Finance and Performance Committee

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Finance and Performance Committee will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Wednesday 28 February 2018

Time:                                    9.30am

Venue:                                 Council Chambers, Civic Offices,
53 Hereford Street, Christchurch

 

 

Membership

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Councillor Raf Manji

Deputy Mayor Andrew Turner

Councillor Vicki Buck

Councillor Jimmy Chen

Mayor Lianne Dalziel

Councillor Mike Davidson

Councillor Anne Galloway

Councillor Jamie Gough

Councillor Yani Johanson

Councillor Deon Swiggs

Mr Mike Rondel (Non-Voting Member)

 

 

23 February 2018

 

 

 

Principal Advisor

Carol Bellette

General Manager Finance and Commercial

 

Aidan Kimberley

Committee and Hearings Advisor

941 6566

aidan.kimberley@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

Note:  The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policy unless and until adopted.  If you require further information relating to any reports, please contact the person named on the report.
To view copies of Agendas and Minutes, visit:
https://www.ccc.govt.nz/the-council/meetings-agendas-and-minutes/

 


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

Terms of Reference Finance and Performance Committee

 

Chair

Councillor Manji

Membership

Deputy Mayor Turner (Deputy Chair), Mayor Dalziel, Councillor Buck, Councillor Chen, Councillor Davidson, Councillor Galloway, Councillor Gough, Councillor Johanson, Councillor Swiggs and a non-voting independent member appointed by the Council.

Quorum

Half of the members if the number of members (including vacancies) is even, or a majority of members if the number of members (including vacancies) is odd.

Meeting Cycle

Monthly

Reports To

Council

 

Responsibilities

The focus of the Finance & Performance Committee is the financial and non-financial performance of the Council and its subsidiaries.

 

The Finance & Performance Committee:

·         Seeks to enhance the Council’s accountability with the community in relation to the Council’s financial and non-financial performance

·         Promotes active citizenship, community participation and community partnerships, including participatory budgeting

·         Works in partnerships with key agencies, groups and organisations

The Finance & Performance Committee considers and reports to Council on issues and activites relating to:

·         The preparation and adoption of the draft and final Annual Plan and Long Term Plan (based on the strategic direction of the Strategic Capability Committee)

·         Performance  against the  Long Term Plan (LTP) and  Annual Plan (AP), including financial performance and non-financial performance including:

-          medium to long term asset management

-          treasury investment and borrowings

-          organisational performance and capability

·         Insurance matters including to:

-          consider legal advice from the Council’s legal and other advisers,

-          approve further actions relating to the issues,

-          make recommendations to Council concerning formal actions.

·         Performance of a number of subsidiaries including Council Controlled Organisations (CCO). 

·         Recommendations   from   Council’s   Subcommittees,   Community Boards, the public, stakeholders and providers in relation to finance and performance.

·         Overseeing the development to the Annual Report for consideration by the Council

·         Development of the financial policy of the Council

·         Development of a Genuine Progress Indicator

 

Process for appointing Independent Members to the Finance and Performance Committee

 

The following principles will guide the appointment process for Independent Members of the Finance and Performance Committee:

 

1.              Council Officers, in consultation with Elected Members, will compile a longlist of candidates and provide this list to the General Manager Finance and Commercial for consideration.

 

2.              If appropriate, the Chair of the Finance and Performance Committee and the General Manager Finance and Commercial may endorse the nominations.

 

3.              Candidates will be contacted at the appropriate time to confirm their willingness to serve as an independent committee member and, if confirmation is received, appropriate background checks as determined by the General Manager Finance and Commercial will be conducted. Candidates will also be informed of Council policies.

 

4.              The Chair and Deputy Chair of the Finance and Performance Committee, and the General Manager Finance and Commercial, will review the candidates to develop a shortlist by assessing the following:

 

a.              Professional credentials and relevant experience.

b.             Their understanding of relevant legislation.

c.              Experience overseeing or assessing the performance of organisations.

d.             Potential conflicts of interest.

e.             Affiliations or connections with the Council and its related entities.

f.               Reference and background check reports.

 

5.              The shortlist of candidates will be presented to an Appointments Panel. The Panel will select from that shortlist the independent member to be appointed to the Committee. The resolution to appoint the independent member should specify the dates on which the appointment commences and concludes. 

 

1.         The Chair of the Panel will inform the Council in writing of the Panel’s decision.

 


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

C       1.       Apologies.......................................................................................................................... 5

B       2.       Declarations of Interest................................................................................................... 5

C       3.       Confirmation of Previous Minutes................................................................................. 5

B       4.       Public Forum.................................................................................................................... 5

B       5.       Deputations by Appointment........................................................................................ 5

B       6.       Presentation of Petitions................................................................................................ 5

STAFF REPORTS

C       7.       AAC Hereford Street (Manchester - Madras) - Financial Report................................. 9

C       8.       Lichfield Car Park - Budget / Contingency planning vs Actual report...................... 13

C       9.       Performance Reporting for January 2018................................................................... 19

C       10.     Regenerate Christchurch - Half year performance to 31 December 2017................ 31

C       11.     Development Christchurch Ltd - Status Report December 2017 - February 2018... 45

C       12.     Resolution to Exclude the Public................................................................................. 50  

 

 


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

 

1.   Apologies

An apology was received from Mayor Dalziel.

2.   Declarations of Interest

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

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

That the minutes of the Finance and Performance Committee meeting held on Wednesday, 31 January 2018  be confirmed (refer page 6).

4.   Public Forum

A period of up to 30 minutes may be available for people to speak for up to five minutes on any issue that is not the subject of a separate hearings process.

It is intended that the public forum session will be held at <Approximate Time>

OR

There will be no public forum at this meeting

5.   Deputations by Appointment

There were no deputations by appointment at the time the agenda was prepared. 

6.   Petitions

There were no petitions received at the time the agenda was prepared.


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

 

 

Finance and Performance Committee

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Wednesday 31 January 2018

Time:                                    9.32am

Venue:                                 Council Chambers, Civic Offices,
53 Hereford Street, Christchurch

 

 

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Councillor Raf Manji

Deputy Mayor Andrew Turner

Councillor Vicki Buck

Councillor Jimmy Chen

Mayor Lianne Dalziel

Councillor Mike Davidson

Councillor Anne Galloway

Councillor Yani Johanson

Councillor Deon Swiggs

Mr Mike Rondel (Non-Voting Member)

 

 

30 January 2018

 

 

 

Principal Advisor

Carol Bellette

General Manager Finance and Commercial

 

Aidan Kimberley

Committee and Hearings Advisor

941 6566

aidan.kimberley@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

To view copies of Agendas and Minutes, visit:
www.ccc.govt.nz/Council/meetingminutes/agendas/index

 


Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

 

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies

Part C

 

 

Committee Resolved FPCM/2018/00001

That the apology from Councillor Gough be accepted.

Councillor Chen/Deputy Mayor                                                                                                                            Carried

 

2.   Declarations of Interest

Part B

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

 

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Part C

Committee Resolved FPCM/2018/00002

Committee Decision

That the minutes of the Finance and Performance Committee meeting held on Wednesday, 6 December 2017 be confirmed.

Deputy Mayor/Councillor Davidson                                                                                                                    Carried

 

4.   Public Forum

Part B

There were no public forum presentations.

 

5.   Deputations by Appointment

Part B

There were no deputations by appointment.

6.   Presentation of Petitions

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.

 

7.   Corporate Finance Report for the period ending 31 December 2017

 

Committee Decided FPCM/2018/00003

Part A

That the Finance and Performance Committee recommends that the Council:

1.         Receives the information in the report

Councillor Chen/Councillor Davidson                                                                                                                  Carried

 

8.   Financial Performance report for the six months to 31 December 2017

 

Committee Decided FPCM/2018/00004

Part A

That the Finance and Performance Committee recommends that the Council:

1.         Receives the information in the report.

Councillor Swiggs/Councillor Chen                                                                                                                       Carried

 

9     Resolution to Exclude the Public

 

Committee Resolved FPCM/2018/00005

Part C

That at 10:28 the resolution to exclude the public set out on pages 41 to 42 of the agenda be adopted.

Councillor Buck/Deputy Mayor                                                                                                                                Carried

 

The public were re-admitted to the meeting at 11:46am.

 

   

Meeting concluded at 11:47am.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018.

 

Councillor Raf Manji

Chairperson

 


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

 

7.        AAC Hereford Street (Manchester - Madras) - Financial Report

Reference:

18/99604

Contact:

Neil Gillon

Neil.Gillon@ccc.govt.nz

 

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Finance and Performance Committee to be informed about the financial status of the AAC Hereford Street (Manchester – Madras) project.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is being provided to fulfil the Finance and Performance Committee’s resolution FPCM/2017/00077, which requests information on the original budget, contingency and actual expenditure.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1.         Receive the information in the report.

 

 

3.   Key Points

3.1       The original budget for this project was $2,349,586 and planned to be delivered in FY23 and FY24.

3.2       The project delivery was brought forward to align with Ōtākaro’s construction of the East Frame.

3.3       The final expenditure on the project is expected to be $900,000.  Savings have been achieved through:

3.3.1   A substantial reduction in the scope of work expected, and

3.3.2   Contract delivery efficiencies.

3.4       The contract has currently achieved practical completion (i.e. is able to be used by the public) and is in the one year defects period.

3.5       As this project is part of the wider An Accessible City programme savings will be held at the programme level, to be either:

3.5.1   Allocated to other projects within the programme based on need, with approvals in line with the financial delegations policy; or

3.5.2   Released as a saving/underspend upon completion of the An Accessible City programme.


 

 

4.   Context/Background

Scope of Work

4.1       The project scope that was defined for the 2015-25 Long Term Plan was:

4.1.1   The full reinstatement of Hereford Street between Manchester Street and Madras Street.

4.1.2   This was to take into account the replacement of assets at the end of their life and/or damaged by the earthquakes.  The design was to be in line with the Streets and Spaces Guide.

4.2       The delivery of the East Frame by Ōtākaro Limited intersected Hereford Street and proposed to deliver approximately 50% by length of this project.

Previous Report

4.3       The following was presented to the Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee at its meeting on 8 March 2017:

4.3.1   Request to bring forward budget from FY23 and FY24 to allow construction to align with the Ōtākaro Limited timeframes, to minimise impact to the community and maximise potential savings.

4.3.2   The outcome of stakeholder engagement and any proposed design requirements.  It should be noted at the time of this report the estimates had not been completed due to the accelerated process for reporting and design.  Hence the budget of $1.94m was referenced.  At this time it was acknowledged that the construction amount would likely be less than the budget and the Council noted the following:

That the amount brought forward will be the amount that is required for the work priced through a competitive pricing mechanism.

4.3.3   Request to proceed with detailed design and construction.

4.4       This recommendation was accepted at the Council meeting of 23 March 2017.

Delivery Method

4.5       The East Frame public realm work was programmed to be completed by Ōtākaro Ltd during FY17.  To provide for the completion of the Council section of Hereford Street to Madras Street the following was undertaken:

4.5.1   Staff undertook an accelerated process to prepare a scheme design and consult with the community.

4.5.2   Detailed design was accelerated to provide a basis for construction pricing.

4.5.3   The project was direct appointed to the City Care/JFC Joint Venture to allow for the coordination of the works, to minimise the impact on the local community and to realise savings through delivery efficiencies.  It should be noted that an independent QS was engaged to review and verify all pricing.


 

Financial Status

4.6       Summary of costs:

 

Original Forecast

Actual

(to date)

Projected Expenditure

Professional fees

(Design, project management, safety audits, stakeholder engagement)

$190,000.00

$172,164.56

$190,000.00

Contract Value (physical works)

$653,644.00

$623,195.79

$623,195.79

Contract variations

$116,356.00

$63,549.33

$86,804.21

Total

$960,000.00

$858,909.68

$900,000.00

 

 

 

 

2015-25 LTP Budget

$2,349,586.00

 

 

Budget Savings

$1,449,586.00

 

 

4.7       Contingency amounts for the project have been applied based on standard industry percentages and the risk profile of the project.  Therefore the following were applied in this project:

4.7.1   Contract contingency – a construction contingency of circa. 18% has been forecast for this project. 

This is relatively high due to the number of unknowns at the time of pricing and the speed of the detailed design contract.

It should be noted that the contract was a NZS3910 contract and as such the valuing and acceptance of variations is controlled by the Engineer to Contract.

Variations to date have included unanticipated alterations to services, removing buried structures and treatment and repair to buried heritage kerb and channel.

4.8       The following savings have been achieved through this project:

4.8.1   Reduction in scope – the scope for this project reduced significantly (approx. 50% by length) as Ōtākaro Ltd delivered the remaining works as part of their East Frame project.

4.8.2   Efficiencies were achieved in the delivery methodology of the contract such as utilising existing contractor facilities, minimising mobilisation and demobilisation costs and bulk purchasing.

4.9       Hereford Street (Manchester to Madras) is part of the wider An Accessible City programme, therefore savings will be held at the programme level and either:

4.9.1   Allocated to other projects within the programme based on need, with approvals in line with the financial delegations policy; or

4.9.2   Released as a saving/underspend upon completion of the An Accessible City programme.

4.10    Note that the contract is not yet complete.  Final costs of variations are currently being negotiated with the contractor and the 12 month defects period commenced in December 2017.


 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Authors

Neil Gillon - Senior Project Manager

Sharon O'Neill - Team Leader Project Management Transport

Approved By

Lynette Ellis - Manager Planning and Delivery Transport

Richard Osborne - Head of Transport

David Adamson - General Manager City Services

  


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

 

8.        Lichfield Car Park - Budget / Contingency planning vs Actual report

Reference:

18/48829

Contact:

Lee Butcher

Lee.butcher@ccc.govt.nz

6774 ext

 

 

1.  Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is:

1.1.1   For the Finance and Performance Committee to be informed, with regard to contingency management on the Lichfield Car Park project, following their request for information at meeting 06/12/2017 FPCM/2017/00077.

1.1.2   To highlight and inform the Committee of the systems used to drive budget & contingency allocations for capital projects (this report is based on Lichfield car park rebuild).

1.1.3   To highlight and inform on the spend of budget & contingency for capital projects (this report is based on Lichfield car park rebuild).

 

Origin of Report

1.2       The report is provided to fulfil the Finance & Performance Committee’s request to provide a report that includes financial information on the original budget allocation, the contingency budget, the actual expenditure and how the contingency was spent.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1.         Receive the information in the report.

 

 

3.   Key Points

3.1       Contingencies are worked out typically through industry percentages but this is not the case for Design & Build (D&B) as for the most part the project is well understood. It is important to note the difference between a traditional procurement method and a D&B method.  The key difference in terms of contingency management is that under D&B the contractor/design consortium own the risk of design documentation.  Therefore, under D&B the client has a greater degree of cost certainty for the project. 

3.2       Once the Construction contract was known ($28,064,849) plus total contingencies ($3,367,782), the full project budget of $31,432,631 (plus allowance for other business costs) was forecast.  This figure includes professional services.

3.3       The expenditure of contingency sums is controlled via two mechanisms; the first being the procurement of professional services using either panel agreements or tenders, and the second is the Project Control Group (PCG) that consists of stakeholders from different business groups of Council and external bodies. In the case of Lichfield Street car park we had BECA plus staff from Transport, Finance, Procurement and Capital Delivery groups within the Council.

3.4       We are still working through the final accounts with the contractors and providers, the current forecast is an underspend of $1,124,107 (Forecasted vs Actual).

4.   Context/Background

Scope of Works

4.1       To replace the existing car parking building and provide a safe building with adequate local parking provisions to return the level of service of parking to pre-quake levels. Refer to Attachment A for a summary of previous Council reports noting that in June 2014 the initial rough order estimates to replace the building were $33.3M.

4.2       805 parking spaces and about 1,000 square metres of retail space.

4.3       Structure to enhance the arcade feel of the retail precinct – the design achieves this goal.

Delivery Method

4.4       The forecasted budget for the parking building was made up of two parts: 

4.4.1   Part one was driven out of market pricing information; this is typically sourced by a Professional Quantity Surveyor (PQS). In this case BECA assisted the Council procurement and transport teams to understand possible costs to construct. PQS teams use live market information and apply that as close as possible to high-level project outcomes. In the case of the parking building this included space, size, functionality and retail contingent.

4.4.2   The second part of this is unique to a Design and Build (D&B) Project (Lichfield car park rebuild was such a project).  Council staff had created a scope document using the old parking building as the base and then added innovation, safety, retail and other tools to meet modern day needs to create the principal requirements that the bidders could use to design the parking building. This document is known as the “Employer’s requirements” which is fundamentally a list of wants/outcomes/deliverables for the project and various stakeholders.

This document assists procurement and allows Council staff to test the market using the D&B delivery method.  Market responses contain a base design and cost to meet the “employer’s requirements” and these are vetted and compared with the PQS budget. This process provides a “forecasted budget” which was suggested as circa NZD$34M for the Lichfield car park building.

4.5       The next phase is also unique to a D&B project. Procurement and Transport work with bidders to ensure that their base design is fit for purpose and meets the “employer’s requirements”. (This process, in the case of Lichfield car park, was extended to further designs with two preferred bidders.)

This process gives the Council a firm design allowing for limited items that are not fully known at that time. At this point in the process, with the final bid forming the contract price, the build budget is now known.  Due to the unique set-up of D&B the contractor carries the risk for both design and construction. 

The construction contract for Lichfield car Park building was $28,064,849.


 

Financial Status

4.6       Summary of Costs:

 

Forecast

Actual

Saving

Contract Sum

$28.065M

$28.065M

Nil

Contingencies:

 

 

 

Changes and Improvements

$2.245M

$1.855M

$0.390M

Professional Services

$1.123M

$0.389M

$0.734M

Total Budget

$31.433M

$30.309M

$1.124M

 

4.7       All contract works were completed to this budget.

4.8       Contingencies are worked out typically through industry percentages but this is not the case for D&B as for the most part the project is well understood. For Lichfield Street the Project Director reviewed the final procurement stages with PQS (BECA) and itemised the at-risk items, items not 100% resolved through the tender/procurement stages. The largest of these within the Lichfield car park building was the retail area, connection to third party buildings and the treatment to Plymouth Lane. It was felt that 4% contingency for those items plus 4% for any other minor unforeseen issues would be sufficient for this project.

A construction contingency of 8% of contract ($2,245,188) was forecast for the project.

The final portion of the Contingency is again not typical and differs to a traditional build. At contract we do not have any professional services in place so an allowance is required in our budgets to cover costs for engineering support / project & financial management / stakeholder management and Health & Safety oversight. In a traditional build these services would have been procured up front and working alongside the builder as the project develops, and these are normally forecasted as industry percentages of 12 - 18%. Given that the contractor had the design and construct role we were able to reduce our scope of work for external consultants greatly. For Lichfield Street car park the Project Director set an allowance of no more than 4% for all non-construction related costs.

A professional services contingency of 4% of contract ($1,122,594) was forecasted for Lichfield car park.

4.9       Once the Construction contract was known ($28,064,849) plus total contingencies ($3,367,782), the full project budget $31,432,631 (plus allowance for other business costs) was forecast. 

4.10    The expenditure of contingency sums are controlled via two mechanisms; the first being the procurement of professional services using either panel agreements or tenders, and the second is the Project Control Group (PCG) that consists of stakeholders from different business groups of Council and external bodies. In the case of Lichfield Street car park we had BECA plus staff from Transport, Finance, Procurement and Capital Delivery groups within Council.

4.11    During the construction of Lichfield car park building we were required to look closely at the re-development of the former Plymouth Laneway. This was undertaken with the Council’s Urban Design team, the business community, stakeholders and Ōtākaro. An opportunity presented itself to relocate the old substation in the lane and open up the area in line with the Central City Master Plan developed by Athfield Architects post-earthquake which promoted the laneway concept. The creation of the new laneway supports new developments in the area and opens up the retail area to further activation. The cost of this element was shared by a number of groups to make it sustainable to both the project and the wider stakeholders.  This cost was circa $800,000; of that the project contributed $382,000, local business owners $250,000 and other parties $150,000.  This will add value to Council’s retail space once fully activated.

4.12    Another large spend was the development of the retail areas highlighted at the project outset as a known risk item (monies had been forecasted for this). Along with the retail area we were also tasked with extending the building’s crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) elements, the biggest part of which was extending the upper level barrier. For the retail area both internal and external property experts looked at the space and assisted the contractor to develop the space further to a modern bright retail area housing seven unique spaces that, at the time of this report, are over 50% committed. The cost was in line with expectations at the project out-set (noted in item 4.8).

With the help of internal and external CPTED experts we also devised a barrier system that met CPTED principles. The total cost for retail improvements was $872,000, the CPTED improvements were $160,000.

Financial Summary

4.9       In summary of spend forecast vs actual:

·   All the large project improvements had a combined cost $1,414,000.00 (circa 5% of contract).

·   A further $440,526 was spent on minor changes and variations during the construction (this accounts for only circa 1.6% of contract).

·   Total paid to the contractor – contract 100% $28,064,849 plus agreed variations for large project improvements and minor changes totalling $1,854,526 (forecasted $2,245,188, a saving of $390,662). 

·   Total paid on other professional services - $389,149 (forecasted $1,122,594, a saving of $733,445).

Following completion of the building late 2017, we are currently finalising the final account with the contractors and providers.  The current forecast is an under spend of $1,124,107 (Forecasted vs Actual). 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Summary of previous reports

17

 

 

Signatories

Author

Lee Butcher - Project Director

Approved By

Liam Nolan - Head of Vertical Capital Delivery and Professional Services

Patricia Christie - Head of Business Partnership

David Adamson - General Manager City Services

  


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

PDF Creator


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

 

9.        Performance Reporting for January 2018

Reference:

18/176256

Presenter(s):

Peter Ryan

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Finance and Performance Committee to note an update on LTP level of service performance.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1.         Receive the information in the attached appendices.

 

3.   Key Points

3.1       Staff forecasts as at 31 January 2018 indicate a high level of achievement (88%) which is in line with historical trends.

3.2       Individual level of service exceptions are set out in the attached appendix.

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Level of Service Forecast Delivery Graph January 2018

20

b

Level of Service Exceptions January 2018

21

 

 

Signatories

Author

Sung Jun Park - Performance Analyst

Approved By

Peter Ryan - Head of Performance Management

Carol Bellette - General Manager Finance and Commercial (CFO)

  


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

PDF Creator


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 


PDF Creator


 


 


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 


 


 


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

 

10.    Regenerate Christchurch - Half year performance to 31 December 2017

Reference:

18/57043

Contact:

Linda Gibb

Linda.Gibb@ccc.govt.nz

941 6762

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Finance and Performance Committee to recommend that Council notes Regenerate Christchurch’s performance for the half year to 31 December 2017.

Origin of Report

1.2       The attached report has been prepared jointly with the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, based on quarterly performance reporting from Regenerate Christchurch.

2.   Significance

2.1       The decisions in this report are of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.  The level of significance was determined by taking into account the impact of the noting decisions sought on the community.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Finance and Performance Committee recommends the Council:

1.         Notes Regenerate Christchurch’s performance for the month of December 2017, and year to date to 31 December 2017; and

2.         Notes that Council staff and Regenerate Christchurch are working towards agreeing a process that is clear on engagement requirements between Regenerate Christchurch, staff and shareholders in order to progress the Cathedral Square and Surrounds’ strategy to completion.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       Regenerate Christchurch has submitted its quarterly performance report for December, which includes information for the half year to 31 December 2017.  The report is at Attachment A.

4.2       Staff from the Council and the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) have prepared a joint report to shareholders assessing Regenerate Christchurch’s performance against its 2017/18 Statement of Performance Expectations’ targets.  This report is at Attachment B

4.3       At the time Regenerate Christchurch finalised its December quarterly report, it had not finalised its December accounts, and therefore its quarterly report provides financial information only to November 2017.  Regenerate Christchurch subsequently provided updated financial information for December which is provided in the Council and DPMC report. 

4.4       The Council and DPMC report notes the following key point:

Project delays

4.4.1   Delays in delivery are prevalent across Regenerate Christchurch’s work programme, due in part to Regenerate Christchurch’s preference for collaboration between its staff and Council staff after it has completed its draft advice.  This has led to time delays while Regenerate Christchurch revises its work to take Council feedback into account.  Council staff are continuing to work towards agreeing on a collaborative process with Regeneration Christchurch in order to achieve completion of the projects as soon as possible.

4.4.2   As a result of the problems experienced to date, Regenerate Christchurch has revised its timeframe for presenting the following:

·   Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor – Regenerate Christchurch has advised that it expects to report to its board with a short-list of options in March 2018, followed by engagement with shareholders (SPE expectations were for delivery of the project between July and September 2017); and

·   Cathedral Square and Surrounds – now projected to be delivered in March 2018 (SPE expectations were for delivery of the project by December 2017).  Council staff consider that this date is at risk given that engagement with shareholders has yet to commence, followed by any review and rework that may be required.

4.4.3   There are a number of reasons that may have contributed to the ongoing delays.  Regenerate Christchurch advises that the change of Government late last year and more recently the appointment of the new Chair to the board have impeded its ability to stay on track with its projects.  It is important that the process established to conclude the Cathedral Square and Surrounds’ Strategy is clear on engagement requirements with staff and shareholders. 

New Brighton

4.4.4   A budget reforecast has been undertaken by Regenerate Christchurch based on re-scheduling within the work programme to take account of delays that have, and continue to occur.  The reforecast has yet to be finalised but has been provided to staff as indicative.  It shows a major re-allocation of existing resources in the current year from delivery of regeneration outputs in New Brighton, to delivery for South Shore and South New Brighton and central city (including Cathedral Square and surrounds).  The expenditure and funding for New Brighton is now expected to be in 2018/19.

4.4.5   We have raised questions with Regenerate Christchurch about its activities in New Brighton which underpin the transfer of budgeted resources from 2017/18 to 2018/19.  We have received advice from Regenerate Christchurch that its board has directed the organisation to “ensure all resources and efforts are focused on the priority areas of the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor and Cathedral Square & Surrounds / Central City at this time, and to ensure the involvement of Regenerate Christchurch in relation to New Brighton is limited to a light touch of occasional design urban design advice / support only”.

 

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Regenerate Christchurch DPMC/CCC Quarterly Performance Report to December 2017

34

b

Regenerate Christchurch Quarterly Report ending 31 December 2017

41

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Author

Linda Gibb - Performance Monitoring Advisor

Approved By

Mushe Shoko - Manager External Reporting & Governance

Diane Brandish - Head of Financial Management

Karleen Edwards - Chief Executive

  


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

 

11.    Development Christchurch Ltd - Status Report December 2017 - February 2018

Reference:

18/130720

Presenter(s):

Rob Hall, Chief Executive, Development Christchurch Ltd

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Finance and Performance Committee to recommend that the Council notes Development Christchurch Ltd’s (DCL) Status Report for December 2017, and January and February 2018.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report has been prepared to accompany DCL’s quarterly report on its activities.

2.   Significance

2.1       The decisions in this report are of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.  The level of significance was determined by taking into account the likely impact of the noting decisions on the community.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Finance and Performance Committee recommends that the Council:

1.         Notes Development Christchurch Ltd’s Status Report for the period December 2017 - February 2018.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       DCL’s Status Report for December 2017 – February 2018 is at Attachment A

4.2       We note the ‘creating momentum fund’ for New Brighton is now closed, and the activities that were funded from it have now ceased.  While many of the initiatives were one-off events, the Carnaby Lane Refurbishment Project has welcomed a small amount of private sector activity in this space, leveraging off DCL’s funding.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Development Christchurch Ltd Status Report - December 2017 - February 2018

47

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Author

Linda Gibb - Performance Monitoring Advisor

Approved By

Mushe Shoko - Manager External Reporting & Governance

Carol Bellette - General Manager Finance and Commercial (CFO)

  


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 

 


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

 

12.  Resolution to Exclude the Public

Section 48, Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

 

I move that the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting, namely items listed overleaf.

 

Reason for passing this resolution: good reason to withhold exists under section 7.

Specific grounds under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution: Section 48(1)(a)

 

Note

 

Section 48(4) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 provides as follows:

 

“(4)     Every resolution to exclude the public shall be put at a time when the meeting is open to the public, and the text of that resolution (or copies thereof):

 

             (a)       Shall be available to any member of the public who is present; and

             (b)       Shall form part of the minutes of the local authority.”

 

This resolution is made in reliance on Section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by Section 6 or Section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public are as follows:


Finance and Performance Committee

28 February 2018

 

 

 

ITEM NO.

GENERAL SUBJECT OF EACH MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED

SECTION

SUBCLAUSE AND REASON UNDER THE ACT

PLAIN ENGLISH REASON

WHEN REPORTS CAN BE RELEASED

13

Public Excluded Finance and Performance Committee Minutes - 31 January 2018

 

 

Refer to the previous public excluded reason in the agendas for these meetings.

 

14

Development Christchurch Ltd - Status Report December 2017 - February 2018

s7(2)(h)

Commercial Activities

THe activities discussed in this report, if revealed could prejudice DCL's ability to successfully achieve the activities/projects.

When approved by the Chief Executive

15

Christchurch City Holdings Ltd - Half year performance report to 31 December 2017

s7(2)(h), s7(2)(j)

Commercial Activities, Prevention of Improper Advantage

Information contained in this report and its attachments is subject to CCHL's continuous disclosure obligations under the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 and the NZX Debt Market Listing Rules.  It is provided to shareholders in confidence until released to the market by 1 March, and until that time is insider information.  It is illegal for any person who has insider information to trade CCHL's bonds, advice or encourage others to trade or hold the bonds, or pass on or disclose the insider information to others.

When the information is publicly available.

16

Riccarton Bush Trust - Appointment of Council trustee

s7(2)(a), s7(2)(f)(ii)

Protection of Privacy of Natural Persons, Protection from Improper Pressure or Harassment

The reputation of a private individual is put at risk if final Council decisions differ from those contained in this report.  Interested third parties could put undue pressure on the Council with respect to its decision-making on such a matter.

After final decisions have been taken and a public announcement made (if any).