Agenda of Annual Plan Deliberations

Annual Plan Deliberations

27 May 2020

Council Annual Plan

MINUTES

Minutes of an ordinary meeting of the Annual Plan Council held in the Via Audio Visual Link on Tuesday 05 May 2020, commencing at 9.30 am

PRESENT

Mayor	Mayor Aaron Hawkins
Deputy Mayor	Cr Christine Garey
Members	Cr Sophie Barker	Cr David Benson-Pope
	Cr Rachel Elder	Cr Doug Hall
	Cr Carmen Houlahan	Cr Marie Laufiso
	Cr Mike Lord	Cr Jim O'Malley
	Cr Jules Radich	Cr Chris Staynes
	Cr Lee Vandervis	Cr Steve Walker
	Cr Andrew Whiley

IN ATTENDANCE

Sue Bidrose (Chief Executive Officer) and Sandy Graham (General Manager City Services)

Governance Support Officer Wendy Collard; Jennifer Lapham (Tuesday); Lauren McDonald (Wednesday); and Lynne Adamson (Thursday)

1 Apologies

There were no apologies.

2 Confirmation of agenda

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Steve Walker):

That the Council:

Confirms the agenda without addition or alteration.

Motion carried (CAPCC/2020/001)

3 Declarations of interest

Members were reminded of the need to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arose between their role as an elected representative and any private or other external interest they might have.

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Steve Walker):

That the Council:

a) Notes the Elected Members' Interest Register; and

b) Confirms the proposed management plan for Elected Members' Interests.

c) Notes the Executive Leadership Team Members’ Interest Register.

Motion carried (CAPCC/2020/002)

Part A Reports

4 Hearing Scheduled for the Annual Plan and Approach to Submissions

The report provided the Councillors with a schedule of submitters wishing to present their views at the Annual Plan hearings during the week beginning 4 May 2020, and to advise on the process followed with submissions during the COVID-19 lockdown.

Approximately 920 Submissions were received, with around 100 submitters wishing to present their submissions to Councillors. Submissions were originally scheduled to close on 15 April 2020, but due to the COVID-19 Lockdown, that date was extended to 24 April 2020.

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

a) Notes the report and the approach taken to submissions during the COVID-19 lockdown period.

Motion carried (CAPCC/2020/004)

5 Submissions
	The people who had indicated they wished to be heard in support of their submissions presented to the Council.
	Dougal McGowan, Otago Chamber of Commerce Dougal McGowan (Chief Executive Officer) spoke to the Otago Chamber of Commerce submission which included positively partnering with Council to support and encourage business innovation. Mr McGowan responded to questions.
	David Cooper, Federated Farmers of NZ David Cooper (Principal Advisor) spoke to the submission from Federated Farmers of NZ which included the proposed rates increase and the Community Targeted Rates options. Mr Cooper responded to questions from Councillors.
	Jo Millar, Grey Power Ms Millar (Southern Representative) spoke on behalf of the Grey Power submission which included the proposed rates increase, South Dunedin Community Hub and the city bus services. Ms Millar responded to questions.
	Lindsay Smith Mr Smith spoke to his submission which included traffic flows, the proposed rates increase, debt and Council spending. Mr Smith requested that Council give consideration to the decision to close the Dunedin Railways. Mr Smith responded to questions.
	Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Deputy Chairperson Christine Garey): That Council: Adjourns the meeting until 10.40 am. Motion carried
	The meeting adjourned at 10.20 am and reconvened at 10.40 am.
	Jasper Harvey Mr Harvey spoke his request for a new mountain bike pump track at the bottom of Signal Hill. He advised that the costs varied between $5,000 for a small dirt track to $100,000 for a large tarsealed track Mr Harvey responded to questions.
	Councillor Hall entered the meeting at 10.53 am.
	Ron Palenski, New Zealand Sports Hall of Fame Ron Palenski spoke to the New Zealand Sports Hall of Fame submission and thanked Council for its support. Mr Palenski requested that Council give consideration to the continuation of the rent rebate that it receives. Mr Palenski responded to questions.
	John Bywater Mr Bywater spoke to his submission which included his personal experience of the Octagon experience Mr Bywater responded to questions.
	Colin Campbell-Hunt, Orokonui Ecosanctuary (Otago Natural History Trust) Colin Campbell-Hunt (Chairperson, Otago Natural History Trust) spoke the submission from Orokonui Ecosanctuary and requested that Council give consideration to assisting with funding for the maintenance of the Ecosanctuary’s perimeter fence. Mr Campbell-Hunt responded to questions.
	Gordon Wilson, Belleknowes Golf Club On behalf of the Belleknowes Golf Club, Gordon Wilson (President, Belleknowes Golf Club) spoke to their submission and requested that Council give consideration a fifty percent rent rebate. Mr Wilson responded to questions.
	Michael Coggan, Otago Cricket Association and Mike Waddell, Otago Polytechnic Michael Coggan (Chief Executive, Otago Cricket Association Inc) and Mike Weddell (Director of External Relations, Otago Polytechnic) spoke to the Otago Cricket Association’s submission. Mr Coggan advised that they wanted Council to give consideration to use of 1650sqm of Logan Park for the establishment of the Otago International Centre of Cricket Excellence. Messrs Coggan and Weddell responded to questions.
	Francesca Dykes and Jack Saunders, Otago University Students' Association (OUSA) On behalf of the OUSA, Francesca Dykes (Political Representative, OUSA) and Jack Saunders (Residential Representative, OUSA) spoke to their submission in support of the proposed Waste Minimisation Management Plan. Ms Dykes and Mr Saunders responded to questions
	Barry Timmings Barry Timmings provided an oral submission which included The Octagon experience and proposed Central City Plan. Mr Timmings responded to questions.
	Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Chris Staynes): That Council: Adjourns the meeting until 2.10 pm. Motion carried The meeting adjourned at 12.40 pm and reconvened at 2.10pm.
	Erwin Lamping Erwin Lamping spoke to his submission regarding the proposed kerbside collection changes.
	Phil Dowsett, Otago Settlers Association Phil Dowsett (Past President) spoke to his and the Otago Settlers Association submissions and requested Council retained the existing funding for the Toitu Otago Settlers Museum. Mr Dowsett responded to questions on both his and the Settlers Assn’s submissions.
	Cr Andrew Whiley withdrew from this item and left the meeting at 2.39 pm
	Karen Anderson Ms Anderson reiterated points outlined in her submission and responded to questions.
	Cr Andrew Whiley returned to the meeting at 2.47 pm.
	Cathy and Alex Shemansky Mr and Mrs Shemansky spoke to their submission on the drainage issues on their property. Mr and Mrs Shemansky responded to questions.
	Peter Dowden, Bus Users Support Group Otepoti-Dunedin On behalf of the Bus Users Support Group Otepoti-Dunedin, Mr Dowden spoke to their submission in support of the proposed bus fare subsidy.
	Peter Dowden, New Zealand Tramways Union Dunedin Branch Inc/Whakakotahitanga Taramu ki Otepoti Peter Dowden spoke to the New Zealand Tramways Union Dunedin Branch Inc/Whakakotahitanga Taramu ki Otepoti’s submission and requested that consideration be given to the accessibility of bus stops for users when road works were undertaken.
	Peter Dowden Mr Dowden spoke to his submission and requested that Council give consideration to the installation of a foot bridge at Ross Creek and a footpath on the Cumberland Street overbridge. Mr Dowden responded to questions on all three submissions.
	Cr Doug Hall left the meeting at 3.25 pm.
	Peter Miller, Archives Records Association of NZ, Otago/Southland Branch Mr Miller spoke to the Archives Records Association of NZ, Otago/Southland Branch submission regarding the Dunedin City Council archives. Mr Miller responded to questions.
	David Tucker Mr Tucker spoke to his submission and provided an overview of the Swedish approach to the disposal of waste. Mr Tucker responded to questions.
	Dr Penny Field Dr Field spoke to her submission on the importance of local food resilience. Dr Field responded to questions.
	Dereck Gray Mr Gray spoke to his submission on the proposed rate increase; community targeted rate options and the city bus services. Mr Gray responded to questions.
	Russell Anderson Mr Anderson spoke to his submission which included maintenance of the road access to Woodside and requested that the Lee Stream bridge on King George Memorial Drive be widened. Mr Anderson responded to questions.
	Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Deputy Chairperson Christine Garey): That the Council: Adjourns the meeting until 9.30 am on Wednesday, 6 May 2020. Motion carried
	The meeting adjourned at 4.22 pm and reconvened on Wednesday, 6 May 2020 at 9.30 am.
	Wednesday 6 May 2020
	Apologies There were no apologies
	Cr Carmen Houlahan withdrew from this item. Joy Davis, Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board Joy Davis tabled and spoke to the Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board’s submission which included new Mosgiel Aquatics facility and affordable housing. Mrs Davis responded to questions.
	Cr Jules Radich withdrew from the item. Scott Weatherall, Saddle Hill Community Board Scott Weatherall spoke to the , Saddle Hill Community Board’s submission and requested a zero rates increase and deferral of projects such as the Waterfront and the Central City Plan. Mr Weatherall responded to questions.
	Cr Andrew Whiley withdrew from this item Paul Pope, Otago Peninsula Community Board Paul Pope spoke to the Otago Peninsula Community Board’s submission and requested deferral of the proposed rates and fees and charges increases; and major projects such the Central City Plan and the Waterfront. Mr Pope responded to questions.
	Steve Walker withdrew from this item Francisca Griffin, West Harbour Community Board Francisca Griffin spoke to the West Harbour Community Board’s submission. Ms Griffin thanked staff for the continued removal of the sycamore trees and requested that installation of a public toilet along the shared pathway. Ms Griffin responded to questions.
	Cr O’Malley withdrew from the item. Alasdair Morrison, Waikouaiti Coast Community Board On behalf of the Waikouaiti Coast Community Board, Alasdair Morrison reiterated the points in their submission which included the Waikouaiti Transfer Station and a cycleway from Waitati to Dunedin. Mr Morrison responded to questions.
	Dell McLeod Ms McLeod spoke to her submission in support of the Council Carbon Zero by 2030 plan. Ms McLeod responded to questions.
	Richard Hall on behalf of Otago Boys High School Sports Council Richard Hall (Rector Otago Boys High School) spoke to the Otago Boys High School Sports Council’s submission requesting funding be allocated for the maintenance of Littlebourne Park. Mr Hall responded to questions.
	Michael Lee Mr Lee spoke and reiterated the point in his submission. Mr Lee responded to questions.
	Dave Hanan Mr Hanan spoke to his submission on the proposed Waste Minimisation Management Plan. Mr Hanan responded to questions.
	Steve Turnbull, Concord School Steve Turnbull (Principal) spoke to the Concord School’s submission requesting safe pedestrian and cyclists’ access to and from Kaikorai Valley Road from Concord and Green Island. Mr Turnbull responded to questions.
	Bob Ischia Mr Ischia reiterated the points in his submission.
	Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey): That Council Adjourns the meeting until 12.00 pm Motion carried
	The meeting adjourned at 11.56 am and reconvened at 12.03 pm
	Mandy Mayhem Ms Mayhem spoke to her submission and thanked staff for their work during the lockdown period. Ms Mayhem-Bullock responded to questions.
	Natalia Tropotova and David Marsh, Property Council New Zealand David Marsh and Natalia Tropotova (Senior Advocacy Advisor) spoke to Property Council New Zealand’s submission which included the proposed rates increase and deferral of major projects. Mr Marsh and Mx Tropotova responded to questions.
	Bill Southworth, The Port Chalmers Foundry Trust On behalf of the Port Chalmers Foundry Trust, Bill Southworth spoke to their submission and requested that Council give consideration to leasing the Sims Building to their Trust for a peppercorn rental. Mr Southworth responded to questions.
	Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey): That the Council: Adjourns the meeting until 1.47 pm. Motion carried
	The meeting adjourned at 12.49 pm and reconvened at 1.47 pm.
	David Murphy, Medical Insurance Services Mr Murphy spoke to his submission and requested that consideration be given to extending the season of the St Clair Saltwater Pool. Mr Murphy responded to questions.
	Niki Bould, Our Food Network Niki Bould spoke to the Our Food Network submission on the importance of local food resilience. Ms Bould responded to questions.
	Cr Jules Radich entered the meeting at 2.06 pm.
	Kate Vercoe, Otago Farmers Market Trust On behalf of the Otago Farmers Market, Kate Vercoe (General Manager) spoke to the submission on the importance of maintaining a local food supply and resilience. Ms Vercoe responded to questions.
	Brent Weatherall and John Bezett Mr Weatherall and Mr Bezett spoke to Mr Weatherall’s submission on the proposed Central City Plan. Mr Weatherall requested that Central City Plan be reconsidered in particular that George Street remain two-way. Mr Bezett reiterated the Mr Weatherall’s concerns regarding the Central City Plan and suggested that Council look at the New Plymouth City Council’s plan. Messers Weatherall and Bezett responded to questions.
	Eleanor Doig and Grace Gemmell, South Dunedin Community Network Grace Gemmell provided an overview of she thought (as an eleven year old) would enhance South Dunedin for its youth which included playgrounds and specific areas in the South Dunedin Community Hub. Eleanor Doig spoke the South Dunedin Community Network submission and requested that funding for the Place Based Grants be increased. Ms Doig and Miss Gemmell responded to questions.
	Suzanne Menzies-Culling Ms Menzies-Culling spoke to her submission in support of the Waste Minimisation Management Plan. Ms Menzies-Culling responded to questions.
	Peter Gale Mr Gale spoke to his submission regarding public transport. Mr Gale responded to questions.
	Jenny Bunce Ms Bunce spoke to the pre-circulated information on her submission. Ms Bunce responded to questions.
	Stephen Jory Mr Jory spoke to his submission in support of the Waste Minimisation Management Plan. Mr Jory responded to questions.
	Fiona Clements, Just Atelier Trust (Stitch Kitchen) and Res.Awesome Ltd Ms Clements spoke to the pre-circulated information on Just Atelier Trust (Stitch Kitchen) and Res.Awesome Ltd submissions. Ms Clements responded to questions.
	Fiona Clements, Sustainable Dunedin City Inc Ms Clements spoke to the Sustainable Dunedin City Inc submission in support of the Waste Minimisation Management Plan, subsided bus fares and local food resilience.
	Cr Sophie Barker left the meeting at 4.35 pm.
	Robert (Bob) Barlin Mr Barlin spoke to his submission and requested that Council give consideration to invoicing one instalment of rates as a relief in particular for the Commercial sector. Mr Barlin responded to questions.
	Cr Christine Garey withdrew from the item. Philippa Harris and Megan Bartlett, Dunedin Symphony Orchestra Ms Harris and Ms Bartlett spoke on the submission from the Dunedin Symphony Orchestra. They requested Council give consideration to reviewing the DVML’s booking process and charges for the Dunedin Centre and an increase in the funding for DCC Grants. Ms Harris and Ms Bartlett responded to questions. Cr Whiley left the meeting at 5.00 pm
	Dr Louise Mainvil Dr Mainvil spoke to the pre-circulated information on her submission. Dr Mainvil responded to questions.
	Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Deputy Chairperson Christine Garey): That the Council: Adjourns the meeting until Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 9.30 am. Motion carried
	The meeting adjourned at 5.14 pm and reconvened on Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 9.30 am
	Thursday 7 May 2020
	Apologies Apologies were received from Cr Lee Vandervis (for lateness) and Cr Garey (for possible early departure). Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Steve Walker): That the Council: Accepts the apologies from Cr Lee Vandervis and Cr Christine Garey for possible early departure. Motion carried
	Late Submission Mayor Hawkins advised that a request had been received from the Rail Maritime Transport Union to present a late oral submission. Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Chris Staynes): That the Council: Accepts the late submission from the Rail Maritime Transport Union Motion carried
	Maurice Prendergast Mr Prendergast spoke to his submission which included the proposed change in the Community Target rate.
	Hamish Seaton, Mountain Biking Otago Hamish Seaton spoke to the pre-circulated information on the Mountain Biking Otago submission. Mr Seaton responded to questions. Cr Jim O’Malley entered the meeting at 9.50 am. Cr Lee Vandervis entered the meeting at 9.51 am.
	Cr Doug Hall left the meeting at 10.11 am Rhys Millar, Landscape Connections Trust Mr Millar spoke to his PowerPoint presentation in support of the Landscape Connections Trust submission. Mr Millar responded to questions.
	Rhys Millar, Predator Free Dunedin Mr Millar spoke to his PowerPoint presentation in support of the Predator Free Dunedin submission. Mr Millar responded to questions.
	Cr Marie Laufiso withdrew from the item. Cr Doug Hall returned to the meeting at 10.46 am. Gina Huakau and Reitu Cassidy, Puaka Matariki Festival Steering Roopu Gina Huakau and Reitu Cassidy spoke in support of the Puaka Matariki Festival Steering Roopu submission and provided an overview of the Matariki Festival activities. Ms Huakau and Ms Cassidy responded to questions.
	Gina Huakau, Tomahawk Smaills Beachcare Trust Gina Huakau spoke to Tomahawk Smaills Beachcare Trust’s submission and requested the continuation of the funding through a multi-year Service Level Agreement. Ms Huakau responded to questions.
	Larna McCarthy, Greater Green Island Community Network Charitable Trust Larna McCarthy spoke to the Greater Green Island Community Network Charitable Trust’s submission which included safe pedestrian and cyclists’ access to and from Kaikorai Valley Road from Concord and Green Island. Ms McCarthy responded to questions.
	Mayor Hawkins withdrew from this item and left the meeting at 11.23 am. The Deputy Mayor assumed the Chair. Jeremy Baker, Cosy Homes Charitable Trust Jeremy Baker (Project Manager) spoke in support of the submission and acknowledged the vital role that DCC funding played in supported their vision to make Otago homes warm. Mr Baker responded to questions.
	Mayor Hawkins entered the building at 11.34 am and assumed the Chair. Tess Trotter, Place-Based Community Network Tess Trotter spoke to the Place-Based Community Network’s submission and requested the funding model be altered to better align with a community-led approach to community building. Ms Trotter responded to questions.
	Anne Barsby and Merrin Bath, Southern Heritage Trust Anne Barsby and Merrin Bath spoke to the Southern Heritage Trust submission and requested that the ownership of the Donaghy’s Rope Walk building land be transferred to the Dunedin City Council. Mrs Barsby and Ms Bath responded to questions.
	Angus Mackay Mr Mackay spoke to his submission and requested that the area of land currently grass be transferred to “Reserve”. Mr Mackay responded to questions.
	John Brimble Sport Otago John Brimble (Chief Executive Officer) spoke to the submission from Sport Otago and requested that all ground charges, leases and rents for 2020/21 be waived to assist community sport and recreation. Mr Brimble responded to questions.
	Cr Jim O’Malley withdrew from this item. Dave Kearns, Rail Maritime Transport Union Dave Kearns (Otago Branch Secretary) on behalf of the Rail Maritime Transport Union requested that Council give consideration to provide funding for a six week trial of commuter trains between Mosgiel and Dunedin. Mr Kearns commented that this would save jobs and would ensure that the track and rolling stock would not deteriorate when not in use. Dave Kearns from RMTU requested that Council give consideration to allow a trial commuter train between Mosgiel and Port Chalmers for six weeks which would allow the retention of jobs and allowing the equipment to be used. Mr Kearns responded to questions.
	Jomana Moharram and Nicola Chapman, Otago Girls' High School Enviroschools Ms Moharram and Ms Chapman spoke to their PowerPoint presentation in support of the Otago Girls' High School Enviroschools. Ms Moharram and Ms Chapman responded to questions.
	Sir Alan Mark and Lily McDougall from Wise Response Society Sir Alan Mark and Lily McDougall spoke to the Wise Response Society’s submission in support of the Carbon Zero by 2030 Policy. Sir Mark and Ms McDougall responded to questions.
	Terry Brosnahan Mr Brosnahan spoke to his submission which included the proposed rates increase.
	Emily Duncan, Prospect Park Productions NZ Emily Duncan (Co-Director) spoke to the Prospect Park Productions NZ’s submission and requested that the Community Access Grant be increased and that the current policy be amended to include other venues. Ms Duncan responded to questions.
	Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Rachel Elder): That the Council: Adjourns the meeting until 1.40 pm. Motion carried
	The meeting adjourned at 1.15 pm and reconvened at 1.40 pm.
	Late Submissions Mayor Hawkins advised that two further requests had been received from the spoke to the pre-circulated information and Diane Yeldon to present a late oral submission. Moved: (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Chris Staynes) That the Council: Accepts the late submissions from Joseph Dougherty, Dunedin Environment Centre Trust; and Diane Yeldon. Motion carried
	Cr Carmen Houlahan entered the meeting at 1.45 pm. Mark Brown Mr Brown spoke to his submission which included deferral of major projects and installation of footpaths within the Waitati area. Mr Brown responded to questions.
	Jack McKerchar Mr McKerchar spoke to the pre-circulated information on his submission. Mr McKerchar responded to questions.
	Sarah Davie-Nitis, Dunedin Area Tracks &Trails Trust Ms Davie-Nitis spoke to spoke to the pre-circulated information on the Dunedin Area Tracks and Trails Trust’s submission. Ms Davie-Nitis responded to questions.
	Gerard Hyland and Brent Irving from the Dunedin Tunnels Trail Trust Gerard Hyland (Trustee) and Brent Irving (Chairperson) spoke to Dunedin Tunnels Trail Trust’s submission. In support of the cycleway from Wingatui to Dunedin. Mr Hyland and Mr Irving responded to questions.
	Cr Radich withdrew from this item and left the meeting at 2.24 pm. Nina Rivett, Heart of Dunedin Nina Rivertt (Manager) spoke to the Heart of Dunedin’s submission and requested the deferral of the Central City Plan upgrade. Ms Rivett responded to questions. Cr Radich returned to the meeting at 2.39 pm.
	Kyra Xavia, Lightwise Guild Kyra Xavia spoke to the Lightwise Guild submission which included the LED streetlighting, use of light rail and a cycleway from Waikouaiti and Waitati. Ms Xavia responded to questions.
	Scott Willis, Blueskin Resilient Communities Trust On behalf of the Blueskin Resilient Communities Trust, Scott Willis spoke to their submission in support of Council’s Carbon Zero by 2030 Policy. Mr Willis responded to questions.
	Joseph Dougherty, Dunedin Environment Centre Trust Joseph Doughtery tabled and spoke to the submission from the Dunedin Environment Centre Trust and requested funding towards the plantings at the Kaikorai Common. Mr Doughtery responded to questions.
	Geraldine Tait Ms Tait spoke to her submission in support of the Waste Minimisation Management Plan. Ms Tait responded to questions.
	Geraldine Tait, Senior-Link Ms Tait spoke to the Senior Link submission and requested the installation of a Barnes Dance crossing a the Cargills Corner intersection. Ms Tait responded to questions.
	Ja Thea Schools Strike 4 Climate Ja Thea spoke to the Schools Strike 4 Change’s submission in support of the Carbon Zero by 2030 Policy and the Waste Minimisation Management Plan. Ms Thea responded to questions.
	Diane Yeldon Ms Yeldon provided an oral submission and requested that Council limit spending and provide cost effective essential public services.
	Gareth McMillan, Dunedin Fringe Festival Gareth McMillan (Director) spoke to the Dunedin Fringe Festival’s and requested that the Grants funding be increased. Mr McMillan responded to questions.
	Jen Coatham and Pippa Chang, Generation Zero Ms Coatham and Ms Chang spoke to the Generation Zero’s submission which in support of subsided bus fares, use of rail and the Waste Minimisation Management Plan. Ms Coatham and Ms Chang responded to questions.
	Chris Ford, Disabled Persons Assembly (DPA) Dunedin Mr Ford spoke to the DPA Dunedin’s submission and requested that consideration be given to the installation of a changing places toilet. Mr Ford responded to questions.
	Anna Parker, Dunedin Community Builders Ms Parker spoke to the Dunedin Community Builders’ submission and requested that the Place-based fund and community grants be increased. Ms Parker responded to questions.
	Anna Parker, Mātāwai Consultancy Ms Parker spoke to their submission which included the COVID-19 recovery be seen as an opportunity to focus on Treaty of Waitangi relationships. Ms Parker responded to questions.
	Russell Lund Mr Lund spoke to his submission and requested the deferral of major projects. He commented on the proposed Community Targeted Rate. Mr Lund responded to a lot of questions.

The meeting concluded at 5.02 pm on Thursday, 7 May 2020.

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

MAYOR

Annual Plan Deliberations

27 May 2020

Operating budgets and COVID-19 support options 2020/21

Department: Finance

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 Since the draft 2020/21 operating budget was approved in January 2020, COVID-19 has impacted on the budget assumptions. This report provides an update to budgets reflecting the changed environment caused by the effects of COVID-19, as well as some budget updates.

2 As requested by Council, this report also provides options for alternative rate increases and funding, with an assessment of any impacts on service levels, rates, borrowing and the ongoing impacts for future years, and ways that ratepayers facing financial hardship might be supported.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Notes the community feedback received on rate increases and the COVID-19 response.

b) Determines the level of overall rates increase for 2020/21 and the level of borrowing (if any) for the revenue shortfall, Dunedin Railway Limited mothballing costs and operating expenditure.

c) Determines the level of funding, if any for a COVID-19 recovery fund.

BACKGROUND

3 This is the third year of the 10 year plan 2018-28. The Year 1 rate increase was 7.8% (2018/19) and Year 2 rate increase was 5.3% (2019/20). The draft budget approved in January 2020 provided for an overall rates increase of 6.5%, which was included in the Annual Plan 2020/21 consultation document.

4 At its meeting on 4 May 2020, Council considered the impacts of COVID-19 on the Annual Plan and passed the following resolutions (unconfirmed minutes).

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Chris Staynes):

That the Council:

a) Acknowledges the unanticipated impacts of COVID-19 on the DCC Draft Annual Plan 2020/2021.

b) Requests staff prepare revised Annual Plan 2020/21 budgets that reflect the impacts of COVID-19 in time for Council consideration at the Annual Plan deliberations meeting.

c) Requests as part of the revised budgets, a report that provides options for alternative rate increases and funding, with an assessment of any impacts on service levels, rates, borrowing and the ongoing impacts for future years.

d) Requests that consideration be given to ways that ratepayers facing financial hardship might be supported, in addition to a lower overall rate increase.

Motion carried unanimously by division

Legislative framework for annual plans and budgets

5 The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) requires the Council to manage its finances prudently and in a manner which promotes the current and future interests of the community. Councils are required to have a balanced budget, which means they need to ensure each year’s operating income is enough to meet that year’s operating expenses. The Council can decide to have an unbalanced budget if it considers it financially prudent to do so.

6 Financial prudence requires the Council to make an overall assessment of circumstances and decision-making that takes a long-term view with consideration of future financial and non-financial consequences of the decision. This approach has been strongly emphasised by both Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) and Society of Local Government Managers (SOLGM) in their advice to councils around New Zealand.

7 As noted in the LGNZ/SOLGM advice, councils need to take care in considering significantly different levels of rates to what was previously indicated to the community and/or the option of setting an unbalanced budget for the 2020/21 year. A change in level of service during Annual Plan deliberations for example would require consideration as to whether that triggers the requirement for a 10 year plan amendment.

8 If the amendment is in response to COVID-19 then temporary changes to the LGA have reduced the requirements for consultation and audit review of the consultation document. Material or significant changes to operating or capital budgets can be considered as part of the next 10 year plan 2021-31. The test for materiality in annual plans is cumulative, changes cannot be considered in isolation from one another.

DISCUSSION

Community feedback

9 A separate report on the summary of community feedback on the draft 2020/21 Annual Plan has been prepared for Council as part of Deliberations. The community feedback as it relates to the operating budget and COVID-19 recovery is listed here.

Rates increase

10 There were 165 comments relating to the rates increase. A number of comments referenced the level of increase given the current economic environment following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. There were some submitters who supported some level of rate increase noting the need for the Council to help lead the economic recovery over the next period.

COVID-19 response

11 There were 124 comments on general policy matters in respect of the Annual Plan consultation. A large number of submitters were calling for Council to consider the impact of COVID-19, and resulting economic impact on the Annual Plan and also the 10 year plan. Many submitters were asking the Council to consider a rates freeze, or a lower rates increase, for this Annual Plan. These themes were reoccurring throughout the feedback.

12 There were many comments generally asking for capital projects, particularly “non-essential" projects, to be delayed. There were also calls for the Council to consider additional support for local businesses considering the economic downturn and concern for some Dunedin households being able to meet basic needs as a result of COVID-19.

Revised budgets

Operating revenue

13 There are many uncertainties about COVID-19 impacts on the 2020/21 draft budget assumptions for both revenue and expenditure. However, the loss of operating revenue has the greatest financial impact for Council as a result of COVID-19. Any changes to proposed fees may further impact on the shortfall.

14 External revenue budgets have been updated based on anticipated decreases in revenue due to COVID-19. The net effect of revenue reduction assumptions is provided in the following table.

Group	Revenue reduction $’000
Three waters	440.0
Roading and footpaths	0
Waste management	1,077.3
Reserves and recreational facilities	808.4
Property	939.6
Community and planning	110.6
Museums and libraries	835.1
Regulatory services	1,467.5
Economic development	192.0
Governance and support services	617.5
Total	6,488.0

15 Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency revenue will be updated to reflect the revised capital expenditure programme.

Operating expenditure

16 Following a review of expenditure, $4.8 million of savings have been identified in the following areas:

a) Personnel costs savings of $1.8 million due to a reduction in the general salary increase, managing vacancies, training, recruitment costs and through continuing to look for savings by reviewing positions and salary spend.

b) Depreciation savings of $1 million and interest savings of $500k due to delayed capital expenditure in 2019/20.

c) Savings in other operational costs of $1.5 million. This comes from reductions for travel, non-essential consultancy costs, and elected member costs including remuneration, training and catering costs.

17 The savings identified are unlikely to impact levels of service.

Dunedin Railways Limited

18 The Council has committed to funding $1 million for the mothballing costs of Dunedin Railways Limited (DRL). This cost has been included in the options for consideration.

Supporting ratepayers

Rates payment plans

19 Staff have been working with ratepayers on flexibility around the timing of rates payments. Ratepayers experiencing financial hardship as a result of the COVID-19 have been encouraged to discuss their situation with the DCC. Residents needing help can confidentially register their details using a dedicated form on the DCC website or by contacting the CSA.

20 The DCC also encourages the use of direct debits to spread the rates cost over smaller regular payments rather than larger quarterly payments to assist with cash flow. Currently 50% of ratepayers pay by direct debit.

Rates remission and postponement policy

21 The DCC rates remission and postponement policy provides financial assistance or support for ratepayers where they might otherwise have difficulty meeting their rate payment obligations, while providing for the collection of rates. The policy provides for:

a) Remission of rates for extreme financial hardship (residential properties only).

b) Postponement of rates for extreme financial hardship.

c) Remission of penalties.

22 Applications are considered on their individual merits and on a case by case basis. The conditions and criteria for each rates remission or postponement is outlined in the rates remission and postponement policy.

OPTIONS

23 There are various options that Council can consider for supporting ratepayers, while maintaining the current levels of services provided to the community.

Additional support for ratepayers

Level of Rates

24 Reducing the overall rates increase from 6.5% provides some relief to ratepayers. Options are discussed below on reduced levels of rates income.

25 Every 1% reduction in the overall rate increase in 2020/21 results in $1.6 million less rates income for the Council. Any reduction in rates income flows through the remaining years of the 10 year plan 2018-28.

Rates penalties

26 Penalties for late payment of rates are not levied to ratepayers who enter into a payment arrangement with Council. This includes those ratepayers opting to pay by direct debit. It is anticipated that there will be an increase in ratepayers seeking assistance in the 2020/21 financial year and the income from penalties has been adjusted down to reflect this.

COVID-19 recovery fund

27 In consideration of the resolution passed at the Council meeting on 4 May 2020, where consideration be given to ways that ratepayers facing financial hardship might be supported, staff have included a placeholder of $1 million for a COVID-19 recovery fund in the options providing for other initiatives to support ratepayers facing financial hardship in 2020/21.

28 If Council approves the COVID-19 recovery fund, and provides guidance on how it wants the fund to be applied, a report with options for the criteria and administration of it will be prepared for Council consideration at the 30 June 2020 Council meeting.

Funding

29 The anticipated reduction in operating revenue of $6.5 million and DRL mothballing costs of $1 million could be funded by borrowing. This provides a pragmatic balance between managing the pressures on current ratepayers and ensuring the Council remains financially sustainable into the future, whereby the actions of today do not impact unfairly on ratepayers in the future.

30 While this does not meet the balanced budget requirements of the LGA, Council can resolve that it is financially prudent to have an unbalanced budget due to the one-off nature of funding the anticipated shortfall in operating revenue and the DRL mothballing costs by debt, to avoid a significant one-off impact on current ratepayers.

31 The DCC revenue and financing policy provides that debt can only be used to fund capital expenditure and not operating expenditure. Section 80 of the LGA allows Council to make a decision that is not in accordance with a Council policy, but when making that decision, it must clearly identify the inconsistency, the reason for the inconsistency, and any intention to amend the policy. A review of the revenue and financing policy will be undertaken as part of the development of the next 10 year plan.

32 Options 1 – 3 presented below provide some relief to ratepayers through proposed lower rate levels than the level consulted on. The full implication of lower rating levels will be felt in the next 10 year plan and may impact on levels of service or future rate increases. At this time, it is not possible to predict the level of those impacts. Options for repaying the monies borrowed under the proposed options would be considered during the development of the next 10 year plan.

Option 1 – Overall rate increase 4.1%

33 This option provides for an increase in rates income of 4.1%. This reflects a reduction due to operational expenditure savings of $4.8 million and the addition of a proposed $1 million recovery fund. Additional borrowing of $7.5 million funds the revenue shortfall and DRL mothballing costs.

Option 1	$’000
Rates Income
Rates income per draft budget	166,952.0
Less operating expenditure savings	(4,816.0)
Plus recovery fund	1,000.0
Revised rates income	163,136.0
Rate increase %	4.1%

Borrowing
Revenue shortfall (net of expenditure)	6,488.0
Dunedin Railways Ltd mothballing costs	1,050.0
Total additional borrowing	7,538.0

34 Borrowing would only be required if the revenue shortfalls eventuate. Borrowing levels may be lower. The cost of borrowing in the 2020/21 financial year can be met from existing budgets.

35 Limiting the overall rate increase to 4.1% would bring rates income for the 2020/21 year in line with the 10 year plan forecast. The 10 year plan forecast an 18.2% increase in rates over the first three years of the 10 year plan. The table below provides a comparison of the rate increases.

Rate Increase %	2018/19	2019/20	2020/21	All 3 years
10 year plan 2018-28	7.8%	4.9%	4.5%	18.2%
Actual and Option 1 for 2020/21	7.8%	5.3%	4.1%	18.2%

Advantages

· Responds to community feedback received through the Annual Plan consultation by reducing the overall rate increase.

· Is not a material change from the 10 year plan and what was proposed in the Annual Plan 2020/21 consultation document.

· No changes to levels of service.

Disadvantages

· Impacts rates increases in future years, but to a lesser extent than options 2 and 3.

· Funding the operating shortfall from debt is inconsistent with the DCC revenue and financing policy.

· Borrowing costs will be incurred.

Option 2 – Overall rate increase 3.5%

36 This option provides for an increase in rates income of 3.5%. This reflects a reduction due to expenditure savings of $4.8 million. Additional borrowing of $8.5 million funds the revenue shortfall, DRL mothballing costs and the proposed $1 million recovery fund.

Option 2	$’000
Rates Income
Rates income per draft budget	166,952.0
Less operating expenditure savings	(4,816.0)
Revised rates income	162,136.0
Rate increase %	3.5%

Borrowing
Revenue shortfall (net of expenditure)	6,488.0
Dunedin Railways Ltd mothballing costs	1,050.0
Recovery fund	1,000.0
Total additional borrowing	8,538.0

Advantages

· Responds to community feedback received through the Annual Plan consultation by reducing the overall rate increase.

· Is not a material change from the 10 year plan and what was proposed in the Annual Plan 2020/21 consultation document.

· No changes to levels of service.

Disadvantages

· Funding the operating shortfall from debt is not consistent with the DCC revenue and financing policy.

· Has a higher portion of borrowing because of the higher revenue shortfall, and associated borrowing costs.

· Impacts rates increases in future years, but to a lesser extent than option 3.

Option 3 – No overall rate increase

37 This option provides for a 0% rates increase. This combines the operating expenditure savings of $4.8 million and a shortfall of $5.4 million operating costs. Additional borrowing of $14 million would fund the revenue shortfall, DRL mothballing costs, the proposed $1 million recovery fund and the $5.4 million of operating costs.

38 This essentially means the Council would borrow to fund all increases in operating expenditure. Alternatively, if borrowing was not an option, Council would need to reduce current levels of service, which would involve major restructuring, changes to community outcomes, and trigger an amendment to the current 10 year plan.

Option 3	$’000
Rates Income
Rates income per draft budget	166,952.0
Less operational expenditure savings	(4,816.0)
Less operational costs funded by borrowing	(5,425.0)
Revised rates income	156,711.0
Rate increase %	0.0%

Borrowing
Revenue shortfall (net of expenditure)	6,488.0
Dunedin Railways Ltd mothballing costs	1,050.0
Recovery fund	1,000.0
Operational costs funded by borrowing	5,425.0
Total additional borrowing	13,963.0

Advantages

· Responds to community feedback received through the Annual Plan consultation by having no overall rate increase.

Disadvantages

· Compared with the other options, this has the most impact on rates increases in future years.

· Changes to levels of service may need to be considered in future years.

· It is not financially prudent to borrow for ongoing operating expenditure.

· Material change from Year 3 of the 10 year plan and what was proposed in the Annual Plan 2020/21 consultation document and requires further consultation.

· Funding the operating shortfall from debt is not consistent with the DCC revenue and financing policy.

Option 4 – Overall rate increase 6.5% (status quo)

39 This option provides for an increase in rates income of 6.5% which was consulted on. The operating expenditure savings of $4.8 million reduces the amount of required borrowing. Additional borrowing of $3.7 million combines funding for the revenue shortfall, DRL mothballing costs, and the proposed $1 million recovery fund.

Option 4	$’000
Rates Income
Rates income per draft budget	166,952.0
Revised rates income	166,952.0
Rate increase %	6.5%

Borrowing
Revenue shortfall (net of expenditure)	6,488.0
Dunedin Railways Ltd mothballing costs	1,050.0
Recovery fund	1,000.0
Less operating expenditure savings	(4,816.0)
Total additional borrowing	3,722.0

Advantages

· In line with the 10 year plan and what was proposed in the Annual Plan 2020/21 consultation document.

· Compared with the other options, this has the least impact on rates increases in future years.

· No changes to levels of service.

Disadvantages

· Does not respond to community feedback received through the Annual Plan consultation.

· Funding the operating shortfall from debt is not consistent with the DCC revenue and financing policy.

NEXT STEPS

40 The level of overall rates increase for 2020/21 and the level of borrowing for the revenue shortfall, Dunedin Railway Limited mothballing costs and operating expenditure determined by the Council will be included in the 2020/21 Annual Plan.

41 The relevant resolutions will be included regarding an unbalanced budget and inconsistent decision in the adoption report for the Annual Plan 2020/21.

42 The decision made by Council on the level of rates will inform options for considering the level of the Community Services Targeted Rates, which is the subject of the report “10 Year Plan Amendment – Community Services Targeted Rate”.

Signatories

Author:

Carolyn Allan - Senior Management Accountant

Gavin Logie - Financial Controller

Authoriser:

Dave Tombs - General Manager Finance and Commercial

Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	LGNZ SOLGM Covid-19 advice to Councils budgeting and setting rates	52
⇩b	DCC Rates Remission and Postponement Policy	58

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

The Annual Plan 2020/21 enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities; and promotes the social, cultural, environmental and economic wellbeing of Dunedin communities now, and in the future.

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Economic Development Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Environment Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Arts and Culture Strategy	☒	☐	☐
3 Waters Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Spatial Plan	☒	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐

The Annual Plan 2020/21 contributes to objectives across the strategic framework, as it describes the Council’s activities, which are aligned to community outcomes.

Māori Impact Statement

The Annual Plan 2020/21 provides a mechanism for Māori to contribute to local decision-making. DCC works with the Māori Participation Working Party, Aukaha and mana whenua to ensure there is process for Māori collaboration across the Annual Plan work programme.

Sustainability

Sustainability is an underlying principle of the DCC’s strategic framework. Activity in the Annual Plan 2020/21 supports the DCC to embed the principles of sustainability across DCC work outlined in the 10 year plan 2018-28.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

This report informs the Annual Plan deliberations and provides an update on the 2020/21 operating budget.

Financial considerations

Financial considerations are detailed in the report.

Significance

Issues of significance were covered as part of the 2020/21 Annual Plan engagement process.

Engagement – external

The Council consulted using the special consultative procedure on the draft budgets.

Engagement - internal

Staff and managers from across the Council have been involved in revising the draft budgets.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

Sector advice from LGNZ and SOLGM (Attachment A) is underpinned by legal advice.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Community Boards may be interested in this report and were involved in the Annual Plan engagement. Boards have submitted as part of the Annual Plan process.

Annual Plan Deliberations

27 May 2020

10 Year Plan 2018-28 Capital Budget Changes

Department: Finance

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report provides an updated capital expenditure programme reflecting timing changes and reallocation of budgets. The capital budget for the 2020/21 year has reduced by $2.5 million to $125.9 million. The overall 10 year programme remains $910.2 million.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the updated 2018/19 – 2027/28 capital expenditure budget for inclusion in the 2020/21 Annual Plan.

BACKGROUND

2 The 10 year plan 2018-28 provided a capital expenditure budget of $878.3 million. This was updated to $910.2 million in the 2019/20 Annual Plan to reflect new projects (Logan Park turf, compliance work on 54 Moray Place and Roading emergency works) and increased funding for the Peninsula Connection and South Dunedin Library and Community Complex. The table below provides a summary of the 2018/19 – 2020/21 years.

2019/20 Annual Plan	2018/19 $m	2019/20 $m	2020/21 $m
Capital expenditure budget	95.9	125.0	128.4

3 Staff indicated to Council during the 29 January 2020 Annual Plan Council meeting that a full review of the capital budget and timing for projects would be provided for Council consideration at the Annual Plan deliberations.

DISCUSSION

4 The capital budget has been reviewed. This report provides a revised capital expenditure programme reflecting timing changes in part due to the COVID-19 lockdown period, and some reallocation of project budgets. The timing changes include carrying forward funding of unspent budgets in 2019/20 to the 2020/21 year, accelerating funding from future years and reprofiling some projects over the 10 year period.

5 The updated 10 year capital expenditure programme remains at $910.2 million. The table below provides a summary of the first three years:

2020/21 Annual Plan	2018/19 $m	2019/20 $m	2020/21 $m
Capital expenditure budget	91.3	96.1	125.9
Increase/(decrease) over 2019/20 Annual Plan	(4.6)	(28.9)	(2.5)

6 The following table provides a summary of the capital expenditure budget for the 2020/21 year as forecast in the 2019/20 Annual Plan, compared to the updated budget for the 2020/21 Annual Plan.

Group Activity	2020/21 per 2019/20 Annual Plan $m	2020/21 Annual Plan Update $m	Change Increase (Decrease) $m
Three Waters	26.7	31.0	4.3
Waste Management	0.9	2.0	1.1
Roading and Footpaths	69.3	55.5	(13.8)
Reserves and Recreation Facilities	15.7	9.8	(5.9)
Libraries and Museums	2.5	2.3	(0.2)
Property	9.5	19.0	9.5
Community and Planning	0.2	0.6	0.4
Governance and Support Services	3.4	5.3	1.9
Regulatory Services	0.2	0.4	0.2
Total	128.4	125.9	(2.5)

7 The main changes are summarised in the following sections by 10 year plan activity group. The updated capital budgets are provided in Attachments A-J.

Three Waters

8 The capital budget for the 3 Waters group reflects timing changes and reallocation of funding between projects and renewals and new capital. The other main changes are:

· Wastewater - an allocation in 2020/21 for investigation work for the network and treatment plants to reduce flooding, accommodate growth and remain compliant.

· Wastewater (biosolids) - an allocation in 2021/22 and 2022/23 to investigate alternative treatment and disposal options.

· Stormwater - an allocation in 2020/21 for ‘stormwater new capital other’ for private-public watercourse flooding issues.

· Renewals - bringing forward network renewals to reduce water supply/flooding risks in problem areas.

Waste Management

9 The capital budget for the Waste Management group reflects timing changes. The main changes are:

· Green Island Landfill and Transfer Station - the budget has been brought forward from future years for additional work at the Green Island Landfill to open up the next landfill filling stages.

· Green Island Landfill Aftercare – the budget has been brought forward from future years as sections of the landfill are now at final consented height.

10 No funding for a new landfill is included as this will be considered as part of the next 10 year plan process.

Roading and Footpaths

11 The capital budget for the Roading and Footpaths group reflects timing changes and some reallocation of project funding. The other main changes are:

· Central City Upgrade, City to Waterfront Connection and Tertiary Precinct Upgrade - these projects have been reprofiled.

· Dunedin Urban Cycleways - funding has been brought forward from future years to complete the harbour link project.

· LED street lights project - funding has been recategorised between new capital and renewals and reprofiled with completion expected in the 2021/22 year.

· Minor Improvements, renamed ‘low cost, low risk improvements’. Funding has been brought forward from future years for additional safety work in 2020/21.

· Renewals - a reduction in the renewals budget for the 2020/21 year reflects limited Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) funding and the ability to meet the requirements for NZTA funding for some renewals work.

Reserves and Recreational Facilities

12 The capital budget for the Reserves and Recreational Facilities group reflects timing changes. The other main changes are:

· Mosgiel Pool (DCC contribution only) - revised budget phasing aligns with the latest project timelines and budget guidance.

· Hydroslide Renewal – revised budget phasing reflects the latest Masterplan and project timeline with capital work commencing in the latter part of the 2020/21 year.

· Moana Pool renewals – aligned with the Masterplan project, commencing in the 2020/21 year.

Libraries and Museums

13 The capital budget for the Libraries and Museums group reflects a carry forward and a budget transfer of two building renewal projects to the Property group capital renewals programme.

Property

14 The capital budget for the Property Group reflects timing changes and reallocation of funding between projects and renewals and new capital.

· Housing – a number of projects will underspend in the current year carried forward to 2020/21. These include the School Street, Palmyra and High Street projects.

· Other – a number of projects underspent in the current year will be carried forward to 2020/21. These include the Civic Centre re-roof, the Manuka causeway Wall Street, South Dunedin Community complex and DPAG atrium and roof work.

Community and Planning

15 The capital budget for the Community and Planning Group reflects timing changes for urban design improvements.

Governance and Support Services

16 The capital budget for the Governance and Support Services Group reflects timing changes. The main changes are:

· BIS – project funding has been carried forward from 2019/20 and rephased over the 2020/21 and 2021/22 years due to project delays. Funding has also been recategorised between renewals and new capital.

· Fleet Operations – funding for fleet renewal and the bookbus replacement has been carried forward to the 2020/21 year.

Regulatory Services

17 The capital budget for the Regulatory Services Group reflects timing changes. The main change relates to parking meter renewals in parking buildings.

Crown Infrastructure Partners ‘shovel ready’ projects

18 The Government has sought applications for infrastructure projects that are ‘shovel ready’ to support the construction industry and reduce the economic impact from COVID-19. DCC submitted ten major ‘shovel ready’ projects.

19 As it is unclear when and if funding applications will be successful, any increased funding has not been included in the updated capital expenditure budget. When the outcome is known an update will be provided to Council.

OPTIONS

20 No options are provided in this report.

NEXT STEPS

21 The updated capital expenditure programme will be included in the 2020/21 Annual Plan.

Signatories

Author:

Carolyn Allan - Senior Management Accountant

Gavin Logie - Financial Controller

Authoriser:

Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure Services

Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Summary Capital Budgets	71
⇩b	3 Waters Capital Budget	72
⇩c	Waste Management Capital Budget	74
⇩d	Roading and Footpaths Capital Budget	75
⇩e	Rserves and Recreation Capital Budget	76
⇩f	Libraries and Museum Capital Budget	78
⇩g	Property Capital Budget	80
⇩h	Community and Planning Capital Budget	81
⇩i	Governance and Support Capital Budget	82
⇩j	Regulatory Capital Budget	83

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☐	☐	☐
Economic Development Strategy	☐	☐	☐
Environment Strategy	☐	☐	☐
Arts and Culture Strategy	☐	☐	☐
3 Waters Strategy	☐	☐	☐
Spatial Plan	☐	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☐	☐	☐
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☐	☐	☐
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☐	☐	☐

The capital expenditure programme primarily contributes to the objectives and priorities of the above strategies.

Māori Impact Statement

Sustainability

Major issues and implications for sustainability relating to the capital expenditure programme are discussed and considered in the 50 year Infrastructure Strategy approved last year as part of the 10 year plan 2018-28.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

This report informs the Annual Plan deliberations and provides an update on the 2020/21 capital budget.

Financial considerations

Financial considerations are detailed in the report.

Significance

Engagement – external

The Council consulted using the special consultative procedure on the draft budgets.

Engagement - internal

Staff and managers from across the Council have been involved in the updating the capital budgets.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Community Boards may be interested in this report and were involved in the Annual Plan engagement. Boards are also submitting as part of the Annual Plan process.

Annual Plan Deliberations

27 May 2020

Annual Plan 2020/21 - Funding Requests

Department: Corporate Policy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report summarises the funding requests from external organisations and resource requests received during the community feedback period on the Annual Plan 2020/21.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Considers the external funding requests from organisations.

b) Considers the feedback from the community on resourcing of DCC activities and projects.

funding requests

2 The following requests were received from organisations and are currently not included in the draft 2020/21 budgets. Staff have provided comments on the funding requests, and these can be found in the submissions database.

3 As a guide, an addition of around $160k of operating expenditure would add 0.1% to rates. A funding request is listed as ‘unspecified’ if there has been no specific amount attached to the request or if the total cost of the request is unclear.

Summary of request	Amount sought 2020/21
Aramoana League Inc (768157): A public toilet at the Shelly Beach Carpark, Aramoana.	Unspecified
Belleknowes Bowls Club (767370): Seeking an annual rental reduction. This is currently $9,264 per annum.	Unspecified
Disabled Persons Assembly NZL (769639) / Donald Beasley Institute (769588): To support the construction of a Changing Places Bathroom in the city. 12 individual submitters support this request. Costs estimated by submitters estimate $280k if new, or $150k if converting existing facility.	Unspecified
Dunedin area Tracks & Trails Trust (DaT&T Trust) In-formation (769891): Formation for Dunedin area Tracks & Trails Trust. The $60k requested is for a part-time project manager and to cover legal costs, wages and accounting fees. Feasibility study for the Southern Gateway Trail as an extension to the existing Tunnels Trail project.	$60k Unspecified
Mountain Biking Otago (769976): Increase in annual maintenance grant from $30,000 to $80,000. A range of initiatives to create and enhance existing tracks around the city, including the creation of a Dunedin Trails Trust.	Additional $50k to bring annual amount to $80k Unspecified
New Zealand Sports Hall of Fame (NZSHOF) (761443): Continuation of $30,590 annual rent rebate from Council (Council also provides NZSHOF with a Property Arrangement Grant of $42,900). Note additional funding request to considered by Council further below.	$30,590 annually
New Zealand Chinese Language Week (NZCLW) Trust (772990): Delivery costs of NZCLW to be held across New Zealand from 20 to 26 September 2020. Note this is a late submission and can be considered pending approval of late submissions.	$5k
Orokonui Ecosanctuary (767521): Requests 10% funding for remediation of predator fence, estimated by the Ecosanctuary as a total $336k. Also requests in kind support for the protection of the sanctuary.	$33,600, being 10% of $336k
Otago Boys High School (767820): Upgrading Littlebourne Sports Ground. There are three options ranging from $4K to $55k.	$4k - $55k
Otago Cricket Association Inc (767782): Seeking, in partnership with Otago Polytechnic, long term access of DCC of land currently being used for tennis courts by Tennis Otago. The land would be used for a new centre. The proposal is supported by Tennis Otago, Rugby Otago and New Zealand Cricket.	Unspecified
Otago Hockey (769616): Support for Otago Hockey and ongoing support for the turf project at King’s High School.	Unspecified
Otago Neighbourhood Support (769347): Increased funding and beyond the one yearly cycle.	Unspecified
Port Chalmers Foundry Trust (769272): Peppercorn lease of the Sims Building and in kind support for other building work improvements at an estimated cost of $400k. Note the Trust’s written submission requested the right to purchase the building from Council for $1 but a peppercorn lease was instead requested at Hearings.	Unspecified
Rail and Maritime Transport Union (771793): Funding for six-week trial of commuter trains between Mosgiel and Dunedin. Note this request is subject to a separate report.	$250k
Southern Heritage Trust (770098): Request Council to purchase Donaghy’s ropewalk and gift Council’s ownership of Bathgate Park (adjacent to 64 Bradshaw St) to the Southern Heritage Trust at nil cost.	Unspecified
Sport Otago (766427): Waiving all ground charges, leases and rents for 2020/21. This figure is estimated at $534k but does not include any impact on Property (e.g. Edgar Centre and Ice Stadium rental).	Unspecified
Tennis Otago (770047): Funding for Stage 2 of Logan Park tennis facility. Stage 1 is yet to be underway.	Unspecified
Tomahawk Smaills Beachcare Trust (769784): Annual funding for operational costs of producing 2,000 plants. Additional project support for planting days.	$23k annually Unspecified

New Zealand Sports Hall of Fame

4 In addition to their Annual Plan funding request above, NZSHOF have also approached DCC for support due to declining visitor figures and the need for substantial investment to ensure its long term viability. Sports New Zealand (NZSHOF’s principal funding partner) have funded an options report by Manuireva Consulting into the future of the NZSHOF.

5 This report demonstrates that NZSHOF will require approximately $500,000 in annual subsidy to enable it to manage its collection, recruit sufficient staff and provide marketing and programming to increase presently declining visitation levels.

6 Manuireva Consulting outlined four options for the future of NZSHOF. Remaining a stand-alone organisation was identified as high risk and remaining in Dunedin was not described as essential. Another option was for NZSHOF to co-locate or integrate with a sports facility or museum. Discussions with Dunedin Venues Management Limited (DVML) and Ara Toi have indicated that, whilst co-location might be an option, it would not be possible to absorb the $500,000 subsidy within existing budgets. DCC staff surveyed NZSHOF visitors from 9 to 21 March 2020 and the results indicate that almost 90% of visitors to the NZSHOF discovered it as part of visiting the railway station rather than making a specific trip.

7 Sports New Zealand have indicated that they will not continue to provide long term support for NZSHOF although they are willing to provide short term funding (until December 2020) to enable NZSHOF to implement the findings of the Manuireva Consulting report. NZSHOF provides a very limited economic impact to Dunedin, and its themes do not fit with the objective or collecting policies of either of the City’s major museums.

DCC RESOURCING REQUESTS

8 There were some requests for resourcing of DCC activities and projects. There may have been more references on these resourcing requests included in other submissions, and therefore the number of submitters is indicative only.

9 The following table identifies the requests for resourcing of DCC activities, most of which have unspecified values:

Summary of request	Amount sought 2020/21
Arts funding (2 submissions): Increases to discretionary arts funding, with an emphasis on vocational pathways in the arts industry, DCC responsiveness to community initiatives, reducing barriers to accessing funding, especially around smaller grants, and increasing the number of grant rounds.	Unspecified
Archives (1 submission): Archives and Records Association request a fully costed proposal for consideration in the next 10 year plan to move DCC archives from civic centre basement to an appropriate facility.	Unspecified
Biodiversity (2 submissions): The planting of 100,000 native trees and plants on Council owned reserves in the Otago Peninsula area. A request for Council to rent an area of land above Deborah Bay (above Blueskin Road), identified as having high biodiversity values, and is currently privately leased.	Unspecified
Burnside off-ramp (2 submissions): Request to share the results from this year’s Green Island community survey with the DCC Road Safety Team and ask that it be a priority for assessment.	Unspecified
Cycleway (10 submissions): Warrington to Waitati.	Unspecified
Community grants (7 submissions): Increased funding and funding certainty for the community sector via community grants and the place-based fund.	Unspecified
Carbon calculators (1 submission): Adoption of FutureFit carbon calculator.	Unspecified
Chisolm Links (1 submission): Increased maintenance to maintain Chisholm Links.	$150k
Community access to Council facilities (8 submissions): Request for an investigation into solutions for accessibility and affordability to the Town Hall and the Glenroy Auditorium, including a review of hiring policies to Dunedin’s community and not-for-profit organisations. Also requests DCC look at venue hire, booking certainty, and the Council’s funding level to Dunedin Venues Management Ltd for the community access grant.	Unspecified
Cycleway (2 submissions): Waitati to Waikouaiti.	Unspecified
Drainage (1 submission): A footpath and street drainage upgrade programme for all residential areas of the Otago Peninsula to improve pedestrian safety and prepare for sea level rise.	Unspecified
Dune protection (1 submission): A coastal dune protection and management programme at Te Rauone, Harwood, Smaills, Tomahawk, and Okia beaches.	Unspecified
Farmers market (1 submission): Access to power and water for sterilisation.	Unspecified
Food advocacy (4 submissions): Staff resourcing of current DCC role to be moved to a more strategic role within the DCC.	Unspecified
Grant Braes Community Facility (1 submission): Completion of facility.	Unspecified
Grants Subcommittee (2 submissions): General increases to the grants funding pool and continued, more certain funding.	Unspecified
Gym facility (1 submission): A new gym facility on land behind Logan Park High School.	Unspecified
LED lighting (1 submission): Use of calvin amber LEDs for areas of ecological significance in Dunedin.	Unspecified
Logan Park Tennis Facility (3 submissions): Conceptual support for funding for Stage 2 of Logan Park tennis facility. Note Stage 1 is yet to be underway.	Unspecified
Matariki Festival (2 submissions): Increased festival funding, including assessment of DCC cultural capacity and review of 0.3 FTE assigned to the festival. Continued DCC support for locally grown events.	Unspecified
Moana pool (2 submissions): More investment.	Unspecified
Pedestrian safety (2 submissions): Safe road crossing points at Macandrew Bay, pedestrian facilities at Pukehiki/Highcliff Rd, speed and safety improvements at Tomahawk Road. Submitters also request for the priority of the Concord Pedestrian crossing when it is examined in 2021 as part of the Tunnels Trail Project designed to connect Wingatui to Kaikorai Valley Road.	Unspecified Unspecified
Peninsula Connection Project (1 submission): Continuation and completion of this project, and removing the Otakou/Harington Point Section from the current programme.	Unspecified
Performing arts theatre (4 submissions): A mid-sized performing arts theatre in proximity to the Dunedin CBD.	Unspecified
Pool hours (1 submission): Extending season for St Clair Hot Salt Water Pool.	Unspecified
Private land (1 submission): A submission drawing attention to drainage issues at 1 Castlewood Rd, Company Bay.	Unspecified
Public toilets (1 submission): Toilets at Purakaunui and on Cycle path. The installation of public toilets at Tomahawk Beach and the upgrade of the public toilets at Macandrew Bay Hall.	Unspecified
Research (1 submission): Funding for tourism research for the Otago Peninsula.	Unspecified
Road sealing (1 submission): Investigation into sealing of gravel roads in the Back-Bays and investigation and preparation of plans for the raising of the Back-Bay roads.	Unspecified
Shared paths (2 submissions): Dunedin to Waihola shared path and Dunedin to Oamaru Shared Path.	Unspecified
Tracks (17 submissions): Including mountain bike tracks/pump track. A large portion of these submissions support Mountain Biking Otago’s submission.	Unspecified
Tracks – other (1 submission): Peninsula Wild Side Trail and Three Peaks tracks.	Unspecified
Water mains (1 submission): Establish water mains for Karitane houses.	Unspecified

NEXT STEPS

10 The level of funding, if any, determined by the Council will be included in the Annual Plan 2020/21.

Signatories

Author:	Sean Jacobs - Senior Policy Analyst
Authoriser:	Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

The Annual Plan 2020/21 enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of, communities; and promotes the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of Dunedin communities now, and in the future.

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Economic Development Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Environment Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Arts and Culture Strategy	☒	☐	☐
3 Waters Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Spatial Plan	☒	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐

The Annual Plan 2020/21 contributes to objectives across the strategic framework, as it describes the Council’s activities, which are aligned to community outcomes.

Māori Impact Statement

Sustainability

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

This report informs the Annual Plan deliberations.

Financial considerations

The financial considerations are detailed in the report.

Significance

Issues of significance were covered as part of the 2020/21 Annual Plan engagement process.

Engagement – external

A full community engagement process was held as part of the 2020/21 Annual Plan engagement process and the submission deadline was extended from 15 to 24 April. Hearings were also conducted from 5 to 7 May.

Engagement - internal

Staff and managers from across the Council have been involved in the development of the draft budgets.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

Refer to the group budget reports and options reports for specific risks considered in the development of the draft budget.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Community Boards may be interested in this report and were involved in the Annual Plan engagement. Boards have submitted as part of the Annual Plan process.

Annual Plan Deliberations

27 May 2020

Annual Plan 2020/21 - Summary of Community Feedback

Department: Corporate Policy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report summarises the community engagement process and the feedback received on the draft Annual Plan 2020/21.

2 Feedback on specific consultation items are included in separate reports, including the proposed amendment to the 10 year plan and joining the New Zealand Local Government Funding Agency.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Considers the feedback received from the community.

BACKGROUND

3 A document titled ‘Dunedin’s Annual Plan consultation document | Te Tuhika Uiui Mahere-ā-Tau o Ōtepoti’ was developed and distributed to the community. This was designed to support community engagement and participation in the Council’s decision-making processes relating to the content of the draft Annual Plan 2020/21 budgets.

4 Consultation on the draft Annual Plan 2020/21 occurred between 12 March and 24 April 2020, to enable the community to have their say.

5 Due to the disruption caused by the COVID-19 lockdown, the original submission deadline of 15 April 2020 was extended to 24 April, in order to ensure the community had adequate time to respond.

6 Specific community feedback was sought on the proposed amendment to the 10 year plan (reduction in the community services targeted rate), Council’s proposal to join the New Zealand Local Government Funding Agency as a Guaranteeing Local Authority, and the draft Waste Minimisation and Management Plan.

7 A range of community engagement activities had been planned as part of the draft Annual Plan 2020/21:

a) Sending the consultation document to every Dunedin home;

b) Use of social media and online channels, including Facebook, Twitter, and the DCC website;

c) ‘Councillor Cuppa’ face to face engagement sessions, which had to be cancelled due to COVID-19 lockdown restrictions;

d) Set ups of static displays at libraries, community facilities and community events, which also had to be cancelled due to COVID-19 lockdown restrictions;

e) Community Board information packs: All Community Boards were provided with Annual Plan information packs to distribute and utilise as part of their local engagement;

f) Providing communications about how to access further information and provide feedback to the Council featured in media, FYI panels and advertising;

g) Convening remote hearings where the community could speak to the Council in person between Tuesday 5 May to Thursday 7 May 2020 (95 people spoke to their submissions at the hearings).

8 A total of 924 feedback items were received during the 2020/21 Annual Plan feedback process (compared with 469 feedback items during the 2019/20 Annual Plan process). The majority of responses were completed via the online feedback form.

9 Feedback comments were received on 65 topics. The Annual Plan Consultation Document asked for specific feedback on three items - the proposed rating change, joining the Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA), and the draft Waste Minimisation and Management Plan (WMMP).

10 The proposed rating change relates to the proposal to decrease the Community Services Targeted Rate. This proposal is discussed in the report “10 year plan amendment – Community Services Targeted Rate” which is being considered as part of the Annual Plan deliberations.

11 The proposal to join the LGFA is discussed in the report “Local Government Funding Agency – Summary of Feedback and Next Steps” which is being considered as part of the Annual Plan deliberations.

12 Council received 327 comments on the WMMP. This feedback is being presented to Council in a separate report, with an updated Waste Minimisation and Management Plan to be considered for adoption.

13 Excluding the three specific topics, the topics most frequently commented on were:

Topic	Number of comments
Rates Increase	200
Central City Plan	172
Corporate Policy	124
Bus Fares	113
Waterfront	107
Transport	85
The Octagon Experience	65

14 68 comments were submitted within the Annual Plan consultation relating to feedback on the kerbside collection option. These have been forwarded to the Waste Futures project team.

15 Attachment A provides further information about the results of consultation including a table showing all feedback topics and number of comments made sorted by topic alphabetically.

16 Feedback was recorded in the Council’s consultation database for analysis and comment by staff and consideration by the Council.

DISCUSSION

Community Feedback

17 A summary of the community feedback received is provided in the 10 year plan grouping of DCC activities and services below. Feedback which relates to budget options or update reports is summarised and analysed in the relevant report.

18 There may have been more references on these topics included in other submissions, and therefore the number of comments for each topic is indicative only and this report provides a general summary only of the community feedback received.

General Annual Plan comments

Rates increase

19 Council received around 200 comments on the rates increase. Many submitters expressed concern about the impacts of the proposed rate increase, given the unexpected COVID-19 crisis and the resulting financial uncertainty for ratepayers. Some submitters called for a rate increase freeze or for a smaller increase, while many asked for a critical re-visit of the proposed budgets for the 2020/21 financial year, including a hold or reduction in DCC staffing. There were some submitters who supported rate increases, noting the need for the Council to help lead the economic recovery over the next period.

20 Council has requested that DCC staff provide options for alternative rate increases. These options are presented in a separate report.

Debt

21 Council received 48 comments on debt. Submitters commented on the need to review the current level of capital spend and the resulting impact on levels of debt.

22 The Financial Strategy, approved as part of the 10 year plan, limits debt to $350 million. Current DCC debt levels are in line with the 10 year plan limits. However, current debt levels are slightly ahead on the 10 year plan timings, following the acceleration of a number of capital projects due to an increased capacity to deliver. This delivery will be impacted in the short term while the market adjusts to new ways of operation under the COVID-19 alert system. It is anticipated that debt will be below budget at end the current 2019/20 financial year.

23 The challenge going forward will be the competing pressure to maintain delivery of the capital renewal and development programme, alongside the resultant pressure on the level of debt. It is anticipated that the level of capital spend and debt limit will be reviewed as part of the next 10 year plan process.

General comments

Policy

24 There were 124 comments on general matters in respect of the Annual Plan consultation. A large number of submitters were calling for Council to consider the impact of COVID-19 and resulting economic impact on the Annual Plan and 10 year plan. Many submitters asked the Council to consider a rates freeze, or a lower rates increase, for this Annual Plan. These themes were reoccurring throughout the feedback.

25 There were many comments generally asking for capital projects, particularly non-essential projects, to be delayed. There were also calls for the Council to consider additional support for local businesses in light of the economic downturn, and to consider delaying the George Street upgrade work due to the combined effect of COVID-19 and the disruption of capital works on retail activity.

26 There was general concern with the ability of some Dunedin households to meet basic needs as a result of COVID-19.

Roading and footpaths

Bus fares

27 There were 112 comments relating to bus fares. Most comments (91) were in favour of Council subsidising bus fares, generally cheaper bus fares, or free bus travel. There were further comments stating that additional public transport improvements are needed more urgently than cheaper bus fares which would have a greater impact on patronage growth.

28 There were nine comments that were not supportive of cheaper bus fares or stated this should be a focus for the Otago Regional Council (ORC). There were 11 comments that specifically supported the use of parking revenue to offset the cost of bus fares. There were 10 comments expressing the need for cheaper fares specifically for regular users like workers and students.

Transport

29 Council received 85 comments on general transport matters. A high proportion of the submissions noted the potential financial impacts of COVID-19 and suggested Council defer ‘nice to have’ transport projects such as the Waterfront Bridge and instead reprioritise spending to ‘essential only’ infrastructure work programmes to maintain, improve or upgrade aging and poorly maintained roading infrastructure for a safer community.

30 Comments suggested the Council use more in-house consultants and project managers to avoid the high costs associated with external consulting companies. A small number of submissions suggested Council ‘keep it local’ and award more contracts to locally owned and operated businesses.

31 Some comments mentioned a poor standard of workmanship from some transport contractors, highlighting that new sections of roads and footpaths can fail and need to be repaired within weeks of completion.

Public transport

32 There were 55 comments relating to general public transport matters. Apart from cheaper bus fares, 16 comments were made about the need for a better public transport service with greater frequencies, operating hours and improved routes. In order to achieve this, five comments specifically referred to Council taking control of the bus network, while 15 comments were calling for rail or light rail to be introduced.

33 Additionally, eight comments were requesting smaller buses, seven requesting low emission vehicles and another seven comments were made in relation to integrating a new park and ride scheme.

Rail

34 There were 48 comments in support of rail to take pressure off the roading network, from both a freight and passenger perspective. Comments stated this could contribute to a zero carbon future. Submitters recognised the need to plan for additional infrastructure such as park and ride facilities for a potential passenger service.

35 A report on the cost of a feasibility study into a commuter rail pilot is included in the reports for this meeting.

LED street lighting

36 There were 28 comments received in relation to the LED street lighting upgrades. Most comments were positive, while some had concerns regarding night sky impacts. The branded LED’s being installed in the city are certified through the international dark sky association fixture seal of approval to minimise light pollution to the sky. Comments also noted the benefit of LED lighting increasing visibility for motorists travelling in fog.

Parking

37 There were 22 comments relating to parking. 14 submissions commented on the difficulty of parking in the city or the loss of central city parking, with some requesting no parking reduction within the central city plan. Three submissions commented that less parking is needed to support active modes and two submissions considered parking should be prioritised for those who need it most, such as mobility users. This feedback will be incorporated in parking-related studies, business cases to improve parking experience and parking management planning.

38 Five submissions suggested parking changes, including more electric vehicle parking in the central city and the hospital, mobility parking and more short term parking. Other parking comments included affordability of parking, ‘park and ride’ hubs on the fringe of the city, and the design of bus stops. These requests have been referred to operational teams for investigation.

Road safety improvement

39 There were 15 comments in relation to road safety improvement, which included support for additional improvements as well as queries about approaches used (such as roundabouts and traffic calming measures). Dunedin is rated the second highest city in New Zealand for intersection death and serious injury crashes. Intersection upgrades are required to reduce this.

40 Roundabouts are proven as the safest intersection treatment. Crash statistics for existing roundabouts, including mini roundabouts, show significant road safety improvements. Traffic calming, such as raised pedestrian crossings and school gateways are considered essential to provide a safe environment for vulnerable road users and to aid the mode shift from car dominated to more active modes.

Cycleways

41 There were nine comments in relation to cycleways, which included support for additional extended cycleways as well as concerns about additional financial investments in this area.

42 In 2019, around 200,000 cyclists were counted in total on all the main cycle routes. Just over 120,000 cyclists were counted on the Portsmouth Drive shared path.

43 The Tunnels Trail project is currently in the planning and design phase, with construction planned to begin in 2021.

44 Staff are planning to review the current Dunedin Strategic Cycleway to ensure the most suitable routes for cyclists are included, and to enable planning on further connections to the existing network. The review of the network will include conversations with the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) to ensure suburbs can be connected to the network along appropriate routes.

45 DCC in partnership with Waitaki District Council, is investigating options for a possible trail connecting Oamaru to Dunedin.

Peninsula connection

46 There were four comments regarding the Peninsula connection project. These were supportive in terms of continuation and completion.

47 All the reclamation necessary for this project has been consented and three more sections will have reclamation (which was part of the 2013 suite of consents).

48 The Ōtākou/Harrington point section is not included for construction within the current 10 year plan, however may be considered as part of the Crown Infrastructure Partners ‘shovel ready’ suite of potential new investments.

Three waters

Stormwater and wastewater improvements

49 There were 33 comments in relation to stormwater and wastewater improvements. Comments were supportive of continuing plans to invest in three waters infrastructure, with the potential for infrastructure driven economic stimulus raised. Other themes were improving wastewater discharge quality and wastewater servicing of un-serviced townships.

Three waters – general

50 There were 25 comments in relation to general three waters matters, including providing high quality drinking water which is a core DCC activity. Improving the quality of discharges from the wastewater and stormwater systems to minimise environmental impacts is one of the key strategic priorities identified in the 3 Waters Strategic Direction Statement, which guides DCC work.

Reserves and recreational facilities

Parks and recreation – general

51 There were 30 comments in relation to general parks and recreation matters. Comments were made on a wide variety of issues including requests for more mountain bike tracks, improved greenspace maintenance, more rubbish bins and consideration of support to sports organisations due to the impact of COVID-19.

Mosgiel Aquatics Centre

52 There were 17 comments in relation to construction of the new Mosgiel pool. Most were requesting Council proceed with the project, and one request was for it to be put on hold due to COVID-19 related financial concerns. There were five comments in relation to Council considering the effects construction would have on the Mosgiel Caravan Park residents.

Property

Community housing

53 Council received 44 comments on community housing. These were broadly in support of Council continuing to invest/increasing investment in community housing and ensuring that it remains breakeven. A review of community housing is currently underway and will be able to inform the development of the next 10 year plan.

Public toilets

54 Council received 10 comments about public toilets. These included multiple requests for new toilets across the city, including the creation of a specialist 'Changing Places' toilet. As a basic indication, a single public toilet generally costs in excess of $100k, whereas a specialist 'Changing Places' toilet is likely to cost in excess of $200k, depending on specifications. New public toilet construction has been proposed in the capital budget for the 2020/21 financial year.

Property – general

55 Seven comments were received on general property matters. These included suggestions and recommendations for purchases, builds, or disposals of various properties.

Property upgrades

56 Three comments were received on property upgrades. These included calls for additional and ongoing investment in heritage buildings, as well as ongoing basic maintenance generally.

Libraries and museums

Ara Toi – general

57 Council received 14 comments on general Ara Toi / Arts and Culture matters. These comments were broadly in support of ongoing and increased arts investment, via arts grants, increased DCC community and planning budgets, commitment to a new performing arts centre, and looking at supporting arts via the community services targeted rate. There was a request the provision of a council building or facility for performance in the period before a performing arts centre is developed.

58 Two comments received supported the procurement of new book buses and one requested that no money be spent on lift or roof refurbishment in the Dunedin Public Art Gallery.

South Dunedin Library and Community Complex

59 Seven comments were received on the South Dunedin Library and Community Complex. Five comments supported the development, and one comment requested the development of an adjacent bus hub. Two comments requested that the project be discontinued.

Public Art

60 There were two comments received requested investment in public art be discontinued.

Customer and Regulatory Services

Regulatory services – general

61 Seven comments were received on general regulatory services. These included request to restrict alcohol licensing for public safety, increased regulation of noise pollution, as well as calls for Council to re-assess fees and charges and monitoring and enforcement activities (e.g. site visits) in light of COVID-19.

62 The DCC Alcohol Licensing team work in collaboration with the Police in relation to licensing and safety in the central city. Monitoring of licensed premises is carried out by Police and licensing inspectors.

63 All noise monitoring is undertaken in accordance with the District Plan noise limits and if they do not comply with these limits further action is taken. Environmental Health will respond to particular complaints.

64 All Building Consent Applications are required to meet the District plan and Building Code requirements before being granted. This includes the provision of acceptable waste, storm and potable water requirements.

Animal services

65 There were two comments in relation to animal services. These included detailed feedback on the DCC dog poo bags as well as additional suggestions for incentivising responsible dog ownership. The DCC Responsible Dog Owner scheme exists to recognise and encourage responsible dog ownership and these owners are given a reduced registration fee to acknowledge their responsible ownership. All dog owners that have de-sexed their dogs are given a $10 reduction in their registration fee. The budget for dog poo bags in 2020/21 is a true reflection of the actual cost of purchasing bags.

Parking enforcement

66 There were two comments in relation to parking enforcement, including a request for cheaper parking rates and a request to use revenue from parking fines to incentivise other climate-neutral behaviours.

Waste management

67 Kerbside collection is part of the Waste Futures project and was subject to a separate engagement process which ran in parallel to the Annual Plan consultation. Council recieved 68 comments in the Annual Plan consultation on kerbside collection, which have been passed on to the Waste Futures team. Feedback on kerbside collection ideas will be presented in the context of development of the next 10 year plan.

Smooth Hill

68 Four comments were received in relation to the proposed Smooth Hill Landfill. These included a call for further information about the project, calls to both progress and halt the project, and suggestions for using revenue from dumping fees/fines. The proposed landfill is not included as part of the 2020/21 Annual Plan. The options around the establishment of a landfill will be part of the process for the next 10 year plan.

Community and planning

Central city plan

69 Council received 172 comments on the central city plan generally. Of these, 123 were on the upgrade of George Street, with 80 comments requesting the project to stop, 36 requested a hold, and seven supporting continuation at this time. Some concerns were expressed about the proposed layout.

70 The budget allocated for George Street is $28 million, with construction on George Street proposed to take place in the 2021/22 financial year.

Waterfront

71 Council received 107 comments on the waterfront. Comments referenced the City to Waterfront bridge and the wider waterfront redevelopment.

72 Of the 56 submissions relating to the bridge, the majority advocated stopping or deferring the project. There were 31 comments suggesting that the bridge not be progressed in the economic context, with some suggesting community well-being should be prioritised instead. There were 26 comments suggesting that the bridge should be deferred until the economy has recovered and/or private sector investment has been secured.

73 Five comments supported the bridge. They focused on the importance of the bridge as the first step in revitalisation of the waterfront and as a part of the cycle and pedestrian network.

74 More than half of the respondents on the wider waterfront development (33) suggested that development should be delayed and re-evaluated considering COVID-19 economic and tourism impacts. Some suggested that the design be scaled back, rethought and developed collaboratively with local residents and businesses. There were 22 comments suggested that the waterfront development should be stopped. The reasons primarily include affordability, considering COVID-19 cost and keeping rates increases down.

75 There were five comments in support of the wider waterfront development. They urged Council to utilise the harbour area more effectively and suggested that the project should be brought forward for the economic future of the city.

The Octagon Experience

76 There were 93 comments relating to the recent trial of the Octagon Experience 2020. There were 65 comments that were not supportive of the trial, 16 comments requested that further work in this area be put on hold, and 12 further comments were in support of the trial.

77 There is no funding currently allocated to make changes to the Octagon. Data from Octagon studies is due at the end of May and will be reported to Council.

City development – general

78 There were 12 comments in relation to general city development. Comments included suggestions around housing (support for tiny houses, apartments, socially mixed housing and suggestions for areas for development), broad comments about deferring amenity improvement projects to avoid rates increases/borrowing, support for investment in infrastructure to support growth/housing, and support for investment in heritage buildings.

Community development and events – general

79 There were six comments in relation to general community development and events. Event organisers and community organisations were requesting continued funding and increased financial support in light of COVID-19. Staff anticipate an increase in funding requests from community, arts and events organisations within the next 18 months.

80 DCC staff support the request for more co-design and engagement with community organisations. DCC staff recommend cross-Council work be undertaken within the next three months to better assess the financial need among non-profit community, arts, recreation, events and environmental groups.

Economic development

Economic development and employment

81 There were 35 comments specifically in relation to economic development and employment, including tourism. DCC is currently looking at the challenges and impacts associated with the COVID-19 pandemic in conjunction with sectors, the Grow Dunedin Partnership, government agencies and neighbouring Councils through the Otago Regional Economic Development framework. DCC is currently promoting local procurement and tourism initiatives as well as buy locally campaigns. The impacts on our economy and infrastructural priorities will inform how DCC can best support Dunedin economic development.

Enterprise Dunedin – general

82 There were 11 comments received in relation to general Enterprise Dunedin matters. Most comments were in relation to the expected economic impacts of COVID-19 and suggesting ways in which DCC can support business. Comments also included request for support of micro-enterprise in South Dunedin, and acknowledgement of sector pressures and uncertainties.

Governance and support services

Zero Carbon 2030

83 There were 26 comments in relation to the Zero Carbon 2030 goal. Comments generally supported the goal for a net carbon zero city by 2030. However, there were four comments questioning the immediacy and practicality of pursuing this objective at this time.

84 Earlier this year, the DCC commenced a Climate 2030 Rapid Review project, working with teams across the DCC to align work programmes with the Zero Carbon 2030 target (and also with DCC climate change adaptation ambitions). The Rapid Review will help prioritise existing and planned activities that will contribute to emissions reduction, flag up any existing or planned activities that may increase emissions, and identify additional areas in which investment will be required to meet the Zero Carbon 2030 target. The Rapid Review is intended to inform the development of the next 10 year plan.

85 Alongside the Rapid Review, the DCC is also working to embed the Zero Carbon 2030 target in its organisational processes (including procurement).

86 The DCC acknowledges that Zero Carbon 2030 will only be achieved in partnership with Dunedin residents, a wide range of organisations and businesses, and central Government.

South Dunedin Future

87 There were 20 comments received in relation to South Dunedin Future. Submissions were focused on the importance of this work to South Dunedin residents and asking that this programme of work continue to be a priority for the Council. Submitters noted that responding to challenges in South Dunedin remains essential, even within the context of COVID-19, and requested that the infrastructure, housing and library projects continue to be a priority in this Annual Plan.

88 The DCC has been working closely with the ORC and other key stakeholders to respond to the more immediate flood risks and longer term sea-level rise risks for South Dunedin. The South Dunedin Future project encompasses a broad programme of work contributing to the resilience and wellbeing of the South Dunedin community. The DCC has dedicated budget for a climate change programme (which includes mitigation and adaptation work) in 2019/20 and 2020/21. In addition, $35 million is allocated in the current 10 year plan for flood alleviation in South Dunedin. The DCC will continue to work closely with the ORC and other key stakeholders to respond to the challenges in South Dunedin.

Rating method

89 There were 15 comments related to the rating method and rating differentials. Council has agreed to review the general rate differentials as part of the next 10 year plan. This review will include options for a separate differential for residential properties used for short term visitor accommodation.

90 There were some general comments related to the impact of the city property revaluation on the rates charged by the Council. The three yearly revaluation of city properties is required by legislation. It should be noted that a revaluation itself does not result in an increase in the overall rates levied, but rather results in a change in the distribution of those rates across city properties.

91 There were some comments of the application of the rates rebate scheme. This scheme is administered by Council on behalf of the Department of Internal Affairs.

Council controlled organisations

92 There were 14 comments in relation to council controlled organisations. Of these, five submissions expressed concern over the performance of Aurora and the planned price rises, which the submitters wanted to be deferred.

93 There were four comments expressing concern over the future of Dunedin Railways Limited and provided suggestions to help secure its future.

Climate Change

94 There were 14 comments in relation to general climate change concerns. Comments were supportive of taking action to address climate change, alongside other measures to increase sustainability and secure broader environmental outcomes for the city. One comment questioned the need to focus on climate change in the current circumstances.

Finance – general

95 There were 12 general finance comments, which mainly related to prioritising expenditure following the impacts of COVID-19. Comments mainly related to reducing DCC staffing, relegating the George Street upgrade, and limiting subsidies for Council services. Two submissions noted that services for the elderly (e.g. accessibility upgrades) should remain important and another submission noted affordability concerns for those in community housing.

Pandemic planning/response

96 There were nine comments in relation to specific pandemic planning. As reflected in many other comments on other DCC activities, the general request was that the COVID-19 context be made central in Council reconsidering the Annual Plan for 2020/21. Several submitters were in support of the current response to COVID-19, including the local government response team. There was one comment that the response to the pandemic had not been well communicated.

NEXT STEPS

97 During deliberations the Council will consider the community’s feedback on the draft Annual Plan 2020/21.

98 As part of the development of the final Annual Plan 2020/21, budget updates may need to be made following any decisions made by Council during the deliberations process.

Signatories

Author:

Sophie Lascarides - Policy Analyst

Sean Jacobs - Senior Policy Analyst

Authoriser:

Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Annual Plan 2020/21 Feedback Topics	115

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☐	☐	☐
Economic Development Strategy	☐	☐	☐
Environment Strategy	☐	☐	☐
Arts and Culture Strategy	☐	☐	☐
3 Waters Strategy	☐	☐	☐
Spatial Plan	☐	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☐	☐	☐
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☐	☐	☐
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☐	☐	☐

The Annual Plan 2020/21 contributes to all of the objectives and priorities of the strategic framework as it describes the Council’s activities; the community outcomes; and provides for decision making and coordination of the Council’s resources, as well as a basis for community accountability

Māori Impact Statement

Sustainability

The summary of community feedback includes the views of the community across a number of sustainability focus areas.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

These considerations are the subject of the report.

Financial considerations

The financial considerations are detailed in the report.

Significance

The summary of community feedback is considered to be of low significance in terms of the Council’s significance and engagement policy.

Engagement – external

Community feedback on the engagement on the draft Annual Plan 2020/21 has been summarised in the report.

Engagement - internal

Staff and managers from across the Council have been involved in the analysis of the community feedback.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Feedback from community board submissions has been included in the summary of community feedback.

Annual Plan Deliberations

27 May 2020

10 Year Plan Amendment - Community Services Targeted Rate

Department: Civic and Finance

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report summarises community feedback received on a proposal to amend the 10 year plan 2018-28, to decrease the community services targeted rate (CSTR) to $100. The proposed amendment was consulted on concurrently with the draft 2020/21 Annual Plan.

2 Council is asked to consider the feedback received, and to make a decision on the level of rates to be collected by way of the CSTR.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Notes the community feedback received on the proposed amendment to the 10 year plan 2018-28, to decrease the community services targeted rate to $100.

b) Decides the amount of the rate to be charged for the community services targeted rate.

BACKGROUND

3 Dunedin properties were revalued in 2019 and these property values form the basis for rating for the 2020-21 rating year. Overall, there has been a 33.5% increase in the capital value (CV) of Dunedin properties.

4 Historically, property revaluations have not had a significant impact on how rates are distributed between properties. This time, however, the increase in capital values of certain properties in the city would have a notable impact on the overall rate increase experienced by ratepayers.

5 This is because the residential category of properties increased in CV by 39.9%, compared to the overall increase of 33.5%. Within the residential category, the CV of lower value properties (median CV of $420,000 and below) increased by 50%; while properties with a CV greater than the median CV increased by 34%. The rating effect means lower value residential properties would pay a greater share of the general rate and therefore have a higher rate increase.

6 At its meeting on 11 February 2020, Council considered a report “2020-21 Rating Method” that included discussion on possible changes to the CSTR that could be applied to reduce the impact on lower value residential properties. The report presented options of various levels of CSTR and the impacts of each of those options.

7 Council consulted on two options for the CSTR in its Annual Plan consultation document as follows:

Option 1 The community services targeted rate would drop from $240.50 to $100 in 2020/21. The amount collected through general rates would be higher than under option 2. (Preferred option).

Option 2 The community services targeted rate would increase $247 (up from $240.50). General rates would still increase, but by a smaller amount than in option one. (Status quo).

8 The proposal to reduce the CSTR to $100.00 would be for the 2020/21 year, noting that Council will consider rating methods when adopting a new 10 year plan commencing 2021/22.

DISCUSSION

Summary of community feedback

9 Council sought feedback from the community on the two options for the CSTR. The following table provides an analysis of the feedback received:

Options

Supports option

Does not support option

Total Feedback

Option one: $100 community services targeted rate

495

78%

128

22%

633

Option two: $247 community services targeted rate

166

34%

319

66%

485

10 A lot of comments were received on rates generally, however approximately 14 submitters commented specifically on the options for the CSTR, with eight in support of option one, four opposed to option one, and two without a preference. Reasons given from those in support of option one included the need for less pressure to be put on those struggling, and the need to provide relief for lower income households.

11 Reasons given from those opposed to option one included the fact that commercial and other properties already pay higher rates than residential properties because of rate differentials, and it is wrong to keep putting increases on commercial businesses.

OPTIONS

12 Options for the level of the CSTR for the 2020/21 year are as consulted on, and high level impacts of each option are discussed below. Prior to this report, Council will be considering a report on the level of rates for the 2020/21 year. Once the rating level has been decided, more detailed impacts of both options on the categories of ratepayers, i.e., residential, lifestyle, commercial and farmland, at the agree rating level, can be calculated, and will be made available to assist discussion on this matter.

Option One – decrease the community services targeted rate to $100 in 2020/21

13 The CSTR for 2020/21 would be set at $100 for all rateable properties, rather than the status quo option of $247. The difference would be added to the general rate requirement.

14 The impacts are:

· The total amount of rates that would be collected from the CSTR would be $8.5 million, and $5.5 million would be added to the general rates.

· The increase of $5.5 million in general rates would be distributed between all categories of ratepayers.

· The CSTR would be at a lower level than predicted in the 2018-28 10 year plan.

Option Two – increase the community services targeted rate to $247 in 2020/21 (status quo)

15 The CSTR for 2020/21 would be set at $247 for all rateable properties.

16 The impacts are:

· The total amount of rates that would be collected from the CSTR under the status quo option is $14 million. The effect is general rates as agreed is unchanged.

· The CSTR is consistent with the 2018-28 10 year plan.

NEXT STEPS

17 Once Council decides it preferred rating method for the CSTR, this will be included in the Annual Plan 2020/21.

18 If Council decides to set the CSTR at $100 for 2020/21, Audit NZ will review the amended rating method and funding impact statement and provide an independent auditor’s report for inclusion with the formal adoption of the 10 year plan 2018-28 amendment in June 2020.

Signatories

Author:

Sharon Bodeker - Corporate Planner

Carolyn Allan - Senior Management Accountant

Authoriser:

Gavin Logie - Financial Controller

Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

The development of the Annual Plan enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities, and promotes the social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Economic Development Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Environment Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Arts and Culture Strategy	☒	☐	☐
3 Waters Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Spatial Plan	☒	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐

The Annual Plan 2020/21 contributes to objectives across the strategic framework, as it describes the Council’s activities, which are aligned to community outcomes. It also provides a long term focus for decision making and coordination of the Council’s resources, as well as a basis for community accountability.

Māori Impact Statement

Sustainability

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

Depending on the decision made by Council on the CSTR, an amendment to the 10 year plan may be required.

Financial considerations

The decision to be made does not impact on the overall total rates to be collected. The agreed rating method will be used to set rates for the 2020/21 financial year.

Significance

The proposal to change the rating method for the CSTR was considered significant and was therefore consulted on using the special consultative procedure.

Engagement – external

A full engagement process was undertaken concurrently with the draft annual plan consultation.

Engagement - internal

Staff and management across Council have been involved in the development of the draft budgets.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Community Boards have had the opportunity to present their views as part of the engagement process.

Annual Plan Deliberations

27 May 2020

Local Government Funding Agency - Summary of Feedback and Next Steps

Department: Finance

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report presents a summary of community feedback regarding Council’s proposal to join the Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA) as a Guaranteeing Local Authority.

2 It is proposed Council now initiate arrangements to give effect to this proposal.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Notes community feedback on Council’s proposal to join the Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA) as a Guaranteeing Local Authority.

b) Approves that the Dunedin City Council join the LGFA as a Guaranteeing Local Authority.

BACKGROUND

3 The LGFA provides local authorities in New Zealand with an additional funding source, competitive funding costs and additional funding terms.

4 The LGFA is the largest lender to the local government sector and, at the time of consultation, had 66 member councils. Dunedin City Council has never been a member of LGFA.

5 Councils that borrow more than $20m are required to sign a joint and several guarantee.

6 Based on the LGFA December update, 53 councils out of the 66 member councils had signed a joint and several guarantee. The guarantee is generally linked to a council’s relative rates income as a percentage of the rates income of all the guaranteeing councils. Council’s share of the guarantee may change over time as the percentage of total rates income changes and if some councils failed to meet their obligations other councils may be required to make up the shortfall.

7 Council passed the following resolution at the 29 January 2019 meeting:

Moved: (Cr Mike Lord/Cr Doug Hall):

“That the Council:

a) Approves DCC supporting DCHL/DCTL in their application to add LGFA to its potential funding sources.

b) Requests DCHL to work with DCC to review the necessary arrangements to allow LGFA to be a potential funding source for DCC and DCC CCOs.

c) Notes the independent report formally recognises the benefits that the current lending structures have provided DCC to date and highlights that ”DCC, through the DCTL structure, operates its Treasury function via a market ‘best practice’ framework”.

Motion carried (CNL/2019/012) by division 14 votes to 0

8 In order to DCHL/DCTL to add LGFA to its potential funding sources, Council is required to join the LGFA as a Guaranteeing Local Authority.

9 As part of consultation on the draft 2020/21 Annual Plan, specific community feedback was sought on the proposal for Council to join the LGFA as a Guaranteeing Local Authority.

10 As noted in the consultation document, the Council believes that participating in the LGFA Scheme would give DCC access, via DCTL, to additional diversified funding sources and potentially lower costs of funds.

11 The consultation document also noted if the Council decides not to participate in LGFA then DCTL will not be able to borrow from LGFA. Accordingly should LGFA offer the best terms in the market, DCTL would be excluded from accessing these terms.

12 Joining LGFA as a member council does not mean Council or DCTL has any legal obligation to use LGFA for its borrowings. The Council and DCTL would be free to borrow from whatever borrowing source provide the most favourable terms.

13 Joining LGFA as a member council does not impact the level of Council or Group debt. Joining LGFA purely provides DCTL with an additional potential source of debt finance.

14 The current structure is that DCTL undertakes all DCC’s borrowing (and that of the DCHL Group) and this would not need to change should DCC join LGFA as a Guaranteeing Local Authority.

DISCUSSION

15 The Council received a total of 623 feedback forms where respondents had indicated their support for or against the proposal to join the LGFA as a Guaranteeing Local Authority.

Support for proposal to join the LGFA as a Guaranteeing Local Authority	Number of responses	Percentage
Supports the proposal	452	72%
Does not support the proposal	172	28%
Total	623

16 A number of responses that did not support the proposal stated that they were concerned with Council’s debt levels. However, as stated above, the proposal to join LGFA has no impact on the level of DCC debt. Existing funding sources can satisfy the borrowing needs of DCTL: the proposal to join LGFA simply provides an additional potential provider for these borrowing needs.

Impact of COVID

17 LGFA has three key debt related financial covenants that member councils need to comply with:

1. Net Debt must be less than 175% of Total Revenue (250% for councils with a credit rating of A or above)

2. Net Interest must be less than 20% of Total Revenue

3. Net interest must be less than 25% of Annual Rates Income (30% for councils with a credit rating of A or above)

Note: Council has credit rating of AA so would access the higher ratios above

18 LGFA has advised of its proposal, as a result of COVID, to increase the Net Debt/Total Revenue cap of 250% to 300% until 30 June 2022 after which time it would gradually decrease over time to a new figure of 280%.

19 This is not expected to have any impact on Council or its group companies.

20 The Chairman of DCHL/DCTL has confirmed that the boards of DCHL/DCTL are satisfied that COVID has no real impact on the decision to join LGFA.

OPTIONS

21 It is proposed Council now initiate administrative arrangements to give effect to this proposal.

Option One – Recommended Option

22 Council applies to join LGFA as a Guaranteeing Local Authority.

Advantages

· Gives the DCC access, via DCTL, to additional diversified funding sources and potentially lower costs of funds and more beneficial terms.

· DCTL would be able to borrow from the LGFA and potentially be charged a lower interest margin for its borrowing and access more favourable borrowing terms.

Disadvantages

· DCC would have a potential exposure to LGFA’s debt liability, which comprises the debt liability of other LGFA members.

Option Two – Status Quo

23 Council does not apply to join the LGFA as a Guaranteeing Local Authority.

Advantages

· DCC would not have a potential exposure to LGFA’s debt liability, which comprises the debt liability of other LGFA members.

Disadvantages

· DTCL will not be able to borrow from LGFA and would not be able to access potentially more favourable borrowing terms.

· Does not provide the DCC an additional diversified funding source and potentially lower costs of funds.

NEXT STEPS

24 If the Council approves the preferred option, DCC will undertake administrative arrangements to apply to join the LGFA as a Guaranteeing Local Authority.

Signatories

Author:	Dave Tombs - General Manager Finance and Commercial
Authoriser:	Dave Tombs - General Manager Finance and Commercial

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of, communities.

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Economic Development Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Environment Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Arts and Culture Strategy	☐	☐	☒
3 Waters Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Spatial Plan	☐	☐	☒
Integrated Transport Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐

This report impacts upon Councils and the Groups commercial and risk profiles.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

This report could impact on Council’s, and the Group’s, long term financial results and risk profile.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

These considerations are the subject of the report.

Financial considerations

The financial considerations are detailed in the report.

Significance

Issues of significance were covered as part of the 2020/21 Annual Plan engagement process.

Engagement – external

The community was consulted using the special consultative procedure. The Council has also conducted significant discussion with the boards and management of DCHL and DCTL in this matter.

Engagement - internal

This matter has been discussed internally between senior executives and finance staff.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

Council’s share of the joint and several guarantee may change over time as the percentage of total rates income changes. If some councils fail to meet their obligations other councils may be required to make up the shortfall.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no implications for Community Boards.

Name	Submission Number
Mike Hammond	772986
Anonymous	773031
Colin Deaker	773033
Marion Maxwell	773037
Jim Mc Quillan	773039
Shirley George	773041

Community Board	Unspent Funding
Mosgiel Taieri	$5,972
Otago Peninsula	$3,704
Saddle Hill	$3,675
Strath Taieri	$5,900
Waikouaiti Coast	$3,761
West Harbour	$8,730
Total unspent funds	$31,742

	Title	Page
⇩a	3 Waters fees and charges schedule 2020/21	127
⇩b	Community and Planning fees and charges schedule 2020/21	128
⇩c	Economic Development fees and charges schedule 2020/21	131
⇩d	Governance and Support Services fees and charges schedule 2020/21	132
⇩e	Libraries and Museums fees and charges schedule 2020/21	133
⇩f	Property fees and charges schedule 2020/21	135
⇩g	Regulatory Services fees and charges schedule 2020/21	136
⇩h	Reserves and Recreational Facilities fees and charges schedule 2020/21	140
⇩i	Roading and Footpaths fees and charges schedule 2020/21	145
⇩j	Waste Management fees and charges schedule 2020/21	146

	Title	Page
A ⇩	Minutes of Ordinary Council Annual Plan meeting held on 5 May 2020	22

Author:	Clare Sullivan - Team Leader Civic
Authoriser:	Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services

Author:	Jeanine Benson - Group Manager Transport
Authoriser:	Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure Services

Author:	Tami Sargeant - Team Leader Regulatory Management - Transport
Authoriser:	Sandy Graham - General Manager City Services