10 July 2017
Media: Rotorua Daily Post
Topic: Lions tour economic impact
Inquiry
Rotorua Daily Post requested comment from Rotorua Lakes Council regarding the Lions tour if possible, on whether or not the tour has been a success and any economic impacts.
Response
Rotorua Daily Post was advised that Council is waiting on an official report from the New Zealand Rugby Union and will share any relevant details when the report is received.
________________________________________________________________________________________
Media: Rotorua Daily Post
Topic: NRB Survey
Inquiry
Could you please advise us when the annual NRB satisfaction survey results for RLC be will be released to the public this year?
As you will recall the RLC held back the release of this report last year and discussed its contents confidentially before releasing it to the public about four months after it was received.
- Has the RLC comissioned the NRB survey this year?
- If so, when will it be released to the public?
- If not, why did the RLC not do the survey this year?
- How much did the survey cost?
- Can I request a copy of the report.
Response
From Acting Chief Executive Craig Tiriana:
A survey was commissioned from NRB this year and we are waiting for their report. When we have it we will analyse it for our reporting purposes and it will be made public at the appropriate time.
The purpose of the survey is to provide information that relates to some of the organisation's performance indicators.
Last year we asked for additional analysis to be done to better understand some of the responses and the report was released at the same time as the annual report was adopted, in late October. It was made public the same day as it was reported to the Council.
The cost of the survey this year is $18,500, which is less than last year because the questions have been refined for current purposes.
________________________________________________________________________________________
Media: Rotorua Daily Post
Topic: Infrastructure budgets
Inquiry
I'd like to ask RLC officials about infrastructure spending and budgets in the district over the past few years.
This is after comments from the deputy Auditor General saying nationally councils were not spending enough on core business and infrastructure.
We'd like to get the figures so I can compare them to figures in recent annual reports.
- For the past three financial years, what has the RLC actually spent on infrastructure - new, renewals, maintenance, depreciation etc?
- For the past three financial years, what did the RLC actually budget for the infrastructure works mentioned above?
- What are the main reasons for the difference between the figures? What projects were added or removed?
- How many rateable properties are there in the district in the past three financial years?
- What was the RLC's total revenue in the past three financial years?
Response
From Chief Financial Officer Thomas Coll:
The budgets set for capital expenditure are estimates and based on key projects identified by Council as part of annual planning. Variances between budget and actual can be due to a number of factors including projects/contracts coming in under or over budget, unforeseen circumstances and deferrals or a change in timing (ie something has to move into the next financial year) - that is the nature of projects. We are still finalising the financials for the 2016/17 financial year but capital expenditure is expected to be over budget due to a high completion rate of capital projects, the library refurbishment being ahead of schedule requiring funding to be brought forward into 2016/17 and the unbudgeted purchase of a museum storage facility which we previously leased but came up for sale.
2014/15
Number of rateable units | Total revenue | Capital spend (budget) | Capital spend (actual) |
28,731 | $102,675,000 | $31,100,000 | $17,796,000 |
Context: Pages 11 and 12 of the 2014/15 Annual Plan outline the financial strategy for that financial year which included a $22m cap on capital spending. The following is from p11: Action was taken in the 2013/14 financial year to ensure Council re-establishes a sustainable financial position in future years. A new sustainable financial strategy was agreed to in December 2013 to address organisational challenges. This strategy does however limit Council's ability to spend and to hold rate increases at previous low levels. A sustainable financial framework underpins the budgets for this Annual Plan. The framework seeks to hold debt increases to a minimum and progressively reduce the current level. Annual rate increases are to be set at approximately 3% per annum and includes any inflation or CPI movement. Capital expenditure has been limited to $22 million, a decrease of approximately 30% on what was planned in the council Long-term Plan A restructure of the council organisation and a strong efficiency focus will mean any further cost savings can be applied to debt reduction. While it is acknowledged that a reduction in capital expenditure of 30% will affect the community, it is important to respond to community expectations. Council will prioritise renewals, maintain essential infrastructure and the remainder of capital works will be linked to 2030 goals and 2016 priorities. Projects will also be considered based on the value they will bring to the community. Funds have been allocated to support the governance portfolios so community partnerships can undertake their respective work Variance between budgeted and actual for 2014/15: -Delay in construction of the full TERAX plant ($9.5m), less stormwater and land drainage work required than originally anticipated for rewewals and upgrades ($1.8m) -Water services spending below budget due to delay in Ngongotaha water source establishment and lower spend on sectorisation and pressure management, new rider mains and backflow prevention devices ($1.3m) -Combination of lower expenditure required for gardens, reserves and sportsgrounds and a delay in construction of parks and facilities renewals and upgrades ($0.9m) -Higher capital expense in waste management than budget for thermal deconstruction plant, partially offset by reduction in landfill renewals. (600,000 more actual vs budget). | |||
2015/16
Number of rateable units | Total revenue | Capital spend (budget) | Capital spend (actual) |
28,763 | $111,363,000 | $34,358,000 | $21,839,000 |
Variances: -Deferred construction of full TERAX plant. -Community Facilities - work on Sir Howard Morrison Performing Arts Centre did not proceed due to capital subsidy not being received. -Governance and Engagement - Enterprise Resource Planning System deferred for completion in following financial year. -Capital work for cell development at landfill not required due to pending change in operational management of the landfill. -Stormwater and Land Drainage - less work than originally anticipated for renewals. -iSite earthquake strengthening work being deferred for completion in following financial year | |||
2016/17 - NB: 2016/17 figures all indicative and to be finalised for annual report
No. rateable units | Total revenue | Capital spend (budget) | Capital spend (actual) |
28,786 | TBC but year to date to 31 May 2017 was $97,525,000 (as per 6 July O&M report - p18) | $29,600,000 | Estimated to be approximately $34.5m (see below) |
From Thomas Coll's presentation to Operations & Monitoring Committee 6 July (you'll find the presentation HEREon RLC website): Significant investment in infrastructure - high completion rate, approx $34.5m in capital expenditure. Capital investment in infrastructure included: - Transport $7.5m - Wastewater $3.6m - Water Supplies $2.4m - Open Spaces $1.6m - Aquatic Centre $0.6m - Energy Events Centre $0.5m - Library $6m (some was brought forward into 2016/17 as project was ahead of schedule - the project remains within budget.) - Museum and storage $1.9m (purchase of storage space the museum had been leasing but opportunity came up to purchase - was not budgeted) - Civic Centre renewals $1.2m | |||
