NAMBUCCA

SHIRE COUNCIL

 


Ordinary Council Meeting

AGENDA ITEMS

27 June 2013

 

Council has adopted the following Vision and Mission Statements to describe its philosophy and to provide a focus for the principal activities detailed in its Management Plan.

 

Our Vision

Nambucca Valley ~ Living at its best.

 

Our? Mission Statement

 

?The Nambucca Valley will value and protect its natural environment, maintain its assets and infrastructure and develop opportunities for its people.?

 

Our Values in Delivery

?            Effective leadership

?            Strategic direction

?            Sustainability of infrastructure and assets

?            Community involvement and enhancement through partnerships with Council

?            Enhancement and protection of the environment

?            Maximising business and employment opportunities through promotion of economic development

?            Addressing social and cultural needs of the community through partnerships and provision of facilities and services

?            Actively pursuing resource sharing opportunities

 

Council Meetings:? Overview and Proceedings

 

Council meetings are held on the last Thursday of each month commencing at 5.30 pm AND and a full day meeting commencing at 8.30am on the Wednesday two weeks and one day before the Thursday meeting. Meetings are held in the Council Chamber at Council's Administration Centre?44 Princess Street, Macksville.

 

How can a Member of the Public Speak at a Council Meeting?

 

1??????? Addressing Council with regard to an item on the meeting agenda:

 

Members of the public are welcome to attend meetings and address the Council.? Registration to speak may be made by telephone or in person before 2.00 pm on a meeting day.? The relevant agenda item will be brought forward at 5.30 pm in agenda order, and dealt with following preliminary business items on the agenda.? Public addresses are limited to five (5) minutes per person with a limit of two people speaking for and two speaking against an item.?

 

2??????? Public forum address regarding matters not on the meeting agenda:

 

Council allows not more than two (2) members of the public per meeting to address it on matters not listed in the agenda provided the request is received before publication of the agenda and the subject of the address is disclosed and recorded on the agenda.

 

Speakers should address issues and refrain from making personal attacks or derogatory remarks.? You must treat others with respect at all times.

 

Meeting Agenda

 

These are available from the Council's Administration Building, the Regional Libraries in Macksville and Nambucca Heads as well as Council?s website: www.nambucca.nsw.gov.au


 

NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

 

Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 June 2013

 

Acknowledgement of Country??????? ? (Mayor)

 

I would like to acknowledge the Gumbaynggirr people who are the Traditional Custodians of this Land.? I would also like to pay respect to the elders both past and present and extend that respect to any Aboriginal People present.

 

AGENDA????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Page

 

1??????? APOLOGIES

2??????? PRAYER

3??????? DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

4??????? CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES ? Ordinary Council Meeting - 12 June 2013

5??????? NOTICES OF MOTION ?

6??????? PUBLIC FORUM

7??????? ASKING OF QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE ??

8??????? QUESTIONS FOR CLOSED MEETING WHERE DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN RECEIVED

9??????? General Manager Report

9.1???? Outstanding Actions and Reports........................................ 6

9.2???? Annual Reporting of Contracts for Senior Staff................... 12

9.3???? Road & Bridge Asset Benchmarking Survey....................... 15

9.4???? Local Government Infrastructure Audit - June 2013........... 19

9.5???? Gumma (Boulton's Crossing) Reserve - Stakeholder Meeting and Acknowledgement of Existing Use Rights.................... 23

9.6???? Review of Organisation Structure - Outdoor Operations..... 27

9.7???? Recruitment of Assistant General Managers...................... 30

9.8???? Planning Reforms White Paper Discussion........................ 32

10????? Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

10.1?? Code of Conduct Review Panel......................................... 37

10.2?? Integrated Planning & Reporting Framework 2013/14 To 2016/17........................................................................... 41

10.3?? Making of Rates and Charges 2013/2014.......................... 50

10.4?? Minutes Of The Access Committee Meeting Held On 28 May 2013................................................................................ 56

10.5?? Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 23 April 2013??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 60

10.6?? T001/2013 Tender for Audit Services for a six (6) year period commencing 1 July 2013.................................................. 64

10.7?? Applications and Statistical Reports 2012-2013 - May 2013 66

10.8?? Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined to 7 - 14 June 2013.. 68

10.9?? Scotts Head Events Committee of Management................ 71

10.10 Schedule of Council Public Meetings................................. 73

11????? Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

11.1?? Rainwater Tank Rebate Scheme Policy............................. 74

11.2?? Nambucca District Water Supply Steering Committee Meeting - 5 June 2013.................................................................. 82 ???

12????? General Manager's Summary of Items to be Discussed in Closed Meeting

12.1?? T001/2013 Tender for audit services for a six (6) year period commencing 1 July 2013

It is recommended that the Council resolve into closed session with the press and public excluded to allow consideration of this item, as provided for under Section 10A(2) (d) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

??

??????????? a???? Questions raised by Councillors at 8 above

 

?????? i???????? MOTION TO CLOSE THE MEETING

?????? ii??????? PUBLIC VERBAL REPRESENTATIONS REGARDING PROPOSAL

???? TO CLOSE

?????? iii??????? CONSIDERATION OF PUBLIC REPRESENTATIONS

?????????????????? iv?????? DEAL WITH MOTION TO CLOSE THE MEETING

13????? MEETING CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC

14????? REVERT TO OPEN MEETING FOR DECISIONS IN RELATION TO ITEMS DISCUSSED IN CLOSED MEETING.

 

 

 

 

 

 


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).

 

??????? ?


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

General Manager

ITEM 9.1???? SF959????????????? 270613??????? Outstanding Actions and Reports

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

 

The following table is a report on all outstanding resolutions and questions from Councillors (except development consents, development control plans & local environmental plans). Matters which are simply noted or received, together with resolutions adopting rates, fees and charges are not listed as outstanding actions. Where matters have been actioned they are indicated with strikethrough and then removed from the report to the following meeting. Please note that the status comments have been made one week before the Council meeting.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the list of outstanding actions and reports be noted and received for information by Council.

 

 

 

No

FILE

NO

COUNCIL

MEETING

SUMMARY OF MATTER

ACTION

BY

STATUS

 

MARCH 2011

1

DA2010/234

17/3/11

Council develop a policy as to the cumulative impacts of locating fill on the floodplain at Macksville and also review the matrix in the Floodplain Risk Management Plan

 

GM

Brief to be prepared and new floodplain study to be undertaken during 2011.

RTA has now engaged Consultants to prepare a new full and comprehensive flood study which will be provided to Council upon completion. At this time Council will be able to proceed to complete a new Flood Plain Risk Management Plan incorporates a revised matrix.

DEP advised meeting arranged with RTA.

Draft flood study likely to be presented to Council May/June 2012.

Re the delay, Council?s Strategic Planner has followed up the RMS.

Staff meeting with Consultants on Wednesday 18/10/12.

Funding for a Flood Risk Management Plan which would consider filling is included in the 2013/14 Environmental Levy program.

JUNE 2011

2

SF841

2/06/2011

Council write to the RMS requesting they design the new Nambucca River bridge at Macksville to provide 62m between the main channel piers and ensure the bridge is tall enough to allow yachts to pass under at maximum high tide.

 

AGMCCS

Letter sent 8 June 2011.

No response as at 6 December 2011.

Further letter sent 10 January 2012.

No formal response, however RMS have verbally advised that a formal response will be with Council prior to the end of May 2012

DEP to follow up with RMS.

To be discussed further with RMS.

Further letter sent 4 January 2013.

No response as at 4 March 2013

Further letter sent 17 April 2013 with copy to Mr Stoner.

Meeting with RMS on 30 May.? Issue discussed.? RMS advise that the per metre cost of the bridge with standard 35m T beams is approximately 50% of ?in situ? construction with cranes.? Response will be forthcoming. Reported to Council


 

JULY 2011

3

SF1031

21/7/2011

That the policy for Climate Change Adaption be deferred to allow amendments to be made to the draft policy

 

GM

Policy under revision and to be reported to future meeting.? Also the State Government policy has recently changed.

 

Awaiting finalisation of Nambucca River Flood Studies

 

OCTOBER 2011

4

SF1460

17/11/2011

Structure of the Farmland (rate) Category be changed to incorporate the statutory minimum with ad valorem maintaining yield. Council undertake a review of the farmland criteria to better reflect high intensity pursuits.

 

AGMCCS

Farmland criteria to be revised prior to the issuing of the 2012/13 rates.

 

Change in Rates staff meant that there has not been the opportunity to review the criteria.? To be reported in 2012/2013.

Once Finance Structure resolved this matter should progress.

FEBRUARY 2012

5

GB2/12

02/02/2012

Appropriate sized nesting boxes be placed in trees in close proximity to the Cabbage Gum site (Link Road)

AGMES

Nesting boxes were installed in December 2012, advanced trees still awaiting delivery.

 

Advanced trees have been sourced and are scheduled for delivery to Council after Easter

Transport issues experienced with the nursery supplying the trees, anticipated delivery now end of May

 

OCTOBER 2012

6

DA2012/069

25/10/2012

Council to seek full external funding for independent traffic study for Pacific Highway Upper Warrell Creek Road Intersection

MBD/

G&CO

Investigations underway

Discussed at meeting on 18 March 2013.? Agreed that Boral and APS would prepare a traffic study.

NOVEMBER 2012

7

SF29

29/11/2012

Representatives of Clarence Valley Council be requested to meet with representatives of this Council to discuss the distribution of the assets and liabilities of the CRL.

 

GM

Letter sent 5 December 2012.? Discussion with CVC General Manager who requested the matters of contention be listed in an email.? Points of contention emailed 28 February 2013.? Response received and being discussed with Manager Community and Cultural Services.

Further letter sent to Clarence Valley Council asking for a breakdown of $206,241 paid for ?redundancies and terminations?.

JANUARY 2013

 

8

RF275

16/01/2013

Councillors to be notified of DA?s with a value or cost > $1m.

 

AGMCCS

On-going

 

9

SF734

16/01/2013

Council undertake a seminar on the implications of the upgrade of the Pacific Highway for the Nambucca Valley and a further report come to Council on proposed speakers, a budget and the availability or otherwise of funding from Industry & Investment.

 

GM

Report March 2013.? Deferred to allow for consultation with the RMS and Kempsey Shire Council.

Propose to conduct in association with urban design proposals. Workshop on 19 June 2013.

 

 

10

LF167

31/01/2013

Mayor and AGMCCS visit the owner of 5625 Pacific Highway, North Macksville and explain the seriousness of Council?s orders and discuss options for rectifying the problem.

 

AGMCCS

Arrangements being made.

On site meeting held. Positive steps for progress.

Plumber engaged by landowners. Recent wet weather has restricted any progress.

 

Application received 22 March 2013 and referred to DI&I (Fisheries) 15 April 2013

 

 

FEBRUARY 2013

 

11

SF84

13/02/2013

Council advise the RFS that it is only prepared to accept the RFS Bid for 2013/14 indexed as per the rate pegging levy of 3.4%.

 

AGMES

Letter sent.? Awaiting response.

 

Letter sent to the RFS Commissioner, Minister and RFS Zone Manager.

-???? NIL response from State Government

-???????? Amended Bid from the Zone Manager provided ?????? to be reported at the April Council meeting.

-???? To be reported to Council mid June

 

 

12

SF1817

28/2/2013

Council write as a matter of urgency to the RMS to place a 60km/hr speed zone on the Pacific Highway at the Link Road, Nambucca Heads intersection.

Also that the RMS be asked to install advising signs on the Highway alerting motorists to the intersection.

 

GM

Letter sent on 6 March 2013.? Response received 28 March 2013 indicating the RMS is in the process of conducting a speed zone review at this location.

 

Follow up letter sent 18 June 2013.

 

MARCH 2013

 

13

PRF54

13/3/2013

A further meeting of stakeholders be arranged to discuss options for the on-going management of the Gumma Reserve.

 

GM

Meeting to be arranged in April 2013.? This meeting was postponed (3/4) to a future date.

Meeting arranged for 6 June 2013.

 

 

 

14

SF1031

28/3/2013

That there be a review in 6 months time of the policy on rainwater tank rebates to determine whether or not there should be an increase in funding.

 

AGMES

Report due October 2013

 

15

SF1760

28/3/0213

That Council be provided with a report on Waste Depot fees for non-service residents, including the possibility of a voucher system.? The report is to provide feedback on how other councils are handling this matter.

 

GM

Approval has now been obtained from the EPA to use waste levy funding to trial a twice per year rural service whereby a mixed waste truck, recycling truck and bulky goods truck would be stationed at Burrapine, South Arm, North Arm and Missabotti for 4 hours on a Saturday morning to receive? source separated waste and recyclables.

 

The service would be available to any person paying the tip availability charge but not receiving a waste service.? There are 1,385 properties in this category.

 

Costs have been obtained from Handybin which indicate that the cost per site for each Saturday collection would be approximately $5,663.? This means the cost for the 4 sites per collection would be $22,654 or $45,308 for the two trial collections.?

 

In general terms the cost of hiring a truck and driver is $927.50 per day.? The disposal cost per truck is spproximately $1295 for mixed waste and $291 for recyclables.

 

Dates for collection have not as yet been determined.? They will be determined in consultation with the contractor.

 

The proposed trial service will be extensively advertised in the rates newsletter and by direct mail.

 

16

RF284

28/3/2013

Council write to the Minister for Transport to expedite the upgrade and replacement of load limited railway bridges (overpasses) on Browns Crossing Road

 

AGMES

Letter written w/e 5/4/2013

 

Verbal advice has been provided to Council that a Ministerial request for information was forwarded to the Rail Authority seeking information on the bridges.

 

APRIL 2013

 

17

SF601

10/4/2013

Council request RMS to urgently prepare for On and Off ramps for the Pacific Highway in the vicinity in North Macksville as to facilitate a discussion

 

GM

Letter sent to RMS on 12 April 2013

Mayor and Ms Janine Reed attended Community Cabinet meeting in Taree on 20 May 2013 in relation to this.

 

Meeting with rms 30 May 2013.? Issue discussed.? Rms are preparing a concept with indicative costing and will supply to Council.

 

Suggested indicative costing is $10M.

 

18

DA2012/010

10/4/2013

That this application be deferred to enable further discussion with the applicant

 

MAC

Will be scheduled for further consideration following discussions

Strata subdivision, Princess Street Macksville.

 

 

MAY 2013

 

19

SF1618

15/5/2013

Draft Community Strategic Plan ? Council note the submissions and recommendations associated with antimony mining and consider ways to address these submissions outside the process of the adopted the CSP.

 

GM

Report in June 2013

 

20

SF844

30/5/2013

Cr Flack?s question concerning the concentration of salt and other minerals in BORS and how they will be managed.

AGMES

NSW Public Works to obtain advice form GHD

 

To be discussed at BORS meeting 5 June 2013.

 

Public Works requested to provide advice in writing.

 

 

21

SF453

30/5/2013

Council write to the GM of CHCC requesting that as the lead Council in the (waste) agreement they undertake an evaluation of the biomass processing rather than rely on the contractor who has a commercial interest.? Also request figures on how much biomass has been sold to date.

 

GM

Letter sent 6 June 2013

 

22

SF453

30/5/2013

That Council receive a report on the comparison of waste costs from a Sydney council and Mid North and North Coast councils.

 

AGMES

Report in July 2013

 

23

SF453

30/5/2013

The GM consult with Bellingen Shire Council to gauge its interest in forming a working group to review the Coffs Coast Waste Service?s strategic direction.

 

GM

Letter sent 6 June 2013.

 

JUNE 2013

 

24

SF270

12/6/2013

Council receive a report in Closed Meeting regarding the progress of the onsite sewage management system at 5625 Pacific Highway, North Macksville.

 

AGMCCS

Report in July 2013.

 

25

SF36

12/6/2013

That a further report be presented to council in relation to the appointment of an Independent Code of Conduct Review Panel

 

AGMCCS

 

 

26

SF36

12/6/2013

That Council seek clarification on the question of quorums where a majority of councillors have a conflict of interest; that statement that councillors can only approach staff or staff organisations to discuss broad work place policies; council staff not being able to speak to objectors outside normal hours but no similar reference to developers.

 

AGMCCS

Report in July 2013.

 

27

SF1822

12/6/2013

Minutes of the Access Committee meeting on 23 April be deferred to clarify whether the minutes are for April or May 2013.

 

AGMCCS

 

 

28

SF632

12/6/2013

Re-reporting modification to remove lot 14 from the strata subdivision ? Princess Street ? that it be deferred so as to provide confirmation via a diagram of the 21 off street parking spaces.

 

AGMCCS

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

?


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

General Manager

ITEM 9.2???? SF839????????????? 270613??????? Annual Reporting of Contracts for Senior Staff

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

Summary:

 

Section 339 of the Local Government Act requires that the General Manager must, at least once annually, report to the council on the contractual conditions of senior staff (ie by 30 June).

 

The General Manager and Assistant General Manager Engineering Services are currently Council?s only designated senior staff positions.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the information concerning the provisions of the employment contracts for the General Manager and Assistant General Manager Engineering Services be received.

?

 

OPTIONS:

 

There are no options.? The report is for information.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Section 339 of the Local Government Act requires that the General Manager must, at least once annually, report to the council on the contractual conditions of senior staff (ie by 30 June).

 

There is no other information as to what actually has to be reported but the Division of Local Government in its Better Practice Review Program indicates that better practice is for the report to contain:

 

????? A list of senior staff

????? The specific term of each contract and when it was entered into

????? The value of the remuneration package and any variations that have been made in the past year or which are proposed for the ensuing year

????? The timing and outcome of any performance assessments that were undertaken

????? A copy of any performance agreement entered into for the current year and/or proposed for the ensuing year, and

????? Details of any other ?material? matters.? These could include any requirement for the General Manager or other senior staff member to advise if she/he is seeking an extension of the current contract or reappointment for a further term and similarly, any requirement for the Council to advise the General Manager/senior staff member of any intention not to renew their appointment and/or readvertise the position.

 

The following information is provided in response to these ?dot? points.

 

Senior Staff

 

Mr Michael Coulter, General Manager

Mr Paul Gallagher, Assistant General Manager Engineering Services

 

Contract Term and Date Entered Into

 

General Manager ? contract commenced 1 April 2011 for a 5 year term

 

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services ? contract commenced 10 January 2011 for a 5 year term

 

Value of the Remuneration Package and any variations made in the past year

 

General Manager - $209,325.74

 

The salary component of the package was increased by the regulated increase for the SES of 2.5% on 1 April 2013.

 

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services - $172,515.78

 

The salary component of the package was increased by the regulated increase for the SES of 2.5% on 10 January 2013.

 

The Timing and Outcome of any Performance Assessments

 

General Manager ? performance assessments undertaken on 14 November 2012 and 24 April 2013 ? outcome ?satisfactory?.

 

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services? ? performance assessment undertaken on 18 January 2013 ? outcome ?satisfactory?.

 

Copy of Performance Agreements

 

The performance agreements are largely standard templates with a large number of management objectives and performance measures.? Of most significance are the priorities for the ensuing year.?

 

The agreed priorities for the General Manager are:

 

?? Assist Council in responding to the reports by the Independent Local Government Review Panel

?? Pending the replacement of the Assistant General Manager position, ensure the Operational Plan/Delivery Program and Long Term Financial Plan are completed by 30 June

?? Ensure work proceeds on the proposed special rate variation application

?? Oversee any issues with the Bowraville Off River Water Storage

?? Initiate and continue with proposals to reduce Council?s stock of depreciating assets (as per Delivery Program)

?? Drive economies in operational expenditure through reduced service levels and process review

 

The agreed priorities for the Assistant General Manager Engineering Services are:

 

???? Minimise revotes

???? Continue the development and review of asset management plans

???? Review Council?s engineering policies and delegations to staff

???? Reporting on the quarterly budget review and the progress of the capital works program

???? Attending to funding requests and work arising out of Natural Disasters

???? Drive economies in operational expenditure through reduced service levels and process review

 

Other Material Matters

Nil

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been on consultation in preparing this report.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

There are no social implications.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

There are no particular risks.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There is no budgetary impact.? The remuneration packages are listed in the report.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ?


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.3???? SF851????????????? 270613??????? Road & Bridge Asset Benchmarking Survey

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

Summary:

 

The Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia (IPWEA) (NSW Division) in association with the NSW Local Government Association has recently published a very useful fourth benchmarking survey to provide a snapshot of the State?s local roads and bridges at the end of the 2011/12 financial year.

 

Overall 30% of timber bridges were rated as being in poor condition; 49% as fair or satisfactory condition; and 21% as being in good condition.? The number of timber bridges rated as being in poor condition was highest on the Mid North Coast.

 

In relation to roads the report found an estimated funding gap for all 152 NSW councils at $567m per annum based on the survey data.? Funding at this level will require a 66% increase on 2011/12 road expenditures if asset management principles are not applied to managing the gap.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the information concerning the road and bridge asset benchmarking survey 2012 be received.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

There are no options.? The report is for information.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia (IPWEA) (NSW Division) in association with the NSW Local Government Association has recently published a very useful fourth benchmarking survey to provide a snapshot of the State?s local roads and bridges at the end of the 2011/12 financial year.

 

There are two separate reports, one dealing with timber bridges and the other with roads.? The General Manager has a hard copy of the two reports.? They can also be found on-line at www.roadsdirectorate.org.au.

 

As a comparison reference for this Council, the State wide survey found that 30% (645) of 2,150 timber bridges in the 89 councils that responded to be in poor condition.? Timber bridge renewal expenditure for 2011-12 was reported by 89 responding Councils at $5.7m for regional road bridges and $12.4m for local road bridges.? If this level of expenditure can be maintained, it would take the 89 reporting councils on average 13 years to renew all timber bridges currently in poor condition.? This does not allow for the decline in condition of timber bridges currently in fair condition due to ageing and other such factors such as overloading, damage from flooding and vehicle impact, poor maintenance practices and lack of maintenance in this period.

 

Overall 30% of timber bridges were rated as being in poor condition; 49% as fair or satisfactory condition; and 21% as being in good condition.? The number of timber bridges rated as being in poor condition was highest on the Mid North Coast.

 

The report notes that timber bridges are critical components of local transportation infrastructure with a catastrophic mode of failure.? It is essential that a plan be developed to address the issue of timber bridges in poor condition.

 

The report also notes that it is of critical importance that councils:

 

????? Identify their timber bridge infrastructure assets and the current condition of such assets,

????? Implement life cycle asset management plans

?? Provide adequate funding to maintain and renew timber bridges to sustain local transport infrastructure

 

In relation to roads the report found an estimated funding gap for all 152 NSW councils at $567m per annum based on the survey data.? Funding at this level will require a 66% increase on 2011/12 road expenditures if asset management principles are not applied to managing the gap.

 

Asset management principles to be applied to managing the funding gap include:

 

?? Ensuring that all councils have adequate accurate knowledge on the road assets and how these assets are performing

?? Ensuring that sealed roads are resurfaced/resealed at the optimum time to maintain waterproofing of pavements.? This will require an increase in funding from $178m in 2011/12 to $348m per annum for all councils (a 96% increase)

?? Consulting with and select appropriate levels of service and costs to meet community needs and available resources

?? Ensure that unsealed roads are resheeted at the optimum time to meet agreed service levels within available resources.? This will require an increase in funding from $53m in 2011/12 to $155m for all councils if service levels reported in the survey are to be maintained (a 194% increase).

?? Making efficiencies in operations, maintenance, resurfacing and pavement renewal aimed at reducing life cycle costs

?? Improving maintenance practices and funding if necessary to extend pavement life and defer projected renewal

?? Ensuring adequate risk management practices are in place to identify risks and implement appropriate risk treatment actions]

?? Rationalising (dispose) of unnecessary infrastructure assets

?? Reducing service levels in consultation with the community

?? Identifying future renewal needs and expenditure required to meet agreed service levels and document in an asset management plan

?? Increasing funding, and

?? Combinations of all actions above.

 

Of interest was that the survey data on road and bridge renewal/replacement costs and useful life estimates allowed a comparison to be made of the consumption of road and bridge assets determined from the technical data to the listed depreciation expense.

 

Whilst the figures should be the same, there have been significant differences in asset consumption of roads and bridges determined from technical estimates and that reported by depreciation in council?s financial reports.

 

Councils? reported depreciation expense is 77% of the technical assessment of asset consumption.? This is reported as a great improvement from the 53% difference in 2007/2009 and 65% in 2009/2010, showing a considerable improvement in technical and financial reporting of infrastructure consumption.

 

It is noted that the improvement in reporting asset consumption is largely due to NSW councils moving to the fair value basis for asset valuations from the deemed cost basis adopted when the assets were recognised in the mid 1990?s.

 

For the record Nambucca Shire Council has reported a depreciation expense for road and bridges which is 75% of the technical assessment of asset consumption.

 

Reasons for the variation in the two figures may include:

 

?? Some councils may be valuing assets at ?greenfield? (cost to acquire the asset in an undeveloped location) values rather than ?brownfield? (cost to replace the asset?s service potential in existing location) values,

?? The estimated asset useful lives used by councils for financial reporting may be based on industry standards, not actual performance and field operating conditions of the assets and therefore understate depreciation expense.

?? The estimated asset lives assessed by the asset managers may be based on technical measures, not community priorities or available resources and therefore overstate the life cycle renewal cost.

 

The two measures of asset consumption, depreciation expense and life cycle renewal cost should be the same.? Asset managers and finance managers should be providing the same information on asset consumption.

 

The report concluded that across NSW the current level of service with the current level of expenditure is not sustainable.

 

Councils may be facing a large and increasing risk exposure at present and in the future.? These risks include:

 

????? The condition of roads and bridges infrastructure will decline,

????? Potential increase in personal injury and legal claims,

?? Road life cycle expenditure ?savings? will be passed onto road users through higher transportation operating costs,

?? Funding will not be available to renew ageing road and bridge assets,

?? Councils will not be able to provide services needed by communities in the medium-long term.

 

In short, renewal expenditures are being transferred to the next generation.

 

Across all councils, asset consumption as reported by depreciation expense is understating the assessment of asset consumption by local road asset managers by almost 23%, down from 50% in 2007/2008.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with Council?s Manager Assets.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

There are social implications arising out of a failing road and bridge network.

 

Economic

 

There are economic implications arising out of a failing road and bridge network.

 

Risk

 

As indicated in the report, there are legal and other risks arising out of personal injury and damage to vehicles arising out of a failing road and bridge network.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The report is for information.? It is apparent that the challenges faced by this Council are widespread.? This was recently confirmed by the NSW Treasury Corporation assessment of each Council.? For the 2011/2012 financial year this Council recorded in its income statement a net operating result before capital grants and contributions of negative $2.67m.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There is no impact on service levels or staff resources.

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.4???? SF42??????????????? 270613??????? Local Government Infrastructure Audit - June 2013

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

Summary:

 

The total infrastructure backlog for all NSW councils has been estimated to be $7.4 billion at 30 June 2012, of which $4.5 billion relates to roads and related assets and $1 billion relates to buildings.?? The backlog in the northern coastal areas of NSW equates to 29% of the State total.? To fund the backlog on the Mid North Coast would require annual, cumulative rate increases of 15% per annum for 10 years.? And that is just to fund the backlog and not the increased maintenance funding which would be required to sustain a satisfactory level of service and not fall back into having a backlog.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the information concerning the Local Government Infrastructure Audit June 2013 be received.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

The report is for information.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Division of Local Government (DLG) has released a council-by-council audit of the local government infrastructure backlog.? The audit can be found on the Division?s website www.dlg.nsw.gov.au.

 

The audit had four key objectives:

 

????????????? Provide information on the infrastructure backlog in NSW

????????????? Assess the reliability of information provided by councils to determine the backlog

????????????? Identify trends in infrastructure needs by area and asset type

????????????? Identify current infrastructure risk exposure.

 

Given the recent report by NSW Treasury Corp on the financial sustainability of NSW Councils, the infrastructure audit is an important piece of supplementary work to corroborate estimates of the backlog and provide information to government on the need for action, both by geographical area and also by asset type.

 

The key findings of the audit are:

 

?????????? The total infrastructure backlog for all NSW councils was estimated to be $7.4 billion at 30 June 2012, of which $4.5 billion relates to roads and related assets and $1 billion relates to buildings

????????????? The backlog in the northern coastal areas of NSW equates to 29% of the State total

????????????? The infrastructure backlog is over $1,000 per head of the NSW population

?????????? Between 2004/2005 and 2011/2012, as a proportion of the written down value of councils? total assets, the backlog fell from over 18% to approximately 10%

?????????? The reduction is primarily due to the introduction of Integrated Planning and Reporting and fair value

?????????? When compared to the councils? estimated required annual maintenance amounts, the majority of councils in NSW are underspending in the area of asset management.? Projections indicate a continuation of this trend

?????????? Infrastructure backlog data is not audited and it does not provide information about how councils propose to bring assets to a satisfactory standard

?????????? Councils appear to have better infrastructure practices and processes in place for the asset classes of roads and related assets, water supply, sewer networks and stormwater drainage

?????????? Indications are that better data is being gathered and used by NSW councils to manage their assets since the introduction of IP&R

?????????? While asset data is being improved 37% of councils still need to implement or improve their infrastructure management practices and procedures

?????????? Many councils still need to determine levels of service in consultation with their communities for all asset classes

?????????? Generally speaking, councils with the largest (backlog to) bring to satisfactory standard per capita, have the weakest financial position with a negative outlook as well as the poorest infrastructure management assessment

?????????? How councils manage the assets that are considered to be in a poor or unserviceable condition is important to the community

?????????? The financial position impacts significantly on a council?s ability to deliver infrastructure

?????????? There are a number of funding and financing strategies that may help councils to reduce their backlog and/or to prevent the backlog increasing such as:

o? Borrowings (especially for councils with low or no debt)

o? Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme (subsidised interest rates)

o? Special rate variations

o? Grants from other levels of government

????????????? Further work is required in relation to strategic and operational asset risk management

 

The report comments that, ?while the notion of backlog has proven persistent in describing growing deficiencies in the provision of infrastructure in the past, a significant shift in thinking is required to move from this highly subjective way of reporting on ?the state of the infrastructure in NSW Local Government?, towards honest community conversations about balancing real needs with available resources in each local government area.? The following provides recommendations based on the four areas identified as the most important in achieving sustainable infrastructure service levels:?

 

Skilled People:

 

1.?????? Ongoing asset management capacity building programs be developed that assist councils in meeting asset management arrangements

 

2.?????? Awareness of the importance of sustainable asset management be raised amongst Elected Representatives and Senior Management within the sector

 

3.?????? Collaboration within the sector continues to develop specialised infrastructure management training programs for Local Government Practitioners

 

4.?????? Innovative solutions be investigated to address the skills shortage within the field and promote sector wide collaboration

 

Appropriate Processes:

 

1.?????? Integrated Planning & Reporting Guidelines and Manual strengthen the focus on asset management practices, in order to assist councils in implementing appropriate systems and processes

 

2.?????? Targeted capacity building programs to be developed with a specific focus on improving council capacity in the fields of

 

a.??????????? Community service level negotiations

b.??????????? Risk management and infrastructure vulnerability assessments and

c.??????????? Identification of critical infrastructure

 

Reliable Data:

 

1.?????? Clearly defined and specific asset management measurement parameters (for example: satisfactory standard, actual condition, renewal, upgrade etc), be developed with the sector for inclusion within each council?s delivery program and annual reporting requirements

 

2.?????? A summary of proposed asset management improvements to be included in council?s delivery programs.? Summary to include expenditure on maintenance, renewals, new or upgraded assets, an assessment of the condition of assets, critical assets and information in relation to levels of service provided

 

3.?????? Councils to report on their progress on achieving what was set out in the delivery program each year.? The report should identify the condition levels of assets across all asset categories and report on actions to be taken with regard to assets reported as being in a poor or very poor condition (as defined in the Integrated Planning & Reporting Guidelines)

 

4.?????? Aspects of asset management to be subjected to an audit.? Audit parameters to be developed to ensure a level of assurance that asset management information is reliable.

 

5.?????? Delete Special Schedule 7 from the financial reports in 2014. (Presumably to be replaced with an audited report or schedule but this is not detailed)

 

Adequate Resources:

 

1.???????? Councils consider using debt to help address backlog issues where they have the capacity

 

2.?????? Councils are encouraged to apply for Local Government Infrastructure Renewal Scheme funding for backlog infrastructure projects

 

3.?????? Councils should be encouraged to consider applying for a special rate variation to rates for backlog purposes

 

4.?????? Support to be provided to those councils that have weak financial outlooks to obtain grant funding from other levels of government to address asset management requirements.

 

5.?????? Examine the distribution of Financial Assistance Grants to see if a greater share can be provided to councils with less capacity, to help manage infrastructure

 

6.?????? Councils are made aware of the risks involved in underfunding annual maintenance and are encouraged to include, in each operational plan, the actual required maintenance.

 

The recommendations are agreed with and hopefully will give the State Government cause to reflect on ?red tape? requirements as they have dissuaded many needy councils from applying for special rate variations.

 

It is important to recognise that asset management is all about managing risk and is not a compliance exercise.? The risks to be managed can either be strategic or operational in nature.? The greatest strategic risk is whether a council is sustainable and therefore able to provide the services desired by the community within the council?s financial capacity.? In order to achieve this, good decisions need to be based on accurate and realistic asset management information.

 

According to the report on a per capita basis, the Far West has the biggest backlog, at about $4,700 per capita, followed by Orana ($3,730), Mid North Coast ($2,890), Murray ($2,850) and Northern Rivers ($2,820).

 

On average over the past four years, it was reported that councils have funded only 74% of the total estimated required annual maintenance.? The cost of maintenance of an asset generally increases exponentially when planned and cyclic maintenance is not carried out.? Inadequate maintenance may also result in a shortened useful life of the asset and the need for earlier than planned renewal.

 

In terms of financing the infrastructure backlog the report contains some interesting statistics.? In 2011/12 total rating income for all NSW councils was $6.784 billion, while the reported backlog was $7.359 billion.? Councils would have needed to increase rates by around 110% above the rate peg in that year simply to fund that backlog.? Even if councils sought to fund the current backlog over a ten year period, it would require an average annual cumulative special rate variation increase of approximately 7%.

 

On a regional basis, the rate rises required in many areas of the State would need to be considerably greater.? For example, in the Far West region an annual special rate variation of around 17% would be required, while the Mid North Coast would require an annual increase of around 15% each year.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with the Assistant General Manager ? Engineering Services

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

To the extent that the report is discussing service levels across Council?s functions there are potential implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

Similarly as the report is discussing service levels across Council?s functions there are potential implications for the community and recreational services which Council provides.

 

Economic

 

Changing service levels will also have economic implications.

 

Risk

 

The report essentially concerns the management of risk.? As indicated in the report, perhaps the biggest strategic risk is whether a council is sustainable and therefore able to provide the services desired by the community within the council?s financial capacity.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The report is for information.? There is no budgetary impact.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

As the report is for information it has no impact on service levels or resourcing.? It is interesting that the report identifies the importance of service levels and that this standard report template acknowledges its importance.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.5???? PRF54????????????? 270613??????? Gumma (Boulton's Crossing) Reserve - Stakeholder Meeting and Acknowledgement of Existing Use Rights

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Michael Coulter, General Manager ????????

 

Summary:

 

The report concerns discussions at a stakeholder?s meeting on 6 June 2013; the closure of a local road which traverses the Reserve and acknowledging the Reserves existing use rights as a camping ground.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1.?????? That Council note the outcome of the stakeholder meeting held on 6 June 2013.

 

2.?????? That Council resolve to close the section of public road traversing the Gumma (Boulton?s ????????? Crossing) Reserve and attach Council?s seal to any documents as required.

 

3.?????? That Council acknowledge that the Gumma (Boulton?s Crossing) Reserve has existing use ????????? rights as a camping ground.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

The options for the Gumma (Boulton?s Crossing) Reserve have been previously listed as:

 

????? Close the reserve

????? Close the reserve to camping

????? Lease the reserve to the NPWS on behalf of the Gaagal Wanggaan Board

????? Appoint the Gaagal Wanggaan Board as the Trust Manager

????? Council continue to operate the reserve

 

DISCUSSION:

 

A stakeholders meeting of the Gumma (Boulton?s Crossing) Reserve was held on 6 June 2013.? In attendance were:

 

Cr Anne Smyth

Bob Birse (Crown Lands - Taree)

Cam Cocchini (Crown Lands ? Taree)

Glenn Storrie (National Parks & Wildlife Service ? Coffs Harbour)

Raylene Ballangarry ? Chair of Gaagal Wanggaan (South Beach) Board of Management

Robin Bryant ? Gaagal Wanggaan (South Beach) Board of Management

Sally Cavanagh ? Gaagal Wanggaan (South Beach) Board of Management

Ken Robinson ? Gumma resident

Michael Coulter ? General Manager

 

Whilst there was no further developments to previous discussions concerning the management arrangements for the Reserve there was useful discussion as to the preferred direction which Council should take in resolving the various issues with approvals, effluent disposal and on-going management.

 

On-going Management

 

With Council remaining as Trust Manager, there was discussion about a number of alternative management arrangements.

 

Firstly, the Crown Lands staff advised of their experiences with contract fee collection and maintenance whereby the contractor is paid a retainer and then a % of the fees collected.

 

There was also discussion about the possibility of an agreement with the Gaagal Wanggaan Board for both the collection of fees and the provision of maintenance services.? This would enable the employment of Aboriginal people in managing culturally important land.

 

A lease agreement with the Gaagal Wanggaan Board may be problematic as they are not incorporated and would likely have to be through the two Local Aboriginal Land Councils as they are incorporated.

 

Glenn Storrie suggested there could be a Section 355 Committee which met quarterly to oversee the development and use of the Reserve as a means of managing any agreement with the Gaagal Wanggaan Board for the provision of services such as fee collection and general maintenance.

 

Local Road

 

In developing a survey plan of the Reserve to support future Section 68 applications, it has been discovered that most of the area used for camping, including the amenities building, lies within a local road reservation.? A plan showing the road is attached.? There was discussion as to whether or not the road should be closed.? The consensus was that the road should be closed, although it was noted that this would likely take many months.

 

Future Direction

 

There was consensus that Council should seek to obtain the necessary Section 68 approval to allow the camping ground to operate on an on-going basis.? Whether or not the camping ground will continue is likely to depend on whether or not the Director-General of Planning and Infrastructure agrees to waive a number of regulatory requirements.? The approval to be sought would be to operate the camping ground in a similar rustic style to that which has occurred in the past.? This will reduce the potential for conflict with the offer from local privately owned caravan parks.

 

Under section 82(1) of the Local Government Act, an applicant for an approval to operate a caravan park or camping ground may lodge with their application an objection that compliance with any provision of the regulations or policy is unreasonable or unnecessary in the particular circumstances of the case.? Council would need to obtain the concurrence of the Director General of the Department of Planning and Infrastructure to waive any standards in the regulations.

 

There are good environmental and social reasons for seeking to waive or reduce some of the standards.? These relate to limiting the volume of effluent and also maintaining the rustic amenity of the place.

 

Existing Use Rights

 

It is apparent that the Boulton?s Crossing (Gumma) Reserve has been used by mainly Gumma residents for decades.

 

An extract from the Gumma Chronicles (History of Gumma), page 20 being an account of events from Mrs Richards states the following:

 

?Bob Ainsworth was on top of the hill across the road from Mr Gow.? He was a quiet sort of a bloke.? He was a trustee on the Gumma Crossing Reserve the same as I was in those days.? When I got on as a trustee of the reserve ? it was in the early fifties ? I approached Mr Jim Brown, the local Member of Parliament, and we got a 100 pound grant and we cleared more ground there and put in a weather shed and a freshwater tank.?

 

As planning control commenced in 1967 and the Gumma (Boulton?s Crossing) Reserve has been in continuous operation as a camping ground since before that date it is recommended that Council formally acknowledge its existing use rights.? This is a necessary pre-requisite for obtaining a Section 68 approval.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with stakeholders

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The issues with the environment have been previously reported on and are discussed in the report.

 

Social

 

The social issues have been previously reported.

 

Economic

 

The economic issues have been previously reported on.? It would be useful to try and quantify the economic benefit of the Reserve to the Nambucca Valley, particularly in terms of the visitation and expenditure by tourists.

 

Risk

 

The risks have been previously reported on.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

At this stage there are no budgetary impacts.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

At this stage there is no impact on working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There will be work required in closing the road and also preparing a Section 68 application.

 

Attachments:

1View

14745/2013 - Gumma Reserve PDF

0 Pages

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 June 2013

Gumma (Boulton's Crossing) Reserve - Stakeholder Meeting and Acknowledgement of Existing Use Rights

 


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.6???? SF1851??????????? 270613??????? Review of Organisation Structure - Outdoor Operations

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Joanne Hudson, Manager Human Resources ????????

 

Summary:

 

A number of changes to the organisation structure are proposed in this report:

 

a)??? Change one Grader Operator position to Roller Operator

b)??? Delete one Labourer position

c)??? Change Labourer position in Concrete Crew to Construction Carpenter

d)??? Change Apprentice Mechanic to Mechanic

e)??? Change Trainee Water Operator to Water Attendant

 

As a number of positions within the structure are currently vacant, the changes will not result in termination of employment for any of the affected staff.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council make the following changes to its organisation structure:

 

a)??? Change one Grader Operator position to Roller Operator

b)??? Delete one Labourer position

c)??? Change Labourer position in Concrete Crew to Construction Carpenter

d)??? Change Apprentice Mechanic to Mechanic

e)??? Change Trainee Water Operator to Water Attendant

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council can determine its organisation structure as it sees fit.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

A number of changes to the organisation structure are proposed in this report:

 

Change one Grader Operator position to Roller Operator and delete one Labourer (Grader Chaser) position

 

An analysis of the plant utilisation rates for the grader over a number of years indicates that only two grader crews are necessary and that it would be more beneficial for Council to replace one of the graders with a roller plus water cart.

 

Affected staff (three Grader Operators and three Labourers known as ?Grader Chasers?) were originally consulted with back in June 2011 when the plant utilisation rates were identified as being unacceptably low. Whilst it was decided to retain the graders at that point, the affected staff were advised that grading operations/utilisation rates would remain under scrutiny.

 

In preparing the 2013/14 budget, it was determined that the Caterpillar 12H grader be shutdown effective 1 July 2013. The implications for the organisation structure are that one Grader Operator position be replaced with a Roller Operator and that one Labourer position be deleted. Fortunately, there will be no loss of jobs as one Grader Operator will be redeployed as a Roller Operator and one Labourer will be redeployed to the Bitumen crew where there is an existing vacancy.

 


Change Labourer position in Concrete Crew to Construction Carpenter

 

The position of Labourer in the Concrete Crew is currently vacant and it is proposed to replace that position with a Construction Carpenter, who will have skills in concreting. The additional expenditure in terms of wages is estimated to be $1400 per annum.

 

Change Apprentice Mechanic to Mechanic

 

The position of Apprentice Mechanic is currently vacant and it is proposed to replace that position with a trade-qualified Mechanic, the main reason being that it is not always possible to provide adequate supervision. The additional salary costs will be offset by the savings in training, travel and accommodation costs associated with the apprenticeship and the requirement to attend TAFE in Tamworth for one week in every four.

 

Change Trainee Water Operator to Water Attendant

 

The position of Trainee Water Operator is currently vacant and it is proposed to replace that position with an additional Water Attendant.

 

By early next year, Council?s Water Operator will be fully utilised operating the dam and headworks infrastructure and will not be available to carry out general duties with the Water Crew as he does now. Council is also taking delivery of a second truck for the Water Crew and it is considered two staff should be allocated to each truck to ensure work is carried out in a more efficient manner.

 

The additional salary costs will be offset by the savings in training costs associated with the traineeship and the requirement to attend classroom based training in Kempsey one day per week. Consideration will be given to replacing the next vacancy in the Water Crew with a Trainee.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services

Manager Civil Works

Manager Water and Sewerage

Affected employees

Consultative Committee to meet before the Council meeting and its recommendation will come to Council as a late report

United Services Union

 

 

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

 

The current budget takes into account the deletion of one (vacant) Labourer position.

 

The additional salary cost associated with replacing the Labourer in the Concrete Crew with a Construction Carpenter is estimated to be $1400 per annum.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

Staffing implications associated with standing down the Caterpillar 12H grader are discussed in the report.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.7???? PV4/2013???????? 270613??????? Recruitment of Assistant General Managers

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Joanne Hudson, Manager Human Resources ????????

 

Summary:

 

Council has engaged Blackadder Associates to provide recruitment services for the vacant positions of Assistant General Manager Corporate Services and Assistant General Manager Development, Environment and Community Services.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council note the engagement of Blackadder Associates to provide recruitment services for the vacant positions of Assistant General Manager Corporate Services and Assistant General Manager Development, Environment and Community Services.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

The report is for information only.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Council has engaged Blackadder Associates to provide recruitment services for the Assistant General Manager Corporate Services and Assistant General Manager Development, Environment and Community Services.

 

Whilst initially it was not proposed to use an external recruitment service, with the decision to appoint two AGM?s and given the critical importance of these two positions as well as the fact that the fee for conducting the recruitment was only marginally more than for a single recruitment, it was considered prudent to engage an external consultant experienced in recruiting local government staff at the most senior level. An external recruitment service also provides more probity in dealing with internal applicants.

 

Consequently, proposals and quotes were sought from and provided by Local Government Management Solutions, who conducted the organisation review in 2011 and did facilitate the General Manager?s annual performance review, and Blackadder Associates.


The fee quoted by Blackadder Associates was only marginally higher than Local Government Management Solutions and it was determined by the General Manager and Manager Human Resources to engage Blackadder Associates on the basis that:

 

? Blackadder has no previous history with Council and is therefore more likely to bring a fresh perspective uninhibited by the legacy of the 2011 organisation review; and

 

? it provides an opportunity to benchmark service quality between the two consultancies.

 

A draft timetable prepared by Mr Blackadder proposes interviews to be held on 16-17 August 2013 with the selection panel comprising the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, General Manager, Manager Human Resources and Mr Blackadder.

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Mayor

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

 

The recruitment costs are within the budget allocation.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

General Manager's Report

ITEM 9.8???? SF669????????????? 270613??????? Planning Reforms White Paper Discussion

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Grant Nelson, Strategic Planner ????????

 

Summary:

 

The purpose of this report is to advise Council that the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure is presently exhibiting the planning white paper and submissions are due on the 28th June 2013. The report provides a basic summary of the key initiatives of the new system.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council provide a submission to the Planning White paper highlighting the key points of concern identified in the report.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1.?? Council may remove or contribute to the issues to be included in Councils submission.

 

2.?? Councillors may also make individual submissions to the planning reforms via the NSW Planning and Infrastructure website.

 

http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/

 

 

DISCUSSION:

The NSW planning system has been widely criticised for being outdated, inefficient, complicated and failing to deliver affordable housing outcomes. The NSW Government has indicated a strong reform agenda and the release of the Green Paper confirmed their intentions to adopt a new planning system. The White Paper detailing the scope of the proposed changes to the planning system is on exhibition until June 28.?

 

Reforms:

Five fundamental reforms to the NSW planning system that are proposed by the White Paper summarised below:

1)??? Changes to the planning culture

The White Paper recognises that a change in planning culture will be necessary to implement the new planning system. This will include a restructure and other changes to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure and a greater emphasis on reporting for strategic planning at all levels.

2)??? Community participation

The White Paper proposes increased community participation at the start of the planning process and participation on an ongoing basis. Councils will be required to adopt a ?Community Participation Charter? setting out the community participation methods for plan making and development assessment processes. The method of community participation will vary depending on the decision being made. A high level of community participation will be appropriate in the development of Subregional Delivery Plans, whereas a low level of participation would be expected for development that complies with ?the rules already established upfront from community involvement.?

It is also envisaged that a move towards ePlanning will allow for improvements in access and convenience for community participation.

3)??? Strategic planning

There will be a shift to evidence based, upfront, strategic planning as the basis of the planning system.

A hierarchy of plans and policies will exist, comprising NSW Planning Policies, Regional Growth Plans,? Subregional Delivery Plans and Local Plans. The legislation will require that each type of strategic plan gives effect to the policies and principles in the strategic plans higher in the hierarchy and that land use and infrastructure are integrated.

In addition, there will be reductions and refinements in referrals, concurrences and other planning related approvals. In many instances these will be addressed at the strategic planning stage. A ?one stop shop? within the Department of Planning and Infrastructure will also be established for those applications that will continue to require referrals, concurrences or other planning related approvals.

4)??? Development assessment

The planning system will move to a ?performance based system? making greater use of code complying development. Eighty per cent of all developments, including a range of residential, commercial, retail and industrial, are proposed to be complying or code assessment within the next five years.

Development will be streamed into five ?tracks? being exempt development, complying or code assessment development (which complies with standards in strategic plans), merit assessment development (which does not comply with standards in strategic plans) or prohibited development.

Consent authorities will be required to meet faster approval timelines. Straightforward complying development approvals will need to be granted within 10 days, and complying development with minor variations, and code assessment approvals within 25 days. There will be restrictions on the ability of consent authorities to ?stop the clock?. Merit assessment development will undergo more rigorous assessment.

Independent expert decision making will be promoted through the Planning Assessment Commission, Regional Planning Panels and Independent Hearing and Assessment Panels.

Applicant and merit objector appeal rights will remain unchanged, however, it is proposed that a new fast track appeal process in the Land and Environment Court be established for appeals regarding single residential dwellings and dual occupancies. In this track, Commissioners will act as experts and will be able to determine appeals on site or at Court promptly.

5) ???Infrastructure

The planning and delivery of infrastructure supporting development will take place in conjunction with planning and delivery for housing and employment. This will be achieved through 10 year local infrastructure plans prepared by local councils and ?growth infrastructure plans? that will be informed by Subregional Delivery Plans.

Three kinds of infrastructure contributions will exist under the new system ? local infrastructure contributions, regional infrastructure contributions and regional growth funds. Local infrastructure contributions will no longer be capped, to enable local councils to deliver infrastructure. However, local infrastructure contributions can only be levied for essential infrastructure such as local roads, parks, drainage and essential community facilities.

Planning agreements will not be abolished, but it is expected that they will generally only be used for State significant development or in exceptional circumstances, as most contributions will be provided through the ?standard? system. Planning agreements will only be allowed to provide for the provision of infrastructure specified in a local infrastructure plan or growth infrastructure plan, a Ministerial planning order, a strategic plan if for affordable housing, or if it is for the conservation or enhancement of the natural environment.

Building regulation and certification

Finally, the White Paper proposes changes to building regulation and certification. The aim of these changes is to provide a ?more robust, consistent and transparent? system for regulation and certification of building.

Response to the reforms

 

Over the last 10-15 years there have been a number of planning reforms to the planning system. Each time the state government implements change expecting to improve performance, minimise complication and achieve sustainable results.

 

Local government is at the forefront of the changes and implementation, and an individual Councils ability to implement the new system will be reliant on Councils being appropriately resourced, and guided via effective communication between the different tiers of government.

 

The key points of concern to be focused on in the submission are the following:

 

-? successful implementation of amendments to the legislation would only be achieved through the provision long term funding commitments from the NSW Government;

 

-? Council has already been through a process of determining Agreed Growth Areas, including identified residential and employment land release strategies as well as the preparation of a shirewide structure plan. Is the State Government proposing to revisit these through rounds of community consultation? Although there is merit in consultation during the development of strategic policy it is unclear what will be addressed and the merit in revisiting many of Councils strategic planning documents is questioned.

 

-? The tiered planning structure including the NSW Planning Policies, Regional Growth Plans, Subregional Delivery Plans and Local Plans will narrow or funnel the level of community input which will now largely be limited to strategic planning processes. Essentially local preferences may be limited within pre-determined legislation;

 

-? The previous reforms which implemented the Standard Instrument LEP did not give adequate consideration to the issues that face regional and rural communities and despite representations from many regional Councils, perceived issues were not changed. Only now is Council proceeding with amendments to rectify anomalies within rural areas. The reforms need to give greater consideration to the issues that face regional and rural communities.

 

-? The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 included clear objects relating to Ecologically Sustainable Development. These objects are absent from the proposed legislation. A balanced planning system is important in achieving sustainable outcomes and such provisions should be considered within the provisions of the legislation. Should the Act fail to include these objects then they should be provided for in the relevant NSW Planning Policy.

 

-? The classification of the existing zoning system reduces the number of zones to 12.? This needs further clarification to determine the implications on individual Councils, particularly regional areas that often have a greater diversity of land use needs.

 

-? E-planning is considered a positive feature of the reforms but needs to be supported by funding and resources to assist implementation.

 

-? If local government is to be the body responsible for community engagement what resources will be provided to assist in this process.

 

-???? There is support for a ?one stop shop? agency referral body but it is not clear how this will function;

 

-???? Certification of building manual to be provided with all approvals will provide clear instruction for property owners and is generally supported.

 

-???? In regards to evaluation and reporting there are a number of issues

 

The proposed the stop the clock provisions only incorporate a 21 day stop time, after this the clock restarts regardless of information being provided. In terms of evaluation this will provide a skewed indication of a Councils performance. The stop the clock provisions should not include an automatic restart.

 

Additional resources will be required to monitor the landuse and development activity as proposed in the white paper.

 

There is no indication on how environmental and social performance is to be monitored in the proposed system.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Senior Planner

Planning Assistant

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

Comments regarding the proposed legislation are provided within the body of this report.

 

Social

 

Comments regarding the proposed legislation are provided within the body of this report.

 

Economic

 

Comments regarding the proposed legislation are provided within the body of this report.

 

Risk

 

NIl

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The proposed legislation will undoubtedly be reliant on local government resources for implementation. Appropriate funding and assistance will need to be provided to assist local government

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

NIL

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

The proposed legislation will undoubtedly be reliant on local government resources for implementation. Appropriate funding and assistance will need to be provided to assist local government

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ?


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 10.1?? SF36??????????????? 270613??????? Code of Conduct Review Panel

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Peter Wilson, Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services ????????

 

Summary:

 

To advise Council of the outcome of an Expression of Interest (EOI) administered by Port Macquarie ?Hastings Council (EOI-12-05) on behalf of the Mid North Coast Region of Councils (MIDROC) to establish a panel of suitably qualified independent persons to serve as Conduct Reviewers of Local Government Code of Conduct matters for Nambucca Shire Council.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council appoint the following individuals to serve as members of Council?s Conduct Review Panel for the period 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2017:

 

Alexander Irving Solicitor

Alexander Irving (Principal)

Chris Gallagher Consulting

Christopher Gallagher (Sole Trader)

Harris Wheeler Lawyers

Matthew Smith (Managing Partner)

Tony Cardillo (Partner)

Lisa Gowing (Special Counsel)

Katrina Reye (Partner)

Micah Jenkins (Partner)

Internal Audit Bureau of NSW

 

Shane Boyd (Director)

Helen Colbey (Senior Business Consultant)

Alan Delany (Senior Business Consultant)

Michelle Wakka (Senior Consultant)

Rhonda Stien (Senior Business Consultant)

Michael Symons (Senior Business Consultant)

Kate Molloy (Senior Consultant)

Peter Harvey (Senior Business Consultant)

Charles Corban (Senior Business Consultant)

Timothy Bye (Senior Consultant)

SINC Solutions

Kathleen Roach (Managing Director)

Local? Consulting

Emma Broomfield (Director)

McCullough Robertson Lawyers

 

Cameron Dean (Partner)

Jeremy Kennedy (Partner)

O?Connell Workplace Relations

Graham Evans (Managing Partner)

Mike Colreavy Consulting

Michael Colreavy (General Manager)

Train Reaction Pty Ltd

Kathy Thane (Director)

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council must by resolution appoint a panel of conduct reviewers. Therefore, Council can either adopt the recommendation or reject the recommendation, in which case Council would be required to re-call expressions of interest for this service.

 


CONSULTATION:

 

Sections 440 and 440AA of the NSW Local Government Act 1993 require every council to adopt a code of conduct and procedures for the administration of the code of conduct that incorporate the provisions of the Model Code and Model Procedure respectively.

 

Pursuant to Part 3 (Administrative Framework) of the Procedures for the Administration of the Model Code of Conduct, Council must by resolution establish a panel of conduct reviewers. A panel of conduct reviewers is to be established after a public expression of interest process and shall have a term of up to four (4) years.

 

On behalf of the Mid-North Coast Regional Organisation of councils (MIDROC), Port Macquarie-Hastings Council advertised an Expression of Interest for suitably qualified independent persons to serve as conduct reviewers of code of conduct matters for councils on the Mid-North Coast of NSW, during February and March 2013.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held 12 June 2013, Council resolved to adopt a new Code of Conduct and Procedures for the Administration of the Code of Conduct as required by the Act, based on the recently revised Model Code and Model Procedures from the Division of Local Government. Pursuant to Part 3 (Administrative Framework) of the Procedures for the Administration of the Model Code of Conduct, Council must appoint conduct reviewers using a prescribed selection process.

 

To be eligible to be a member of a panel of conduct reviewers, a person must, at a minimum, meet the following requirements, have:

????? an understanding of local government, and

????? knowledge of investigative processes including but not limited to procedural fairness requirements and the requirements of the Public Interest Disclosures Act 1994, and

????? knowledge and experience of one or more of the following:

a)???????? investigations, or

b)???????? law, or

c)????????? public administration, or

d)???????? public sector ethics, or

e)???????? alternative dispute resolution, and

 

In addition to the above requirements a person must also meet the eligibility requirements. A person is not eligible to be a member of the panel of conduct reviewers if they are:

a)?????????? a councillor, or

b)?????????? a nominee for election as a councillor, or

c)?????????? an administrator, or

d)?????????? an employee of a council, or

e)??? a member of the Commonwealth Parliament or any State Parliament or Territory Assembly, or

f)???? a nominee for election as a member of the Commonwealth Parliament or any State Parliament or Territory Assembly, or

g)?????????? a person who has a conviction for an indictable offence that is not an expired conviction.

 

A person is not precluded from being a member of Council?s panel of conduct reviewers if they are a member of another council?s panel of conduct reviewers.

 

Duties may include serving on a conduct review committee, or providing advice on an individual basis at any MIDROC council in relation to complaints or breaches to that council?s code of conduct.


 

Procurement Process

 

MIDROC was seeking applicants that are appropriately qualified and of high standing within the community and independent of the councils. Successful applicants are to be placed on a panel of suitable applicants for appointment, as required by each of the MIDROC councils.

 

Expression of Interest EOI-12-05 was first advertised on 26 February 2013 and closed 4 April 2013. During the submission period, forty one (41) registered entities downloaded the tender documents from the Council's tendering website. Twelve (12) EOI?s were received in business names, with the individuals named within the application and these are listed below, in no particular order:

 

1.???????? Alexander Irving Solicitor - Alexander Irving (Principal)

2.???????? Chris Gallagher Consulting - Christopher Gallagher (Sole Trader)

3.?????? Harris Wheeler Lawyers - Matthew Smith (Managing Partner), Tony Cardillo (Partner), Lisa Gowing 0(Special Counsel), Katrina Reye (Partner) and Micah Jenkins (Partner)

4.?????? Internal Audit Bureau of NSW - Shane Boyd (Director), Helen Colbey (Senior Business Consultant), Alan Delany (Senior Business Consultant), Michelle Wakka (Senior Consultant), Rhonda Stien (Senior Business Consultant), Michael Symons (Senior Business Consultant) Kate Molloy (Senior Consultant), Peter Harvey (Senior Business Consultant), Charles Corban (Senior Business Consultant) and Timothy Bye (Senior Consultant)

5.???????? TQC Solutions - Mark Pigram

6.???????? SINC Solutions - Kathleen Roach (Managing Director)

7.???????? Local? Consulting - Emma Broomfield (Director)

8.???????? McCullough Robertson Lawyers - Cameron Dean (Partner), Jeremy Kennedy (Partner)

9.???????? O?Connell Workplace Relations Graham Evans (Managing Partner)

10.???? Mike Colreavy Consulting - Michael Colreavy (General Manager)

11.???? Train Reaction Pty Ltd - Kathy Thane (Director)

12.???? Work Ethics Partners Pty Ltd - Peter Pearce (Principal Consultant)

 

A Tender Evaluation Panel (TEP) was formed which included staff representing a number of MIDROC councils.

 

The TEP made the assessment that eleven (11) submissions had completed all schedules and addressed the specified criteria and were therefore considered conforming and further evaluated. This assessment included compliance with contractual requirements and provision of requested information.

 

The submission from TQC Solutions was considered non-conforming with the immediate requirements of the EOI and was therefore not further evaluated.

 

The qualitative criteria assessment was carried out by the TEP members at an evaluation meeting conducted on 18 April 2013. The TEP members scored the submissions in accordance with the agreed approach. At this meeting the individual scores were combined and summarised to demonstrate a ranking for priced and non-priced criteria. Each submission was then discussed in detail.

 

The criteria against which the expressions of interest were evaluated were:

?????????? Demonstrated understanding of local government, the principles of procedural fairness and ethical decision making

?????????? An understanding of the Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW and the Procedures for the Administration of the Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW

????????????? High standing within the community

????????????? Qualifications and experience in relation to conflict resolution or mediation

????????????? Ability to conduct investigations, review conduct matters and deliberate on these matters

?????????? Ability to prepare reports to Council outlining findings and recommendations as a sole reviewer, or on behalf of a Conduct Review Committee

????????????? Ability to communicate effectively and work in partnership with officers of Council

????????????? Availability on a flexible basis whenever Committees are convened or reviewers required

????????????? Schedule of Rates and Value for Money.

 

In addition to the above weighted criteria, applicants were asked to declare whether they are employed by, or have any recent (within the past 12 months) current or ongoing contractual relationship with any participating council, or whether they are employees of any entity with such a contractual relationship.

 

It should be noted that Port Macquarie Council will be providing Council with a copy of the confidential Evaluation & Pricing Analysis which details the final evaluation scores for the expressions of interest as determined by the Tender Evaluation Panel and lists the rates offered by each of the expressions of interest. This analysis contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business. [NSW Local Government Act 1993 ? Section 10A(2(c)].

Ensuring Good Governance

Having discussed each submission in detail, the submission from Work Ethics Partners was not considered to have relevant Local Government experience and therefore was not considered for appointment to the panel. The TEP were satisfied that the remaining submissions, which appear in the

Recommendation, represent a balanced panel of individuals with the necessary skills and experience to accommodate the requirement of the Act.

 

It is acknowledged that the panel is extensive, however, the term of the panel is for four (4) years and is also to be shared between all MIDGOC councils. The potential is that seven council reviewers could be engaged at any one time, requiring different skill sets.?

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

There are no environmental impacts as a result of this report.

 

Social

There are no social impacts as a result of this report.

 

Economic

There are no broader economic implications as a result of this report.

 

Risk

 

Th panel of conduct reviewers enables Council to serve the local community.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Members of the Council?s conduct review panel will only be used on an ?as needs? basis, to act as an independent conduct reviewer or as part of a conduct review committee. Funds would be made available in the budget, if and when required.

 

The EOI provides Council with a panel of Conduct Reviewers at competitive market tested pricing.

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

Not applicable.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

Not applicable.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

Not applicable.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 10.2?? SF1620??????????? 270613??????? Integrated Planning & Reporting Framework 2013/14 To 2016/17

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Peter Wilson, Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services ????????

 

Summary:

 

The purpose of this report is to present the Nambucca Shire Council 2023 Community Strategic Plan (as reviewed) 2013-2017 Delivery Program, 2013/2014 Operational Plan, 2013-2017 Program Budgets and 2013/14 Fees and Charges following their public exhibition and review.

 

A review of the 2013-2023 Long Term Financial Plan and 2013-2017 Workforce Management Plan has also been completed and these are presented for adoption.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1??????? That Council respond to all who made submissions, advising them of the outcome and thanking them for their input.

 

2????????? That Council adopt the reviewed Nambucca Shire Council 2023 Community Strategic Plan.

 

3??????? That Council adopt the 2013-2017 Delivery Program, 2013/2014 Operational Plan and 2013-2017 Program Budgets.

 

4??????? That Council adopt the 2013/2014 Fees and Charges (subject to amendment for GST applicability).

 

5??????? That Council adopt the 2013-2023 Long Term Financial Plans for General, Water and Sewer Functions

 

6??????? That Council adopt the reviewed Workforce Management Plan (component of Resourcing Strategy).

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

It is a statutory requirement that the suite of draft documents that make up the Integrated Planning and Reporting (IPR) Framework be placed on public exhibition for 28 days and be adopted prior to 30 June.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The Integrated Planning & Reporting Framework was introduced in 2009 and was developed as part of the Local Government Reform Program. It introduced changes to the NSW Local Government Act 1993 to improve Council?s long term community, financial and asset planning.

 

The Framework opens the way for Councils to identify and plan for funding priorities and service levels in consultation with their community, while preserving local identity and planning for a more sustainable future.

 

Council elected to be a ?Group 3? Council in relation to the implementation of the framework, which required adoption by 30 June 2012.

 

The IP&R Framework is made up of the following plans:

????? A Community Strategic Plan (CSP) covering at least 10 years

????? A Council Delivery Plan (DP) covering 4 years

????? A one-year Council Operational Plan (OP) including a budget, revenue policy and fees and charges.

 

These plans are supported and informed by a Resourcing Strategy made up of:

????? A Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP) covering at least 10 years

????? An Asset Management Strategy covering at least 10 years

????? A Workforce Management Plan (WMP) covering at least 4 years.

 

The Community Strategic Plan is a 10 year plan that identifies the main priorities and aspirations for the future of the Nambucca Shire local government area. It is the primary document within the IP&R Framework.

 

The Delivery Program details the principal activities to be undertaken by Council to implement the strategies established by the CSP within the resources available under the Resourcing Strategy. Whilst it is essentially a four year plan that is aligned to the term of the new Council, it must still be reviewed each year when preparing the Operational Plan.

 

Council is required to develop a schedule of fees and charges each year as part of the Revenue policy within the Operational Plan. In determining the appropriate level of fees to be charged, a range of issues are considered such as what is fair and equitable, and how much the service costs to provide.

 

The list of fees and charges has been prepared based on assumptions made regarding the GST status of each fee and charge. Staff will be attending training seminars prior to the end of the financial year on the application of the 4 published and the 4 draft rulings issued by the ATO and the anomalies that have been highlighted. A number of items on the draft rulings have been queried by Genesis Accounting (GST Specialists) and they don?t expect the last items to be addressed until probably August 2013. Should the GST legislation or the interpretation of this legislation change, Council reserves the right to increase or decrease the amount of the fees stated, by the amount of the GST.

 

As part of the Resourcing Strategy, Council has developed a 10 year Long Term Financial Plan which is used to inform decision making and must be updated annually as part of the development of the Operational Plan. A significant amount of effort has gone into revising the LTFP to satisfy TCorp?s financial assessment of the Council?s LIRS Round 2 application, including the segregation of the Water and Sewer Functions and these Plans are now being submitted for adoption. This work will provide the foundation for the undertaking of a further review in Q3 2013.

 

A review of the Workforce Management Plan has also been completed, with the main focus on format and content, and this can now be submitted for adoption.

 

The suite of documents comprising the Nambucca Shire Council Community Strategic Plan 2023, 2013-2017 Delivery Program, 2013/14 Operational Plan and Program Budgets, 2013/2014 Fees and Charges,?

2013-2023 Long Term Financial Plans for General, Water and Sewer and 2013-2017 Workforce Management Plan will be distributed under separate cover.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

A major review of the IP&R Framework is required following the election of a new Council (September 2012). Principally, Council has to review the Community Strategic Plan, the Delivery Program, Long Term Financial Plan and the Workforce Management Plan. The revised draft Community Strategic Plan and Delivery Program/Operational Plan have to be placed on public exhibition for 28 days.

 

A separate community engagement process was implemented in regard to the review of the Community Strategic Plan 2023 with a report being submitted to Council on 15 May 2013. The engagement process sought input from the community via submissions and a community forum, government and non-government agencies and staff.

 

The suite of documents was placed on public exhibition from Friday 17 May 2013 to Friday 14 June 2013. The documents could also be accessed on the Council?s website and printed copies were available for inspection at the Administration Building and Branch Libraries.

 

A public meeting to brief the community on the Plans was advertised for Wednesday 29 May 2013, however no members of the public attended.

 

An Information for Ratepayers Sheet was also exhibited outlining the rates and charges proposed for the 2013/2014 rating year.

 

Council received one (1) community submission and two (2) staff submissions in relation to the Community Strategic Plan, Delivery Program and Operational Plan and these are summarised below:?

 

Naj Hadzic

Healthy Communities Coordinator

Nambucca Shire Council

(TRIM 14571/2013)

 

Suggest the inclusion and recognition of the concept of ?healthy communities, and a liveable and sustainable place? in the Strategic Plan 2023.

 

One aspect of the Healthy Communities Initiative is to encourage policy development and improvements that promote healthy and active living.? Health and well-being is significant and can impact on the whole community, and its development and sustainability.

 

There is increasing evidence and trends that indicate that a higher quality of life for individuals, families and the whole community can be achieved through better understanding and supporting healthy and active living and recognising the importance of establishing liveable and sustainable places and communities.

 

There is an opportunity to link the eleven strategic directions and their goals to a common outcome: a liveable and sustainable place, which highlights and supports our vision and mission as Council.?

 

Currently the Strategic Plan includes:

 

KEY STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS AND GOALS

 

Eleven key strategic directions provide a focus for the development of key goals and strategies.

 

They provide a framework to plan social, environmental, economic and governance outcomes to deliver and achieve our vision of ?Living at its Best? in partnership with our community and other Government agencies.

 

The following is suggested as an addition:

 

LIVEABLE AND SUSTAINABLE PLACE

 

Design, planning and development which promote healthy and active living benefits individuals and families and adds value, at all levels, to the community.

 

Linking the key strategic directions and working to achieve their goals, in effect offers a higher quality of life for the community, and supports a liveable and sustainable place for everyone.

 

There are strong links between liveability, productivity and sustainability.? A healthy living environment encourages, builds and sustains a liveable, attractive and prosperous place for residents, business and visitors.

 

Comment by Council

No strategy modifications have been made in response to submissions. However the Delivery Program objectives and Operational Plan actions have been amended to incorporate the intent of the submissions received.????

Michelle Boon

Treasurer

Womens Sport NSW

(TRIM 14568/2013)

Making submission as a Board member on behalf of Womensport & Recreation NSW Inc, a state-wide not for profit organisation that promotes equity, access & participation for women & girls through sport & recreation.? Through our current long-term strategic planning project, one of our deliverables is to work with the NSW Division of Local Government (DLG) to develop procedures for Councils to address the objectives of increased equity, participation & access for women & girls in sport & recreation.

 

While we note that some aspects of the above mission have been addressed in Council?s Draft CSP Nambucca Valley ?Living at its Best? 2023 Community Strategic Plan (refer CSP Strategic Direction 8.3, CSP Strategic Goal 8.3.1. ? 8.3.4.), we believe that Council could achieve greater outcomes through further enhancement of the CSP by actively including more detailed actions around this strategy targeting increased sports & recreational participation & associated service strategies or performance standards to allow for progressive measurement of achievements.? This aspect of the Strategic Direction doesn?t appear to have been addressed at this point & we feel it would be of great benefit to a wide section of the community.

 

We have developed some proposals in conjunction with Rockdale City Council and are discussing with DLG that they be disseminated to all NSW Councils as best practice.

 

Following is a suggested approach that could be integrated into the relevant area/s of the current draft CSP.

 

Theme: Rockdale is a welcoming and creative City with active, healthy and safe communities.

Objective: Our community?s health and well-being will increase.

Strategy: Improve the access and effectiveness of services and facilities all members of the community to encourage active living to improve health and well being

?

Delivery Program Principal Activity 2013 ? 2017: Ensure that a range of active recreation, leisure and sporting opportunities is available for all ages, genders, ethnicities, ability levels and socio-economic groups.

Operational Plan Action 2013 ? 2014: Partnerships established with service providers, neighbouring Councils, the South Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils, sporting associations and sports clubs to improve participation outcomes to under represented groups.

Delivery Program Assessment Methods: Community Survey satisfaction with opportunities to participate in sporting and recreation opportunities is increasing

 

Some additional suggestions for incorporation into the 2013/17 Delivery Program & 2013/14 Operational Plan are:

 

???? As a further measure of access to recreation facilities for females, it would be great if Council commenced (or continues if so doing) collecting data on sports field & facilities bookings by gender to provide a baseline for determining future progress.? Information provided by other Councils indicates the level of usage by females is likely to be less than 20% of all Council bookings.? Having this type of data would enable Council to engage with the local Youth Advisory Groups & existing sport & recreation organisations to consider ways of increasing this to something nearer to 50%

???? In regards to planned facilities upgrades, we would like Council to consider the following:

-???? amenities - incorporate features that address females' needs, such as working locks on cubicles & showers; mirrors; adequate lighting etc;

-???? referees? & officials' rooms - if having these, appropriate to have 2 rooms ie. a separate room for males & females, rather than having them share 1 facility;

-???? lighting - should be sufficient to make night-time & evening access safe from car parks & public transport drop-off zones, & also generally moving around the common areas of the sports facility

 

Comment by Council

No strategy modifications have been made in response to submissions. However the Delivery Program objectives and Operational Plan actions have been amended to incorporate the intent of the submissions received.????

 

Coral Hutchinson

Manager Community and Cultural Services

Nambucca Shire Council

(TRIM 14536/2013)

 

Request for inclusion of three Objectives in the 2013/2017 Delivery Program

 

The proposed new Pacific Highway from Warrell Creek to Urunga is fast becoming a reality and the impact on the Shire will be significant for many reasons ? not least the complete by-pass of Macksville. 

 

The 2013-2017 Delivery Program makes mention of the Pacific Highway upgrade under 9.1, however the Program could include objectives which are more community development focussed so that the economic and social impacts and opportunities can be identified, managed or realised.   Whilst the approval processes will address physical and environmental impacts, Council will need to lead management of social and economic impacts/benefits.

 

1. Request that the 2013-2017 Delivery Program include a 4-Year Delivery Objective which would recognise the need to develop a collective local vision for, during and after the Pacific Highway realignment.  Whether this is one plan or several may depend on interest and resources.  There may be a range of strategies which are developed to address things like:

 

? The future management of the current Highway assets

? Town centre improvements

? Place-based initiatives which reflect the character statements developed by the community and listed in the Nambucca Valley Structure Plan

? A Highway Service Centre

? Grants and Funding opportunities

? An Economic Strategy for highway-dependent businesses

? Local infrastructure adjustments;

 

2. Request that the Delivery Program recognise the commencement of work on a new urban design for Macksville.  Work on this is in the early stages however the timing is appropriate for the 2013-2017 Program. 

 

Objective

- Develop a new urban design for Macksville which recognises the town as a destination rather than a thoroughfare.

 

Actions

- Finalise and Implement Macksville Town Centre Revitalisation Plan.

- Continue to implement the recommendations of the Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan (PAMP).

 

3. Request that the Delivery Program recognise the opportunity to work with other towns and villages to help shape their future.

 

Objective

- Continued improvements to urban centres and villages

?

Actions

- Implementation of existing streetscape plans for Nambucca and Bowraville (if in existence) and revisiting as necessary to address other issues that may be relevant to the urban centres and villages.

- Continue to implement the recommendations of the Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan (PAMP) in regards to Bowraville and Nambucca Heads

- Continued implementation of the Nambucca River Master Plan noting that the Plan identifies improvements for Bellwood which could be undertaken post-highway.

 

The development of a Council strategy or strategies is an important first step in addressing any negative impacts associated with the Pacific Highway deviation and positioning towns so that they may maximise the potential positive benefits associated with the works.  Inclusion of these strategies in the Delivery Plan will also strengthen any submissions for funding for related projects or initiatives.  Finally, this is a rare opportunity for the community to work together to establish what the future will look like.

 

Comment by Council

No strategy modifications have been made in response to submissions. However the Delivery Program objectives and Operational Plan actions have been amended to incorporate the intent of the submissions received.????

 

?

As a result of the feedback received a number of improvements have been made to the Community Strategic Plan. These can be summarised as follows:

 

- Update community profile with 2011 Census data;

- Inclusion of additional section on Community Indicators;

- Minor formatting and text changes

- Inclusion of text under the heading ?Environmental Planning? acknowledging the emerging focus on the impacts and challenges of resource development.

 

No strategy modifications have been made in response to submissions. However the Delivery Program objectives and Operational Plan actions have been amended to incorporate the intent of the submissions received.????

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

The IP&R Framework arises from state wide planning reforms that are based on sustainability principles and each component addresses social, environmental, economic and civic leadership issues.

 

Environment

 

The draft documents include a number of strategies to assist and contribute to the environmental sustainability of the Nambucca Shire.

 

Social

 

The public exhibition process will assist community engagement in the finalisation of the IP&R Framework. Consistent with the ongoing intent of the Nambucca Shire Council Community Strategic Plan 2023, the draft documents include a range of strategies to enhance the social development of the shire.

 

Economic

 

The IP&R Framework enables a number of strategies aimed at assisting and contributing to the economic development of the shire.

 

Risk

 

Sections 402 to 405 of the NSW Local Government Act 1993 detail requirements in relation to the IP&R Framework. Failure to adopt a reviewed Community Strategic Plan, Delivery Program and Operational Plan by 30 June 2013 would contravene legislative requirements.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

The documents included in this report detail Council?s financial position over the medium term of 5 years and should be referred to when making decisions in relation to the allocation of Council?s limited financial resources.

 

TCorp has developed a definition of financial sustainability being:

?A local government will be financially sustainable over the long term when it is able to generate sufficient funds to provide the levels of service and infrastructure agreed with its community.?

 

The definition takes into account the effect ongoing change could have on a Council?s operating position and service levels over the long term. The definition brings together what TCorp considers are the key elements of financial strength, service and infrastructure requirements, and needs of the community. TCorp considers that this definition is concise enough to be remembered, whilst broad enough to cover the key aspects.

 

TCorp?s report into the Financial Sustainability of the NSW Local Government Sector (April 2013) assessed Nambucca Shire Council as having a WEAK Financial Sustainability Rating (FSR) and assigned a NEGATIVE outlook

 

For Councils assigned a Negative Outlook, TCorp provided some recommendations and areas of investigations to assist in improving the sustainability position. The recommendations include:

-???? The need to source additional revenue, such as under an SRV, to improve financial flexibility

and to assist in reducing the Infrastructure Backlog

-???? For Councils with the borrowing capacity, consider using debt funding to reduce the

Infrastructure Backlog and improve intergenerational equity

-???? Devising programs and strategies to contain rising costs and improve efficiencies

-???? Further improvement required in AMPs and integration into the Long Term Financial Plan

(LTFP)

-???? Increasing spending on maintenance and infrastructure renewal, balancing this with the need

for capital expenditure on new assets.

 

The NSW Government Local Government Infrastructure Audit report (June 2013) confirms that there is a large local government infrastructure backlog in NSW and some Councils face real and significant challenges in terms of maintaining and renewing the infrastructure that is critical to their communities and the NSW economy.

 

The total infrastructure backlog for all NSW Councils was estimated to be $7.4 billion at 30 June 2012, of which $4.5 billion relates to roads and related assets and $1 billion relates to buildings. The Mid North Coast region had the second largest total reported backlog at $738.2 million and the combined backlog in the northern rivers and mid north coast area of NSW equates to 29% of the State total.

 

The infrastructure backlog is over $1,000 per head of the NSW population with the mid north coast region per capita rates just below $3,000.

 

The report states that there are a number of funding and financing strategies that may help Councils to reduce their backlog and/or prevent the backlog increasing such as:

 

????? Borrowings ? where there is capacity

????? Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme (LIRS) ? subsidised interest rates

????? Special rate variations

????? Grants from other levels of government.

 

The report states that a key option for Councils to help address their infrastructure backlog is through a special rate variation, however it is unrealistic to believe that many Councils will ever be able to address their backlog problem solely through additional rate increases.

 

To put this in perspective, in 2011/12 total rating income for all NSW Councils was $6.784 billion, while the reported backlog was $7.359 million. Therefore if Councils sought to fund the current backlog over a 10 year period, it would require an average annual cumulative special rate variation increase of approximately 7%.

 

More alarmingly is that on a mid-north coast regional basis, the annual rate increase required each year over 10 years would be 15.5%. For Nambucca this would generate additional annual ordinary rate income of $1.35 million compared to the additional rate income of $297,000 permissible under the rate pegging limit of 3.4%.????

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

A summary of the four year budget covered by the delivery program is as follows:

 

Year

General Fund Budget Estimates ? Surplus/(Deficit) $

2013/2014

(28,800) Deficit

2014/2015

(2,224,600) Deficit

2015/2016

(1,455,200) Deficit

2016/2017

(1,813,500) Deficit

2017/2018

(1,813,500) Deficit

Total

(7,088,200) Deficit

 

The financial information presented in the draft plan highlights the vulnerability of Council?s General Fund position in the medium to long term. The development of a Financial Planning Policy, continued implementation of infrastructure management practices and procedures and ongoing service level reviews are required to improve the sustainability of the Council.

 

The proposed 2013/2014 capital works program totals $31.8million. Some of the major items in the works program include:

 

Off-Stream Water Storage - $24.0m

Roads/Streets Rehabilitation/Resealing - $2.5m

Bridge Construction - $1.5m

Sewerage Works South Macksville - $0.75m

Stormwater and K&G Reconstruction/Augmentation - $0.2m

 

Amendment to Program Budget 2013/14 ? Hall Maintenance

Argents Hill Hall - The Operational Plan budget allocation for Hall Maintenance has been reviewed with an amount of $2,000 to be reallocated to cover essential fire services, pest inspections and minor repairs and maintenance following the hall?s partial reopening. No funding provision has been made for any capital works.??

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

?

The 2013/2014 consolidated budget forecasts an overall deficit of $25,000. This compares with a $3,000 consolidated surplus in the 2012/2013 original budget.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

Any service level changes and resourcing implications reflected in Resourcing Strategy.?

 

ATTACHMENTS:

 

There are no attachments for this report.

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 10.3?? SF1760??????????? 270613??????? Making of Rates and Charges 2013/2014

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Chris Wills, Rates Officer ????????

 

?Summary:

 

The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) confirmed a rate peg increase of 3.4% under Section 508 (2) of The Local Government Act 1993 for 2013/2014 financial year.

 

Council is now required to make the rates and charges in accordance with Section 535 of The Local Government Act 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act)

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That it be confirmed that in accordance with Section 501 of the Act, the annual standing charge for water supply services to all properties connected or able to be connected to Council?s water supply in accordance with Section 552(1) of the Act for 2013/2014 is made at one hundred and nine dollars ($109.00) per occupancy for each assessment, for a 20mm or 25mm connection; four hundred and thirty six dollars ($436.00) for a 40mm connection, six hundred and eighty one dollars ($681.00) for a 50mm connection, one thousand seven hundred and forty four dollars ($1,744.00) for a 80mm connection and two thousand seven hundred and twenty five dollars ($2,725.00) for a 100mm connection, to be charged per connection for each assessment; with a consumption charge of two dollars and eighty one cents ($2.81) per kilolitre to apply to all water consumption billed during the financial year and such charge to have a short title of ?Water Charge?.

 

2????????? That it be confirmed that in accordance with Section 501 of the Act the annual access charge for sewerage services to all properties connected or able to be connected to Council's sewer in accordance with Section 552(3) of the Act for 2013/2014 is made at five hundred and eighty eight dollars ($588.00) per occupancy for each assessment for residential connections; two hundred and eighteen dollars ($218.00)? per assessment for 20mm non residential connections, eight hundred and seventy two dollars ($872.00) per assessment for 40mm non residential connections, one thousand three hundred and sixty three dollars ($1,363.00) per assessment for 50mm non residential connections, three thousand four hundred and eighty eight dollars ($3,488.00) per assessment for 80mm non residential connections, five thousand four hundred and fifty dollars ($5,450.00) per assessment for 100mm non residential connections and two hundred and eighteen dollars ($218.00) for vacant land/non connection per assessment; with a sewer usage charge of three dollars and sixty four cents ($3.64) per kilolitre to be calculated on the estimated volume discharged from all properties excluding residential connections using the total water consumption based on Land and Water Conservation's formula and Department of Energy, Utilities and Sustainability's best practice pricing guidelines and such charge to have a short title of "Sewer Usage Charge" and be included on the ?Water Account?.

 

3????????? That it be confirmed that in accordance with Section 501 of the Act, the waste management tip provision charge for 2013/2014 is made at one hundred and thirty six dollars ($136.00) per assessment for properties which do not receive a domestic waste service or are not on a waste collection route, or vacant land where the service is available; such charge to have the short title of ?Waste Management Tip Provision?.


 

4????????? That in accordance with Section 496 of the Act, the annual charge for 2013/2014 for domestic waste service on all occupied rateable land in the Shire, categorised Farmland or Residential under Section 515 or 516 of the Act to which a domestic waste service is provided, is made at five hundred and two dollars ($502.00) per occupancy for each assessment which contains up to and including five residential occupancies, such charge to have a short title of ?Domestic Waste Management? ?? Occupied?, the amount of the annual charge will be the amount derived by applying the formula A = B x $502.00, where ?A? equals the annual charge, ?B? equals the number of occupancies and $502.00 is the unit price. Residential assessments with six or more occupancies, upon request, may be charged one base charge of five hundred and two dollars ($502.00) and sufficient additional bins, at the appropriate charge, to service the waste collection requirements of the assessment, as agreed between the property owner and the Council?s Waste Management Officer.

??????????? A waste management ?tip provision? or ?vacant? annual charge of one hundred and thirty six dollars ($136.00) for the year 2013/2014 is made for properties categorised Farmland or Residential that are not vacant, but do not receive a domestic waste service or are not on a waste collection route, or are vacant land where the service is available.

 

5????????? That it be confirmed that in accordance with Section 496 of the Act the annual charge for 2013/2014 for domestic waste on all vacant rateable land in the Shire, categorised Residential (under Section 516 of the Local Government Act 1993) and located within the confines of the towns of Nambucca Heads, Valla Beach, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville and Scotts Head and the villages of Taylors Arm Upper, Taylors Arm Lower, Eungai Rail, Eungai Creek, Warrell Creek and Donnellyville and all land within the rural sector with a residential building entitlement, including land categorised as Farmland, where the domestic waste collection service is available, is made at one hundred and thirty six dollars ($136.00) per assessment, such charge to have short title of ?Domestic Waste Management ? Vacant?.

 

6????????? That it be confirmed that in accordance with Section 501 of the Act, the annual charge for 2013/2014 for waste service on all occupied rateable land in the Shire, categorised Business (under Section 518 of the Act) to which a waste service is provided, is made at five hundred and two dollars ($502.00) per occupancy per land parcel/assessment, such charge to have a short title of ?Waste Management? ?? Occupied?, the amount of the annual charge will be the amount derived by applying the formula A = B x $502.00, where ?A? equals the annual charge, ?B? equals the number of separate occupancies and $502.00 is the unit price.

 

7????????? That it be confirmed that in accordance with Section 502 of the Act the waste service charge for 2013/2014 for actual use of accessing weekly waste service by non rateable properties is made at nine dollars and sixty five cents ($9.65) per week per service per occupancy per land parcel/assessment, such charge to have the short title ?Waste Management? ?? Non Rateable?, and the amount of the charge will be the amount derived by applying the formula A = B x C X $9.65, where ?A? equals the charge, ?B? equals the number of separate occupied sites, "C" equals the number of weekly services and $9.65 is the unit price per service per week.

 

8????????? That it be confirmed that in accordance with Section 501 of the Act the annual charge for waste for 2013/2014 on all vacant rateable land in the Shire, categorised business (under Section 518 of the Act) and located within the confines of the towns of Nambucca Heads, Valla Beach, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville and Scotts Head and the villages of Taylors Arm Upper, Taylors Arm Lower, Eungai Rail, Eungai Creek, Warrell Creek and Donnellyville, is made at one hundred and thirty six dollars ($136.00) per assessment, such charge to have a short title of ?Waste Management? ?? Vacant?.


 

9????????? That it be confirmed that in accordance with Section 496A & 510A of the Act the annual charge for 2013/2014 for stormwater management services on all rateable privately owned developed non strata residential land located within the confines of the towns of Nambucca Heads, Valla Beach, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville and Scotts Head is made at twenty five dollars ($25.00) per land parcel/assessment, such charge to have a short title "Stormwater Management?Residential Charge".

 

10??????? That it be confirmed that in accordance with Section 496A & 510A of the Act the annual charge for 2013/2014 for stormwater management services on all rateable privately owned developed strata residential land located within the confines of the towns of Nambucca Heads, Valla Beach, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville and Scotts Head is made at twelve dollars and fifty cents ($12.50) per lot/assessment, such charge to have a short title "Stormwater Management?Residential Strata Charge".

 

11??????? That it be confirmed that in accordance with Section 496A & 510A of the Act the annual charge for 2013/2014 for stormwater management services on all rateable privately owned developed urban business land and located within the confines of the towns of Nambucca Heads, Valla Beach, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville and Scotts Head is made at twenty five dollars ($25.00) per land parcel/assessment plus an additional twenty five dollars ($25.00) for each 350 square metres or part of 350 square metres by which the area of the parcel of land exceeds 350 square metres, such charge to have a short title "Stormwater Management Business Charge" and be capped at $100.00 per assessment.

 

12??????? That it be confirmed that in accordance with Section 496A & 510A of the Act the annual charge for 2013/2014 for stormwater management services on all rateable privately owned developed urban business strata lots/land and located within the confines of the towns of Nambucca Heads, Valla Beach, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville and Scotts Head is made at an amount equal to twenty five dollars ($25.00) per strata plan land parcel (parent parcel) plus an additional twenty five dollars ($25.00) for each 350 square metres or part of 350 square metres by which the area of the parcel of land exceeds 350 square metres and capped at $100.00 then divisible on a pro rata basis between the rateable strata lots, such charge to have a short title "Stormwater Management-Business Strata Charge".

 

13??????? That a rate of zero point zero zero four nine nine nine dollars ($0.004999) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category of ?Farmland?, is made for the year 2013/2014, subject to a minimum rate of four hundred and seventy four dollars ($474.00) per assessment, in accordance with Section 458 of the Act, such rate to apply to all properties categorised as ?Farmland?, pursuant to Section 515 of the Act, such rate to have a separate short title of ?Farmland? in accordance with Section 543 of the Act.

 

14??????? That a rate of zero point zero zero four six one one dollars ($0.004611) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category ?Residential? is made for the year 2013/2014, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and twenty four dollars ($724.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all properties categorised as ?Residential?, pursuant to Section 516 of the Act, excluding all properties in the sub categories ?Town? and ?Village/Estates?, such rate to have a separate short title of ?Residential-Non-Urban? in accordance with Section 543 of the Act.


 

15??????? That a rate of zero point zero zero four six one one dollars ($0.004611) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category ?Residential?, sub category ?Town? is made for the year 2013/2014, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and twenty four dollars ($724.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all rateable land located in centres of population described as comprising all properties zoned residential, and land not otherwise categorised, located in the towns of Nambucca Heads, Hyland Park, Macksville, Bowraville, Scotts Head and Valla Beach and serviced with water supply, sewerage, or septic tank, such rate to have a separate short title of ?Residential-Town?, in accordance with Section 543 of the Act.

 

16??????? That a rate of zero point zero zero four six one one dollars ($0.004611) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category ?Residential?, sub-category ?Village/Estates? is made for the year 2013/2014, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and twenty four dollars ($724.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all rateable land located in the villages of Eungai Rail, Eungai Creek, Warrell Creek, Donnellyville, Taylors Arm ? Upper and Lower, and all Estates comprising all residential land within the rural sector with a residential building entitlement and within a subdivision both past and present which results in the concentration of holdings to create an estate of two or more lots, all ribbon development residential lots along rural roads contiguous to developed estates and villages and all ribbon development residential lots along rural roads immediately opposite to developed estates, such rate to have a separate short title ?Residential ? Village/Estates?, in accordance with Section 543 of the Act.

 

17????? That a rate of zero point zero zero six four six five dollars ($0.006465) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category ?Business? is made for the year 2013/2014, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and twenty four dollars ($724.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all properties? categorised as ?Business?, pursuant to Section 518 of the Act, excluding all properties in the sub categories ?Caravan Park?, ?CBD? and ?Industrial Estate?, such rate to have a separate short title of ?Business-Ordinary? in accordance with Section 543 of the Act.

 

18????? That a rate of zero point zero zero nine six five five dollars ($0.009655) on the land value of ????????? all rateable land in the rating category ?Business?, sub category ?Caravan Park?, is made?? ????????? for the year 2013/2014, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and twenty four dollars ????????? ($724.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all rateable properties categorised as ????????? Business sub category ?Caravan Park? and have a short title of ?Business-Caravan Park?, in ????????? accordance with Section 543 of the Act.

 

19????? That a rate of zero point zero one zero four three nine dollars ($0.010439) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category ?Business?, sub category ?CBD? is made for the year 2013/2014, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and twenty four dollars ($724.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all rateable properties categorised as ?Business?, sub category ?CBD? in the towns of Nambucca Heads, Bowraville, Macksville, Valla Beach, and Scotts Head and such rate to have a separate short title of ?Business-CBD? in accordance with Section 543 of the Act.

 

20????? That a rate of zero point zero zero six four six five dollars ($0.006465) on the land value of all rateable land in the rating category ?Business?, sub category ?Industrial Estate? be now made for the year 2013/2014, subject to a minimum rate of seven hundred and twenty four dollars ($724.00) per assessment, such rate to apply to all rateable properties categorised as ?Business?, sub category ?Industrial Estate? in the towns of Nambucca Heads and Macksville, and such rate to have a separate short title of ?Business-Industrial Estate? in accordance with Section 543 of the Act.

 

21????? That a special rate, pursuant to Section 495 of the Act, of zero point zero zero zero one two three one dollars ($0.0001231) on the land value of all rateable land in Council?s area (refer Section 538 of the Act) is made for the year 2013/2014, additional to a base amount of eighteen dollars and fifty cents ($18.50) per assessment (refer Section 499 of the Act) so that the levying of the base amount will produce not more than fifty percent (50%) of the total amount payable by the levying of the special rate so as to comply with Section 500 of the Act, as provided by Section 537 of the Act and determined by Section 536 of the Act. Such special rate to have a separate short title of ?Environmental? in accordance with Section 543 of the Act.

 

22????? That a charge of eighty nine dollars ($89.00) be the annual fee for Category 1 (Low Risk) Sewer Trade Waste, is made for the year 2013/2014 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act and have a short title Trade Waste Fee?Cat 1.

 

23????? That a charge of eighty nine dollars ($89.00) be the annual fee for Category 1A (Low Risk) Sewer Trade Waste, is made for the year 2013/2014 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act and have a short title Trade Waste Fee?Cat 1A.

 

24????? That a charge of one hundred and forty nine dollars ($149.00) be the annual fee for Category 2 (Medium Risk) Sewer Trade Waste, is made for the year 2013/2014 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act and have a short title Trade Waste Fee?Cat 2 with an additional charge of one dollar and sixty nine cents ($1.69) for the Usage Charge per kilolitre or fifteen dollars and fifteen cents ($15.15) per kilolitre for Non-Conforming Usage Charge, is made for the 2013/2014 pursuant to Section 502 of the Act.

 

25????? That a charge of one hundred and forty nine dollars ($149.00) be the annual fee for Category 3 (High Risk) Sewer Trade Waste, is made for the year 2013/2014 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act and have a short title Trade Waste Fee?Cat 3, with an additional charge of one dollar eight cents ($1.08) per kilogram for Excess Mass Charge, is made for the year 2013/2014 pursuant to Section 502 of the Act.

 

26????? That a charge of eighty nine dollars ($89.00) be the annual fee for Category 4 Septic tank Effluent Disposal Sewer Trade Waste, is made for the year 2013/2014 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act and have a short title Trade Waste Fee?Cat 4.

 

27????? That a charge of eighty nine dollars ($89.00) be the annual fee for Category 4 Caravan Dump Effluent Disposal, is made for the year 2013/2014 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act and have a short title Trade Waste Fee?Cat 4, with a charge of one hundred and thirty one dollars ($131.00) for Disposal at Treatment Works with a maximum of 2,500L. Disposals over 2,500L will have an additional charge of forty eight dollars ($48.00) per 1000L, is made for the year 2013/2014 pursuant to Section 501 of the Act.

 

28????? That an interest rate of 9% per annum be charged on overdue rates and charges for the year 2013/2014 pursuant to Section 566 of the Act.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council may resolve to adopt the Rates and Charges without applying the 3.4% rate peg or to adopt the Rates and Charges with a percentage between 0 and 3.4%.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

IPART has approved a rate peg increase in general income of 3.4%.

 

Council's minimum rate for Residential and Business categories has been increased by $19.00 to $724.00.

Council?s minimum rate for the Farmland category has been increased by $16.00 to $474.00.

 

Recommendation 1 - has additional wording ?billed during the financial year? to cover the two to three week period, at the June meter read, where water users are charged current year cost for prior year consumption.

 

Recommendation 4 ? has been worded to differentiate between residential multiple occupancies of up to and including five occupancies and six or more occupancies to service more appropriately these higher multiple occupancy assessments.

 

Recommendation previously relating to Business sub category ?Manufactured Home Community?, which was incorporated into Business ?Ordinary? from 1 July 2012, was deleted.

 

Recommendation 28 ? was added to meet to the requirement concerning the interest rate charged on overdue rates and charges.??

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

General Manager

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services

Manager Financial Services

Rates Officer

Division of Local Government

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

This report has no environmental impact.

 

Social

 

This report has no social impact.

 

Economic

 

There is no economic impact.

 

Risk

 

There is no risk to Council.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

There are no additional financial implications to the adopted budget.

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 10.4?? SF1822??????????? 270613??????? Minutes Of The Access Committee Meeting Held On 28 May 2013

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Coral Hutchinson, Manager Community and Cultural Services ????????

 

Summary:

 

The minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held 28 May 2013 are attached for Council?s endorsement.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the Access Committee minutes from the meeting on 28 May 2013 be endorsed by Council.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council has the option of not endorsing the minutes or making additional or alternative resolutions.

 

DISCUSSION:

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Senior Health and Building Inspector

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

Nothing specific identified

 

Social

Access improvements to facilities such as the Bowraville Theatre have positive social outcomes for people with disabilities through increased opportunities for community participation and social inclusion.

 

Economic

Nothing identified.

 

Risk

There is a small risk that

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Maintenance of a bigger building

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Nothing required.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

Nothing identified.

 

Attachments:

1View

13559/2013 - Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 28 May 2013

0 Pages

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 June 2013

Minutes Of The Access Committee Meeting Held On 28 May 2013

 

PRESENT

 

Mrs Shirley Holmes (Chairperson)

Mrs Fiona Holmes

Cr E South

Mrs Margaret Hutchinson

Cr A Smyth

Dr Dorothy Secomb

Ms Coral Hutchinson

Mr Peter Shales

Ms Jenny Adams

Ms Alba Sky

Mr Keith Davis

Mr Les Small

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Ms Lee-Anne Funnell

Engineering Staff Nambucca Shire Council

 

 

 

 

DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

 

There were no Disclosures of Interest declared.

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

 

RECOMMENDATION:? ADAMS/SOUTH

 

That the minutes of the previous meeting held 23 April 2013, be endorsed.

 

 

 

?

ASKING OF QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE - nil

 

 

Director Environment and Planning Report

ITEM 5.1???? SF1822????????????? 280313???? Report on Business Arising from previous meeting held 28 May 2013

Discussion was held on the following:

??? Transport forum on 19 June at Coffs Ex-services Club from 11am ? 2pm.

??? Woolworths toilets ? Coral Hutchinson and Paul Guy will investigate original development plans, any alterations and the approval and then recommend options for further action.

Recommendation: SMYTH/DAVIS

 

That the issue of the Woolworths Toilets be referred to the Manager of Applications and Compliance and that the other matters arising from the previous minutes be noted.

 

 

 

 

ITEM 5.2???? SF1822????????????? 28/5/13???? Report on correspondence to the Access Committee meeting of 28 May 2013

The following items have been received / sent:

1.??? Submission on scooters ? Coral Hutchinson had a call from the Joint Standing Committee, they would like someone from the Access Committee to attend a public hearing in Port Macquarie in August to speak about the issues included in the submission.

2.??? Paraquad News

3.??? Letter of thanks has been sent to the Nambucca Shire Council Staff re. Winifred St Car Park

ReSOLVED:? (SHALES/DAVIS)

 

That the items of correspondence and related actions be noted.

 

 

 

 

 

ITEM 5.3???? SF1614????????????? 260711???? Report on General Business and Matters of Interest

The following items were discussed in General Business:

1.??? Anthony Brandie, Senior Health and Building Surveyor spoke to the group about the Bowraville Theatre. Discussion was held on the 1:14 / 1:11.5 ramp.? Issues the Access Committee would like the Council staff to look into include:

??? Lighting on external ramp

??? Awning over ramp to protect from rain

??? Chair lift to stage

??? Signage on ramp to identify grade

??? Evacuation plan to manage people with disabilities.

2.??? Three flags in Ridge St, Nambucca Heads are a hazard

3.??? Skateboarders using footpaths near Woolworths / Post Office in Nambucca Heads CBD.? Ideas included talking to the school re. educating children on rules for bikes and skateboards.? Coral Hutchinson will talk to Youth Development Officer about this issue and report back to the committee.

4.??? 3-10 June is the YMCA Annual appeal ? raising money and awareness that they are a charity and that funds go back to the local community for various activities

5.??? Meet and greet at Pacifica on Wed 29/5/13

Recommendation:

 

That the reports be noted.

 

 

 

???

 

 

?

 

 

NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on Tuesday 25th June 2013 commencing at 2:00pm.

 

CLOSURE

 

There being no further business the Mayor then closed the meeting the time being 3:45 pm.?

 

 

 

 

(CHAIRPERSON

 


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

Corporate and Community Services

ITEM 10.5?? SF1822??????????? 270613??????? Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 23 April 2013

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Coral Hutchinson, Manager Community and Cultural Services ????????

 

Summary:

 

The minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held Tuesday 23 April 2013 are attached for Council?s endorsement.?

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the Committee?s submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Road Safety regarding Non-registered motorised scooters be noted, and the minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held 23 April 2013 be endorsed.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

Council has the option of not endorsing the minutes or making additional or alternative resolutions.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Whilst the minutes do not contain any specific recommendations, Council may wish to note the Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Road Safety regarding Non-registered motorised scooters.? The content of the Submission was as follows:

 

?Like many other Local Government Areas, Nambucca Shire has an aged and ageing population and the use of non-registered motorised vehicles is increasing.  The community concern about their use is also growing and has been for some time.  At the local level, Nambucca Shire Council has responded to this by proactively promoting safe usage of these vehicles through workshops, presentations and distribution of various publications.  In addition to this, information regarding recent other enquiries into the use of motorised scooters (ie NRMA and ACCC in the past year or so) has been actively promoted for community input. 

 

Notwithstanding those actions, a clear message to the Joint Standing Committee is that more needs to be done at a higher level. 

 

The Access Committee View

 

Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee which advocates on behalf of older people and people with disabilities, resolved at its 23 April 2013 meeting, to make a submission into the Joint Standing Committee enquiry and I put forward the following points on their behalf:

 

1.?? There is a need for users of non-registered motorised vehicles to have insurance along the lines of 3rd Party protection.

2.?? Vehicles need a better braking mechanism to reduce vehicle/pedestrian collisions.  Whilst "hands-off = stop", this is not immediate and the vehicle continues to travel for some distance.

3.?? There is a  need for a capacity test of some type.  Most of the faculties required to drive a motor vehicle are required to drive a scooter, especially adequate vision, ability to look around you and ability to respond quickly are all essential for safe scooting.


The Need for Adequate Infrastructure

 

From a broader Council perspective, the key safety issue for people using non-registerd motorised vehicles is safe path of travel via an adequate footpath network.  The daunting task of asset maintenance for Local Government is well documented.  At the Nambucca Shire level, it is rare that a new footpath is constructed due to competing needs in other areas of Council and the priority of maintaining existing pathways.  Getting scooters and the like off roadways is imperative to safety.  Council has a Pedestrian Access Management Plan (PAMP) which identifies requirements for new footpaths and where in-fill would form a continuous off-road path of travel, however Council's ability to fund the PAMP is another story.  Programs such as the recent funding under NSW Family and Community Services (in conjunction with LGSA) -  Aged Friendly Communities Grant provide much needed capital for on-ground projects.  At the local level, the difference these projects make cannot be under-estimated.?

 

The timing of the Committee meeting and the deadline for submissions did not provide an opportunity for a report to Council and in any case, the content of the submission was based on well-documented views which have been reported to Council on various occasions over the life of the Access Committee.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Assistant General Manager ? Engineering Services

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

Nothing identified

 

Social

Nothing identified

 

Economic

Nothing identified

 

Risk

Improved management of non-registered motorised scooters serves to lower risks associated with their use.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Nothing identified

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Nothing required

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

Nothing identified

 

Attachments:

1View

12399/2013 - Minutes of the Nambucca Shire Council Access Committee meeting held 23 April 2013

0 Pages

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 June 2013

Minutes of the Access Committee meeting held 23 April 2013

 

Meeting Opened: 2:10 pm.

 

PRESENT

 

Mrs Shirley Holmes (Chairperson)

Cr A Smyth

Ms Coral Hutchinson

Cr Elaine South

Dr Dorothy Secomb

Ms Margaret Hutchinson

Mr Les Small

Ms Alba Sky

Ms Lee-anne Funnell

Ms Jenny Adams

 

 

APOLOGIES

 

Mr Peter Shales

Mr Keith Davis

Mrs Fiona Henwood

 

 

 

 

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 3.1???? SF1822????????????? 230413???? Confirmation of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting held 26 March 2013

ReSOLVED: (SMYTH/SOUTH)

 

That the minutes of the meeting held 26 March 2013 be confirmed.

 

 

ITEM 3.2???? SF1822????????????? 230413???? Report on Business Arising from the Previous Meeting held 26 March 2013

ReSOLVED: (SECOMB/SOUTH)

 

That the following business arising from the previous minutes be noted:

 

1.? Council?s Assistant General Manager Engineering Services advised that attending the May meeting would be preferred as a draft Council budget would be available by then.

2.? Sliding showers have now been installed in disability shower/toilets at Macksville Aquatic Centre to better cater for people with disabilities.

3.? $6,000 has been raised towards the cost of a chair lift for the big pool, largely due to the concerted efforts of one person.

4.? A second aqua-chair has been ordered for use in the hydrotherapy pool to cater for demand at peak periods.

 

 


 

 

ITEM 3.3???? SF1822????????????? 230413???? Report on Correspondence to Access Committee meeting 23 April 2013

ReSOLVED: (HUTCHINSON/SMALL)

 

That the correspondence be noted and that a submission on behalf of the Access Committee be sent to the NSW Joint Standing Committee on Road Safety in response to its inquiry into non-registered motorised vehicles.

 

 

 

ITEM 3.4???? SF1822????????????? 230413???? Report on General Business to Access Committee meeting 23 April 2013

 

Transport for NSW Social Access Framework ? Let?s Hear Your Thoughts

 

The consultation on 19 June 2013 in Coffs Harbour was discussed and the following is the be followed up:?

1.? What are the costs of using Community Transport including their buses?

2.? What public transport connections are there south?

3.? The successful public bus education activities recently held for young people could form the basis of something similar for adults, particularly older people on their own who don?t know how to use public transport.? A mystery shopper trip?

Elders Abuse Helpline ? 1800 628 221

Information noted.

 

???

NEXT MEETING DATE

 

The next meeting will be held on Tuesday 28 May 2013 commencing at 2:00 pm.?

 

CLOSURE

There being no further business the Chairperson then closed the meeting the time being 3:20 pm.?

????????????

SHIRLEY HOLMES

(CHAIRPERSON)


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 10.6?? T001/2013??????? 270613??????? T001/2013 Tender for Audit Services for a six (6) year period commencing 1 July 2013

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Faye Hawthorne, Accountant; Craig Doolan, Manager Financial Services ????????

 

Summary:

 

Council were advised on 15 May 2013 that tenders had been invited under delegated authority and resolved as follows:

 

????????? ?That Council note tenders have been invited for Audit Services for the six years commencing 1 July 2013.?

 

The tender closed at 11.00 am on Thursday 13 June 2013.

 

Five tender submissions were received from the following:

 

?????????? Forsyths Business Services Pty Ltd

?????????? WHK Camerons Audit Services

?????????? Northcorp Accountants

?????????? Hill Rogers Spencer Steer Assurance

?????????? Hayes Knight Audit (Qld) Pty ltd

 

The tender is for a six (6) year period commencing 1 July 2013.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council accept the tender submitted by Forsyths Business Services Pty Ltd for Tender No. T001/2013 for a period of six (6) years commencing on 1 July 2013 and terminating on 30 June 2019, being the lowest tender received.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1??????? Accept the recommendation.

2??????? Not accept the recommendation.

3??????? Accept any of the other tenderers.

 

Please note: If Council wishes to discuss the tenders and/or accept a different tender it will be necessary to move into closed meeting.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

In accordance with Sections 422 and 424 of the Local Government Act 1993 Council invited tenders for the appointment of Council?s Auditor for the six (6) years commencing 1 July 2013.

 

Council received five (5) responses and all tenderers have addressed the requirements of the tender specification.? All have similar approaches to the conduct of the audit, the audit process and audit reporting. All tenderers have the necessary qualified personnel to serve as auditors to Council.

 

The submissions were evaluated using the assessment criteria and weightings which have been detailed in a confidential report together with the evaluation summary detailing name, price and comments.? The tender with the highest weighted score has been recommended.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Manager Finance

Mid North Coast Councils

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no environmental implications.

 

Social

 

There are no social implications.

 

Economic

 

There are no economic implications.

 

Risk

 

That the cost of audit services not be provided for in the annual budget.

 

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budget

 

The cost of Audit Services is provided for in the annual budget. If Council chooses to engage Hayes Knight Audit, Northcorp Accountants or Hill Rogers Spencer Steer a variation will be required at the September Budget Review.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

Any additional expenses will be a variance to working funds each year.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

Not applicable.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 10.7?? SF1709??????????? 270613??????? Applications and Statistical Reports 2012-2013 - May 2013

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Lorraine Hemsworth, Business Service Coordinator ????????

 

Summary:

 

Development Application statistics for the calendar year 2013 compared with 2012 are provided in the body of the report.

 

Recommendation:

 

1????????? That Council note development application statistics and processing times for 2013 compared with 2012.

 

2????????? That Council note the statistical information for Applications and Certificates received and released by Council for 2012-2013.

 

Development Application Statistics

 

The figures show a 4.17% Increase in the number of DA?s received to end May 2013 with construction costs increasing by 74.66% compared to the same period in 2012. The total number of DA?s/CD?s approved for the month of May 2013 was 16 plus 3 modifications.

 

DA?S AND COMPLYING DEVELOPMENT

 

Construction Costs

No Applications Received

Applications Approved (DA & CD)

January-May 2012

$6,891,340

92

58

January-May 2013

$27,198,450

96

77

 

 

FINANCIAL:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The above comparisons will be considered in the next quarterly budget review to identify what impact the development application numbers will have on our projected income.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

An average income is estimated at the start of each budget year and is reviewed at each quarterly review.

 


TURNAROUND TIMES FOR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS 2013

Month

Mean Time

Median

#Average age of DA?s (Days)

Average

Highest

Lowest

January

46.1

34.5

51.5

149

18

February

62.4

39.5

62.4

173

16

March

41.8

40

58.2

162

17

April

34.92

30

37

49

23

May

37.30

28

47.31

199

2

 

#Average age of DA?s

The average age of all DA?s for the month is derived from the total number of days from when the applications were lodged with Council until determined. This average is provided for information as many applications required additional information by Council and/or other Government Agencies to enable them to be processed (ie Stop Clock applied).

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 10.8?? SF1031??????????? 270613??????? Outstanding DA's greater than 12 months, applications where submissions received not determined to 7 - 14 June 2013

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Lorraine Hemsworth, Business Service Coordinator ????????

 

Summary:

 

In accordance with Council resolution from 15 May 2008 meeting, the development applications listed below are in excess of 12 months old (Table 1) (One application is in excess of 12 months old).

 

Table 2 is development applications which have been received but not yet determined due to submissions received. In accordance with Minute 848/08 from Council meeting of 18 December 2008, should any Councillor wish to ?call in? an application a Notice of Motion is required specifying the reasons why it is to be ?called in?.

 

If an application is not called in and staff consider the matters raised by the submissions have been adequately addressed then the application will be processed under delegated authority. Where refusal is recommended the application may be reported to Council for determination.

 

Recommendation:

 

That the applications where submissions have been received be noted and received for information by Council.

 

 

TABLE 1: ????? UNRESOLVED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS IN EXCESS OF 12 MONTHS OLD

 

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/
STAFF COMMENTS

2012/011

03/02/2012

Nambucca Gardens Estate 346 Lot Residential Subdivision with Residue, Associated Works ? Staged

Lot 2 DP 1119830, Alexandra Drive, Bellwood

? Submissions outlined in previous report to Council 27 September 2012 ? Item 10.1

????? Further information required from applicant before matter may be processed

????? Voluntary Planning Agreement supported by Council at its 28 February 2013 meeting.

????? Additional information still being provided

 

Please note that there is one unresolved Development Applications in Excess of 12 months old.

 

TABLE 2: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS WHERE SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND ARE NOT YET DETERMINED

DA NO

DATE OF RECEIPT

PROPOSAL

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED/
STAFF COMMENTS

2013/025

1/03/2013

Attached Dual Occupancy

Lot 2 DP 791770, 2 Brahminy Street, Nambucca Heads

????? Building on fence line with neighbours

????? Bedrooms at back of neighbours home and would be quite close to building

????? Nice and quiet area

????? Devalue properties

 

Site inspection being arranged (delayed due to tenants in property)

Site inspection arranged

 

Still trying to arrange site inspection

Final Notice for site inspection or application will be returned

Access now been permitted and assessment being conducted

2013/029

11/03/2013

32 Lot Large Lot Residential Subdivision plus 1 Rural Residue Lot

Lot 2 DP 773170, 166 Bald Hill Road, Macksville

????? Road design to provide flood free access to eastern end of the proposed subdivision

????? Intersection is extremely dangerous for existing residents as already many accidents

????? Dangerous blind spots on Bald Hill road and grass shoulders

????? Existing wildlife corridor which has been there for more than 50 years ? will this be preserved or destroyed?

????? The Road, Power and Phone lines are in constant disrepair

????? Not clear on effluent disposal

????? Enquiring if Council are going to notify all property owners on Bald Hill Road

 

Reviewing DA and submissions

Town Planning Staff and RFS concerns have been reported to applicant

Applicant is preparing amended plans

No update to this

2013/036

20/03/2013

Dual Occupancy

Lot 2 DP 1038947, Scotts Head Road,, Way Way

????? On registration of DP Clearing of 20m strip along Grassy Head Road was registered a restriction to user

????? On DP it is stated that access to Grassy Head Road is prohibited from this property ? 3 properties use one access

????? Only one dwelling should be allowed on each lot and not two

 

Assessment being conducted

2013/057

02/05/2013

Dual Occupancy & Demolition of existing dwelling

Lot 10 Section C, DP 17707, 2 Waratah Street, Scotts Head

????? Amenity ? view sharing concerns ? height limits and loss of views therefore property value decrease

????? Compliance concerns ? query on complying with sq metre rule excluding access handles

????? Adjacent windows on 2nd floor overlook external area

???? Privacy concerns ? increase in noise levels due to increased housing density and location of buildings

????? Demolition concerns ? regarding the removal of asbestos

????? Could set precedent in dual occupancies and parking issues

 

Officer assessing proposal and submissions

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ?


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

Assistant General Manager Corporate and Community Services Report

ITEM 10.9?? SF1782??????????? 270613??????? Scotts Head Events Committee of Management

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Monika Schuhmacher, Executive Assistant ????????

 

Summary:

 

At its meeting on 3 June 2010 Council resolved to note the discontinuation of the Scotts Head New Year?s Eve Celebrations Committee of Management (s355 committee).? After eleven years the event had grown substantially and neither Council nor the Committee had the resources to continue holding such a large event.?

 

Some members of the discontinued Committee have reunited and now request that the former Scotts Head New Year?s Eve Celebrations Committee of Management be resurrected as a s355 committee and be known as the Scotts Head Events Committee of Management.

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council approve the formation of a s355 Committee of Management to be known as Scotts Head Events Committee of Management.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1????????????? That Council approve the s355 Committee of Management

2????????????? That Council not approve the s355 Committee of Management

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

The new Committee proposes to hold its first event in April 2014 ? Scotts Head Food, Wine and Music Festival ? on the Scotts Head Reserve between 10.00 am and 8.00 pm.

 

An application for this event has been approved by Council staff as well as Council?s insurers.

 

The Festival will provide for all age groups and will include various activities for children (eg jumping castle, circus and workshops, merry go round, clowns, giant slides).? There will be a variety of stalls and an area for music and dancing.?

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

There has been consultation with representatives of the former Scotts Head New Year?s Eve Committee of Management.

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

There are no implications for the environment.

 

Social

 

The provision of a family oriented Committee will provide a positive social impact.

 

Economic

 

There are no significant economic implications.

 

Risk

 

Any events held by this Committee will require a risk assessment approved by Council?s insurer.

 

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

There is no impact on budgets.

 

Source of fund and any variance to working funds

 

There is no impact on working funds.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

The administration of the s355 Committee will be dealt with in current staffing and resourcing levels.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ?


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

Corporate and Community Services

ITEM 10.10? SF251????????????? 270613??????? Schedule of Council Public Meetings

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Monika Schuhmacher, Executive Assistant ????????

 

Summary:

 

The following is a schedule of dates for public Council meetings.? The meeting dates may change from to time and this will be recorded in the next available report to Council.

 

Recommendation:

 

That the schedule of dates for public Council meetings be noted and received for information by Council.

 

 

 

MEETING

DATE

VENUE

COMMENCING

Ordinary Council Meeting

27/06/2013

Council Chambers

? 5.30 PM

Water Supply Steering Committee

03/07/2013

Bowraville site

Leave Council Chambers at 10.15 am

10.45 AM

Ordinary Council Meeting

10/07/2013

Council Chambers

? 8.30 AM

Access Committee

23/07/2013

Council Chambers

? 2.00 PM

Ordinary Council Meeting

25/07/2013

Council Chambers

? 5.30 PM

Water Supply Steering Committee

07/08/2013

Bowraville site

Leave Council Chambers at 10.15 am

10.45 AM

Ordinary Council Meeting

14/08/2013

Council Chambers

? 8.30 AM

Access Committee

27/08/2013

Council Chambers

? 2.00 PM

Ordinary Council Meeting

29/08/2013

Missabotti Hall

Leave Council Chambers at 4.00 pm

? 5.30 PM

Water Supply Steering Committee

04/09/2013

Bowraville site

Leave Council Chambers at 10.15 am

10.45 AM

Ordinary Council Meeting

11/09/2013

Council Chambers

? 8.30 AM

Access Committee

24/09/2013

Council Chambers

? 2.00 PM

Ordinary Council Meeting

26/09/2013

Warrell Creek Hall

Leave Council Chambers at 4.30 pm

? 5.30 PM

Water Supply Steering Committee

02/10/2013

Bowraville site

Leave Council Chambers at 10.15 am

10.45 AM

Ordinary Council Meeting

16/10/2013

Council Chambers

? 8.30 AM

Access Committee

22/10/2013

Council Chambers

? 2.00 PM

Ordinary Council Meeting

31/10/2013

Taylors Arm Hall

Leave Council Chambers at 4.30 pm

? 5.30 PM

Water Supply Steering Committee

06/11/2013

Bowraville site

Leave Council Chambers at 10.15 am

10.45 AM

Ordinary Council Meeting

13/11/2013

Council Chambers

? 8.30 AM

Access Committee

26/11/2013

Council Chambers

? 2.00 PM

Ordinary Council Meeting

28/11/2013

South Arm Hall

Leave Council Chambers at 4.30 pm

??5.30 PM

Ordinary Council Meeting

11/12/2013

Council Chambers

? 8.30 AM

 

Note:?? Departure times to Rural Halls have been added.

Note:?? Meetings at the Rural Halls commence with light refreshments at 5.00 pm.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ?


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.1?? SF1031??????????? 270613??????? Rainwater Tank Rebate Scheme Policy

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Richard Spain, Manager Water and Sewerage ????????

 

Summary:

 

Council has previously resolved to fund the rainwater tank rebate scheme through the Water Fund with $20,000 allocated in the 2013/14 budget for this purpose.

 

A revised policy has been drafted and provided to Council for review and comment and following that process it was resolved to provide a rebate for tanks sized from 1,000 litres up.

 

The draft policy was placed on public exhibition for the minimum 28 day period and no submissions were received from the public.

 

It is recommended that Council now adopt the draft policy.? A copy of the policy is attached for Council?s information

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council resolve to adopt the amended rainwater tank rebate policy.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

No other options were considered as Council has already reviewed and commented on the policy and no public submissions were received during the exhibition period.

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

This is a straight forward matter previously reported to Council in detail and no further discussion is considered necessary.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

????? Council

????? General Public

????? Assistant General Manager Engineering Services

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY:

 

Social

 

The funding of the rainwater tank rebate through the Water Fund will have no additional social impact.

 

Environment

 

The funding of the rainwater tank rebate through the Water Fund will have no additional environmental impact.?

 

Economic

 

The funding of the rainwater tank rebate through the Water Fund will not in itself provide an economic impact.? However it is hoped that the proposed increase to rebate will encourage a higher uptake and increased economic benefit to those ratepayers that choose to install the tanks

 

Risk

 

The funding of the rainwater tank rebate through the Water Fund will have no additional impact on risk.

 

 

FINANCIAL:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

The rebate for rainwater tanks will require an increase in the budget for the water saving devices rebate.

It will be a fixed amount each year and once the allocation has been filled further applications will not be accepted until the following year.

 

Source of funds and any variance to working funds

 

Funds for the rainwater tank rebate will be sourced from the Water Fund.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There are no implications related to levels of service and the rebates will be managed and administered using resources from the Business Services Unit, Community Services and Engineering Departments..

 

 

Attachments:

1View

3760/2013 - DRAFT Policy - Rainwater Tank Rebate Scheme Policy

0 Pages

??


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 June 2013

Rainwater Tank Rebate Scheme Policy

 

 

 

 

 

 

NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL

DRAFT RAINWATER TANK REBATE SCHEME POLICY

 

 

Our Vision

 

Nambucca Valley ~ Living at its best

 

Our Mission Statement

 

?The Nambucca Valley will value and protect its natural environment, maintain its assets and infrastructure and develop opportunities for its people.?

 

 

1.0???? POLICY OBJECTIVE

 

The Objectives of this Policy are to provide a financial incentive to install rainwater tank/s to reduce demand on Council?s reticulated water supply and storage and provides guidance to property owners proposing to install new rainwater tank/s (roof catchment only) and seek an installation rebate from Council.

 

 

2.0???? POLICY APPLICATION

 

This Policy applies to the whole shire for both new and existing residences following the purchase and installation of new rainwater tanks after 30 June 2013 for roof catchment only.

 

Second hand tanks, stormwater catchment tanks, transportation, pressure pumps and tanks required for compliance with a BASIX Certificate, are not covered by this Policy.

 

 

3.0???? RELATED PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

3.1?????? State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

 

??????????? Encourages sustainable residential development and requires certain criteria to be met for new residential development and includes alterations and additions and swimming pools associated with residential developments.

 

Where the installation of a rainwater tank is required to achieve the criteria for the issue of a BASIX Certificate, no rebate will be available under the Nambucca Shire Rainwater Tank Rebate Scheme.

 

Properties connected to the town water supply which have met all BASIX and bushfire fighting water storage requirements, will be eligible for a rebate under the Nambucca Shire Rainwater Tank Rebate Scheme for:

 

?????????? an additional rainwater tank of minimum size 2,000 litres; or

?????????? an increase in capacity of any tank required to meet BASIX or bushfire fighting requirements, by a minimum of 2,000 litres.

 

??????????? In this case the rebate will relate only to the additional rainwater tank or increased capacity.

 

3.2?????? State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008.

 

3.3?????? Nambucca Shire Council Exempt and Complying Development Control Plan (DCP 10)

 

??????????? Both of the above (3.2 and 3.3) cover the installation, including locations, of above or on-ground rainwater tanks on individual properties. In many instances, where the positioning of a rainwater tank complies with the stated requirements under the SEPP (3.2 above) and/or DCP 10 (3.3 above), approval will not be required from Council.

??????????? (NB: Inground water storage tanks require approval from Council)

 

3.4?????? Planning for Bushfire Protection and AS3959 ? Building in a Bushfire Prone Area.

 

??????????? Relating to location, type and size of water storage tanks will need to be considered.

 

3.5?????? Guidelines also exist for the use of water collected in rainwater tanks, these are:

 

?????????? Australian Drinking Water Guidelines ? 2004

?????????? NSW Health Department ?Private Water Supply Guidelines?.

 

 

4.0?????? DEFINITIONS

 

The terms used in this Policy shall be read in conjunction with the definitions contained within:

 

?????????? NSW Local Government Act 1993;

?????????? Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979;

?????????? Nambucca Local Environmental Plan in force at the time; and

?????????? Drinking water ? water intended primarily for human consumption.

 

 

5.0???? POLICY STATEMENT

 

Rainwater tanks are commonly used in the Nambucca Shire as a private water supply in areas where there is no public water supply available.

 

Rainwater tanks can also provide benefits in urban areas with reticulated public water supplies. While NSW Health recommends using the reticulated supply for human consumption (drinking water) ie drinking, cooking and bathing, the tank water is entirely suitable for toilet flushing, laundry, car washing, swimming pool top up and garden watering purposes. Such dual supplies need to be carefully installed to ensure that water from the tank cannot backflow into the public supply and this means separate piping systems and backflow prevention valves.

 

Rainwater tanks can also act as a stormwater control device by providing some temporary storage of runoff from the roof. This tends to mimic, to some degree, the way natural environments behave in slowing down the rate of discharge of stormwater. This can reduce the adverse impacts of urbanisation on local streams and the landscape, and in many cases can reduce localised flooding.

 

Council supports and encourages the use of rainwater tanks to:

 

?????????? reduce demand on town water;

?????????? reduce environmental impacts by conserving the water resource;

?????????? reduce environmental impacts by reducing the severity of stormwater runoff from urban areas;

?????????? provide additional water security to consumers during times of drought and interrupted water supply; and

?????????? reduce costs to consumer and Council by reducing demand for treated town water.

 

Suggested Uses for Water from Rainwater Tanks

 

The suggested uses for rainwater include:

 

?????????? Toilet flushing

?????????? Cold water service to washing machine

?????????? Garden watering, car washing, swimming pool top up and all other external outdoor uses

 

In reticulated areas, Council does not recommend the use of water supplied from a rainwater tank for human consumption such as drinking, cooking or bathing purposes. The decision to use rainwater for drinking or other consumption purposes is entirely at the residents? and owners? risk.

 

It should be noted that after a tank is installed, it is vital that consumers continue to minimise water usage (particularly garden watering and other external uses).

 

If consumers fail to exercise the same vigilance and restraint and the tank simply becomes an extra source of supply, the potential environmental benefits are lost.

 

 

6.0???? History

 

Nambucca Shire introduced a 4% Environmental Levy on all ratepayers in the 2003/04 and 2004/05 budgetary years. This generated just over $200,000 in 2003/04 with a rate pegging increase in the second year.

 

The extra funding enabled a number of environmental projects to proceed that had been held in abeyance for years due to a lack of funding. The last few years have seen an increase in the demand from the community and governments to improve and monitor water quality, undertake bushland regeneration, reduce water use, all of which add to the need for secure and dedicated funding.

For Council to continue the Environmental Levy after 2004/05 the Minister required Council to prepare a program for expenditure for five years 2005/06 to 2009/10. Within the five year program a ?Rainwater Tank Subsidy? of $20,000 was identified for the three years 2007/08, 2008/09 and 2009/10. Council has identified the continuation of the Rainwater Tank Rebate in its draft 2010 ? 2012 Environmental Levy to be presented to the Minister for Local Government as part of the 2010/2011 Management Plan and Budget process.

The Nambucca Shire Council Rainwater Tank Rebate Scheme took effect from 1 July 2008. In January 2013 Council resolved to no longer fund the Rainwater Tank Rebate Scheme through the Environmental Levy.? Instead the rebate is to be funded as a water demand management strategy through the Water Fund.? This proposed demand management strategy formed part of the recommendations of Council?s Integrated Water Cycle Management Plan.

 

Up until 2011 the NSW Government also provided a rainwater tank rebate scheme however this has been discontinued and the rebates are no longer available

 

 

7.0???? WHO IS ELIGIBLE? ? ELIGIBILITY CONDITIONS

 

7.1???? General

 

7.1.1?? The scheme is open to residential households in Nambucca Shire and is payable only to the registered owner of the property.

 

7.1.2?? The rebate applications will only be considered for new tanks purchased and installed after 30 June 2013.

 

7.1.3?? There is only one rainwater tank rebate claim payable per property over the lifetime of the scheme through Nambucca Shire Council.

 

7.1.4?? Rebates apply only to new products and do not apply to used or second-hand products.

 

7.1.5?? The maximum rebate from Nambucca Shire Council shall not exceed half the original invoiced cost of the rainwater tank. The available rebate amounts are detailed in Section 8.

 

7.1.6?? Delivery charges are not eligible for rebates and will not be considered as part of any claim.

 

7.1.7?? For connections to internal fixtures a Nambucca Shire Council approval must be obtained. Internal connections are to be carried out by a licensed plumber.

 

7.1.8?? For rainwater tanks deemed Exempt Development, installation must comply with the provisions of either State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 or Nambucca Shire Council?s Development Control Plan 10 - Exempt and Complying Development. Rainwater tanks that are not Exempt Development, a Complying Development Certificate or a Development Application (whichever applies) will be required and will need to comply with the Building Code of Australia and Nambucca Local Environmental Plan in force at the time.

 

7.1.9?? If the rainwater tank is a mandatory requirement for a newly constructed residential household, or required under the requirements of BASIX, a rebate will not be paid except when the tank or a separate tank is installed, which exceeds the BASIX requirement for storage capacity by at least 2,000 litres.

 

7.1.10 Rebate applications will only be considered once the tank is installed, inspected by a Council Officer and operational.

 

7.1.11 This offer is strictly limited. Once allocated budget for rebates for the current financial year have been issued, there will be no more rebates in that year. The program MAY continue into the following financial year.

 

7.1.12 To claim a rebate under the Nambucca Shire Rainwater Tank Rebate Scheme, the applicant must complete and submit the application form annexed to this document and also available from Council?s website www.nambucca.nsw.gov.au (Council Forms), and provide the ORIGINAL tax invoice as proof of purchase of a rainwater tank. Copies of tax invoices will be not be accepted. See Annexure A ? Rebate Application Form.

 

7.2???? Properties on Town Water Supply

 

7.2.1?? The minimum rainwater tank size for which a rebate will apply is 1,000 litres.

 

7.2.2?? Rainwater tanks shall not be cross-connected to Council?s reticulated water system.

 

7.2.3?? Rainwater tanks should only be used for toilet flushing, cold water clothes washing, swimming pool top up and outdoor purposes.

 

7.2.4?? Rebates can be claimed for tanks installed for either indoor or outdoor use.

 

7.3???? Properties Outside Town Water Supply

 

Rebates can be claimed for rainwater tanks installed for either indoor or outdoor residential use only and in the following instances:

 

7.3.1?? New dwellings ? for a tank which exceeds the BASIX and bushfire fighting storage requirements by at lease 1,999 litres

 

7.3.2?? Existing dwellings ? for a tank which exceeds the minimum 22,500 litres capacity by 2,000 litres.? The rebate will be paid on that portion of the tank volume that exceeds the minimum requirement (ie. for a 30,000 litre tank the rebate will be that applicable to a to a 7,500 litre tank).

 

 

8.0???? REBATE AMOUNTS

 

Rebates for rainwater tanks shall be paid in accordance with the capacity of the tank as detailed in the table below:

 

TANK CAPACITY (litres)

REBATE

1,000 ? 4,999?

$300 or half the cost whichever is least

5,000 ? 10,000?

$500 or half the cost whichever is least

>10,000 ? 20,000?

$750 or half the cost whichever is least

>20,000 ? 30,000?

$1,000 or half the cost whichever is least

> 30,000

$1,500 or half the cost whichever is least

 

Note that where a minimum tank size is required for development consent the rebate will only be provided on the basis of any additional tank capacity installed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Department:

ENGINEERING SERVICES

Last Reviewed

Resolution Number

Author:

 

 

 

Document No.

 

 

 

First Adopted:

17 January 2008

 

 

Resolution No:

 

20 October 2011

 

Review Due:

 

15 April 2010

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting - 27 June 2013

Rainwater Tank Rebate Scheme Policy

 

Rainwater Tank & Plumbing Rebate Application Form

 

 

Applicant Details

 

Title:????????????????????? First Name:?????????????????????????????????????????? Surname:

 

Postal Address:????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Town:???????????????????????????? Postcode:

 

Property Address:????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Town:???????????????????????????? Postcode:

 

Contact Phone Number:???????????????????????????????????????????????????? Mobile:

 

Signed:????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Dated:

 

 

 

Rainwater Tank Information

 


Is the rainwater tank installed above ground or below ground????

 

 


Is the installation deemed ?Exempt Development??

 


If not Exempt Development, has a Complying Development Certificate

or Development Consent been obtained?

 

If yes, CDC or DA Number:??

 


What is rainwater tank connected to??

 

Yes??????????????????? No

 
Will the rainwater tank be supplemented from Nambucca Shire

Council Water Supply (mains water)?

 

If no, what other source?

 

 

CHECKLIST (original receipts/tax invoices are mandatory)

 


???????? Have you included your original rainwater tank receipt?

 

???????? Have you checked that the plumber is appropriately licensed to carry out the work and a Section 68 approval (if required) has been granted by Council?

 

???????? Have you signed and dated the application form?

 

???????? Have you read the eligibility conditions on the reverse of this form to ensure that you are entitled to this rebate?

 

Mail this form and attachments to Nambucca Shire Council, PO Box 177, Macksville, NSW, 2447 or it may be hand delivered to Nambucca Shire Council, 44 Princess Street, Macksville.

 

** Please note Council will inspect all applications for rural properties prior to a rebate being approved.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 27 June 2013

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services Report

ITEM 11.2?? SF844????????????? 270613??????? Nambucca District Water Supply Steering Committee Meeting - 5 June 2013

 

AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES:??? Richard Spain, Manager Water and Sewerage ????????

 

Summary:

 

Water and Sewerage Steering Committee (WSSC) meetings relating to the Nambucca District Water Supply Bowraville Off-River Storage Project are scheduled to be held monthly at the construction site office

 

The minutes relating to the meeting held on 5 June 2013 are provided at the end of this report for information and adoption by Council.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council adopt the minutes of the Water and Sewerage Steering Committee Meeting held on 5 June 2013.

 

 

OPTIONS:

 

1??????? Adopt the minutes

2??????? Seek further clarification on particular items

 

 

DISCUSSION:

 

Contracts have been awarded and construction works have commenced on the Bowraville Off River Storage Project.? As this is a very significant project Council has resolved to hold monthly meetings of the WSSC at the site office of the Principal Dam Contractor with a view to keeping regularly informed of the progress, risks, variations and expenditure on the project.

 

 

CONSULTATION:

 

Assistant General Manager Engineering Services

NSW Public Works

NSW Office of Water

GHD

Haslin Constructions Pty Ltd

Ledonne Constructions Pty Ltd

 

 

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

 

Environment

 

The environment impacts of the project are detailed in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that was prepared by GHD.? The contractors are required to prepare and work to Environmental Management Plans that conform to the requirements of the EIS.

 

Social

 

The project aims to provide a social benefit through security of water supply.

 

Economic

 

The project will have a significant economic impact on the community as increases in both the typical residential bill and developer charges will be required to service Council?s financial commitment to the project.

 

The construction works should also provide an economic stimulus to the Shire.

 

Risk

 

This is a major project for the Shire and there are significant risks associated with construction contracts of this size.? An updated project risk register is kept by the Project Managers and the risks are discussed during the meetings.

 

 

FINANCIAL:

 

Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets

 

Council has committed funding for construction works on the Off River Storage Project in the 2012/13 budget and funds will also be allocated for inclusion in the 2013/14 budget.

 

Source of funds and any variance to working funds

 

Funding for the project will be sourced from reserves, grants and loans.

 

The Office of Water has confirmed a $14.8 million subsidy as part of the existing Country Towns Water Supply and Sewerage program.? $7.4 million of the funding has been claimed to date.

 

Council has also signed a Stage 2 funding deed for the remaining $9 million of a $10 million grant offered by the Federal Government.? $8 million of this Stage 2 funding has been claimed and paid to date with the remaining $1 million to be paid on completion of the works.

 

Service level changes and resourcing/staff implications

 

There are no implications related to levels of service and resourcing.

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report. ????