General Purpose Committee - 19
January 2011
AGENDA Page
1 APOLOGIES
2 DISCLOSURE
OF INTEREST
3 General Manager Report
8.1 September 2010 Budget Review
4 Director
Environment and Planning Report
9.1 Presentation of Flood Study Peer Review for the Pacific Highway Bypass of Macksville by the RTA
|
Time
|
Description
|
Where
OS/CC
|
Item No
|
Page No
|
|
08.30-8.45
|
Introduction
of new staff:
Paul Gallagher, Director Engineering Services
Kate Wickman,
Project Officer—Drink Don’t Sink
|
CC
|
|
|
|
8.45 am
|
September
Budget Review
|
CC
|
8.1
|
4
|
|
9.45 am
|
Morning Tea
with RTA representatives
|
CC
|
|
|
|
10.00 am
|
RTA - Peer
Review Flood Study Warrell Ck to Urunga Pacific Highway Upgrade
|
CC
|
9.1
|
7
|
NAMBUCCA SHIRE COUNCIL
DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST AT MEETINGS
|
Name
of Meeting:
|
|
|
Meeting
Date:
|
|
|
Item/Report
Number:
|
|
|
Item/Report
Title:
|
|
|
|
|
|
I
|
|
declare
the following interest:
|
|
(name)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pecuniary – must leave chamber, take no part in discussion
and voting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non
Pecuniary – Significant Conflict –
Recommended that Councillor/Member leaves chamber, takes no part in
discussion or voting.
|
|
|
Non-Pecuniary
– Less Significant Conflict –
Councillor/Member may choose to remain in Chamber and participate in
discussion and voting.
|
|
For
the reason that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Council’s
Email Address – council@nambucca.nsw.gov.au
Council’s
Facsimile Number – (02) 6568 2201
(Instructions and definitions are
provided on the next page).
Definitions
(Local Government Act and Code of Conduct)
Pecuniary – An interest that a person has in a matter because
of a reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss
to the person or another person with whom the person is associated.
(Local
Government Act, 1993 section 442 and 443)
A
Councillor or other member of a Council Committee who is present at a meeting
and has a pecuniary interest in any matter which is being considered must
disclose the nature of that interest to the meeting as soon as practicable.
The
Council or other member must not take part in the consideration or discussion
on the matter and must not vote on any question relating to that matter. (Section
451).
Non-pecuniary – A private or personal interest the council official
has that does not amount to a pecuniary interest as defined in the Act (for
example; a friendship, membership of an association, society or trade union or
involvement or interest in an activity and may include an interest of a
financial nature).
If
you have declared a non-pecuniary conflict of interest you have a broad range
of options for managing the conflict. The option you choose will depend on an
assessment of the circumstances of the matter, the nature of your interest and
the significance of the issue being dealt with. You must deal with a non-pecuniary
conflict of interest in at least one of these ways.
·
It may be appropriate that no
action is taken where the potential for conflict is minimal. However, council officials should consider providing an explanation of why they consider a conflict
does not exist.
·
Limit involvement if practical
(for example, participate in discussion but not in decision making or
visa-versa). Care needs to be taken when exercising this option.
·
Remove the source of the conflict
(for example, relinquishing or divesting the personal interest that creates the
conflict or reallocating the conflicting duties to another officer).
·
Have no involvement by absenting
yourself from and not taking part in any debate or voting on the issue as if
the provisions in section 451(2) of the Act apply (particularly if you have a
significant non-pecuniary conflict of interest).
|
General Purpose Committee
|
19 January 2011
|
General Manager's Report
ITEM 8.1 SF1524 190111 September 2010 Budget Review
AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES: Craig Doolan, Manager Financial Services
|
Summary:
General Fund: This review revises
the net operating result for 2010/11 to a deficit of $214,000 and varies
Current Liquid Equity to $1,556,569, a decline of $150,900 since the Original
Budget.
Council’s estimated Current Liquid Equity (available working capital
at year end) is adequate at approximately $265,000 above the minimum level as
per Council’s policy.
Water Supplies: This review revises
the net operating result for 2010/11 to a surplus of $37,800 and varies
Current Liquid Equity to $1,716,737, an improvement of $36,800 since the
Original Budget.
Council’s estimated Current Liquid Equity (available working
capital at year end) is strong at approximately $1,116,000 above the minimum
level as per Council’s policy.
Sewerage Services: This review revises the
net operating result for 2010/11 to a deficit of $26,600 and varies Current
Liquid Equity to $701,240, a decline of $2,000 since the Original Budget.
Council’s estimated Current Liquid Equity (available working
capital at year end) is adequate at approximately $356,000 above the minimum
level as per Council’s policy.
The attached
budget review document includes, as variances, amounts required to match
unexpected income/expenditure items plus resolved inclusions to the budget.
Items varying $5,000 or more are briefly discussed commencing page 2 in
ledger account order and referenced to the page no. in budget review document.
Significant variations influencing the result are discussed further in this
report.
|
|
Recommendation:
1 That
the budget review for the quarter ended 30 September, 2010 be received.
2 That the recommended increases and
decreases in votes be included as subsequent votes for the financial year
2010/2011.
3 That the rehabilitation of Pioneer St
North be included in the Nambucca Heads Urban Streets Rehabilitation program
by providing additional funding of $10,000.
|
OPTIONS:
Not Applicable
DISCUSSION:
As mentioned in
the 30th June 2010 Budget Review report, delays to financial
reporting have occurred due to implementation issues associated with the
conversion of Council’s corporate software. As a result of dissimilarities in
financial data storage and presentation between the Fujitsu and Civica systems,
there are some slight variations in the way the financial information is presented.
The Civica system has a much larger ledger account, composing of a master, sub
and resource level. In alleviating the density and thus complexity of the
available data the budget review configuration has been constructed similar to the
structure designed in Fujitsu via a function and activity hierarchy with
information presented at the sub account level.
GENERAL
ACTIVITIES
The summary of
current liquid equity is on page 1 of the Budget Review document. The estimated
current liquid equity surplus is $1,556,569 inclusive of internal loans.
The original
2010/11 budget forecast a net operating deficit of $63,100. Items revoted from
2009/10 amounted to $1,114,100. The balance of internal loans borrowed from
current liquid equity was $631,340.
Despite an
increase in the expected allocation of the Financial Assistance Grant of
$171,000 (General Purpose $116,100 & Roads component $54,900) a deficit
forecast of $214,000 is expected at this review.
The major offset
to this revised grant funding were additional funds required for the
incorporation of concrete girders in relation to the refurbishment of Congarinni North Bridge. Further, Council resolutions relating to consultancy costs for the
Scotts Head Master Plan of $25,500, additional $20,000 for building
alterations at NEOC, and $12,000 for playground equipment at Memorial Park have
been factors. Also, Council received notification that a Workers Compensation
adjustment premium for 2009/10 of $36,300 would be experienced with General’s
contribution calculated as $34,600.
Director
Engineering commentary:
Pioneer
Street
The northern
end of Pioneer St beside “Bucca Blue” is in poor condition and requires an
asphaltic concrete overlay 30mm thick. The estimated cost is $10,000.
WATER
SUPPLIES
The original
2010/11 budget forecast a net operating surplus of $1,000. Net revotes from
2009/10 amount to $0.
This September
review revises the result for 2010/11 to an operating surplus of $37,800, an
improvement of $36,800 on the original $1,000 budget surplus.
After a review
Council’s telemetry system it has been found that the radio transmitters are
old technology and no longer supported. Replacement is urgent as they have
reached the end of their useful life. This has required $50,000 to be allocated
in both Water and Sewerage funds. An offsetting adjustment has been made to the
2010/11 Water Storage allocation with associated reserves utilised for funding.
Approval of a
subsidy amounting to $37,400 for the Metering and Leakage Control Project
completed in 2009/10 has been granted and is the only major net variation
impacting on the result.
SEWERAGE
SERVICES
The original
2010/11 budget forecast a net operating deficit of $24,600. Items revoted from
2009/10 amounted to $25,000.
This September
review revises the result for 2010/11 to a net operating deficit of $26,600, a
decline of $2,000 on the original budget deficit.
Other than
mentioned above in Water, an additional $80,000 is required for switchboards
relating to the augmentation works. Reserves have been utilised with another
deduction to the 2010/11 Water Storage allocation offsetting overall Water and
Sewerage expenditure.
There are no
major net variations to the result as part of this review.
CONSULTATION:
General Manager
Directors
Responsible
Officers
Accountant
SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:
Environment
Not applicable.
Social
Not applicable.
Economic
Not applicable.
Risk
Not applicable.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets
Refer to discussion.
Source of fund and any variance to working funds
Refer to
discussion.
Attachments:
There are no attachments for this report.
|
General Purpose Committee
|
19 January 2011
|
Director Environment & Planning's Report
ITEM 9.1 SF841 190111 Presentation of Flood Study Peer Review for
the Pacific Highway Bypass of Macksville by the RTA
AUTHOR/ENQUIRIES: Greg Meyers, Director Environment and Planning
|
Summary:
Council at its
meeting of 16 June 2010, reaffirmed the Notice of Motion put to Council on 15
April 2010, requesting the NSW Department of Planning to undertake a peer
review of the flood study for the Pacific Highway upgrade around Macksville.
The RTA
engaged WMA Water to undertake the Peer Review, which has now been completed
and was included in the report on submissions to the Environmental Study for
the Warrell Creek-Urunga Pacific Highway Upgrade.
The RTA have
agreed to attend the 19 January 2011 General Purpose Committee Meeting to
present the findings of the Peer Review.
|
|
Recommendation:
That
Council note and thank the RTA, for the presentation of the Peer Review for
the flood study relating to the Pacific Highway Bypass of Macksville.
|
OPTIONS:
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
A Notice of
Motion was put to Council’s meeting on 15 April 2010 regarding the accuracy of
the Roads and Traffic Authority’s Environmental Assessment of the Pacific
Highway Upgrade—Warrell Creek to Urunga (Volume 1 January 2010) resulting in
the recommendations:
1 That Council not accept the Roads and Traffic
Authority’s Environmental Assessment of the Pacific Highway Upgrade, Warrell
Creek to Urunga.
2 That the NSW Department of Planning require a
peer review of the Roads and Traffic Authority’s flood study with the
discrepancies in the submissions to be listed by Council.
3 That Council invite the Roads and Traffic
Authority to address the flooding issues directly at a future Council meeting.
4 That prior to any meeting with the Roads and
Traffic Authority a list be provided to the Roads and Traffic Authority, the
Department of Planning and Councillors identifying all issues Council has in
regard to the flooding.
The Roads and
Traffic Authority addressed Council at its General Purpose Committee meeting on
Wednesday 16 June 2010.
The Peer Review
was undertaken by WMA Water and included in the Submissions Report following
the exhibition of the environmental assessment for the Warrell Creek to Urunga
Pacific Highway Upgrade.
The
representatives from the RTA, Mr Bob Higgins, Mr Chris Clarke, Mr Adam Cameron
and from WMA Water, Mr Mark Babister, will be attending to present the
findings.
CONSULTATION:
RTA
General Manager
SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:
Environment
Not applicable
Social
Not applicable
Economic
Not applicable
Risk
Not applicable
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Direct and indirect impact on current and future budgets
Not applicable
Source of fund and any variance to working funds
Not applicable
Attachments:
There are no attachments for this report.