Agenda of Arts, Culture & Heritage Committee

Palmerston North City Council

Minutes of the Arts, Culture & Heritage Committee Meeting Part I Public, held in the Council Chamber, First Floor, , Civic Administration Building, 32 The Square, Palmerston North on 04 March 2020, commencing at 9.02am

Members

Present:

Councillor Rachel Bowen (in the Chair), The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Zulfiqar Butt, Renee Dingwall, Lorna Johnson, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas and Tangi Utikere.

Non Members:

Councillors Susan Baty, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta and Aleisha Rutherford.

Apologies:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) (for early departure on Council business) and Councillors Billy Meehan and Leonie Hapeta (for early departure).

The Mayor (Grant Smith) was not present when the meeting resumed at 2.33pm. He was not present for clauses 2 to 6 inclusive.

1-20

Apologies

Moved Rachel Bowen, seconded Vaughan Dennison.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Committee receive the apologies.

Clause 1-20 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

The meeting adjourned at 9.03am.

The meeting resumed at 2.33pm.

When the meeting resumed The Mayor (Grant Smith) was not present.

2-20

Presentation - Centrepoint Theatre

Ms Kate Louise Elliott made a presentation on behalf of Centrepoint Theatre regarding current funding for Centrepoint, future plans for the Theatre and this year’s programme of activity.

Ms Elliott noted Creative NZ were happy with the Theatre’s progress and vision and had provided increased funding, making it possible to increase staff numbers.

A building feasibility study is currently being undertaken on the building that houses the Theatre, the outcome of which will be of interest as the Theatre has occupied this building since the late 70s, and has outgrown the space.

Ms Elliott was pleased to note the Theatre had smashed its target of bringing in 1,000 new people per year, and continued to set the standard in professional performing arts in the Central North Island.

After discussion Elected Members felt Centrepoint should be included in the work being undertaken on the Civic & Cultural Precinct Masterplan, to ensure as much prework as is sensible went into consulting with the appropriate people.

Moved Rachel Bowen, seconded Brent Barrett.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Arts, Culture & Heritage Committee receive the presentation for information.

2. That the Chief Executive ensure that Centrepoint Theatre is considered in the current work around the Civic & Cultural Precinct Masterplan.

Clause 2-20 above was carried 14 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

3-20

Presentation - Palmerston North Defence Heritage Advisory Group

Mr Joe Hollander made a presentation on behalf of Palmerston North Defence Heritage Advisory Group regarding the Group’s activities.

Mr Hollander noted planning for events such as Anzac Day were being reconfigured to allow for greater audience numbers, and that Palmerston North was one of the few cities in New Zealand to hold a formal Armistice Day commemoration.

The 175^th anniversary of the Army had been planned for commemoration this year, but as the NZ Defence Force were unsure as to how they wanted to mark this occasion it had been postponed.

The Remembrance Army Project was working at great pace, in particular addressing the restoration of service personnel graves.

Mr Hollander noted the Group was very interested in the work being done around the CET Arena, and hoped it would be involved in the consultation on the masterplan.

Moved Rachel Bowen, seconded Brent Barrett.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Arts, Culture & Heritage Committee receive the presentation for information.

Clause 3-20 above was carried 14 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

4-20

Confirmation of Minutes

Moved Rachel Bowen, seconded Brent Barrett.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the minutes of the Arts, Culture & Heritage Committee meeting of 11 December 2019 Part I Public be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Clause 4-20 above was carried 14 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

5-20

Status of the Relationship Between PNCC and NZ Rugby Museum

Memorandum, presented by Joann Ransom - Community Development Manager.

Elected Members were of the opinion that this report did not adequately address the way in which PNCC could support local museum spaces, which had come out of annual budget discussions last year, and asked that this be explored more fully in a further report.

Moved Rachel Bowen, seconded Brent Barrett.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Chief Executive ensure the NZ Rugby Museum is considered in the current work around the Civic and Cultural Precinct Master Plan.

2. That a further report on the status of the relationship between Palmerston North City Council and the NZ Rugby Museum be provided to Arts, Culture & Heritage Committee; and that the report seeks to identify options for formalising the relationship between Palmerston North City Council and the NZ Rugby Museum.

Clauses 5.1 and 5.2 above were carried 14 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

6-20

Committee Work Schedule

Moved Rachel Bowen, seconded Brent Barrett.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Arts, Culture & Heritage Committee receive its Work Schedule dated March 2020.

Clause 6-20 above was carried 14 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The meeting finished at 3.31pm

Confirmed 10 June 2020

Chairperson

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Memorandum

TO: Arts, Culture & Heritage Committee

MEETING DATE: 10 June 2020

TITLE: Cultural CCOs Draft Statements of Intent 2020-23

Presented By: Julie Macdonald, Strategy & Policy Manager

APPROVED BY: Sheryl Bryant, General Manager - Strategy & Planning

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1. That the draft Statements of Intent 2020–23 submitted by the cultural CCOs (Attachments 1–5 of this memorandum entitled ‘Cultural CCOs Draft Statements of Intent 2020-23’) be received.

2. That the Globe Theatre Trust is advised of the recommended changes to the final Statement of Intent 2020–23 outlined in Table 1 of this memorandum entitled ‘Cultural CCOs Draft Statements of Intent 2020-23’.

3. That Caccia Birch Trust Board is advised of the recommended changes to the final Statement of Intent 2020–23 outlined in Table 3 of this memorandum entitled ‘Cultural CCOs Draft Statements of Intent 2020-23’.

4. That the Regent Theatre Trust is advised of the recommended changes to the final Statement of Intent 2020–23 outlined in Table 5 of this memorandum entitled ‘Cultural CCOs Draft Statements of Intent 2020-23’.

5. That Te Manawa Museums Trust is advised of the recommended changes to the final Statement of Intent 2020–23 outlined in Table 7 of this memorandum entitled ‘Cultural CCOs Draft Statements of Intent 2020-23’.

6. That the Chief Executive develop a proposal for an increase of $50,000 per year to the Globe Theatre Trust operating grant for Elected Members to consider in the 10 Year Plan 2021–31 process.

7. That the Chief Executive develop a proposal for an increase of $40,000 per year to the Caccia Birch Trust Board operating grant for Elected Members to consider in the 10 Year Plan 2021–31 process.

1. ISSUE

The cultural Council-Controlled Organisations (CCOs) have delivered their draft Statements of Intent (SOIs). Officers have analysed the SOIs drafted by each cultural CCO, and the full documents are appended to this memo. Representatives of each CCO are in attendance to present their draft SOIs.

Under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA), when preparing the final SOI, a CCO must consider any comments made on the drafts by the Council prior to a certain date. Due to COVID-19 the draft SOIs were not presented to Council before the deadline. However, the CCOs may still choose to consider Council’s comments prior to delivering a final SOI by 31 July 2020. The purpose of this report is to provide an opportunity for the Council to give feedback to the CCOs on the SOI.

2. BACKGROUND

A CCO is an organisation in which Council has the right to appoint at least fifty percent of the trustees. Council has four cultural CCOs which were set up to independently manage Council-owned cultural facilities for a mixture of commercial and community purposes: Globe Theatre Trust, Te Manawa Museums Trust, Caccia Birch Trust Board and Regent Theatre Trust. These organisations are each managed by a Board of Trustees made up of committed volunteers.

Caccia Birch Trust Board, while currently exempted as a CCO pursuant to s 7(3) of the LGA, is still required to report to Council in the same way as a CCO.

The CCOs were each sent a Statement of Expectation to assist them in preparing the draft SOIs. Statements were presented to and approved by Council at its meeting on 18 December 2020. In March 2020, the Boards were further asked to amend their draft SOIs to include a “best guess” illustration of the impact of COVID-19. To assist with this, the deadline for delivery of the final SOIs was extended by one month, the maximum allowed under the LGA.

3. Globe Theatre Trust

The Board has presented a draft SOI that aligns with Council’s strategic direction and addresses the Statement of Expectation, as outlined in Table 1 below. The Board has responded to COVID-19 by revising down its usage targets for 2020/21 to match the six-month result as at 31 December 2019.

Table 1: Comparison of Globe SOI with Council’s Statement of Expectation

Statement of Expectation	Globe Draft SOI	Comments for Final SOI
Contribute towards specific actions in the Arts Plan and align activities to Council’s overall vision, goals and strategies.	The Board demonstrates a clear link between its strategic objectives and Council’s strategic direction.	N/A
Develop 4-6 high-quality performance measures with officers.	In progress. Discussion of new performance measures was delayed due to COVID-19.	Work with Council staff to review performance measures.
Outline approach to good governance practices, financial sustainability and environmental sustainability.	Included in “How we operate” section.	N/A
Produce a business plan and 10-year plan.	The Board will finalise its plans in time to provide input into Council’s next 10 Year Plan.	N/A
Actively explore and report on commercial models.	Included in performance measures.	N/A
Actively explore collaboration on a one-stop front of house booking operation.	Further discussions planned with Council staff.	N/A
Actively explore bringing ticketing functions under one umbrella for city venues.	Further discussions planned with Council staff.	N/A
Identify your regionally/nationally significant events based on current delivery and explore a stretch target.	Included in performance measures.	N/A
Work with Council and other agencies to develop Economic Impact reporting for regionally/nationally significant events.	Further discussions planned with Council staff.	N/A
Financials.	Summarised in Table 2. The Board has illustrated how it would utilise a $50,000 increase in its Council operating grant from the year beginning 1 July 2021.	Reduce Council operating grant to the level set in the 10 Year Plan 2018–28, adjusted for inflation, and update expenses accordingly.

Table 2: Globe SOI Summary Financials

Summary Financials ($000)	Forecast	SOI
	2019/20	2020/21	2021/22	2022/23
Financial Performance
Revenue provided by PNCC	116	118	170	173
Total revenue	302	204	278	278
Total Expenses	273	269	326	333
Net Surplus (Deficit)	29	(65)	(48)	(55)

Financial Position
Current Assets	55	46	56	70
Total Assets	357	292	243	189
Current Liabilities	18	18	18	18
Total Liabilities	18	18	18	18
Equity	339	274	225	171

Cash Flows
Total Net Cash Flows	(34)	(9)	10	14
Opening Cash	71	37	28	38
Closing Cash	37	28	38	52


Current Ratio	3.06	2.56	3.11	3.89
Working Capital	37	28	38	52

· In 2021/22 and 2022/23 it is assumed revenue provided by PNCC will increase by $50K compared to 2020/21

· In 2020/21 – 2022/23 it is expected that donations and fundraising revenue will be significantly lower than previous years

· Employee, trustee and contractor costs increase by $45K in 2021/22 onwards compared to 2020/21

· A net deficit is expected for 2020/21 – 2022/23

Staff recommend that Council consider the Board’s request for funding as part of the 10 Year Plan process, once the Board’s new strategic plan is complete. In the meantime, the Board should adjust the SOI to reflect current funding levels to ensure the SOI is consistent with the Council’s budgets.

4. Caccia Birch Trust Board

The Board has presented a draft SOI that aligns with Council’s strategic direction and addresses the Statement of Expectation, as outlined in Table 3 below. The Board has responded to COVID-19 by revising its usage targets for 2020/21. In last year’s SOI it anticipated five publicly accessible events; the new target is three. Targets for social function and conference/meeting hires are reduced from 464 to 395.

Table 3: Comparison of Caccia Birch SOI with Council’s Statement of Expectation

Statement of Expectation	Caccia Birch Draft SOI	Comments for Final SOI
Contribute towards specific actions in the Culture and Heritage Plan and align activities to Council’s overall vision, goals and strategies.	The Board demonstrates a clear link between its strategic objectives and Council’s strategic direction.	N/A
Council believes the Trust Deed needs to be updated to include more of an emphasis on commercial viability.	The Board does not consider it necessary to amend the Trust Deed. Its preference is to seek regular agreement with Council about the balance of its activities through the SOI process.	Engage in further discussions with Council.
Develop 4-6 high-quality performance measures with officers.	Work complete.	N/A
Outline approach to good governance practices, financial sustainability and environmental sustainability.	Included in “About Caccia Birch Trust Board” and “How we operate” sections.	N/A
Produce a business plan and 10-year plan.	The Board will finalise its plans in time to provide input into Council’s next 10 Year Plan.	N/A
Actively explore and report on commercial models.	Included as an activity under strategic objective 3.	N/A
Financials.	Summarised in Table 4. The Board has illustrated how it would utilise a $40,000 increase in its Council operating grant from the year beginning 1 July 2021.	Reduce Council operating grant to the level set in the 10 Year Plan 2018–28, adjusted for inflation, and update expenses accordingly.

Table 4: Caccia Birch SOI Summary Financials

Summary Financials ($000)	Forecast	SOI
	2019/20	2020/21	2021/22	2022/23
Financial Performance
Revenue provided by PNCC	107	109	151	154
Total revenue	313	260	363	378
Total Expenses	334	289	382	385
Net Surplus (Deficit)	(21)	(29)	(19)	(7)

Financial Position
Current Assets	55	59	62	72
Total Assets	126	109	91	85
Current Liabilities	30	42	42	43
Total Liabilities	30	42	42	43
Equity	96	67	49	42

Cash Flows
Total Net Cash Flows	(3)	(17)	2	9
Opening Cash	40	37	20	22
Closing Cash	37	20	22	31


Current Ratio	1.83	1.40	1.48	1.67
Working Capital	25	17	20	29

· In 2021/22 and 2022/23 it is assumed revenue provided by PNCC will increase by $40K compared to 2020/21

· A net deficit is expected for 2020/21 – 2022/23

· Wages and salary costs increase by $45K in 2021/22 onwards compared to 2020/21

· Property, plant and equipment decreases from $50K in 2020/21 to $14K in 2022/23

Staff recommend that Council consider the Board’s request for funding as part of the 10 Year Plan process, once the Board’s 10-year plan is complete. In the meantime, the Board should adjust the SOI to reflect current funding levels to ensure the SOI is consistent with the Council’s budgets.

5. REGENT THEATRE TRUST

The Board has presented a draft SOI that aligns with Council’s strategic direction and addresses the Statement of Expectation, as outlined in Table 5 below. The Board has responded to COVID-19 by revising its usage targets for 2020/21. In last year’s SOI it anticipated 200 use-days; the new target is 158 days. Attendance targets have been revised from 102,550 to 88,600.

Table 5: Comparison of Regent SOI with Council’s Statement of Expectation

Statement of Expectation	Regent Draft SOI	Comments for Final SOI
Contribute towards specific actions in the Arts Plan and Culture and Heritage Plan and align activities to Council’s overall vision, goals and strategies.	The Board demonstrates a clear link between its strategic objectives (particularly 1, 2 and 4) and Council’s strategic direction.	Consider rolling objectives 3, 5 and 6 into a single objective which outlines the Board’s internal aims.
Council has reviewed the purpose statement in the Regent Theatre Trust’s constitution and believes the constitution needs to be updated.	In progress. Discussion with officers was delayed due to COVID-19.	Engage in further discussions with Council.
Develop 4-6 high-quality performance measures with officers.	In progress. Discussion of measures was delayed due to COVID-19.	Work with Council staff to review performance measures.
Outline approach to good governance practices, financial sustainability and environmental sustainability.	Included in “Activities” and “How we operate” sections.	N/A
Produce a business plan and 10-year plan.	The Board will finalise its plans in time to provide input into Council’s next 10 Year Plan.	N/A
Actively explore and report on commercial models.	Included as an activity under strategic objective 2.	N/A
Actively explore collaboration on a one-stop front of house booking operation.	Further discussions planned with Council staff.	N/A
Actively explore bringing ticketing functions under one umbrella for city venues.	Further discussions planned with Council staff.	N/A
Identify your regionally/ nationally significant events based on current delivery and explore a stretch target.	Included in performance measures.	N/A
Work with Council and other agencies to develop Economic Impact reporting for regionally/nationally significant events.	Further discussions planned with Council staff.	N/A
Financials.	Summarised in Table 6.	N/A

Table 6: Regent SOI Summary Financials

Summary Financials ($000)	Budget	SOI
	2019/20	2020/21	2021/22	2022/23
Financial Performance
Revenue provided by PNCC	234	237	241	244
Total revenue	1,425	991	998	1,021
Total Expenses	980	1,024	1,038	1,048
Net Surplus (Deficit)	445	(33)	(40)	(27)

Financial Position
Current Assets	267	294	331	388
Total Assets	1,202	1,170	1,130	1,103
Current Liabilities	167	167	168	168
Total Liabilities	167	167	168	168
Equity	1,035	1,003	962	935

Cash Flows
Total Net Cash Flows	40	28	36	57
Opening Cash	180	220	248	284
Closing Cash	220	248	284	341


Current Ratio	1.60	1.76	1.97	2.31
Working Capital	100	127	163	220

· A net deficit is expected for 2020/21 – 2022/23

· Theatre operations revenue for 2020/21 – 2022/23 is expected to remain consistent with 2019/20 revenue budget

· Current assets increase from $267K in 2019/20 to $833K in 2022/23 due to an increase in bank accounts and cash

6. Te Manawa Museums Trust

The Board has presented a draft SOI that aligns with Council’s strategic direction and largely addresses the Statement of Expectation, as outlined in Table 7 below.

The development of Te Manawa’s Statement of Intent followed a long process of engagement with Council, which did not leave the Board much time to integrate the final expectations into the SOI. Staff have therefore analysed the draft SOI and suggested specific changes to ensure full alignment with the Council’s SOI.

The Board has responded to COVID-19 by revising its visitor targets for 2020/21. In last year’s SOI it anticipated 170k physical visits; it now anticipates 150k. However, the target for online visits has been increased, from 450k to 500k.

Table 7: Comparison of Te Manawa SOI with Council’s Statement of Expectation

Statement of Expectation	Te Manawa Draft SOI	Comments for Final SOI
Contribute towards specific actions in the Arts Plan and Culture and Heritage Plan and align activities to Council’s overall vision, goals and strategies.	The Board demonstrates a clear link between its strategic objectives and Council’s strategic direction.	N/A
Focus on engaging local communities in relevant and meaningful learning experiences.	Development of an education strategy is signalled in the Chair’s introduction and in the performance measures (under strategic objective 4).	Include specific actions planned to enhance the learning experience offered by Te Manawa, including development of an education strategy, in the “What we will do” section.
Focus on developing and growing use of and access to collections.	Actions to increase access to collections is signalled in the Chair’s introduction, such as maintaining a turnover of exhibitions and reviewing programmes.	Include specific actions planned to increase use of and access to collections in the “What we will do” section.
Focus on attracting visitation and third-party investment.	Increased visitation is a focus of the actions under strategic objective 1. Development and implementation of fundraising strategies is included as an activity under strategic objective 3.	N/A
Develop a thorough and evolving understanding of the community.	Community engagement included as activities under strategic objective 4.	Include specific actions planned to ensure strategy is based on an understanding of the community, e.g. undertaking data collection, in the “What we will do” section.
Strategic partnerships.	Stakeholder engagement included as activities under strategic objective 4.	Include specific actions planned to establish, formalise and nurture strategic partnerships in the “What we will do” section.
Develop performance measures that demonstrate performance (specific measures requested).	Included some requested measures. A full review was disrupted by COVID-19.	Work with Council staff to incorporate requested performance measures. Ensure performance measures clearly explain what is being counted, and that planned activities are captured in the “What we will do” section rather than as performance measures.
Outline approach to good governance practices, financial sustainability and environmental sustainability.	Included in Statement of the Board’s Approach to Governance and in the performance measure “Develop and environmental framework”.	Address these items in a separate “How we operate” section.
Produce a business plan and 10-year plan.	The Board is working on a draft business plan; however, COVID-19 recovery work has disrupted this.	Provide a timeframe for completion of plans.
Financials (produce an activity-based budget).	Summarised below.	N/A

Table 8: Te Manawa SOI Summary Financials

Summary Financials ($000)	Forecast	SOI
	2019/20	2020/21	2021/22	2022/23
Financial Performance
Revenue provided by PNCC	3,200	3,264	3,329	3,396
Total Revenue	3,586	3,860	4,052	3,821
Total Expenses	3,463	3,849	4,028	3,797
Net Surplus (Deficit)	123	11	24	24

Financial Position
Current Assets	1,084	1,132	1,176	1,296
Total Assets	18,503	18,523	18,547	18,571
Current Liabilities	430	441	441	441
Total Liabilities	436	444	444	444
Equity	18,067	18,079	18,103	18,127

Cash Flows
Total Net Cash Flows	(107)	(45)	47	112
Opening Cash	582	475	430	477
Closing Cash	475	430	477	589


Current Ratio	2.52	2.57	2.67	2.94
Working Capital	654	691	735	855

· A net surplus is expected for 2020/21 – 2022/23

· Fundraising and sponsorship revenue is expected to be greater than $250K in 2020/21 and 2021/22. Fundraising and sponsorship revenue is forecasted to be $9K in 2019/20

7. NEXT STEPS

Any Council comments on the draft SOIs will be communicated in writing to the CCOs.

The cultural CCOs will deliver their final SOIs by 31 July 2020 and their annual reports by 30 September 2020. These will be presented to the next available Arts, Culture and Heritage Committee.

8. Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide?		No
Are the decisions significant?		No
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water?		No
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan?		No
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure?		No
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions?		Yes
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?		No
The recommendations contribute to Goal 2: A Creative and Exciting City
The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Creative and Liveable Strategy
The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in the Arts Plan The action is: to support CCOs to achieve the objectives of the arts plan.
Contribution to strategic direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being	Providing comments on the Draft Statements of Intent is a mechanism for Council to provide guidance and direction to the cultural CCOs

Attachments

1.	Globe Theatre Trust - Draft Statement of Intent for 2020-23 ⇩
2.	Caccia Birch Trust Board - Draft Statement of Intent for 2020-23 ⇩
3.	Regent Theatre Trust - Draft Statement of Intent for 2020-23 ⇩
4.	Te Manawa Museums Trust - Draft Statement of Intent for 2020-23 ⇩
5.	Te Manawa Museums Trust - Draft Statement of Intent for 2020-23 (financials) ⇩

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Memorandum

TO: Arts, Culture & Heritage Committee

MEETING DATE: 10 June 2020

TITLE: Maintenance and Renewal Plans and Budgets for Cultural Facilities

Presented By: Bryce Hosking, Manager - Property

APPROVED BY: Tom Williams, Chief Infrastructure Officer

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1. That the memorandum titled ‘Maintenance and Renewal Plans and Budgets for Cultural Facilities’ presented to the Arts, Culture and Heritage Committee on 10 June 2020 be received for information.

2. That Council approve the consistent capital renewal and maintenance approach whereby Council only maintains the fixed assets and those that are part of the building fabric, and the balance of works would be the tenant’s responsibility and at their cost.

1. ISSUE

1.1 The Arts, Culture and Heritage Committee Meeting on 11 June 2018 resolved:

“That the Chief Executive be instructed to present annual maintenance and renewal plans and budgets for the cultural facilities to the Arts, Culture and Heritage Committee, excluding the Central Library.”

1.2 In order to address this resolution, this report discusses the following:

Section 3 – Asset and Facilities Management

· Facilities Management;

· Asset Management Planning;

· Condition Grade Assessments;

· Asset Component Levels of Service;

· Asset Component Hierarchy;

Section 4 – Portfolio Considerations

· Need for a Consistent Approach to the Cultural Facilities Portfolio;

· Seismic Buildings and Compliance;

Section 5 – Capital Renewal and Maintenance Works Planned for 2020/21

· Capital Renewal and Maintenance Works Planned for 2020/21; and

· Repairs and Maintenance Works Planned for 2020/21.

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 The Property Division is responsible for the facilities management and capital renewal work for these properties. The division ensures the cultural facilities are not only fit for purpose, but that they are well maintained, and the level of service expectations of the key stakeholders are being met.

2.2 The buildings that sit in the Cultural Facilities portfolio include:

· The Globe Theatre;

· The Regent Theatre;

· Square Edge Building;

· Te Manawa and the Art Gallery;

· Creative Sounds;

· Caccia Birch; and

· Central Library Building.

2.3 The resolution in Clause 1.1 specified excluding the Central Library. As a result, this report will not specifically discuss the renewals to be undertaken within the Central Library Building.

2.4 The renewal works undertaken within the cultural facilities portfolio is delivered through Programme 213 – Cultural Facilities – Replacement of Structures, Internal Fit Out and Services.

2.5 The day-to-day operation and upkeep of the cultural facilities is undertaken by the facility’s respective boards. The Property Division works with these boards to ensure the facilities are maintained.

3. Asset and Facilities Management

Facilities Management

3.1 The Facilities Management team within the Property Division has been undertaking a significant review of how this service has been delivered in the past and is in the process to moving to a more commercially approved facilities management service delivery model.

3.2 The enhanced service delivery model will allow for prudent asset management to be integrated into the FM service provision.

3.3 The changes in this area are focusing on:

· Cost efficiencies;

· System and technology improvements;

· Movement to preferred contractors in each service industry;

· Visible KPIs and expectations including response times to maintenance, customer satisfaction etc. with these industry contractors;

· Clearly documented scheduled maintenance approach to maximise asset life cycle; and

· Integrated asset management.

3.4 Please note, a report will be brought to the Infrastructure Committee in August 2020 to provide a more thorough update on the improvements in the Facilities Management function.

3.5 Furthermore, these improvements will have a direct improvement on the content of our AMPs and will help to ensure the programme of works planned is well scoped and deliverable.

Asset Management Planning

3.6 To ensure Council’s cultural facilities portfolio is managed effectively it is important its asset and facilities management delivers accountability, sustainability, risk management, financial efficiency and optimised asset investment.

3.7 The Property Division is working closely with the Asset Planning Division to:

· Develop a budgeted programme of works informed by Asset Management Plans and the Infrastructure Strategy; and

· Provide asset information intelligence that better informs asset management planning and developing priorities for the programme of works.

3.8 The improved asset management planning will become evident through the updating of the AMPs in the 2020/21 Year, resulting in a well scoped, deliverable, end of life replacement and renewal programme.

3.9 Three key pieces of work that are being undertaken to support the asset management planning discussed in Clause 3.2 is:

· Condition Grade Assessments;

· Determining Asset Component Levels of Service; and

· Determining an Asset Component Hierarchy.

Condition Grade Assessments

3.10 These three elements are interlinked and form the starting point for the compilation of the renewal and maintenance programmes.

3.11 It is essential the Property Division understands the current condition of our facilities and importantly the individual components within them. Asset components are graded on a 1-5 scale whereby:

· Grade 1 – Very good/ new condition

· Grade 2 – Good condition

· Grade 3 – Fair condition

· Grade 4 – Poor condition

· Grade 5 – Very Poor condition/ failure

3.12 The previous strategy to condition grade assessments relied on 3-yearly portfolio-wide assessments and focused on replacement upon failure. If this assessment process was delayed the condition data would become more and more out of date.

3.13 The revised strategy is for condition assessments to be integrated into the FM service provision. For example, when a contractor is conducting service work in our facilities they are also reporting on the condition of the asset at the same time.

3.14 In addition to this the Property Division is currently undertaking an initial portfolio-wide assessment to bring all the condition data up to date. Not only will this help to inform the next LTP but will also form a strong basis to begin working from under the superior approach of continued assessments.

Asset Component Levels of Service

3.15 Coupled with understanding the condition of our assets, there is also a need to determine at what point during the individual asset’s life within the facility need to be replaced or renewed.

3.16 This is informed by a balance of Council’s overall level of service expectations for cultural facilities and the expectations of the CCOs.

3.17 For clarity, some assets within a facility may be renewed or replaced at a higher level than others depending on their criticality and performance. For example, it may be appropriate to let carpet get to a poor condition (grade 4), but windows and sills may be renewed at a fair condition (grade 3) so to ensure water-tightness.

Asset Component Hierarchy

3.18 Determining at what level assets are to be replaced or renewed, and what assets should be prioritised over others is determined by the asset component hierarchy.

3.19 The hierarchy of assets within the cultural facilities is:

1. Works that affect water-tightness or cause damage if not resolved

· Roof work, windows, cladding, toilets etc.

2. Essential works to meet tenancy standards

· Bathrooms, kitchens, lighting etc.

3. Compliance related matters

· Fire detection and protection, asbestos, electrical and wiring etc.

4. Cosmetic and other works

· Painting, carpet etc.

3.20 Please note: this is not an exhaustive list of assets. It is simply intended to provide an overview of this workstream.

3.21 The benefit of determining the hierarchy is it allows for works to be prioritised should there be budget constraints. For example – in a situation where Council had limited funds and had to choose between replacing a roof or carpet in a facility, the roof would take priority as that falls into the “Works that affect water-tightness or cause damage” category, whereas the carpet falls into category 4 – “other works”.

4. Portfolio Considerations

Need for a Consistent Approach to the Cultural Facilities Portfolio

4.1 As part of determining the works programme in the culture facilities portfolio for next financial year, and by extension the LTP, several issues have become apparent:

· An imbalance in which facilities are receiving capital renewals – some facilities have received a much higher apportionment of works, whereas other facilities have had minimal capital renewal works completed over the last 3 years;

· A poor prioritisation of works and a lack of clear data supporting what works are set to be completed and timings of these; and

· No agreed clear responsibility line/ stance for works to be completed has been determined – Essentially what is a CCO’s responsibility, what is Council’s?

4.2 The first two points in Clause 4.1 will be resolved by the superior asset and facilities management practices in Section 3 of this report.

4.3 The third point – determining a responsibility line – requires Council direction.

4.4 Without a clear works responsibility line in place it is very difficult for both the CCO trust and the Property Division to know exactly what each other’s responsibility is when it comes to works needing to be completed and who needs to fund these.

4.5 In the past there has been situations where Council replaces the curtains in one facility, but not the others; in some facilities Council undertakes external painting only, but not internal, but then does all painting in others etc. This needs to clear and consistent over the entire cultural facilities portfolio.

4.6 For clarity, this is not necessarily about handing works off to the trusts and Council doing less, there have been several examples in the past where works have been undertaken and paid for from the trusts which should have been done by the property team. It is a focus on consistency, so all parties have a clear understanding.

4.7 To resolve this, Council Officers recommend Council only maintains the fixed assets and those that are part of the building fabric. The balance of works would be the tenant’s responsibility.

4.8 Councils responsibility would include:

· External cladding and roof work;

· Structural issues;

· Toilets and bathrooms;

· Carpet replacement;

· All painting – internally and externally;

· Air-conditioning replacement, servicing and maintenance;

· Major reconfigurations of layout;

· Compliance matters – detailed in Clause 4.13 below;

· Lighting and electrical wiring; and

· Footpaths, carparks and driveways.

4.9 The tenants responsibly would include:

· Curtains and blinds;

· Furniture;

· Security systems;

· Sound and audio-visual systems;

· Cosmetic non-fixed items;

· Signage;

· Exterior sculptures and feature items;

· Gardens and grounds maintenance; and

· Operational items.

4.10 This is consistent with the approach to renewals, repairs and maintenance within our commercial and community facilities such as community centres.

4.11 The alternative approach could be to tailor a specific approach to each of the facilities individually, but this is time consuming and difficult to manage.

4.12 If the proposed approach to works in Clauses 4.7, 4.8 and 4.9 was approved, it is important to note the following considerations:

· There will need to be clear expectations on the CCOs perhaps through their individual management agreements around the upkeep and repairs and maintenance of the items in their responsibility;

· In some cases, there may be a funding shortfall for the CCOs if some of these works had previously been undertaken by Council;

· An audit of the chattels and assets within the cultural facilities portfolio will be required to determine what items are in Council’s ownership and which are owned by the CCOs. These items will then need to be aligned with the appropriate party’s asset balance sheets.

Seismic Buildings and Compliance

4.13 As mentioned in Clause 4.8 building compliance matters are Council’s responsibility.

4.14 There are several compliance matters that are considered when undertaking works within the portfolio:

· Asbestos Management;

· Seismic Strengthening Requirements;

· Fire Compliance;

· Building Compliance (BWOF); and

· Electrical Testing and Tagging (Council owned assets, Tenant chattels are their responsibility).

4.15 Most of these compliance matters are managed either proactively or as works are undertaken. The seismic strengthening requirements of a building are an additional consideration that can influence whether it is prudent to undertake some significant works or not.

4.16 The following cultural facilities are deemed earthquake prone buildings (EPB):

· The Regent Theatre;

· Square Edge Building;

· Te Manawa – 8 of the 9 buildings are EPBs; and

· Central Library Building.

4.17 A plan to address the seismic strengthening requirements over the entire building portfolio is being undertaken as separate programme of work and will be primarily funded through Programme 902.

4.18 The elements being considered as part of this seismic strengthening plan include:

· The order of strengthening our facilities;

· The strengthening “sweet-spot” for each building;

· The individual strengthening requirements of each facility;

· The timing and frequency of strengthening projects to be put forward in the next LTP; and

· The cost of strengthening Council’s EPBs.

4.19 If looking to undertake significant works to these buildings the following considerations are needed:

· Is the work required to be building essential?

· The scope of the work required.

· Cost of work.

· When is the building scheduled to be strengthened?

· Will the strengthening design conflict with the work required resulting in works being undertaken having to be redone or removed?

4.20 For clarity, in some cases it may be prudent to not undertake significant works depending on the strengthening requirements and timings.

4.21 A separate future report will be brought to Council to discuss the seismic portfolio and proposed plan in more detail.

5. Capital Renewal and Maintenance works Planned for 2020/21

5.1 Below is an overview of the capital renewal works planned for 2020/21:

Location	Planned Capital Renewal Projects	Approx. Budget ($)
The Globe	· Bathroom and Changing Rooms	$140,000
Te Manawa and Art Gallery	· Te Manawa – 3 Air-Con Unit Replacements · LED Lighting Upgrade	$100,000 $50,000
The Regent	· Carpet Renewal in Main Foyer	$110,000
Caccia Birch	· New Carport · Security Camera Upgrade · Conversion of old Custodian Kitchen to Storage Room	$80,000 (C/-Fwd)* $15,000 $35,000
Square Edge	· Fire Safety Upgrades Continuation	$143,000 (C/-Fwd)*
Creative Sounds	· Nothing planned	$-
Total Budget for 2020/21		$450,000 plus carry-forwards

5.2 Please Note: Carry forward is subject to Council Approval.

5.3 Below is an overview of the repairs and maintenance works planned for 2020/21:

Location	Planned Maintenance Projects
The Globe	· Exterior biannual building wash
Te Manawa and Art Gallery	· Te Manawa Exterior building wash · Art Museum Exterior building wash · Te Manawa – Fix sprinkler over storage cupboard · Te Manawa – Fix Roof due to leak remerging · Te Manawa – Replace glass in kids play area with safety glass · Te Awahou school exterior wash · Exterior building wash Totaranui House · Fix up Totaranui House – rotting timbers & posts, needs fumigating & back door fixing etc.
The Regent	· Exterior biannual building wash
Caccia Birch	· Exterior building washes quarterly · Replace external Strang room door · Coach-House Archive replace old panels · Disabled bathroom – Add Baby changing table
Square Edge	· Full exterior clean · 2 x rear lightwell Exterior Paint Renewal · Putty top windows front facade
Creative Sounds	· External building clean

5.4 Please note:

· This is only the planned maintenance identified by the Property Division in conjunction with the various CCOs. Any unscheduled repairs will be undertaken over and above this as required.

· Works that are being undertaken by the Tenant/ CCO is not included and over and above the above works.

6. NEXT STEPS

6.1 Council Officers to undertake an audit of the chattels and assets within the cultural facilities portfolio to determine what items are in Council’s ownership and which are owned by the CCOs.

6.2 Council to determine a clear stance on what assets the Property Division is to maintain and what assets are the CCOs responsibility.

6.3 Implement a Council-endorsed consistent facilities management approach to future capital renewals and maintenance.

7. Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide?		Yes
Are the decisions significant?		No
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water?		No
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan?		No
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure?		No
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions?		Yes
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?		No
The recommendations contribute to Goal 2: A Creative and Exciting City
The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Creative and Liveable Strategy
The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in the Arts Plan The action is: Develop plans for the seismic strengthening and enhancing the city’s existing arts and culture buildings to achieve the Council’s aspirations and meet the community’s needs.
Contribution to strategic direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being	A robust renewals programme and facilities management model will help ensure the city’s existing arts and culture buildings are achieving the Council’s aspirations and meet the community’s needs.

Attachments

Nil

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Report

TO: Arts, Culture & Heritage Committee

MEETING DATE: 10 June 2020

TITLE: Options for formalising the relationship between Palmerston North City Council and the NZ Rugby Museum

PRESENTED BY: Joann Ransom, Community Development Manager

APPROVED BY: Chris Dyhrberg, Chief Customer Officer

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1. That the Chief Executive develop a proposal for an annual grant to the NZ Rugby Museum for Councillors to consider in the Long Term Plan process.

Summary of options analysis for

Problem or Opportunity	Options for formalising the relationship between Palmerston North City Council and the NZ Rugby Museum (NZRM).
OPTION 1:	Relationship based on a funding agreement.
NZRM View provided by Stephen Berg, Director of the Rugby Museum.	“This is the preferred option for the museum. An agreement in writing means there is an expression of intent and an exchange of value between the Council and NZRM. It would allow NZRM to plan for a longer term and give NZRM surety of tenure and inclusion in Council planning. At the present time the NZRM lease is expired at Te Manawa, and the buildings housing both the gallery and the stores have been deemed earthquake prone. Most recently Covid-19 has affected the NZRM revenue earning ability due to a severe down-turn in tourism. Due to the fluid nature of the times the NZRM has been unable to see a clear forecast for when revenues will approach pre-Covid levels. The threat of a drawn out recovery time cannot be ignored.”
Benefits	Long Term Plan would give certainty of fixed funding for at least 3 years and indicative for 10 years.
Risks	Fixed funding under an MOU or contract provides little room to manoeuvre should the NZRM need additional support due to a worsening economy.
Financial	Rent-free tenancy within Te Manawa – est. value $130,000 pa. plus an annual grant of $x
OPTION 2:	Informal relationship between Rugby Museum and Council
NZRM View provided by Stephen Berg, Director of the Rugby Museum.	“While this is not our preferred option it may be suitable in the immediate future due to Covid-19 and the need to be flexible “just-in-case”. Without the Covid situation the museum does not favour this option due to the uncertainty around the museum rent, building site and long-term tenure.”
Benefits	The present informal relationship does not preclude an annual grant being made to NZRM through either the Long Term Plan or the Annual Budget Round. An application through the annual budget round would give the NZRM the ability to present its case for a grant which may vary from year to year.
Risks	There is no certainty the NZRM would receive any funding in any given year.
Financial	Rent-free tenancy within Te Manawa – est. value $130,000 pa. plus an annual grant of $x

Rationale for the recommendations

1. Overview of the problem or opportunity

1.1 Council has had a long relationship with the Rugby Museum Society of New Zealand and wishes to continue to support the NZ Rugby Museum (NZRM) because it adds value to the City and Council wants to ensure it is successful and supported into the future.

1.2 The museum adds significantly to the economic well-being of the city bringing tourists in off the highway and encouraging them to spend time and money here. It also contributes to social well-being by providing a destination for families or opportunities for volunteering.

2. Background

2.1 The Rugby Museum Society of New Zealand Incorporated was formed in 1969, registered as an Incorporated Society in 1970 and as a charitable entity in 2008([1]).

2.2 The museum’s mission is to be the official rugby museum in New Zealand that safeguards the preservation, protection and display of the history and heritage of New Zealand rugby.

2.3 The NZRM opened in 1977, at the corner of Grey and Carroll Streets, before relocating rent-free to a building owned by Palmerston North City Council on Cuba St in 1991. This building was modified to give the museum three gallery areas and space to continue to build the collection.

2.4 The NZRM became the only tourist attraction from Palmerston North recognised in the AA’s 101 things to do in New Zealand and was rated as an attraction for Palmerston North in the Lonely Planet.

2.5 In 2011 the NZRM relocated to its current premises in the Te Manawa complex. The “fit-out” of Te Manawa and the NZRM was a joint project with Council and $2M was raised. While the NZRM is co-located with Te Manawa it continues to operate as a separate entity with its own governance and decision-making process.

2.6 The NZRM is viewed as the leading sports museum in New Zealand, with a collection in excess of 40,000 items, world class displays and activities and strong visitor numbers. The NZRM is networked with other rugby museums internationally, including The World Rugby Museum (Twickenham, London), and the rugby museums of Italy, Argentina, Australia and the new South African rugby museum.

2.7 Stephen Berg, Director of the Rugby Museum offers the following additional information:

“Historically the NZRM has run with a small surplus annually and successfully for 50 years.

Upon moving to TM, NZRM accepted the move based on the existing free rent deal that was in place at Cuba St. Additionally TM were unable to successfully attract visitors to the upstairs gallery that NZRM took over. NZRM as a destination attraction was able to operate on the upper floor and attract visitors.

The redevelopment in 2011 was significantly more expensive than forecast and NZRM required $200,000 loan from PNCC. That amount was repaid with interest by end of 2015.

Since that time NZRM have managed to rebuild reserves and were planning a significant ($240,000) upgrade with new cabinets in 2020-2021.

NZRM has a proven record of working in collaboration with Council to produce national and international exhibitions.

TM2025 discussions were only briefly held with NZRM and NZRM remain unsure of our place within the TM2025 redevelopment.”

3. previous council decisions

3.1 At a Council Meeting on 20 May 2019 to consider the outcome of the consultation process on the Annual Budget for 2019/2020, Council resolved:

“That the Chief Executive provide a report to the Arts Culture & Heritage Committee on the status of the relationship between PN City Council and NZ Rugby Museum with recommendations for any necessary action to demonstrate the City's ongoing support and commitment.”

3.2 A report was thus presented to the Arts, Culture and Heritage Committee on the 4th March 2020. The key points were:

· that the NZ Rugby Museum is an independent charitable organisation,

· current Council support is provided in three ways: rent-free tenancy^{^[2]} within Te Manawa, grant funding and marketing support for the Rugby World Cup in Japan;

· that the Rugby Museum should be considered in current work around the Civic and Cultural Precinct Master Plan.

3.3 Elected Members felt that the report did not adequately address the way in which PNCC could support the NZRM and asked that this be explored more fully. Council resolved:

“That a further report on the status of the relationship between Palmerston North City Council and the NZ Rugby Museum be provided to Arts, Culture & Heritage Committee; and that the report seeks to identify options for formalising the relationship between Palmerston North City Council and the NZ Rugby Museum.”

4. Description of options

4.1 National Services Te Paerangi is a division of Te Papa established to provide practical and strategic help to the museum sector. They produce a series of publications including Issue No. 33: Working effectively with local government^{^[3]}.

4.2 This guide discusses options for the relationship between museums and council. These include:

· A relationship based on the museum being a unit of council.

· A relationship based on the museum being a Council-Controlled Organisation.

· A relationship based on a funding agreement.

· An informal relationship.

To these can be added a 5th option:

· NZRM becoming part of the Te Manawa Museums Trust.

5. Analysis of options

5.1 The Rugby Museum Society of New Zealand is a successful, independent charitable trust and Council has no authority to change the way the Society operates. Accordingly, all options dependent on the Society ceasing to operate in its current form have been discarded leaving only 2 viable options to consider:

· A relationship based on a funding agreement.

· An informal relationship.

5.2 Relationship based on a funding agreement

Description

Many private museums operating as charitable trusts receive council funding for operating expenses and/or capital costs. This support is often essential to day-to-day operations and varies from small annual contributions to local heritage bodies run by volunteers, to major commitments to larger regional and district museums managed by paid professionals.

Councils need to ensure this public money is well-spent and increasingly councils negotiate a structured accountability relationship with museums they support with funding. Council could enter into a funding agreement seeking assurances about museum performance and management. It would include a reporting process to ensure oversight in the spending of public money and would ensure the council is aware of the museum’s concerns and possible implications.

Pros

This would provide certainty of funding for the NZRM and remove the need to prepare annual submissions to Council. Council could implement a longer term funding commitment to the NZRM through the 10 year LTP, including capital and operational components.

Cons

An MOU or funding contract usually ‘buys’ something so there would be an expectation for the NZRM to do something it is not currently doing, or at least agree to certain deliverables and enter into an accountability regime.

Officers are not aware of any concerns Council may have about NZRM operations and are unsure for what purpose to base an MOU.

5.3 An informal relationship

Description

This is the existing relationship model.

Te Paerangi acknowledge that an informal relationship can be just as beneficial to a museum as a formal one with museums benefiting in both financial and nonfinancial ways. For example, Council owns the Te Manawa building which houses the NZ Rugby Museum and this relieves the museum of responsibility for maintenance costs.

Other council support has included marketing expertise to attend the Rugby World Cup in Japan but looking forward support could include information technology services, human resources, marketing and communications services, participation in council-run training workshops etc.

Council could also make an annual grant effectively ‘on a handshake’ as it does with the PN Sculpture Trust which is another long standing and highly trusted relationship. There is no contract and the Sculpture Trust is required to make an annual presentation to Council.

Pros

As a trusted partner of Council the NZRM can approach Council to discuss areas of interest, opportunity and concern for mutual benefit – exactly as it did with the Rugby World Cup partnership in Tokyo. It also allows Council to respond to opportunities and challenges as they arise and tailor responses on a case by case basis.

6. discussion

6.1 The NZRM are likely to be find it increasingly difficult financially in the next year or two. The Museum has already been advised that it will not receive its annual grant from the NZRFU. Declining interest rates and less disposable income spent on lottery tickets and gaming machines will translate to less grant funding available. International tourism is going to be near zero for many months and that will have a significant impact on door takings.

6.2 If Council wishes to strengthen the relationship with the NZRM then making provision for ongoing funding would provide confidence and support to the Board. Options for funding the NZRM include:

Annual Budget	The NZRM made a submission to the Annual Budget for grants in 2020/2021 and 2021/2022.
Long term plan	Officers submit a programme bid for Councillors to consider in their process for the next LTP. This could result in an annual grant for 3 – 10 years. (LTP reviewed 3 yrly)
Strategic Priority Grant	NZRM could apply to this contestable fund for groups whose organisational goals contribute to Council’s strategic outcomes. The next funding round opens in late 2021 with the first payment in July 2022. Decisions are made by officers. Could result in a 3 years funding commitment with agreed KPIs and 6 monthly reporting.

7. Conclusion

7.1 The present informal relationship does not preclude an annual grant being made to NZRM through either the Long Term Plan or the Annual Budget Round. Council are currently considering a submission for an annual grant to the NZRM for 2020/2021 and 2021/2022.

7.2 The NZRM are looking for certainty of funding for a longer term and on that basis it is recommended that Council consider making provision for an annual grant to the NZRM in the LTP which will commence from 2022/2023.

8. Next actions

8.1 If Council accepts the recommendation, Officers will meet with the NZ Rugby Museum and develop a proposal for Council to consider in the LTP.

9. Outline of community engagement process

9.1 This report was written following several conversations with and direct input from Stephen Berg, the Director of the Rugby Museum Society of New Zealand. This was to preserve the high-trust relationship between the museum and council and ensure that the Rugby Museum Trust’s views were accurately represented.

Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide?		No
Are the decisions significant?		No
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water?		No
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan?		No
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure?		No
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions?		No
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?		No
The recommendations contribute to Goal 2: A Creative and Exciting City
The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Creative and Liveable Strategy
The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in the Arts Plan The Arts Plan contained the following action: “Provide a capital grant to the NZ Rugby Museum to support their cataloguing/ conservation work’ (2018/2019)”.
Contribution to strategic direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being	The Rugby Museum currently sits somewhat awkwardly in the Arts Plan due to its proximity with Te Manawa. To contribute as an arts organisation and be eligible for contestable funding from council the NZRM organisational goals would need to align with those expressed in the Arts Plan. On that basis, an application by NZRM for a Strategic Priority Grant is unlikely to be successful. Councillors may believe that the NZRM is of a primarily economic benefit to the city due to its function as a national / international tourist attraction. In this case the NZRM could be moved from the Arts Plan, where it receives only passing attention, and establish it as part of the economic picture of the city within the Economic Development Plan. Any funding would need to be through the 10 Year LTP or Annual Budget.

Attachments

Nil

[1] The background of the Rugby Museum was extracted from a webpage retrieved on 14/05/2020 from: http://rugbymuseum.co.nz/

[2] Officers estimate the space (over 500m² including some storage) has a market value to a commercial tenant of around $130,000 per annum plus GST and on-goings.

Rachel Bowen (Chairperson)
Brent Barrett (Deputy Chairperson)
Grant Smith (The Mayor)
Zulfiqar Butt	Karen Naylor
Renee Dingwall	Bruno Petrenas
Lorna Johnson	Tangi Utikere