Agenda of Council meeting - Wednesday, 25 March 2026

Council Meeting Agenda

25 March 2026

MINUTES OF A Council Meeting OF THE Central Otago District Council
HELD AT Cromwell Service Centre, 42 The Mall, Cromwell
AND LIVE STREAMED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON Wednesday, 25 February 2026 COMMENCING AT 10:30 am

PRESENT: Cr T Paterson (Chairperson), Cr S Browne, Cr S Duncan, Cr C Laws, Cr N McLean, Cr M McPherson, Cr C Pannett, Cr C Sanders, Cr B Scott

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), Q Penniall (Group Manager - Planning, Infrastructure and Regulatory), S Righarts (Group Manager - Governance and Business Services), D Rushbrook (Director – Regional Deals), D Scoones (Group Manager - Community Experience), G Bailey (Parks and Recreation Manager), D Anderson (General Counsel), G Robinson (Property and Facilities Manager), M Burnett (Parks Officer – Strategy and Planning), Z Zeelie (Team Leader – Statutory Property), M Ridd (Statutory Property Officer), D McKewen (Systems and Corporate Accountant), G Virk (System Management Accountant), N Lanham (Economic Development Manager), A Crosbie (Policy and Strategy Lead), A Lines (Risk and Procurement Manager), G Chrystall (Community Experience Manager), W McEnteer (Governance Manager)

1 Karakia

Cr Paterson gave a karakia to begin the meeting.

2 Apologies

Apology

Resolution

Moved: Paterson

Seconded: Browne

That the apology received from Her Worship the Mayor be accepted.

Carried

3 Public Forum

There was no public forum.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

Resolution

Moved: Paterson

Seconded: Scott

That the public minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 28 January 2026 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

5 Declarations of Interest

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

6 Community Board Chair Update

26.2.2 Community Board Chair Update

Mrs Harrison, Chair of the Cromwell Community Board was unable to attend.

7 Reports

Note: Cr Duncan assumed the Chair as the Roading portfolio lead.

26.2.3 Proposed Road Stopping - Adj to 100 Roxburgh East Road, Roxburgh

To consider a proposal to stop an unformed unnamed road adjacent to 100 Roxburgh Road in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Act 1981.

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Pannett

That the Council

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

B. Approves the proposal to stop the unnamed unformed road adjacent to 100 Roxburgh East Road, as shown in appendix 1 (Proposed Road Stopping Plan), in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Act 1981, subject to:

· The proposed unformed road marked on appendix 1 to this report being stopped.

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

· The applicant paying for all cost of the road stopping including the purchase of sections 1, 3 and 4 as per the valuation shown in appendix 3.

· The stopped road parcels of land (proposed sections 1, 3, and 4) being amalgamated with the applicant’s Record of Title as per appendix 1.

· The stopped road parcel of land identified as proposed section 2 being acquired as road as per appendix 1.

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

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

Carried

Note: Cr Browne assumed the Chair as the Community Vision and Experience Portfolio lead.

26.2.4 Alexandra Golf Club Shed

To approve granting Alexandra Golf Club Ltd permission to erect a relocated greenkeepers storage shed on Recreation Reserve Section 3 SO 524226, Alexandra Golf Course, 118 Clyde-Alexandra Road, Alexandra (pursuant to delegated authority), in accordance with Section 54(1) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Resolution

Moved: McLean

Seconded: Scott

That the Council

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

B. Recommends to Council to approve and give consent of the Minister of Conservation (pursuant to delegated authority), to the erection of a relocated greenkeepers storage shed on Recreation Reserve, Alexandra Golf Course, 118 Clyde-Alexandra Road, Alexandra), in accordance with Section 54(1) of the Reserves Act 1977.

C. Approval granted on the condition that a variation to the original 1984 Lease agreement with the Alexandra Golf Club is executed by the parties to include the new shed as a listed improvement on the premises and additionally to insert the standard clauses for the removal of improvements at termination of the lease that are currently not provided for in the 1984 lease

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

Carried

26.2.5 Containers on Reserves

To consider adoption of the Containers on Reserves Policy.

During discussion it was noted that the likely value of the bond would be the cost of removing a container from a reserve, but that that would be confirmed in the fees and charges schedule.

Resolution

Moved: McLean

Seconded: Laws

That the Council

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

B. Adopts the Containers on Reserves Policy.

C. Agrees the financial security mechanism to be included in the Containers on Reserves Policy is a refundable bond.

D. And that the value of the bond be included in the Council’s Fees and Charges schedule.

Carried

26.2.6 Play Strategy

To consider the draft Play Strategy and approve it for public consultation.

It was noted that the play advocates would be present in the district from 17-19 March 2026.

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Scott

That the Council

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

B. Approves the Draft Play Strategy for public consultation.

C. Authorises the Chief Executive to make editorial and minor amendments to the Draft Play Strategy prior to consultation (where these do not change intent).

Carried

26.2.7 Cromwell Facility name - community feedback process

To consider the recommendations from the Cromwell Community Board regarding the process to engage the community and gather feedback on the English name for the new facility in Cromwell.

Resolution

Moved: Paterson

Seconded: Laws

That the Council

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

B. Agrees to ratify the recommendation from Cromwell Community Board to engage the Central Otago community over a two-week period, from 2 March, to gather feedback on an English name for the new facility in Cromwell.

C. Notes that a high-level awareness and education campaign about naming the new facility has begun due to the tight timeframe.

D. Notes that Elected Members will lead the community engagement with support from Council staff.

E. Agrees that the feedback be gathered and reviewed by the Cromwell Community Board at its April meeting and recommends a English name to Council for its 29 April meeting.

Carried

Note: Cr McPherson left the meeting at 11.19 am.

26.2.8 Granting Of New Lease To Netball Centre Incorporated At Molyneux Park Recreational Reserve

To consider granting a new lease to Central Otago Netball Centre Incorporated (the Netball Centre) on an area of 7,304 m2 more or less of the land known as Molyneux Park Recreational Reserve being legally described as all of Lot 3 DP 21404 contained in Record of Title OT13B/231 and part of Lot 2 DP 21404, contained in record of Title OT13B/230.

After discussion it was agreed that the initial part of the lease should be 18 years to acknowledge that the last lease expired in 2023. Rent review dates and the final expiry date were changed accordingly

Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Duncan

That the Council

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

B. Approves (pursuant to the Instrument of Delegation dated 12 June 2013) the Minister of Conservation’s consent in terms of Section 54 (1) of the Reserves Act 1977 to granting of a lease to the Netball Centre on leased areas indicated on Figure 2 of the report of the Molyneux Park Recreational Reserve, being 7,304 m2 more or less legally described as being all of Lot 3 DP 21404 contained in Record of Title OT13B/231 and part of Lot 2 DP 21404, contained in record of Title OT13B/230 on the following terms and conditions:

· Commencement Date: 1 July 2023

· Term: Eighteen (18) Years

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

· Rental: $260 Plus GST per annum

· Rent review frequency every Five (5) years

· Rent review dates: 1 July 2028, 1 July 2033, 1 July 2038, 1 July 2043, 1 July 2048, and 1 July 2053

· Outgoings 100%

· Final Expiry Date: 30 June 2056

· 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

Note: Cr McPherson retuned to the meeting at 11.27 am.

Note: The Deputy Mayor resumed the Chair.

Note: With the permission of the meeting, item 26.2.10 was moved earlier.

26.2.10 Financial Report for the Period Ending 31 December 2025

To consider the financial performance for the period ending 31 December 2025.

Resolution

Moved: Pannett

Seconded: McPherson

That the report be received.

Carried

26.2.9 Forecast 2 Changes for the 2025/26 Financial Year

To consider a second revised budget for the financial year 2025/26 including forecast budget changes and estimated capital expenditure projects budgets to be transferred into Annual Plan 2026/27.

Resolution

Moved: Scott

Seconded: Browne

That the Council

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

B. Authorises the second 2025/26 revised operating budgets as in table 1.

C. Authorises the second 2025/26 capital projects revised budget in table 2.

Carried

26.2.11 Adoption of the Triennial Agreement

To consider ratifying the Otago Local Authorities Triennial Agreement 2026-2029.

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Paterson

That the Council

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

B. Agrees ratify the Otago Local Government Authorities Triennial Agreement for 2026-2029.

C. Authorises the Mayor to sign the Agreement on behalf of Council.

D. Notes that the Agreement requires the Otago Mayoral Forum to identify and oversee progress on ‘regional focus areas’ – areas where a regional approach is either required or can improve outcomes for Otago.

Carried

Note: Cr Scott left the meeting at 11.54 am.

26.2.12 Attendance at the Zone 5&6 Conference

To consider giving permission for Karla Sanders to attend the Zone 5&6 Conference.

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: McLean

That the Council

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

B. Approve Karla Sanders attendance at the Zone 5&6 Conference in Christchurch.

Carried

Note: Cr Scott returned to the meeting at 11.55 am.

26.2.13 Resource Management Act Delegations

For Council to consider an updated set of delegations under the Resource Management Act 1991 (‘RMA’) and also consequential amendments including to the current Council delegations register.

Resolution

Moved: Paterson

Seconded: McPherson

That the Council

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

B. Adopts the set of RMA delegations set out in appendix one of the report.

C. Adopts the further RMA delegations set out below and the proposed amendments to the current delegations register in appendix two.

Carried

26.2.14 Update to the Register of Delegations

To consider changes to the Register of Delegations.

After discussion it was agreed that the proposed changes to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977 should be left in place. Those provisions would continue to come to Council for their consideration.

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Browne

That the Council

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

B. Adopts the proposed changes to the Register of Delegations:

· Delegates ss.69-70 and ss.159-177 of the Local Government (Water Services) Act 2025 to the Chief Executive Officer.

· Moves the waste portion of the Three Waters and Waste portfolio to Planning and Regulatory portfolio.

C. Declines the proposed changes to delegate parts of the Reserves Act 1977 to the Chief Executive Officer.

D. Notes that the changes will take effect on 26 February 2026.

Carried

26.2.15 Policies Policy Review

To consider renewing the Policies Policy for a three year period.

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Scott

That the Council

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

B. Adopts the Policies Policy.

Carried

26.2.16 Protected Disclosure (Whistleblowing) Policy Adoption

To consider the updates made to the Protected Disclosure (Whistleblowing) Policy in line with its three-yearly review.

Resolution

Moved: Paterson

Seconded: McLean

That the Council

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

B. Adopts the Protected Disclosures (Whistleblowing) Policy.

Carried

Note: Cr Sanders left the meeting at 12.20 pm and returned at 12.22 pm.

26.2.17 Quarterly Performance and Business Reporting

To consider performance and business reporting for Q2 of financial year 2025/26 (October, November, December).

Resolution

Moved: Pannett

Seconded: Browne

That the report be received and its contents noted.

Carried

26.2.18 Key Risk Report

To consider the Key Risk Register as at February 2026.

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Laws

That the report be received and its contents noted.

Carried

Note: The meeting adjourned at 12.38 pm and resumed at 1.09 pm.

Note: Cr Laws returned to the meeting at 1.15 pm.

26.2.19 Ratepayers Assistance Scheme - Letter of support

To consider providing support for the Ratepayer Assistance Scheme (RAS) and its potential benefits to the community.

During discussion it was noted that this was just an agreement in principle and that it would return to Council before any payments to the scheme were made.

Resolution

Moved: Paterson

Seconded: Browne

That the Council

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

B. Approves in principle support for establishment of the Ratepayer Assistance Scheme (RAS), subject to commitment from other key stakeholders (central government, Local Government Funding Agency and other local authorities), acceptable final development and due diligence.

C. Approves notification to the Minister for Local Government that assuming the RAS is established as envisioned, Central Otago District Council intends to:

a. Make RAS products (which may include Rates Postponement, Deferred Development Contributions and potentially IMPACT (Investment for Modernising Properties and Community Transformation loans) available to its ratepayers by joining RAS as a member.

b. Join RAS as a member requiring it to:

i) Sign up to joint and several guarantee (based on the LGFA joint and several guarantee)

ii) Support ratepayer access to RAS products through for example links on the CODC website

iii) Support information sharing arrangements between CODC and RAS

c. Consider making an equity investment in RAS in due course, noting that total equity is estimated to be $30 million to $35 million, the majority of which will come from the local government sector.

D. Notes that any commitment, beyond the notification of intent to the Minister of Local Government as outlined in resolution “C” is subject to final approval of Council upon further development of the RAS. This will include consideration of the relevant amount of equity required to be invested in the future and any consultation requirements that are needed for an equity investment consistent with that required on the establishment of the LGFA. For the avoidance of doubt the passing of resolution “C” does not commit CODC to any contribution of equity or other funding unless approved at a later date by Council.

Carried

26.2.20 Audit and Risk Committee Independent Chair Appointment

To consider the re-appointment of the current independent Audit and Risk chair, Bruce Robertson, when his 3-year term expires later this year.

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Pannett

That the Council

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

B. Agrees to reappoint Bruce Robertson as the independent Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee for a further 3-year term, From October 2026 through to October 2029.

C. Authorises Her Worship the Mayor to enter into contract negotiations with Bruce Robertson and sign on behalf of Council.

Carried

26.2.21 Capex Report on the Facility by the Lake

To provide capex updates on the Facility by the Lake Project.

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Scott

That the report be received.

Carried

8 Mayor’s Report

26.2.22 Mayor's Report

The report from Her Worship the Mayor was taken as read and the Deputy Mayor added that she had attended a meeting of the engagement group for the new Dunedin Hospital and that there had been three great A&P shows across the district in recent weeks.

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Browne

That the Council receives the report and notes its contents.

Carried

9 Status Reports

26.2.23 February 2026 Governance Report

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

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: McLean

That the report be received and its contents noted.

Carried

10 Community Board Minutes

26.2.24 Minutes of the Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 3 February 2026

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Duncan

That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Vincent Community Board Meeting held on 3 February 2026 be noted.

Carried

26.2.25 Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 4 FEBRUARY 2026

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Duncan

That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 4 April 2026 be noted.

Carried

26.2.26 Minutes of the Teviot Valley Community Board Meeting held on 5 February 2026

Resolution

Moved: McPherson

Seconded: Duncan

That the unconfirmed Minutes of the Teviot Valley Community Board Meeting held on 5 February 2026 be noted.

Carried

11 Date of Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 25 March 2026.

12 Resolution to Exclude the Public

Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: McPherson

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)(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)(c)(ii) - 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 otherwise to damage the public interest 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)	Commercial sensitivity Due to an obligation of confidence and to ensure the information avenue remains open Due to an obligation of confidence and to protect the public interest Legal professional privilege To enable commercial activities To enable commercial activities
26.2.27 - Request for Funding for Commercial Property	s7(2)(h) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities	To enable commercial activities
26.2.28 - Risk Management Update	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	To prevent use of the information for improper gain or advantage
26.2.29 - February 2026 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 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 enable commercial activities To enable commercial or industrial negotiations To prevent use of the information for improper gain or advantage
26.2.30 - Confidential Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 4 February 2026	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 1.50 pm and the meeting closed at 2.08 pm.

25 March 2026

26.3.5 Cromwell Golf Club - Request to Authorise Building Alterations and Other Improvements on Reserve Land

Doc ID: 2744162

Report Author:

Zelda Zeelie, Statutory Property Team Leader

Helen Giles, Property and Facilities Officer (Cromwell)

Garreth Robinson, Property and Facilities Manager

Reviewed and authorised by:

David Scoones, Group Manager - Community Experience

1. Purpose of Report

To consider granting permission to the Cromwell Golf Club Incorporated to:

1. Extend the current club house footprint

2. Erect a new deck outside the club house

3. Construct a new Pro Shop

on Recreation Reserve Section 4 BLK XCII Town of Cromwell, Cromwell Golf Course, 55 Neplusultra Street, Cromwell (pursuant to delegated authority), in accordance with Section 54(1) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Approves the granting of the consent of the Minister of Conservation (under delegated authority), to extend the current club house footprint, erect a new club house deck and construct a new pro shop on Recreation Reserve, Cromwell Golf Course, 55 Neplusultra Street, Cromwell, in accordance with Section 54(1) of the Reserves Act 1977.

C. Agrees that consent is granted on the condition that a variation to the original 1981 Lease agreement with the Cromwell Golf Club is executed by the parties to insert the standard clauses for the removal of improvements at termination of the lease that are currently not provided for in the 1981 lease.

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

2. Background

Cromwell Community Board Recommendation

At its meeting held on 3 March 2026 the Cromwell Community Board resolved as follows:

26.2.3 Cromwell Golf Club - Request to Authorise Building alterations and Other Improvements on Reserve Land

To consider recommending to Council to grant permission to the Cromwell Golf Club Incorporated to:

1. Extend the current club house footprint

2. Erect a new deck outside the club house

3. Construct a new Pro Shop

Recommendations

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Recommends to Council to approve the granting of the consent of the Minister of Conservation (under delegated authority), to extend the current club house footprint, erect a new club house deck and construct a new pro shop on Recreation Reserve, Cromwell Golf Course, 55 Neplusultra Street, Cromwell, in accordance with Section 54(1) of the Reserves Act 1977.

C. Recommends to Council that consent is granted on the condition that a variation to the original 1981 Lease agreement with the Cromwell Golf Club is executed by the parties to insert the standard clauses for the removal of improvements at termination of the lease that are currently not provided for in the 1981 lease.

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

The Cromwell Golf Club currently leases land situated on a Section 4 Block XCII Town of Cromwell comprising 22.279 ha.

Golf has a long-standing history in the Central Otago district, and The Cromwell Golf Course is a primary venue for physical activity and social interaction. Providing the required infrastructure allows the club to maintain the course at a high standard and deliver a safe, quality experience for both members and casual players.

To continue to improve the customer experience for the golf club users, the club are seeking approval for three proposed improvements:

1. Extend the current club house footprint

2. Erect a new deck outside the club house

3. Construct a new Pro Shop

3. Discussion

The proposal to make the three improvements, represent necessary infrastructure upgrades for the Cromwell Golf Course to enable them to further grow and prosper. The current clubrooms, whilst well used would benefit from better functionality, a new outdoor space will improve the usability of the space, and a larger Pro Shop will greatly improve the customer experience.

The three proposed improvements shown in figure 1 involve:

1. Extending the current club house footprint – this involves extending the existing clubhouse footprint to expand the kitchen area and relocate the bar and chiller adjacent to the kitchen. This reconfiguration will create a more functional and efficient operating layout for the provision of catering and beverage services to clubhouse users.

The extension also enables the construction of a new accessible toilet on the same floor level as the kitchen and bar, ensuring the clubhouse facilities are accessible to all users.

2. Erect a new deck outside the club house – includes the construction of a new outdoor deck adjacent to the clubhouse, providing an attractive and functional space for club users to enjoy the outdoor environment following their game. The deck will also create a strong physical and visual connection to the proposed hospitality improvements, enhancing the overall usability and appeal of the clubhouse facilities.

3. Construct a new Pro Shop - a new, larger pro shop allows the golf club to modernise its facilities, improve accessibility and operational efficiency, and better integrate with the wider clubhouse and course layout. The expanded space supports increased membership and visitor use by improving customer flow, enabling professional services such as coaching and club fitting, and providing a safer, more welcoming experience for all players. In addition, greater retail and storage capacity strengthens revenue generation and supports the club’s long‑term financial sustainability and competitiveness.

Figure 1: Location of proposed improvements

Attached to the report as Appendices 1 and 2 are the building plans submitted for your information.

The current lease with the Golf Club dates back to 1981. It is recommended that the standard modern clause relating to improvements on Council‑leased land at the end of a tenancy be included in the deed of variation. This clause protects the interests of both parties—Council as landlord and the Golf Club as tenant—by clarifying the status of any improvements made during the lease term. It provides that such improvements must either be removed by the tenant at termination or may, with Council’s agreement, be transferred to Council without compensation.

If the tenant fails to remove improvements at the end of the lease, Council may choose to demolish them at the tenant’s expense, unless Council elects to take ownership. As the 1981 lease does not contain these provisions, it is recommended that they be incorporated through the proposed deed of variation.

4. Financial Considerations

The decision to grant approval for the three proposed improvements does not carry any direct financial implications for the Council. All costs associated with the design, consenting, construction, and ongoing maintenance of the new shed are the sole responsibility of the applicant, the Cromwell Golf Club Inc.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

To approve the three improvements

Advantages:

· The clubhouse reconfiguration will create a more functional and efficient operating layout for the provision of catering and beverage services to clubhouse users.

· The extension also enables the construction of a new accessible toilet on the same floor level as the kitchen and bar, ensuring the clubhouse facilities are accessible to all users.

· The new deck provided an attractive and functional space for club users to enjoy the outdoor environment following their game

· The expanded Pro Shop space supports increased membership and visitor use by improving customer flow, enabling professional services such as coaching and club fitting, and providing a safer, more welcoming experience for all players

· Expanded and improved facilities help accommodate growing membership and increased visitor numbers. This supports active recreation, social interaction, and community wellbeing

· Allowing facility upgrades supports the club’s ability to remain financially viable through improved hospitality and retail operations. A more sustainable club reduces the likelihood of future financial distress, closure, or requests for council intervention or support.

· Recognises that the building is consistent with the Reserves Act 1977 and the 2013 Instrument of Delegation, ensuring due process has been followed with minimal environmental effects.

Disadvantages:

· Nil

Option 2

To not approve the three improvements.

Advantages:

· Maintains the status quo of the reserve land

Disadvantages:

· Would hinder Cromwell Golf Club’s ability to support continued membership growth and maintain its long‑term sustainability.

· Outdated or undersized facilities can detract from the overall experience of club members, casual players, and visitors.

· Other golf clubs that are allowed to modernise and expand their facilities may attract members, tournaments, and visitors away from the club. This could place the Cromwell Golf Club at a competitive disadvantage within the regional recreational and tourism landscape, resulting in lost economic and social benefits for the wider Cromwell community.

· Does not recognise the Reserves Act 1977 delegation for a structure consistent with the reserve's purpose.

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 ensuring the sustainable management of a key community recreational asset. By approving the improvements as requested, the Council supports the long-term viability of the Golf Club, protects community-owned assets from environmental degradation, and ensures the club can provide affordable recreational opportunities.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes - The recommendation is consistent with the CODC District Plan, specifically policies relating to "Open Space" and "Recreation" zones which encourage the provision of facilities that support and enhance the use of the district's reserves. It also aligns with the Economic Development Strategy by supporting Central Otago’s profile as a premier recreational and tourism destination. High-quality golf facilities are a key component of the local visitor economy, and providing for their maintenance and equipment storage ensures the long-term health of this asset.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	Not applicable due to the specialist nature of this equipment and limited supply options. The proposal has a positive impact from a sustainability perspective, as it supports the continued use and viability of an established public recreational facility by improving the functionality and efficiency of existing operations. The proposal represents a self‑funded enhancement of an existing public asset and does not create additional financial obligations for Council or ratepayers.
Risks Analysis	There are no risks to Council associated with the recommended option. Denying the consent (Option 2) would create operational and financial risk for the Cromwell Golf Club.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The proposal does not exceed any of the thresholds nor meet any of the criteria in the Significance and Engagement Policy and public consultation is not considered required. No specific Iwi engagement was undertaken as the proposal involves an operational building within an existing, highly modified recreational area. Parks and Recreation Team have been consulted. No other departments are significantly impacted. In accordance with the CODC Significance and Engagement Policy, this matter is determined to be of Low Significance. The decision does not involve a strategic asset, has no negative impact on Council's financial capacity or debt, and does not significantly change the levels of service provided to the community. Consequently, a formal public consultation process is not required. There are no negative consultation implications. The approval is a standard administrative exercise of delegated authority to support an existing community tenant in managing their operational infrastructure.

7. Next Steps

· Once the Council resolution is passed, the outcome will be formally communicated to the Cromwell Golf Club.

· Execute the Deed of Variation to include the relevant improvement clauses.

· Works on the three areas will proceed upon receipt of the formal resolution and the successful issuance of a Building Consent.

8. Attachments

Nil

25 March 2026

26.3.6 Cemeteries Bylaw

Doc ID: 2749896

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

1. Purpose of Report

To adopt the Cemeteries Bylaw 2026 and Cemeteries Handbook 2026.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Adopts the Cemeteries Bylaw 2026

C. Adopts the Cemeteries Handbook 2026.

2. Background

There are 21 Cemeteries within the Central Otago District. Of those, Council is responsible for 16, three of which are closed cemeteries.

Bylaws are reviewed every 5 years following their initial adoption then 10 years after a review.

The Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and the Local Government Act 2002 provide Council

with the ability to develop bylaws to manage activities within its cemeteries. Any new or

reviewed bylaw must follow the special consultative process and requirements specified in section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Cemeteries Handbook

The Cemeteries Handbook accompanies the Cemeteries Bylaw. The Handbook sets out rules relating to activities and behaviour in cemeteries. These rules can be amended, with community engagement, without having to amend the Bylaw itself.

This means the Handbook can be kept up to date with minor amendments and targeted consultation, rather than a full Bylaw review and Special Consultative Procedure. It was last updated in 2024.

It should be noted that Trust operated Cemeteries are not subject to this Bylaw.

At its January 2026 Meeting Council reviewed its 2020 Cemeteries Bylaw and Handbook and resolved the following.

Receives the report and accepts the level of significance.

Determines that a Bylaw is the appropriate legal mechanism for the management of Cemeteries and Burials in accordance with Section 155 of the Local Government Act.

Approves the draft Cemeteries Bylaw for public consultation.

Approves the Statement of Proposal for consultation.

Approves the updated Cemeteries Handbook.

Appoints Councils Hearings Panel to hear any submissions received and make recommendations to Council for adoption or otherwise of the Cemeteries Bylaw.

Consultation following the special consultative process was open from Monday, 2 February to Friday, 6 March 2026. Hard copies of the bylaw and submission forms were available at all Council Service Centres and Libraries.

3. Discussion

Following the required period of consultation, no submissions were received. This was not unexpected as there were only minor changes to the Bylaw. The main change was in the Cemeteries Handbook to recognise different cultural requirements for burials and provide more flexibility. This reflects the growing population diversity within the district.

The Cemeteries Bylaw 2026 is attached as Appendix 1.

The Cemeteries Handbook 2026 is attached as Appendix 2.

4. Financial Considerations

There is no financial implication from adopting this Bylaw.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Adopt the Cemeteries Bylaw 2026, and Cemeteries Handbook 2026.

Advantages:

· The public have had the opportunity to engage with the process.

Disadvantages:

· No disadvantages have been identified.

Option 2

Do not adopt the Cemeteries Bylaw 2026, and Cemeteries Handbook 2026.

Advantages:

· No advantages have been identified.

Disadvantages:

· The existing Bylaw will expire and become inoperative.

6. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities through the special consultative procedure.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Cemeteries Bylaw 2026 and Cemeteries Handbook.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	There are no perceived impacts with adopting the resolution.
Risks Analysis	There are no perceived risks in adopting the reports resolutions.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	Both the Local Government Act 2002 and the Burial and Cremations Act 1964 require public consultation for Bylaw reviews. This utilised the special consultative procedure.

7. Next Steps

The proposed Cemeteries Bylaw and Cemeteries Handbook updated on Councils website and interested parties advised.

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Cemeteries Bylaw ⇩

Appendix 2 - Cemeteries Handbook ⇩

25 March 2026

26.3.7 Cromwell Racecourse Reserve Event

Doc ID: 2736579

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 recommendation from the Cromwell Community Board allowing improvements at Cromwell Racecourse Reserve to enable large events to be undertaken within the reserve.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. That Council provides consent under clause 5 of its lease with the Central Lakes Equestrian Club for the Cromwell Racecourse Reserve to be improved to host the proposed Wheels event as per the attached plan.

2. Background

During the Development of the Cromwell Racecourse Reserve Management Plan in 2025 (the Plan) it was noted that the Cromwell Racecourse Reserve is regularly used to host local events that benefit from its large open space, central location, and flexibility of use.

Discussions have continued since the adoption of the Plan, between Council staff, Central Lakes Equestrian Club,(CLEC), (who hold a lease to manage the reserve on Councils behalf) and representative from the Wheels group, who previously were involved in the Wheels on Wanaka event to determine if the Reserve could be adapted for a similar Wheels event.

Such events are consistent with the Plan.

CLEC have confirmed their support for the Wheels event on the Racecourse Reserve starting Easter 2027 and every second year through to 2035.The North South orientation is the preferred option for the parade ground.

3. Discussion

Appendix 1 shows the revised layout plan that enable the proposed Wheels event and continued equestrian use with future plans for sports ground development all achievable.

The location of the Machinery digging area is at #11 with #13 being a viewing embankment.

This area will be dug up and re-levelled after the event each time to minimise any ongoing disruption to other reserve users.

Area #12 is the permanent Machinery Show area or parade ground and is large enough to have full sized rugby field in the centre. It can also be used for other events such as concerts.

The reimaged the layout sees the removal of one sports field which is not seen as material in the overall scheme of things and enables existing usage and future sports ground development.

Under the lease agreement Council has with CLEC clause 5 states.

The lessee will not make any structural alterations to any buildings or other improvements without the prior consent of Council in writing.

At its March 2026 meeting the Cromwell Community Board resolved. Full report Appendix 2.

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Recommends to Council its support of the proposed Wheels event at the Cromwell Racecourse Reserve and that Council provides its consent for the associated improvements under clause 5 of its lease with the Central Lakes Equestrian Club.

It is appropriate for the Council to support the Cromwell Community Boards recommendation and provide Council approval under the lease for the proposed improvements.

4. Financial Considerations

There are no financial implications for Council in this resolution.

5. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Recommends that Councils provide its consent for the improvements under clause 5 of its lease with the Central Lakes Equestrian Club.

Advantages:

· Decision is consistent with the Cromwell Racecourse Reserve Management Plan.

· Consistent with the lease Council has with Central Lakes Equestrian Club.

· Enables larger events to happen with minimal impact on future sports ground development plans.

Disadvantages:

· Do disadvantages have been identified.

Option 2

The Council does not support the proposal or the approval through the lease of improvements at the Racecourse.

Advantages:

· No advantages have been identified.

Disadvantages:

· Decision not consistent with the Reserve Management Plan or lease.

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 ensuring the Cromwell Racecourse Reserve is available for community events.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Cromwell Racecourse Reserve Management Plan 2025.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No impacts are anticipated through adopting this resolution.
Risks Analysis	Minimal risk to Council is anticipated through adopting this resolution.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The Reserve Management Plan was consulted on in 2025, and the recommendation is consistent with its policies.

7. Next Steps

Central Lakes Equestrian Club will be advised of Councils decision.

8. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Amended Racecourse Layout. ⇩

Appendix 2 - Cromwell Community Board March 2026 Meeting. ⇩

25 March 2026

26.3.8 Roxburgh Entertainment Centre Rebuild Project Location Options Investigation

Doc ID: 2731443

Report Author:

Tara Bates, Property Officer

Garreth Robinson, Property and Facilities Manager

Reviewed and authorised by:

David Scoones, Group Manager - Community Experience

1. Purpose of Report

To consider a submission for alternate site options for the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre project.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

2. Approves one of the three following options a), b) or c) or an alternative option as decided by Council:

a) Council approves to proceed with the design and construction of the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre on the existing site as planned.

b) Council approves to:

i. Place a hold on the design procurement for the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre rebuild; and

ii. Further investigate the potential acquisition of land at 130 Scotland Street, including due diligence on costs, risks and implications; and

iii. Explore a change in project scope to include the development of a new library, service centre, and other community or commercial spaces within an expanded site area of approximately 3,400m2.

c) Council approves to:

i. Confirm that the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre rebuild will proceed as planned on the existing site; and

ii. Further investigate the potential acquisition of land at 130 Scotland Street for the future development of a new library, service centre, and/or other community or commercial facilities as a potential Stage 2 project; and

iii. Proceed with community consultation to determine the level of support for a Stage 2 precinct development as part of the future Long Term Plan processes.

3. Authorises the chief executive to do all that is necessary to give effect to the resolution.

2. Background

At its meeting on 1 December 2025 Council resolved the following:

That the Council

B. Approves the following recommendations from the Teviot Valley Community Board taking into account the information on public feedback and opinion poll results tabled at the meeting:

That Council

(a) Approve for the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre Project Steering Group to investigate current and alternative options for the location of the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre rebuild.

(b) Approve that once the investigations are complete, a report be provided to the Teviot Valley Community Board and Council in March 2026 outlining the findings on current and alternative location options, to enable a decision on whether to change the project scope.

C. Notes that the recent draft Teviot Valley Community Plan should feed into this investigation phase.

D. Authorises the Chief Executive to do all that is necessary to give effect to Council’s recommendation.

Carried

A formal Request for Proposal for Alternate Locations for the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre was released on 28 January and submissions closed on the 10 February.

The following information was required from submissions to be considered:

One submission was received, copy attached as Appendix 1.

3. Discussion

Summary of Submission

The single submission does not propose a new site. It offers adjacent privately owned land (approx. 1,406 m²) at 130 Scotland Street for purchase. If acquired, the total site area (existing 2,000 m² plus proposed) would be approx. 3,406 m².

See aerial map below which shows the existing L-shaped site currently owned by Council outlined and shaded in blue and the proposed site for purchase outlined in red.

Aerial view of a neighborhood

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Key submission points:

· The submitter offers land with a non‑heritage old hotel building (demolishable).

· An adjacent former café building at 124 Scotland Street, also owned by the submitter, is not included in the offer.

· The submitter proposes using the extra land to build a much larger community hub, potentially including:
– indoor sports court
– large modern library
– breakout rooms
– I‑SITE
– cyclist amenities (showers, bike/EV charging)
– Council offices/hot desks
– expanded community spaces

· The submitter suggests that the community hub has potential to be an active site with cost recovery options.

Project Scope and Process Considerations

· Council has no evidence the community needs or wants to spend additional funds and take additional time to build a significantly larger building than the former REC.

· The process for establishing what is required for the new REC is during the design investigation phase which will be led by an architect. An architect will have the expertise and experience to collate and interpret data about current available facilities, the previous use of the building and feedback from community stakeholders in order to develop a concept design.

· Moving the library and service centre into a new building has not been formally considered by Council or the community and it represents a major project scope change.

· Any such changes would require LTP consultation, new funding, and extensive feasibility work before the building design phase could start.

· If Council wishes, expanded facilities could be explored as a Stage 2 future precinct project, allowing the REC rebuild to proceed now without delay.

Time and cost implications

Cost

The current insurance settlement for the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre is approximately $6,400,000. This is based on replacing a building of similar size to the former facility, which was just over 1,000 m².

The acquisition of land and demolition costs are estimated at a minimum of $800,000- $900,000. This is based on the rateable value for the land and buildings as the purchase price is unknown but likely to be greater than rateable value.

If the project scope was extended to include a new service centre, library, RSA room and Memorial Hall this would mean a minimum building size increase of approximately 700 m². To construct a new building of the same size and service level would cost an estimated $4,200,000, based on a commercial build rate of $6,000 per m² (excluding design fees). The true additional cost of the extended project scope is unknown.

These costs will not be covered by the insurance settlement and would require new funding. However, some cost could be offset from the sale of the Council service centre/library building which has a rateable value of $760,000.

Time

The current REC project is estimated to be completed around mid-late 2028 subject to any design changes.

If Council decided to proceed with further investigation and inclusion for the new project proposal in the Draft LTP 2027-37 public consultation process it would put the REC project on hold for at least 15 months.

If Council then decided to proceed with the proposed acquisition of land and increased project scope it will take significantly more time for feasibility work, exploration of funding streams and design and construction due to the increased size and complexity of the building.

It is estimated that the minimum delay to the opening of a new facility would be 2-3 years.

Summary of alignment with relevant community goals in the Teviot Valley Community Plan

Community Goal / Action	Existing Site	Alternate Site
Strong Community Spirit	✔ Strong: Potential for flexible spaces, cinema, café, breakout rooms, outdoor areas.	✔✔ Very strong: larger footprint allows more community functions.
Library Expansion / Remote Working	✔ Already provided by the existing library and service centre. Limited opportunity for expansion.	✔ Potentially strong but duplicates current facilities unless relocated.
Youth Spaces	✔ Good: potential for youth space and library support.	✔✔ Very strong: greater flexibility and more potential interior and exterior space for tech library and breakout rooms.
Recreation & Active Lifestyles	✔ Moderate: hall and flexible event space.	✔✔ High: indoor sports, outdoor green space, cyclist hub.
Tourism & Destination Appeal	✔ Moderate: events-based appeal.	✔✔ Moderate–High: visitor amenities (EV chargers, i‑SITE, toilets). These are ambitious suggestions which would need to be considered in a wider context including existing facilities.

Risk Register — Alternate Site (130 Scotland Street plus existing site)

Risk Category	Description	Risk Level
Scope Creep	Expanded facilities not in approved REC scope; risks loss of focus.	High
Governance & Decision Path	Requires LTP amendment and consultation; earliest start for feasibility and building design phase July 2027.	High
Acquisition Risk	Land purchase required; final cost uncertain; no binding agreement.	High
Capital Funding Gap	Costs will exceed insurance; significant additional funding required.	High
Programme Delay	Minimum 15‑month delay plus extended design and construction period. Estimated 2-3 years delay to opening.	High
Existing Structures / Demolition	Asbestos and demolition cost variability.	Medium–High
Community Mandate	Only one submission received; no clear evidence of wider support.	High
Geotech / Contamination	Unknown ground conditions; potential cost/time impact.	Medium–High
Operating Cost Increase	Larger building increases OPEX and staffing needs.	Medium–High
Changes in Local Government	Time delay means election cycles, councils amalgamation, or local government policy reform may alter priorities and funding.	High
Market Escalation	Delay increases construction inflation exposure.	High
Loss of Seasonal Worker Accommodation	The old hotel currently provides 14 beds used by seasonal workers at times. Demolition removes these beds, potentially impacting local employers and accommodation supply.	High
Commercial Competition	Submitter is retaining the café site at 124 Scotland Street. Any Council‑owned café/activity space in a new hub would face direct competition, reducing revenue potential and activation benefits.	Medium–High

Comparison of Existing vs Alternate Site

Pros and Cons – Existing Site vs Alternate Site (130 Scotland Street Offer)

Criteria	Existing Site (2,000 m²)	Alternate Site – 130 Scotland Street (3,406 m² combined)
Ownership / Control	Council-owned; no purchase cost.	Privately owned; purchase required (GV value approximately $530,000). Property owners expectation of purchase price is unknown.
Site Readiness	Cleared and ready to build.	Existing buildings require demolition and site to be cleared (Approximately $350,000).
Programme Status	Approved scope; design can start immediately.	Requires new budget and public consultation in Draft Long Term Plan 2027-37; earliest start for building design etc July 2027. Due to the increased scale and complexity of the project scope feasibility work, design and construction will take significantly longer than the current project and delay opening of the facility further.
Design Flexibility	L-shaped but workable; supports flexible hub, cinema, breakout spaces.	Larger/regular site; supports additional facilities beyond REC scope.
Cost Impact	Within $6.4m insurance settlement.	Significant additional cost and new funding required.
Community Activation Potential	Strong for REC needs.	Higher potential but no community mandate; major scope expansion.
Risk Profile	Lower cost and time risk.	High cost, governance, schedule, and funding risk.

4. Financial Considerations

The final cost implications cannot be confirmed for the proposal submitted until further investigation and project scope is confirmed. But there will be a significant increase of budget required estimated at a minimum of $5,000,000-$6,000,000 for land acquisition, demolition of buildings and an increased building footprint to be funded in addition to the insurance settlement.

5. Feedback from Community Boards

A report went to the Teviot Valley Community Board on 19 March 2026 to consider the submission for an alternate site.

The Board’s recommendation will be tabled prior to this meeting.

6. Options

Option 1

Council confirms approval to proceed with the design and construction of the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre on the existing site as planned.

Advantages:

· The site is owned by Council and is cleared and ready for development.

· There is no additional cost associated with purchase of land, demolition of buildings and other due diligence costs associated with new land acquisition.

· There will be no further time delays in proceeding with design procurement and design investigation.

· No further approvals are required until a concept plan has been developed.

· Over 50% of community who responded to an online survey on Lets Talk supported rebuilding on the existing site.

· The site provides sufficient size and flexibility to build a new and improved facility that the community can be proud of.

· The site and planned REC will align with many of the relevant community goals in the Draft Teviot Valley Community Plan.

· Lowest time and financial risk option.

Disadvantages:

· A larger site may provide more development options, a broader community hub concept, and stronger alignment with some goals of the Community Plan

· Does not allow for co-location of library, service centre, or other community facilities unless funded separately in future.

Option 2

Council approves to:

1. Place a hold on the design procurement for the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre rebuild; and

2. Further investigate the potential acquisition of land at 130 Scotland Street, including due diligence on costs, risks, and implications; and

3. Explore a change in project scope to include the development of a new library, service centre, and other community or commercial spaces within an expanded site area of approximately 3,400 m²

Advantages:

· The proposed larger site has more options for development and the potential to create a larger community hub in one location incorporating new council offices and library and multiple community spaces.

· Strong alignment with a broader interpretation of the Draft Teviot Valley Community Plan, particularly around recreation, youth, and destination appeal.

· Opportunity to consolidate multiple Council and community functions into one modern community hub precinct.

Disadvantages:

· The alternate site submission introduces significantly more cost, delays and risks with an increased project scope.

· The acquisition and demolition costs are estimated at over $1,000,000 and cost for additional m2 to incorporate a council offices/library etc to match the existing facility is estimated at $4,200,000. Other funding sources will be required.

· There is currently no clear community mandate for this proposal as only one submission was received by the actual owner of the property offered for sale. Community consultation will be required if further investigation is to proceed.

· If the community did want to pursue this option extensive feasibility work would need to be carried out and budget estimates and funding options included in the Draft Long Term Plan 2027-37.

· The minimum time delay to the current project would be at least 15 months to allow for community consultation for the LTP until the feasibility and building design work could start.

· Real risk that, after delays and investigations, the community may not support the expanded proposal through the LTP process.

· Introduces high governance and political risk: future election cycles, potential amalgamation, or government policy changes could alter priorities.

· Loss of 14 seasonal worker accommodation beds currently in the old hotel if demolished.

· The retained café site at 124 Scotland Street could compete directly with any café or commercial activation within the new hub.

· Increases project complexity, procurement risk, market escalation exposure, and OPEX costs.

Option 3

Council approves to:

1. Confirm that the Roxburgh Entertainment Centre rebuild will proceed as planned on the existing site; and

2. Further investigate the potential acquisition of land at 130 Scotland Street for the future development of a new library, service centre, and/or other community facilities as a potential Stage 2 project; and

3. Proceed with community consultation to determine the level of support for a Stage 2 precinct development as part of future Long-Term Plan processes.

Advantages:

· Does not delay the current REC project design process.

· There is no current clear mandate that the community want to spend additional money on this option so this will allow more time for the community to have their say.

· Enables thorough feasibility work, cost analysis, and design exploration before committing to a significantly expanded scope.

· Maintains flexibility: Council may preserve the opportunity for a future precinct without impacting the current project.

· Allows Council to approach any acquisition strategically, with long-term planning rather than urgency.

Disadvantages:

· Running two parallel workstreams increases overall project complexity and requires additional resources which will stretch current Council resources.

· Investigating relocating the library, service centre, or other existing facilities may be seen as unnecessary duplication.

· Community may experience consultation fatigue (REC consultation, Teviot Valley Community Plan, RFP feedback).

· Creates a risk of raised community expectations if Stage 2 proves unaffordable or unsupported.

· Future land purchase or Stage 2 investment may still face significant funding challenges, as it is outside the scope of the insured rebuild.

If Stage 2 proceeds in future years, demolition would still result in the loss of seasonal worker accommodation currently provided in the old hotel (14 beds).

7. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by exploring a community-led proposal for an alternative location for the new Roxburgh Entertainment Centre that could better serve the community.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Any changes to the current project scope which will impact project cost and timing will require public consultation and to be considered
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	The construction of the Entertainment Centre on the existing or an alternative site will not impact on sustainability of the environment.
Risks Analysis	See full list of risks associated with the alternate location proposal above. Risks will be managed by project planning and close project management. Any additional risks associated with change of location will be identified during the investigation and will be considered by the Board and Council before final approval is confirmed.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	Any changes to the current project scope which will impact project cost and timing will require public consultation through the 2027-37 draft LTP process.

8. Next Steps

25 March - Council consider all options at their meeting on 25 March and make a decision whether to proceed or put a hold on the current project for further investigations.

From 25 March - If Council make the decision to allow the REC project to proceed the design procurement process will continue as planned in April 2026 with an architect expected to be appointed in May.

9. Attachments

Appendix 1 - RFP Submission Roxburgh Entertainment Centre Alternate Locations 90226.pdf ⇩

25 March 2026

26.3.9 Notification of Waitaki District Council's Request to Join Southern Waters

Doc ID: 2752396

Report Author:	Peter Kelly, Chief Executive Officer
Reviewed and authorised by:	Peter Kelly, Chief Executive Officer

1. Purpose of Report

To consider approval for Waitaki District Council to rejoin Southern Waters, approval for documentation to establish the Joint Council Controlled Organisation (CCO) and its incorporation as a company and to confirm the Council’s two representatives on the Southern Waters Stakeholders’ Representative Group (SRG).

The report has several attachments including:

To allow Waitaki to rejoin Southern Waters:

a. Notification of Waitaki District Council’s request to join Southern Waters.

b. Deed of Accession and Amendment to the Commitment Agreement.

c. Deed of Accession to the Deed of Amendment and Cost Sharing.

To establish the CCO and incorporate it as a company:

d. Southern Waters Limited Constitution.

e. Southern Waters Limited Shareholders’ Agreement.

f. Southern Waters CCO – Elected Members Role

This report and attached documentation will be presented to the Central Otago and Clutha District Councils at meetings on 25 March and 1 April 2026, respectively. All three Councils need to resolve to approve Waitaki rejoining Southern Waters and

The purpose of the report is for Council to:

a. Receive and approve the attached request by Waitaki District Council to rejoin Southern Waters.

b. Resolve that a council-controlled organisation jointly owned by Central Otago District Council, Clutha District Council, Gore District Council and Waitaki District Council be incorporated under the Companies Act 1993.

c. Agree to subscribe for 100 Class A Shares in Southern Waters Limited on incorporation.

d. Approve and adopt the Southern Waters Limited Constitution and Shareholders’ Agreement.

e. Approve Bruce Gemmell as the initial director of Southern Waters Limited, on the terms set out more particularly in the Shareholders’ Agreement.

f. Establish a Stakeholders’ Representative Group as a Joint Committee with Central Otago District Council, Clutha District Council, Gore District Council and Waitaki District Council.

g. Appoint the Mayor and nominate Cr Cheryl Laws as the Council’s members on the Stakeholders’ Representative Group.

h. Delegate to the Mayor and Cr Cheryl Laws the powers, functions and duties necessary to participate in the Stakeholders’ Representative Group and to carry out the members’ responsibilities set out in the Stakeholders’ Representative Group’s Terms of Reference.

i. Confirm it will proceed to prepare and negotiate a Transfer Agreement with Southern Waters Limited in a similar form to that set out in Schedule 6 of the Shareholders’ Agreement.

j. Delegate to the Chief Executive the power and authority to:

i. Give notice to Southern Waters Limited of the Council’s nominees to the Stakeholders’ Representative Group.

ii. Approve minor amendments to and execute all documentation referred to above (other than the Transfer Agreement).

iii. Commence preparation and negotiation of the Transfer Agreement on behalf of and subject to final approval by the Council and

iv. do all things and enter all documents that are otherwise necessary to give effect to the above resolutions.

2. Executive Summary

On 3 October 2025 the Department for Internal Affairs (DIA) adopted the Southern Waters WSDP and joint CCO model. Since this time the Council Executive Group or CEG (composed of Mayors, elected member representatives and Chief Executives) and the Southern Waters project team, including the Establishment Chair and Programme Director, have been developing the legal documentation to establish the Joint CCO as part of the agreed implementation plan.

Waitaki District Council resolved to rejoin Southern Waters on 24 February 2026 as provided for in Southern Waters’ joint WSDP.

That decision requires approval by Gore, Central Otago and Clutha District Councils.

The following key documents are attached with this report for adoption by Central Otago District Council and the other Southern Waters shareholder Councils:

a. Deeds of Accession pursuant to which Waitaki District Council will become a party to the existing Commitment Agreement and Cost Sharing Deed.

b. Constitution of Southern Waters Limited.

c. Shareholders’ Agreement which also includes the terms of reference for the Stakeholders’ Representative Group and a template Transfer Agreement.

Once the Shareholders’ Agreement, Constitution and Deeds of Accession have been approved by the existing shareholding councils they will be presented to Waitaki District Council for adoption. Once agreed, the Chief Executives will, under Council delegation, execute all documentation to stand up the Southern Waters CCO.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Receives and approves the request from Waitaki District Council to join Southern Waters Attachment 1.

C. Notes Morrison Low’s financial analysis of Waitaki District Council joining Southern Waters.

D. Approves and enters into the Deed of Accession and Amendment to the Commitment Agreement to be entered into between Central Otago District Council, Clutha District Council, Gore District Council and Waitaki District Council in Attachment 2.

E. Approves and enters the Deed of Accession to the Deed of Amendment and Cost Sharing to be entered into between Central Otago District Council, Clutha District Council, Gore District Council and Waitaki District Council in Attachment 3.

F. Resolves that a council-controlled organisation jointly owned by Central Otago District Council, Clutha District Council, Gore District Council and Waitaki District Council be incorporated under the Companies Act 1993 and registered as Southern Waters Limited for the purposes of delivering water services.

G. Subscribes for 100 Class A Shares in Southern Waters Limited.

H. Approves and adopts the Constitution for Southern Waters Limited in Attachment 4.

I. Approves and enters into the Shareholders’ Agreement relating to Southern Waters Limited in the form or substantially the form in Attachment 5.

J. Approves Bruce Gemmell as the initial director of Southern Waters Limited, on the terms set out more particularly in the Shareholders’ Agreement.

K. Establish a Stakeholders’ Representative Group as a Joint Committee with Central Otago District Council, Clutha District Council, Gore District Council and Waitaki District Council with the Terms of Reference set out in Schedule 4 of the Shareholders’ Agreement in Attachment 5.

L. Appoints two representatives as the Council’s members on the Stakeholders’ Representative Group, being the mayor and Cr Cheryl Laws, as notified by or on behalf of the Council to Southern Waters Limited in accordance with the Shareholders’ Agreement from time to time.

M. Delegates to its Stakeholders’ Representative Group members the powers, functions and duties necessary to participate in the SRG and to carry out the members’ responsibilities set out in the Terms of Reference.

N. Prepare and negotiate a Transfer Agreement with Southern Waters Limited in a substantially similar form and having regard to the principles set out in Schedule 6 of the Shareholders’ Agreement in Attachment 5.

O. Delegates to the Chief Executive the power and authority to, on behalf of the Council:

i. give notice to Southern Waters Limited of the Council’s nominees to the Stakeholders’ Representative Group.

ii. approve minor amendments to and execute all documentation referred to above (other than the Transfer Agreement).

iii. commence preparation and negotiation of a Transfer Agreement on behalf of and subject to final approval by the Council and

iv. do all things and enter all documents that are otherwise necessary to give effect to the above resolutions.

3. Background

Otago and Southland councils have worked collaboratively to identify and evaluate water services delivery models. Central Otago, Clutha and Gore District Councils agreed to form the Southern Waters Joint Council-Controlled Organisation in August 2025. The Secretary for Local Government accepted the Southern Waters joint WSDP and preferred option to establish a Joint CCO on 3 October 2025.

Since October 2025 the three Councils have progressed several activities to implement the WSDP and establish the Southern Waters joint CCO, including:

a. Appointing external advisors including Wynn Williams (legal workstream), Bancorp (finance and debt workstream) and Sheffield (key leadership recruitment).

b. Completing five workshops with staff across the three Councils on governance, finance, asset management and operations, people, culture and communication/customer experience, and data and digital.

c. Appointing an Establishment Chair and Programme Director to Southern Waters.

d. Progressing the development of the Southern Waters Shareholders’ Agreement and Constitution with Wynn Williams between December 2025 and March 2026.

On 17 March 2026 Gore District Council resolved the above recommendations to approve Waitaki District Council rejoining Southern Waters and to adopt the Constitution and Shareholders Agreement. Mayor Bell and Cr Neville Phillips were also confirmed as the Gore District Council representatives on Stakeholders’ Representative Group.

4. Discussion

Waitaki District Council’s request to rejoin Southern Waters

On 24 February 2026, Waitaki District Council resolved to request to rejoin Southern Waters as a shareholder council (see attachment 1).

Waitaki District Council 2026/49

Moved: Mayor Mel Tavendale

Seconded: Councillor Frans Schlack

That Council:

Resolves to request to join Southern Waters to deliver water services, this resolution being irrespective of other Council decisions.

Admitting the Waitaki District Council would increase the water entity’s scale and expand its service area, likely strengthening Southern Waters' long-term financial and operational capacity.

For example, the 10 July 2025 report to Central Otago District Council by Morrison Low conservatively indicated $627m in savings by 2054 across all four Southern Waters Councils. This compares with an updated report by Morrison Low on 12 August 2025 where the levels of savings had been reduced to approximately $392 million by 2054 without Waitaki.

The Southern Waters WSDP specifically provided for work with Waitaki District Council to enable that council to rejoin. Under the proposed governance arrangements, any new council can only become a shareholder if all existing shareholder councils agree to its admission.

This requirement is reflected in the attached Shareholders’ Agreement, which provides that new shareholders may only be admitted with the unanimous approval of the existing shareholder councils.

2. Subject to Council approving Waitaki District Council to rejoin Southern Waters:

a. The attached Deed of Accession and Amendment to the Commitment Agreement would need to be signed by all parties (see attachment 2)

b. The attached Deed of Accession to the Deed of Amendment and Cost Sharing would need to be signed by all parties (see attachment 3)

c. Waitaki District Council would approve and sign the Shareholders’ Agreement and Constitution, the same as the existing councils.

d. Waitaki would transfer its water services responsibilities, assets and liabilities to Southern Waters through a Transfer Agreement at the agreed go-live date.

e. Waitaki would hold shares in Southern Waters and appoint representatives to the Stakeholders’ Representative Group (SRG).

The proposed Shareholders’ Agreement already includes Waitaki District Council as a party for drafting purposes, noting that its admission remains subject to formal approval by the existing Southern Waters shareholding councils.

Foundational CCO Documents for Approval.

The establishment of Southern Waters requires several legal and governance documents that set out how the new water services organisation will operate and how the shareholding councils will work together.

These documents form the legal and governance framework for how Southern Waters will operate and how the shareholder councils will work to implement the Southern Waters’ joint WSDP and meet the requirements of the Local Government (Water Services) Act 2025.

All the following documentation needs to be adopted to progress the establishment of the Southern Waters CCO. While the Transfer Agreement is included in the pack, it should be considered as a template only and will be further developed and negotiated by each council once the CCO has been incorporated.

*Documents for approval:*
Deed of Accession and Amendment to Commitment Agreement (see attachment 2)	Waitaki District Council will become a party to the Commitment Agreement following its decision to rejoin Southern Waters on 24 February 2026. Amendments have been made to Schedule 1 of the Commitment Agreement to include Waitaki’s details and to align the various project teams/reporting lines with current practice.
Deed of Accession to Deed of Amendment and Cost Sharing (see attachment 3)	WDC will become a party to the Deed of Amendment and Cost Sharing as above.
Constitution (see attachment 4)	Sets out how Southern Waters will be governed, including its share structure, shareholder rights and meetings, and duties of directors. Filed with the Companies Office on incorporation. The Constitution is based on a DIA template and incorporates changes agreed through the Project Steering Group and the CEG.
Shareholders’ Agreement (see attachment 5)	Sets out the rights and obligations of each shareholding council of Southern Waters in relation to governance and decision-making, and other rights and obligations that the shareholders will owe to each other. Also provides for the formation of the Stakeholders’ Representative Group (comprising shareholding council, mana whenua and rural water stakeholder representatives) that will be responsible for overseeing the Statement of Expectations, appointing and overseeing the board of Southern Waters, reviewing the performance of Southern Waters, and considering Reserved Matters. The Stakeholders’ Representative Group’s Terms of Reference are set out in Schedule 4 to the Shareholders’ Agreement. Waitaki District Council is included as a party to the attached Shareholders’ Agreement for drafting purposes, noting that its admission to Southern Waters remains subject to formal approval by Central Otago, Clutha and Gore District Councils. The Shareholders’ Agreement is based on a DIA template and incorporates changes agreed through the Project Steering Group and the CEG.
Transfer Agreement	Provides for the transfer of each council's water services assets, obligations and responsibilities to Southern Waters and includes: · matters being/not being transferred. · shared interest arrangements and interface governance between each council and Southern Waters. · transition and ad hoc services; and · charging and revenue collection. This is a template only which will be appended to the Shareholders’ Agreement (in Schedule 6) and used as the starting point for each shareholding council to populate and finalise, in agreement with Southern Waters Limited, after incorporation. The Transfer Principles in Part A of Schedule 6 of the Shareholders’ Agreement will underpin that process. The Transfer Agreement is based on a DIA template and incorporates changes agreed through the Project Steering Group and the CEG.

Stakeholder Representative Group

Each Shareholding Council will appoint two members to the SRG one of whom must be an elected member of the relevant Shareholding Council. Should the Shareholder Councils increase beyond four, the number of members from each Council will reduce to one.

Under the preferred option, Council will appoint the mayor and nominate a second representative as the Council’s members on the SRG. Council will also delegate to the mayor and second representative the powers, functions and duties necessary to participate and to carry out the members’ responsibilities set out in the SRG Terms of Reference.

Mana whenua and rural water

The Shareholders’ Agreement requires the SRG to engage with Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu to develop a process for appointing up to two mana whenua representatives. This process must include protocols for their selection, appointment, and replacement, and the proposal must be presented to the Shareholders for approval.

Similarly, the SRG must engage with rural water scheme stakeholders to develop a process for their representation. This process must also include protocols for selection, appointment, and replacement, and the proposal must be presented to the Shareholders for approval.

If there are more than four shareholding councils of Southern Waters Limited at any time the two mana whenua representatives would reduce to one.

5. Financial Considerations

Elected members have previously received analysis from Morrison Low regarding Waitaki District Council’s involvement with Southern Waters.

6. Feedback from Community Boards

N/A

7. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Council agrees to resolve the recommendations set out within this report which will enable Waitaki District Council’s to join Southern Waters and establish the Southern Waters Joint CCO.

Advantages:

· Consistent with previous decisions by Council as part of the development of the Southern Waters joint WSDP and its acceptance by the Secretary for Local Government on 3 October 2025.

· Morrison Low analysis indicates greater financial savings, conservatively estimated at $627m by 2054, can be achieved across the four Southern Waters Councils (Gore, Central Otago, Clutha and Waitaki) when compared with the three Councils approximately $392m savings to 2054 (Gore, Central Otago and Clutha only).

· The Shareholders’ Agreement and Constitution have been discussed by the Southern Waters Project Steering Group and Council Executive Group on several occasions since December 2025. The attached documents are consistent with these discussions and direction.

· The attached documents have been prepared and reviewed by Wynn Williams who consider they are fit for purpose and meet the intentions of the shareholder councils.

· Allows Councils to progress the establishment of the Southern Waters CCO, to onboard Waitaki District Council within the agreed WSDP and to work towards to go-live date of 1 July 2027.

· Gore District Council resolved to approve Waitaki District Council rejoining Southern Waters and the attached Constitution and Shareholders Agreement on 17 March 2026.

Disadvantages:

· Less time to consider the proposed additional changes to the attached Shareholders’ Agreement and Constitution and the implications of the Deeds of Accession.

Option 2

The Council does not approve the request by Waitaki District Council’s to join Southern Waters but agrees the attached Constitution and Shareholders’ Agreement.

Advantages:

· Consistent with timeframe for the development of the Southern Wates joint WSDP accepted by the Secretary for Local Government on 3 October 2025.

· The Shareholders’ Agreement and Constitution have been discussed by the Southern Waters Project Steering Group and CEG on several occasions since December 2025. The attached documents are consistent with these discussions.

· The attached documents have been prepared and reviewed by Wynn Williams who consider they reflect the intent of Southern Waters and are fit for purpose.

· Allows Councils to progress the establishment of the Southern Waters CCO.

Disadvantages:

· Inconsistent with the joint WSDP accepted by the Secretary for Local Government on 3 October 2025, to enable Waitaki District Council join Southern Waters if the Central Otago, Clutha and Gore District Councils are satisfied that requirements set out in the joint WSDP and Commitment Agreement are met.

· Less financial savings and benefits accrued through a three Council model ($392m savings to 2054) compared with a four Council model which is conservatively estimated at $627m by 2054.

· Potential reputational risk with Waitaki District Council, Government and/or future Southern Waters directors who are likely to be more attracted to a four Council CCO.

· Less time to consider the proposed additional changes to the attached Shareholders’ Agreement and Constitution and the implications of the Deeds of Accession.

Option 3

Council does not agree the recommendations set out within this report and does not approve Waitaki District Council rejoining Southern Waters and does not approve the Constitution or Shareholders’ Agreement.

Advantages:

· Council has potentially more time to consider the proposed additional changes to the attached Shareholders’ Agreement and Constitution and the implications of the Deeds of Accession. However, this would increase the risk in not achieving the 1 July 2027 go live date for Southern Waters.

Disadvantages:

· Inconsistent with the recommendations and review of the Constitution and Shareholders’ Agreement by the Council Executive Group, Chief Executives, Southern Waters Project Team and legal advisors.

· Less financial savings and benefits accrued through a three Council model ($392m savings to 2054) compared with a four Council model conservatively estimated at $627m by 2054.

· Increased legal costs associated with any additional review of the Shareholders’ Agreement and Constitution.

· Likely reputational risk with Waitaki District Council, Government and/or future Southern Waters directors who are likely to be more attracted to a four Council CCO.

· Would likely delay the establishment of the Southern Waters CCO beyond 1 July 2027.

8. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This report enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by considering this application against Council policy.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Matters within this report are consistent with the Joint Water Services Delivery Plan which was agreed by the Secretary for Local Government on 3 October 2025.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	Matters within this report are consistent with the Joint Water Services Delivery Plan which was agreed by the Secretary for Local Government on 3 October 2025.
Risks Analysis	The attached Shareholders’ Agreement (including Transfer Agreement) and Constitution has been developed by lawyers Wynn Wiliams based on templates provided by the DIA and informed by guidance from the CEG.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The adoption of documentation to establish Southern Waters Limited is necessary to implement the Council’s previous decisions to adopt a joint water services delivery model and is a key implementation step identified in the Joint Water Services Delivery Plan. These previous decisions have already been subject to public consultation and engagement under the Local Government (Water Services Preliminary Arrangements) Act 2024. The establishment and composition of the SRG will further facilitate mana whenua and rural water scheme stakeholder engagement.

9. Next Steps

This report will be considered by Clutha District Council on 1 April 2026. Subject to the three shareholding Councils approving the following matters, a similar report will be presented to Waitaki District Council most likely in early April:

a. Waitaki District Council’s request to join Southern Waters.

b. The attached Deed of Accession and Amendment to the Commitment Agreement.

c. The attached Deed of Accession to the Deed of Amendment and Cost Sharing.

d. The attached Constitution of Southern Waters Limited.

e. The attached Shareholders’ Agreement (including the template Transfer Agreement in Schedule 6).

Once the four Councils have agreed the above documents the Chief Executives of each Council, under delegation, will continue the process to establish the Stakeholders’ Representative Group. This includes convening an initial meeting of the shareholders in April 2026 as well as working with the Establishment Chair and Programme Director to create the Southern Waters CCO and legal entity.

10. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Waitaki District Council Request to Join Southern Waters ⇩

Appendix 2 - Deed of Accession and Amendment - Commitment Agreement ⇩

Appendix 3 - Deed of Accession - Cost Sharing ⇩

Appendix 4 - Southern Waters Limited - Constitution ⇩

Appendix 5 - Southern Waters Limited - Shareholders Agreement ⇩

Appendix 6 - Southern Waters Limited - Transfer Agreement (Schedule 6 to SHA) ⇩

Appendix 7 - Southern Waters CCO - Role of Elected Members ⇩

25 March 2026

26.3.11 Long-term Plan 2027-37: Community Board Priorities

Doc ID: 2753816

Report Author:	Alix Crosbie, Policy & Strategy Lead
Reviewed and authorised by:	Louise Fleck, Group Manager - People and Culture, Acting Group Manager - Community Vision

1. Purpose of Report

To consider incorporation on the community Board’s priorities into the 2027-37 Long-term Plan.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Agrees the Cromwell Community Board’s priorities be developed for consideration in the 2027-37 Long-term Plan.

C. Agrees the Maniototo Community Board’s priorities be developed for consideration in the 2027-37 Long-term Plan.

D. Agrees the Teviot Valley Community Board’s priorities be developed for consideration in the 2027-37 Long-term Plan.

E. Agrees the Vincent Community Board’s priorities be developed for consideration in the 2027-37 Long-term Plan.

2. Background

As part of the development of the 2027-37 Long-term Plan, workshops were held with each community board during February 2026 to ascertain their priorities for consideration in the development of the Plan.

3. Discussion

All Community Boards were provided with the following information:

· The Long-term Plan 2027-37 Strategic Scan, completed in October 2025

· Council’s Strategic Priorities 2026 sheet developed with Alicia McKay in January 2026

· The Board’s own Strategy Report, completed as part of the induction process in 2025.

The priorities identified in each Board’s Strategy Report were compared against Council’s Strategic Priorities. Boards were then asked to provide further information – or any other identified priorities for inclusion.

Themes that emerged across the boards included:

· The current financial circumstances were kept top of mind.

· There is a high level of community expectations and need that is required to be balanced against the level of financial constraint. In response, all four Boards have streamlined their priorities and work programmes for the coming term – looking at the places they can work most effectively.

· There was broad support of the strategic priorities set by Council.

· Most boards are looking at how to diversify how they deliver, and to work more closely with the community on initiatives already underway, or ideas that could develop into future LTP priorities.

· All four boards noted healthcare advocacy as a priority outside the LTP process.

· All four boards are interested in options for affordable housing.

Each priority includes the following diagram:

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü	ü

‘Funding’ has been called ‘Diversifying income sources’ in these tables to reduce confusion relating to different interpretations of the word ‘funding’. RL stands for Regional Leadership – it has been shortened to fit the 1/10^th scale of this box.

Vincent Community Board – 3 February 2026

Museums

The Board discussed the need to refresh the current Museum Strategy and to find a way forward on funding.

They felt this to be an area with a medium to high level of expense. They noted the potential to diversify income sources through discussion with the museum network, the need to align timing of various work aspects relating to museums, and the element of attraction to bring in schools and other educational groups from outside the district.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü

Boundary Road Precinct

The board wishes to investigate additional recycling services at the Boundary Road site, including waste recovery and reuse.

Is an area with a potentially high expense. It has the potential for different options to provide costs toward running the facility. It was felt it would be nice if it can be delivered in a way that it covers its own costs, however there are benefits that make it worthy of consideration even if it runs at a loss.

High strategic alignment with Council’s plans and strategies – including Waste Management and Minimisation Strategy.

Potential for Regional Leadership benefit if innovative approach taken, otherwise benefits are largely in the ‘Protection’ space, with some financial elements.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü		ü

Wilding Pines

Reducing wilding pines are largely an advocacy priority for the Board – with the majority of the responsibility/regulation sitting with central government.

The Board noted the issue as a low to medium cost, and potentially a lower priority than some other items – but a necessity to identify work that needs to happen to prevent future higher costs.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü		ü

Community Halls

Following the 2025-34 Long-term Plan discussion on potential divestment of community halls, the Board noted the need to resume conversations on facilities in Becks, Lauder, and Ophir once the new Community Hub is built.

Costs are existing and budgeted with relation to these facilities.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü

Blossom Festival funding

The Board would like to provide certainty of ongoing funding arrangements to the Blossom Festival.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü

Grants funding generally

Through the Blossom Festival funding conversation, the Board expressed a desire to consider the amount in the Grants funding pot more generally – as it is often oversubscribed and they are seeing a high degree of community need.

This item was not assessed against the strategic matrix with the Board. There are elements of Protection and Attraction. There is the potential for benefits in the other two priority areas depending on the specific arrangements of such a proposal.

Housing

Housing is a priority for the Board. They discussed potential options and ways to deliver – including use of land or working with partners. The cost could vary widely depending on the model chosen.

The Board felt there was significant room to deliver benefits across all priority areas from this item, particularly Protection and Attraction.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü

Alexandra Outdoor Pool

The Board expressed a desire for a further conversation with the community around heating at the Alexandra Pool, following community feedback in the 2025-34 Long-term Plan about the retention of this facility.

This item was not assessed against the strategic matrix with the Board.

Signalling interest in other areas

Outside the LTP, the Board expressed interest in supporting the community/advocacy in the following priority areas:

· Healthcare/hospital facilities

· Dark skies/Winterstellar

· Adjustment to Council processes around the use of Molyneux Stadium and grounds

Cromwell Community Board – 4 February 2026

Cromwell Masterplan

Expressed desire for an extension/refresh of masterplan for Cromwell to better plan for growth. Discussed spatial planning components of Regional Deal. Early signal that this is an area of focus for the Board.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü	ü

Cromwell Town Centre

Potentially higher cost priority, focused on delivery of a refreshed town centre. During the 2025-34 Long-term Plan, Council has requested further work be done on the town centre of consideration in this current long-term plan.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü

Sport & Recreation Precinct Strategy

Community and commercial desire to develop an indoor sports centre in Cromwell. Low level of funding sought for a feasibility study towards this project.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü	ü

Supporting tourism, economic development, and business growth

Low level of funding sought for strategic work to support provision of accommodation and other commercial initiatives to support business growth in Cromwell, including opportunities for leasing and commercial arrangements for the Board. This work could be potentially done within current BAU.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü	ü

Strategic partnerships and land use

The Board wish to explore partnership approaches to develop land in Cromwell with strategic offerings. Low level of funding sought for further exploration of idea, and assessing if there is sufficient need/potential to move to the next phase.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü	ü

Housing, including CHIPs

Discussion on Council’s role in Housing. Board indicated willingness to explore available options.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü	ü

Sandflat Road sealing

The Board feel Sandflat Road has become a major thoroughfare into Bannockburn and Cromwell, and that sealing is appropriate. Funding sought toward this project. It has high usage, connects to the high use Highlands Motorsport Park, and causes issues with dust.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
	ü

Delivery of dog park or similar facility

The Board wish funding to be considered for the development of a dedicated dog park following community feedback in their meeting’s public forum.

Signalling interest in other areas

The Cromwell Community Board are actively working in other areas, that will likely be progressed for the next Long-term Plan, or through other Council processes. They wish to signal interest in the following areas:

· Planning for additional cyclists at Bannockburn Junction and on Felton Road

· Note interest in Ratepayer Assistance Scheme for rooftop solar

· Looking at strategic options to provide additional community space – looking at smaller spaces for NGOs or office/meeting spaces for small community groups.

Teviot Valley Community Board – 5 February 2026

Entertainment Centre/Town Hall rebuild

Future decision making – scheduled for March 2026 (after the deadline for this report) – will identify the likely costs associated with the rebuild, and if these exceed the insurance budget. The Board wish to signal this project is a priority in the community.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü

Multi use sports centre

Signalled interest in investigation toward a business case – likely for consideration in a future Long-term Plan. The Board are currently undertaking preliminary work and a needs assessment. Potential to be part of the Entertainment Centre/Hall rebuild.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü

Community housing

As other Boards, the Board signalled an interest in exploring options for providing affordable housing to attract families to the area. They also expressed an interest in affordable rentals.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü	ü

Evening dining

This has been a community suggestion in the Teviot Community Plan process. There may or may not be an LTP element. The Board are interested in supporting the types of Council support available for attracting further evening dining options to Roxburgh, including mobile dining locations.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
		ü

Priority roading and footpaths

The Board are interested in seeing the following priority roading projects in the Long-term Plan: Millers Flat bridge; Cycle bridge at Millers Flat; Kelso Street kerb and channelling.

The community have asked that the road to Lake Onslow be maintained to a higher degree. The Board note this to Council.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü

King George Park toilets

Public toilets are in poor condition, are in high demand, and are located slightly too far from the playground and food retailers. The Board wish to rebuild a new facility at the other end of the Park from the current facility.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
	ü	ü

Expand Library offerings

Area of focus identified by youth in Teviot Valley Community Plan. Could be part of the Entertainment Centre rebuild, or in another location.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
	ü	ü

Delivery of CCTV in Roxburgh Village

The Board wish to deliver CCTV in Roxburgh Village. This was a focus of the previous Community Board and arose due to community feedback.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
	ü	ü

Expand skatepark to include BMX pump track

An item that arose via the Teviot Valley Community Plan – a need for greater play offerings for older kids. The Board are exploring potential options to co fund. Idea is early stages – potential for inclusion in future Long-term Plan.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü

Roxburgh Pool equipment, shade, and seating

The Board wish for better shade and seating at the pool – all seating surfaces are hard surfaces with high degree of sun exposure. Also need for additional play equipment to be factored in to the LTP.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
	ü	ü

Rubbish bin collection frequency

Following community feedback, there was a request to explore more frequent collection of public bins and the provision of public bins at Millers Flat. There was some discussion around amenities at Millers Flat to support cycling that may develop in the future.

This item was not assessed against the priority matrix.

Signalling interest in other areas

Outside the LTP process, the Board are interested in or advocating for the following:

· Provision of healthcare services and support for aging population

· After school care solutions

Maniototo Community Board – 12 February 2026

Protect and maintain existing community assets

The Board wish to hold, maintain, and upgrade existing community assets – parks, halls, facilities, and buildings – rather than invest in new ones. Have signalled this as a priority and are interested in exploring new revenue streams and options to achieve this.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü

Fair district wide investment

The Board would like to see a fair distribution model for funding and investment across the district. Are keen to work with Council on this as a strategic workstream.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü

Unlocking land and housing to enable growth

This initiative is in the initial stages. The Board expressed an interest in developing the workstream into a strategic approach to growth in the district.

There is a strong housing element to this priority. The Board are interested in exploring affordable housing models in the Long-term Plan.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü	ü

Improve climate resilience and community preparedness

Priority identified by the Board in their induction session. The next steps to scope and outline strategic approach.

Diversifying income sources 50%	Protection 25%	Attraction 15%	RL 10%
ü	ü		ü

Playgrounds

There was interest in the provision of adventure play offerings, following considerable engagement with the development of the Play Strategy and local need.

The Board were also approached by community members around play facilities at Ranfurly Gun Reserve during the meeting. The Board asked staff look into options and potential inclusion in this process.

This priority was not assessed against the priority matrix.

Roading priorities

The Board have provided staff with a full list of roading priorities.

This priority was not assessed against the priority matrix.

Ranfurly Pool

The Ranfurly Pool is at the end of life. The Board wish to explore whether it should be remediated, or if timing and costs permit, replaced with a facility at the stadium.

This priority was not assessed against the priority matrix.

Signalling interest in other areas

In future LTP processes, the Board expressed an interest in:

· Turf

· Walking areas

Outside the LTP process, the Board expressed an interest in:

· Maniototo Community Fund from Industrial Development – exploring what mechanisms are available to support this

· Strengthen healthcare and hospital services

· Support volunteers and community capacity

· Wayfinding signage

· Pest and broom control

4. Financial Considerations

These will be presented back to Council when ideas are further refined for Council to consider approving for inclusion in the 2027-37 Long-term Plan.

5. Feedback from Community Boards

Workshops were held with each of the community boards in developing the material for this paper.

6. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Approve that each community board’s priorities be developed for consideration in the 2027-37 Long-term Plan.

Advantages:

· Enables the views of the community boards to be considered in the development of the 2027-37 Long-term Plan

· Does not commit Council to include the projects and priorities as these will be presented back to Council for further consideration.

Disadvantages:

· None identified.

Option 2

Does not approve that each community board’s priorities be developed for consideration in the 2027-37 Long-term Plan.

Advantages:

· None identified.

Disadvantages:

· An opportunity for early consideration of community board’s will be lost.

7. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by considering community board views in the early development of the 2027-37 Long-term Plan.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Yes this is consistent with the legislative requirements under the Local Government Act 2002.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	None identified.
Risks Analysis	There are no risks in considering the community board’s priorities in the early development of the 2027-37 Long-term Plan.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The consultation document and supporting documents for the 2027-37 Long-term Plan will be consulted as per the requirements under the Local Government Act 2002.

8. Next Steps

Pending Council approval, these priorities will be further developed and costed for consideration in the 2027-37 Long-term Plan.

9. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Council Strategic Priorities 2026 ⇩

Appendix 2 - Community Board LTP Priorities Summary Document Long List ⇩

25 March 2026

26.3.12 Elected Member Security System Remuneration

Doc ID: 2753298

Report Author:

Wayne McEnteer, Governance Manager

Alix Crosbie, Policy & Strategy Lead

Reviewed and authorised by:

Saskia Righarts, Group Manager - Governance and Business Services

1. Purpose of Report

To consider operationalising clause 15 of the Local Government Elected Members Determination 2025 by the Remuneration Authority – the allowance for elected member security systems.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Agrees in principle, subject to further work, to expand the existing Elected Member Allowances and Reimbursements Policy.

2. Background

The Remuneration Authority have introduced an allowance of up to $4,500 to cover elected members installing and monitoring a security system at home (the same figure as for Members of Parliament), plus $1000 annually for maintenance. The allowance came into effect after the 2025 local elections.

The allowance was introduced due to an increase in abuse, harassment and threatening behaviour toward elected members nationwide. Central Otago District Council played a role in the development of the allowance through the local government remit process.

3. Discussion

Council need to consider whether to put the allowance in place, and – if so – how to administer it.

The following options have been developed:

· Expansion of the existing Elected Members Allowances and Reimbursements Policy

· The creation of a new standalone Security System Allowance Policy

· No changes, issue continues to be managed on an ad-hoc basis.

The following questions were considered in the development of the proposals:

· Who organises the purchase and installation?

· How do we assist elected members if upfront costs are a barrier?

· Who is the decision maker?

· What happens to the equipment if an elected member moves house or leaves office? (The Remuneration Authority specifies this must be outlined in a Policy).

· Would Council be responsible for any home repairs or maintenance as a result of installation or removal of equipment?

Option One: Expansion of the existing Elected Member Allowances and Reimbursements Policy.

This is an expansion of the current approach to allowances for vehicle kilometres, travel time, ICT, and childcare. It is also consistent with the way Members of Parliament access their equivalent security allowance.

Elected members would be able to claim both the installation and maintenance amounts by submitting them as expenses for reimbursement.

Staff could arrange direct procurement or a purchase order in cases of financial necessity.

There is no decision maker assessing each individual claim, under this option. It assumes that ‘need’ is most accurately judged by the elected member in question and their feeling of safety.

Council takes no responsibility or ownership over the equipment, it remains the property of the elected member. It would remain with them if they left office. Council would have no involvement with the removal of equipment or covering holes, etc…

Staff could include clauses with mandatory length of tenure periods, i.e. if an elected member served for a short period then the allowance must be paid back.

Option Two: Creating a new standalone Security System Allowance Policy

This is a bespoke approach that would allow a greater level of scrutiny over the expenditure, but include a higher degree of Council involvement and therefore responsibility.

Elected members who felt threatened, harassed, or unsafe would submit a request to either the Mayor or Governance Manager, to be determined based on set criteria (to be developed). This would create records of threatening behaviour experienced by an elected member, but could also be confronting and a barrier to access.

Staff would then arrange the installation and maintenance of security systems, including their removal when the member leaves office. Council may be required to cover holes, etc, relating to the installation of the equipment.

This option has the potential to cost less, with less members accessing the allowance and the reuse of equipment.

Split approach

Council could consider a different approach to community board members than to the Mayor and councillors, based on a different risk profile to these roles.

The following additional factors were considered in the overall approach:

How will we balance privacy and transparency?

Records of threats experienced by elected members are protected under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987. Details of these would not be shared to individuals requesting this under the LGOIMA process.

For transparency, Council could consider proactively releasing the full dollar amount accessed and the number of elected members who utilised the fund on a semi-regular basis (i.e. annually, or once a term).

When and how will additional security kick in?

This will continue to be managed by staff on a case-by-case basis. Council take threats against elected members seriously and will involve Police and other agencies where appropriate.

When and how could a second system be installed? Old tech for a long serving member, faulty tech, etc…

There is no scope for replacement in the Remuneration Authority Determination.

A replacement could be defensible when a risk profile changes, or the existing system is no longer adequate to mitigate the identified risk.

This will be managed as additional security by staff.

Following this analysis, staff recommend option one as the simple, easy to administer option. If elected members felt that people were accessing the allowance unfairly, or too often, option two could be considered instead.

4. Financial Considerations

Security reimbursements are currently unbudgeted but can be allowed for in future planning.

The full cost is dependent on the need. At the full allowance, across 27 elected members, it would cost $175,000 for a three-year term.

This would involve all new members all claiming the full allowance. This is very unlikely – currently 16 of our 27 elected members have served at least one prior term.

5. Feedback from Community Boards

This paper has not been discussed with Community Boards and they will be updated following advice from Council.

6. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Expand the Elected Member Allowances & Reimbursements Policy

Advantages:

· Consistent with approach taken to Members of Parliament

· Consistent with approach taken by CODC to other expenses

· Provides most access for elected members

· Clauses can be added to address some concerns

· Meets Remuneration Authority requirements

Disadvantages:

· Potentially lower level of financial oversight

Option 2

Develop standalone Security System Policy with criteria to access funding

Advantages:

· Provides higher level of scrutiny over expenditure

· Meets Remuneration Authority requirements

Disadvantages:

· Administratively heavy

· Costs potentially associated with removal and transfer of equipment

· Lower access

· Requires significant record keeping of threats to elected members

Option 3

Do not incorporate an allowance into any policy and continue in an ad-hoc basis.

Advantages:

· Lowest cost

Disadvantages:

· Lowest access to security systems for elected members

7. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by operationalising a national direction.
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	Consistent with approach to other expenses.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	No impact.
Risks Analysis	Potential for health and safety risks associated with lower access to security measures for some options.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	Not required.

8. Next Steps

Staff will develop a policy consistent with elected member direction and return by the May meeting.

9. Attachments

Nil

25 March 2026

26.3.13 Approval of Draft Annual Plan 2026-27

Doc ID: 2742325

Report Author:

Amelia Lines, Risk and Procurement Manager

Gursewak Virk, System Management Accountant

Reviewed and authorised by:

Saskia Righarts, Group Manager - Governance and Business Services

1. Purpose of Report

To consider the Draft Annual Plan 2026-27 for approval

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Agrees not to consult on the draft Annual Plan 2026-27.

C. Approves the draft Annual Plan 2026-27 to enable Long-term Plan 2027-37 budget input.

D. Approves the draft fees and charges for 2026-27.

2. Background

At the Council meeting on 30 June 2025, the Council resolved to adopt the Long-term Plan 2025-34 (The LTP).

Council is required under section 95(1) of the Local Government Act 2002 to produce an annual plan in the intervening financial years.

The LTP forecasted an average rates increase of 7.51% (after adjusting for growth of 2.1%) for financial year 2026-27.

Council was presented with the draft Annual Plan 2026-27 (The AP) which excluded property rating examples at a workshop on 17^th December 2025. During that workshop it was highlighted that proposed average rates increase for 2026-27 financial year was 7.26% (after adjusting for growth of 2.1%).

Council was presented with an updated draft AP during the workshop on 11 February 2026. During that workshop it was highlighted that proposed average rates increase for 2026-27 financial year was 6.34% (after adjusting for growth of 2.1%), and the proposed current financial year capital expenditure budgets to be included in the draft AP.

Council was presented with 2025-26 forecast 2 reports on 25 February 2026. This report highlighted current capital expenditure budgets that were to be transferred into the AP.

3. Discussion

The draft AP is being presented to Council at this stage to enable the Long-term Plan 2027-37 budget input process

The planning process for the AP has been in progress since October 2025. The focus has been on following through with commitments made in year two of the LTP, identifying changes, and keeping cost at or below the LTP year 2 forecasts.

The average rates increase across the district is 6.34% after adjusting for projected growth of 2.1%. This rates increase is below planned rates increase of 7.51% from the LTP.

Cost pressures faced while preparing this Annual Plan include an increase in depreciation costs due to asset revaluations, increased regulatory requirements, and an increase in operating costs. These cost increases have been offset to an extent by increase in expected fees and charges revenue, one-off use of operational reserves, projected decreasing external borrowing interest rates, and a reassessment of current capital expenditure budgets timelines.

The LTP proposed capital expenditure budgets for 2026-27 financial year at $43.836M. The proposed capital expenditure budget for AP is $61.827M. Of this, $17.202M relate to current capital project budgets which are expected to continue into 2026-27 financial year and have been incorporated into the AP and forecasted out of 2025-26 financial year. These include projects across three waters, property, roading and waste management. The change to proposed capital expenditure budget also resulted in review of expected depreciation expense, external debt requirements and repayments, timing of debt uplift and external interest cost.

The Local Government Act 2002 (S 95 (2A)) requires council to consult with community before adopting an AP if the proposed plan includes significant or material differences from the content of the LTP for the financial year to which the proposed AP relates.

Consultation for changes in proposed capital expenditure budgets for AP is considered not to be required. These project budgets have been approved by previous council as part of the LTP and AP.

4. Financial Considerations

The current draft average rates increase is 6.34% across the district for financial year 2026-27. This includes allowance of projected growth of 2.1%.

5. Feedback from Community Boards

As no material departures from the LTP have been made, feedback from Community Boards has not been sought in relation to this AP.

6. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

Approve the draft Annual Plan 2026-27 and fees and charges, with final adoption in June 2026.

Advantages:

· Allows Council to adopt the Annual Plan in June 2026 and set the budgets for the 2026-27 financial year.

· Allows Council to start budget work on the Long-term Plan 2027-37

Disadvantages:

· There are no identified disadvantages to this option

Option 2

Does not approve draft Annual Plan 2026-27 and fees and charges.

Advantages:

· There are no identified advantages

Disadvantages:

· Long-term Plan 2027-37 budget input timeline is delayed. This will impact the ability to provide estimated LTP budgets in line with the LTP timeline.

7. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	Local authorities must have an Annual Plan for each financial year under section 95 of the Local Government Act 2002 AND This decision promotes the (social/cultural/economic/environmental) wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future by giving consideration to the communities preference for their district included in the 2026-27 Annual Plan
Decision consistent with other Council plans and policies? Such as the District Plan, Economic Development Strategy etc.	The decision to approve Annual Plan is consistent with year two of Council’s Long-term Plan 2025-34.
Considerations as to sustainability, the environment and climate change impacts	These have all been considered as part of the Long-term Plan 2025-34
Risks Analysis	There are no risks to be noted in considering this report and approving the draft Annual Plan.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	The decision to adopt this report is significant as adoption will approve the 2026-27 Annual Plan, the consequential setting of the 2026-27 rates, and the confirmation of the 2026-27 fees and charges. As no material changes have been made since the adoption of Long term Plan 2025-34, no additional consultation has been undertaken.

8. Next Steps

Approval of the draft Annual Plan 2026-27 and fees and charges will allow activity managers to progress with next Long-term Plan 2027-37 budgets. Final 2026-27 Annual Plan and rates resolution will be presented to council in June 2026 for consideration and adoption.

9. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Draft Annual Plan 2026-27 (under separate cover) ⇨

Appendix 2 - Draft Fees and Charges 2026-27 (under separate cover) ⇨

25 March 2026

26.3.15 Proposal to preparing a Local Bill

Doc ID: 2723382

Report Author:	Dylan Rushbrook, Regional Deals Lead
Reviewed and authorised by:	Peter Kelly, Chief Executive Officer

1. Purpose of Report

This paper seeks approval from the Central Otago District Council (CODC) to begin the process of developing a Local Bill, enabling statutory support for implementing minimum flows on the Manuherekia River and securing land/easements required to replace or rebuild Falls Dam at a higher level.

Recommendations

That the Council

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

B. Approves staff to investigate the process of developing the “Central Otago Manuherekia Minimum Flows and Falls Dam Enabling Bill” (or other name) as a Local Bill and to bring back to Council a decision report seeking formal approval to proceed.

C. Notes Miles Anderson MP as the Member in charge and Joseph Mooney MP as co‑sponsor.

D. Considers the offer of financial and resource support from the Manuherikia River Limited and authorises the Chief Executive to negotiate a cost‑sharing agreement.

E. Notes the estimated Local Bill development cost of $180,000–$260,000, with CODC liable for 50% ($90,000–$130,000).

F. Directs staff to engage professional services to support the work program.

2. Background

A Local Bill is required where Parliament must modify or tailor general law for a specific locality — typically to permit land transfers, easements, or operational arrangements that cannot be secured under standard legislation.

Similar water‑infrastructure legislation has been used successfully, including the Tasman District Council (Waimea Water Augmentation Scheme) Local Bill (2018), which enabled riverbed transfers and conservation‑land inundation rights to allow the Waimea Community Dam to proceed.

Given Falls Dam’s age, new dam‑safety regulations, and the requirement to lift river minimum flows in future regional planning, a higher‑storage replacement dam is strategically aligned with regional environmental and community needs. (Falls Dam requires an estimated $40m in upgrades simply to comply with safety regulations, prompting investigation of a larger replacement.)

CODC’s Local Bill will:

· Enable implementation of a legislated minimum flow regime for the Manuherekia River.

· Provide Parliamentary authority for land/easement rights needed for a replacement or higher Falls Dam.

· Support long‑term water reliability, environmental outcomes, and alignment with ORC’s evolving minimum‑flow framework.

The Bill will be co‑sponsored by Joseph Mooney MP (Southland) and Miles Anderson MP (Waitaki).

This report outlines the preliminary legislative steps, project governance arrangements, and a cost‑sharing approach with the Manuherikia River Limited (MRL), who have confirmed their willingness to support the process financially and with resources.

3. Discussion

The development of a Local Bill is intended to provide legislative certainty to the community and users of the Manuherekia River and enable future decision making around the viability of raising Falls Dam and the associated flow on impacts.

Council does not have an official position on the minimum flow rate, this will be explored through the process of developing a Local Bill and bought back to Councillors for a decision before it progresses to Parliament, if it gets that far.

The public debate which Council will be at the centre of, will centre around giving greater water security to the rural economy and communities that take from that water source including Council for the communities at Omakau and Ophir, while ensuring the environmental/ecological needs of the community are met.

There are two factors needing to be resolved by the Local Bill which will provide decision making certainty to raising the current level of Falls Dam;

· Legislated minimum flow for Manuherekia River

· Easement/land transfer of Crown land

Minimum Flow Context

ORC’s technical work shows the Manuherekia catchment is heavily allocated, hydrologically complex, and ecologically sensitive, with proposed minimum flows ranging from 0.9 to 3.0 m³/s at various sites.

ORC staff recommendations have considered staged increases toward 1.2 m³/s by 2030 and 2.5 m³/s by 2040 at Alexandra. These recommendations have not been adopted.

The Kāi Tahu recommendation for the minimum flow was 2,500 l/s to 3,100 l/s

in summer and 4,300 l/s in winter.

Based on a catchment management plan prepared for the Manuherekia Catchment Group, Manuherikia River Limited believe a lower level of minimum flow (1.1 m³/s) would provide all the ecological benefits required, while also making investment in raising Falls Dam a viable option.

While the setting of a minimum flow for the river falls under the Otago Regional Council it is currently unable to notify a regional water plan before a new National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management is published. This leaves setting the minimum flow in a vacuum.

In 2021, CODC commissioned an economic impact study which highlighted the impact on the economy of higher minimum flows. A copy of that report is attached to this paper.

Falls Dam Renewal

The 1930s dam is nearing end‑of‑life, facing an estimated $40m in regulatory upgrade requirements.
A new dam slightly south of the current structure with ~34× the existing 10 Mm³ storage has been preliminarily discussed, which would:

· Improve irrigation reliability,

· Support higher minimum flows, and

· Strengthen drought resilience

· Enable productivity growth through crop trials

Risk

There is a very real risk the community may see Council as favouring the rural sector over the environment considerations of the community.

Council will find itself in the middle of an ongoing debate between the rural sector, Mana Whenua and ORC partners. All sides will have strong views on whether this process is the correct one for Council to be a part of.

In addition, there will be several formal and informal groups and individuals within the community who may be concerned Council is considering this process and again seeing Council as disregarding the environmental impacts that may result from a lower minimum flow.

Mitigation of Risk

Council is not setting the minimum flow in this process, Council is seeking to resolve the minimum flow rate and have that legislated so decisions around the rebuild of Falls Dam and water supply for community growth can be made.

The level of minimum flow will be determined through a consultation process, taking onboard the views and evidence provided by all parties. While Council will make a recommendation, it will be a decision of the Select Committee and Parliament to determine the minimum flow rate, not Council’s.

Key decision points

Today’s decision does not bind Council to undertaking the full process, or expense. Council may decide to exit this process at any stage, for a number of reasons such as; no alignment with the desires of the community, mana whenua views, , outcomes unlikely to be achieved and resourcing costs

There are also several drafting gates this process will need to pass through with Council before it gets to Parliament:

· Formal approval to proceed with the work, once we understand the full detail of process to be followed, including timeline, pre-consultation requirement, cost and resources

· Formal approval of the draft pre-consultation document to determine the range of minimal flow options and the pros/cons of each

· Deliberations/hearing of submissions, and decision on setting of the minimum flow, and

· Draft Local Bill approval for submission

Manuherikia River Limited

The Manuherikia River Limited has formally offered to support the Local Bill process, including financial contribution and technical resources. The exact amount of the contribution has not yet been discussed and agreed with them.

Proposal

Council will promote the Central Otago (Manuherekia Minimum Flows and Falls Dam Enabling) Bill, which will:

1. Authorize land transfers or easements (e.g., LINZ riverbed, DOC conservation land inundation), paralleling the Waimea model.

2. Support implementation of a minimum‑flow regime consistent with ORC science and regional planning.

3. Enable codified operational management linking dam releases to environmental objectives.

4. Ensure community‑wide and iwi engagement through the Select Committee process.

Central Government has confirmed a $2m loan to MRL as part of its Regional Infrastructure Fund program, to be matched funded by MRL. This will fund pre-construction project costs; confirm regulatory requirements, consenting, engineering and detailed design, procurement processes, estimated construction costs, and financing options. This work is expected to take 2 years to complete.

4. Financial Considerations

Estimated Cost of Developing the Local Bill

Costings are based on precedent (Waimea), legal drafting requirements from Parliamentary Counsel Office ( PCO guidance, Parliament’s Standing Orders compliance, public consultation processes, and technical evidence preparation.

An option would be to utilise the $250,000 secured from Santana Minerals Limited as part of the Access Agreement negotiations. This would be a complimentary fit with the Regional Deal proposal that states a return of mining royalties would support critical infrastructure to support economic and infrastructure resilience.

Estimated total cost: $180,000 – $260,000

Breakdown:

Component	Indicative Cost
Legislative drafting & PCO liaison	$40,000 – $70,000
Legal review, property rights & easement mapping	$35,000 – $50,000
Standing Orders compliance (notices, direct stakeholder notifications, administration)	$10,000 – $20,000
Preparation of Select Committee dossier (science, economics, hydrology summaries, graphics)	$40,000 – $60,000
Consultation, facilitation & hearings support	$15,000 – $30,000
Project management & governance	$15,000 – $30,000

Cost‑sharing arrangement (CODC–MRL)

MRL has expressed willingness to fund part of the process but the likely quantum and their contribution has not been determined. On the basis of a 50/50 share, this would create a Council budget impact of $90,000 – $130,000 spread over the 6–9 month legislative programme.

5. Feedback from Community Boards

This has not been discussed with Community Boards. While it will have an impacts on the catchment areas of Vincent and Maniototo Wards, it is a Council decision and process that will be led by Council.

6. Options

Option 1 – (Recommended)

1. Approves staff to investigate the development of the “Central Otago Manuherekia Minimum Flows and Falls Dam Enabling Bill” (or other name) as a Local Bill.

2. Confirms Miles Anderson MP as the Member in charge and Joseph Mooney MP as co‑sponsor.

3. Appoints the Chief Executive as the promoter’s agent with delegated authority to engage the Parliamentary Counsel Office.

4. Considers the offer of financial and resource support from the Manuherikia River Limited, and authorises the Chief Executive to negotiate a cost‑sharing agreement, confirming liability for any overruns.

5. Notes the estimated Local Bill development cost of $180,000–$260,000, with CODC liable for 50% ($90,000–$130,000).

6. Directs staff to engage professional services to support the first stage of this work program.

Advantages:

· Begins the process to confirm a minimum flow rate for Manuherekia River

o Provides certainty for the decision making relating to the raising of Falls Dam

o Provides certainty Enables community growth through certainty of water supply

· Council can exit from the process at a number of key decision points

· Provides community opportunity to provide feedback through a clear legislated process

· Alignment with Regional Deals proposals to support infrastructure, economic and community growth

Disadvantages:

· Council will be caught in the middle of strong debate for and against

· If the project proceeds to presenting a Local Bill, it comes at significant cost with no guarantee of success

Option 2

Decline the proposal in full

Advantages:

· Retains funding for other activities

Disadvantages:

· Doesn’t provide any legislative certainty for minimum flows in order to enable the Falls Dam rebuild to occur

Option 3

Council considers a lower level of financial input to support the Local Bill proposal

Advantages

· Lessens the financial input from Council

Disadvantages

· May impact viability of the Local Bill process to proceed

Option 4

Council declines the offer from MRL and funds 100% of the project cost itself

Advantages

· Provides separation from MRL, limiting any risk of reputational impact on both entities

Disadvantages

· Full cost is carried by the ratepayers

7. Compliance

Local Government Act 2002 Purpose Provisions	This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities by following the legislative process as outlined by Central Government.
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	There are no direct impacts from this decision today as final decision/s will be brought back to Council for further consideration. There may be impacts as a result of the final outcome. This will depend on the level of minimum flow agreed upon, and any associated impacts from the raising of Falls Dam.
Risks Analysis	The risks have been outlined in the paper above and will be further explored when a decision report to proceed or not is brought back to Council.
Significance, Consultation and Engagement (internal and external)	There will be significant consultation and engagement required as part of developing a Local Bill. This process will be undertaken by specialists as part of this project.

8. Next Steps

Staff will engage with representatives from MRL to develop a project plan and timeline, with expert external support. Key partners, ORC and Aukaha will also be engaged early to work through how they wish to be part of the process.

A full project plan and Comms plan will be developed and shared with Councillors as part of this project.

9. Attachments

Appendix 1 - Guide Book on Introducing Local and Private Bills ⇩

Appendix 2 - Economic impacts of minimum flows in the Manuherikia Catchment ⇩

25 March 2026

8 Mayor’s Report

26.3.18 Mayor's Report

Doc ID: 2750540

1. Purpose

To consider an update from Her Worship the Mayor.

Recommendations

That the Council receives the report and notes its contents.

To start this week, I wanted to share a few slides from my recent family holiday. I should probably confess up front that I was the ultimate local government tragic while I was away.

My holiday photos include:

· Manhole covers — beautifully designed, locally distinctive covers that are so popular in this particular area they’re now printed on hoodies, t‑shirts, towels and stickers and sold as souvenirs. A great reminder that even the most utilitarian pieces of infrastructure can become points of pride when they reflect place and identity.

· Stormwater infrastructure that also doubles as irrigation infrastructure, servicing rice paddies right in the centre of town. It was a fascinating example of truly multi‑functional infrastructure, where flood management, food production and urban design all intersect.

· Large‑scale land stabilisation works above roads and waterways, showing the level of investment required to manage natural hazards safely and proactively.

· And finally — pine trees. This particular example shows that when you have the right trees in the right place, they can look fantastic and enhance a landscape — and look nothing like the wilding pine challenges we are dealing with here in Central Otago.

Turning to matters closer to home, today we will be discussing whether Waitaki District Council will be welcomed back into the Southern Waters partnership, following similar papers being considered by Gore and Clutha District Councils.

This discussion represents the culmination of many, many hours of work — phone calls, emails, meetings, travel, and ongoing conversations — all focused on positioning Southern Waters not just as a high‑performing water entity, but as one that genuinely values partnership and ensures every community has a voice as we move into the next phase of water services delivery.

I want to sincerely thank my fellow mayors Jock Martin, Ben Bell and Melanie Tavendale, along with the exceptional Southern Waters team, for the enormous amount of effort that has gone into reaching this point. This has been complex, time‑consuming, and at times challenging work, but it has been done with integrity and a clear focus on the best outcomes for our communities. By the time I read this out we will know if we will know what the outcome is.

Over recent weeks I have also met with a number of agencies, including the Ministry of Social Development, Health New Zealand, and our local MPs, to talk through some of the pressures facing our towns. This has included discussions around housing, workforce challenges, and the planned closure of the Cromwell Chalets, which has raised understandable concern locally.

Alongside this, I’ve continued discussions with the Southern Lakes Health Trust and am very much looking forward to the outcome of the Clinical Services Plan, which is currently before the Minister. This work is critically important for the long‑term sustainability of health services in our region.

There have also been a number of Local Government New Zealand meetings during this period, including Zoom sessions with Ministers, as well as significant work going into organising the upcoming Zone 5 and 6 Conference in Christchurch, and planning for the next Zone 6 meeting later in the year.

In February, I attended the Otago Regional Council‑led community session in Roxburgh, which focused on the flooding risk associated with the alluvial fans above the town. The meeting was very well attended, reflecting the level of concern in the community. I look forward to continued collaboration between ourselves, ORC, DOC, and affected landowners as we work through how best to manage and reduce this risk in a practical and coordinated way.

I’m also very pleased to share some genuinely positive news. Our Mayor’s Taskforce for Jobs team — Craig and Nick — have done such outstanding work that they have been awarded an additional tranche of funding to continue this mahi, connecting local young people with local employers. This additional funding comes with increased targets, which Craig has already begun making progress on.

Not every area in New Zealand has achieved this level of success, and it is a real testament to the strong relationships Craig has built with our MSD partners and with employers across the district.

There has been heightened public and media interest in a number of Council matters over this period. I’ve engaged with both local and national media through columns, press releases, interviews, and a live appearance on Radio New Zealand, where we talked about the many positive things happening in Central Otago — although I probably could have filled the entire programme if allowed.

Looking ahead, the next 12 months will bring a number of complex and highly topical issues before Council and our communities. These include:

· Fast‑track applications

· Naming the Cromwell Hall

· Tree removals

· Simplifying Local Government and proposals to abolish regional councils

· RMA reform

· Rates capping

· Ongoing Regional Deal negotiations

And that list is far from exhaustive.

Fortunately, none of us signed up thinking this role would be an easy ride. While we won’t always please everyone, it remains an enormous privilege to serve our community and to work through these challenges together.

Finally, a very warm welcome to Andrew Dowling, who joins us today. It’s fantastic for our community to once again have a full complement of elected members, and I know Andrew is keen to get stuck into the work ahead.

2. Attachments

Nil

Maniototo Community Board Minutes

12 February 2026

MINUTES OF A meeting of the
Maniototo Community Board
HELD IN THE Ranfurly Service Centre, 15 Pery Street, Ranfurly
AND LIVE STREAMED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON Thursday, 12 February 2026 commencing AT 2:00 pm

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

IN ATTENDANCE: T Alley (Mayor), P Kelly (Chief Executive Officer), Q Penniall (Group Manager - Planning, Infrastructure and Regulatory), S Righarts (Group Manager - Governance and Business Services), D Scoones (Group Manager - Community Experience), A Crosbie (Policy Lead), S Reynolds (Governance Support Officer)

1 ApologiES

There were no apologies.

2 Public Forum

Russ Haigh and Tania Murray – the need for more EV charges in the town

Mr Haigh and Ms Murray thanked Council staff for agreeing to constructing a boundary fence at 9 John Street, noting that it would improve the street’s appearance. They also highlighted the opportunity to create a pump track at the corner of John Street and expressed interest in exploring funding for the project.

They also described plans they had for installing a flag pole in the Railway Station garden. And discussed the need for a pedestrian crossing outside the Railway Station, pointing out near-misses, and noted that an assessment had been completed, expressing hope for progress from NZTA. Additionally, they highlighted that the EV charger had been out of service for a couple of weeks and emphasised the need for a second charger to improve reliability for travellers.

3 Condolences

The chair referred to the deaths of Bev Claridge, Winton Amies, Nica Davis, Tracy Parker, Bill Morice. Members stood for a moment’s silence as a mark of respect.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

Committee Resolution

Moved: Helm

Seconded: Dowling

That the public minutes of the Maniototo Community Board Meeting held on 27 November 2025 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

5 Declarations of Interest

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

6 Mayor’s Report

26.1.2 Mayor's Report

Her Worship the Mayor reported on the following:

· Noted the busy start to the year, with proposed Central Government reforms providing significant work for elected members.

· Provided an update on Southern Water, noting positive progress in this area.

· Outlined the cohesive approach of fellow Mayors from nearby districts, noting an appetite for change and hope to continue working together throughout 2026 to make improvements.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Duncan

Seconded: Helm

That the Maniototo Community Board receives the report.

Carried

7 Chair's Report

26.1.3 Chair's Report

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

· Noted that the hospital extension is nearly complete and that it was positive to see this progress.

· Observed that some sealing work had been completed in the town.

· Provided an overview of the planned work at Patearoa to extend the bowling club and create an alternative space for social functions, replacing the hall which is no longer fit for purpose.

· Noted that there had been some complaints about broom, and that it had been a poor season for spraying.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Harris

Seconded: Helm

That the report be received.

Carried

8 Members' Reports

26.1.4 Members' Reports

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

Mr Dowling reported on the following:

· Noted that the reserves are looking really good, irrigation is working well, and pre-season rugby has started.

· Noted that he is planning to schedule a zoom meeting with Helios Energy to give the board an opportunity to have an update on their work in the ward.

· Discussed trees at the rugby grounds and when replanting would occur. It was noted that this issue has been raised several times, and that some public messaging on this could be useful to confirm that plans are in place for winter planting.

· Noted that it had been a good summer, with lots of people around, which was very positive.

Ms McAulay reported on the following:

· Noted that the town had been really busy over the holiday period, and that the main street was looking great with the addition of some new murals and that the planting along the street was also looking good.

· A regular dog walker asked if there could be an opportunity to address dog waste near the dog walking area around the stadium. It was noted that there are no rubbish bins anywhere on the reserve and that adding a bin in this area would be helpful.

· It was discussed that a new sign is needed to indicate the swimming pool and playground, as a previous sign had been removed. It was also noted that the school sign is completely obscured by a tree, and asked that this was addressed.

· Noted that Plunket parents expressed thanks for the financial support for the swim programme, with over 40 children participating. The coaching was excellent, and the programme’s importance to encourage children to learn to swim was recognised.

Mr Helm reported on the following:

· Noted that he was looking forward to the show in a couple of weeks and that it had been a good season for farming.

Cr Duncan reported on the following:

· Provided an update on recent Council meetings, noting the media coverage around the mine development. Mentioned participation in an interesting workshop on risk, and observed that while some risk is necessary, the liability for Council is significant.

· Attended a meeting with the Wilding Conifer Group.

· Discussed whether weed spraying could be rethought and whether local contractors could be subcontracted for greater effectiveness. Noted that farmers have been spraying their own verges, and that a rebate system could be considered.

· Noted the heavy workload for elected members and the Mayor, given the significant reforms happening at Central Government level.

· Noted that he is looking forward to show season, that agriculture is going very well, and that there has been significant activity on the Rail Trail, with many Australian visitors and a busy atmosphere.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Harris

Seconded: Duncan

That the report be received.

Carried

9 Status Reports

26.1.5 February 2025 Governance Report

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

Staff provided an introduction to the Community Plan, noting that it will be revised in 2026. It was noted that the plan was last completed in 2007 and that the community will be consulted throughout the process.

Staff also informed the board that there were currently no applications for community grants and that the application closing date for this round was Sunday 1 March 2026.

Staff also gave an update on the Play Strategy work, noting the Play Strategy Hui was coming up and that all elected members were invited to the session on March 19 at 1 pm in the Alexandra Chambers.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Harris

Seconded: Duncan

That the report be received.

Carried

10 Date of the Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 26 March 2026.

The meeting closed at 3.10 pm

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

CHAIR / /

Cromwell Community Board Minutes

3 March 2026

Unconfirmed

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, 3 March 2026 COMMENCING AT 2:00 pm

PRESENT: Ms A Harrison (Chair), Mr W Sanford, Ms R Anderson, Cr S Browne (via Microsoft Teams), Mr M Casey

IN ATTENDANCE: T Paterson (Deputy Mayor), P Kelly (Chief Executive Officer), Q Penniall (Group Manager - Planning, Infrastructure and Regulatory), S Righarts (Group Manager - Governance and Business Services), D Scoones (Group Manager - Community Experience), G Bailey (Parks and Recreation Manager), Z Zeelie (Team Leader Statutory Property), W Harris (Venue Director), G Chrystall (Community Experience Manager), S Reynolds (Governance Support Officer)

1 KARAKIA

Mr Casey gave a karakia to begin the meeting.

2 Apologies

There were no apologies but it was noted that Cr Browne was joining online and may have intermittent signal. It was also noted that Mr Casey would be an apology for early departure.

3 Public Forum

Kylie Murdoch & Shirley Calvert - Cromwell & Districts Community Trust, Project Lead – Project Tīrau

Ms Murdoch provided an overview of the trust’s work exploring potential options for the former polytechnic site on Molyneux Avenue, envisioning it as a community learning and wellbeing centre to support education, culture, health, and connection. She noted that a feasibility study was the next step to assess project viability and that Council and Ngāi Tahu involvement was hoped to support this stage, while the polytechnic had not yet confirmed whether it would sell the site, with a collegial partnership agreement seen as key to maintaining it for community use.

Ms Murdoch and Ms Calvert then responded to questions from attendees.

Gary Kirk - Mall Development

Mr Kirk noted that he had been involved with properties in the mall for many years and had previously attempted to revive it as a commercial developer. He was against spending more public money in the mall, suggesting that developing a complex along Murray Terrace would allow growth to occur naturally, with potential uses on the west side including youth facilities, a library, and council offices.

Mr Kirk then responded to questions.

Lisa Telle - Cromwell Dogs

Ms Telle provided an update, noting that the group was funding a report to obtain a second opinion on whether the trees in the Sandflat Road area needed to be felled. She noted that she would inform the board once this report was available.

Note: Cr Browne joined the meeting at 2.15 pm.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

Committee Resolution

Moved: Casey

Seconded: Anderson

That the public minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 4 February 2026 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

5 Declarations of Interest

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

6 Reports

26.2.2 Cromwell Racecourse Reserve Event

To approve improvements at Cromwell Racecourse Reserve to enable large events to be undertaken within the reserve.

It was noted that the function aligned with the long-term aspirations for the reserve and that the required earthworks would not impact existing lease, with the all parties collaborating to ensure the successful delivery of the event.

Opportunities for long-term improvements to the reserve through collaboration between these groups were also noted.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Casey

Seconded: Sanford

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

Carried

26.2.3 Cromwell Golf Club - Request to Authorise Building alterations and Other Improvements on Reserve Land

To consider recommending to Council to grant permission to the Cromwell Golf Club Incorporated to:

1. Extend the current club house footprint

2. Erect a new deck outside the club house

3. Construct a new Pro Shop

Committee Resolution

Moved: Anderson

Seconded: Sanford

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

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

Carried

26.2.4 Use of Financial Contributions for Bannockburn Cycle Path Connection

To consider the use of Financial Contribution Reserves to fund a shared path connection in Bannockburn (approximately 185m) to improve safety and accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists, in line with the opening of the Kawarau Gorge Cycle Trail.

It was noted that a physical barrier should be installed between the road and the trail to further discourage cyclists from using the road.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Anderson

Seconded: Sanford

That the Cromwell Community Board

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

B. Approves the use of Financial Contribution Reserves to fund the design and construction of the Bannockburn shared path connection, up to a budget of $300,000.

Carried

7 Mayor’s Report

26.2.5 Mayor's Report

Her Worship the Mayor was an apology to the meeting so no report was presented.

8 Chair's Report

26.2.6 Chair's Report

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

Attended a Museum Trust meeting and noted the change in their governance structure and the collaboration discussed at the meeting.
Completed a virtual tour of the facility by the lake, observed the rapid changes, and encouraged submissions on the hall naming discussion.
Had a walk around at the Racecourse Reserve with the Wheels of Wanaka group and CLEC, discussing logistics and planning for the event, including potential benefits for long-term site leases.
Met with the new franchise holder of a Cromwell gym, who expressed interest in exploring a comprehensive wellbeing centre.
Attended the morning drop-in session for the hall naming at the Library and promoted the next session at that evening at the RSA Club.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Harrison

Seconded: Sanford

That the report be received.

Carried

Note: Cr Browne left the meeting at 3.05 pm and did not return.

9 Members' Reports

26.2.7 Members' Reports

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

Mr Sanford reported on the following:

Attended the “Naming of Our Place” drop-in session at the library.
Participated in BA5 business meeting at Alexandra Community House.
Attended the club athletics day in Wanaka.
Spoke with locals about Sandflat Road development and the Cromwell town centre.
Attended the land development stakeholder session, noting the strong attendance.
Completed his annual visit to the Water Park.
Visited Queenstown, including a walk up Wye Creek and a dinner out.

Ms Anderson reported on the following:

Had unfortunately had to spend some time at hospitals with sick family members.
Spent time at the youth centre with participants of the BLAST programme, with 20 young people and acknowledged it as a highly valuable programme.
Attended the drop-in session on the facility naming, which yielded interesting discussions.

Mr Casey reported on the following:

Dog Walkers and Sandflat Road

Had been on a site visit on with Zoomies representative to understand their priorities and the focus on the triangle at the northern end of Sandflat Road.
Facilitated round table discussion with 6 local dog walkers who outlined the following preferences:-

To retain existing pine trees for shade; open to alternative tree options due to safety advice.
A willingness to consider increased dog registration fees to fund dog-related infrastructure.
Support for shared/integrated land use with dog walking coexisting with solar generation or passive leisure activities.

Cromwell Promotions Group

Attended the first meeting with the group and received an overview of current and upcoming initiatives.
Discussed increasing lanterns at Light Up Cromwell from 1,000 to 2,500; FENZ had no concerns.
Noted that the group intends to reform from incorporated society to charitable trust.
Gave an overview of upcoming events: street party over Labour Weekend, cherry spitting event in December, and detailed a new potential autumn event.
Noted that they had lodged their grant application for the Cromwell Community Board.

Cromwell and Districts Community Trust

Was an apology to their recent meeting.
Met with Shirley Calvert to discuss current trust projects, board funding and their priorities.
Noted the planned redevelopment of the former Cromwell Primary School.

New Zealander of the Year Awards

Noted that he had been selected as a finalist in the Kiwibank New Zealander of the Year Awards, Sustainability category and that the winner would be announced 19 March.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Anderson

Seconded: Casey

That the report be received.

Carried

10 Status Reports

26.2.8 March 2026 Governance Report

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

Staff gave a presentation on the proposed updates to the Cemetery Bylaw, which are currently under development.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Sanford

Seconded: Casey

That the report be received.

Carried

11 Date of The Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 7 April 2026.

12 Resolution to Exclude the Public

Committee Resolution

Moved: Anderson

Seconded: Sanford

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
Confidential Minutes of the Cromwell Community Board Meeting held on 4 February 2026	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
26.2.9 - March 2026 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 3.27 pm and the meeting closed at 3.32 pm.

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

CHAIR / /

Audit and Risk Committee Minutes

9 February 2026

Unconfirmed

MINUTES OF Central Otago District Council
Audit and Risk Committee
HELD IN Cromwell Service Centre, 42 The Mall, Cromwell
AND LIVE STREAMED VIA MICROSOFT TEAMS ON Monday, 9 February 2026 AT 9:34 am

PRESENT: Mr B Robertson (Chair), Her Worship the Mayor T Alley, Cr S Browne, Cr C Pannett, Cr T Paterson

IN ATTENDANCE: P Kelly (Chief Executive Officer), L Fleck (Group Manager - People and Culture, Acting Group Manager - Community Vision), D Rushbrook (Regional Deals Lead), D Scoones (Group Manager - Community Experience), P Morris (Chief Financial Officer), A Crosbie (Policy and Strategy Lead), A Lines (Risk and Procurement Manager), A Jansen (Health, Safety and Wellbeing Advisor), W McEnteer (Governance Manager)

1 Apologies

There were no apologies.

2 Public Forum

There was no public forum.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

Committee Resolution

Moved: Robertson

Seconded: Paterson

That the public minutes of the Audit and Risk Committee Meeting held on 8 December 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 Reports

26.1.2 Policy and Strategy Register

To consider the updated Policy and Strategy Register.

After discussion it was requested that there be a separate table in the register to note the reason a policy was out of date and when it would be brought up to date.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Alley

Seconded: Browne

That the report be received and its contents noted.

Carried

26.1.3 LTP Update

To consider an update on the Long-Term Plan (LTP) project.

Staff updated the meeting on the current activities of the LTP, including the formation of AMPS and the roadmap to guide members of where the project currently sat.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Pannett

Seconded: Browne

That the report be received and its contents noted.

Carried

26.1.4 Health, Safety and Wellbeing Report

To provide the Audit & Risk Committee with an update on the health, safety and wellbeing performance of the organisation.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Browne

Seconded: Alley

That the report be received and its contents noted.

Carried

26.1.5 Implementation of findings Operational Finance Review

To consider a proposed roadmap to implement the findings of the recent report commissioned as part of Council’s internal audit process.

After discussion it was noted that there were also steps to implement findings, such as opening the Long-term Plan budgets earlier.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Pannett

Seconded: Browne

That the report be received and its contents noted.

Carried

6 Chair's Report

26.1.6 Chair's Report

To consider the Chair’s report.

There was no report from the Chair.

7 Members' Reports

26.1.7 Members' Reports

To consider the members’ reports.

There were no reports from Members.

8 Status Reports

26.1.8 February 2026 Governance Report

To report on items of general interest and the current status report updates.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Robertson

Seconded: Alley

That the report be received.

Carried

9 Date of The Next Meeting

The date of the next scheduled meeting is 5 June 2026.

10 Resolution to Exclude the Public

Committee Resolution

Moved: Robertson

Seconded: Alley

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
Confidential Minutes of Ordinary Committee Meeting	s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons 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)(g) - the withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege 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	To protect a person's privacy Commercial sensitivity Legal professional privilege To prevent use of the information for improper gain or advantage
26.1.9 - Bad Debts and Abandoned Land	s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons 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	To protect a person's privacy Commercial sensitivity
26.1.10 - Risk Management Update	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	To prevent use of the information for improper gain or advantage
26.1.11 - Litigation Register	s7(2)(g) - the withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege	Legal professional privilege
26.1.12 - Digital Strategy 2026-2030 and Key Risk Initiatives	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	To prevent use of the information for improper gain or advantage
26.1.13 - CEO Update	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	To prevent use of the information for improper gain or advantage

Carried

The public were excluded at 10.53 am the meeting closed at 12.26 pm.


AGENDA Ordinary Council Meeting Wednesday, 25 March 2026
Date:	Wednesday, 25 March 2026
Time:	10:30 am
Location:	Maniototo Rugby Club Rooms, Stadium Drive, Ranfurly (A link to the live stream will be available on the Central Otago District Council's website.)
Peter Kelly Chief Executive Officer

Residual Risk Rating	Number of Key Risks
Very High	2
High	4
Medium	9
Low	3
Very Low	0
Total	18

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

Report Author:	Patrick Keenan, Capital Projects Programme Manager
Reviewed and authorised by:	Julie Muir, Group Manager - Three Waters

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