Finance and Performance Committee of the whole - Terms of Reference Ngā Ārahina Mahinga

Chair	Councillor MacDonald
Deputy Chair	Councillor Coker
Membership	The Mayor and all Councillors
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

Delegations

The Council delegates to the Finance and Performance Committee authority to oversee and make decisions on:

Capital Programme and operational expenditure

· Monitoring the delivery of the Council’s Capital Programme and associated operational expenditure, including inquiring into any material discrepancies from planned expenditure.

· As may be necessary from time to time, approving amendments to the Capital Programme outside the Long-Term Plan or Annual Plan processes.

· Approving Capital Programme business and investment cases, and any associated operational expenditure, as agreed in the Council’s Long-Term Plan.

· Approving any capital or other carry forward requests and the use of operating surpluses as the case may be.

· Approving the procurement plans (where applicable), preferred supplier, and contracts for all capital expenditure where the value of the contract exceeds $15 Million (noting that the Committee may sub delegate authority for approval of the preferred supplier and /or contract to the Chief Executive provided the procurement plan strategy is followed).

· Approving the procurement plans (where applicable), preferred supplier, and contracts, for all operational expenditure where the value of the contract exceeds $10 Million (noting that the Committee may sub delegate authority for approval of the preferred supplier and/or contract to the Chief Executive provided the procurement plan strategy is followed).

Non-financial performance

· Reviewing the delivery of services under s17A.

· Amending levels of service targets, unless the decision is precluded under section 97 of the Local Government Act 2002.

· Exercising all of the Council's powers under section 17A of the Local Government Act 2002, relating to service delivery reviews and decisions not to undertake a review.

Council Controlled Organisations

· Monitoring the financial and non-financial performance of the Council and Council Controlled Organisations.

· Making governance decisions related to Council Controlled Organisations under sections 65 to 72 of the Local Government Act 2002.

· Exercising the Council’s powers directly as the shareholder, or through CCHL, or in respect of an entity (within the meaning of section 6(1) of the Local Government Act 2002) in relation to –

o (without limitation) the modification of constitutions and/or trust deeds, and other governance arrangements, granting shareholder approval of major transactions, appointing directors or trustees, and approving policies related to Council Controlled Organisations; and

o in relation to the approval of Statements of Intent and their modification (if any).

Development Contributions

· Exercising all of the Council's powers in relation to development contributions, other than those delegated to the Chief Executive and Council officers as set out in the Council's Delegations Register.

Property

· Purchasing or disposing of property where required for the delivery of the Capital Programme, in accordance with the Council’s Long-Term Plan, and where those acquisitions or disposals have not been delegated to another decision-making body of the Council or staff.

Loans and debt write-offs

· Approving debt write-offs where those debt write-offs are not delegated to staff.

· Approving amendments to loans, in accordance with the Council’s Long-Term Plan.

Insurance

· All insurance matters, including considering legal advice from the Council’s legal and other advisers, approving further actions relating to the issues, and authorising the taking of formal actions (Sub-delegated to the Insurance Subcommittee as per the Subcommittees Terms of Reference)

Annual Plan and Long Term Plan

· Provides oversight and monitors development of the Long Term Plan (LTP) and Annual Plan.

· Approves the appointment of the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the External Advisory Group for the LTP 2021-31.

Submissions

· The Council delegates to the Committee authority:

· To consider and approve draft submissions on behalf of the Council on topics within its terms of reference. Where the timing of a consultation does not allow for consideration of a draft submission by the Council or relevant Committee, that the draft submission can be considered and approved on behalf of the Council.

Limitations

· The general delegations to this Committee exclude any specific decision-making powers that are delegated to a Community Board, another Committee of Council or Joint Committee. Delegations to staff are set out in the delegations register.

· The Council retains the authority to adopt policies, strategies and bylaws.

The following matters are prohibited from being subdelegated in accordance with LGA 2002 Schedule 7 Clause 32(1) :

· the power to make a rate; or

· the power to make a bylaw; or

· the power to borrow money, or purchase or dispose of assets, other than in accordance with the long-term plan; or

· the power to adopt a long-term plan, annual plan, or annual report; or

· the power to appoint a chief executive; or

· the power to adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under this Act in association with the long-term plan or developed for the purpose of the local governance statement; or

· the power to adopt a remuneration and employment policy.

Chairperson may refer urgent matters to the Council

As may be necessary from time to time, the Committee Chairperson is authorised to refer urgent matters to the Council for decision, where this Committee would ordinarily have considered the matter. In order to exercise this authority:

· The Committee Advisor must inform the Chairperson in writing the reasons why the referral is necessary

· The Chairperson must then respond to the Committee Advisor in writing with their decision.

· If the Chairperson agrees to refer the report to the Council, the Council may then assume decision making authority for that specific report.

Urgent matters referred from the Council

As may be necessary from time to time, the Mayor is authorised to refer urgent matters to this Committee for decision, where the Council would ordinarily have considered the matter, except for those matters listed in the limitations above.

In order to exercise this authority:

· The Council Secretary must inform the Mayor and Chief Executive in writing the reasons why the referral is necessary

· The Mayor and Chief Executive must then respond to the Council Secretary in writing with their decision.

If the Mayor and Chief Executive agrees to refer the report to the Committee, the Committee may then assume decision-making authority for that specific report.

A black text on a white background

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Finance and Performance Committee

Open Minutes

Date: Wednesday 26 February 2025

Time: 9.31 am

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

Present

Chairperson

Deputy Chairperson

Members

Councillor Sam MacDonald

Councillor Melanie Coker

Mayor Phil Mauger

Deputy Mayor Pauline Cotter

Councillor Kelly Barber

Councillor Celeste Donovan

Councillor Tyrone Fields

Councillor James Gough

Councillor Tyla Harrison-Hunt

Councillor Victoria Henstock

Councillor Yani Johanson

Councillor Aaron Keown

Councillor Jake McLellan

Councillor Andrei Moore

Councillor Mark Peters

Councillor Tim Scandrett

Councillor Sara Templeton

Principal Advisor

Bede Carran

General Manager Finance, Risk & Performance / CFO

Tel: 941 8999

bede.carran@ccc.govt.nz

Meeting Advisor

David Corlett

Democracy Services Advisor

Tel: 941 5421

david.corlett@ccc.govt.nz

Website: www.ccc.govt.nz

Part A Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B Reports for Information

Part C Decisions Under Delegation

Karakia Tīmatanga

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1. Apologies Ngā Whakapāha

Part C

Committee Resolved FPCO/2025/00067

That the apologies from Councillor Johanson for early departure and the Mayor for partial absence be accepted.

Councillor MacDonald/Councillor Coker Carried

2. Declarations of Interest Ngā Whakapuaki Aronga

Part B

Councillors Coker and MacDonald declared an interest in Items 12 - Appointment of Councillor to the Christchurch City Holdings Ltd Board of Directors, 13 - CCHL - Ability to Borrow from the Local Government Funding Agency, and 14 - Christchurch City Holdings Ltd - Review of board fees.

3. Confirmation of Previous Minutes Te Whakaāe o te hui o mua

Part C

Committee Resolved FPCO/2025/00068

That the minutes of the Finance and Performance Committee meeting held on Wednesday, 29 January 2025 be confirmed.

Councillor MacDonald/Councillor Coker Carried

4. Public Forum Te Huinga Whānui

Part B

There were no public forum presentations.

5. Deputations by Appointment Ngā Huinga Whakaritenga

Part B

There were no deputations by appointment.

6. Presentation of Petitions Ngā Pākikitanga

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.

7. Key Organisational Performance Results - January 2025

Committee Resolved FPCO/2025/00069

Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1. Receives the information in the Key Organisational Performance Results - January 2025 Report.

Mayor/Councillor Coker Carried

8. Financial Performance Report - January 2025

Committee Resolved FPCO/2025/00070

Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1. Receives the information in the Financial Performance Report - January 2025 Report.

Councillor MacDonald/Councillor Donovan Carried

Councillor Harrison-Hunt left the meeting at 9.47am and returned at 9.49am during consideration of item 9.

9. Capital Programme Performance Report January 2025

Committee comment

The Committee requested that the Watchlist Project page in the report show the variance from one month to the next, possibly in the form of a dashboard.

Committee Resolved FPCO/2025/00071

Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1. Receives the information in the Capital Programme Performance Report January 2025.

Councillor MacDonald/Councillor Keown Carried

10. Draft Council Submission: Local Government (Water Services) Bill
	Committee Comment 1. Council Officer Luke Adams, Principal Advisor Policy, joined the table to present the report. 2. The Mayor moved the staff recommendations, which was seconded by Councillor Coker. 3. Councillor Johanson then advised the Chair that he had wording for a proposed amendment. 4. The Chair moved to the next agenda item to allow staff time to provide advice on the proposed amendment. 5. Discussion on Item 10 resumed after Item 14 was concluded (refer pages 7-9 below).
	Committee Recommendations That the Finance and Performance Committee: 1. Receives the information in the Draft Council Submission: Local Government (Water Services) Bill Report. 2. Approves lodging the Council submission on the Local Government (Water Services) Bill (Attachment A and B) to the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee. 3. Notes that the decision in this report is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Mayor/Councillor Coker Carried/Lost

11. Antigua Street - Request to proceed ahead of Annual Plan completion

Committee Resolved FPCO/2025/00072

Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1. Receives the information in the Antigua Street - Request to proceed ahead of Annual Plan completion Report.

2. Notes that the decision in this report is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

3. Approves the transfer of $1,250,000 of FY25 budget from 26611 Wheels to Wings Section 1 to 59181 Antigua Street

a. Noting that – should the additional budget for Antigua Street indicated in the draft Annual Plan be approved – the budget will be returned to the donor project in a future year

4. Notes that staff will progress the Antigua Street project to procurement and construction

The division was declared carried by 11 votes to 6 votes the voting being as follows:

For: Councillor Coker, Deputy Mayor Cotter, Councillor Barber, Councillor Donovan, Councillor Fields, Councillor Harrison-Hunt, Councillor McLellan, Councillor Moore, Councillor Peters, Councillor Scandrett and Councillor Templeton

Against: Councillor MacDonald, Mayor Mauger, Councillor Gough, Councillor Henstock, Councillor Johanson and Councillor Keown

Councillor Templeton/Councillor Coker Carried

Election of a Chair

Committee Resolved FPCO/2025/00073

The Finance and Performance Committee resolved that Councillor Scandrett be appointed Chairperson of the Finance and Performance Committee for Item 12 - Appointment of Councillor to the Christchurch City Holdings Ltd Board of Directors, Item 13 - CCHL - Ability to Borrow from the Local Government Funding Agency, and Item 14 - Christchurch City Holdings Ltd - Review of board fees.

Councillor MacDonald/Councillor Coker Carried

Councillor Scandrett assumed the Chair for consideration of Items 12, 13 and 14.

12. Appointment of Councillor to the Christchurch City Holdings Ltd Board of Directors

Committee Resolved FPCO/2025/00074

Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1. Appoints Councillor Melanie Coker to the Christchurch City Holdings Ltd (CCHL) Board of Directors, to commence immediately and retire as soon as she is no longer an elected member of the Council or within three months after the 2025 local body triennial election; and

2. Agrees that, during the remainder of this term, if both the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Finance and Performance Committee have a conflict of interest on an CCHL related item that Councillor Scandrett to Chair that item.

3. Notes that the decision in this report is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Councillor Scandrett/Councillor Templeton Carried

13. CCHL - Ability to Borrow from the Local Government Funding Agency

Committee Resolved FPCO/2025/00075

Officer recommendations accepted without change

Part C

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1. Receives the CCHL - Ability to Borrow from the Local Government Funding Agency Report.

2. Notes that the decision in this report is assessed as of low significance based on the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

3. Delegates to the Mayor and one other Elected Member authority to sign the Multi Issuer Accession Deed and Notes Subscription Accession Agreement (and any required ancillary documents) that will enable CCHL to borrow directly from LGFA.

Councillor Scandrett/Councillor Barber Carried

14. Christchurch City Holdings Ltd - Review of board fees
	Committee Comment 1... Bryan Pearson (CCHL Chair) and Matt Slater (CCHL CEO) joined the table to present this Item and answer any questions. 2... The Deputy Mayor and Councillor Donovan proposed an amendment to defer consideration on CCHL directors’ fees adjustments. The motion was lost on a division vote. 3.... The staff recommendations, having been moved by the Mayor and seconded by Councillor Scandrett, were then put to the Committee and passed.
	Committee Recommendations That the Finance and Performance Committee: 1. Receives the information in the Christchurch City Holdings Ltd - Review of board fees; 2. Defer consideration on CCHL directors’ fees adjustments until all benchmarking work to 2025 is completed and can be submitted for one Council decision after the 2025 local body election. The division was declared lost* by 6 votes to 9 votes the voting being as follows:* *For:* Deputy Mayor Cotter, Councillor Donovan, Councillor Fields, Councillor Harrison-Hunt, Councillor Johanson and Councillor McLellan *Against:* Mayor Mauger, Councillor Barber, Councillor Gough, Councillor Henstock, Councillor Keown, Councillor Moore, Councillor Peters, Councillor Scandrett and Councillor Templeton Deputy Mayor/Councillor Donovan Lost Councillor MacDonald and Councillor Coker, having declared an interest, sat back on this Item and took no part in the debate or vote
	Committee Resolved FPCO/2025/00076 Officers original recommendations accepted without change Part C That the Finance and Performance Committee: 1. Receives the information in the Christchurch City Holdings Ltd - Review of board fees; 2. Notes that the proposal for the increase in Christchurch City Holdings Ltd’s directors’ fees meets the requirements of the Council’s Policy for the Appointment and Remuneration of Directors, including incorporating a discount for the public service element of around 20%; 3. Agrees that the Christchurch City Holdings Ltd directors’ fees pool of $445,500 remains unchanged and it be allocated between seven directors rather than eight, which is an effective increase of 13.75%; 4. Agrees that the Chair be paid a director’s fee of $110,000 (up from $96,700) and the other six directors be paid directors’ fees of $55,000 (up from $48,350) effective from 1 July 2024; 5. Notes that the directors’ fees of the Councillor directors are paid to the Mayor’s Welfare Fund; 6. Notes that the fees pool does not include provision to fill the vacant independent director role, and if filled by a new appointee the directors’ fees pool will need to be authorised by the Council at that time; 7. Notes that benchmarking undertaken to inform the proposed fees is for the period ending 30 June 2023 and will be followed by a further proposal after the 2025 local body election to adjust the fees to meet benchmarking results for 2025; 8. Notes that directors’ fees pool is funded by Christchurch City Holdings Ltd; and 9. Notes that the decision in this report is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The division was declared carried* by 10 votes to 5 votes the voting being as follows:* *For:* Mayor Mauger, Councillor Barber, Councillor Gough, Councillor Harrison-Hunt, Councillor Henstock, Councillor Keown, Councillor Moore, Councillor Peters, Councillor Scandrett and Councillor Templeton *Against:* Deputy Mayor Cotter, Councillor Donovan, Councillor Fields, Councillor Johanson and Councillor McLellan Mayor/Councillor Scandrett Carried Councillor MacDonald and Councillor Coker, having declared an interest, sat back on this Item and took no part in the debate or vote

Councillor MacDonald returned to the Chair.

The meeting adjourned at 11.01am and reconvened at 11.20am. Councillor Johanson and The Mayor were not present at this time.

10. Draft Council Submission: Local Government (Water Services) Bill
	Committee Comment 1. Council Officers Luke Adams, Principal Advisor Policy, rejoined the table along with Naomi Soper, Senior Legal Counsel, to answer questions. 2. The mover and seconder agreed to incorporate Councillor Johanson’s amendment (recommendations 4 and 5 below) into the substantive motion. 3. The Committee voted on recommendations 1 to 4, and then 5a, which were passed 4. A division was held on recommendation 5b, which carried on a vote of 8 to 7.
	Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu That the Finance and Performance Committee: 1. Receives the information in the Draft Council Submission: Local Government (Water Services) Bill Report. 2. Approves lodging the Council submission on the Local Government (Water Services) Bill (Attachment A and B) to the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee. 3. Notes that the decision in this report is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
	Committee Resolved FPCO/2025/00077 Part C That the Finance and Performance Committee: 1. Receives the information in the Draft Council Submission: Local Government (Water Services) Bill Report. 2. Approves lodging the Council submission on the Local Government (Water Services) Bill (Attachment A and B) to the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee. 3. Notes that the decision in this report is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. 4. Incorporate the following feedback into Council’s Local Government Water Services Bill submission and seeks a meeting with relevant Government Ministers to progress the key points: a. That one of the aims of the Bill in its explanatory note is to "make changes affecting the water quality regulatory framework, including changes to the Water Services Act 2021 to reduce the regulatory burden of the drinking water quality regime and improve proportionality in the application of regulatory powers." b. That the Finance and Performance Committee note the willingness from the current government for Councils to reduce rates. c. That the Finance and Performance Committee note the very significant cost of implementing the permanent chlorination of our water supply. 5. That Council’s submission seeks amendments that will: a. provide a more efficient and less cumbersome approach to reduce the requirements to applying for and gaining an exemption from permanently chlorinating Christchurch City Council's water supply and ensure the requirements are proportionate to the scale, complexity and risk profile of each supply. Mayor/Councillor Coker Carried
	Committee Resolved FPCO/2025/00078 5. That Council’s submission seeks amendments that will: b. provide the Council with the ability to stop chlorinating its water supply while an application for an exemption is considered and determined. The division was declared carried* by 8 votes to 7 votes the voting being as follows:* *For:* Councillor MacDonald, Councillor Barber, Councillor Fields, Councillor Gough, Councillor Henstock, Councillor Keown, Councillor Moore and Councillor Peters *Against:* Councillor Coker, Deputy Mayor Cotter, Councillor Donovan, Councillor Harrison-Hunt, Councillor McLellan, Councillor Scandrett and Councillor Templeton Mayor/Councillor Coker Carried

15. Resolution to Exclude the Public Te whakataunga kaupare hunga tūmatanui

Committee Resolved FPCO/2025/00079

Part C

That at 11.38am the resolution to exclude the public set out on pages 160 to 161 of the agenda be adopted.

Councillor MacDonald/Councillor Coker Carried

The public were re-admitted to the meeting at 11.42am.

Karakia Whakamutunga

Meeting concluded at 11.42am.

CONFIRMED THIS 26^th DAY OF MARCH 2025

Councillor Sam MacDonald

Chairperson

7. Key Organisational Performance Results - February 2025
Reference Te Tohutoro:	25/342696
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Peter Ryan, Head of Corporate Planning & Performance Peter.Ryan@ccc.govt.nz
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Bede Carran, General Manager Finance, Risk & Performance / Chief Financial Officer

1. Purpose and Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 To provide Council with an overview of performance towards delivering year one of our Long-Term Plan 2024-34 (LTP), our ‘contract with the community’.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1. Receives the information in the Key Organisational Performance Results - February 2025 Report.

3. Background/Context Te Horopaki

3.1 This is a regular report focused on a suite of the ‘vital few’ organisational performance targets and forms a key component of the Council’s Performance Framework and its reporting.

4. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

4.1 The key organisational performance targets include:

· Service Delivery (levels of service (LOS)).

· Capital Projects (both milestone delivery and planning).

· Value for Money (finance – activity budgets and capex).

4.2 This report provides February’s monthly performance forecasts against ELT performance priority targets for year-one of the LTP 2024-34.

4.3 Overall organisational performance priority forecasts are mixed but show improvement.

4.4 Community Level of Service delivery (88.0%) sees further improvement of 1.5% since from January and is forecast to achieve the ELT performance target (85%).

4.5 Management Level of Service delivery (87.1%) shows an improvement of 0.7% from January. The Executive Leadership Team (ELT) performance target remains forecast to be achieved (85%).

4.6 Capital Project milestone delivery (82.4%) sees an increase of 0.2% from the January forecast. Capital Programme milestone delivery remains below the ELT performance target (85%).

4.7 Capital planning performance forecasts both show good progress for this time of year, with no change for the previous three months. The forecasts remain likely to meet the ELT target of 90% as follows:

· Funding programme budgets allocated for FY2026 by 31st March 2025 remains reported at 88%.

· Budget drawdowns for FY2027 and 2028 by 30th June 2025 are reported at 78%.

4.8 Activity budgets, actively managed to budget (82.1%), saw an improvement of 2.6% from January. It is unlikely the organisational target set by ELT (100% of activities are actively managed to budget) will be met.

4.9 Deliver Capital Programme within approved budget (-$37.5M), remains forecast within the ELT target (=/< $0). This forecast has remained consistent since the start of the financial year (between -$37.1M and -$37.5M).

5. Service Delivery

*B = Black, no data. R = Red, will miss target. A = Amber, requires intervention. G = Green, will achieve target.

5.1 Community Level of Service delivery (88.0%) sees further improvement of 1.5% from January, remaining forecast to achieve the ELT performance target (85%).

5.2 Active monthly reviews continue to positively impact community-facing performance measures. Between January and February three further level of service exceptions (across three activities) are now forecast to achieve target for year-end:

· Otākaro Avon River Corridor [Measure: Effective permanent Co-Governance entity for the Otākaro Avon River Corridor (6.8.12.2)].

· Parks Heritage Management [Measure: LTP24: Parks scheduled heritage buildings are repaired (6.9.1.8)].

· Community Development & Facilities [Measure: LTP24: Requests for service regarding graffiti are responded to promptly (2.2.6.8)].

5.3 It is likely that this forecast will remain stable through to year-end. If so this will be Council’s highest level of service delivery performance since 2009/10, the financial year directly preceding the first Canterbury earthquake sequence.

5.4 Management LOS delivery (87.1%) sees a small improvement of 0.7% from January. Overall, this ELT performance target remains on target (85%).

5.5 Following active business review two level of service exceptions are now forecast to achieve target for year-end:

· Vertical Capital Delivery [Measure: Delivery of the day-to-day capital programme (Capital delivery - project management) of approved milestones, due for the financial year, are achieved within the year (13.7.26.11)]

· Asset Management & Facilities [Measure: LTP24: Enable asset utilisation by assessing overall fleet efficiency and emissions to identify potential efficiency savings (13.4.11.5)].

5.6 LOS forecasts remain in line with the standing Audit and Risk Management Committee (ARMC) request for all LOS that did not meet target the previous year, that they continue to be reported as an amber exception until evidence is provided the target will or has been met. This provides for conservative forecasts at the beginning of a financial year.

5.7 In response, having moved past the half-way point of the year, the business is beginning to identify LOS that have previously been conservatively flagged at risk (amber, based on ARMC guidance) that can now be forecast green (on track).

5.8 The scatter-diagram below (also Attachment A) shows forecast activity LOS delivery performance (Community and Management LOS), against forecast activity budget performance (over- or under-spend).

· Across all activities, level of service delivery forecasts range from 51.9% to 100% achieved, while all but 7 activities are presently forecast on budget.

· The vertical y-axis shows forecast service delivery (LOS) performance.

· The horizontal x-axis shows forecast budget over/underspend (scaled to relative budget).

5.9 The updated view of Service Delivery is attached to this report (Attachment B). It is:

· a visual summary of activity overall service delivery and activity budget performance,

· underpinned by a more granular LOS summary across the activity, before

· listing specific exceptions detail and business commentary.

6. Responses to questions from Councillors

6.1 Responses to recent questions from Councillors can be seen in Attachment C, pertaining to:

6.1.1 Building Regulation – questions asked 27 November 2024

6.1.2 Parks and Foreshore activity – question asked 26 February 2025

7. Capital Projects – Delivery and Planning

7.1 Capital project milestone delivery performance is forecasting 82.4%, showing an increase of 0.2% from January. This remains forecast below the ELT target of 85%.

7.2 As at year-end last financial year the reported results were 88% for key projects and 86% for non-key projects (across a total of 865 projects), against the ELT target of 85%.

7.3 The capital delivery target relates to projects Council is responsible for delivering, including Council-funded and externally funded projects.

7.4 Capital planning performance forecasts both continue to show good progress for this time of year, and are likely to meet ELTs targets of 90% as follows:

· Funding programme budgets allocated for FY2026 by 31st March 2025 currently at 88%.

· Budget drawdowns for FY2027 and 2028 by 30th June 2025 is currently at 78%.

7.5 For further information and underlying project detail, refer to the Capital Programme Performance Report.

8. Value for Money

8.1 82.1% of activities are forecast to meet budget (nett controllable cost, after carry-forwards), against the ELT target 100%. 32 of the 39 activities are forecast on budget (from 31 of 39 activities as of January).

8.2 For those activities forecast to not meet budget there has been some sizeable movement between forecasts from December to February.

8.2.1 Water Supply activity forecast unfavourable variance of $3.43M overspend, a significant increase in the full year forecast of $1.89M from January, principally as a result of a shortfall in funding for personnel costs and staff recoveries and lower than forecast excess water charges being received.

8.2.2 Wastewater collection, treatment and disposal activity forecast unfavourable variance remains $2.02M overspend, an improvement of $0.95M from January.

8.2.3 Christchurch City Libraries Ngā Kete Wānanga o Ōtautahi activity forecast unfavourable variance of $0.53M, a further increase in the forecast overspends of $0.05M from January.

8.2.4 Parks & Foreshore activity forecast unfavourable variance of $2.44M overspend, a significant increase of $2.14M in forecast overspend from January, principally from under recovery of Hagley Park parking revenue and under recovery in capital deliveries.

8.2.5 Digital activity forecast as unfavourable variance of $0.35M overspend due to operational savings and staff vacancies, an improvement of $0.19M from January.

8.2.6 Building Regulation activity forecast unfavourable variance of $0.49M overspend/under recovery, with no change from January.

8.2.7 Technical Services & Design (TSD) activity forecast unfavourable variance of $0.30M under recovery arising from staff vacancies, noting that TSD is a full cost recovery activity, a further increase in forecast variance position of $0.12M from January.

8.2.8 Flood Protection and Control Works activity is no longer forecast to overspend.

8.3 For more information refer to Attachments A & B and to the Financial Performance Report.

8.4 Overall capital programme budget expenditure is forecast at an underspend of $37.5M, against ELTs target of within approved budget (= < $0). This applies a consistent PMO forecast of $510.0M against the current programme of $547.6M, approx. 93.1% of the programme. The forecast includes core and externally funded work but excludes One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha.

8.5 More detailed information is available in the Capital Programme Performance Report.

8.6 Following is the forward view of capital delivery performance for the LTP 2024-34 (financial).

8.7 The forward view of capital delivery performance (financial) looks at commitments for the first three years of the LTP 2024-34, accompanied by confirmed capital delivery in preceding LTP-cycles against plan.

8.8 This view takes into account the adopted capital programme from the LTP 2024-34 as updated through the Draft Annual Plan 2025/26, adopted for consultation on 12 February 2025. (Adjustments to years 2025/26 and 2026/27.)

8.9 Both Finance and Performance Committee and Council have formally resolved that an analysis be provided on the deliverability of the core capital programme out to 2026/27 (excluding One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha) as well as risks associated with the delivery of the capital programme. This analysis is being prepared by the Programme Management Office.

A graph of a delivery budget

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

8.10 The extended black line is the full planned delivery budget including One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha (as adopted through the Draft Annual Plan 2025/26).

8.11 The extended blue line shows the full Council planned delivery budget (excluding One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha, and before any confirmed carry forwards):

· from a consistent $488M to $483M planned budget for the three years (2021-24);

· to between $548m to $723M planned budget for the future three years (2024-27) (as adopted through the Draft Annual Plan 2025/26).

8.12 Currently, Council capital delivery (green line) for 2024/25 (year one of the LTP 2024) is forecast at $510.0M against the current programme budget of $547.6M (blue line). This equates to -$37.5M, or 93.1% forecast delivery.

8.13 This forecast delivery value is in line with the year-end actual value for 2023/24, $502M.

8.14 The ELT performance goal for capital delivery is based on all delivery Council is accountable for (excluding One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha), regardless of funding source.

8.15 Figures align with the Financial and Capital Programme Performance reports.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Top Activities (Service Delivery & Budget)	25/444494	26
b ⇩	Service Delivery Summary (Levels of Service)	25/444495	28
c ⇩	Responses to Questions Raised	25/473702	63

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Amber Tait - Performance Analyst

Meg Wedlock - Performance Analyst

Boyd Kedzlie - Senior Corporate Planning & Performance Analyst

Approved By

Peter Ryan - Head of Corporate Planning & Performance

Bede Carran - General Manager Finance, Risk & Performance / Chief Financial Officer

8. Financial Performance Report - February 2025
Reference Te Tohutoro:	25/281384
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Russell Holden, Head of Finance
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Bede Carran, General Manager Finance, Risk & Performance / Chief Financial Officer

1. Purpose and Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to inform the Finance and Performance Committee on Council's financial performance to 28 February 2025, including the year-end forecast.

1.2 This is a regular monthly report that is presented to the Committee. Treasury, debtor and general insurance claims information is reported quarterly.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1. Receives the information in the Financial Performance Report - February 2025 Report.

3. Executive Summary

3.1 The year-to-date operational surplus is $29.1 million higher than budget. This is driven by: savings in insurance costs, reduced personnel costs due to staff vacancies, lower than budget solid waste recycling / organics processing fees, savings in Transport electricity costs (mainly streetlights), increased Recreation and Sports participation revenues and higher building / planning consenting revenues.

3.2 The forecast operating surplus for the year is currently $23.0 million, compared to the $20.9 million forecast last month. The increase of $2.1 million has been driven by a forecast reduction in Transport and Waste operating and maintenance costs ($2.9 million), reduced Three Waters maintenance costs ($1.2 million, noting that the activity remains in an overall negative variance to budget position), and an improvement in Burwood Landfill revenues ($0.6 million). These savings are partially offset by a capitalisation deterioration in Parks ($1.8 million), reduced Excess water charges ($1.0 million) and reduced Transport NZTA opex subsidies ($0.6 million).

3.3 Council have utilised $14.0 million of this forecast surplus in the 25/26 Draft Annual Plan to defer 1.8% rates increase to 2026/27.

3.4 The capital programme delivery is below the year-to-date budget by $5.0 million (1.2%), primarily driven by delayed expenditure on projects in Parks ($15.0 million, 23.5%) and Three Waters ($7.7 million, 7.0%), partially offset by the early spend on the One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha ($8.5 million, 7.2%) and Transport projects ($12.5 million, 25.4%). PMO forecast the under delivery to extend to $32.6 million by year end.

4. Operational Revenue and Expenditure

4.1 This covers day to day spend on staffing, operations and maintenance, and revenues to fund the operational spend.

4.2 Operational revenue exceeds expenditure as it includes rates revenue for capital renewals and debt repayment. This ‘capital’ revenue is referred to below as ‘Funds not available for Opex’ and is removed to show the year to date and forecast cash operational surplus or deficit.

	Year to Date Results			Forecast Year End Results			After Carry Forwards
$m	Actual	Budget	Var	Forecast	Budget	Var	Carry Fwd	Var
Revenues	(758.0)	(758.8)	(0.8)	(1,081.8)	(1,079.3)	2.5	-	2.5
Expenditure	518.7	548.0	29.3	806.3	827.8	21.5	0.8	20.7
Funds not available for Opex	194.4	195.0	0.6	252.1	251.5	(0.6)	(0.4)	(0.2)
Operating (Surplus)/Deficit	(44.9)	(15.8)	29.1	(23.4)	-	23.4	0.4	23.0

4.3 The current operating surplus variance of $29.1 million is forecast to reduce to $23.0 million at year end after carry forwards. Summaries of the current and forecast material revenue and expenditure variances are highlighted below.

4.4 Revenue is $0.8 million under budget year to date and forecast to be $2.5 million over budget at year end. Due to the large amount of corporate revenues within Council’s budget, for which timing is well known, actuals track very closely to budget overall with only a 0.2% positive variance forecast.

4.5 Key drivers of actual and forecast revenue variances to budget include (amounts in brackets are revenues below budget):

Revenue Variances	Annual Budget	YTD Var	Forecast Var
Building & Planning consent volumes	35.0m	1.7m	2.9m
Recreation & Sports pools & fitness centres higher participation	21.5m	1.6m	1.6m
Resource Recovery Transfer stations, organics processing and landfills	13.8m	1.6m	1.1m
Resource Recovery Eco-Central rebate	-	0.8m	0.8m
Rates Levy – late LTP growth	760.8m	0.6m	0.9m
Rates penalties	5.3m	0.5m	0.5m
Transport parking compliance fines	4.9m	0.3m	-
Subvention receipts	11.3m	-	2.8m
Residential Excess Water charges	2.3m	(0.4m)	(0.4m)
Commercial Excess Water charges	2.9m	(0.6m)	(0.7m)
Interest Revenue (largely offset by lower on-lending costs (see cost variances))	57.4m	(0.8m)	(4.2m)
Hagley Park parking fees – new parking meters delayed & lower monthly receipts	2.2m	(1.2m)	(1.6m)
Transwaste dividend	7.3m	(1.6m)	0.4m
Resource Recovery MFE Levy reduction	9.0m	(1.6m)	(2.2m)
NZTA Opex subsidy	28.8m	(2.2m)	(1.2m)
Other revenues	116.8m	0.5m	1.8m
Total	1,079.3m	(0.8m)	2.5m

4.6 Expenditure is $29.3 million under budget, year to date, and forecast to be $20.7 million (2.5%) under budget after carry forwards at year end. Key drivers of actual and forecast expenditure variances to budget include (amounts in brackets are expenses greater than budget):

Expenditure Variance	Annual Budget	YTD Var	Forecast Var
Insurance costs	38.3m	7.9m	7.7m
Personnel costs (vacancies which were planned to be filled)	266.7m	6.9m	2.5m
Waste Management lower recycling processing fees and organic processing fees, and landfill costs	69.6m	6.8m	8.5m
Transport – timing of maintenance costs	55.2m	2.8m	0.3m
Debt Servicing (lower on-lending, favourable hedging and timing of capital expenditure, largely offset by reduction in interest revenue)	148.1m	2.0m	5.4m
Transport – street lighting electricity costs, savings due to change to LED lighting and new pricing	5.1m	1.7m	2.0m
Parks – underspend in maintenance due to the timing of the in-house maintenance teams achieving full capacity and operational readiness.	15.2m	1.3m	0.6m
Rates cost on Council owned properties	36.8m	0.2m	1.0m
Three Waters – continued high reactive maintenance volumes.	37.3m	0.1m	(0.4m)
Three Waters – less staff time capitalisation	(7.8m)	(0.7m)	(1.0m)
Building Consenting & Planning Consenting – additional costs outsourcing consent processing to meet LoS, due to volumes and staff shortages (offset by increased revenue).	6.9m	(1.1m)	(3.0m)
Parks – less staff time capitalisation	(5.2m)	(1.9m)	(2.4m)
Other minor variances	161.6m	3.3m	(0.5m)
Total	827.8m	29.3m	20.7m

5. Capital Expenditure and Revenue

5.1 This section covers the capital programme spend and funding relating to it.

	Year to Date Results			Forecast Year End Results			After Carry Forwards
$m	Actual	Budget	Var	Forecast	Budget	Var	Carry Fwd	Var
Core Programme	272.1	283.6	11.5	492.4	521.8	29.4	21.1	8.3
External Funded Programme	13.8	15.8	2.0	21.0	25.8	4.8	4.2	0.6
Less unidentified Carry Forwards	-	-	-	(3.4)	-	3.4	12.3	(8.9)
Core/External Funded Programme	285.9	299.4	13.5	510.0	547.6	37.6	37.6	-
One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha	126.5	118.0	(8.5)	195.2	190.2	(5.0)	(5.0)	-
Total Capital Programme	412.4	417.4	5.0	705.2	737.8	32.6	32.6	-
Revenues and Funding	(257.7)	(200.0)	57.7	(354.8)	(330.9)	23.9	-	23.9
Borrowing required	154.7	217.4	62.7	350.4	406.9	56.5	32.6	23.9

Capital Expenditure

5.2 Capital expenditure of $412.4 million has been incurred against a year-to-date budget of $417.4 million, including the One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha

5.3 The Project Management Office (PMO) forecasts that full year capital expenditure, excluding One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha, will be $510 million against an annual budget of $547.7 million, an unfavourable variance of $37.6 million. Of this forecast variance the majority is likely to be requested to be carried forward at year end.

5.4 The PMO forecasts that full year capital expenditure, including One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha, will be $705.4 million against an annual budget of $737.8 million, overall an unfavourable variance of $32.4 million. One New Zealand Stadium at Te Kaha is advancing well and is forecast to spend an additional $5.2 million more than budget, due not to cost overruns but to being ahead of programme.

5.5 Staff note that work is being carried out to inform Council on the deliverability of the capital programme for 2025/26. It is expected that this will be reported back no later than April.

Capital Revenues and Funding

5.6 Capital revenues and funding is $57.7 million higher than budget year to date. This is largely due to the insurance recovery of $55 million from the CWTP fire, and higher development contributions being collected.

5.7 The forecast of $23.9 million higher than budget is largely due to the insurance receipt above and $7.1 million of Development contributions, partly offset by a $25.0 million reduction in expected Crown recoveries due to a budget overstatement in the LTP, and lower NZTA subsidies ($12.3 million).

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments to this report.

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Karthik MG - Reporting Accountant

Mitchell Shaw - Reporting Accountant

Bruce Moher - Manager Corporate Reporting

Steve Ballard - Group Treasurer

Approved By

Russell Holden - Head of Finance

Bede Carran - General Manager Finance, Risk & Performance / Chief Financial Officer

10. Food Resilience Network - Support Options
Reference Te Tohutoro:	25/346563
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Rose Crossland – Community Development Advisor Gary Watson – Manager Community Partnerships
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, Acting General Manager Citizens and Community

1. Purpose and Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to enable the Council to consider providing further support to the Food Resilience Network Inc (the Network) to progress their Ōtākaro Orchard Project.

1.2 The report originated through a request by the Network.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1. Receives the information in the Food Resilience Network - Support Options Report.

2. Notes that the decision in this report is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

3. Forgives the current community loan of $150,000, waives overdue interest payments in respect of this loan currently totalling $2,129.95, and considers all matters relating to any security arrangements between the parties as having been satisfied.

4. Notes that the Food Resilience Network should have no expectation of further financial assistance from the Council to this Ōtākaro Orchard Project other than through Council’s contestable community funding schemes.

3. Executive Summary Te Whakarāpopoto Matua

3.1 The Council and the Food Resilience Network have a historical relationship over the Ōtākaro Orchard Project in the Central City. Most recently the Network applied for a $350,000 community loan to complete their build project.

3.2 Whilst considering this request - a workshop was held in February 2025 with the Network to understand more about the project and options for Council support, if any.

3.3 Following this workshop the Network wrote to Council asking it to consider three different support options. Staff have subsequently met with the Network, discussed the options and made an assessment which is detailed in this report.

3.4 The preferred option aims to allow the Network greater freedom to engage with the philanthropic and business community free from a loan liability. It also provides for Council Staff assisting the Network in securing third party funding.

4. Background/Context Te Horopaki

4.1 In 2017, the Network began fundraising for Ōtākaro Orchard. A post-quake project that emerged from the Share-An-idea campaign, it was going to be New Zealand’s first edible park in the centre of Christchurch where visitors could gain knowledge and inspiration about sustainable food systems in practise. In 2019, due to lack of funding, the scope of the project was resized.

4.2 In 2020 the Network was granted a community loan of $150,000 at a 2% interest rate over a 7-year term. The purpose of the loan was to:

· Complete the cold-shell project allowing the Network to secure substantial third-party funding.

· Allow the café to operate and generate revenue to repay the loan.

4.3 The Network did not meet payment schedules. In 2023, the loan was extended by one year so the Network could pay interest-only until September 2024 to allow time for the café to be completed.

4.4 From September 2024, as agreed, loan repayments transitioned from interest-only of $750 per quarter to a total of $8,734.76 per quarter, accounting for principal.

· As of 20 March 2025, three payments totalling $26,204.28 (principal and interest) are overdue.

· Council staff were advised on 19 February 2025 that the Network are unable to repay the existing loan.

4.5 In February 2023 a Better Off Fund grant of $200,000 was made to the Network to support the completion of the construction and secure the sustainable operation of the project through the proceeds of the Café.

4.6 The grant did not enable completion of the construction or the operation of the café. The Network advise that the grant was spent on:

· Building improvements including the Green Roof and Underfloor heating.

· The purchase of building materials.

· Subsidising the costs of running the organisation through the build process.

4.7 On 7 August 2024, the Network applied for an additional community loan of $350,000 to complete the building project and cover operational costs until the café could bring in its own revenue stream. Supporting information was provided by the Network in September, October and November 2024.

4.8 An options report was presented to Council on 4 December 2024 with a recommendation that the loan application be declined and a grant of $34,939 be awarded to cover overdue and forthcoming existing loan repayments to September 2025, in order to allow the Network, the opportunity to seek alternative funding. See attachment A. The rationale for the recommendation included:

· That the Network could not afford the repayments of a total loan of $500,000, even with a completed café facility.

· $350,000 may be insufficient to complete the café and keep the organisational operational until café revenues are sufficient to repay the loans and cover the costs of running the organisation.

· The financial and project information along with the business assumptions supplied by the Network was insufficient to allow staff to recommend that the Council grant a second loan. Particularly in light of the café projects’ recent history and the current status of the project. In particular:

· An estimate of the cost to complete from a Quantity Surveyor.

· A robust project plan detailing how and when the project will be completed.

· Assumptions behind cost and revenue estimates for the facility and café operation.

4.9 Council agreed to let the report lie on the table. A Council workshop was held on 3 February to discuss the loan, Council’s security interest over the Networks assets and the wider history, aspirations and capacity of the Network.

· Council staff confirmed that they would recommend that Council released its security interest on the Networks assets.

· The Network presentation to Council is attached to this report as attachment B. The staff presentation is attached to this report as attachment C.

4.10 The Network subsequently wrote to Council on 13 February withdrawing the loan application and asking Council to consider three alternative options as soon as practically possible, namely:

· Council approves a grant of $250,000 from the Capital Endowment Fund to allow for completion of the building excluding the café fit out and operating cost.

· Council gifts the underlying land to the Network and releases security over the building.

· Council forgives the current community loan of $150,000.

· A copy of this was sent to the mayor and councillors on 13 February and is attached to this report as attachment D.

4.11 The Network also advised that the cost to complete the project had dropped to $246,533 from the $634,284 in August 2024. The difference being attributed to materials already procured and the anticipation of volunteer or in-kind contributions.

4.12 Council staff met the Network on 19 February, clarified the options proposed by the Network, agreed to present an options report to Council. Staff offered a range of support services to assist with community fundraising and securing offers of support.

4.13 The Network Committee have resolved to create a limited company with a MOU and formal partnership agreement with the Network as a landlord and stakeholder. The company would be privately funded, be a registered charity and pay market rent to the Network which will cover the any loan repayments and some of the operational costs. The Network believe this is an organisational structure better suited to owning and operating community assets.

4.14 To date the Council has provided the Network:

· $308,500 in grant funding for a range of projects

· $200,000 in Better-Off grant funding

· $150,000 in a low-interest community loan.

· Offers of assistance with fundraising and building philanthropic relationships.

4.15 The following related memos/information were circulated to the meeting members:

Date	Subject
13 February 2025	Information and options proposed by the Network, attachment D.

4.16 The following related information session/workshops have taken place for the members of the meeting:

Date	Subject
4 December 2024	Options report considered, resolved to lie on the table attachment A.
3 February 2025	Council workshop, attachments B, C.

Options Considered Ngā Kōwhiringa Whaiwhakaaro

4.17 The following reasonably practicable options were considered and are assessed in this report:

4.17.1 The Council forgives the current community loan of $150,000, waives overdue interest payments of $2,130.03 and offers assistance with fundraising and building philanthropic relationships.

4.17.2 The Council approves a grant of $250,000 from the Capital Endowment Fund.

4.17.3 The Council gifts the underlying land to the Network.

4.17.4 Council maintains the status quo and continues to work with the Network over repayment of the existing loan.

4.18 The following options were considered but ruled out:

4.18.1 To recommend a further loan. This was ruled out as it is considered that the Network do not have the capacity to repay any further borrowing.

Options Descriptions Ngā Kōwhiringa

4.19 Preferred Option: The Council forgives the current community loan of $150,000, waives overdue interest payments of $2,130.03, considers all matters relating to any security arrangements between the parties as satisfied, and offers assistance with fundraising and building philanthropic relationships.

4.19.1 Option Advantages

· Removes the current $150,000 loan and $2,130.03 interest liability on the Network giving them a distinct advantage in courting new investors by promoting that everything invested will go toward the goals of the Network and not to repay a previous loan.

· Prevents the further escalation of debt to the network.

· Removes an at-risk debt from Council’s loan portfolio as the Network are unable to repay the existing community loan and interest costs.

· Saves considerable administrative time and expense to both the Council and the Network from not having to work through an at-risk loan.

· This option can be granted on the condition that there can be no expectation that the Network can come back to Council requesting further funding for this, or similar, projects other than through the existing contestable funding schemes.

· Council staff are poised to provide active support for securing additional funding and building philanthropic relationships.

· $2,130.03 for waiving interest costs can be accommodated within the Community Support and Partnerships budget at no additional cost to rates.

· Provides a “clean slate” for a valuable community project.

4.19.2 Option Disadvantages

· $150,000 less will be available in the Community Loans Scheme for future loans. (A current balance of ~$700,000 is available).

· May be reputational damage to the Council for forgiving a loan and waiving interest payments at a time of increasing financial pressure on Council.

4.20 Option 2: To approve a grant of $250,000 from the Capital Endowment Fund to complete the project.

4.20.1 Option Advantages

· The Network believe this will be sufficient to complete the building excluding café fit out and operating cost.

· The Network still intend to repay the community loan.

4.20.2 Option Disadvantages

· The application does not meet the criteria for the Capital Endowment Fund as it is an existing project (with pervious Council support) that has run out of money.

· This option does not provide sufficient funds to enable the project to be fully operational, which raises the risk of the ability for the project to be completed and the loan to be repaid. No quantity surveyors estimate, or project plan has been supplied demonstrating the cost and pathway to completion.

· The Network has indicated it would use this grant to pay down the loan which would result in Council funding a bad debt of its own whilst only leaving $100,000 to deliver a project needing $246,533 (or substantially more) to complete.

4.21 Option 3: To gift the underlying land to the Network

4.21.1 Option Advantages

· The Network believes it will be easier for the Network to source funds for the completion and activation of the building.

4.21.2 Option disadvantages

· Council loses an asset valued at $1,400,000.

· Even with covenants specifying the permitted use and a buy-back provision, Council would lose some control over this valuable inner-city site beside the Avon River.

· Necessary restrictive covenants on the use and buy back of the land may make it very difficult for the Network to leverage sufficient value from the land to fund the project.

· Gifting involves community consultation and is a 9-to-12-month process. This is not consistent with the requirement of the Network to plan with certainty and get on with the job.

4.22 Option 4: Keep the status quo i.e. the current community loan is expected to be repaid.

4.22.1 Option Advantages

· The expectation that the loan is repaid remains intact.

4.22.2 Option Disadvantages

· Based on historical track record and a current financial position the Network will not be able to make repayments.

· The Network will continue to find it hard to find other funding due to the load repayment requirement and security interest over the Building.

· The project may run out of money leaving an unfinished building on Council land

Analysis Criteria Ngā Paearu Wetekina

4.23 Analysis criteria include but is not limited to:

· The historic inability of the Network to pay the current community loan of $150,000.

· The inherent viability of the project given its history and Council funding to date.

· The ability of the Network to approach other funders if they are hampered by a security interest over the building and the requirement to repay the existing loan.

· The ability to raise the remaining $250,000 (or more) to complete the building.

· The degree to which Council has already supported the project through a community loan at a subsidised rate and a $200,000 grant.

· The confidence that the revised budget of $250,000 to complete the project is realistic and achievable.

5. Financial Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

	Recommended Option – Forgive the loan and waive overdue interest	Option 2 Approve a Capital Endowment Fund grant	Option 3 Gift the underlying land to the Network	Option 4 Status quo: keep current loan
Cost to Implement	$150,000 $2,130 - interest	$230,000	loss of ~$1.4m asset	Risk of not repaying $150,000 + interest
Maintenance/Ongoing Costs	None	None	Staff time for consultation and gifting	Staff Time
Funding Source	Community Loans Scheme OPEX Budget	Capital Endowment Fund	N/A	Community Loans Scheme
Funding Availability	Available	Available	N/A	Available
Impact on Rates	None	N/A	None	None

5.1 There will be a cost to the community loans scheme if the community loan is forgiven; effectively causing a permanent reduction in the total funds available in the scheme. There is no budget to cover Council forgiving the loan. This will not have an impact on rates.

5.2 There are sufficient funds to accommodate an application in the CEF. After accounting for all commitments to the CEF, the current balance available for allocation in 2024/25 is $1,620,248. If the recommendations of a report being presented to Council on 19 March are accepted the remaining available balance for this financial year will be $1,537,748.

5.3 There is one application to the 2024/25 Capital Endowment Fund in progress, a request of $70,000 to support St Albans Cricket Club.

5.4 Gifting the land means that ~$1.4million of central city assets would be lost from the Council’s books.

5.5 More information would be needed about expected café revenue and other potential income streams to have confidence that the Network would be able to service any community loan.

6. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

Risks and Mitigations Ngā Mōrearea me ngā Whakamātautau

6.1 If the community loan is forgiven, there is still a risk of the project remaining unfinished if full funding isn’t realised.

6.1.1 This risk is partially mitigated by the potential for the Network to be better placed to secure funding elsewhere with no loan repayment requirement.

6.2 If the community loan is forgiven there is a risk to Council from reputational damage arising from the forgiveness of the loan in a fiscally constrained environment and the impact this may have on the availability of funding for future loans.

6.2.1 This risk is partially mitigated by clear communications over the rationale for Council’s decision, the inherent value of the project and the assurance that there is sufficient funding for new community loans available.

Legal Considerations Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

6.3 Statutory and/or delegated authority to undertake proposals in the report:

6.3.1 The authority to make decisions relating to the forgiving of community loans sits with the Council.

Strategy and Policy Considerations Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.4 The required decisions:

6.4.1 Align with the Christchurch City Council’s Strategic Framework. Specifically, the priorities to:

· Be an inclusive and equitable city

· Reduce emissions

· Manage ratepayers’ money wisely

· Green and liveable neighbourhoods and community

6.4.2 Is assessed as low significance based on the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by evaluating the number of people affected and/or with an interest.

6.5 This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2024 - 2034):

6.6 Communities & Citizens

6.6.1 Activity: Community Development and Facilities

· Level of Service: 2.3.1.1 Provide and manage funding for initiatives that facilitate resilient and active communities owning their own future - 100% of funding assessments detail rationale and demonstrate benefits aligned to Council’s strategic priorities, and where appropriate, Community Board Plans .

Community Impacts and Views Ngā Mariu ā-Hāpori

6.7 Community views have not been specifically sought as the Community Loans Scheme is a level of service in the recently consulted 2024/25 LTP. Engagement has been limited to Council staff and the Network.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.8 The decision does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land, a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Mana Whenua, their culture, and traditions. This is due to the fact that the decision Council is being asked to make is whether to financially support a community organisation with an existing project.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.9 The decisions in this report are likely to:

6.9.1 Contribute positively to adaptation to the impacts of climate change.

6.9.2 Contribute positively to emissions reductions.

6.10 The Network is a strong advocate for renewable food production in Christchurch. They lead the Edible Canterbury Charter project which contributes significantly to the Council’s Climate Strategy.

6.11 They support education around local food initiatives, reducing emissions and the benefits of locally produced food. Whilst the building continues to be finished, they already run a community garden, run workshops and regular working bees onsite at the Ōtākaro Orchard. Once the building is completed, they will have a demonstration kitchen and a café featuring locally grown food.

6.12 Once the build is finished, Ōtākaro Orchard will be a physical space be a metro hub for people interested in food resilience and climate change. With an increased inner city residential population, the site will also be a local hub and community garden.

6.13 The various options for consideration do not stop the positive climate change activities of the community garden, workshops and working bees from occurring. However, decision outcomes may delay the completion of the building and depending on the decided, it could affect the cashflow of the Network and present financial challenges as they require remaining funds to complete the building through other sources while still required to repay their existing community loan.

7. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

7.1 Staff will work with the Food Resilience Network to implement the decision(s) reached by Council.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	04 December - Food Resilience Network Community Loan Application	24/1637013	118
b ⇩	03 February - Workshop Presentation - Food Resilience Network	25/466630	126
c ⇩	03 February - Workshop Presentation - CCC Staff	25/466651	131
d ⇩	13 February - Food Resilience Network - Proposed Alternate Options	25/466631	136

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Rose Crossland - Community Development Advisor

Josh Wharton - Team Leader Community Funding

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Approved By

Gary Watson - Manager Community Partnerships

Peter Langbein - Finance Business Partner

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Andrew Rutledge - Acting General Manager Citizens and Community

11. Venues Ōtautahi Half Year Report for the six months ending 31 December 2024
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/1991788
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Linda Gibb, Performance Advisor, Finance
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Bede Carran, General Manager Finance, Risk & Performance / Chief Financial Officer

1. Purpose and Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to present Venues Ōtautahi’s (VŌ’s) Half Year Report for 2024/25.

1.2 The Half Year Report was received on 27 February 2025 as required by section 66 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA). It is at Attachment A.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1. Receives Venues Ōtautahi’s half year report for the six months ending 31 December 2024.

3. Background/Context Te Horopaki

3.1 VŌ’s activities are undertaken with a view to creating economic and social (including environmental and cultural) outcomes for Christchurch. Its activities in pursuit of this include venue marketing, event attraction and management, venue operations, management and maintenance and food and beverage provision. Its venues are the Wolfbrook Arena, Town Hall, Apollo Projects Stadium, Airforce Museum (under management) and Hagley Oval.

3.2 There are significant ownership costs for the upkeep of the venues, and which cannot be recouped through pricing alone. These include the operational costs of insurance, rates, utilities and running repairs to ensure the health, safety and compliance of the venues as well as the capital costs of maintaining and renewing them to ensure they are fit for purpose and their value is maintained.

3.3 The major consideration for VŌ is bringing the operations of One NZ Stadium at Te Kaha into its business model in April 2026. This includes securing commercial partnerships including sponsorship, venue and premium hospitality ahead of the stadium’s opening and delivering a schedule of events in the first year of operations (and longer term) that leverages the Council’s investment in the asset to the greatest extent possible.

3.4 Overall, VŌ is reporting a positive first half to the financial year.

4. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

2024/25

Actual

$000

2024/25

Budget

$000

Variance

$000

2023/24

Actual

$000

Variance

$000

Council operating grant

1,625

EBITDA*

296

(411)

+707

(1,497)

+1,793

4.1 The following table presents VŌ’s operating performance for the six months to 31 December 2024.

*Earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) = profit from VŌ’s event attraction, planning and delivery - includes the Council’s operating grant; excludes costs VŌ incurs and funds itself for the pre-opening costs for One NZ Stadium at Te Kaha, interest, tax and depreciation of assets.

	Actual	Budget	Variance	Prior year	Variance
Number of events	230	217	+13	211	+19
Number of visitors	334,876	250,000	+84,876	279,013	+55,863

4.2 Against target, EBITDA is higher by $0.7 million which is largely attributable to a higher number of business events (meetings, incentives, conferences and exhibitions) which have contributed to a higher contribution ($0.4 million) to profit from VŌ’s food and beverage services and reflect new commercial partnerships secured in the reporting period. Overheads and fixed costs are lower by $0.3 million in part attributable to the near end of Apollo Stadium’s life as well as VŌ’s ongoing efforts to reduce overhead costs. Reporting at the EBITDA level allows the focus to be on the costs and revenues that VŌ can influence (refer page 13 of Attachment A for the EBITDA calculation)

4.3 Against the prior year, EBITDA is higher by $1.8 million made up of higher net food and beverage income by $1.2 million from 19 more ticketed events, in particular, international sporting events (which generate higher retail food and beverage revenue than many other event types). Excluding food and beverage, VŌ has improved its cost to revenue ratio by 5%.

4.4 The Statement of Comprehensive Revenue and Expense records a net profit after tax of $1.3 million. This takes into account the costs relating to fixed overheads, depreciation, asset maintenance and repairs and the Council’s capital grant, along with income tax.

4.5 VŌ is meeting all pre-opening costs for One.NZ Stadium at Te Kaha from its operating cashflows, which will be reimbursed from operating funding in FY25/26 and FY26/27. These costs are excluded from EBITDA reported above.

4.6 Expectations for financial year end – VŌ advises that it expects its full year result to 30 June 2025 will exceed its budget.

4.7 Non-financial performance targets are all progressing to be completed by 30 June.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Venues Otautahi - Half Year Report to 31 December 2024	25/495352	142

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Linda Gibb - Performance Monitoring Advisor CCO

Approved By

Russell Holden - Head of Finance

Bede Carran - General Manager Finance, Risk & Performance / Chief Financial Officer

13. Council-controlled Organisations - Half Year Reports for the six months ending 31 December 2024 and Draft Statements of Intent for 2025/26
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/1991488
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Linda Gibb, Performance Advisor, Finance
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Bede Carran, General Manager Finance, Risk & Performance / Chief Financial Officer

1. Purpose and Origin of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to present the half year reports for the six months ending 31 December 2024 and draft Statements of Intent (SOIs) for 2025/26 for the following Council-controlled organisations (CCOs) – Civic Building Ltd, Local Government Funding Agency, Riccarton Bush Trust, Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust and Te Kaha Project Delivery Ltd.

1.2 The half year reports were all received on or before 28 February 2025 as required by section 66 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA). The draft SOIs were all received on or before 1 March 2025 as required by clause 1(2), Part 1 of Schedule 8 of the LGA.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

1. Receives the half year (interim) reports for the six months ending 31 December 2024 for the following Council-controlled Organisations - Civic Building Ltd, Local Government Funding Agency, Riccarton Bush Trust, Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust and Te Kaha Project Delivery Ltd;

2. Receives the draft Statements of Intent for the three years beginning 1 July 2025 for the following Council-controlled Organisations - Civic Building Ltd, Local Government Funding Agency, Riccarton Bush Trust, Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust and Te Kaha Project Delivery Ltd; and

3. Advises any comments on the draft Statements of Intent to be referred to the Council-controlled organisations’ boards.

3. Background/Context Te Horopaki

Half-yearly reports

3.1 Section 66 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) requires the board of a council-controlled organisation (CCO) to deliver a half-yearly report within two months after the end of the first half of each financial year. The half-yearly reports were therefore due to the Council by 28 February 2025, for the period 1 July 2024 – 31 December 2024.

3.2 The half-yearly report must include the information required to be included by the CCO’s SOI.

Draft Statements of Intent

3.3 The purpose of a SOI is recorded in section 64(2) of the LGA as being to:

a) State publicly the activities and intentions of the CCO for the year, and the objectives to which those activities will contribute; and

b) Provide an opportunity for shareholders to influence the direction of the organisation; and

c) Provide a basis for the accountability of the directors for performance.

3.4 Clauses 1 and 2 of schedule 8, part 1 provide the shareholder of a CCO may provide comments on the draft SOIs [of its directly and indirectly owned CCOs] to the CCO board by 1 May and the CCO board must consider the comments and finalise the SOI by 30 June.

3.5 In December 2023 the Council issued an Enduring Statement of Expectations to its fully-owned CCOs. The expectations particularly relevant to SOIs are as follows:

· demonstrating linkages between the CCO’s and the Council’s Community Outcomes and Strategic Framework that underpins the draft Long Term Plan 2024-34;

· targeting carbon neutrality by 2030;

· making health and safety a top priority;

· setting meaningful, reliable and concise performance targets; and

· engagement with mana whenua in areas of mutual interest.

4. Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro

Civic Building Ltd (Attachments A and B)

Half year report 2024/25

4.1 Civic Building Ltd (Civic) is the Council’s representative in a 50/50 joint venture with Ngai Tahu for the development and maintenance of the Te Hononga Civic Building. Civic’s income is generated mostly from the Council’s finance lease payments for its occupancy of Civic Building, less the costs of servicing its loan for acquiring its 50% interest in the Te Hononga Civic Building joint venture.

Half year financial results to 31 December 2024

Actual

2024/25

$000

SOI target

2024/25

$000

Variance

$000

Half year

2023/24

$000

Variance

$000

Net profit after tax

358

186

+173

235

+123

Total assets

48,789

48,496

+293

51,998

-3,200

4.2 The key driver of improved profitability against both the SOI target and the prior half year is higher interest income on the cash accumulated from rental income for Civic Building (prior to the capital repayment in late 2024).

4.3 Total assets have reduced by $3,200 from December 2023 against the balance in the prior period due in large part to the repayment of $3 million in redeemable preference shares, which were treated as equity, in December 2024 (as projected in the SOI). This has led to a consequential reduction in the ratio of shareholder’s funds to total assets against both target and the same period last year.

4.4 Non-financial performance targets are in progress towards completion by year end.

Draft Statement of Intent 2025/26

4.5 CBL’s financial projections in its draft SOI for 2024/25 compared with last year’s final SOI are set out in the table below:

Net profit after tax	2025/26 $000	2026/27 $000	2027/28 $000
Current draft SOI	452	425	219
Last year’s final SOI	496	399	-
Change	-44	+26	-

4.6 The reduction in net profit before tax in both 2025/26 and 2026/27 reflects lower interest costs due to the reduction in cash held as a result of the capital repayment of $3 million in 2024, offset by a compensating reduction in the interest charged on the Council’s loan.

4.7 There is a significant reduction in NPAT of around $0.2 million (50%) forecast in 2027/28 compared with the prior two years. This is due to lower interest from the lease of the building to the Council and on cash held for future capital repayments.

4.8 Total assets have reduced over the SOI period reflecting ongoing capital repayment as shown in the table below:

Total assets	2025/26 $000	2026/27 $000	2027/28 $000
Current draft SOI	45,271	42,762	42,225
Last year’s final SOI	48,344	45,128	-
Change	-3,073	-2,366	-

Non-financial performance targets

4.9 The performance targets are largely the same as in the prior year’s SOI.

Local Government Funding Agency (Attachments C and D)

Half year report 2024/25

4.10 The LGFA is owned by the New Zealand Government (11.1%) and 30 councils (88.9%). Christchurch City Council, and eight other councils all have equal shareholdings of 8.3% each and the remaining 14.2% is split between 22 other local authorities.

Half year to 31 December 2024

Actual

2024/25

SOI target

2024/25

Variance

Last year

2023/24

Variance

Net profit (tax not payable)

8.6

8.5

+0.1

5.2

+3.4

Total lending to participating councils

22,342

Annual target 23,957

20,549

+1,793

4.11 Against half year SOI targets, net profit is higher by around $100,000 which is not material.

4.12 Against 2022/23 half year performance, net profit is higher by $3.4 million (65%) attributable to higher income of $5.8 million mostly due to interest from increased lending to local authorities (+$1.7 billion over the half year) and an increase in the base lending rate from 1 July 2024. Operating expenses were higher by $2.4 million of which $2 million was higher Approved Issuer Levy) for borrowing from offshore markets. The significant increase in the levy reflects a larger amount of borrowing LGFA is sourcing from offshore markets.

4.13 Non-financial performance targets have all been met or are on track to be met at year end with one exception - no new Green, Social and Sustainable loans have been approved against a full year target of two. LGFA advises that it has increased its sustainability capability with a new appointment of a Senior Manager Sustainable Finance.

4.14 As part of its half year report, LGFA notes that the financial strength of LGFA was affirmed by Fitch Ratings who maintained its domestic currency credit rating at AA+ in October 2024. S&P Global Ratings affirmed it at AAA/AA+ in September 2024 and under their revised methodology, LGFA’s standalone credit profile improved from AA- to AA+. These ratings are the same as those held by the Government.

Draft Statement of Intent 2025/26

4.15 The LGFA’s financial forecasts compared with those projected in last year’s SOI are shown in the tables below.

Net profit	2025/26 $m	2026/27 $m	2027/28 $m
Current draft SOI	23.5	19.7	23.4
Last year’s final SOI	21.5	21.2	-
Change	+2.0	-1.5	-

Lending	2025/26 $m	2026/27 $m	2027/28 $m
Current draft SOI	24,791	27,271	28,497
Last year’s final SOI	26,509	29,043	-
Change	-1,718	-1,772	-

4.16 The forecast changes in net profit and lending to local government are all minor (i.e. less than 10%) and therefore no comment is made.

4.17 The dip in profitability in 2026/27 reflects the Approved Issuer Levy charged by the government on foreign currency borrowing which has been growing and will continue to do so over the SOI period. In 2027/28 the impact of the AIL is more than offset by an increase in interest revenue as the value of the LGFA’s lending continues to grow.

4.18 Non-financial performance targets

4.19 The majority of targets are the same as in prior years. There are additional targets relating to Local Water Done Well reforms including ensuring a smooth transition of water-related loans if the reforms progress over the SOI period and preparing to on-board Water CCOs if requested.

4.20 Additional climate change targets have been developed including incorporating it into the LGFA’s credit risk assessments and reviewing what governance skills are needed for the company to be well informed about climate-related risks and opportunities.

Riccarton Bush Trust (Attachments E and F)

Half year report 2024/25

4.21 The Riccarton Bush Trust is a trust, incorporated under an Act of Parliament in 1914. The Trust administers 7.8 hectares of native bush and Riccarton (historic) House. The Trust supplements the Council’s funding with its own revenue generating initiatives such as rent and commissions from the on-site café (The Quarters) and Saturday market. The Trust actively seeks grant funding to support the historic nature of Riccarton House.

4.22 RBT’s half year financial performance is shown in the table below:

	6 months Actual 2024/25 $000	6 months SOI target 2024/25 $000	Variance $000	6 months Actual 2023/24 $000	Variance $000
Revenue	511	392	+119	322	+189
Expenses	(463)	(322)	-141	(502)	+-39
Surplus/(deficit)	48	70	-22	(180)	+228

4.23 Against the SOI target, the surplus was lower by $22,000 from higher revenue of $119,000 largely from grants and donations from third parties (not included in the SOI forecast due to uncertainty) of $110,000. Expenses were higher by $141,000 mostly due to the depreciation expense of $150,000 which is not forecast in the SOI as it is non-cash.

4.24 Against the six months last year, the surplus is higher by $228,000 due to increased revenue of $189,000 made up of the Council’s capital grant of $52,000 (in part for the Bush Enhancement Project), increased operating levy of $44,000 (for remuneration costs including a significant increase in the living wage and general inflationary pressures), and grants and donations of $89,000 following fundraising for the Bush Enhancement Project.

4.25 Expenses were lower by $39,000 (8%) which includes the impact of non-repeating costs incurred in the December 2023 half year, including an additional insurance premium adjustment of $7,000, legal fees to support the Trust’s submission on the Christchurch District Plan of $10,000 and technology costs of $4,000 following compromise of the Trust’s website. Tree and building maintenance expenditure was lower by $11,000 which is a timing difference that will correct in the second half of the year.

4.26 Non-financial performance targets have all been met or are in progress to be met by financial year end.

Draft Statement of Intent 2025/26

4.27 The following table sets out the Trust’s forecast revenue and expenses over the SOI period compared with last year’s final SOI:

Operating surplus / (deficit)	2025/26 $000	2026/27 $000	2027/28 $000
Current draft SOI	(269)	(272)	(270)
Last year’s final SOI	(271)	(274)	-
Change	-2	-2	-

4.28 The financial forecasts are sufficiently consistent with last year's final SOI forecasts and do not warrant comment.

Council funding	2025/26 $000	2026/27 $000	2027/28 $000
Opex grant (draft SOI)	510	529	531
Opex grant (last year)	510	529	-
Change	-	-	-

4.29 The Council operating funding levy as shown in the above table is consistent with the Council’s LTP 2024-34.

Council funding

2025/26

$000

2026/27

$000

2027/28

$000

Capex grant (draft SOI)

27,500

25,000

LTP 2024-34

28,298

28,920

26,896

4.30 An error has occurred in recording the capital allocations in the draft SOI. This will be rectified in the final SOI.

Non-financial performance targets

4.31 The Trust’s non-financial performance targets have changed only to the extent that the Bush Enhancement Project has progressed from completing the tender process for Stage 1 last year to completing Stage 1 of the project in this year’s draft SOI.

Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust – Half year report (Attachments G and H)

Half year report 2024/25

4.32 The Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust supports sustainable management, conservation and recreation on Banks Peninsula.

Half year to 31 December 2024

Actual

2024/25

$000

SOI target

2024/25

$000

Variance

$000

Last year

2023/24

$000

Variance

$000

Surplus/(deficit)

(94)

(176)

+82

1,459

-1,553

4.33 Against target, the operating deficit is lower by $82,000 which is due to higher revenue of $69,000 due to receiving the Council’s annual funding in one sum during the period rather than half in each six month period as the SOI assumed and higher interest income by $19,000 on the Trust’s funds including the Council’s grant in 2024 of $1.35 million. Expenditure on strategic grants and projects was higher by $24,000 reflecting a catch up on the prior year.

4.34 Against 2023/24 half year performance, the operating surplus is lower by $1.5 million largely reflecting the Council’s capital grant in 2023 of $1.35 million. Overhead expenses increased by $66,000 from - the Trust Manager position was vacant for 3-4 months in the prior half year with the new appointee commencing in January 2024 (+$33,000) coupled with a timing difference for audit fees (charged in the first half of the 2024/25 financial year but in the second half of the prior year ($20,000).

4.35 Non-financial performance targets have all been met or are in progress to be met by financial year end.

Draft Statement of Intent 2025/26

4.36 The following table sets out the Trust’s SOI financial projections:

Surplus/(deficit)	2025/26 $000	2026/27 $000	2027/28 $000
Current draft SOI	(568)	877	(437)
Last year’s final SOI	(801)	537	-
Change	+233	+340	-

4.37 The changes in financial forecasts for the most part reflect lower expenditure on strategic grants and projects of $258,000 in 2025/26 and $366,000 in 2026/27. This reflects a review of the Trust’s approach to the allocation of grants and assessment of projects to improve its forecasting accuracy.

4.38 The 2026/27 forecast surplus reflects the Council’s capital grant of $1.35 million as provided for in the Long Term Plan 2024-34 (LTP). The grant is for a three year period after which no further capital funding has been provided for. The LTP also provides for $100,000 in operating funding in each year through to 2034 which is reflected in the draft SOI.

Non-financial performance targets

4.39 The Trust has reviewed its non-financial performance targets which has led to fewer but more focussed targets. The targets fit well with the Trust’s strategic objectives and its priorities to achieve them - access, biodiversity, and knowledge. Previously there was an additional strategic priority ‘partnerships’ but this is a delivery approach that runs through all that the Trust does and has been discontinued as a standalone priority.

4.40 The performance targets on pages 7 and 8 of the Trust’s draft SOI relate to the three year SOI period. While acknowledging the good progress the Trust has made on re-shaping its SOI, as seen in the draft document, further attention needs to be given to the specificity of the targets. Staff are discussing this with the Trust in terms of:

· Setting measurable targets in each of the three years to demonstrate interim progress on long-lived projects and activities;

· Providing greater specificity as to what is expected to be achieved, as opposed to general undertakings such as improving and increasing; and

· Considering the inclusion of content relating to the Trust’s position on meeting the Council’s goals for greenhouse gas emission reductions.

4.41 The Trust has advised its intent to address these issues in its final SOI.

Te Kaha Project Delivery Ltd (Attachments I and J)

Half year report 2024/25

4.42 Te Kaha Project Delivery Ltd is the governance body tasked with commissioning the design and construction of Te Kaha. The responsibility and accountabilities for the final design and construction of Te Kaha are held with the Council’s Capital Delivery – Major Facilities Team which reports to the Council monthly.

Half year to 31 December 2024

Actual

2024/25

$000

SOI target

2024/25

$000

Variance

$000

Last year

2023/24

$000

Variance

$000

Revenue / Expenses

303

330

-27

319

-17

4.43 The variances against both the SOI targets and the six months ending 31 December 2023 reflect a timing difference which will be resolved later in the current financial year.

4.44 Non-financial performance targets have been met or are in progress to be met by financial year end, or are ongoing.

Draft Statement of Intent 2025/26

4.45 The funding allocations are the governance costs only which are funded from the overall project budget. The SOI advises that Te Kaha is due to be completed by April 2026 and that Te Kaha Project Development Ltd will be decommissioned in the 2026 financial year.

4.46 Following the project’s completion, there is a 12 month Defects Period. During that time, the Design and Construct contractor (BESIX Watpac) will be responsible for repairing any defects and resolving any issues that may arise with the stadium’s operation (if the defects or other issues are due to the contractor’s design or construction). Any defects and issues are expected to be resolved in the 2026/27 financial year.

4.47 The draft SOI has included contingency costs of $73,000 in 2027/28 to reflect the risk that the addressing of any defects or resolving other issues is prolonged as can be the case with large buildings. There has also been a re-balancing of the governance budget which has for the most part seen costs transferred from 2025/26 to 2026/27.

4.48 The Chair and four directors will continue over the defects period which is expected to end in April 2027.

Revenue/Expenses	2025/26 $000	2026/27 $000	2027/28 $000
Current draft SOI	270	300	73
Last year’s final SOI	321	232	-
Change	-51	+68	-

Non-financial performance targets

4.49 Performance targets for 2025/26 and 2025/27 have been amended to reflect the expected completion of the project in 2025/26 and the defects period in 2026/27.

4.50 There are no performance targets for 2027/28 since it is not yet clear if there will be any activity in that year. In the event activity is required, performance targets will be added into the SOI for that year.

4.51 Transition targets have been provided in the draft SOI, including:

· Providing operation and maintenance manuals and as-built documentation to allow full operation of the stadium; and

· Undertaking a project review including lessons learned.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Civic Building Ltd - Half-yearly report 2024/25	25/511123	184
b	Civic Building Ltd - Draft SOI 2025/26 (Under Separate Cover)	25/511136
c ⇩	Local Government Funding Agency - Half-yearly report 2024/25	25/511063	194
d ⇩	Local Government Funding Agency - Draft SOI 2025/26	25/511042	224
e ⇩	Riccarton Bush Trust - Half-yearly report 2024/25	25/511075	239
f ⇩	Riccarton Bush Trust - Draft SOI 2025/26	25/511210	252
g ⇩	Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust - Half-yearly report 2024/25	25/511111	268
h ⇩	Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust - Draft SOI 2025/26	25/511098	286
i ⇩	Te Kaha Project Delivery Ltd - Half-yearly report 2024/25	25/510974	302
j ⇩	Te Kaha Project Development Ltd - Draft SOI 2025/26	25/510874	316

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Signatories Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author	Linda Gibb - Performance Monitoring Advisor CCO
Approved By	Bede Carran - General Manager Finance, Risk & Performance / Chief Financial Officer

[3] NPAT measures a company’s profit after all expenses and taxes have been paid, the ‘bottom line’, and is the total amount available for distribution and reinvestment.

9. Capital Programme Performance Report February 2025
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/2094853
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Nicky Palmer, Head of Programme Management Office
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Brent Smith, Acting General Manager City Infrastructure

	Actual YTD to Dec 2024 $000	SOI target $000	Variance $000	Last YTD to Dec 2023 $000	Variance $000
CCC core funding	7,951	7,951	-	7,951	-
Third party revenue	1,248	1,266	-18	2,293	-1,045
Operating expenditure	(8,389)	(8,589)	200	(9,018)	629
Surplus/(Deficit) before tax	688	485	+203	1,226	-741

ITEM NO.	GENERAL SUBJECT OF EACH MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED	SECTION	SUBCLAUSE AND REASON UNDER THE ACT	PUBLIC INTEREST CONSIDERATION	Potential Release Review Date and Conditions
16.	Public Excluded Finance and Performance Committee Minutes - 26 February 2025			Refer to the previous public excluded reason in the agendas for these meetings.
17.	Christchurch City Holdings Ltd - Appointment of Director to the Board	s7(2)(a)	Protection of Privacy of Natural Persons	To protect the reputation of the candidate.	31 March 2025 After the appointment decision has been made and the candidate notified of the Council's decision.
18.	Christchurch City Holdings Ltd - Strategic Update	s7(2)(b)(ii), s7(2)(h)	Prejudice Commercial Position, Commercial Activities	To protect sensitive information that could, if it became public prejudice CCHL's commercial outcomes.	10 October 2025 After CCHL's Annual Report for 2024/25 has been published.
19.	Cloud Transformation Project Change Request	s7(2)(h)	Commercial Activities	The advantages of protecting Council’s commercial position during contract negotiations with vendors and suppliers outweighs the public interest.	1 August 2025 At completion of the project phase 1 (Migration) anticipated to be in 4 months time. Noting redaction of monetary figures will be needed to protect Council and Vendor commercial interests upon release.

12. ChristchurchNZ Holdings Ltd - Half Year Report for the six months ending 31 December 2024
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/1991549
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Linda Gibb, Performance Advisor, Finance
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Bede Carran, General Manager Finance, Risk & Performance / Chief Financial Officer

14. Christchurch City Holdings Ltd - Interim Report for the six months ending 31 December 2024 and Quarter 2 2024/25 Traffic Lights Performance Report
Reference Te Tohutoro:	24/1991421
Responsible Officer(s) Te Pou Matua:	Linda Gibb, Performance Advisor, Finance
Accountable ELT Member Pouwhakarae:	Bede Carran, General Manager Finance, Risk & Performance / Chief Financial Officer