Agenda of Ordinary Meeting - 17 December 2019

Ordinary Meeting

Meeting Date: Tuesday, 17 December, 2019

Location: Council Chambers, City Administrative Building, Bridge Road, Nowra

Time: 5.00pm

Membership (Quorum - 7)

All Councillors

Please note: The proceedings of this meeting (including presentations, deputations and debate) will be webcast and may be recorded and broadcast under the provisions of the Code of Meeting Practice. Your attendance at this meeting is taken as consent to the possibility that your image and/or voice may be recorded and broadcast to the public.

Agenda

1. Acknowledgement of Traditional Custodians

2. Opening Prayer

3. Australian National Anthem

4. Apologies / Leave of Absence

5. Confirmation of Minutes

· Ordinary Meeting - 26 November 2019

· Extra Ordinary Meeting - 3 December 2019

6. Declarations of Interest

7. Call Over of the Business Paper

8. Presentation of Petitions

9. Mayoral Minute

Mayoral Minute

MM19.23..... Mayoral Minute - Support to the Forest Industry Group in Shoalhaven........ 1

MM19.24..... Mayoral Minute - Acknowledgement - First Responders and Front-line Staff - Shoalhaven Current Bushfire Situation.......................................................... 2

MM19.25..... Mayoral Minute - Congratulations - Essence Group...................................... 3

MM19.26..... Mayoral Minute - NSW State Government's Proposal - Privatise - Softwood Division of Forestry NSW............................................................................................. 4

10. Deputations and Presentations

11. Notices of Motion / Questions on Notice

Notices of Motion / Questions on Notice

CL19.361..... Rescission Motion - DE19.122 - Review of Tabourie Lake Entrance Management Policy.............................................................................................................. 5

CL19.362..... Notice of Motion - DE19.122 - Review of Tabourie Lake Entrance Management Policy........................................................................................................................ 6

CL19.363..... Rescission Motion - DE19.128 Proponent Initiated Planning Proposal (Rezoning) - Lot 1 DP 1246435, 55 Wire Lane, Berry.............................................................. 7

CL19.364..... Notice of Motion - DE19.128 Proponent Initiated Planning Proposal (Rezoning) - Lot 1 DP 1246435, 55 Wire Lane, Berry................................................................. 8

CL19.365..... Notice of Motion - To support the naming of a road at Sussex Inlet - Ralph Lucas Drive................................................................................................................ 9

CL19.366..... Notice of Motion - Callala Beach Drainage Maintenance and Construction 11

CL19.367..... Notice of Motion - Construction of Accessible Viewing Platform - Surfers Avenue, Narrawallee................................................................................................... 12

12. Committee Reports

CL19.368..... Report of the Youth Advisory Committee - 23 October 2019...................... 14

YA19.10...... Youth Advisory Committee Action Plan 2019-2022

YA19.13...... School Bus Transport Safety & Overcrowding Clarification

CL19.369..... Report of the Inclusion & Access Advisory Group - 4 November 2019....... 15

IA19.52........ Additional Item - Noah's Challenge - Support

IA19.53........ Additional item - Investigate Improving Beach Access at Tilbury Cove and Ocean Street, Culburra

IA19.54........ Additional item - Plantation Point Playground Proposal

IA19.55........ Additional Item - (IA19.33) - Disabled car space at the Mollymook Cemetery

CL19.370..... Report of the Shoalhaven Arts Board - 14 November 2019........................ 16

AB19.26...... Shoalhaven Arts Board - Resignation - Karen Akehurst - Vacancy

CL19.371..... Report of the Strategy & Assets Committee - 10 December 2019.............. 17

SA19.223.... Additional Item - Water Availability – Bush Fire Affected Properties - 4,500 L - Trial - Evans Lane Milton

SA19.212.... Retail Lease - Shop 39/43 Kinghorne Street Nowra

SA19.213.... Retail Lease - Schofields Lane Nowra

SA19.218.... Citywide CMP Scoping Study - Variation of Project Funds and Scope

SA19.219.... Draft Citywide Scoping Study Report - Public Exhibition

CL19.372..... Report of the Shoalhaven Traffic Committee - 10 December 2019............ 20

TC19.62...... Private Use of Public Parking - 82 South Street Ulladulla (PN 3561)

TC19.63...... No Parking Zone Extension - Idlewild Avenue - Sanctuary Point Public School (PN 3569)

TC19.64...... Parallel Parking Signage - Mitchell Parade - Mollymook Beach (PN 3573)

TC19.65...... Private Use of Public Parking - Reserve Road (Jellicoe Street) - South Nowra (PN 3570)

TC19.66...... Restricted Parking - Greenwell Point Boat Ramp (PN 3571)

TC19.67...... Parking Signage - Owen Street Huskisson (PN 3572)

TC19.68...... Disabled Parking Upgrades - Shoalhaven Memorial Gardens and Lawn Cemetery - Worrigee Road Worrigee (PN 3574)

TC19.69...... Old Southern Road - South Nowra - Lot 188 - DP755952 - 60 lot Subdivision (PN 3575)

TC19.70...... Reduction of Load Limit - Mayfield Road Bridge (PN 3576)

13. Reports

CEO Group

CL19.345..... Code of Conduct Complaints - Annual Statistics Report - 1 September 2018 to 31 August 2019.................................................................................................. 45

CL19.346..... Update - Code of Conduct - Penalties available to Councils for Breaches by Councillors.................................................................................................... 51

CL19.373..... Office of Local Government Guideline - A New Risk Management and Internal Audit Framework for Local Councils in NSW........................................................ 55

CL19.374..... Grant Acceptance - Environment and Tourism Fund - Shoalhaven Sustainable Tourism Infrastructure Package................................................................... 64

Finance Corporate & Community Services

CL19.375..... Ongoing Register of Pecuniary Interest Returns - 1 August to 6 December 2019...................................................................................................................... 69

CL19.352..... 2020 Local Government Election Cost Estimates....................................... 71

CL19.376..... Submission - Local Government Remuneration Tribunal Review............... 77

CL19.377..... Investment Report - November 2019........................................................... 94

Planning Environment & Development

CL19.378..... Development Application – 132 Forster Drive Bawley Point – Lot 21 & DP 1217069.................................................................................................................... 100

Councillor Conference Report

CL19.379..... International Cities, Town Centres and Communities (ICTC) Conference 110

CL19.356..... 28th NSW Coastal Conference.................................................................. 121

14. Confidential Reports

Nil

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 17 December 2019

Page 0

CL19.365 Notice of Motion - To support the naming of a road at Sussex Inlet - Ralph Lucas Drive

HPERM Ref: D19/432216

Submitted by: Clr Greg Watson

Purpose / Summary

The following Notice of Motion, of which due notice has been given, is submitted for Council’s consideration.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Resolve to support the appeal to the Geographical Names Board (GNB) for the naming of a new road in Sussex Inlet “Ralph Lucas Drive”.

2. Write to the Member for South Coast the Hon. Shelley Hancock MP Minister for Local Government to seek her support for the appeal.

Background

In June 2019, Developers Sheargold and Lucas Property Group submitted an application to Council and subsequently the GNB as the naming authority, to name a new road within an extensive new development in Sussex Inlet called “Ralph Lucas Drive”.

The GNB objected to the name Ralph Lucas Drive under the NSW Road Naming Principles, Principle 6.7.5 – Acceptable Road Names: Use of Given Names – The use of given/first names in conjunction with a surname is not acceptable.

Ralph Lucas is the founder and Managing Director of Lucas & Tait, which became the Lucas Property Group in 2003. Lucas & Tait commenced marketing Paradise Lagoon Estate Sussex Inlet over 50 years ago.

Following that, Lucas & Tait purchased a large parcel of land in the Badgee area and commenced the Riviera Estate. This was developed in a number of stages producing over 300 home sites.

Lucas & Tait purchased another large parcel of land in the centre of Sussex Inlet. This area known as Riviera Keys Estate was developed as a canal subdivision producing over 300 water frontage home sites in stages over a number of years, plus two medium density sites.

The Lucas Property Group developed The Anchorage town house complex on one site and The Moorings complex on the other.

During all these years Lucas & Tait have supported many Sussex Inlet communities, organisations and clubs. Following a request from the Sussex Inlet Lions Club, Ralph Lucas organised free of charge for the majority of the earthworks construction for the playing fields at the Thompson Street complex.

The Sussex Inlet Business Community repeatedly acknowledge the huge contribution Lucas & Tait provided by promoting Sussex Inlet by way of full page ads in the Sydney press, radio commercials and a large television campaigns. Because of this Development and Marketing, Sussex Inlet became the fastest growing village in the Shoalhaven Council area.

Unfortunately the Moratorium placed on Sussex Inlet by the Jervis Bay Regional Plan Stage 2 caused this progress to stall for 14 years. When the owner of the Sussex Inlet Golf Course Jack Curtis decided to close the golf course, it was Ralph Lucas who negotiated to purchase the golf course as he believed that Sussex Inlet must not lose this amenity. Ralph Lucas met with the Golf Club committee and offered them the opportunity to lease the Golf Course for $1 per year, based on the club maintaining the course and the club retaining all revenue. That deal was done on a handshake and has been in existence for over 48 years. Lucas & Tait also provide grants from time to time for course improvements.

Following the rezoning of the Group’s 500 acres of land at Sussex Inlet, Lucas Property and Sheargold Property Groups are about to commence the development of golf course frontage home sites, normal home sites, town houses, a commercial area and a Life Style Village. The total development will consist of over 700 sites.

As a consequence of Ralph Lucas’s contribution to the Shoalhaven area and in particular the Sussex Inlet community, I seek a resolution from council to support the appeal to the GNB that they make an exemption in this case in relation to the using of a first name and surname for the naming of a new road which is the next step in the process.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 17 December 2019

Page 0

CL19.371 Report of the Strategy & Assets Committee - 10 December 2019

HPERM Ref: D19/437995

SA19.212 Retail Lease - Shop 39/43 Kinghorne Street Nowra

HPERM Ref: D19/394291

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Enter into a lease with Louise Fenton-Jones trading as Pony Clothing for two (2) years with a two (2) year option at a commencing rent of $23,718.72 inc GST, per annum with annual 3% fixed increases; and

2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign all documentation required to give effect to the resolution and to affix the Common Seal of the Council of the City of Shoalhaven to all documentation required to be sealed.

SA19.213 Retail Lease - Schofields Lane Nowra

HPERM Ref: D19/396438

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Enter into a lease with Phillip & Jayanne Robertson trading as Paceway Cafe for one (1) year with a one (1) year option at a commencing rent of $22,653.36 inc GST, per annum with annual 3% fixed increases; and

2. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign all documentation required to give effect to the resolution and to affix the Common Seal of the Council of the City Of Shoalhaven to all documentation required to be sealed.

SA19.218 Citywide CMP Scoping Study - Variation of Project Funds and Scope

HPERM Ref: D19/371286

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Endorse the variation in scope, removing the need to prepare a scoping study, for the Lake Conjola and Shoalhaven River estuary Coastal Management Program (CMP) grant projects, as detailed in this report, as a Draft Citywide Scoping Study has been prepared for the open coast and all estuaries.

2. Acknowledge the shortfall of funds remaining in the Open Coast and St Georges Basin/Sussex Inlet CMP grant, as the full cost of preparing the citywide Scoping Study has been attributed to this grant (job number 15885).

3. Submit a grant variation to NSW DPIE for an increase of the project costs by $114,000 (50% to be funded by Council) to fund the preparation of the Open Coast and St Georges Basin/Sussex Inlet CMP.

4. Allocate additional funds of $57,000 from job number 75742 to the Open Coast and St Georges Basin/Sussex Inlet CMP (job number 15885), as Council’s 50% contribution to item 3 above at the December 2019 quarterly review.

SA19.219 Draft Citywide Scoping Study Report - Public Exhibition

HPERM Ref: D19/416733

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Adopt the draft Shoalhaven Citywide Coastal Management Program (CMP) Scoping Study report for public exhibition from mid-December to mid-February to allow sufficient time for the community to make submissions, taking into account the Christmas and Summer holiday period.

2. Copies of the draft Shoalhaven Citywide Coastal Management Program (CMP) Scoping Study report to be placed on Council’s ‘Get Involved’ webpage; at the Nowra, Sanctuary Point, Milton and Ulladulla libraries; the Bay & Basin and Ulladulla Leisure Centres and Council administration buildings.

3. Notify those people that participated and provided their contact details in the scoping study community consultation workshops and drop-in sessions; Council Consultative Bodies and owners of properties located in known coastal hazard locations that the Draft Shoalhaven Citywide Coastal Management Program (CMP) Scoping Study is on public exhibition.

4. Report back to Council following the pubic exhibition period detailing any submissions received and any recommended amendments to the draft Shoalhaven Citywide Coastal Management Program (CMP) Scoping Study report, for final adoption.

SA19.223 Additional Item - Water Availability – Bush Fire Affected Properties

Recommendation

That

1. Council adopt and trial a policy of making 4,500 L of water available at no cost to property owners facing an imminent fire threat, where their tank water supplies have been depleted, and logistics and Staff safety enables Council to comply with the policy.

2. The initial trial area be Evans Lane which forms the border between the farmlands adjacent to Milton and the forested lands.

3. Should the property owners wish to increase the allocation this is to charged to them at cost.

4. If for any reasons Council resources are not available, property owners be encouraged to make their own water transfer arrangements while still having the benefit of the first 4,500 L of water at no cost.

5. The Chief Executive Officer be authorised to vary this policy following advice from The Rural Fire Service, or the Director Shoalhaven Water.

6. This activity be deemed to be a Community Service of Shoalhaven Water.

Note by the CEO:

This Recommendation lies outside the delegation of the Strategy & Assets Committee as it would amount to the allocation of funding. The CEO has acknowledged this as an urgent direction of Council given the current fire situation and will activate it prior to the endorsement of the Recommendation by Council at the Ordinary Meeting.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 17 December 2019

Page 0

CL19.372 Report of the Shoalhaven Traffic Committee - 10 December 2019

HPERM Ref: D19/434862

Attachments: 1. PN 3561 Plan ⇩

2. PN 3569 Plan ⇩

3. PN 3573 Plan ⇩

4. PN 3570 Plan ⇩

5. PN 3571 Plan ⇩

6. PN 3572 Plan ⇩

7. PN 3574 Plan ⇩

8. PN 3575 Plan ⇩

9. PN 3576 Plan ⇩

The Shoalhaven Traffic Committee is a technical review committee not a committee of Council under the Local Government Act, 1993.

The Roads and Maritime Services has delegated certain powers to Council under the Transport Administration Act 1988 (Section 50). A condition of this delegation is that Council must take into account the Traffic Committee recommendations.

IMPORTANT NOTE:

Council cannot amend a Traffic Committee recommendation. The Council can only:

1. Adopt the Traffic Committee recommendation;

2. Not Adopt the Traffic Committee recommendation; or

3. Request the Traffic Committee reconsider the issue.

Other issues can be raised as Additional Business at the Ordinary Meeting.

The full guide to the delegation to Councils for the regulation of traffic can be viewed at: RMS Website

TC19.62 Private Use of Public Parking - 82 South Street Ulladulla (PN 3561)

HPERM Ref: D19/426764

Recommendation

That the Chief Executive Officer (Director Assets and Works) be advised that the Shoalhaven Traffic Committee has no objection to the proposed extension of the Private Use of Public Parking for an additional 3 months ending on the 30th September 2020, as detailed in Plan No: (D19/426854).

TC19.63 No Parking Zone Extension - Idlewild Avenue - Sanctuary Point Public School (PN 3569)

HPERM Ref: D19/426785

Recommendation

That the Chief Executive Officer (Director Assets and Works) be advised that the Shoalhaven Traffic Committee has no objection to the proposed extension of the No Parking zone along Idlewild Avenue Sanctuary Point for an additional 17m, as detailed in Plan No: (D19/426909).

TC19.64 Parallel Parking Signage - Mitchell Parade - Mollymook Beach (PN 3573)

HPERM Ref: D19/426810

Recommendation

That the Shoalhaven Traffic Committee do not support the installation of parallel parking signage along frontage of No 132 to 140 Mitchell Parade as detailed per Plan No: (D19/427125), for the reason that public consultation and late submissions received indicate negative support from the community.

TC19.65 Private Use of Public Parking - Reserve Road (Jellicoe Street) - South Nowra (PN 3570)

HPERM Ref: D19/426833

Recommendation

That the Chief Executive Officer (Director Assets and Works) be advised that the Shoalhaven Traffic Committee has no objections to the temporary use of 17 parking spaces for a period of approximately 55 weeks and 4 days during the works of 145~159 Princes Highway, South Nowra as detailed per Plan No: (D19/427004), subject to payment of associated fees in accordance with Council’s Private Use of Public Parking Policy 16/154.

TC19.66 Restricted Parking - Greenwell Point Boat Ramp (PN 3571)

HPERM Ref: D19/426851

Recommendation

That the Chief Executive Officer (Director Assets and Works) be requested to arrange for the installation of time-restricted parking along the eastern and western sides of the Greenwell Point Boat ramp and the installation 62 m of C3 'No Stopping' yellow line marking around the circumference of the turning circle, as detailed per Plan No: (D19/427113), pending clarification from Transport for NSW on the format of the signs.

These signs will be for a trial period, ending 30 April 2020, where these signs will be re-evaluated in consultation with the community and the Greenwell Point Community Association.

TC19.67 Parking Signage - Owen Street Huskisson (PN 3572)

HPERM Ref: D19/426867

Recommendation

That the Chief Executive Officer (Director Assets and Works) be advised that the Shoalhaven Traffic Committee has no objection to the proposed signage and line marking within the Owen Street / Morton Street carpark, to establish 3 disabled car parking spaces in lieu of the 2 existing. Additionally, 5 motorcycle parking spaces to be relocated to the north-western corner of the carpark. Plan No: 2408.06 (D19/427102).

TC19.68 Disabled Parking Upgrades - Shoalhaven Memorial Gardens and Lawn Cemetery - Worrigee Road Worrigee (PN 3574)

HPERM Ref: D19/426942

Recommendation

That the Chief Executive Officer (Director Assets and Works) be advised that the Shoalhaven Traffic Committee has no objection to the proposed installation of regulatory signage and line marking in association with the newly provisioned disabled/accessible parking spaces in the Shoalhaven Memorial Gardens and Lawn Cemetery, Worrigee, as detailed per Plan No: 2197.230-240 (D19/427169).

TC19.69 Old Southern Road - South Nowra - Lot 188 - DP755952 - 60 lot Subdivision (PN 3575)

HPERM Ref: D19/426956

Recommendation

That the Chief Executive Officer (Director Assets and Works) be advised that the Shoalhaven Traffic Committee has no objection to the signage and line marking plans for this development at Lot 188 - DP 755952, Old Southern Road, South Nowra (as per condition 28 of DS19/1446) and as detailed per Plan No: (D19/427180).

TC19.70 Reduction of Load Limit - Mayfield Road Bridge (PN 3576)

HPERM Ref: D19/426964

Recommendation

That the Chief Executive Officer (Director Assets and Works) be advised that the Shoalhaven Traffic Committee has no objection to the Mayfield Road Bridge to decreased from '10 Tonne Limit' to '2 Tonne Limit' for the proposed Bridge Works between February 2020 to June 2020, as per Plan No: (D19/427936).

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 17 December 2019

Page 0

CL19.345 Code of Conduct Complaints - Annual Statistics Report - 1 September 2018 to 31 August 2019

HPERM Ref: D19/378462

Approver: Stephen Dunshea, Chief Executive Officer

Attachments: 1. Code of Conduct Complaint Statistics - 1 September 2018 to 31 August 2019 ⇩

Reason for Report

Note: This item was deferred from the Ordinary meeting of 26 November 2019.

This report is submitted in accordance with Clause 11.1 of the Procedures for the Administration of the Code of Conduct which requires that statistics concerning complaints made about Councilllors and the CEO be reported to Council within 3 months of the end of September each year.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That the Report of the Chief Executive Officer concerning complaints under the Code of Conduct for the period 1 September 2018 to 31 August 2019 be received for information

Options

1. That the report be received for information as recommended

Implications: This would meet the requirements under the Local Government Act and the Procedures.

2. That the report be accepted in accordance with the Code of Conduct Procedures and additional recommendations made.

Implications: Further recommendations would need to be in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act and the Procedures for the Administration of Code of Conduct Complaints.

Background

Statistics of the Code of Conduct complaints received by Council are provided as Attachment 1 to this report.

Council is required to provide the statistics to the Office of Local Government in accordance with Clause 11.2 of the Procedures for the Administration of the Code of Conduct.

In summary, five (5) complaints about Councillors under the Code of Conduct were received in the reporting period. One (1) of those complaints was dealt with by alternative strategies by the previous General Manager, three (3) were referred to a Conduct Reviewer and one (1) was referred to the Office of Local Government as required by the Procedures.

Of the three (3) Code of Conduct complaints referred to a Conduct Reviewer, one (1) was resolved by the Conduct Reviewer by alternative strategies. The remaining two (2) complaints (related) proceeded to investigation and were resolved by the Council. The Council did not adopt the Conduct Reviewer’s recommendation.

All Code of Conduct complaints recorded in these statistics were dealt with according to the Council’s previous Code of Conduct (POL16/221) and Procedures (POL13/30). Council adopted a revised Code of Conduct and Code of Conduct Procedures based on the Model Code and Procedures on 28 May 2019.

Community Engagement

No specific community engagement is required other than advising the public of Code of Conduct complaints via this annual reporting requirement of the Code of Conduct Procedures. The Office of Local Government publishes the statistics once collated.

Financial Implications

As a general rule, the costs involved with handling complaints involving Councillors which are resolved by the General Manager/Chief Executive Officer by alternative means are estimated at approximately $900 each, but that can increase if the resolution involves greater complexity or multiple Councillors or if the matter is referred to a Conduct Reviewer.

The total cost of dealing with Code of Conduct complaints received in the reporting period, including staff costs, was approximately $12,804.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 17 December 2019

Page 0

CL19.346 Update - Code of Conduct - Penalties available to Councils for Breaches by Councillors

HPERM Ref: D19/390012

Approver: Stephen Dunshea, Chief Executive Officer

Attachments: 1. Circular 19-25 ⇩

Reason for Report

Note: This item was deferred from the Ordinary meeting of 26 November 2019.

To inform Council of advice from the Office of Local Government with respect to the current penalties available to Council for breaches by Councillors as outlined in Circular 19-25.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Note the report on Code of Conduct - Penalties for information

2. Receive a further report outlining any further guidance from the Office of Local Government on this matter.

Options

1. As recommended

Implications: The Council is to receive the information at this time and await further guidance. Should Council be required to deal with a Code of Conduct Investigation Report prior to further guidance being received, further advice will be obtained and provided to Council when dealing with that matter.

2. Alternate recommendation

Implications: Not Known

Background

The Office of Local Government released Circular 19-25 – Penalties available to councils for code of conduct breaches by Councillors on 2 October 2019.

The Circular is provided as Attachment 1 to this report.

In summary, the Circular advises the Council of the result of a recent decision by the Supreme Court in the matter of Cornish v Secretary, Department of Planning, Industry and Environment [2019] NSWSC 1134, where it held that the only disciplinary power available to councils under the Local Government Act 1993 for code of conduct breaches by councillors is the power to formally censure conferred under section 440G. This decision impacts on the validity of some of the penalties made available under the Model Code of Conduct Procedures and thereby the Council’s adopted Code of Conduct Procedures.

The Office of Local Government is considering the implications of the decision and will provide further advice. In the meantime, it is discouraging Councils from imposing penalties on councillors other than:

· Formal censures under Section 440G of the Local Government Act (Cl 7.59(h) and (i) of the Procedures); and/or

· Making findings of inappropriate conduct by councillors public by publishing the investigator’s findings and determination in the minutes of the meeting (Cl 7.59((f) of the Procedures).

The implications are limited to the conclusion of an investigation of a Code of Conduct complaint at the stage when a report on an Investigation is presented to the Council. Should Council be in this position prior to further guidance being made available by the Office of Local Government, further advice will be sought and provided to Council.

The decision does not affect the ability of the Chief Executive Officer and conduct reviewers/investigators to informally resolve Code of Conduct complaints against councillors by alternative means such as, but not limited to, explanation, counselling, training, mediation, informal discussion, negotiation, a voluntary apology or an undertaking not to repeat offending behaviour.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 17 December 2019

Page 0

CL19.373 Office of Local Government Guideline - A New Risk Management and Internal Audit Framework for Local Councils in NSW

HPERM Ref: D19/429820

Section: Executive Strategy

Approver: Stephen Dunshea, Chief Executive Officer

Attachments: 1. Draft Submission - OLG - A New Risk Management and Internal Audit Framework for Local Councils ⇩

Reason for Report

The purpose of this paper is to provide Council’s submission in response to the Office of Local Government Guideline on ‘A New Risk Management and Internal Audit Framework for Local Councils in NSW’.

Recommendation

That Council endorse the Draft Submission (as attached) to the Office of Local Government in response to their proposal on Office of Local Government Guideline on ‘A New Risk Management and Internal Audit Framework for Local Councils in NSW’ and submit to the OLG prior to the 31 December 2019 deadline.

Options

1. As recommended.

Implications: The submission will be made to the office of Local Government as attached.

2. That the submission be amended.

Implications: Amendments to the submission may be included and detailed in the Council Resolution

3. That the Council does not make a submission.

Implications: The issues identified by the Council staff and Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee will not be provided to the Office of Local Government for consideration.

Background

A discussion paper has been released by Office of Local Government on ‘A New Risk Management and Internal Audit Framework for Local Councils in NSW’ (https://www.olg.nsw.gov.au/content/new-risk-management-and-internal-audit-framework-local-councils-nsw) to propose how councils should establish and implement risk and audit functions.

This discussion paper has originated from the amendments made to the Local Government Act in 2016 which requires each council to be financially sustainable, continuously review its regulatory functions, operate honestly, efficiently, appropriately, and have sound decision-making and risk management practices (s8A – 8C and 223).

The Act amendments also require that each Council establish an Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee (ARIC) as a third line of defence to continuously review and provide independent advice and assurance on Council’s first and second lines of defence. The Local Government Act also envisages the establishment of a Risk Management Framework and Internal Audit Function in each council to support the work of the Committee.

Thus, OLG is consulting on the proposed regulatory framework. Submissions on the proposal are due on 31 December 2019.

The model proposes nine core requirements. The core requirements are based on the international standards and the experience of Australian and NSW Government public sector agencies who already have implemented risk management and internal audit.

Shoalhaven City Council already has comprehensive internal audit and risk management functions that are well-supported by a high-functioning and effective Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee - formed under the guidelines issued by OLG under s23A the Local Government Act 1993 in September 2010. It is acknowledged that elements of the changes proposed under the OLG framework provide the opportunity to enhance our existing framework to become a best practice business assurance model for local government in NSW.

A summary on the key additional changes as proposed by OLG is summarised in the table below:

#	Core Requirement	Key additional changes proposed by OLG	Impact on Council
1	Appoint an independent Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee (ARIC).	§ ARIC to be composed of independent members only. § ARIC members to be recruited from panel administered by NSW government. Renumeration to be based on the panel rates. § ARIC to review the implementation of strategic plan, delivery program and strategies. § ARIC to be provided direct and unrestricted access to council resources and staff to perform its function.	§ Currently Councillors are included in the ARIC committee and provide valuable contributions and insights to the process § Council currently utilises the panel and alternative options for recruitment. No significant change § This would result in additional requirements being undertaken by the ARIC to monitor plans § ARIC are already provided with staff resources. Additional resources could be provided as needed.
2	Establish a risk management framework consistent with current Australian risk management standards.	§ Implement an integrated risk management framework and approach which applies to all council activities and risks. § Governing body to provide resources to implement a risk management framework and deliver risk treatments and controls. § ARIC to advise the governing body on the resource requirement. § Governing body will be responsible for approving key elements of the risk management framework. § Council to implement a risk management plan that provides structure on how council will implement its risk management policy and conduct its activities. § Risk management plan to be endorsed by ARIC. § Risk management framework to be integrated to all council’s decision-making processes, governance structures, operational procedures and IP&R processes. § Risk Management Coordinator position required for the day to day activities required to implement the council’s risk management framework. § Senior management to establish and maintain an ongoing monitoring and review process for the information gathered from council’s risk management process. § Performance targets are to be set annually by the senior management group, in consultation with the general manager and the ARIC. § ARIC to provide an annual assessment of the council’s risk management framework as part of its annual assurance report to the governing body of the council.	§ A risk framework is currently in place. Additional work would be required to meet specifications of ISO31000. § Some additional resource allocation may be needed to establish the framework requirements § Risk management is currently managed through HR/Governance Manager § Ongoing monitoring is currently in place however improvements and additional specifications would be required to be implemented as per the guidelines.
3	Establish an internal audit function mandated by an Internal Audit Charter.	§ ARIC to advise the governing body of the resources required for the internal audit activities. § The general manager to be responsible for the administrative delivery of council’s internal audit function.	§ Additional operational function for ARIC relating to allocation of resources. § Currently Council meets requirements for independent and dedicated internal audit resource and internal functioning of this position. § GM is currently responsible for the IA function within the CEO group
4	Appoint internal audit personnel and establish reporting lines.	§ The general manager to consult with the chair of the ARIC before appointing or dismissing the Chief Audit Executive. § If the Chief Audit Executive is dismissed, the general manager is to report to governing body advising the reasons why the Chief Audit Executive was dismissed. § The internal audit function, including the appointment of the internal audit person is to be overseen by the Chief Audit Executive. § The Chief Audit Executive must be a council employee and cannot be outsourced.	§ The IA function is an internal resource within the organisation. The recruitment of this resource is overseen by the GM/CEO. § Any dismissal or change to this resource would follow standard Council procedures. Advice can be provided to the ARIC committee as required.
5	Develop an agreed internal audit work program.	§ Develop a four-year strategic plan with alignment to council’s integrated planning and reporting framework and timetable. § The four-year strategic plan is to be developed in consultation with ARIC, governing body, general manager and senior managers. § Quality assurance and improvement program to collect data and information required to review the council’s internal audit activities. Performance indicators to be set annually by the ARIC in consultation with the Chief Audit Executive and the general manager.	§ Currently a three year strategic plan is developed for the ARIC. This can be aligned to a four year plan and the IP&R framework if required § Additional engagement and strategic work to develop this plan would be required if the new guidelines were adopted. § Performance indicators are currently set via Council’s IPR framework and reported annually to Council. This could be advised to the ARIC to include their feedback and comment.
6	How to perform and report internal audits.	§ Chief Audit Executive is to ensure that the council develops and maintains policies and procedures to guide the operation of the internal audit function and the performance of internal audits. § The ARIC is to review and provide advice to the general manager of the council on all internal audit policies and procedures before they are finalised. § The general manager will have a maximum of ten working days to approve and provide the council’s response to the Committee on the internal audit report recommendations. § The governing body can also request access to internal audit information via a resolution of the council. The ARIC is to decide the governing body’s request. Any disputes between the governing body and the committee are to be referred to the Office of Local Government for resolution.	§ Currently the IA function is supported and governed by the IA Charter, ARIC Charter, Internal Plan and IP&R performance measures. Additional or alternative policies could be developed if required. § Generally, the standard practice is for comments to be made on reports within a 10 day period. There are times when this measure is not met, and additional time is required to consider and respond to the report. § Currently all confidential IA reports/information is not provided to the governing body. Currently the minutes of the ARIC meeting are provided. If requested provision of information can occur.
7	Undertake ongoing monitoring and reporting.	§ The governing body of the council is to be advised of the internal audits undertaken and progress made implementing corrective actions and any significant or emerging risk issues after each quarterly meeting of the ARIC.	§ Council is currently provided with an Annual Report from the ARIC. This could be adjusted to a quarterly report if required. This will require some additional administrative work to be undertaken.
8	Establish a quality assurance and improvement program.	§ External assessment of council’s assurance activities is to be conducted at least once every council term by a qualified, independent assessor according to the IPPF quality assessment framework. § Annual attestation statements to be issued by the GM annually.	§ The last assessment was conducted in 2014. It would be timely for another assessment to be conducted in the new term of Council in 2020/21
9	Councils can establish shared internal audit arrangements.	N/A	§ Dedicated resource is already established.

OLG is seeking submissions on the following questions on the proposal:

1. Will the proposed internal audit framework achieve the outcomes sought?

2. What challenges do you see for your council when implementing the proposed framework?

3. Does the proposed framework include all important elements of an effective internal audit and risk framework?

4. Is there anything you don’t like about the proposed framework?

5. Can you suggest any improvements to the proposed framework?

The draft proposal attached addresses the above questions from OLG.

Community Engagement

The Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee has been updated on the proposal. Their feedback is reflected on the draft submission.

Policy Implications

Shoalhaven City Council has had an established ARIC for some time, which includes Independent, Councillor and Executive Members.

Council’s ARIC operates to a very high standard and has an existing Charter in place, which is followed by the Committee. This proposed change may require amendments to the Charter and the structure of the Committee. The Office of Local Government has proposed transitional timeline from March 2021 to 2026 for the implementation of the nine core requirements once legislated.

Financial Implications

The implementation of the nine core requirements as proposed will require additional resource and budget allocations.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 17 December 2019

Page 0

CL19.374 Grant Acceptance - Environment and Tourism Fund - Shoalhaven Sustainable Tourism Infrastructure Package

HPERM Ref: D19/433043

Section: Tourism

Approver: Stephen Dunshea, Chief Executive Officer

Reason for Report

Council made an application under the Restart NSW Environment and Tourism Fund for the Shoalhaven Sustainable Tourism Infrastructure Package and has been informed that the application has been approved and funding offers have been received.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Accept the grant of $5,300,000 from the Restart NSW Environment and Tourism Fund for the Shoalhaven Sustainable Tourism Infrastructure Package.

2. Authorise the CEO to sign the funding agreements with the NSW Government for the above project.

3. Source the matching contributions for the project, totalling $1,500,000, from the Capital Works Program budgets over the period 2021/22 to 2022/23.

Options

1. The recommendation be accepted as written.

Implications: The grant offer is accepted, and Council will provide the additional funds in accordance with the financial implications contained in the previous report to Council in January 2019 - MIN19.34 (with updated financial year allocation):

That Council:

1. Note the Expression of Interest submitted for the Shoalhaven Sustainable Tourism Infrastructure Package under the State Government’s Regional Growth Environment and Tourism Fund Round 2 for information.

2. Endorse the action taken by staff in preparing a Detailed Application for submission by 1 February 2019 for the Shoalhaven Sustainable Tourism Infrastructure Package at a project cost of $6.88M.

3. Commit $1.5M over the period 2018/19 to 2020/21 as its co-contribution towards the Shoalhaven Sustainable Tourism Infrastructure Package should the application be successful to be funded in future years Capital Works Programs.

4. Receive a further report on the progress of Council’s Detailed Application as information is received.

5. Council receive a report to Strategy and Assets regarding the previous Notice of Motion for Tourism Funding submitted by Clr Proudfoot.

2. The recommendation be amended.

3. An alternative resolution be proposed.

4. Grant offers be refused by resolution.

Background

In September 2018 Council staff submitted an Expression of Interest (EOI) to Round Two, Stream One of the State Government’s Regional Growth – Environment and Tourism Fund (RGETF) for a suite of projects collectively titled the “Shoalhaven Sustainable Tourism Infrastructure Package”.

Submission under the Fund allowed for large scale projects with a minimum grant request of $5 million for regionally iconic tourism activation projects with an applicant co-contribution greater than 25%.

The decision to submit the EOI at short notice arose after significant and ongoing feedback regarding the need for improved tourism infrastructure in several locations throughout the region and this grant program being a great opportunity to fast track a suite of projects that would enhance the visitor experience and local amenity at various locations in the Shoalhaven.

The total estimated cost of the package of proposed works in the submission was $6.88M – and in order to give Council’s EOI a better chance to progress, a 30% co-contribution of $1.58M was nominated – noting that this includes an $80,000 contribution from the Ulladulla Local Aboriginal Land Council.

We were informed on 16 November 2018 that Council’s EOI had been shortlisted to proceed to Detailed Application and staff worked on the detailed submission which was due on 1 February 2019.

On 22 October 2019 we were informed that our detailed application had been successful.

The Shoalhaven Sustainable Tourism Infrastructure Package is a showcase of the iconic coastline of the Shoalhaven. It promotes sustainable nature-based, cultural and accessible tourism through a series of foreshore walks and other projects across the local government area. These projects highlight a range of natural areas, enabling the sustained growth of tourism in the area through a diversified offering that actively manages existing tourism hot spots, while encouraging visitors to explore new opportunities.

The project focuses on three key areas – nature-based attractions, Indigenous heritage and equal access opportunities – all of which are recognised as being foundations for attracting and integrating tourism to the area in a way that is both respectful and engaging to a wide audience.

In undertaking the project there are a number of key projects that will be delivered; community consultation will be undertaken during project implementation, where not previously undertaken and as necessary.

Deliverables include (from north to south):

· Deliverable 1 – Vincentia / Plantation Point Inclusive Beach Access Project – The Plantation Point area is a popular beach access location on the shores of Jervis Bay. The project is located on the Barfleur Beach side of the Point, which is home to the Vincentia Sailing Club and a beach which is known for its gentle and protected access point. The facilities will enable equitable access for all and be a key inclusive tourism drawcard for the area. Funding has been received for part of these works, though the remaining elements as set out in the project costs are identified for implementation of the entire project. The works will include:

o Beach access ramps down to the beach (funding already available)

o General amenities including disability access facilities (partial funding available)

o Adult lift and change amenities facility

o New accessible pathways between change facilities, parking and beach access ramps

o New accessibility compliant car parking spaces

· Deliverable 2 – Sanctuary Point / Palm Beach – A waterfront public open space in one of the most popular fishing and boating destinations on the NSW South Coast – St Georges Basin. The project will provide upgraded equal access from the amenities (disabled compliant) to the car parking area, beach and open spaces areas, where a loop pathway and new accessible BBQ and picnic shelter facilities are to be provided. The works will include:

o BBQ and shelters in two locations

o New accessible pathways and loop between carpark, open space, beach and amenities

o New access pathway from Palm Beach up to the adjoining Greville Avenue and through to other shared paths and to Bherwerre Wetlands (see further below)

o Upgrades around the existing compliant amenities building

o Carpark improvements

· Deliverable 3 – Basin Walking Track – This project will see the upgrade of the existing basic track to a regional level raised boardwalk / waterfront walkway connecting the western end of the existing Basin Walking Track to Palm Beach and beyond to the Bherwerre Wetland walks, and further again to the shared pathways that connect on to the Round the (Jervis) Bay walk further north. The paths would generally be, or be near to, disability compliant standards wherever possible, again focusing on nature-based attractions with high levels of accessibility. Works will include:

o A mixture of gravel and raised boardwalk style trails traversing low-lying areas around St Georges Basin waterbody

o A new shared pathway to link Palm Beach to the Bay and Basin Shared Path network via the Bherwerre Wetland

· Deliverable 4 – Bherwerre Wetland – The Bherwerre Wetland area connects to the Basin Walking Track and shared path which in turn connects Jervis Bay and Sanctuary Point / St Georges Basin. The grant works will facilitate the construction of the hard infrastructure whilst not jeopardising the site as a future biodiversity stewardship and offset site in the future. The area contains a number of vegetation types and is ideal for nature-based activities including bird watching, bush walking and environmental education. Part of the project will provide disability compliant parking and pathways around the eastern portion of the site. Works will include:

o A mixture of gravel and raised boardwalk style trails, including fully accessible component

o New disabled compliant parking spaces connecting to the accessible pathway on the eastern edge of the wetland

o Viewing and rest areas with seating and interpretative information

· Deliverable 5 – Hyams Beach – As a high-profile tourism hotspot, the Hyams Beach project will provide a range of infrastructure works to support a more sustainable level of visitation to what has become one of the most iconic destinations on the NSW South Coast. Project works will include a range of accessibility improvements, including all-access amenities, pathways and viewing opportunities.

· Deliverable 6 – Ulladulla Headland / Warden Head walking trails – To be undertaken in conjunction with the Ulladulla Local Aboriginal Land Council (ULALC) and incorporating the Coomee Nulunga Cultural Trail, the project will support Indigenous tourism opportunities and incorporate the local Aboriginal community’s guided tours. The project includes provision of comprehensive improvements to both the North Head Walking Trail and to the Warden Head on the southern headland – with existing pathways and recently constructed links being used to provide access between the two. Both projects will seek to improve accessibility through re-surfacing and other improvements, with "One Track for All" being upgraded with a view to increasing accessibility and compliance with disability standards wherever possible. The works will include:

o Replacement of the Bunaan sculpture (current commission by the ULALC as in-kind contribution to the project)

o New boardwalks and track improvements in areas of Coomee Nulunga Cultural Trail

o Viewing area and interpretative signage on both headlands

o Resurfacing and trail improvements to the North Head Walking Trail

· Deliverable 7 – Murramarang Coastal Walk – Which will see the substantial expansion of the Murramarang Coastal Walk, which has received partial funding via National Parks and Wildlife Service within the existing national park areas, particularly the Murramarang National Park. The project is a significant opportunity for the southern Shoalhaven area, with links provided from the north and to the south to extend the walk from Narrawallee / Mollymook through to Bawley Point – a total distance of approximately 45km. The works will include:

o New or upgraded beach access points

o A section of new track construction

o Directional bollards and interpretative signage

There is no doubt that the proposed infrastructure works will have the consequence of growing, diversifying and sustaining growth in the visitor economy of the Shoalhaven and South Coast areas through highlighting areas of nature-based, cultural and accessible tourism opportunity.

Community Engagement

This is varied for each project. Many letters of support were received from parties with an interest in the projects and these were submitted in support of the application.

Formal community consultation is also included in the project timelines.

Policy Implications

The projects are consistent with Council’s adopted Delivery Program.

Financial Implications

The Council contributions required are:

$1.5M will be included in the Capital Works Program budgets over the period 2021/22 to 2022/23. This contribution was previously reported to Council in January 2019 – MIN19.34 as being allocated from the 2019/20 to 2021/22, due to the length of time between application and allocation financial year contributions have been updated.

The grant application also included provision for project management costs which will enable direct resourcing to deliver these exciting projects as soon as possible.

Risk Implications

The infrastructure projects are within the scope and expertise of Council staff to manage with delivery by contractors determined through Council’s Procurement Policy, with application of tender or quotation processes.

Construction risks will be managed by the Project Manager and transferred to contractors for on-ground works. Financial risks will be managed by the Project Manager under the direction of Council executive and management. Reputational risk will be managed by the expertise of Council staff and the Project Manager with close adherence to NSW Government directions, Council Policies and Procedures and appropriate Community engagement.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 17 December 2019

Page 0

CL19.375 Ongoing Register of Pecuniary Interest Returns - 1 August to 6 December 2019

HPERM Ref: D19/404479

Section: Human Resources, Governance & Risk

Approver: Jane Lewis, Acting Director Finance Corporate & Community Services

Reason for Report

To provide the Council with the Register of Pecuniary Interest Returns lodged with the Chief Executive Officer for the period of 1 August 2019 to 6 December 2019 as required under Section 440AAB of the Local Government Act 1993 and Part 4.26 of the Model Code of Conduct.

Recommendation

That the report regarding the Register of Pecuniary Interest Returns lodged for the period of 1 August 2019 to 6 December 2019 be received for information.

Options

1. As Recommended

Implications: The requirements of the new Code of Conduct will be adhered to.

2. Alternative Recommendation

Implications: Not known

Background

Under Section 440AAB of The Local Government Act 1993 and Part 4.26 of the Model Code of Conduct, designated persons are required to complete a Pecuniary Interest Return within 3 months of becoming a designated person.

Section 440AAB(2) of The Local Government Act 1993 states:

Returns required to be lodged with the general manager must be tabled at a meeting of the council, being the first meeting held after the last day specified by the code for lodgement, or if the code does not specify a day, as soon as practicable after the return is lodged.

Part 4.26 of the Model Code of Conduct states:

Returns required to be lodged with the general manager under clause 4.21(c) must be tabled at the next council meeting after the return is lodged.

This report is one of a series of reports of this nature which will be provided throughout the year to align with the legislative requirements. Annual Returns were last reported to Council in October 2019.

Those persons who had an obligation to lodge an initial pecuniary interest return within the period are listed below:

Group	Name	Returned
Planning Environment & Development	Natalia Komadina	Yes
Planning Environment & Development	Belinda Keech	Yes
Planning Environment & Development	Nicholas Kilminster	Yes
Planning Environment & Development	Ariann Fernie	Yes
Assets and Works	Trevor Dando	Yes
Shoalhaven Water	Andrew Bancroft	Yes
Planning Environment & Development	Ben Coddington	Yes
Shoalhaven Water	Anthony Galea	Yes
Assets and Works	Phillip Perram	Yes
Planning Environment & Development	Alexander Woodworth	Yes
Assets and Works	Michael Taylor	Yes
Assets and Works	Peter Herald	Yes
Shoalhaven Water	Adam Drenoyanis	Yes

As outlined in the table, all of the listed staff completed their requirement to lodge a return within the period.

Advice provided to Council by the Office of Local Government in September 2015 was that ‘hard copies’ of returns are no longer required to be tabled at the Council meeting. Therefore, the register of returns for this period is listed and tabled and electronic versions of the documents may be viewed upon request.

Risk Implications

A failure of meeting the obligations with respect to the Pecuniary Interest Returns by a designated officer leaves Council at risk of non-compliance with legislative requirements, conflicts of interest and limited transparency.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 17 December 2019

Page 0

CL19.352 2020 Local Government Election Cost Estimates

HPERM Ref: D19/383614

Section: Human Resources, Governance & Risk

Approver: Jane Lewis, Acting Director Finance Corporate & Community Services

Attachments: 1. 2020 Election Cost Estimate ⇩

Reason for Report

Note: This item was deferred from the Ordinary meeting of 26 November 2019.

This report provides Council with cost estimates for the 2020 Elections which have been received from the Electoral Commission NSW (NSWEC).

Recommendation

That Council

1. Note the Cost estimate of $663,032 (excluding GST) for the NSW Electoral Commission to conduct the 2020 Local Government Election.

2. Increase the Election Budget in future budget reviews to accommodate for the estimated election management costs and internal costs.

3. Authorises the Chief Executive Officer (Group Director- Finance, Corporate and Community Services) to finalise contractual arrangements with the NSW Electoral Commission.

Options

1. As recommended. The Council has previously resolved to engage the NSW Electoral Commission to undertake the Election.

Implications: The election contractual arrangements will proceed.

2. Alternative resolution

Implications: Council was required under Legislation to make a decision by 1 October 2019 on its electoral provider. Alternate resolutions would be restricted from rescinding this decision on election provision.

Background

Council has previously considered three (3) reports in relation to the arrangement for the 2020 Election during 2019.

At the Ordinary Meeting of the Council held on 26 February 2019, Council considered report CL19.39 entitled “2020 Local Government (Council) Elections” and resolved (MIN19.97):

“That

1. Pursuant to s.296(2) and (3) of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) (“the Act”) that an election arrangement be entered into by contract for the Electoral Commissioner to administer all elections of the Council.

2. Pursuant to s.296(2) and (3) of the Act, as applied and modified by s.18, that a Council poll arrangement be entered into by contract for the Electoral Commissioner to administer all Council polls of the Council.

3. Pursuant to s.296(2) and (3) of the Act, as applied and modified by s.18, that a constitutional referendum arrangement be entered into by contract for the Electoral Commissioner to administer all constitutional referenda of the Council.

4. The contract be finalised by 11 June 2019 (15 months before the scheduled election) subject to:

a. The cost estimate from Electoral Commission NSW being presented to, and accepted by the Council, and

b. Any alternative requirements enacted by legislation passed or directives from the Office of Local Government received before that time (as foreshadowed in Office of Local Government Circular 19-02).”

The situation at the time of the February Report was that a review of IPART had been called on Election Costs; however, there had not been legislative change required to alleviate the requirement to engage a provider by 11 June 2019 and the NSWEC had advised that they were unable to provide a cost estimate until the IPART review was concluded.

On 25 July 2019 the Ordinary Meeting considered and noted a report (CL19.186) which outlined the Local Government Amendment Act 2019 which was assented to on 24 June 2019 and several provisions came into effect on 25 June 2019.

With respect to the Local Government Elections, the amendments resulted in:

i. extending the “cut-off date” for councils to decide on the administration of elections in 2020 (to 1 October 2019), and;

ii. removing the ability for the General Manager of the Council to conduct elections, and thereby requiring councils that do not enter into an arrangement with the Electoral Commissioner to engage an alternate electoral services provider to administer elections.

iii. Councils engaging the Electoral Commissioner are required to enter into contracts by 1 January 2020.

A further report was presented to the Extraordinary Meeting of the Council held on 20 September 2019, CL19.228 entitled “2020 Local Government Election Arrangements -Update” at which time it was resolved (MIN19.708)

‘That Council:

1. Note the information provided in the report

2. Confirm its previous resolution (MIN19.97) of February 2019 to engage the NSW Electoral Commission to conduct the 2020 Shoalhaven City Local Government Election

3. Receive a further report which outlines the estimated costs for the 2020 Local Government Election when received from the NSW Electoral Commission

4. Enter into contractual arrangements with the NSW Electoral Commission prior to the required date of 1 January 2020 as outlined in Section 296 (5A) b of the Local Government Act, 1993.’

This report outlined the result of the IPART review of local government election costs and the resolution ensured that the Council had met the requirements under s296(5A) (a) of the Local Government Act to appoint an election provider prior to the revised date of 1 October 2019. A cost estimate had not yet been received from the NSW Electoral Commission.

Council received the cost estimate for the Election from the NSW Electoral Commission on 26 September 2019. The estimate is provided as Attachment 1 to this report.

The cost estimate provided to Council is for $663,032 excluding GST. The table below provides comparison to the previous election and the recommendations of the IPART Report, taking into account the NSW Government Subsidy which was announced in September 2019.

Table 1.

Shoalhaven City Council - Election Cost Summary
Description	2016	2020	Variance 2016 Election to 2020
Council Election Costs	$516,000	$663,000*	$147,000	28%
Council Election Costs- CPI Estimate (as at June '19)	$541,000	$663,000	$122,000	23%
Electors	78,000	81,000	3,000	14%
Cost per Elector	$ 6.62	$ 8.19*	$ 1.57	24%
IPART Final Report recommended cost (less NSW Subsidy)	516	$580,000	$64,000	12%


Variance Between IPART Final Report and NSWEC Estimate			$83,000	14%

*Cost estimate.

After receipt of the cost estimate the Chief Executive Officer wrote to the NSW Electoral Commission on 30 October 2019 to clarify several points. The questions and responses from the NSW Electoral Commission received on 1 November 2019 are outlined below for the information of Councillors:

Q1. Does the estimate include the Poll for the Popular Election of the Mayor?

A: As the basis of the estimate was the service provision for the 2016 election where Council also had a poll for the election of the Mayor, yes it does.

Q2. The cost estimate you have forwarded is $83,000 higher than the estimate for Shoalhaven indicated in the Final Report of the IPART on Election Costs – Can you outline why there is a 14% difference?

A: The IPART report was written by IPART. Even though we provided IPART with a full dataset of services and costs to conduct the elections, we did not provide estimated costs for each council. We have no idea how IPART derived its costs and IPART has chosen not to provide any explanation to us.

Q3. In reviewing the cost estimate I note that compared to the 2016 actual election costs there is a significant increase in the following areas. Can you please outline the rationale for these increases?

(a) Call Centre costs are estimated at $36,277. This is an increase of $25,994 or 253%

A: The call centre has previously been based at our Riverwood warehouse. The warehouse was subsidised by the State government, hence the full cost of the call centre was never passed onto councils. After the 2017 elections the lease wasn’t renewed on the warehouse and all the functions managed from there were relocated. For the State general election we leased premises for the call centre and completely built the telephony system and centre infrastructure from scratch. After the election it was broken down and the property re-leased. We again have to build a call centre for the 2020 LG elections. As we did for the 2019 state election, we will explore all of the options, but none of them will be as cost-effective as the Riverwood centre.

(b) Event Staffing is estimated at $327, 603. This is an increase of $110,542 or 51%

A: We have consistently been the second lowest paying electoral commission in the country (in fact, we were paying below the minimum wage). We therefore obtained an independent determination on the pay rates for election staff (election day staff in particular) and have adjusted our rates accordingly. We have also made a number of other adjustments, including adding a deputy polling place manager to every polling place, reducing table loadings to enable election day staff to have their legislated breaks and capping the hours election day staff will work, to fall in line with work health and safety requirements. All of the above have caused an increase in the staffing costs.

The comments and information above outlines that the outcome of the IPART review of local government election costs did not achieve the decrease in election costs that was hoped to be achieved. The Council, is, however required to enter into arrangements with the NSW Electoral Commission as no other alternative exists at this time.

Financial Implications

As outlined in the above table the estimated cost for the 2020 election will be approximately $147,000 or allowing for CPI adjustment $122,000 greater than that which was paid for the 2016 election (ex GST).

The Council budget proposed for the 2020 election was $600,000 distributed across two financial years as follows:

2018/2019 Financial Year – $155,000 – Including pre-election costs such as ward boundary adjustments, advertising, venue procurement etc.

Proposed 2020/2021 Financial Year - $445,000

Adjustments will be required in a future quarterly budget review for FY 2019/20 and to the 2020/2021 budget to reflect the service and costs estimate received from the NSW Electoral Commission and for estimated internal costs.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 17 December 2019

Page 0

CL19.376 Submission - Local Government Remuneration Tribunal Review

HPERM Ref: D19/434795

Section: Human Resources, Governance & Risk

Approver: Jane Lewis, Acting Director Finance Corporate & Community Services

Attachments: 1. Notification of Review - Local Government Remuneration Tribunal ⇩

2. Draft Submission ⇩

Reason for Report

To provide Council with a Draft Submission to the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal for endorsement prior to lodgement, which seeks to have Council rated at a level higher than the Regional Centre Category.

Recommendation

That Council endorse the attached Draft Submission to the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal for submission by 20 December 2019.

Options

1. As recommended

Implications: The Draft submission document (Attachment 2) will be submitted to the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal

2. Amendments be made to the draft prior to the Submission

Implications: The Council may wish to make amendments to the draft submission document (Attachment 2) prior to lodgement. It is suggested that the content of any amendments be clearly stated in the Council resolution and the CEO be given authority for final approval of the amended document prior to submission

3. That Council does not make a submission at this time.

Implications: Council may not wish to make a submission on the basis of the intended creation of the new Regional Centre category in which it would be included.

Background

At the June Ordinary Meeting, the Council considered the fees payable to Councillors (SA19.71) and resolved (MIN19.416) inter-alia:

“That Council…

3. Make a submission to the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal as part of the 2020 Review on the basis that the current categorisation of Shoalhaven City Council does not adequately reflect the attributes, challenges and responsibilities of the Council.”

Council received correspondence from the Local Government Remuneration Tribunal on 1 November 2019 (Attachment 1) which advised that the Tribunal had commenced its review for the 2020 Annual Determination.

As part of the determination, the Tribunal will consider:

1. Proposed classification model and criteria

2. Allocation in the proposed classification model

3. Range of fees payable

4. Other matters

The Tribunal has also advised that in preparation for the review it has reviewed the existing model of and proposes to create a new category for Non-Metropolitan Councils. If determined, the new ‘Regional Centre’ category is proposed to include Shoalhaven City Council.

The criteria for that category is proposed to be as follows:

“Regional Centre

Councils categorised as Regional Centre will typically have a minimum population of 40,000. Other features may include:

• a large city or town providing a significant proportion of the region's housing and employment

• health services, tertiary education services and major regional airports which service the surrounding and wider regional community

• a full range of high-order services including business, office and retail uses with arts, culture, recreation and entertainment centres

• total operating revenue exceeding $100M per annum

• a degree of economic activity within the Council area characterised by a Gross State Product exceeding $2B

• the highest rates of population growth in regional NSW

• significant visitor numbers to established tourism ventures and major events that attract state and national attention

• a proximity to Sydney which generates economic opportunities.

Councils in the category of Regional Centre are often considered the geographic centre of the region providing services to their immediate and wider catchment communities.”

There is no indication of fees proposed for the Regional Centre Category of Councils.

Given the attributes of the Shoalhaven LGA, it can be reasonably argued that the Council should sit at the level above Regional Centre – being Regional Strategic Area.

“Regional Strategic Area

Council’s categorised as Regional Strategic Area are differentiated from council in the Regional Centre category on the basis of their significant population and will typically have a population above 200,000.

These councils:

· contain a mix of urban and rural settlements

· provide a range of services and activities including business, office and retail uses, along with arts, culture, recreation and entertainment facilities to service the wider community

· host tertiary education campuses and health facilities

While councils categorised as Regional Strategic Area may have populations which exceed those of Regional City, they would not typically provide the same range of regional services or have an equivalent sphere of economic influence.”

A draft submission has been prepared for consideration by the Council. It is provided as Attachment 2 to this report. This set out the basis on which Council should be considered a Regional Strategic Area.

The draft document was previously distributed to Councillors for review and suggested amendments prior to publication.

If Council intends to make a submission, it is to be lodged by 20 December 2019.

Financial Implications

Any adjustment to Category or fees will need to be considered in the Budget for the 2020/2021 Financial Year onwards. A further report will be provided to the Council when the fees and review has been completed to allow any adjustments to be made.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 17 December 2019

Page 0

CL19.377 Investment Report - November 2019

HPERM Ref: D19/431618

Section: Finance

Approver: Jane Lewis, Acting Director Finance Corporate & Community Services

Attachments: 1. Monthly Investment Report - Shoalhaven City Council - November 2019 (under separate cover) ⇨

Reason for Report

In accordance with section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993 and Clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation, a written report is provided to Council setting out the details of all money it has invested.

Recommendation

That:

1. The report of the Chief Executive Officer (Finance, Corporate & Community Services Group) on the Record of Investments for the period to 30 November 2019 be received for information.

2. Council note Council’s investment portfolio returned a solid 2.16% for the month of November 2019, exceeding the benchmark AusBond Bank Bill Index (1.00% pa) by 116 basis points (1.16%)

Options

1. The report on the Record of Investments for the period to 30 November 2019 be received for information

Implications: Nil

2. Further information regarding the Record of Investments for the period to 30 November 2019 be requested

Implications: Nil

3. The report of the Record of Investments for the period to 30 November 2019 be received for information, with any changes requested for the Record of Investments to be reflected in the report for the period to 31 December 2019

Implications: Nil

Background

Please refer to the attached monthly report provided by Council’s Investment Advisor, CPG Research and Advisory Pty Ltd.

As noted in the report, cash increased from last month to a relatively high 18% this is due to the rates instalment due date falling over a weekend at the end of November.

Portfolio Return

Council’s investment portfolio returned a solid 2.16% for the month of November 2019, exceeding the benchmark AusBond Bank Bill Index (1.00% pa) by 116 basis points (1.16%).

The following graph shows the performance of Council’s investment portfolio against the benchmark on a rolling twelve (12) month basis. As can be seen, performance has consistently exceeded the benchmark due to the mix of Council’s investment portfolio.

Interest Earned – November 2019

The following table shows the interest earned for the month of November 2019. The interest earned for the month of November was $364,752; which was $8,563 below the current budget.

Interest Earned - Year to Date

The following table shows how the interest earned year to date actual dollars against the total budget forecast dollars is performing with 42% of the year passed - the interest earned to the month of November was $2,003,447, 44.11% of the current full year budget.

Appropriate budget adjustments to decrease General Fund (developer contributions interest) and increase Water Fund interest are being recommended as part of the September quarterly budget review.

The graphs below illustrate the cumulative interest earned for the year for each fund against original budget.

Restricted Asset Movements

The table below lists the major movements in Restricted Assets:

Total Cash	+$10,951,773	Rates instalment month
Sewer Fund	+$3,308,900	Reduced expenditure on projects
Grant Reserve	+$1,279,229	Additional grant funds received
Financial Assistance Grant	-$1,574,829	Quarterly recognition of FAG received in advance
Unrestricted Cash	+$5,212,864	November was a rates instalment month

Financial Implications

It is important for Council to be informed about its investments on a regular basis. Revenue from interest forms a vital part of Council’s revenue stream.

Statement by Responsible Accounting Officer

I hereby certify that the investments listed in the attached report have been made in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993, clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulations 2005 and Council’s Investments Policy POL18/57

Vanessa Phelan Date: 10 December 2019

Responsible Accounting Officer

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 17 December 2019

Page 0

CL19.378 Development Application – 132 Forster Drive Bawley Point – Lot 21 & DP 1217069

DA. No: DS19/1465/4

HPERM Ref: D19/408119

Section: Ulladulla Service Centre

Approver: Phil Costello, Director Planning Environment & Development Group

Description of Development: Show Jumping Arena

Owner: Capital Property Corporation Pty Ltd

Applicant: Karen Emms

Notification Dates: 20 November 2019 to 4 December 2019

No. of Submissions: 1 in support.

Purpose / Reason for consideration by Council

The purpose of this report is to seek Council direction with respect to a request for a variation of a development standard under Clause 4.6 of the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan 2014 (SLEP 2014). The variation relates to building height (lighting structures for proposed Show Jump Arena) and is greater than 10%, thus requiring Council approval. The height limit established by SLEP is 11 metres with the application requesting a maximum 29m height.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1. Confirm that it supports the proposed variation, under clause 4.6 of Shoalhaven Local Environment Plan 2014, to the 11m maximum building height to allow for the lighting structures to a maximum 29.0m in height,

2. Refer the application back to staff for determination

Options

1. Resolve to support the propose variation to the development standard for height from 11m to 29m for lighting structures to the show jump arena application and refer the application back to staff to determine under delegated authority.

Implications: This would enable the application to be finalised and conditions of consent determined.

2. Resolve not to support the proposed variation to the development standard and refer the application back to staff to negotiate with the applicant to redesign the proposal to better match the 11m height standard.

3. Adopt an alternative recommendation and provide direction to staff.

Location Map

Background

History

The original application for an open show jump arena at Willinga Park (DA18/1212) included lighting structures up to 19m in height for which Council resolved under Min19.117 to support a clause 4.6 variation to the 11m height standard. The lighting design comprised two free standing light poles at a height of 11.6m above the finished surface level of the warm up arena, a continuous light bar with two rows of lights mounted at 11m and 11.6m in height supported by 8 structural steel poles on the east side of the show jumping arena and additional lighting mounted directly to the roof structure over the covered seating.

This application was subsequently approved under delegation on 11 March 2019.

Proposed Development

The current modification comprises:

a. changes to the layout and design of the show jump arena and associated civil works and landscaping

b. changes to arena lighting from a continuous light bar to nine freestanding light poles around the edge of the arena;

c. the roof of the spectator stand has been simplified and adjusted;

d. the basement level has been removed from the spectator stand as it is no longer required;

e. the ground level of the arena has been raised by 600mm;

f. a VIP pavilion has been added in the space between the grassed embankment and the seating area to the west of the arena.

Lighting

Light Spill

The spill analysis below shows spill light levels in all directions. The design uses poles that are well elevated above the arena surface, together with high efficiency Modus LED fittings with narrow beam targeted optics and shielding. The highest spill incidence is only 2.5 lux@110m. The proposed works are more than 300m away from the nearest neighbouring property and more than 600m away from the nearest neighbouring dwelling. The spill light is well below the level at which it would impact on the neighbouring property or adjacent vegetation.

Subject Land

The site is part of a large land holding known as Willinga Park and is being established as an Equine Centre of Excellence, comprising facilities for the breeding and training of horses for dressage, show jumping, polo, camp drafting and includes a stable complex, indoor and outdoor arenas, ancillary education centre, food and drink facilities, primitive camp ground, tourist cabins, guesthouse, stockyards, horse paddocks, car parking areas, show jump arena and an ongoing events approval.

Site & Context

The development site is immediately surrounded by RU2 zoned rural land with E2 zoned land around the headwaters of Lake Willinga to the north. Surrounding land uses are predominantly agriculture and rural residential. Willinga Park contains a number of larger buildings and monolithic feature walls, landscaping and sculptures that form gateways into the different areas of the development that are appropriate to the scale of the site and have provide a high-quality built environment.

Issues

Clause 4.3 Height of Buildings

The site is within an area where the Height Building Maps under cl.4.3 of SLEP 2014 does not map a specific maximum building height, therefore, the default height of 11.0m applies. This application seeks to vary this development standard. A variation of up to 163.6% (29.0m) is sought for (3) lighting structures (HM 4-6) above the 11.0m height plane. The remaining lighting poles and associates lighting structures are of reduced height as detailed in table 1 below.

Light Poles	HM-1	HM-2	HM-3	HM 4-6	HM - 7	HM - 8	HM - 9
Structure Height m	15.15	20.9	21.85	26.15	19	16.15	16.15
Height in m above natural surface level	15.7	23.1	26.8	29	22.1	14.9	17.3
% of the 11.0m height standard	142.7	210	243.6	263.6	200.9	135.45	157.3

Table 1: Proposed lighting structure heights

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to Development Standards

The NSW planning system provides flexibility in planning controls by providing the ability for Council to vary development standards in certain circumstances. In this regard, the concurrence of the Secretary of the Department of Planning and Environment (DP&E) can be assumed as provided in DP&E publication – Varying development standards: A Guide – August 2011 (the Guide) Planning Circular PS 18-003 (21 February 2018).

Clause 4.6 enables a development standard to be varied, provided the applicant has submitted a written request that adequately justifies the exception from the development standard by demonstrating that:

a) that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case; and

b) that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening a development standard.

Further, the consent authority must be satisfied that:

i. the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by subclause (3), and the proposed development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objective for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out.

Applicant’s Submission

The applicant provided Council with a justification for the variation of the development standards:

The proposed amended design at the Willinga show jumping arena raises the height of the poles to 20m above the arena surface, which allows the light fittings to be aimed downwards rather than across the arena. The use of high efficiency Modus LED fittings with targeted optics and only a 15-degree beam means that the light is directed down rather than across into the line of sight of the viewer, greatly reducing glare both on the arena and from the adjacent areas. The higher 20m poles and specialised optics are crucial to reducing glare in this installation.

The key driver for the required amended height and configuration of the lighting structure and lighting design is the necessity to ensure that both horizontal and vertical lighting is to the standard/level required to ensure that show jumping, in particular, can be carried out safely. (Simply put, the horizontal lighting enables the spectators to see the horse and rider performing, the vertical lighting enables the horse to see what’s in front of and around it).

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the height standard for the following reasons:

• the height of the lighting structures for the show jumping arena is appropriate for the conditions of the site and its context;

• the proposed lighting structures will have no overshadowing, view loss, or other amenity impacts on any other property;

• the proposed lighting structures will have no adverse heritage or other amenity impacts.

Is compliance with the height standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

• the height of the light poles for the show jumping arena, notwithstanding the requested variation to the height standard, is appropriate for the conditions of the site and its context;

• the proposed light poles are essential to the proper and satisfactory organisation of events to be held at the new show jumping arena;

Are there sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the height standard?

The amended lighting design, including the height of the light poles, will result in an improved outcome of reduced lighting spill.

Has this written request adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by sub-clause 4.6(3)?

Yes.

Is the development in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the height standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out?

Yes. The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the height standard for the reasons set out above and is consistent with the objectives for development in the “RU2 Rural Landscape” zone.

Public interest

The proposed lighting structures are considered to be in the public interest as they are consistent with the objectives of the standard and the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out. As explained above a strict application of the height control is not considered necessary due to the site’s isolation and the need to elevate the LED lights to minimise light spill and glare.

Discussion

In accordance with 4.(a)(i) of Clause 4.6 of the SLEP 2014, the applicant’s written request is considered to have adequately addressed the required matters. After reviewing the applicant’s submission, it is considered that the variation is reasonable and acceptable for the following reasons:

· the show jump arena and associated facilities are located with a large setback (>600m) to the nearest potential non associated residential receiver

· the (29m) high lighting structures are located downslope of the covered seating area which effectively reduces their visibility

· The building height variation does not generate overshadowing impacts on the surrounding properties.

· The proposal is consistent with the desired future character of Willinga Park.

· The proposal is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the height standard, to ensure that the height of development is appropriate to the condition of the site and its context.

When dealing with a variation to a development standard under cl 4.6, the Council must also consider the following five part test (as outlined in the Guide) to determine if the variation is acceptable:

1. The objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding noncompliance with the standard.

The objective of the Height of Buildings clause are:

a) to ensure that buildings are compatible with the height, bulk and scale of existing and desired future character of the locality,

b) to minimise visual impact, disruption of views, loss of privacy and loss of solar access to existing development,

c) to ensure that the height of building on or in the vicinity of a heritage item or within a heritage conservation area respect heritage significance.

The proposal is consistent with bulk and scale of the existing development and the desired future character of the locality. The proposed height of the development is appropriate to the context and is compatible with the prevailing pattern of buildings, feature gates and landscaping in the locality.

The proposal positively responds and satisfactorily addresses the particular characteristics of the site and its broader context. The proposal is of a height and scale that is sympathetic to its immediate context.

2. The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is not relevant to the development and therefore compliance is unnecessary – The underlying objectives of the standard are not relevant to the proposed height variations as the lighting structures will not be visible to any other premises outside the site and the structures are remote from any other property.

3. The underlying object or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required and therefore compliance is unreasonable – Not relevant to the proposal.

4. The development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by Council’s own actions in granting consents departing from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable – Not relevant to the proposal.

5. The compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or inappropriate due to existing use of land and current environmental character of the particular parcel of land. That is, the particular parcel of land should not have been included in the zone. – Not relevant to the proposal.

Planning Assessment

The application will be fully assessed under s4.15C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 following determination of the variation to development standards.

Consultation and Community Engagement:

One (1) public submission was received in relation to Council’s notification of the development, in support of the development. The notification was made in accordance with Council’s Community Consultation Policy with letters being sent within a (500m) buffer of the site. The application was also notified in the Milton Ulladulla Times newspaper for a 4 week period.

There were no specific issues raised in relation to the construction of the show jump arena or the design for lighting.

Summary and Conclusion

The proposed works are located more than 300m away from nearest neighbouring property and more than 600m away from the nearest neighbouring dwelling not affiliated with the applicant.

The lighting system has been carefully designed using energy efficient projector type LED lights with a symmetrical distribution and narrow light distribution beam that will minimise light spill and unwanted glare to the targeted area and surrounding land.

The proposal is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the height standard, to ensure that the height of development is appropriate to the condition of the site and its context.

Ordinary Meeting – Tuesday 17 December 2019

Page 0

Local Government Amendment (governance & planning) act 2016

Chapter 3, Section 8A Guiding principles for councils

(1) Exercise of functions generally

The following general principles apply to the exercise of functions by councils:

(a) Councils should provide strong and effective representation, leadership, planning and decision-making.

(b) Councils should carry out functions in a way that provides the best possible value for residents and ratepayers.

(c) Councils should plan strategically, using the integrated planning and reporting framework, for the provision of effective and efficient services and regulation to meet the diverse needs of the local community.

(d) Councils should apply the integrated planning and reporting framework in carrying out their functions so as to achieve desired outcomes and continuous improvements.

(e) Councils should work co-operatively with other councils and the State government to achieve desired outcomes for the local community.

(f) Councils should manage lands and other assets so that current and future local community needs can be met in an affordable way.

(g) Councils should work with others to secure appropriate services for local community needs.

(h) Councils should act fairly, ethically and without bias in the interests of the local community.

(i) Councils should be responsible employers and provide a consultative and supportive working environment for staff.

(2) Decision-making

The following principles apply to decision-making by councils (subject to any other applicable law):

(a) Councils should recognise diverse local community needs and interests.

(b) Councils should consider social justice principles.

(d) Councils should consider the principles of ecologically sustainable development.

(e) Council decision-making should be transparent and decision-makers are to be accountable for decisions and omissions.

(3) Community participation

Councils should actively engage with their local communities, through the use of the integrated planning and reporting framework and other measures.

Chapter 3, Section 8B Principles of sound financial management

The following principles of sound financial management apply to councils:

(a) Council spending should be responsible and sustainable, aligning general revenue and expenses.

(b) Councils should invest in responsible and sustainable infrastructure for the benefit of the local community.

(c) Councils should have effective financial and asset management, including sound policies and processes for the following:

(i) performance management and reporting,

(ii) asset maintenance and enhancement,

(iii) funding decisions,

(iv) risk management practices.

(d) Councils should have regard to achieving intergenerational equity, including ensuring the following:

(i) policy decisions are made after considering their financial effects on future generations,

(ii) the current generation funds the cost of its services

Chapter 3, 8C Integrated planning and reporting principles that apply to councils

The following principles for strategic planning apply to the development of the integrated planning and reporting framework by councils:

(a) Councils should identify and prioritise key local community needs and aspirations and consider regional priorities.

(b) Councils should identify strategic goals to meet those needs and aspirations.

(d) Councils should ensure that the strategic goals and activities to work towards them may be achieved within council resources.

(e) Councils should regularly review and evaluate progress towards achieving strategic goals.

(f) Councils should maintain an integrated approach to planning, delivering, monitoring and reporting on strategic goals.

(g) Councils should collaborate with others to maximise achievement of strategic goals.

(h) Councils should manage risks to the local community or area or to the council effectively and proactively.

(i) Councils should make appropriate evidence-based adaptations to meet changing needs and circumstances.