offset by depreciation of ($17k).

· Roading ($1.3M) U – Income has an unfavourable variance of ($1.04M). This is mainly due to the timing of the roading capital works programme and the NZTA subsidy of ($1.07M) and lower-than-expected development contributions of ($143k). Expenditure has an unfavourable variance of ($268k). Contributing to this is depreciation of ($338k), which is being offset by the timing of the roading maintenance contract which is favourable against the year-to-date budgets.

· Stormwater $64k F – Income has a favourable variance of $98k. This is due to interest revenue being earnt on surplus reserves. Expenditure has an unfavourable variance of ($34k). This is due to overhead costs ($9k) and physical works contract of ($25k).

· Wastewater ($719k) U – Income has an unfavourable variance of ($441k). This is mainly due to development contributions of ($427k). These are difficult to gauge as they are reliant on developers. Expenditure has an unfavourable variance of ($278k). This is being driven by interest expense ($262k), professional fees ($47k), overhead cost of ($97k), fuel and energy ($10k) and operating expense of $26k.

· Water ($854k) U – Income has an unfavourable variance of ($815k). This is being driven by development contributions of ($546k) and other revenue of ($158k) and volumetric water sales of ($120k). Development contributions are difficult to gauge as they are reliant on developers. Volumetric water charges are still being read for the year, with the final reads taking place in June. Expenditure has an unfavourable variance of ($39k). This is due to staff costs of ($351k), contract cost ($365k), and professional fees ($62k), which is offset by depreciation of $478k, and operation cost $208k.

III. Capital Expenditure

Year-to-date against the revised budget 67% of the total capital spend against the full year’s revised capital budget has been expensed. This level of capital project completion is a cause for concern and impacts budgeting, funding and borrowing requirements in the current year. This has potential to effect completion rates in future years creating a bow wave that becomes more difficult to address.

2024/25						2024/25	Progress to date against revised budget
Annual Plan	CAPITAL EXPENDITURE	YTD Actual	YTD Revised Budget	YTD Variance		Revised Budget
$000		$000	$000	$000		$000
3,020	Environmental Services	674	2,616	1,942	˜	3,110	22%
1,092	Governance and Corporate Services	1,206	1,375	169	˜	1,601	75%
96	Planning and Regulatory	96	96	-	˜	134	72%
2,399	Pools Parks and Cemeteries	2,550	3,409	858	˜	3,872	66%
25,741	Property and Community Facilities	23,584	23,740	156	˜	26,264	90%
179	Service Centres and Libraries	1,015	1,063	48	˜	1,103	92%
10,416	Roading	7,613	8,735	1,122	˜	9,784	78%
320	Stormwater	67	270	203	˜	320	21%
11,520	Wastewater	1,905	4,434	2,529	˜	5,088	37%
14,669	Water	6,879	14,626	7,747	˜	16,694	41%

69,454	Grand Total	45,588	60,363	14,775		67,970	67%

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

· Environmental Services $1.942M F – The primary focus is securing additional funding and conducting detailed planning work, which are still in progress. Planning and design work is being conducted to ensure efficient and effective waste management solutions are implemented. Work has been carried out on Ranfurly bins supply, tree removal, bin supply and distribution, and St Bathan's Closed Landfill Remediation, etc.

· Governance and Corporate Services $169k F – This activity includes vehicle fleet pool replacements and Information Services. The vehicle replacement programme has been completed. IS are slightly behind budget by $134k. This includes user ICT programme $71k, information management programme $17k, Enterprise information systems programme $28k and business continuity and emergency management programme $8k.

· Planning and Regulatory (Nil) – Vehicle replacements for building control and resource management have been completed for the financial year.

· Pools, Parks and Cemeteries $858k F – This is driven by a mixture of the timing of project budgets, work programme and contractors’ availability to perform the work. The variance is mainly related to: Cromwell pool $56k, Alexandra pool $61k, Ranfurly pool $74k, Clyde reserves $48k, Anderson Park $134k, Pioneer Park ($37k), Omakau Recreation Reserve $29k, Oturehua Domain $41k, Naseby cemetery ($15k), Alexandra cemetery $37k, and Alexandra Town Centre (Alexandra River Park) $326k. The upgrade of the “The Rec” at Pioneer park has been completed ahead of budget. Work carried out at the Naseby Cemetery was higher than expected due to log prices being lower than expected.

· Property and Community Facilities $156k F – This is driven by a mixture of the timing of project budgets, work programme and contractors’ availability to perform the work. This variance is mainly related to: Alexandra airport $26k, elderly person housing $224k, Cromwell Memorial Hall ($428k), William Fraser Building $73k, Clyde hall $42k, Maniototo Park Stadium $31k, Administration building Roxburgh and Tarbert street building $31k.

· Service Centres and Libraries $48k F – Library book renewals are behind the budget. The Alexandra library building upgrade project was completed in December.

· Roading $1.122M F – The roading capital works programme can be different from the budget due to the seasonal renewal programme. Projects include structures renewals ($114k), sealed road renewals $149k, footpath renewals $143k, minor improvements $816k, drainage renewals ($91k), unsubsidised community roading $420k, gravel road renewals ($342k), traffic services renewals ($51k), and carpark renewals $192k. Minor improvements include: the Clyde Heritage Precinct stage 3 and the Little Valley Bridge project will be carried forward to 2025/26. Structures renewals include $388k of emergency works for the October 2024 flooding event and vehicle damage is putting this budget under pressure. Drainage renewals variance relates to budget timing and the February 2025 Teviot Valley flood event and responding to a slip on Moa Flat Road.

· Stormwater $203k F – The stormwater network renewals programme related to pipe renewal, which are currently being assessed and further is investigation being carried out before any renewals taking place.

· Wastewater $2.529M F – This is driven by a mixture of the timing of project budgets, work programme and contractors’ availability to perform the work. The variance is mainly related to plant renewals $747k, district treatment $342k, plans and consents ($227k), Ranfurly treatment $288k, Naseby treatment $264k, Alexandra and Clyde treatment $343k, district network renewals $277k, point renewal $159k, and pipe renewal $134k.

· Water $7.747M F – This is driven by a mixture of timing of project budgets, work programme and contractors’ availability to perform the work. The variance is mainly related to: Cromwell Treatment Plant $2.1M, point renewals $1.2M, plant renewals $569k, district network $937k, Roxburgh Treatment $234k, Omakau Ophir treatment $109k and Cromwell rising main $399k. The Cromwell Rising Main project was completed in October 2024.

IV. Internal Loans

Forecast closing balance for 30 June 2025 is $4.09M.

Lender	Owed By	Original Loan	1-Jul-24	30-Jun-25
Lender	Owed By	Original Loan	Opening Balance	Closing Balance
Cromwell General Reserve	Public Toilets	670,000	418,752	392,568
District General Reserve	Tarbert St Bldg	25,868	8,400	6,713
District General Reserve	Alex Town Centre	94,420	33,464	27,577
Vincent General Reserve	Alex Town Centre	186,398	56,284	43,728
Cromwell General Reserve	Alex Town Centre	290,600	105,202	87,176
Maniototo General Reserve	Centennial Milkbar	47,821	11,621	8,130
Maniototo General Reserve	Pioneer Store Naseby	21,589	6,760	5,246
Cromwell General Reserve	Water	867,000	634,634	604,581
District General Reserve	ANZ Bank Seismic Strengthening	180,000	131,758	125,519
Vincent General Reserve	Molyneux Pool	650,000	498,650	466,150
Maniototo General Reserve	Maniototo Hospital	1,873,000	1,615,133	1,558,020
District General Reserve	Alexandra Airport	218,000	180,720	171,958
Teviot Valley General Reserve	Roxburgh Community Pool Upgrade	250,000	232,446	223,172
Vincent General Reserve	Molyneux Pool - Iceinline Roof Upgrade	400,000	386,215	371,913
Total		5,774,695	4,320,038	4,092,451

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

V. External Loans

The total amount of external loans at the beginning of the 2024/25 financial year was $4k. As at 31 May 2025, all external loans had been paid, and the balance is nil.

Owed By

Original Loan

1 July 2024
Actual

Opening Balance

Principal

Interest

31 May 2025
Actual
Closing Balance

Oturehua Water

46,471

4,389

103

46,471

4,389

103

This table has rounding (+/- 1)

VI. External Debt

The total of external debt is $50M with a planned external debt of $88.5M at the end of this financial year. It was estimated after the first forecast that external debt for the end of this financial year will lower to $85.1M. External debt is managed using operating cashflows to reduce the impact from interest rates. Debt is currently being uplifted in the three waters area.

Reserve Funds table

· As at 30 June 2024 the Council had an audited closing reserve funds balance of $12.15M. This reflects the whole district’s reserves and factors in the district-wide reserves which are in deficit at ($24.09M). Refer to Appendix 1. This has been updated for forecast and carry-forwards and is forecasted to end this financial year, 30 June 2025 with a surplus of $15.77M.

NB: the reserves totals are recognised at a high level.

3. Attachments

Appendix 1 - 2024-25 CODC Reserve Funds ⇩

30 July 2025

25.15.9 Letter of support for Ratepayer Assistance Scheme

Doc ID: 2518751

Report Author:	Nick Lanham, Economic Development Manager
Reviewed and authorised by:	Louise Fleck, Group Manager - People and Culture, Acting Group Manager - Community Vision

1. Purpose of Report

To consider the request from Rewiring Aotearoa for an in-principle letter of support for the Ratepayer Assistance Scheme (RAS).

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Approves the letter of support.

C. Notes the possibility of a future discussion regarding investment into RAS.

2. Background

New Zealand is facing a range of challenges including the cost of living crisis, changing demographics (in particular the growing cohort of elderly New Zealanders on fixed incomes), the infrastructure deficit, the quality and health of homes, the housing deficit, climate change impacts, energy and fuel security, resilience and decarbonisation of the economy.

Local Authorities (LAs) have a critical role to play in addressing these challenges:

· as organisations delivering critical services and infrastructure; and

· by supporting ratepayers themselves to directly address the challenges that affect them; and

· providing flexibility in the way ratepayers choose to pay LA charges to meet LAs' funding requirements.

In this regard, a group of metro councils (Auckland Council, Hamilton City Council, Tauranga City Council, Wellington City Council, Christchurch City Council), Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ), Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA) and Rewiring Aotearoa formed a steering group to develop the Ratepayer Assistance Scheme (RAS).

The RAS is a proposed initiative to provide low-cost financing to ratepayers for approved purposes, including through:

· existing local government policies that involve the LA effectively lending money to ratepayers (such as rates postponement);

· new, flexible funding products (such as deferred development levies); and

· loans for property improvements which provide public and private benefits.

The steering group and specialist consultants have undertaken significant work to get the RAS to the final development stage. While there are complex issues to address no insurmountable red flags have been raised. Among other things, the RAS will require establishment equity capital estimated at $30 million from LAs and central government, and enabling legislation.

The Minister of Local Government has confirmed support for the RAS and has asked officials to initiate work in August and recommended that further development work on the RAS be undertaken before then to ensure officials can move quickly at that stage.

Rewiring Aotearoa has requested a letter of support for the RAS from Council (see appendix 1). Rewiring Aotearoa is an independent non-partisan non-profit organisation working on energy, climate, and electrification research, advocacy, and supporting communities through the energy transition.

3. Discussion

THE RATEPAYER ASSISTANCE SCHEME (RAS)

The RAS would be a national shared service available to all LAs.

The RAS would be structured much like the LGFA to get the benefits of scale. It would:

· be a new entity, owned by LAs and central government (a council-controlled organisation (CCO));

· have the power to impose a 'rate-like' / levy charge ranking ahead of mortgages to ensure it gets repaid (enabling it to achieve a very high 'government' credit risk weighting - broadly in line with the LGFA);

· raise low-cost, long-term financing from the debt capital markets (through an out sourcing arrangement with LGFA) and pass this on to ratepayers at interest rates expected to be 1 - 1.5 per cent below standard mortgage rates;

· be off-balance sheet for LAs;

· undertake all the operational requirements associated with the ratepayer loans through an "IT heavy" platform (to minimise costs and benefit from economies of scale); and

· be an operational organisation only with no discretion in what it could lend money for, which would be dictated by LAs and central government.

The use of the RAS would be optional for qualifying ratepayers.

The operations and processes of the RAS would be structured so that there is a seamless interface with LAs.

The RAS levy would be reflected as a charge on the property title (as per a mortgage). Any charge on the title would be dealt with during the conveyancing process when a property is sold.

Uses of the RAS

The RAS would be a flexible omnibus platform and multiple applications are possible (essentially any loan to property owners that LAs / central government decide to make).

To date the focus has been on three applications:

· rates postponement (RP)

· deferred development contributions / development levies (DCs / DLs)

· property improvement loans (PILs)

In principle, the RAS could also be applied to other property related taxes including Infrastructure Funding and Financing (IFF) levies and the recently announced Development Levy System, if appropriately structured.

Rates Postponement (RP)

RP provides flexibility regarding the timing of payments for LA charges and could be a valuable tool for LAs and option for ratepayers, given:

· there is a major demographic change underway in New Zealand (increasing elderly population with fixed incomes);

· New Zealanders are facing cost-of-living challenges;

· LA rates are increasingly significant, 5 to 10 per cent per annum increases are not unusual; and

· other charges (e.g. water levies, IFF levies and infrastructure / development levies) are likely to increase over time.

The RAS would make the equivalent payment to LAs upfront on behalf of the ratepayer and get repaid from the proceeds on sale of the property.

RP operates like a reverse mortgage but at significantly lower cost (negligible fees and interest rates ~4-5% lower). There are two reverse mortgage providers in the New Zealand market, Heartland Bank and Southland Building Society (SBS). Heartland Bank, the largest provider, had a reverse mortgage book of ~$1.1 billion in 2024 having grown ~22 per cent per annum since 2022.

The Productivity Commission has recommended a national RP scheme and Grey Power supports the establishment of the RAS.

British Columbia (population 5.5 million) in Canada has had a successful Property Tax Deferral Scheme for many years - with 83,000+ users, $2.7 billion in loans in 2024 (it has quadrupled in size from C$670 million in 2016 and now includes ~3.9%of British Columbia households).

Central Otago District Council has a Postponement of Rates Policy (in accordance with the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002) which requires assessment of eligibility based on extreme financial circumstances, is administered by council and had zero uptake in the last financial year.

At this stage we do not know whether residents will be able to use RP for a water CCO. This will need to be addressed as part of any legislation establishing a RAS.

Deferred Development Contributions / Development Levies

Nationally, there has been significant inquiry to LAs regarding alternative funding mechanisms to upfront DCs / DLs.

The RAS could provide an alternative to upfront DCs / DLs by making the one-off payment required to LAs and converting it into a rate-like charge against the property. The targeted rate would be paid by the future property owner(s) to the RAS via an annual charge over say 30 years or alternatively fully repaid on sale of the property by the seller at the discretion of the buyer.

DCs in New Zealand are forecast to total ~ $700 million per annum in 2026 based on LTPs (and it is expected that a large proportion of developers would take advantage of a DC offering).

The proposed Development Levy System (DLS) is expected to expand the scope of new development levies to enable LAs to more fully recover development growth costs and raise more revenue to fund growth infrastructure. The affordability of these increased charges and risk to the very developments that the charges are intended to support are critical considerations, further supporting the proposed deferred DC / DL offering.

It is anticipated that the currently proposed legislation (establishing Development Levies (DL)) would be able to take advantage of the RAS.

Property Improvement Loans

Current legislation facilitates LAs providing financing to ratepayers that can be repaid via voluntary targeted rates.

In principle, PlLs could be utilised to support a wide range of policy goals including:

· improving housing quality - e.g. insulation, heat pumps, double glazing

· developing infrastructure that mitigates the impacts of climate change - e.g. community seawalls, flood protection

· supporting de-carbonisation efforts and the electrification of New Zealand - e.g. solar panels, EV chargers, home batteries

· enhancing the health and safety of homes - seismic strengthening, chimney removal, septic tanks replacement, water storage tanks and waterway fencing.

The Minister of Local Government / Minister for Energy is particularly interested in the potential for the RAS to support the uptake of renewable, lower cost energy through PILs and in this regard, has directed the steering group to engage with Rewiring Aoteaora and the Energy Efficiency and Conversation Authority. As such, work is underway to enable PILs to be available for electrification loans (especially solar and batteries).

Commercial analysis

To provide insight, Cameron Partners has developed an operating model, detailed business case and built a comprehensive financial model analysing multiple scenarios based on objective data and input from steering group members (in particular LGFA), the British Columbia Property Tax Deferment Scheme team, and IT service providers.

The basic economics of the RAS are that it will generate a net interest margin of ~1% (i.e. it will make loans to ratepayers at ~1% above what it borrows at). Ultimately its net interest will need to cover its operating costs to break even (e.g. if operating costs are $7 million per annum the RAS will require a loan book of $700 million to break even).

Based on the analysis reviewed, it is expected that the RAS will be able to generate a surplus and provide a strong return to its shareholders. The Base Case RP and Deferred DC scenario indicates breakeven in year 4, initial equity fully paid back after eight years, and an annual dividend yield on initial investment of over 100% by year 15.

Once breakeven is achieved, surplus capital could be distributed back to shareholders or to reduce the interest rate charged to ratepayers even further.

Funding from both central government and LAs will be required to capitalise the RAS at establishment.

It has been assumed that ~$30 million will be required from founding shareholders to capitalise the RAS. The proposed $30 million includes $2.5 million already secured for the final development.

Funding already provided by the steering group including the $2.5m for final development would count as establishment capital.

The steering group (as sponsors and original funders) will be able to set the terms of any establishment capital to compensate those LAs providing early funding for the development risk being taken and to mitigate the "free rider" risk of other LAs delaying their commitment.

The establishment capital will be provided by all shareholders at establishment. There is a constraint on the investment of any single investor at 20% of total capital to avoid the risk that the RAS will be on-balance sheet for that shareholder.

As with LGFA, there is merit in getting the widest shareholding spread possible to support uptake. Notwithstanding, the number of shareholders could be limited given the high potential returns and the investment/risk capital already put in by the steering group warranting a preferential position.

LAs will also provide limited joint and several guarantees in proportion to their ratepayers' use of the RAS (based on the limited joint and several guarantee that LAs provide to the LGFA).

Legislation will be required to enable the RAS to have the powers to impose a "rate-like" levy and navigate Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003 (CCCFA) issues.

Russell McVeagh has advised that there are strong precedents for the required legislation provided by the LGFA and IFF respectively and consequently this won't involve "breaking new ground".

PWC notes that none of the accounting and tax issues identified as needing to be addressed are considered insurmountable and would be resolved through an iterative process in final design / development.

A decision will be made in December 2025 about whether to establish an entity and progress the RAS. With appropriate support from local and central government it is estimated that the RAS could be established in approximately 12 – 18 months.

4. Financial Considerations

There are no cost implications of providing an in-principle letter of support.

If the RAS is successful in making it through the final stage and being established;

The RAS will be off-balance sheet and off-credit so there will be no balance sheet implications for Council from its ratepayers using RAS products.

Council would no longer require "in-house" capacity and capabilities to administer RP and any other RAS products such as PILs.

Council would not be required to invest in RAS for it’s ratepayers to access its products.

An opportunity may present for Council to consider investing in the establishment of the RAS. No funding has been budgeted for this possibility.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Provide an in-principle letter of support for the RAS.

Advantages:

· Demonstrates Council’s support for ratepayers to have greater and more affordable payment options for LA charges and property improvements.

· Increases the likelihood of Central Government making legislation change required for RAS.

Disadvantages:

· Potential reputational risk if the scheme establishes and does not perform as intended or with unintended consequences.

Option 2

Do not provide an in-principle letter of support for the RAS.

Advantages:

· It would be prudent to not write a letter of support if there were operational or regulatory concerns, however this is not the case.

Disadvantages:

· Does not demonstrate Council’s support for providing ratepayers with greater and more affordable payment options for LA charges and property improvements.

· Decreases the likelihood of legislation change from Central Government for RAS.

· Reputational risk from not supporting a local government sector initiative.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the social, cultural, economic, environmental wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by supporting a greater range and more affordable finance option for ratepayers.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	PlLs would be approved for purposes that have both private and public benefits and could include climate change related policy initiatives (e.g. solar panels, home EV chargers, home insulation and window double glazing) and initiatives to mitigate the impacts of climate change (e.g. retaining walls and other required infrastructure).
Risks Analysis	Minimal risk as this report is only requesting an in-principle letter of support.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	No public consultation is anticipated in relation to this letter of support or the scheme itself as the RAS is a completely opt in process for each individual ratepayer. Council may wish to raise awareness of the RAS with ratepayers should it be established. A consultation process maybe required in the future if Council were to consider invest in a future CCO.

7. Next Steps

A letter of support for the RAS will be provided to Rewiring Aotearoa.

The RAS will commence its final stage of development and engage with officials to support their policy work. Completion of the final development work is expected in December to enable a stop go implementation decision by the steering committee and central government.

An update on the stop go decision will be provided to Council.

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Draft Letter of Support ⇩

Appendix 2 - Rewiring Aotearoa - RAS explainer ⇩

Appendix 3 - RAS Opportunity presentation slides ⇩

30 July 2025

25.15.10 Journey to an Established Welcoming Community

Doc ID: 2524085

Report Author:	Heather Harries, Welcoming Communities Officer
Reviewed and authorised by:	Louise Fleck, Group Manager - People and Culture, Acting Group Manager - Community Vision

1. Purpose

To share highlights from the Central Otago Welcoming Communities programme – including its progression to an Established Welcoming Community (Stage 2) classification through the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) – and to provide insight into the programme’s direction for the next 12 months.

Recommendations

That the report be received.

2. Discussion

Welcoming Communities supports councils, mana whenua and communities to welcome

newcomers to the district, and builds an economic and competitive advantage to attract, support and retain newcomers[1]. The programme also works to grow social inclusion through welcoming activities that increase social engagement and build community connections.

At the heart of the Welcoming Communities programme are eight standards which provide a benchmark for what a successful welcoming community looks like. Through these standards the programme aims to bring together local government and community leaders to build strong connections between newcomers, the land, and each other; recognising that communities are healthier, happier, and more productive when newcomers fully participate in society and the local economy.

3. Discussion

In 2021 the Central Otago District Council was selected into a three-year Welcoming Communities programme sponsored by Immigration New Zealand and MBIE. In July 2024, Council extended the Welcoming Communities programme for a further two years, providing more time for the community to take ownership of initiatives that suit their needs.

This programme aligns with Council’s Economic Development Strategy objectives of supporting businesses to source and hold labour, create experiences for locals and visitors, and reduce the loss of talent from the district. These objectives are particularly relevant for Central Otago as we continue to experience unprecedented population growth coupled with low unemployment rates. Connecting employees and their families into the community also helps smooth the settlement process, as well as enriching local community groups and experiences.

The focus of the Central Otago Welcoming Communities programme over these twenty-four months is to reinforce genuine and collaborative engagement with local communities, businesses, and organisations to help newcomers feel included and want to make Central Otago their home.

The investment in this programme is not borne by Council alone. Central Lakes Trust has committed a two-year grant of $16,000 per annum to Central Otago Welcoming Communities. Welcoming Communities’ recent accreditation from MBIE as an Established Welcoming Community also contributes a one-off grant of $9,500 towards the project.

4. 2024/2025 Highlights

Welcoming Communities has been involved in a range of activities over the past twelve months. These range from the ongoing facilitation of existing community networks – such as the Cromwell and Alexandra Newcomer Networks, multicultural partnership groups, and the Seasonal Staff Manaaki / Southern Labour Governance Pastoral Care Group – through to facilitating and supporting community activities and training opportunities.

Here are some highlights:

Welcoming Communities Stage Two Accreditation

In June 2025, Central Otago’s Welcoming Communities application to MBIE for Stage 2 Accreditation was accepted. The Welcoming Communities Standard for New Zealand sets the benchmark for what a thriving welcoming community looks like, including economic, social, civic, and cultural success. Accreditation formally recognises that our Council and community are being intentionally welcoming and a place where everyone can belong and flourish.

Stage 2 Accreditation demonstrates that Central Otago District Council’s Welcoming Communities’ programme is clear about what we want to achieve, and we are implementing the activities laid out in our Welcome Plan.

The strengths identified in the Central Otago programme are our commitment to improve cultural competency and develop partnerships, our community engagement activities, and inclusive programmes (such as Women’s Wednesdays swimming and Business South Leadership Scholarship).

Areas identified for further growth and progression include role-modelling of cultural competency by leadership, the sustainability of existing initiatives, and two-way engagement opportunities.

Immigration Q&A & Immigration Made Simple

Alexandra (February 2024) and Cromwell (November 2024)

Immigration rules and policies change frequently, impacting visa applications and eligibility. An increase in the number of temporary migrant visas has contributed to uncertainty and mismatched expectations of an actual path to residency. The knock-on effects are significant, including a strain on mental health, support networks, schools, and employers. To demystify immigration policy and offer expert advice, an Immigration Q&A session was held in Alexandra, with over 50 attendees. Due to the success of this event, it was repeated in Cromwell later in the year. Although feedback reinforced that the content was valuable, unfortunately, attendance was less than anticipated.

Newcomer Leadership Scholarships

Recognising the value of diversity in the workplace by harnessing the contributions that newcomers can offer leads to economic gain for the region.

Business South and Welcoming Communities joined forces for three years running to offer Newcomer Leadership Scholarships. This project links directly to Central Otago’s Economic Development programme.

Bianca (recipient in 2024 from Ranfurly) wrote, “Thank you so much for the opportunity to be able to listen to some truly inspirational businesspeople. I’m excited to tackle my next business project with confidence, armed with the wealth of knowledge from the Leadership Academy.”

Adam (recipient in 2024 from Cromwell) surmised that, “The emphasis on effective communication and team-building skills has equipped me to foster a more collaborative and motivated work environment”.

Find Your Perfect Match – Volunteer “Speed Dating”

Alexandra (February 2024) and Cromwell (September 2024)

Participating in civic activities helps newcomers build connections, understand local culture, and have their voices heard in decision making processes, contributing to the community’s wellbeing and fostering a sense of belonging. Volunteering is deeply ingrained in New Zealand’s culture, offering benefits to both the individual and the community as a whole. Welcoming Communities collaborated with Volunteer South, Alexandra Community House and Cromwell Community House to host two volunteer speed dating events. These events have been successful in connecting locals and newcomers and creating perfect volunteer matches.

A close-up of hands holding each other

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

In 2025, Volunteer South is collaborating with Queenstown Lakes to replicate this concept over Welcoming Week, with one event in Queenstown and another in Wānaka.

In Central Otago, this event will be run over Mental Health Awareness Week (6-12 October 2025). Welcoming Communities will collaborate to amplify and support this event.

Cultural Talent Festival

Cromwell (June 2024)

Respecting, valuing, and learning about the different ethnicities in our community leads to a culturally rich and vibrant community and enhances a sense of belonging for everyone. The Cultural Talent Festival saw approximately 120 people come together to celebrate the increasing diversity within our district, with dance, song, magic and food to share. Nationalities included the Philippines, I-Kiribati, Chile, India, Tonga, New Zealand and more.

Photo: FCCONZ (Filipino Community Central Otago NZ)

Photos: Meraine from Kiribati, Juan Pablo from Chile, and siblings Rehaan & Ambreen from India.

The sense of belonging and inclusivity cannot be underestimated by those that participated. Evaluation results demonstrated that the event was enjoyable for those who came to watch as well as those who participated (average rating = 4.59/5), and everyone said they would attend/perform/help with a future event.

The re-establishment of the Alexandra Badminton Club – “Give it a Go!” days

October 2024 and December 2024

Globally, more than 300 million people actively participate in badminton, with a strong presence in Asia and Europe. Welcoming Communities was approached by Central Otago REAP when a member of the Choices programme (for second chance learners) expressed a desire to reignite the Alexandra Badminton Club. Welcoming Communities and the Alexandra Newcomers Network which were put towards refreshments for two “Give it Go!” sessions. Welcoming Communities amplified the initiative through Council communication platforms and worked in collaboration with Sport Central and Central Otago REAP. The Alexandra Badminton Club has a newly instated committee and strong membership, meeting every Thursday. Newcomers to the district are acting as both participants and instructors/leaders.

Inclusive engagement with community at grassroots level

The Tribe: Local schools have seen a marked increase in new migrant enrolments and the need to provide English Language Learner support. The Terrace School has created a Wednesday afternoon group called “The Tribe”, whereby, children born outside of NZ meet to support each other and find a common ground through their differences. Welcoming Communities has had the privilege of being invited to some of their Wednesday afternoon sessions and an afternoon tea.

A group of students sitting in a circle

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Cromwell College had over 40 new migrant enrolments in Term 3 of 2023. In response, Welcoming Communities, Cromwell Community House and Cromwell Newcomers Network collaborated with Cromwell College to create the Cromwell Focus Group for Migrants. These meetings were initially held on school grounds during work hours, but they have morphed into relaxed gatherings held at the Cromwell Youth Hub over shared kai in the evenings.

Migrant Families Hui was an initiative led by Central Otago REAP in which Alexandra schools, employers, social services, and pastoral care organisations collaborated to create a network to aid migrant families through the settlement process.

This collective led to the provision of workplace English lessons for new migrants. The Kiwi English ESOL course was followed by the Drive My Life Programme. These lessons took place in the workplace, during paid worktime hours, to reduce barriers to these services. The Drive My Life programme supported 82 migrants through the driving license journey, improving their quality of life and helping to make our roads safer.

From working with aged-care sector ESOL employees in Alexandra, the initiative moved to Ripponburn and Golden View in Cromwell.

Photos above: Roleplays at Ripponburn – how to make an emergency phone call in New Zealand,

Kiwi slang and Kiwi culture at (while making a chocolate log!), and Drive My Life lessons, at Ranui Court Retirement Village

Multicultural Partnership Groups: Multicultural groups were created in Cromwell and Alexandra to provide a network of support among those who identify as international newcomers. The focus away from domestic newcomers was to help address the additional challenges they face (including language, immigration, and culture shock). The groups gather for meetings, shared food, and the Alexandra group have also hosted a casual “meet and greet” in the park and a walk in the hills.

Women’s Wednesdays Swim Programme

Cromwell (February-March 2025)

Sport Central, Te Whatu Ora, Central Otago Swim Centres and Welcoming Communities collaborated to mobilise a 3-week pilot for women to develop confidence in and around water. The programme was targeted at migrant and New Zealand females who wanted to swim but felt uncomfortable in public swimming sessions. The sessions helped develop water confidence and basic swimming skills.

The pilot was so well supported that it was extended to 6 weeks.

“New to Central” button on The Central App

The Central App and Welcoming Communities have collaborated to create a digital information platform for newcomers. The “New to Central” button includes essential information for newcomers navigating this place, along with newcomer profiles. This is a work in progress and there are readily accessible surveys to gather community feedback to make this information fit for purpose, easy to navigate, and up to date.

5. Looking Ahead to 2025/26

The focus for Central Otago Welcoming Communities over the next twelve months is:

o Developing a Welcome Guide for newcomers that can be accessible through a range of mediums;

o Investigating needs and opportunities for Welcoming Communities initiatives in Māniatoto and the Teviot Valley;

o Raising public awareness of the Welcoming Communities programme; and

o Strengthening existing networks so that they become self-sustaining.

There are also a number of events and activities scheduled:

· Newcomer Business Mentorships (2025)

The Business South Newcomer Scholarship initiative has been adapted to provide two newcomers a business mentor each for a full year. Expressions of interest have been sought and the selection process for these mentorships is currently underway.

· Women’s Wednesdays 10-week swim programme (September – November 2025)

In spring, Welcoming Communities, Central Otago Swim Centres, and Sport Central are collaborating once more to roll out a 10-week all women’s programme in spring in Cromwell. This network is also teaming up with ACOSS to roll out a 3-week swim pilot programme in Alexandra.

· An online Welcome to Central Otago for Seasonal Staff (Term 3 2025)

Welcoming Communities is collaborating with Clyde Primary School to create a welcome video for our seasonal workers in the summer of 2025. This video will align with Central Otago Regional Identity messaging.

· Welcoming Week and the Festival of Lifelong Learning (September 2025)

Welcoming Week coincides with the Festival of Lifelong Learning – this is a chance to celebrate lifelong learning alongside hearing the voices and stories of our longtime locals and newcomers to Central Otago.

Central Otago District Arts Trust, Central Otago REAP and Welcoming Communities are also welcoming the women who lost loved ones in the Christchurch Mosque attacks with their project called 51 Threads. This is an opportunity to hear their stories of resilience and to celebrate unity, diversity and inclusion in Central Otago through the art of calligraphy and embroidery. English as a second language (ESOL) migrants are also invited to tell their stories in their mother-tongue.

6. Attachments

Nil

30 July 2025

25.15.11 Cromwell Land Investment Strategy

Doc ID: 2508818

Report Author:	Saskia Righarts, Acting Group Manager - Community Experience
Reviewed and authorised by:	Peter Kelly, Chief Executive Officer

1. Purpose of Report

To consider approval of the Cromwell Land Investment Strategy.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Approves the Cromwell Land Investment Strategy.

C. Agrees that this strategy is reviewed in one year’s time, and then every three years to align with the local body election cycle.

2. Background

The Cromwell Community Board has been considering the development of a land investment strategy to guide decision making on the development and proceeds from Cromwell endowment land (Bannockburn Road subdivision). The Board in their work have made the strategy sufficiently broad enough that the guiding principles can be applied to other parcels of land in time.

Council considered a draft of this strategy at their meeting in February 2025.

3. Discussion

Following feedback from Council at their meeting on 17 June 2025, the Cromwell Community Board endorsed the draft strategy and resolved that it be recommended to Council to be adopted. The Board also resolved that the strategy be reviewed in a year’s time and then reviewed every three years to align with local body elections (as opposed to Council’s standard approach of a five-year renewal cycle for strategies). Given the importance of land sales to achieve a balanced budget for the 2025-34 Long-term plan a more regular review of this strategy is prudent.

4. Financial Considerations

There are no immediate financial considerations in adopting this strategy. All land sales and proceeds will be worked through in accordance with long-term planning processes at the appropriate time.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Approves the Cromwell Land Investment Strategy and agrees to a review after one year, then every three years after that.

Advantages:

· Will enable a framework for decision making by Council.

· Ensures transparency with the community on the approach to the developing land.

Disadvantages:

· None identified.

Option 2

Do not approve the Cromwell Land Investment Strategy and agree to a review after one year, then every three years after that.

Advantages:

· None identified.

Disadvantages:

· May result in the development of endowment land (and the proceeds) not being used in a strategic way as intended by the Cromwell Community Board and Council.

· May result in ad-hoc decisions over time

· May not meet the expectations of the community.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the social, economic, environmental wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by ensuring that the development of endowment land in Cromwell is developed in accordance with a sound strategy.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	These will be considered as part of agreed land developments.
Risks Analysis	There are no risks in adopting this report
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	This decision does not meet the level of public engagement or consultation under the Significance and Engagement Policy.

7. Next Steps

If approved, the strategy will be included in the policy and strategy register will the review dates as agreed. This strategy will inform the development of the 2027-37 Long-term Plan.

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Cromwell Land Investment Strategy Final Draft ⇩

30 July 2025

25.15.12 Remuneration Authority Determination 2025 and Update to the Elected Members Allowances and Reimbursement Policy

Doc ID: 2522024

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

1. Purpose of Report

To consider the recent determination from the Remuneration Authority and changes to the Elected Allowances and Reimbursement Policy.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Notes the 2025/26 determination from the Remuneration Authority.

C. Adopts the revised Elected Allowances and Reimbursement Policy.

2. Background

The Remuneration Authority has released the 2025/26 determination (see appendix one). This sets elected member remuneration for the coming year. Please note that it is broken into remuneration before the election in October and after it. In addition, there are amendments that require an update of the Elected Allowances and Reimbursement Policy (see appendix 2).

3. Discussion

The determination of remuneration for elected members is presented for information. The decision of the Remuneration Authority is final and it is unable to be contested.

There are also updates to consider for the Elected Allowances and Reimbursement Policy. There are changes to allowances totals for childcare and in travel-time. Childcare moves from $6,000 per child per annum to $7,500 per child per annum. Travel-time moves from $40 per hour to $41.30 per hour.

There is one addition to be considered in this determination, which is the provision for a home-based security allowance. The Remuneration Authority noted that this provision has followed on from a similar policy for Members of Parliament and is in response to a rise in threatening behaviour towards elected members. However, this provision will not come into force until the new triennium so this change will be addressed in the policy then. There may need to be a separate policy for this issue which goes into more depth, for instance around eligibility.

4. Financial Considerations

These changes come from existing budgets.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Adopt the updated Elected Allowances and Reimbursement Policy.

Advantages:

· The policy will be up to date with the recent determination.

Disadvantages:

· None.

Option 2

Do not adopt the Elected Allowances and Reimbursement Policy

Advantages:

· None

Disadvantages:

· The policy will be out of date and no longer adhering to the law.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by ensuring that guidance from the Remuneration Authority is adhered to.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes it is consistent.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	These changes are of an electronic nature so there are no considerations in this space.
Risks Analysis	There are no risks with this decision as the changes are adherence to law.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	This does not reach the threshold for consultation.

7. Next Steps

The policy will be updated online. Remuneration has already been updated for each elected member.

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Local Government Members 2025-2026 Determination ⇩

Appendix 2 - Elected Members Allowances Policy - to be adopted ⇩

30 July 2025

25.15.15 Appointment of Cemetery Trustees

Doc ID: 2512189

Report Author:	Gordon Bailey, Parks and Recreation Manager
Reviewed and authorised by:	David Scoones, Group Manager - Community Experience

1. Purpose of Report

To approve the appointment of Cemetery Trustees to various Trust operated Cemeteries under delegation.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Appoints in accordance with section 24 of the Burial and Cremations Act 1964 the following Cemetery Trustees -

Millers Flat Cemetery Trust:

Pam	P	Reichel	Roxburgh 9572
Hilary	H	Paterson	Roxburgh 9572
Forbes	F	Knight	Millers Flat
Norman	N	Paterson	Roxburgh 9572

Kyeburn Cemetery Trust:

David	D C	Crutchley	Ranfurly 9396
Valerie	V	Smith	Ranfurly 9396
Phillip	P	Smith	Ranfurly 9396
Peter	P J	Hore	Ranfurly 9396
Charles	CA	Crutchley	Ranfurly 9397
Graeme	GJ	Brown	Ranfurly 9398

Gimmerburn Cemetery Trust:

Max	M	Paterson	Ranfurly 9398
Colin	CT	Paterson	Ranfurly 9446
Mark	MS	Paterson	Ranfurly 9395
James	JRC	Paterson	Ranfurly 9395
Angela	AL	Scott	Ranfurly 9396
Simon	SD	Paterson	Ranfurly 9395
George	GR	Paterson	Ranfurly 9396
Duncan	DA	Helm	Ranfurly 9397
Stephen	SJ	Blakely	Ranfurly 9395
Jeffery	JL	Cleugh	Dunedin 9010
	AG	Clarke	Ranfurly 9395

Drybread Cemetery Trust:

Tony	T	Glassford	Omakau 9376
Karen	K	Glassford	Omakau 9377
Mark	M	Huddleston	Omakau 9376
Murray	M	Heckler	Omakau 9377
Tom	T	Moran	Omakau 9352
Jo	J	Moran	Omakau 9352
Ross	R	Naylor	Omakau 9376
Rodger	R	Williams	Omakau 9376
Nikki	N	Williams	Omakau 9376
Alistair	A	Groundwater	Omakau 9376
Barbara	B	Groundwater	Omakau 9376

C. Notes that the names will be publicly notified.

2. Background

Across the district there are eight Trustees operated cemeteries, with the remaining 12 being operated directly by Council.

Millers Flat, Dry Bread, Kyeburn,and Gimmerburn cemeteries are operated by Cemetery Trustees who manage the day-to-day activities of their particular cemetery.

Kyeburn Cemetery was set aside for a cemetery by gazette notice in 1880, and the Maniototo County Council was appointed the powers to appoint and remove Trustees in 1888.

Gimmerburn Cemetery was set aside for a cemetery by gazette notice in 1887 and the Maniototo County Council was appointed the powers to appoint and remove Trustees in 1887.

Millers Flat Cemetery was set aside for a cemetery in 1872, and the Tuapeka County Council was appointed the powers to appoint and remove Trustees in 1903.

Drybread Cemetery was set aside for a cemetery in 1879, and the Vincent County Council was appointed the powers to appoint and remove Trustees in 1927.

Council has delegation from the Governor General through Section 24 of the Burial and Cremations Act 1964 to appoint Trustees from time to time to these cemetery trusts.

3. Discussion

The Burial and Cremations Act 1964 outlines the following process for Council to make appointments of Cemetery Trustees.

“Section 24 Governor-General may delegate powers

(1) The Governor-General may from time to time, by Order in Council, delegate to a local authority, in respect of any particular cemetery or cemeteries, all or any of the powers conferred on him by subsections (1) and (2) of section 23, and may at any time revoke any such delegation.

(2) Every appointment of trustees by a local authority pursuant to a delegation under subsection (1) shall be publicly notified in the district wherein the cemetery is situated, and it shall not be necessary to notify any such appointment in the Gazette.

(3) Every appointment or removal of trustees by a local authority pursuant to a delegation under subsection (1) shall take effect as if such appointment or removal had been made or effected by the Governor-General.

(4) Subsection (3) of section 22 shall apply in the case of a cemetery of which the trustees have been appointed by a local authority as it does in the case of a cemetery of which the trustees have been appointed by the Governor-General.”

Where a cemetery has existing trustees, it is the responsibility of those Trustees to ensure Trustees who have retired are replaced. This is typically done at their Annual General Meeting. Those names are provided to Council for ratification under Council’s delegation. The updated list of Cemetery Trustees is provided below for ratification by Council.

Millers Flat Cemetery Trust:

Pam	P	Reichel	Roxburgh 9572
Hilary	H	Paterson	Roxburgh 9572
Forbes	F	Knight	Millers Flat
Norman	N	Paterson	Roxburgh 9572

Kyeburn Cemetery Trust:

David	D C	Crutchley	Ranfurly 9396
Valerie	V	Smith	Ranfurly 9396
Phillip	P	Smith	Ranfurly 9396
Peter	P J	Hore	Ranfurly 9396
Charles	CA	Crutchley	Ranfurly 9397
Graeme	GJ	Brown	Ranfurly 9398

Gimmerburn Cemetery Trust:

Max	M	Paterson	Ranfurly 9398
Colin	CT	Paterson	Ranfurly 9446
Mark	MS	Paterson	Ranfurly 9395
James	JRC	Paterson	Ranfurly 9395
Angela	AL	Scott	Ranfurly 9396
Simon	SD	Paterson	Ranfurly 9395
George	GR	Paterson	Ranfurly 9396
Duncan	DA	Helm	Ranfurly 9397
Stephen	SJ	Blakely	Ranfurly 9395
Jeffery	JL	Cleugh	Dunedin 9010
	AG	Clarke	Ranfurly 9395

Drybread Cemetery Trust:

Tony	T	Glassford	Omakau 9376
Karen	K	Glassford	Omakau 9377
Mark	M	Huddleston	Omakau 9376
Murray	M	Heckler	Omakau 9377
Tom	T	Moran	Omakau 9352
Jo	J	Moran	Omakau 9352
Ross	R	Naylor	Omakau 9376
Rodger	R	Williams	Omakau 9376
Nikki	N	Williams	Omakau 9376
Alistair	A	Groundwater	Omakau 9376
Barbara	B	Groundwater	Omakau 9376

4. Financial Considerations

There are no financial implications to Council in approving the recommendation.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Council uses its delegation under the Burial and Cremations Act 1964 to appoint the cemetery trustees listed in the recommendation.

Advantages:

· This will support Council’s obligations under the Burial and Cremations Act 1964.

Disadvantages:

· No disadvantages have been identified.

Option 2

Council does not appoint Cemetery Trustees under the Burial and Cremations Act 1964.

Advantages:

· No advantages have been identified with option.

Disadvantages:

· Council will not be complying with the Burial and Cremations Act 1964.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by Confirming the proposed cemetery trustees reinforces the local decision-making process, and ensures these cemeteries are meeting the cultural wellbeing of the local community.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Central Otago Cemeteries Strategy – Asset Management – Operational Direction 2010.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	This decision will not contribute to climate change impacts.
Risks Analysis	No risk has been identified with this decision.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	In accordance with the Burial and Cremations Act 1964 new Trustees will have their names publicly notified.

7. Next Steps

Following adoption of the recommendation, the names of the Trustees will be publicly notified and the Cemetery Trusts advised.

8. Attachments

Nil

30 July 2025

25.15.16 Reserve Land Status Classification Report

Doc ID: 2503431

Report Author:	Gordon Bailey, Parks and Recreation Manager
Reviewed and authorised by:	David Scoones, Group Manager - Community Experience

1. Purpose of Report

To consider

a) declaring and classifying reserve land held under the Local Government Act 2002

b) classifying reserve land held under the Reserves Act 1977

c) starting the process to revoke the reserve status land held under the Reserves Act 1977

d) approve public notification where required

e) consider submissions received

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Approves approve public notification of proposals to declare as reserve and classify according to their primary purpose 10 parcels of land, pursuant to section 14(2) of the Reserves Act 1977, as described in Attachment 1 of this report.

C. Approves approve five parcels of land to be declared as reserve and classified according to their primary purpose, pursuant to section 14(1) of the Reserves Act 1977, as proposed in Attachment 2 of this report.

D. Confirm that 10 parcels of land will continue to be held under the Local Government Act 2002 as described in Attachment 3 of this report.

E. Approve the proposed classification of 54 parcels of reserve land pursuant to section 16(2A) of the Reserves Act 1977, as described in Attachment 4 of this report.

F. Approve public notification of the proposals to start the process to revoke the reserve status of three land parcels pursuant to section 24(2) of the Reserves Act 1977 described in Attachment 5 of this report.

G. Consider all submissions received, before making final recommendations.

2. Background

The Reserves Act 1977 requires Councils to prepare Reserve Management Plans (RMP) for its reserves (Sec 41).

RMPs provide for and ensure the use, enjoyment, maintenance, protection, and preservation, as the case may require, and, to the extent that the administering body’s resources permit, the development, as appropriate, of the reserve for the purposes for which it is classified, and shall incorporate and ensure compliance with the principles set out in section 17 to 23, as the case may be, for a reserve according to its classification.

While Council has 20 RMPs for various reserves across the district there are still a significant number of land parcels held as “Reserve Land” that do not have a RMP. While not a compulsory requirement, developing RMPs is best practice and provides an opportunity to engage with the community of how they wish to use these reserves into the future.

In order to have a binding RMP for a reserve the reserve needs to be formally classified under the Reserves Act 1977 (RA). If a land parcel is held under the RA, it is necessary to ensure that it has been appropriately classified, as required under section 16 of the RA and assigned a primary purpose, as defined in sections 17 to 23 of the Act, that aligns with its present values and uses.

The recent Reserve land identification project identified all land held as reserves by Council. It also identified that while Council has formal classification for many of its reserves there were a significant number that have yet to be classified even though they are held under the Reserves Act. This is particularly so for land provided as reserves through subdivision over recent years.

Reserves classified for Scenic or Recreation purposes require a RMP, for other classifications such as Local Purpose the preparation of RMPs is optional.

Future RMPs will focus on grouping up similar type reserves in a ward into what is called an Omnibus Reserve Management Plan. Council has a number of these already particularly for Maniototo, Teviot and for Cromwell Sports Grounds. There will still be Reserves that warrant their own individualised RMP due to their unique nature such as Manorburn Dam Recreation Reserve.

Remaining Omnibus plans yet to be developed include Greenways in Cromwell, Neighbourhood parks in Cromwell and Vincent wards.

To enable progress for those reserves that require an RMP a number of actions are required for land to be included in the RMPs, and this includes appropriately classifying land held under the RA.

This report presents the findings of the comprehensive land status investigation,

which was undertaken as an essential preliminary task in the development of

RMPs, which include 189 parks and reserves land parcels in the district.

3. Discussion

This report seeks approval from Council for various actions for land to be included in future RMPs. This includes land held under the RA and land held under the LGA.

Land held under the LGA can be

1. retained as parkland under the LGA or

2. declared to be reserve under section 14 of the RA and classified appropriately.

Land held under the RA can be:

1. classified according to the land’s primary purpose as per section 16 of the RA,

2. reclassified to align to the land’s primary purpose (per section 24 of the RA),

3. its reserve status can be revoked (per section 24 of the RA), or

4. it can continue to be held as unclassified reserve under the RA.

The option to continue to hold land as unclassified reserve under the RA is not recommended as it would mean that a reserve management plan would not comply with the RA or meet the statutory obligation under the Act to classify land.

For land where the Reserves Act status is proposed to be revoked, it is important to note that Council can initiate this process and undertake public consultation on proposals. The decision to revoke the RA status, however, sits with the Minister of Conservation, as this power has not been delegated to local authorities under the 2014 Ministerial Delegations under the RA.

Considerations to determine appropriate actions for LGA and RA land and RA Classifications

In considering whether to proceed with the options for each land parcel, staff have

considered the following criteria:

a. Why does the Council own the land and how was it acquired?

b. What is the primary purpose of the land?

c. What is the status of adjacent parcels of land within the same park?

d. What is the current and likely future main use or purpose of the land?

e. What potential does the land have for protection, enhancement and

development?

f. Is there likely to be a need to retain flexibility for future use of the park?

Staff also considered the benefits and disadvantages of the RA or LGA in managing and

enabling the use, protection and development of each park or reserve, and developed a set of criteria to guide assessment of each land parcel.

Considerations to determine appropriate RA classifications

Classification involves assigning a reserve (or part of a reserve) a primary purpose, as

defined in sections 17 to 23 of the Act, that aligns with its present values.

Consideration is also given to potential future values, activities, and uses.

Consultation with mana whenua has been initiated.

Public notification requirements

For land held under the RA, reserves to be classified under Section 16(2A) do not require

public notification.

Reserves to be classified under Section 16(1) of the RA require public notification under

Section 16(4) and in accordance with Sections 119 and 120, however the following

exceptions apply as per Section 16(5):

a. the proposed classification is in conformity with the relevant operative District

Plan under the Resource Management Act 1991; or

b. the reserve has been held under previous legislation for a similar purpose; or

c. the proposed classification was a condition under which the land was acquired.

Public notification of the intention to classify land is to be open to objections and

submissions for not less than one month.

Objectors and submitters may request a hearing as per Section 120 of the RA.

Section 14(2) of the RA requires public notification of at least one month, when declaring

LGA land a reserve and classifying it, unless a district plan makes provision for the use of

the land as a reserve or the land is designated as a proposed reserve under an operative

District Plan

All proposals to reclassify land are to be publicly notified for one month as per section

24(2) of the Reserves Act.

Mana whenua have been asked for comment and will be formally consulted through the public notification process.

All objections and submissions are to be made in writing.

Land Status Investigation Findings and Recommendations

The land status investigation has found that:

· 25 land parcels are held under the LGA

· 61 land parcels are held under the RA.

For land held under the LGA and in applying the criteria above, staff recommended for 15 land parcels to be declared reserve under the RA and classified according to their primary purpose.

Of the 15 land parcels 10 require public notification, as they are not designated as open space in the Operative District Plan see Appendix 1.

Five land parcels can be declared reserve and classified without public notification see Appendix 2.

For the remaining 10 land parcels, no actions are required see Appendix 3.

In applying the criteria above for land held under the RA, the following actions are recommended:

· 54 land parcels are to be classified see Appendix 4. Public notification is not required, as all land parcels are classified under section 16(2A) of the RA.

· For 3 land parcels, the RA status is proposed to be revoked see Appendix 5.

Appendix 6 shows the location of each reserve land parcel.

4. Financial Considerations

The costs associated with formal gazetting and notifications are accounted for within existing budgets.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

That Council classifies Reserve land as recommended and where appropriate undertake the required public notification processes.

Advantages:

· Council meets its obligations under the Reserves Act 1977.

· Reserve Management Plans can be prepared where required.

· Land is classified to meets it purpose.

· Land is clearly identified as being held under the Reserves Act or Local Government Act.

Disadvantages:

· None identified.

Option 2

Council does not proceed with classification of reserve land.

Advantages:

· No advantages have been identified.

Disadvantages:

· Council will not be meeting its statutory obligations to classify land.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by in the present and for the future by appropriately setting land aside for future recreational opportunities.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Reserve Management Plans Open Spaces and Recreation Strategy
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No Implications
Risks Analysis	There is no perceived risk identified.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	Public notification will be undertaken as required for the land parcels described in the recommendations of this report.

7. Next Steps

Land not requiring public notification will be classified through the New Zealand Gazette.

Public notification of land parcels will be undertaken as required.

Council will consider submissions received through the public notification process and recommend next steps.

Land status report will be undertaken on the land where classifications are to be revoked to determine the next steps.

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Reserve Land Requiring Public Notification ⇩

Appendix 2 - Reserve Land NOT Requiring Public Notification ⇩

Appendix 3 - Land to be retained under LGA ⇩

Appendix 4 - Land to be classified under Reserves Act ⇩

Appendix 5 - Reserve land to be revoked ⇩

Appendix 6 - Land Status Maps. ⇩

30 July 2025

25.15.17 Ratification of the Cromwell Community Board Resolution 25.4.4 (Proposed New Lease to Cromwell Bike Park Incorporated on Nelplusultra Recreation Reserve)

Doc ID: 2506640

Report Author:	Zelda Zeelie, Statutory Property Team Leader
Reviewed and authorised by:	David Scoones, Group Manager - Community Experience

1. Purpose of Report

To consider ratifying the Cromwell Community Board Resolution 25.4.4 recommending the granting of a new lease to the Cromwell Bike Park Incorporated on an area of 1 Hectare (more or less) of the Neplusultra Recreation Reserve, being part of Lots 1 and 2 Deposit Plan 19357.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Agrees to ratify Resolution 25.4.4 to grant a lease to Cromwell Bike Park Incorporated on leased areas indicated on Figure 1 of the report of the Neplusultra Recreation Reserve, being part of Lot 2 Deposit Plan 17280 on the following terms and conditions:

· Commencement 1 July 2023

· Term Fifteen (15) years

· Right of Renewal One (1) right of renewal for another Fifteen (15) years

· Rental $1 per annum (if demanded)

· Outgoings 100%

· Final Expiry Date 30 June 2053

· Cancellation Clause Five (5) years advanced notice of cancellation

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

2. Background

Resolution 25.4.4

At its meeting the Cromwell Community Board resolved to grant a new lease to the Cromwell Bike Park Incorporated on an area of 1 Hectare (more or less) of the Neplusultra Recreation Reserve, being part of Lots 1 and 2 Deposit Plan 19357.

The full report attached as Appendix “1” with financial reports attached as Appendices “2” to “6”.

3. Discussion

As per discussion contained in Appendix “1”.

4. Financial Considerations

The financials of the Cromwell Bike Park Incorporated for the last 5 financial years have been obtained and indicated that apart from donations there have been no other income for the club.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Agrees to ratify Resolution 25.4.4 of the Cromwell Community Board to grant a lease to Cromwell Bike Park Incorporated on leased areas indicated on Figure 1 of the report of the Neplusultra Recreation Reserve, being part of Lot 2 Deposit Plan 17280 on the following terms and conditions:

• Commencement 1 July 2023

• Term Fifteen (15) years

• Right of Renewal One (1) right of renewal for another Fifteen (15) years

• Rental $1 per annum

• Outgoings 100%

• Final Expiry Date 30 June 2053

• Cancellation Clause Five (5) years advanced notice of cancellation

Advantages:

· The continuation of the Bike Park Facility would benefit the community

· Continuation of the occupation and maintenance of the land

· The cancellation clause covers the possibility of terminating the lease if the land should be required by Council in the future for other purposes.

Disadvantages:

· None

Option 2

Agrees to not ratify Resolution 25.4.4 of the Cromwell Community Board to grant a lease to Cromwell Bike Park Incorporated on an area of 1 Ha (more or less) of the Neplusultra Recreation Reserve, being part of Lots 1 and 2 Deposit plan 19357.

Advantages:

· None

Disadvantages:

· The community would lose the benefit of the Bike Park facility.

· The land would not be occupied, and Council will have to maintain the tracks.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the social and cultural wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by supporting the continued operation of the Bike Park facility. The Minister of Conservation’s consent is delegated to Council in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977, and the “Instrument of Delegation to Territorial Authorities” dated 12 June 2013.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	The decision is consistent with the Neplusultra Reserve Management Plan, and the Community Leasing and Licensing Policy by encouraging the facilitation of the reserve for recreation and sporting purposes for the welfare and enjoyment of the community.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No sustainability, environmental or climate change impacts are related to the decision as continuation of the lease have no material effect on the land.
Risks Analysis	There is no risk associated with the recommended option. All potential risk associated with the approved activities in the lease is covered under the lease agreement and Council’s Risk Insurance.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The decision is not considered significant with regard to the Significance and Engagement Policy.

7. Next Steps

· Council Ratifies approval of the lease 30 July 2025

· Lessee notified and lease document sent to lessee August 2025

· New lease executed August 2025

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - CCB 17 June 2025 - Report - Porposed New Lease to Cromwell Bike Park Incorporated on Neplusultra Recreation Reserve ⇩

Appendix 2 - 2020 March - Cromwell Bike Park Inc - CC48239_AnnualReturnSummary_AR008 ⇩

Appendix 3 - 2021 March - Cromwell Bike Park Inc - CC48239_AnnualReturnSummary_AR009 ⇩

Appendix 4 - 2022 March - Cromwell Bike Park Inc - CC48239_AnnualReturnSummary_AR010 ⇩

Appendix 5 - 2023 March - Cromwell Bike Park Inc - CC48239_AnnualReturnSummary_AR011 ⇩

Appendix 6 - 2024 March - Cromwell Bike Park Inc - CC48239_AnnualReturnSummary_AR013 ⇩

30 July 2025

A brown and white logo

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

25.15.18 Road Stopping Adjacent to 34 Mutton Town Road - Mutton Town Limited

Doc ID: 2506684

Report Author:	Zelda Zeelie, Statutory Property Team Leader
Reviewed and authorised by:	David Scoones, Group Manager - Community Experience

1. Purpose of Report

To consider ratifying the resolution made by the Vincent Community Board at its meeting held on 29 July 2025 regarding a proposal to stop part of unformed legal road adjacent to rapid 34 Mutton Town Road in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Act.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Agrees to approve the proposal to stop the unformed legal road, as shown in Figure 3 (the Scheme Plan), in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Act 1981, subject to:

· The proposed marked ‘Section 1’ on the Scheme Plan as shown in Figure 3 of the report being stopped and amalgamated with Record of Title OT 9B/1133.

· The stopping and legislation being approved by the Minister of Lands.

· The final survey plan being approved by the Chief Executive.

· The owner of 34 Mutton Town Road pays all the cost in relation to the road stopping.

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

2. Background

The Vincent Community Board decision:

Due to time constraints and for efficiency the decision of the Vincent Community Board on 29 July 2025 will be reported to the Council at its meeting on 30 July 2025.

The Road

Mutton Town Road starts from the split off westwards from Clyde-Alexandra Road and ends into Sunderland Street, Clyde as shown in Figure 1 of the report.

A aerial view of a city

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Figure 1

The Applicant’s Property

The current owner of 34 Mutton Town Road (Record of Title OT9B/1133), Mutton Town Limited applied for the road stopping of part of Mutton Town Road and amalgamation to his land title as set out in Figure 2 below.

An aerial view of a road

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

The Road to be Stopped

Council Roading Manager has reviewed the proposed road stoppage area and has approved the process as per Scheme Plan shown in Figure 3 below.

A map of a river

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

3. Discussion

Utility Networks & Provider Requirements

There is no utility network infrastructure located in the block of road that is to be stopped. All utilities currently on the road reserve will still be in the road reserve after completion of the road stopping.

Legislation and Policy

Council’s Roading Policy determines the appropriate statutory procedure for stopping a legal road or any part thereof. The policy for selecting the correct statutory process is outlined in section 8.5 of Council’s Roading Policy. The options are as follow:

The Local Government Act 1974 road stopping procedure shall be adopted of one or more of the following circumstances shall apply:

a) Where the full width of road is proposed to be stopped and public access will be removed as a result of the road being stopped; or

b) The road stopping could injuriously affect or have a negative or adverse impact on any other property; or

c) The road stopping has, in the judgement of the Council, the potential to be controversial; or

d) If there is any doubt or uncertainty as to which procedure should be used to stop the road.

The Local Government Act process requires public notification of the proposal. This involves erecting signs at each end of the road to be stopped, sending letters to adjoining owners/occupiers and at least two public notices a week apart in the local newspaper. Members of the public have 40 days in which to object.

The Public Works Act 1981 road stopping procedure may be adopted when the following circumstances apply

a. Where the proposal is that a part of the road width be stopped and a width of road which provides public access will remain.

b. Where no other person, including the public generally, are considered by the Council in its judgement to be adversely affected by the proposed road stopping.

c. Where other reasonable access will be provided to replace the access previously provided by the stopped road (i.e. by the construction of a new road).

It is proposed that Public Works Act 1981 procedures be adopted for this application for the following reasons:

· The proposal is to stop part of the road width only.

· Public access will not be adversely affected.

The Public Works Act 1981 further provides for legal road to be stopped, sold, and amalgamated with an adjacent title.

In this instance the stopped road will be amalgamated with the land contained in Record of Title OT 9B/1133.

Evaluation of Application

An evaluation of the proposal to stop a portion of the Road is shown in the table below.

Item	Criteria to be considered	Evaluation
District Plan	Has the road been identified in the District Plan for any specific use or as a future road corridor?	No part of the Road identified for any specific purpose or as a future road corridor.
Current Level of Use	Is the road used by members of the public for any reasons?	This section of the road reserve is not used by members of the public for any reason.
	Does it provide the only or most convenient means of access to any existing lots?	No, all existing lots adjacent to the Road have existing legal access to Mutton Town Road.
	Will stopping the road adversely affect the viability of any commercial activity or operation?	No, the road stopping will not adversely affect the viability of any commercial activity or operation.
	Will any land become landlocked if the road is stopped?	No
Future Use	Will the road be needed to service future residential, commercial, industrial, or agricultural developments?”	No
Future Use	Will the road be needed in the future to connect existing roads?	No
Non-traffic Uses	Does the road have current or potential value for amenity functions, e.g., walkway, cycleway, recreational access, access to conservation or heritage areas, park land?	The Road does not provide access to any recreational area, conservation land, or to a heritage area.
	Does the road have potential to be utilised by the Council for any other public work either now or potentially in the future?	The Road does not have potential to be used for public work.
	Does the road have significant landscape amenity value?	The Road does not have any significant landscape amenity value.
Access to Waterbody	Does the road provide access to a river, stream, lake or other waterbody?	The Road does not provide access to any type of waterbody.
Access to Waterbody	If so, there is a need to consider Section 345 of the Local Government Act, which requires that after stopping the land be vested in Council as an esplanade reserve	N/A (refer above)
Infrastructure	Does the road currently contain any services or other infrastructure, such as electricity, telecommunications, irrigation, or other private infrastructure?	Yes, but these will remain in the road reserve after road stopping is completed.
Infrastructure	Can the existing services or infrastructure be protected by easements?	Not required.
Traffic Safety	Does the use of motor vehicles on the road constitute a danger or hazard?	There is no danger or hazard associated with using a motor vehicle on the Road.

4. Financial Considerations

Council’s Roading Policy determines that the applicant is responsible for all costs and expenses associated with the road stopping and to pay the value of the road reserve land acquired.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Recommends to Council to approve the proposal to stop the unformed legal road, as shown in appendix “1” (the Scheme Plan), in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Act 1981, subject to:

· The marked proposed ‘Section 1’ on the Scheme Plan as shown in Figure 3 of the report being stopped and amalgamated with Record of Title OT 9B/1133.

· The stopping and legislation being approved by the Minister of Lands.

· The final survey plan being approved by the Chief Executive.

· The owner of 34 Mutton Town Road pays all the cost in relation to the road stopping

Advantages:

· All costs associated with the stopping will be paid by the owner of 34 Mutton Town Road.

The income received from the road stopping will be used to address other public roading issues.

Disadvantages:

· None

Option 2

Recommends to Council to not approve the proposal to stop the unformed legal road, as shown in appendix “1” (the Scheme Plan), in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Act 1981, subject to:

· The proposed marked ‘Section 1’ on the Scheme Plan attached as Appendix “1” being stopped and amalgamated with Record of Title OT 9B/1133.

· The stopping and legislation being approved by the Minister of Lands.

· The final survey plan being approved by the Chief Executive.

Advantages:

· None

Disadvantages:

· No income is received from the requested road stopping.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the economic wellbeing of the community by generating income from the disposal of land that is held, (but not required) for roading purposes, and where it has limited other use.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Council’s Road Stopping Policy applies to this application. Consideration of this policy has ensured that the appropriate statutory process, being to stop the road in accordance with the provisions of Public Works Act 1981, has been adopted.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No sustainability, environmental or climate change impacts are related to the decision to stop this short unnamed unformed road.
Risks Analysis	No risks to Council are associated with the recommended option.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The Significance and Engagement Policy has been considered, with none of the criteria being met or exceeded. Notice of the completed road stopping will be published in the New Zealand Gazette.

7. Next Steps

The following steps have been/will be taken to implement the stopping:

o Community Board approval

o Council approval

o Survey and LINZ Accredited Supplier engaged

o Survey Plan approved

o Gazette notices published

o Sale of land completed

8. Attachments

Nil

30 July 2025

A brown and white logo

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

25.15.19 Road Renaming Approval Report - Kawariki Court

Doc ID: 2503096

Report Author:	Faye Somerville, Roading Administration Assistant
Reviewed and authorised by:	Quinton Penniall, Acting General Manager - Planning and Infrastructure

1. Purpose of Report

To ratify the Cromwell Community Board’s recommendation to rename Plover Court to Plover Lane, and Kawariki Court to Plover Lane.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Agrees to rename Kawariki Court to Plover Lane.

C. Agrees to rename Plover Court to Plover Lane.

2. Background

A report was presented to the Cromwell Community Board on 17 June 2025 (appendix 1) to consider renaming the previously named Kawariki Court in the Wooing Tree Development. A change to the road layout removed the separation between Plover Court and Kawariki Court, which were previously divided by a greenway. The two roads now form a single continuous through road, making the use of separate names no longer appropriate.

A close-up of a map

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

3. Discussion

Renaming Kawariki Court would allow the entire length of the now-continuous road to share a single name. During discussions it was noted that the recent layout change means Plover Court is now part of a through road, rather than a short, enclosed street. As a result, the name "Plover Court" was no longer considered appropriate, and it was agreed that both Kawariki Court and Plover Court should be renamed Plover Lane.

Clarification was sought from the LINZ Addressing Team regarding the suitability of the "Lane" suffix, and approval was given for the proposed name changes.

The diagram below shows the new road layout including changed road names.

A map of a neighborhood

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

4. Financial Considerations

All costs for the application and road name signs will be met by the developer.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Ratify the Cromwell Community Board’s recommendation to rename Kawariki Court and Plover Court to Plover Lane.

Advantages:

· Creates a seamless continuation of Plover Lane following layout change.

· Aligns with the developer’s request.

· Has pre-approval from LINZ Addressing Team

Disadvantages:

· None identified

Option 2

Do not ratify the recommendation.

Advantages:

· None identified.

Disadvantages:

· Contrary to Cromwell Community Board’s recommendation and developers wishes.

· Creates confusion for emergency and postal services.

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 clear direction for post and emergency services.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Decision is consistent with other policies.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	Managing change while protecting and enhancing our culture, heritage and landscape is one of the council’s sustainable goals. Road naming has the ability to celebrate culture and heritage aspects of the area. Road naming has no climate change impacts or benefits.
Risks Analysis	Approval of this road name presents no discernible risk.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The decision does not trigger engagement under the Significance and Engagement Policy.

7. Next Steps

1) Council confirms the road name change.

2) Council sends a copy of the resolution to the Registrar-General and the Surveyor-General.

3) Staff will inform affected parties of the decision

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Cromwell Community Board Road Renaming Approval Report .pdf ⇩

30 July 2025

A brown and white logo

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

25.15.20 Alcohol Fees and Charges

Doc ID: 2511514

Report Author:	Lee Webster, Regulatory Services Manager
Reviewed and authorised by:	Quinton Penniall, Acting Group Manager – Planning, Infrastructure and Regulatory

1. Purpose of Report

To consider updating Council’s fees and charges for alcohol licence fees to include gst.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Agrees to amend the 2025 / 2026 fees and charges to include gst as reflected in the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (fees) Regulations 2013.

2. Background

The Sale and Supply of Alcohol (fees) Regulations 2013 specify the fees for all alcohol related applications.

Council has not previously stated these fees in its fees and charges schedule, however included these this year to assist customers in finding these fees in one location.

The fees stated in the regulations are exclusive of gst.

3. Discussion

Whilst the fees all alcohol related applications are specified in the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (fees) Regulations 2013, these exclude gst.

In transferring these statutory fees to Council’s fees and charges schedule, regrettably the gst was omitted.

As the fees are set in statute, there is no requirement to correct this omission by the special consultative process. If Council wanted to set fees outside of the fees set in statute, Council would need to develop a specific bylaw for this via the special consultative process.

During the Long Term Plan process, an alcohol bylaw was discussed and Council determined that it did not wish to amend theses fees to set its own fee schedule.

4. Financial Considerations

If the error is not corrected, Year 1 alcohol fee income will be 15% lower than budgeted in the Long Term Plan, as GST would not be applied.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Include the gst in the alcohol fees.

Advantages:

· Reflects Councils intention

· Ensure consistency of fees and charges with those stated in statute.

· Avoids income shortfall

Disadvantages:

· May be perceived as a fee increase by some applicants (although it reflects the correct amount as set in statute).

Option 2

Do not include gst in the alcohol licence fees.

Advantages:

· Applicants would pay 15% less than the statutory fee (as no gst is added).

Disadvantages:

· Inconsistent with Council intent and statutory fee structure.

· Would require development of a bylaw to formally adopt non statutory fees.

· Results in reduced revenue against Long Term Plan budget.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision promotes the (social and economic) wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by maintaining the fee structure as intended in statute.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No implications identified.
Risks Analysis	No risks identified with the decision.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The interested parties are those would apply for an alcohol licence. This decision does not require consultation as the fees are set in statute.

7. Next Steps

To amend the fees in Council’s fees and charges schedule to include gst.

8. Attachments

Nil

30 July 2025

A brown and white logo

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

8 Mayor’s Report

25.15.22 Mayor's Report

Doc ID: 2430946

1. Purpose

To consider an update from Her Worship the Mayor.

Recommendations

That the Council receives the report.

An update on some of the key projects I’ve been working on this month:

Health – At the start of July I attended a public meeting in Wanaka to discuss health in the area with Minister Matt Doocey and several key stakeholders from Health NZ. This was well facilitated and very well attended by the public, including Central Otago residents and interested parties.

The following day I met with Minister Simeon Brown, together with the Southern Lakes Health Steering committee – myself, Mayor Lewers and local MP’s. The trust has been working with interested parties, including proposed private/public hospitals from Southern Infrastructure and Roa, alongside local facilities already in place such as Dunstan Hospital. The recent announcement that Health NZ will undertake Clinical Services Planning for our joint districts before the end of the year is very welcome news.

I attended an event in Dunedin with Edward Ellison from Ōtākou Marae, to acknowledge the many decades of mahi Edward has contributed to his people and the wider area, including the establishment of Aukaha in the late 1990’s. Edward will remain well engaged with this work, but has stepped down as chairman of the board. It was an honour to be able to share some thoughts on his efforts from myself and Tim Cadogan.

After a somewhat false start with Waitaki, Central Otago, Clutha and Gore have voted to proceed with Southern Water Done Well planning. We continue to keep a number of other councils in the loop about progress, and I do anticipate that the three councils who currently form the group will increase. Southern Water Done Well is the most affordable way for our people to access water services that are safe, compliant and sustainable, now and into the future.

Council has begun the work towards the Te Korowai process, which is exciting. Last week at the LGNZ conference I facilitated two sessions on how Te Korowai and REG (Road Efficiency Group) can help Councils to deliver better, more efficient systems in a way that is easy to explain to their communities. It was very interesting, and I learned a lot about the power that “knowing your numbers” can bring to conversations with our people. This will be a big piece for our commns team, and us, as the DIA dashboards are released later this month.

On the topic of the LGNZ conference, I have a few key highlights:

- Ron Mark, Mayor of Carterton, said it is OUR job to educate our public, and our responsibility to make the hard decisions for the people that elected us to this table.

- Nick Smith, Mayor of Nelson – “The government is stepping away from the table and we’re being left to pick up the tab.” (Talking about the school bus system)

- Prime Minster Christopher Luxon “We’re backing councils to get the basics done brilliantly,” – interestingly not the same as what he said to the media that afternoon

- Local Government Minister Simon Watts – “Back to basics is still the direction of travel”

- Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop – “We have to start being a country that says yes a lot more and no a lot less.” (Not sure how this aligns with saying no to nice-to-haves as above)

- Sam Broughton, Mayor of Selywn, Councils will spend $77 billion dollars across the length of our LTP’s and now own a third of all NZ’s public infrastructure. We should be aiming to get the best possible value from our assets.

- Hillmare Schulze, chief economist of BERL – “We like to compare ourselves to the likes of Norway, Ireland and Singapore. We haven’t been comparable to those countries since the 1960s, we are falling behind because we do not have a vision for our country.”

- I found myself wholeheartedly agreeing with two points from Deputy PM David Seymour “Council’s job is to provide a bundle of goods that are not otherwise available.” And “Ultimately we all want the same thing, and that is an effective and affordable government.”

We’ve had our first Joint Committee meeting for the Regional Deal negotiation and appointed ORC chair Gretchen Roberston as the chair of that committee and congratulations to Cr Paterson who has been appointed Deputy Chair. Central Government will no doubt be looking to progress these discussions quickly and we will keep you updated on where this is at, including as a standing item to this council each meeting.

Thank you all for your continued efforts this month of behalf of our communities. You are appreciated.

2. Attachments

Nil

Minutes

Unconfirmed

MINUTES OF A mEETING OF THE
Vincent Community Board
HELD IN THE Ngā Hau e Whā, William Fraser Building, 1 Dunorling Street, Alexandra
AND LIVE STREAMED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON Monday, 9 June 2025 COMMENCING AT 10.00 am

PRESENT: Mr J Cromb (Chairperson), Dr R Browne, Cr L Claridge, Mr T Hammington, Mr D Johns, Cr M McPherson,

IN ATTENDANCE: T Alley (Mayor) via Microsoft Teams, P Kelly (Chief Executive Officer), S Righarts (Acting Group Manager - Community Experience), D Rushbrook (Regional Partnership Lead), P Morris (Acting Group Manager – Governance and Business Services), L van der Voort (Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure), Q Penniall (Infrastructure Manager), G Robinson (Properties and Facilities Manager), D McKewen (Acting Chief Financial Officer), G Bailey (Parks and Recreation Manager), M Burnett (Parks Officer – Strategy and Planning) , Z Zeelie (Team Leader Statutory Property), R Williams (Community Development Officer), S Reynolds (Acting Governance Manager)

1 Apologies

Committee Resolution

Moved: Cromb

Seconded: Browne

That apologies from Cr T Paterson be received and accepted.

Carried

2 Public Forum

Ken Churchill- Aronui Reserve

Mr Churchill presented a slide show outlining the work that had been completed at the site of Aronui Dam. He spoke about the spread of raupō, and noted that a stone wall on the site was subsiding. He requested that Council accessed the reserve and looked at options for removal of raupō.

Nicola Rae - Airport Reserve wilding pines and pests

Ms Rae spoke about wilding conifers at the airport reserve and noted the rapid spread of the confiders over recent years. She said she had been removing saplings actively, but the remaining ones require machinery for removal. She requested that the council create a plan for the reserve and inform the community about a timeline the removal. She noted the situation with the rabbits on the reserve and mentioned that the current sporadic pest control programme was inadequate.

Ms Rae then responded to questions.

Professor Brian Boyle- Winterstellar

Professor Boyle discussed his role in the Winterstellar programme and highlighted Central Otago's excellent star-gazing spots. He emphasized the issue of artificial light pollution and noted that had found that communities generally supported reducing street lighting for better visibility of stars. He noted that obtaining International Dark Sky reserve accreditation was lengthy but felt confident in the team working toward this accreditation. He requested that the board gave their support to this work and responded to questions.

Darryl Jones – on behalf of Lauder community

Mr Jones highlighted Lauder's efforts and community support for the dark sky initiative. He requested a letter from the Council to endorse the project and highlighted the business and tourism opportunities from the accreditation.

Mr Jones then responded to questions.

Ewan Johnstone and Andy Davey – on behalf of St Bathans & Cambrian community

Mr Johnstone and Mr Davey spoke to the project work that had taken place with regards to the Winterstellar Astronomical Site project. The board requested a letter of support for this work and asked for communication and consideration of their objectives across council departments, including planning and regulatory teams.

Rory McLellan – Kāmoanahaehae Riverside Park

Mr McLellan thanked the board for their continued commitment and support to the project. He stated that the project's original objective was to connect the town centre to the river. The trust had been coordinating with Contact Energy in their revision of the Landscape and Visual Amenity Management Plan, and with the Wairoa-Manuherekia Trust to align with their work near the site.

Mr McLellan then responded to questions.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Johns

That the public minutes of the Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 29 April 2025 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.

Dr. Browne noted his resignation from the Central Otago REAP board after serving for fourteen years.

Mr Cromb also noted that as he sits on the Kāmoanahaehae Riverside Park working group he would not vote on item 25.4.2.

5 Reports

25.4.2 Kāmoanahaehae - Riverside Park Stage 2 Ramp

To consider allocating funding to complete stage 2 the Ramp at Kāmoanahaehae - Riverside Park.

The initial design did not fully anticipate engineering requirements. Due to the site's flood risk, rust-proof stainless steel fittings were needed, adding extra cost.

It was also noted that the original estimates from six years ago had significantly increased for all aspects of the project.

Committee Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Claridge

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

B. Recommends to Council that Stage 2 the Ramp of the Kāmoanahaehae - Riverside Park will be funded through account 2137 - Reserves Contribution Fund Vincent up to the value of $400,000.

C. Notes that the completion of Stage 2 will be dependent on river levels and consent requirements.

Carried with Mr Cromb abstaining from the vote

Note: Mr Andy Davey and Ms Mary-Anne Baxter joined the meeting for item 25.4.3

25.4.3 Alexandra District Museum Inc. Accountability Report 2022-2023 Financial Year

To provide an accountability report on the objectives and actions of the Alexandra District Museum Inc, over the 2023/24 financial year.

It was noted that the organisation could consider making an application for a contestable grant for an activities outside of their general museum activities.

Ms. Baxter addressed the centre's resourcing issues, noting the recent reduction in opening hours due to this. She commented that she joined the board in order to support the organisation with staffing challenges and ensure the facility's continued operation.

Committee Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Johns

That the report be received.

Carried

Note: Mr Hammington left the meeting at 11.34 am and returned at 11.36 am

25.4.4 Draft Manorburn Dam Recreation Reserve Management Plan for Approval

Approve the draft Manorburn Dam Recreation Reserve Management Plan and recommend that Council adopt the Plan under its delegated Reserves Act 1977 authority from the Minister of Conservation.

The modifications subsequent to the presentation of the draft plan were detailed, and the recommended revisions had been implemented.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Johns

Seconded: Claridge

That the Vincent Community Board

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

B. Recommends that the suggested amendments and changes to the plan are approved

C. Recommends to Council the adoption of the amended Manorburn Dam Recreation Reserve Management Plan under its delegated authority from the Minister of Conservation.

Carried

25.4.5 Tree Planting Reserve State Highway 8 Alexandra

To consider allocating funding for the grinding of tree stumps in the Tree Planting Reserve adjacent to State Highway 8 Alexandra.

It was noted that the cost to remove the stumps was considerable and there was consideration given that these funds could be better invested in a future planting scheme.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Hammington

That the Vincent Community Board

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

B. Agrees not grind stumps within the Tree Planting Reserve adjacent to State Highway 8.

C. Notes that if approved the Ngai Tahu Properties Limited subdivision application may have an impact on how this reserve is developed.

Carried with Mr Cromb recording his vote against.

25.4.6 Proposal to Approve the Licence to Occupy to Upcycles Charitable Trust on Part of 60 Boundary Road, Alexandra

To consider the approval of a Licence to Occupy to Upcycle Charitable Trust being approximately 125 square metres more or less on Part Lot 3 DP 355061 held on Record of Title 224692 for the purpose of Local Purpose (Transfer/Landfill) Reserve.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: McPherson

That the Vincent Community Board

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

B. Recommends to Council to approve the granting of a Licence to Occupy to Upcycles Charitable Trust of approximately 125 square metres more or less on Part 3 DP 355061 held on Record of Title 224692 for the purpose of Local Purpose (Transfer/Landfill) Reserve, on the following terms and conditions:

• Term: Five (5) years

• Right of renewal: None

• Commencement Date: 1 July 2025

• Licence Fee: $1 per annum plus GST (if demanded)

• Rent Review: None

• Permitted Use: For the establishment and use as a bicycle repair and restoration facility.

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

Carried

25.4.7 Proposal to Revoke Part of Resolution 25.3.2

To consider the proposal to revoke part of resolution 25.3.2 from the Vincent Community Board meeting on 29 April 2025.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Johns

That the Vincent Community Board

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

B. Agrees to revoke Resolution 25.3.2 item B, as the Blossom Festival Committee will be receiving funding from Council for the next two years, following the 2025-34 Long-term Plan deliberations.

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

Carried with Cr McPherson abstaining from the vote

25.4.8 Vincent Financial Report for the Period Ending 31 March 2025

To consider the financial performance overview as at 31 March 2025.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Cromb

Seconded: Hammington

That the report be received.

Carried

Note: Cr McPherson left the meeting at 12.01 pm and returned at 12.08 pm.

6 Mayor’s Report

25.4.9 Mayor's Report

Her Worship the Mayor gave an update on activities and issues with in Vincent Community Ward since the last meeting. See report attached.

Committee Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Claridge

That the Vincent Community Board receives the report.

Carried

Attachments

1 Mayors Report

7 Chair's Report

25.4.10 Chair's Report

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

Committee Resolution

Moved: Cromb

Seconded: McPherson

That the report be received.

Carried

Attachments

1 Chairs Report - 9 June 2025

8 Members' Reports

25.4.11 Members' Reports

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

Mr Hammington reported on the following:

· Had attended an Elevate business breakfast.

· Had attended two Promote Dunstan meetings.

· Had attended a Blossom festival meeting.

· Had been involved in a planting day for Keep Alexandra Clyde Beautiful.

Cr Claridge reported on the following:

· Gave an update on recent Council activities, noting the hearings and deliberations on the Long-term Plan.

Cr Mcpherson gave an update on the following:

· Gave an update on recent Hearing Panel meetings.

· Gave an overview of recent Council meetings.

Mr Johns reported on the following:

· Had attended Alexandra Rugby Club and Alexandra golf club meetings

· Attended a meeting with staff to consider options for Vallance Cottage.

Dr Browne reported on the following:

· Attended a meeting of Keep Alexandra Clyde Beautiful.

· Attended a meeting of Alexandra and District Museum board.

· Chaired two meetings of the Creative Writers Circle.

· Gave a talk to Alexandra U3A.

· Attended two Elevate business group breakfast meetings.

· Attended a meeting of the Central Otago District Arts Trust.

· Attended a meeting of staff of CODC and Central Stories to review their relationship.

· Stepped down from the board of Central Otago REAP after 14 years, including eight as chair.

· Attended a meeting of Elevate with Joseph Mooney and Miles Anderson.

· Attended the opening of the refurbished Henderson House.

· Enjoyed a performance by Waiata Theatre of “The Hunchback of Notre Dame”.

· Performed with the Central Otago Regional Orchestra in Cromwell and Arrowtown.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Cromb

Seconded: Hammington

That the report be received.

Carried

9 Status Reports

25.4.12 June 2025 Governance Report

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

A verbal update was given on the status of the play strategy work.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Johns

That the report be received.

Carried

10 Date of The Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 29 July 2025.

11 Resolution to Exclude the Public

Committee Resolution

Moved: Cromb

Seconded: Browne

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

General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Plain English Reason
25.4.13 - Legalisation and Sale of part of Mutton Town Road	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 12.30 pm and the meeting closed at 12.56 pm

Cromwell Community Board Minutes

17 June 2025

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, 17 June 2025 COMMENCING AT 2.00 pm

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

IN ATTENDANCE: T Alley (Mayor), P Kelly (Chief Executive Officer), L van der Voort (Group Manager - Planning and Infrastructure), D Rushbrook (Regional Deals Lead), S Righarts (Acting Group Manager - Community Experience), N Lanham (Acting Group Manager - Community Vision), Q Penniall (Infrastructure Manager), Z Zeelie (Statutory Property Team Leader), D McKewen (Acting Chief Financial Officer), S Reynolds (Governance Support Officer)

1 Apologies

There were no apologies.

2 Public Forum

There were no speakers for public forum.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

Committee Resolution

Moved: Laws

Seconded: Browne

That the public minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 6 May 2025 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

Note: Ms McConnell joined the meeting at 2.04 pm

4 Declarations of Interest

Members were reminded of their obligations in respect of declaring any interests.

Note: Cr Laws noted an interest in item 25.4.3 and did not take part in the discussion or vote on the item.

5 Reports

25.4.2 Road Name Approval Report - Shannon Farm

To consider a request to name eight roads in the Shannon Farm subdivision in Cromwell.

Discussion followed and there was preference for local identity references over horticultural varietals.

Road	Confirmed Name
1	Infinity Drive (approved)
2	Riggir Crescent
3	Leyser Lane (approved)
4	Malcolm Close
5	Betsy Place
6	Fortune Place
7	Springcrest Court
8	Goldrich Place

Committee Resolution

Moved: Gillespie

Seconded: Scott

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Agrees that the roads be named Infinity Drive, Leyser Lane, Riggir Crescent, Malcolm Close

Betsy Place, Fortune Place, Springcrest Court, Goldrich Place

Carried

25.4.3 Road Renaming and Naming Approval for Wooing Tree Development

To consider the renaming Kawariki Court to Plover Court and naming an unnamed road off Plover Court, Kawariki Court.

It was decided that 'Lane' was a more appropriate descriptor for a through road rather than 'Court'.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Sanford

Seconded: Browne

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Recommends to Council that Kawariki Court be renamed Plover Lane.

C. Approves the unnamed road off Plover Court be named Kawariki Lane.

Carried

25.4.4 Proposed New Lease to Cromwell Bike Park Incorporated on Nelplusultra Recreation Reserve

To consider granting a new lease to the Cromwell Bike Park Incorporated on an area of 1 Hectare (more or less) of the Neplusultra Recreation Reserve, being part of Lots 1 and 2 Deposit Plan 19357.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Laws

Seconded: Browne

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Recommends to Council to grant a lease to Cromwell Bike Park Incorporated on leased areas indicated on Figure 1 of the report of the Neplusultra Recreation Reserve, being part of Lot 2 Deposit Plan 17280 on the following terms and conditions:

· Commencement 1 July 2023

· Term Fifteen (15) years

· Right of Renewal One (1) right of renewal for another Fifteen (15) years

· Rental $1 per annum if demanded

· Rent review frequency No rent review frequency

· Outgoings 100%

· Final Expiry Date 30 June 2053

· Cancellation Clause Five (5) years advanced notice of cancellation

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

Carried

25.4.5 Land Investment Strategy

To consider final draft of the land investment strategy for recommendation to Council

The board requested that the strategy could be reviewed after 12-months and then with each election cycle.

It was considered that this strategy could serve as a template for other areas of council land in throughout the district. There was discussion around whether the document could be expanded to signal where the proceeds from land sales might be directed.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Laws

Seconded: Scott

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Notes the suggested changes on the final draft of the land investment strategy.

C. Approves the strategy and recommends to Council they adopt the land investment strategy.

D. Recommends to Council that the strategy be reviewed after 12 months and subsequently on a three-year cycle.

Carried

Note: Ms McConnell left the meeting at 3.01 pm and did not return.

25.4.6 Cromwell Financial Report for the Period Ending 31 March 2025

To consider the financial performance overview as at 31 March 2025.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Gillespie

Seconded: Browne

That the report be received.

Carried

6 Mayor’s Report

25.4.7 Mayor's Report

Her Worship the Mayor gave an update on her activities in the district over recent weeks. See attached report.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Sanford

Seconded: Browne

That the Cromwell Community Board receives the report.

Carried

Attachments

1 Mayors Report

7 Chair's Report

25.4.8 Chair's Report

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

· She noted that Cromwell Kahui Ako will disband at the end of the year, and acknowledged the achievements of this collaboration and thanked local businesses for their support which had enabled the additional support for many children with diverse needs. She noted that there was work underway to ensure the continuation of this mahi via an external trust.

· She noted that she was looking forward to Matariki celebrations with her school whānau.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Harrison

Seconded: Browne

That the report be received.

Carried

8 Members' Reports

25.4.9 Members' Reports

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

Cr Laws reported on the following:

· Had met with the Hon. Andrew Hoggard.

· Attended Long-term Plan hearings and noted the support for maintaining community halls and the presentation given by children from Poolburn School.

· Attended an Old Cromwell meeting, where the projected increases in water charges were discussed, due to the groups high water usage.

· Attended Long-term Plan deliberations and reported that the decisions made were in-line with the community's needs and wants.

· Gave an update on the May Council meeting.

· Noted that she had been an apology for the Cromwell Community House meeting.

Mr Sanford reported on the following:

· Attended Central Otago Sports Awards with Central Otago District Council.

· Attended a Business South BA5 at Highlands, hosted by Santana Minerals.

· Attended a Cromwell business network breakfast at Black Rabbit, where Julie Muir spoke on Local Water Done Well.

· Attended Nathan Wallis's presentation on Brains, supported by 45 South and Highlands.

· Attended drop-in session on the Cromwell Racecourse Reserve, held at the Cromwell service centre.

· Attended a LGNZ Community Board Zoom Meeting, where Moko Te Pania was guest speaker.

· Participated in Highland Events Rustic Run at Bannockburn Sluicing’s last weekend.

· Attended two Automobile Association District Council meetings

· Had fielded numerous queries on Local Water Done Well and had initiated discussions on the Cromwell Racecourse Reserve Management Plan.

Cr Gillespie reported on the following:

· Provided an update on Long-term Plan hearings, highlighting the substantial submissions received and addressing some of the misinformation that had been circulated.

· Acknowledged the Chairs comprehensive Community Board Chair update given at the May Council meeting.

· Attended a Hearings Panel meeting on 10 June.

· Requested that Cromwell’s heritage experts provide additional names for the road naming list, as most previous suggestions had been exhausted.

Cr Browne reported on the following:

· Attended the Zones Rippa tournament at Molyneux Park.

· Attended the monthly Automobile Association meeting, outlining the speed limit reduction on State Highway submission made by the group.

· Attended a meeting with the Cromwell Resilience Group meeting where they undertook a table top exercise with Cromwell, Bannockburn & Tarras community resilience groups.

· Attended a Community Meeting with the Cromwell Resilience Group, seeking more members and offering education to attendees on what they might be required to do in the event of a significant disaster.

· Gave an update on recent Council meetings.

· Attended a drop-in session on the Cromwell Racecourse Reserve Management Plan.

· Attended a Memorial Hall fortnightly meeting, where museum fitout had been discussed.

· Attended Long-term Plan hearings and deliberations in May.

· Attended Audit & Risk meetings in May and June.

· Had been awarded the RMA commissioner certification after taking the ‘Making Good Decisions Course’ in April.

Mr Scott reported on the following:

· Attended the open forum session on Cromwell Racecourse Reserve, and noted the good attendance.

· Attended Long-term Plan session in Alexandra, and spoke to his submission with regards to the development of the Town Centre.

· Attended a planning meeting for the Cromwell and Districts Promotions group.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Laws

Seconded: Browne

That the report be received.

Carried

9 Status Reports

25.4.10 June 2025 Governance Report

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

Staff gave an update on the Play Strategy, detailing community engagement and feedback gathering efforts. The data collected so far will help in form a draft strategy, that is planned to be open for consultation in November.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Gillespie

That the report be received.

Carried

10 Date of The Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 5 August 2025.

11 Resolution to Exclude the Public

Committee Resolution

Moved: Scott

Seconded: Laws

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

General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Plain English Reason
Ordinary Meeting - Confidential Minutes	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
25.4.11 - Proposal to Approve a New Lease with Central Speedway Cromwell Incorporated	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
25.4.12 - Gair Ave Development Update	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 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)	Commercial sensitivity To enable commercial activities To enable commercial or industrial negotiations
25.4.13 - June 2025 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 3.51 pm and the meeting closed at 4.32 pm

[1] The term Newcomer includes recent migrants, former refugees, international students, seasonal workers, plus those who have moved to our community from another part of New Zealand.


AGENDA Ordinary Council Meeting Wednesday, 30 July 2025
Date:	Wednesday, 30 July 2025
Time:	10.30 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

Report Author:	Rebecca Williams, Community Development Lead
Reviewed and authorised by:	Louise Fleck, Group Manager - People and Culture, Acting Group Manager - Community Vision

Report Author:	Garreth Robinson, Property and Facilities Manager
Reviewed and authorised by:	David Scoones, Group Manager - Community Experience

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