DCC financial position | DCC reply: “$20M cash on hand” #LGOIMA

### dunedintv.co.nz May 5, 2015 – 12:27pm
DCC’s financial position better than expected
The Dunedin City Council is finishing the financial year on a high, with an operating surplus of almost $8m. Its finance committee has just analysed the latest accounts, which show the council’s in a better position than expected. It’s received more money through its invested Waipori Fund, and saved on asset maintenance. The council’s got less debt to pay than what was initially budgeted for, and has deferred some work. But it’s received less than expected from the New Zealand Transport Agency for roading projects, and it’s lost some money on the sale of a Dukes Road property. The financial year ends in June.
Ch39 Link

As tabled at the DCC Finance Committee meeting on 4 May 2015:

█ Report – FC – 04/05/2015 (PDF, 1.2 MB)
Financial Result – Nine Months to 31 March 2015

█ Report – FC – 04/05/2015 (PDF, 1.2 MB)
Financial Result – Eight Months to 28 February 2015

****

WHERE DID DCC’S $20M “CASH ON HAND” DEMATERIALISE TO ?????

From: Elizabeth Kerr
Sent: Tuesday, 23 September 2014 11:13 p.m.
To: Sandy Graham [DCC Group Manager Corporate Services]
Subject: LGOIMA request

Dear Sandy

Re: Cull warns debt still hurdle for council (ODT 15.9.14)
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/315949/cull-warns-debt-still-hurdle-council

Within the news item it says:

“The forecast had included about $22 million in “cash on hand”, but, since Mr McKenzie’s arrival, the decision had been made to slash the amount to about $2 million, he said.

“The cash was instead used to pay for capital projects, avoiding the expected need to borrow for the work, which reduced the council’s need to borrow by $20 million, he said.”

6.5.15 This paragraph goes unexplained in Ms Graham’s reply below;
a further clarification has been sought on WHICH CAPITAL PROJECTS

I would like the DCC to precisely itemise the way(s) in which the city council has spent this $20 million of “cash on hand”, to include the capital projects by name or other reference; the name(s) of the relevant council department(s) and or committee(s) that incurred this expenditure; the dates of expenditure; the spending delegations attributable to which, by name, formal signatories on account; and any other information in legible form that would assist the city council to meet my request in a forthright, full and transparent manner.

I look forward to reply.

Thanks, kind regards

Elizabeth Kerr

—

* My LGOIMA request was made on 23 September 2014.
** Dunedin City Council was legally required to reply within 20 working days.
*** Dunedin City Council finally replied on 29 April 2015.

—————————————

From: Sandy Graham
Sent: ‎Wednesday‎, ‎29‎ ‎April‎ ‎2015 ‎1‎:‎36‎ ‎p.m.
To: Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: RE: LGOIMA request [DCC expenditure of $20M cash on hand]

Dear EJK

I do appear to have sent this on Friday. I’m resending. Can you confirm receipt?

Regards
Sandy

—

From: Sandy Graham
Sent: Friday, 24 April 2015 1:40 p.m.
To: Elizabeth Kerr
Cc: Carolyn Allan; Grant McKenzie
Subject: RE: LGOIMA request [DCC expenditure of $20M cash on hand]

Dear Elizabeth

We have considered your questions and now provide the following response which we hope finally answers your enquiry. Apologies for the delay in providing this clarification.

First I want to background a couple of things to give context to both the question and our response. In our budget (the Annual Plan), the Council ensures that there is enough money to meet its financial obligations. This means that the Council has budgeted money in order to pay for a liability if and when it falls due over the course of the financial year.

While the budget provides for the necessary money to meet the various financial obligations that fall due over the course of the financial year, it is not financial best practice to have large sums of money sitting in the bank at the same time as the Council has debt. This is because the cost of borrowing is generally at a higher rate than the return on money invested in the bank.

With that background I want to deal with the specific situation referenced in the ODT on 15 September 2014 which forms the basis of your enquiry. For clarification, the article in the ODT on 15 September 2014 referred to a decision to “slash” the amount of cash on hand from $22 million to $2 million. To clarify, the $22 million was a budgeted amount of cash based on the Annual Plan for 2014/15. It was never physically in the bank – it was simply a budgeted figure.

The reference to “slash the amount” to about $2 million simply means that the Council (which had intended to borrow this money following the completion of certain capital expenditure projects) did not borrow it. It wasn’t spent on anything – the debt wasn’t raised. If it did borrow the money, then the Council would’ve had the money sitting in the bank. As outlined above, the current practice is to have a minimal amount of money in the bank but access to money if and when required.

The Council is currently consulting on a draft Financial Strategy which formalises this approach and incorporates it into the budget from 1 July 2015 onwards. I have attached a copy of the draft Financial Strategy for your information.

Regards
Sandy

█ Attachment: Finance-Strategy

—————————————

From: Elizabeth Kerr
Sent: Friday, 24 April 2015 1:56 a.m.
To: Sandy Graham
Cc: Carolyn Allan
Subject: Re: LGOIMA request [DCC expenditure of $20M cash on hand]

Dear Sandy

Please can you have the information requested since 23 September 2014 to me within 5 working days. Appreciated.

Regards, Elizabeth

Sent from Windows Mail

—————————————

From: Elizabeth Kerr
Sent: Thursday, 9 April 2015 11:49 a.m.
To: Sandy Graham
Cc: Carolyn Allan; Elizabeth Kerr
Subject: Re:RE: LGOIMA request [DCC expenditure of $20M cash on hand]

Dear Sandy and Carolyn

The draft LTP has recently been signed off by the Council and is now available for public consultation.

Further to your last email, Sandy, if you can, please provide timeline for delivery of the information promised to me regarding DCC’s use of the $20M cash on hand, as referred to in the Otago Daily Times on 15 September 2014 (refer correspondence below).

I look forward to your update and following, prompt receipt of the information kindly requested last year.

Best regards, Elizabeth

█ The rest of the oh so tiresome email trail can be found at this thread:
3.11.14 DCC: What happened to $20 million cash on hand? #LGOIMA

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCC Annual Report 2013-14

ODT 29.10.14 (page 5)

http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/321565/460k-departing-council-staff

—

█ Report – Council – 30/10/14 (PDF, 2.5 MB)
Approval and Adoption of Annual Report

Recommendation: That the Council approves and adopts the Dunedin City Council Annual Report for the year ending 30 June 2014, subject to any minor editing required between adoption and final publication.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Carisbrook Stadium Trust: Financial statements for the year ended 30.6.13

Received via Bev Butler
Wednesday, 12 March 2014 1:48 p.m.

The CST’s latest financial accounts – link to full financial statements and a copy of the summary below [click to enlarge].

Source:
[enter in your browser] *Carisbrook Stadium CT 30.6.13 signed Accounts.pdf*

Download: Carisbrook Stadium CT 30.6.13 signed Accounts (PDF, 255 KB)

For more, enter the terms *cst*, *csct*, *carisbrook*, *charitable*, *trust*, or *farry* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DVML, DVL and DCHL annual reports

### ODT Online Fri, 28 Oct 2011
Lack of revenue puts stadium loss at $3.2m
By Chris Morris
Forsyth Barr Stadium chief executive David Davies says his feet are “firmly on the ground” after the company tasked with running the roofed venue recorded a $3.2 million loss in its first financial year. The result was confirmed in Dunedin Venues Management Ltd’s first annual report, for the year ending June 30, 2011, to be presented to councillors at the next full council meeting on Monday.

• The report covers the period the company was in start-up mode, before the stadium’s opening on August 5 this year, meaning DVML was accruing costs while unable to earn revenue.
• It did not include the four Rugby World Cup matches held at the stadium, which fell outside the reporting period but were expected to result in a further loss of $400,000 for DVML.
• The company’s annual report identified employee expenses as the main driver behind the loss, totalling $446,293 in 2010 but growing to just over $1.3 million in 2011, while directors fees rose from $66,760 last year to $88,000 this year.

Read more

—

### ODT Online Fri, 28 Oct 2011
No statement of intent filed
By Chris Morris
Dunedin Venues Ltd – the company that owns the Forsyth Barr Stadium – breached the Local Government Act by not filing a statement of intent, it has been confirmed. The confirmation came in the Dunedin City Council-owned company’s first annual report, to be considered at the next full council meeting on Monday. The report acknowledged DVL’s directors failed to provide a statement of intent for the year beginning on July 1, 2010, or report the company’s performance against the statement.
Read more

—

Meeting of Dunedin City Council on 31 October 2011 at 2pm
Council Chamber, Municipal Chambers

Agenda – Council – 31/10/2011 (PDF, 42.9 KB)

Report – Council – 31/10/2011 (PDF, 1.4 MB)
Annual Reports from Dunedin Venues Management Ltd and Dunedin Venues Ltd

Report – Council – 31/10/2011 (PDF, 2.1 MB)
Dunedin City Holdings Ltd Annual Report

DCC pagelink (other reports)

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

DCHL chief executive replies to critics

In his letter to the editor, Bevan Dodds explains that DCHL was established to allow Dunedin City Council-owned companies to operate commercially at arm’s length from the council while returning a dividend which the council can then use to offset rates. Although in conclusion he asks, “Why would you not smile at payments of $19.8m that help keep your rates down?”, this doesn’t begin to address – and doesn’t have to – the signalled rate increases ahead. Ahhh, the convenience of that arm’s length between truth or dare.

****

[here abridged]

### ODT Tue, 20 Oct 2009 (page 8)
Letters to the editor
Inconvenient truth: DCHL did well
By Bevan Dodds
Chief Executive, Dunedin City Holdings Ltd

Several “Letters to the Editor” have claimed ‘spin’ or challenged the expenditure of ratepayers’ money on celebrating, via a half page advertisement in your newspaper, the 2008-09 financial results posted by the Dunedin City Holdings Ltd Group of companies.
The payments made by DCHL to the council of $19.8 million comprised $9.5 million dividends and $10.3 million of interest, reflecting the investment in DCHL made up of both loans and shares. The breakdown is carefully set out in the annual report.
After tax profit figures calculated under NZ accounting standards for a group such as DCHL will never match cash or “what is left over in the bank”. Note 34 to the DCHL accounts lists 20 reconciling items between the accounting profit and the cash generated by the group from its business activities.
The total of the profits of the subsidiaries plus the profit of the parent company will only in very rare situations match the consolidated profit of an accounting group. There is no magic here, or mysterious losses because if there was Audit New Zealand and indeed the ODT’s own business reporters would make this very clear, just the pure principles of consolidated accounting.
{continues}

The full letter is available in print and digital editions of the Otago Daily Times.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr