NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

General Purpose Committee - 19 January 2011

 

 

AGENDA                                                                                                   Page

 

1        APOLOGIES

2        DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

3        General Manager Report

8.1     September 2010 Budget Review

4        Director Environment and Planning Report

9.1     Presentation of Flood Study Peer Review for the Pacific Highway Bypass of Macksville by the RTA    

 

 

Time

Description

Where

OS/CC

Item No

Page No

08.30-8.45

Introduction of new staff:

Paul Gallagher, Director Engineering Services

Kate Wickman, Project Officer—Drink Don’t Sink

 

CC

 

 

8.45 am

September Budget Review

CC

8.1

4

9.45 am

Morning Tea with RTA representatives

CC

 

         

10.00 am

RTA - Peer Review Flood Study Warrell Ck to Urunga Pacific Highway Upgrade

CC

9.1

7

 

 


NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST AT MEETINGS

 

 

Name of Meeting:

 

Meeting Date:

 

Item/Report Number:

 

Item/Report Title:

 

 

 

I

 

declare the following interest:

          (name)

 

 

 

 

Pecuniary – must leave chamber, take no part in discussion and voting.

 

 

 

Non Pecuniary – Significant Conflict – Recommended that Councillor/Member leaves chamber, takes no part in discussion or voting.

 

 

Non-Pecuniary – Less Significant Conflict – Councillor/Member may choose to remain in Chamber and participate in discussion and voting.

 

For the reason that

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signed

 

Date

 

 

 

 

 

Council’s Email Address – council@nambucca.nsw.gov.au

 

Council’s Facsimile Number – (02) 6568 2201

 

(Instructions and definitions are provided on the next page).

 


Definitions

 

(Local Government Act and Code of Conduct)

 

 

Pecuniary – An interest that a person has in a matter because of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss to the person or another person with whom the person is associated.

(Local Government Act, 1993 section 442 and 443)

 

A Councillor or other member of a Council Committee who is present at a meeting and has a pecuniary interest in any matter which is being considered must disclose the nature of that interest to the meeting as soon as practicable.

 

The Council or other member must not take part in the consideration or discussion on the matter and must not vote on any question relating to that matter. (Section 451).

 

 

Non-pecuniary – A private or personal interest the council official has that does not amount to a pecuniary interest as defined in the Act (for example; a friendship, membership of an association, society or trade union or involvement or interest in an activity and may include an interest of a financial nature).

 

If you have declared a non-pecuniary conflict of interest you have a broad range of options for managing the conflict.  The option you choose will depend on an assessment of the circumstances of the matter, the nature of your interest and the significance of the issue being dealt with.  You must deal with a non-pecuniary conflict of interest in at least one of these ways.

 

·        It may be appropriate that no action is taken where the potential for conflict is minimal.  However, council officials should consider providing an explanation of why they consider a conflict does not exist.

·        Limit involvement if practical (for example, participate in discussion but not in decision making or visa-versa).  Care needs to be taken when exercising this option.

·        Remove the source of the conflict (for example, relinquishing or divesting the personal interest that creates the conflict or reallocating the conflicting duties to another officer).

·        Have no involvement by absenting yourself from and not taking part in any debate or voting on the issue as if the provisions in section 451(2) of the Act apply (particularly if you have a significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest).

 

         


General Purpose Committee

19 January 2011

General Manager's Report

ITEM 8.1      SF1524            190111         September 2010 Budget Review

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:     Craig Doolan, Manager Financial Services         

 

Summary:

 

General Fund:                This review revises the net operating result for 2010/11 to a deficit of $214,000 and varies Current Liquid Equity to $1,556,569, a decline of $150,900 since the Original Budget.

 

Council’s estimated Current Liquid Equity (available working capital at year end) is adequate at approximately $265,000 above the minimum level as per Council’s policy.

 

Water Supplies:             This review revises the net operating result for 2010/11 to a surplus of $37,800 and varies Current Liquid Equity to $1,716,737, an improvement of $36,800 since the Original Budget.

 

Council’s estimated Current Liquid Equity (available working capital at year end) is strong at approximately $1,116,000 above the minimum level as per Council’s policy.

 

Sewerage Services:        This review revises the net operating result for 2010/11 to a deficit of $26,600 and varies Current Liquid Equity to $701,240, a decline of $2,000 since the Original Budget.

 

Council’s estimated Current Liquid Equity (available working capital at year end) is adequate at approximately $356,000 above the minimum level as per Council’s policy.

 

The attached budget review document includes, as variances, amounts required to match unexpected income/expenditure items plus resolved inclusions to the budget. Items varying $5,000 or more are briefly discussed commencing page 2 in ledger account order and referenced to the page no. in budget review document. Significant variations influencing the result are discussed further in this report.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1        That the budget review for the quarter ended 30 September, 2010 be received.

 

2        That the recommended increases and decreases in votes be included as subsequent votes for the financial year 2010/2011.

 

3        That the rehabilitation of Pioneer St North be included in the Nambucca Heads Urban Streets Rehabilitation program by providing additional funding of $10,000.

 

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Not Applicable

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

As mentioned in the 30th June 2010 Budget Review report, delays to financial reporting have occurred due to implementation issues associated with the conversion of Council’s corporate software. As a result of dissimilarities in financial data storage and presentation between the Fujitsu and Civica systems, there are some slight variations in the way the financial information is presented. The Civica system has a much larger ledger account, composing of a master, sub and resource level. In alleviating the density and thus complexity of the available data the budget review configuration has been constructed similar to the structure designed in Fujitsu via a function and activity hierarchy with information presented at the sub account level.

 

 

GENERAL ACTIVITIES

 

The summary of current liquid equity is on page 1 of the Budget Review document. The estimated current liquid equity surplus is $1,556,569 inclusive of internal loans.

 

The original 2010/11 budget forecast a net operating deficit of $63,100. Items revoted from 2009/10 amounted to $1,114,100. The balance of internal loans borrowed from current liquid equity was $631,340.

 

Despite an increase in the expected allocation of the Financial Assistance Grant of $171,000 (General Purpose $116,100 & Roads component $54,900) a deficit forecast of $214,000 is expected at this review.

 

The major offset to this revised grant funding were additional funds required for the incorporation of concrete girders in relation to the refurbishment of Congarinni North Bridge. Further, Council resolutions relating to consultancy costs for the Scotts Head Master Plan of $25,500, additional $20,000 for building alterations at NEOC, and $12,000 for playground equipment at Memorial Park have been factors.  Also, Council received notification that a Workers Compensation adjustment premium for 2009/10 of $36,300 would be experienced with General’s contribution calculated as $34,600.

 

Director Engineering commentary:

 

Pioneer Street

 

The northern end of Pioneer St beside “Bucca Blue” is in poor condition and requires an asphaltic concrete overlay 30mm thick. The estimated cost is $10,000.

 

 

WATER SUPPLIES

 

The original 2010/11 budget forecast a net operating surplus of $1,000. Net revotes from 2009/10 amount to $0.

 

This September review revises the result for 2010/11 to an operating surplus of $37,800, an improvement of $36,800 on the original $1,000 budget surplus.

 

After a review Council’s telemetry system it has been found that the radio transmitters are old technology and no longer supported. Replacement is urgent as they have reached the end of their useful life. This has required $50,000 to be allocated in both Water and Sewerage funds. An offsetting adjustment has been made to the 2010/11 Water Storage allocation with associated reserves utilised for funding.

 

Approval of a subsidy amounting to $37,400 for the Metering and Leakage Control Project completed in 2009/10 has been granted and is the only major net variation impacting on the result.

 

 

SEWERAGE SERVICES

 

The original 2010/11 budget forecast a net operating deficit of $24,600. Items revoted from 2009/10 amounted to $25,000.

 

This September review revises the result for 2010/11 to a net operating deficit of $26,600, a decline of $2,000 on the original budget deficit.

Other than mentioned above in Water, an additional $80,000 is required for switchboards relating to the augmentation works. Reserves have been utilised with another deduction to the 2010/11 Water Storage allocation offsetting overall Water and Sewerage expenditure.

 

There are no major net variations to the result as part of this review.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

Directors

Responsible Officers

Accountant

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

Not applicable.

 

Social

 

Not applicable.

 

Economic

 

Not applicable.

 

Risk

 

Not applicable.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Refer to discussion.

 

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Refer to discussion.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.  


General Purpose Committee

19 January 2011

Director Environment & Planning's Report

ITEM 9.1      SF841              190111         Presentation of Flood Study Peer Review for the Pacific Highway Bypass of Macksville by the RTA

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:     Greg Meyers, Director Environment and Planning         

 

Summary:

 

Council at its meeting of 16 June 2010, reaffirmed the Notice of Motion put to Council on 15 April 2010, requesting the NSW Department of Planning to undertake a peer review of the flood study for the Pacific Highway upgrade around Macksville.

 

The RTA engaged WMA Water to undertake the Peer Review, which has now been completed and was included in the report on submissions to the Environmental Study for the Warrell Creek-Urunga Pacific Highway Upgrade.

 

The RTA have agreed to attend the 19 January 2011 General Purpose Committee Meeting to present the findings of the Peer Review.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note and thank the RTA, for the presentation of the Peer Review for the flood study relating to the Pacific Highway Bypass of Macksville.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Not applicable.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

A Notice of Motion was put to Council’s meeting on 15 April 2010 regarding the accuracy of the Roads and Traffic Authority’s Environmental Assessment of the Pacific Highway Upgrade—Warrell Creek to Urunga (Volume 1 January 2010) resulting in the recommendations:

 

1        That Council not accept the Roads and Traffic Authority’s Environmental Assessment of the Pacific Highway Upgrade, Warrell Creek to Urunga.

 

2        That the NSW Department of Planning require a peer review of the Roads and Traffic Authority’s flood study with the discrepancies in the submissions to be listed by Council.

 

3        That Council invite the Roads and Traffic Authority to address the flooding issues directly at a future Council meeting.

 

4        That prior to any meeting with the Roads and Traffic Authority a list be provided to the Roads and Traffic Authority, the Department of Planning and Councillors identifying all issues Council has in regard to the flooding.

 

The Roads and Traffic Authority addressed Council at its General Purpose Committee meeting on Wednesday 16 June 2010.

 

The Peer Review was undertaken by WMA Water and included in the Submissions Report following the exhibition of the environmental assessment for the Warrell Creek to Urunga Pacific Highway Upgrade.

 

The representatives from the RTA, Mr Bob Higgins, Mr Chris Clarke, Mr Adam Cameron and from WMA Water, Mr Mark Babister, will be attending to present the findings.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

RTA

General Manager

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

Not applicable

 

Social

 

Not applicable

 

Economic

 

Not applicable

 

Risk

 

Not applicable

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Not applicable

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Not applicable

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.