Agenda of Strategy and Assets Committee

Minutes of the Strategy and Assets Committee

Meeting Date: Tuesday, 10 November 2020

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

Time: 5.00pm

The following members were present:

Clr John Wells - Chairperson

Clr Amanda Findley

Clr Joanna Gash

Clr Patricia White

Clr Kaye Gartner – (Remotely) left at 7.58pm

Clr Nina Digiglio

Clr Annette Alldrick

Clr John Levett

Clr Andrew Guile – (Remotely) left at 6.02pm

Clr Mitchell Pakes

Clr Greg Watson

Clr Mark Kitchener – (Remotely)

Clr Bob Proudfoot

Mr Stephen Dunshea - Chief Executive Officer

Apologies / Leave of Absence

Nil

Confirmation of the Minutes

RESOLVED (Clr Levett / Clr Digiglio) MIN20.817

That the Minutes of the Strategy and Assets Committee held on Tuesday 13 October 2020 be confirmed.

CARRIED

Declarations of Interest

Stephen Dunshea - CEO – “SA20.212 - Notice of Motion - A Study into the Feasibility of Providing Tomerong Village and Environs with a Reticulated Sewerage Scheme” – significant non pecuniary interest declaration – will leave the room and will not take part in discussion or vote – “he is a property owner and resident of Tomerong”.

Clr Pakes – “SA20.227 - Tenders – Management & Operation of Holiday Haven Swan Lake” – less than significant non pecuniary interest declaration – will remain in the room and will take part in discussion and vote – “one of the Tenderers works at the Culburra Bowling and Recreation Club of which he is a Director”.

Mayoral Minutes

Nil

Deputations and Presentations

SA20.213 – Notice of motion – Donation Request – Slow Food Berry 2 Jervis Bay Inc

Marilyn Odowd – FOR

SA20.233 – Ulladulla Civic Centre – Management Review

Darryl Bozicevic – FOR

Notices of Motion / Questions on Notice

SA20.211 Notice of Motion - Marriott Park Master Plan

HPERM Ref: D20/458115

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That:

1. The Marriot Park Master Plan be further reviewed as per the diagram below and be readvertised to relevant stakeholders.

2. A further report be prepared by Staff for the consideration of the Council following readvertising of the revised master plan.

RESOLVED (Clr Wells / Clr Pakes) MIN20.818

That:

1. The Marriot Park Master Plan be further reviewed as per the diagram below and be readvertised to relevant stakeholders.

2. A further report be prepared by Staff for the consideration of the Council following readvertising of the revised master plan.

CARRIED

Note: The CEO - Stephen Dunshea left the meeting at 5.04pm prior to the discussion.

SA20.212 Notice of Motion - A Study into the Feasibility of Providing Tomerong Village and Environs with a Reticulated Sewerage Scheme

HPERM Ref: D20/464841

Stephen Dunshea - CEO – significant non pecuniary interest declaration – he is a property owner and resident of Tomerong - left the room and did not take part in discussion or vote.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That the CEO (Executive Manager, Shoalhaven Water):

1. Undertake a feasibility study into the provision of a sewerage scheme to Tomerong Village and Environs that will:

a. Reduce the amount of effluent finding its way into St Georges Basin.

b. Promote a healthier Village environment.

c. Connect to the St Georges Basin Treatment plant to facilitate a connection with the Reclaimed Water Management Scheme to enable an increase to the amount of irrigation water available to farmers.

2. Report to Council when the study is completed and such report include the possibility of the proposal being part funded by grant source(s).

RESOLVED (Clr Watson / Clr Proudfoot) MIN20.819

That the CEO (Executive Manager, Shoalhaven Water):

1. Undertake a feasibility study into the provision of a sewerage scheme to Tomerong Village and Environs that will:

a. Reduce the amount of nutrient finding its way into St Georges Basin.

b. Promote a healthier Village environment.

c. Connect to the St Georges Basin Treatment plant to facilitate a connection with the Reclaimed Water Management Scheme to enable an increase to the amount of irrigation water available to farmers.

2. Report to Council when the study is completed and such report include the possibility of the proposal being part funded by grant source(s).

CARRIED

Note: The CEO - Stephen Dunshea returned to the meeting at 5.09pm

SA20.213 Notice of Motion - Donation Request - Slow Food Berry 2 Jervis Bay Inc.

HPERM Ref: D20/480210

Recommendation

That Council donate $3,000 (from the Unallocated Donations Budget) to Slow Food Berry 2 Jervis Bay Inc to support their work in planning and creating a large (1 acre) community vegetable garden to be worked by refugee communities on the South Coast.

REcommendation (Clr Gartner / Clr Findley)

That Council donate $3000 and provide approximately three (3) good loads of mulch and delivery (from the Unallocated Donations Budget) to Slow Food Berry 2 Jervis Bay Inc to support their work in planning and creating a large (1 acre) community vegetable garden to be worked by refugee communities on the South Coast.

CARRIED

Reports

SA20.214 Application for Community Consultative Body Council Accreditation - Burrill Lake Community Association Inc

HPERM Ref: D20/482413

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1. Supports in-principle the application from Burrill Lake Community Association Inc. to become a Council accredited CCB.

2. Advertise the proposal for public comment.

3. Following receipt of public comment, submit a report to Council for determination.

RESOLVED (Clr White / Clr Pakes) MIN20.820

That Council:

1. Supports in-principle the application from Burrill Lake Community Association Inc. to become a Council accredited CCB.

2. Advertise the proposal for public comment.

3. Following receipt of public comment, submit a report to Council for determination.

CARRIED

SA20.215 DPOP 2020-21 - Quarterly Performance and Budget Report (July-September)

HPERM Ref: D20/459982

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1. Receive the September Quarterly Performance Report on the 2017-2022 Delivery Program and 2020-2021 Operational Plan and publish on Council’s website.

2. Receive the September Quarterly Budget Review Report.

3. Adopt the budget adjustments as outlined in the September Quarterly Budget Review document.

RECOMMENDATION (Clr Proudfoot / Clr White)

That Council:

1. Receive the September Quarterly Performance Report on the 2017-2022 Delivery Program and 2020-2021 Operational Plan and publish on Council’s website.

2. Receive the September Quarterly Budget Review Report.

3. Adopt the budget adjustments as outlined in the September Quarterly Budget Review document.

CARRIED

SA20.216 Proposed Submission - Multiple Aboriginal Land Claims - Shoalhaven Heads, Culburra Beach (Crookhaven Headland), Huskisson and Kioloa

HPERM Ref: D20/452365

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1. Notify the NSW Department of Planning, Industry & Environment – Crown Lands Aboriginal Land Claims Assessment Team (ALCAT) that Council:

a. Raises no objections to Aboriginal Land Claim (ALC) Number 37806, Part Claim 42448 and Part Claim 42479 over Lot 2 DP 704667, 134 Scott Street, Shoalhaven Heads.

b. Does not support Part ALC Numbers 42454 and 42493 over two Part-Lots 34 DP 755971 and Lot 7004 DP 1059066, Prince Edward Avenue, Culburra Beach (Crookhaven Headland), because at the date of claim lodgement:

i. The land was lawfully used and occupied for its Reserve Purpose of ‘Public Recreation’ and ‘Community Purposes’ and contained infrastructure to support this use.

ii. The land was needed for an essential public purpose, being the Shoalhaven Marine Rescue, and contained infrastructure to support this use.

iii. Part of the land was leased to Marine Rescue NSW to support this essential public purpose.

c. Does not support Part ALC Numbers 42448, 42454, 42479 and 42493 over Huskisson Marine Rescue site, Voyager Memorial Park and White Sands Park, Huskisson (Lot 7012 DP 1021163, Lot 1 DP 209436, Lot 1 DP 209435, two Part-Lots 7010 DP 1076858), because at the date of claim lodgement:

i. The land was lawfully used and occupied for its Reserve Purpose of ‘Public Recreation’ and contained significant public infrastructure to support this use.

ii. The land was needed for an essential public purpose (multiple uses).

iii. Part of the land was leased or licenced in accordance with its Reserve Purpose.

d. Does not support Part ALC Numbers 42454 and 42487 over Lot 34 DP 755941, Lot 7009 DP 1020455 and Lot 7304 DP 1143028, Kioloa Marine Rescue site, because at the date of claim lodgement:

i. The land was lawfully used and occupied for its Reserve Purpose of ‘Public Recreation’ and contained infrastructure to support this use.

ii. The land was needed for an essential public purpose, being the Kioloa Marine Rescue and associated marine infrastructure.

iii. Part of the land was leased to Marine Rescue NSW to support this essential public purpose.

2. Provide any necessary documents and evidence to the ALCAT to support this position.

RESOLVED (Clr Findley / Clr Proudfoot) MIN20.821

That Council:

1. Accept the detail contained in the report as the basis for establishing the ‘interests’ that exist in the subject land at Culburra Beach/Crookhaven Headland, Huskisson and Kioloa.

2. Defer any action in this regard until after the November 2020 Council meeting to enable discussions to be held in the meantime with the Jerrinja Local Aboriginal Land Council.

3. Receive a further report on these matters, if needed, at the November 2020 Council meeting.

CARRIED

Note: Clr Guile left at 6.02pm

SA20.217 Shoalhaven Economic Performance

HPERM Ref: D20/474816

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That the report on the state of the Shoalhaven Economic Performance be received for information.

RESOLVED (Clr Proudfoot / Clr White) MIN20.822

That the report on the state of the Shoalhaven Economic Performance be received for information.

CARRIED

SA20.218 Road Network Strategy - Nowra / Bomaderry - Key Road Projects - Prioritising Congestion Chokepoints

HPERM Ref: D20/476760

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That

1. Council as a matter of urgency re-emphasise to the NSW Ministers for Roads and Transport that the section of the Princes Highway between Cambewarra Rd in the north and Jervis Bay Rd in the south is in critical need of being upgraded to address issues of regular congestion

2. Council lobby the NSW Members for South Coast and Kiama and the Federal Member for Gilmore to have the section of the Princes Highway between Cambewarra Rd in the north and Jervis Bay Rd in the south included within the scope for the Princes Highway Upgrade being funded by the NSW and Australian Governments

3. Council instruct the CEO to take whatever initiatives are considered reasonable to elevate this issue before Governments and government agencies.

RESOLVED (Clr Proudfoot / Clr White) MIN20.823

That Council:

1. As a matter of urgency re-emphasise to the NSW Ministers for Roads and Transport that the section of the Princes Highway between Cambewarra Rd in the north and Jervis Bay Rd in the south is in critical need of being upgraded to address issues of regular congestion;

2. Lobby the:

a. NSW Member for South Coast – The Hon Shelley Hancock;

b. NSW Member for Kiama – The Hon Gareth Ward;

c. Federal Member for Gilmore – Mrs Fiona Phillips MP,

d. Minister for Regional Transport and Roads – The Hon Paul Toole,

e. Minister for transport and Roads – The Hon Andrew Constance,

f. Minister for Water, Property and Housing – The Hon Melinda Pavey,

g. Minister for Regional NSW Industry and Trade The Hon John Barilaro

to have the section of the Princes Highway between Cambewarra Rd in the north and Jervis Bay Rd in the south included within the scope for the Princes Highway Upgrade being funded by the NSW and Australian Governments;

3. Include in the representations, that the strong preference of the community and Council is addressing the critical choke point/s between the intersections of Plunkett and Kalandar street/s for urgent upgrade and grade separation, with a secondary concern being congestion from Kalandar to Hillcrest Street/s.

4. Instruct the CEO to take whatever initiatives are considered reasonable to elevate this issue before Governments and government agencies.

CARRIED

SA20.219 Bushfire Local Economy Recovery Fund - project nominations

HPERM Ref: D20/481406

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That

1. Council endorse the following projects to be submitted as applications to the Bushfire Local Economy Recovery (BLER) Fund and the Council contributions be also endorsed:

a. Materials Recovery Centre, West Nowra

i. Council contribution = $13,000,000

b. Additional REMS dam, Coonamia

i. Council contribution = $7,000,000

c. Livestock yard holding improvements @ 4 Showgrounds

d. Remediate former Ulladulla STP site for Employment Land development

i. Council contribution = $2,500,000

e. Bawley Pt / Kioloa Energy Hub

f. Huskisson Boardwalk refurbishment

g. Sanctuary Point Employment Land

i. Council contribution = $3,000,000

h. Underground power to Bamarang water facilities

i. Conjola Park Regional Boat Ramp

j. Sussex Inlet Employment Lands – Water & Sewerage extension

k. Citywide K&G renewal program

l. Lake Conjola Entrance Rd – new SUP Bridge

m. Inground Water tanks in APZs

i. Council contribution $260,000

n. Shoalhaven Water Recovery & Resilience Project (Generators)

i. Council contribution = $250,000

o. Construct new RFS Station at Conjola

p. Construct new RFS Station at Manyana

q. SCC Development Assessment Personnel (Temporary)

r. Worrigee Cemetery APZ & Asset protection

s. Shoalhaven Heads Boat Ramp

t. Low-cost sealing of Prosperity Rd, Sth Nowra

u. Additional generators & PV @ telecommunications sites

i. Council contribution = $150,000

2. Council contributions for the BLER projects, totalling $4.05M, will be sourced from a combination of internal borrowing from reserves and future capital budget allocations over the period 2020/21 to 2021/22

3. The Chief Executive Officer be authorised to sign and execute any deeds or documents for any successful projects from the Bushfire Local Economic Recovery Fund

Motion (Clr Pakes / Clr White)

That:

1. Council endorse the following projects to be submitted as applications to the Bushfire Local Economy Recovery (BLER) Fund and the Council contributions be also endorsed:

a. Materials Recovery Centre, West Nowra

i. Council contribution = $13,000,000

b. Additional REMS dam, Coonamia

i. Council contribution = $7,000,000

c. Livestock yard holding improvements @ 4 Showgrounds

d. Remediate former Ulladulla STP site for Employment Land development

i. Council contribution = $2,500,000

e. Bawley Pt / Kioloa Energy Hub

f. Huskisson Boardwalk refurbishment

g. Sanctuary Point Employment Land

i. Council contribution = $3,000,000

h. Underground power to Bamarang water facilities

i. Conjola Park Regional Boat Ramp

j. Sussex Inlet Employment Lands – Water & Sewerage extension

k. Citywide K&G renewal program

l. Lake Conjola Entrance Rd – new SUP Bridge

m. Inground Water tanks in APZs

i. Council contribution $260,000

n. Shoalhaven Water Recovery & Resilience Project (Generators)

i. Council contribution = $250,000

o. Undertake renovations and alterations to the existing RFS Station at Conjola (Estimate of $750,000)

p. Construct new RFS Station at Manyana (allocate $1.5M)

q. SCC Development Assessment Personnel (Temporary)

r. Worrigee Cemetery APZ & Asset protection

s. Shoalhaven Heads Boat Ramp

t. Low-cost sealing of Prosperity Rd, Sth Nowra

u. Additional generators & PV @ telecommunications sites

i. Council contribution = $150,000

3. The Chief Executive Officer be authorised to sign and execute any deeds or documents for any successful projects from the Bushfire Local Economic Recovery Fund

AMENDMENT (RESOLVED) (Clr Findley / Clr Gartner) MIN20.824

That:

1. Council endorse the following projects to be submitted as applications to the Bushfire Local Economy Recovery (BLER) Fund and the Council contributions be also endorsed:

a. Materials Recovery Centre, West Nowra

i. Council contribution = $13,000,000

b. Additional REMS dam, Coonamia

i. Council contribution = $7,000,000

c. Livestock yard holding improvements @ 4 Showgrounds

d. Remediate former Ulladulla STP site for Employment Land development

i. Council contribution = $2,500,000

e. Bawley Pt / Kioloa Energy Hub

f. Huskisson Boardwalk refurbishment

g. Sanctuary Point Employment Land

i. Council contribution = $3,000,000

h. Underground power to Bamarang water facilities

i. Conjola Park Regional Boat Ramp

j. Sussex Inlet Employment Lands – Water & Sewerage extension

k. Citywide K&G renewal program

l. Lake Conjola Entrance Rd – new SUP Bridge

m. Inground Water tanks in APZs

i. Council contribution $260,000

n. Shoalhaven Water Recovery & Resilience Project (Generators)

i. Council contribution = $250,000

o. Undertake renovations and alterations to the existing RFS Station at Conjola (Estimate of $750,000)

p. Construct new RFS Station at Manyana (allocate $1.5M)

q. SCC Development Assessment Personnel (Temporary)

r. Worrigee Cemetery APZ & Asset protection

s. Shoalhaven Heads Boat Ramp

t. Low-cost sealing of Prosperity Rd, Sth Nowra

u. Additional generators & PV @ telecommunications sites

i. Council contribution = $150,000

v. Construct portion of Riversdale Road, joint application with Bundanon

3. The Chief Executive Officer be authorised to sign and execute any deeds or documents for any successful projects from the Bushfire Local Economic Recovery Fund

For: Clr Wells, Clr Findley, Clr Gash, Clr White, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett, Clr Kitchener and Stephen Dunshea

Against: Clr Pakes, Clr Watson and Clr Proudfoot

AMENDMENT carried

tHE AMENDMENT BECAME THE MOTION AND WAS PUT TO THE MEETING

For: Clr Wells, Clr Findley, Clr Gash, Clr White, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against: Nil

CARRIED

SA20.220 Further Update - Rent Relief - Occupiers of Council Owned or Management Properties

HPERM Ref: D20/421669

Recommendation

That Council

1. Extend the COVID19 rent-free period to:

a. all tenancies listed (Attachment 1 – ‘Proposed Rent Relief Table’) 100% rent relief until 31^st January 2021.

b. all tenants listed as Community Organisations (Attachment 1 – ‘Proposed Rent Relief Table’) 100% rent relief until the 30 June 2021.

2. Delegate authority to the CEO (Director City Services) to provide Rent Relief to tenancies listed in Attachment 1 – ‘Proposed Rent Relief Table’ if a “hardship” case can be demonstrated as a result of the COVID19 crisis. The CEO (Director City Services) is to report all representations and decisions at an appropriate Budget Quarterly Review.

Clr Findley raised a Point of Order and requested the Chairperson ask Clr Pakes to refrain from making side comments.

The Chairperson asked all Councillors to refrain from making side comments.

REcommendation (Clr White / Clr Pakes)

That Council:

1. Extend the COVID19 rent-free period to:

a. all tenancies listed (Attachment 1 – ‘Proposed Rent Relief Table’) 100% rent relief until 31^st January 2021.

b. all tenants listed as Community Organisations (Attachment 1 – ‘Proposed Rent Relief Table’) 100% rent relief until the 30 June 2021.

CARRIED

SA20.221 Proposed Road Closure - Part Bolong Road Bomaderry - Shoalhaven Starches P/L

HPERM Ref: D20/420227

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Close approximately 103.2 sqm of Bolong Road, Bomaderry as per Attachment 1 (D20/460983) adjoining Lot 1 DP 838753 by way of a notice published in the Government Gazette;

2. Authorise the creation of any easements, including for services and any restriction on the use of the land in favour of Shoalhaven City Council across the portion comprised in the road closure at the time of finalising the survey plan;

3. Authorise the sale of the portion comprised in the road closure, per point 1 above, to Shoalhaven Starches (adjoining property owner) for $3,100 (plus GST if applicable);

4. Require the portion comprised in the road closure and the adjoining Lot 1 DP 838753 to be consolidated into one lot;

5. Require all costs associated with the road closure and sale be borne by Shoalhaven Starches and the net income from the sale be placed in the Property Reserve; and

6. Authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign any documentation required to give effect to this Resolution and to affix the Common Seal of the Council of the City of Shoalhaven to all documentation required to be sealed.

REcommendation (Clr Gash / Clr Findley)

That Council:

1. Close approximately 103.2 sqm of Bolong Road, Bomaderry as per Attachment 1 (D20/460983) adjoining Lot 1 DP 838753 by way of a notice published in the Government Gazette;

3. Authorise the sale of the portion comprised in the road closure, per point 1 above, to Shoalhaven Starches (adjoining property owner) for $3,100 (plus GST if applicable);

4. Require the portion comprised in the road closure and the adjoining Lot 1 DP 838753 to be consolidated into one lot;

5. Require all costs associated with the road closure and sale be borne by Shoalhaven Starches and the net income from the sale be placed in the Property Reserve; and

CARRIED

SA20.222 Proposed Road Closure & Sale Jarretts Lane Kangaroo Valley

HPERM Ref: D20/458022

Recommendation

That Council

1. Close approximately 89.64 lineal metres of the unformed Jarretts Lane, Kangaroo Valley shown red on Attachment 1 (D20/458208) at the rear of 115A Jarretts Lane, Kangaroo Valley by a notice published in the Government Gazette.

2. Authorise the sale of the closed road to Trudie Nicole Jarnason (adjoining property owner) for $4,000 + GST (if applicable)

3. Require the portion comprised in the road closure be consolidated into one lot with Lot 1 DP 826997.

4. Require all costs associated with the road closure and sale to be borne by Stefan and Trudie Jarnason.

5. Authorise the Chief Executive officer to sign any documentation required to give effect to this Resolution and to affix the Common Seal of the Council of the City of Shoalhaven to all documentation required to be sealed.

REcommendation (Clr Proudfoot / Clr Digiglio)

That Council:

2. Authorise the sale of the closed road to Trudie Nicole Jarnason (adjoining property owner) for $4,000 + GST (if applicable)

3. Require the portion comprised in the road closure be consolidated into one lot with Lot 1 DP 826997.

4. Require all costs associated with the road closure and sale to be borne by Stefan and Trudie Jarnason.

CARRIED

SA20.223 Easement for Access Extinguishment Lot 48 DP 25550 and Road Dedication Lots 46 & 47 DP 25550 Island Point Road St Georges Basin

HPERM Ref: D20/426031

Recommendation

That Council

1. Resolve to dedicate Lots 46 & 47 DP 25550 Island Point Road St Georges Basin as Public Road pursuant to Section 10 of the Roads Act 1993; and

2. Approve the Extinguishment of the Right of Way over Lots 46 & 47 DP 25550 as no longer required due to the Road dedication under point 1 above; and

3. Approve the Extinguishment of the Easement for Access over Lot 48 DP 25550 Island Point Road St Georges Basin as no longer required due to the Road dedication under point 1 above; and

4. Grant authority to affix the Common Seal of the Council of the City of Shoalhaven to any documents required to be sealed and that the Chief Executive Officer be authorised to sign any documentation necessary to give effect to this Resolution.

REcommendation (Clr Proudfoot / Clr White)

That Council:

1. Resolve to dedicate Lots 46 & 47 DP 25550 Island Point Road St Georges Basin as Public Road pursuant to Section 10 of the Roads Act 1993; and

2. Approve the Extinguishment of the Right of Way over Lots 46 & 47 DP 25550 as no longer required due to the Road dedication under point 1 above; and

3. Approve the Extinguishment of the Easement for Access over Lot 48 DP 25550 Island Point Road St Georges Basin as no longer required due to the Road dedication under point 1 above; and

CARRIED

SA20.224 Creation of Asset Protection Zone over Council Land - Lot 61 DP 833017 Ilett Street, Mollymook

HPERM Ref: D20/441004

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Approve the creation of an Asset Protection Zone over part Lot 61 DP 1833017 as shown in SET Consultant’s APZ Plan at Attachment 2 (D20/442538), by way of a positive covenant in accordance with the provisions of Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 allowing the following activities:

a. Clear from the APZ Site and at all times, keep the APZ Site free of all bush, scrub, flora and fauna (with the exception of grass); and

b. Do all things necessary to maintain the APZ Site as an APZ.;

2. Require the landowners of Lot 76 DP 1243148 indemnify Council against any loss, injury or damages incurred whilst on Council owned land and undertaking the activities noted above at 1 (a) & 1 (b) and pay all costs (including Councils) associated with the creation of the positive covenant; and

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

RESOLVED (Clr White / Clr Pakes) MIN20.825

That the matter relating Creation of Asset Protection Zone over Council Land - Lot 61 DP 833017 Ilett Street, Mollymook be deferred and:

1. Referred to an on-site meeting of available Councillors and the RFS be invited; and then

2. Referred to a Clr Briefing.

CARRIED

SA20.225 Creation of Asset Protection Zone over Council Unmade Road adjoining Lot 1 Sec 5 DP 758322 - 2 Jervis St, Currarong

HPERM Ref: D20/461430

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Resolve to approve the creation of an Asset Protection Zone over Council’s unmade road at Crookhaven Parade, Currarong adjoining the common northern boundary of Lot 1 Sec 5 DP 758322 as shown on Attachment 1 (D20/461554), by way of positive covenant in accordance with the provisions of Section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919’

2. Require that the landowners of Lot 1 Sec 5 DP 758322 indemnify Council against any loss, injury or damages incurred whilst on Council owned land and undertaking the activities defined in the APZ Management Plan and pay all costs, fees and charges (including legal) associated with the creation of the positive covenant: and

REcommendation (Clr Pakes / Clr Gash) MIN20.826

That Council:

For: Clr Wells, Clr Gash, Clr White, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against: Clr Findley, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick and Clr Levett

CARRIED

Note: Clr Gash and Clr Alldrick left the meeting at 7.32pm

SA20.226 Parkcare Action Plans - Callala Bay Foreshore / Collingwood Reserve / Fishermans Paradise / Friends of Hyams Beach / Paino Reserve / Surfers Avenue

HPERM Ref: D20/410898

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council

1. Endorse the updated and new ‘Parkcare” plans for

a. Callala Bay Foreshore – Callala Bay (NEW)

b. Collingwood Reserve – Basin View (UPDATED)

c. Hazel Rowbotham Reserve – Fishermans Paradise (NEW)

d. Hyams Beach Parks – Hyams Beach (UPDATED)

e. Paino Reserve – Sanctuary Point (NEW)

f. Surfers Avenue Reserve – Narrawallee (UPDATED)

2. Continue to allocate ongoing annual operating funding of $400 (GST exclusive and CPI adjusted) for each Parkcare Group, totalling $2,400, to cover safety PPE, miscellaneous materials, waste disposal and purchase minor tools. This has been provided for in the Draft 2021/2022 Operating Budget.

RESOLVED (Clr Proudfoot / Clr Levett) MIN20.827

That Council:

1. Endorse the updated and new ‘Parkcare” plans for

a. Callala Bay Foreshore – Callala Bay (NEW)

b. Collingwood Reserve – Basin View (UPDATED)

c. Hazel Rowbotham Reserve – Fishermans Paradise (NEW)

d. Hyams Beach Parks – Hyams Beach (UPDATED)

e. Paino Reserve – Sanctuary Point (NEW)

f. Surfers Avenue Reserve – Narrawallee (UPDATED)

For: Clr Wells, Clr Findley, Clr Gash, Clr White, Clr Gartner, Clr Digiglio, Clr Alldrick, Clr Levett, Clr Pakes, Clr Kitchener, Clr Proudfoot and Stephen Dunshea

Against: Clr Watson

CARRIED

SA20.227 Tenders – Management & Operation of Holiday Haven Swan Lake

HPERM Ref: D20/463153

Clr Pakes – less than significant non pecuniary interest declaration – will remain in the room and will take part in discussion and vote – “one of the Tenderers works at the Culburra Bowling and Recreation Club of which he is a Director”.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council consider a separate confidential report in accordance with Section 10A(2)(d)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993.

RESOLVED (Clr Proudfoot / Clr White) MIN20.828

That Council consider a separate confidential report in accordance with Section 10A(2)(d)(i) of the Local Government Act 1993.

CARRIED

SA20.228 Fishermans Paradise Voluntary Planning Agreement

HPERM Ref: D20/459989

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That the Strategy and Assets Committee endorse the Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) for the dedication of land at Fisherman’s Paradise subject to the developer Grange Estates P/L meeting the following requirements:

1. Prior to the commencement of any site works, including the clearing or modification of any vegetation, or the issuing of a Subdivision Works Certificate, the Developer Grange Estates P/L will submit to Council an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) prepared by a suitably qualified practising Ecologist, Environmental Scientist or Bushland Restoration Expert for the rehabilitation and ongoing management of the Public Reserve for a period of 5 years in accordance with the NSW DPIE Guidelines for the management of waterfront lands.

The EMP shall include a requirement to install four strand plain wire fencing supported by treated pine posts along the interface between the road reserve and the public reserve where required to prevent public access as part of Year 1 works and as part of the works required to be completed prior to dedication of the land to Council; and

2. Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate for the Plan of Survey for Stage 2A (shown plan N27743-11 rev 2 dated 19 December 2019 (D20/161178) ) which will dedicate the Public Reserve, the developer Grange Estates P/L will:

a. implement the actions in the approved EMP which are required to be completed prior to dedication of the land; and

b. provide Council with a EMP monitoring and implement report to confirm works within the EMP have been completed.

3. Following dedication of the Public Reserve, the Developer Grange Estates P/L will:

a. implement any additional actions identified in the approved EMP for Years 1 and 2; and

b. provide Council with a EMP report monitoring and implementation report at the end of years 1 and 2 to confirm EMP actions have been completed; and

c. pay $2,240 annually to Council on the 3^rd, 4^th and 5^th anniversary of the date the Public Reserve was dedicated to cover Council’s estimated costs for implementing the EMP on the Public Reserve for years 3-5.

RESOLVED (Clr Proudfoot / Clr White) MIN20.829

a. implement the actions in the approved EMP which are required to be completed prior to dedication of the land; and

b. provide Council with a EMP monitoring and implement report to confirm works within the EMP have been completed.

3. Following dedication of the Public Reserve, the Developer Grange Estates P/L will:

a. implement any additional actions identified in the approved EMP for Years 1 and 2; and

b. provide Council with a EMP report monitoring and implementation report at the end of years 1 and 2 to confirm EMP actions have been completed; and

CARRIED

SA20.229 Conjola Community Forum and Case Clinic

HPERM Ref: D20/481294

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council receive this report for consideration and:

1. Thank Resilience NSW for their offer of assistance

2. Support the initiative to hold a Case Clinic for internal stakeholders to discuss the current issues within Conjola.

3. Support the initiative, following the case clinic, to have a series of Community Forums within Conjola, hosted by Resilience NSW that focus on bringing the community together.

RESOLVED (Clr Findley / Clr White) MIN20.830

That Council receive this report for consideration and:

1. Thank Resilience NSW for their offer of assistance

2. Support the initiative to hold a Case Clinic for internal stakeholders to discuss the current issues within Conjola.

3. Support the initiative, following the case clinic, to have a series of Community Forums within Conjola, hosted by Resilience NSW that focus on bringing the community together.

CARRIED

SA20.230 Acquisition - Sewer Purposes - 9 Matron Porter Drive Narrawallee

HPERM Ref: D20/432758

Recommendation

That

1. Council acquire an Easement for sewerage purposes 2.4 metres wide over part of Lot 5 DP 216561, No. 9 Matron Porter Drive Narrawallee shown highlighted on Attachment 1.

2. Council pay compensation of $11,500 plus GST if applicable and reasonable legal costs associated with the acquisition to the owner in accordance with the provision of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991, from Shoalhaven Water’s Sewer Fund.

3. The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Shoalhaven be affixed to any documents required to be sealed.

REcommendation (Clr Findley / Clr Digiglio)

That:

1. Council acquire an Easement for sewerage purposes 2.4 metres wide over part of Lot 5 DP 216561, No. 9 Matron Porter Drive Narrawallee shown highlighted on Attachment 1.

3. The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Shoalhaven be affixed to any documents required to be sealed.

CARRIED

SA20.231 Acquisition of Easement - Sewer Purposes - 6 Woodlawn Avenue Burrill Lake

HPERM Ref: D20/435421

Recommendation

That

1. Council acquire an Easement for sewerage purposes 1.2 metres wide over part of Lot 82 DP 209662, No. 6 Woodlawn Avenue Burrill Lake shown highlighted on Attachment 1.

2. Council pay compensation of $5,000 plus GST if applicable and reasonable legal costs associated with the acquisition to the owner in accordance with the provision of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991, from Shoalhaven Water’s Sewer Fund.

3. The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Shoalhaven be affixed to any documents required to be sealed.

REcommendation (Clr Proudfoot / Clr Pakes)

That:

1. Council acquire an Easement for sewerage purposes 1.2 metres wide over part of Lot 82 DP 209662, No. 6 Woodlawn Avenue Burrill Lake shown highlighted on Attachment 1.

3. The Common Seal of the Council of the City of Shoalhaven be affixed to any documents required to be sealed.

CARRIED

SA20.232 Yalwal Camping Area - Staged Reopening Strategy

HPERM Ref: D20/472365

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1. Approve the reopening of access to the Yalwal camping area for day use only.

2. Progress the development of the site as outlined in the Danjera Dam Camping - Future Directions Report

3. Continue to limit access for day use only, until such time the campground is formalised, and planned improvements made to its facilities and management.

RESOLVED (Clr Proudfoot / Clr Levett) MIN20.831

That Council:

1. Approve the reopening of access to the Yalwal camping area for day use only.

2. Progress the development of the site as outlined in the Danjera Dam Camping - Future Directions Report

3. Continue to limit access for day use only, until such time the campground is formalised, and planned improvements made to its facilities and management.

CARRIED

Introduction of Items as Matters of Urgency

RESOLVED (Clr Wells / Stephen Dunshea) MIN20.832

That the following addendum reports be introduced as matters of urgency:

1. SA20.233 Ulladulla Civic Centre - Management Review

CARRIED

The Chairperson ruled the matters as ones of urgency as they relate to urgent business of Council and allowed their introduction.

Note: Clr Gash and Alldrick returned to the meeting at 7.37pm

Addendum Reports

SA20.233 Ulladulla Civic Centre - Management Review

HPERM Ref: D20/457991

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council

1. Adopt the Internal Management Model (ATP Model 3) as recommended in the “Business Plan for the Management and Operation of the Ulladulla Function Centre” report and transfer the management and operation of the Ulladulla Civic Centre to Council at the expiration of the current management contract .

2. Notify Milton Ulladulla Ex-Servos Club Ltd (MUES) that the existing contract will expire on 31 December 2020 when the management and operation of the Ulladulla Civic Centre will transfer back to Shoalhaven City Council.

RESOLVED (Clr White / Clr Gash) MIN20.833

That Council:

1. Receive and note the report from Asset Technologies Pacific on the Business Plan for the Management and Operation of the Ulladulla Function Centre and Management Models.

2. Not proceed at this time to bring the management and operation of the Ulladulla Civic Centre in-house;

3. Delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the authority to negotiate and enter into a contract for the continued management and operation of the Ulladulla Civic Centre with the Milton Ulladulla Ex-Servos for a period of up to 12 months for an amount not exceeding the tender threshold.

4. Proceed to call for a public Request for Tender process via the open market for the management and operation of the Ulladulla Civic Centre with a report to Council by June 2021.

For: Clr Wells, Clr Gash, Clr White, Clr Alldrick, Clr Pakes, Clr Watson, Clr Kitchener, Clr Gartner and Clr Proudfoot

Against: Clr Findley, Clr Digiglio, Clr Levett and Stephen Dunshea

CARRIED

Confidential Reports

Pursuant to Section 10A(4) the public were invited to make representation to the meeting before any part of the meeting is closed, as to whether that part of the meeting should be closed.

No members of the public made representations.

RESOLVED (Clr Pakes / Clr White) MIN20.834

That the press and public be excluded from the Meeting, pursuant to section 10A(1)(a) of the Local Government Act, 1993, to consider the following items of a confidential nature.

CSA20.16 Tenders – Management & Operation of Holiday Haven Swan Lake

Commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it.10(A)(2)(d)(i)

There is a public interest consideration against disclosure of information as disclosure of the information could reasonably be expected to reveal commercial-in-confidence provisions of a contract, diminish the competitive commercial value of any information to any person and/or prejudice any person’s legitimate business, commercial, professional or financial interests.

CARRIED

Note: Clr Gartner left the meeting at 7.58pm.

The meeting moved into confidential the time being 7.58pm.

The meeting moved into open session, the time being 8.00pm.

Report from confidential session

The following resolutions of the meeting, whilst closed to the public, were made public.

CSA20.16 Tenders – Management & Operation of Holiday Haven Swan Lake

HPERM Ref: D20/463435

RESOLVED MIN20.835C

That:

1. Council endorses the recommendation of the Tender Assessement Team to accept the Tender from Jane and Trent Robey for Management and Operation of Holiday Haven Swan Lake

2. The contract documents and any other associated documents be executed on behalf of the Council in accordance with cl165 of the Local Government Regulation by the Director – City Services, as the Principal’s Representative

CARRIED

There being no further business, the meeting concluded, the time being 8.01pm.

Clr Wells

CHAIRPERSON

Strategy and Assets Committee – Tuesday 08 December 2020

Page 1

SA20.240 Code of Conduct and Code of Conduct Procedures - Changes to Model Code to be reflected in Council Policy Documents

HPERM Ref: D20/484863

Section: Business Assurance & Risk

Approver: Kevin Voegt, Director - City Performance

Attachments: 1. DRAFT - Amended Code of Conduct (under separate cover) ⇨

2. DRAFT - Amended Procedures Code of Conduct (under separate cover)

Reason for Report

To provide Council with the amended Council documents for adoption which reflect amendments to the Model Code of Conduct and Code of Conduct Procedures which have been enacted.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council adopt:

1. The amendments to the Code of Conduct (provided as Attachment 1 to the report) including the increase in the cap on Gifts and Benefits at $100 outlined in the enacted revised Model Code

2. The amendments to the Code of Conduct Procedures (provided as Attachment 2 to the report) reflecting the amendments the enacted revised Model Procedures.

Options

1. Adopt the attached documents which reflect the enacted changes to the Model Code of Conduct and the Code of Conduct Procedures

Implications: Council’s policy documents will reflect the changes to the Model Code which are in place for dealing with Code of Conduct Matters

2. Not adopt the attached documents

Implications: The provisions enacted by the changes to the Model Code will require to be implemented in dealing with conduct matters, but the Council’s Policy documents will be incorrect.

3. Made amendments to the documents before adoption

Implications: There are limitations on what amendments can be made and public consultation will be required for changes which do not align with the Model Code of Conduct and / or Procedures. Should the Council wish to make further changes it is suggested that the Council resolve at this time to adopt the documents provided and further resolve for a report from the CEO to address any further changes proposed.

Background

The Model Code of Conduct and Procedures for the Administration of the Model Code of Conduct (Model Code Procedures) are prescribed under section 440 and 440AA of the Local Government Act 1993. The 2020 Model Code of Conduct and Model Code Procedures were prescribed and commenced on 7 August 2020.

Amendments to the Code of Conduct

In the Circular 20-32 Amendments to the Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW and Procedures which announced the changes, the following changes were outlined:

· “The Model Code of Conduct has been amended to:

· remove as a breach, failure to comply with a council resolution requiring action in relation to a code of conduct breach (because it is now redundant)

· update the language used to describe the various heads of discrimination in clause 3.6 to reflect more contemporary standards

· include in the definition of council committee and council committee members, members of audit, risk and improvement committees (ARICs) in anticipation of the commencement of the requirement for all councils to appoint an ARIC following the next local government elections.

· Amendments have also been made to the gifts and benefits provisions of the Model Code of Conduct in response to feedback from some councils. The amendments:

· lift the $50 cap on the value of gifts that may be accepted to $100

· clarify that items with a value of $10 or less are not “gifts or benefits” for the purposes of the Model Code of Conduct and do not need to be disclosed

· clarify that benefits and facilities provided by councils (as opposed to third parties) to staff and councillors are not “gifts or benefits” for the purposes of the Model Code of Conduct, and

· remove the cap on the value of meals and refreshments that may be accepted by council officials in conjunction with the performance of their official duties.

· Councils are not obliged to amend their codes of conduct to lift the cap on the value of gifts that may be accepted if they do not wish to. It is open to councils to retain the existing $50 cap or to impose another cap that is lower than $100.”

Attachment 1 to this report demonstrates the changes to the Council’s existing Code of Conduct using ‘tracked changes. The changes to the document being shown in blue text, including the following significant changed provisions:

· Section 3.6 which outlines discrimination now provides further clarity on racial discrimination which could apply to colour, national or ethnic origin or immigrant status, and reflects updated language with respect to family responsibilities and gender identity and status;

· Section 6.2 (a) which removes items with a value of less than $10 and (d) which removes gifts or benefits from the Council to an employee or Councillor from the definition of a gift, benefit, or hospitality;

· Sections 6.8 to 6.11 which increases the limit for gifts, benefits, and hospitality from $50 to $100; and

· Section 8.19 restricts conversion of property of the Council to personal ownership without proper authorisation.

Amendments to the Procedures

In the Circular 20-32 Amendments to the Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW and Procedures which announced the changes, the following changes were outlined:

· “Consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision, councils have the following options when taking disciplinary action against councillors for breaches of their codes of conduct under the new Procedures:

· that a councillor be formally censured for the breach under section 440G of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act), or

· that a councillor be formally censured for a breach under section 440G and the matter referred to OLG for further disciplinary action under the misconduct provisions of the Act.

· The process for censuring councillors for breaches of the code of conduct has been significantly strengthened to ensure councillors are made publicly accountable to their electors for their conduct. When censuring councillors, councils are required to specify in their resolution the grounds on which the councillor is being censured by disclosing the investigator’s findings and determination and any other grounds that the council considers may be relevant or appropriate.

· Councillors may seek to avoid public censure for breaches of the code of conduct by voluntarily agreeing to undergo training or counselling, to apologise for their conduct or to give undertakings not to repeat their conduct before the investigator finalises their report to the council. Investigators can finalise their investigations without a report to the council where they consider these to be an appropriate outcome to the matter they are investigating. However, it will remain open to investigators to finalise their report and to recommend censure where they consider this is appropriate and warranted.

· The process for referral by councils of code of conduct breaches by councillors to OLG for further disciplinary action under the misconduct provisions of the Act has been streamlined. Investigators are required to consult with OLG before recommending the referral of matters to ensure the conduct in question is sufficiently serious to warrant disciplinary action for misconduct and that there is sufficient evidence of the breach to allow OLG to take further disciplinary action.

· Other amendments have been made to the Procedures to:

· allow panels of conduct reviewers to be appointed without a resolution of the council, and

· allow the referral of investigators’ reports to OLG for action under the misconduct provisions of the Act where the council will not have a quorum to deal with the matter.

Attachment 2 to this report demonstrates the changes to the Council’s existing Procedures for the Code of Conduct using ‘tracked changes’. The significant changes being to the following provisions:

· Definitions of council committee and council committee member amended to include members of the Council’s Audit, Risk, and Improvement Committee

· The removal of a requirement for a Council resolution for the establishment of a panel of Conduct Reviewers (Clauses 3.1, 3.2 and 3.10)

· Investigations are limited to those situations where the alleged conduct is sufficiently serious to warrant the formal censure of a councillor under section 440G of the LGA or disciplinary action against the general manager under their contract of employment ( Clauses 6.22 and 6.24).

· Changes to Final Investigator report and Council report consideration provisions to reflect the changed investigation limitations, including removal of sanctions which were previously permitted to be recommended by the Investigator (Clauses 7.31 to 7.61).

· Changes to the sanctions available to the Office of Local Government in line with the investigation restrictions above (8.19 -8.21)

Community engagement

As Council is adopting the Model Code of Conduct and the Procedures for Administration of the Code of Conduct as prescribed and with unchanged content to the versions published on the Office of Local Government website, there are no consultation processes for Council associated with this report. These documents were immediately effective upon release, so it is important that Council adopt these.

If the Council wishes to make amendments further to those in the attached documents, a consultation process will be required.

Policy Implications

Adoption of the Code of Conduct and Model Code Procedures will rescind the previously adopted versions, which were based on the Office of Local Government - Model Code of Conduct and Model Code Procedures of 2018.

Risk Implications

Adoption of the Code of Conduct and Model Code Procedures will ensure Council is complying with the Local Government Act 1993.

Strategy and Assets Committee – Tuesday 08 December 2020

Page 1

SA20.241 2021/22 Budget Parameters

HPERM Ref: D20/528633

Section: Finance

Approver: Kevin Voegt, Director - City Performance

Reason for Report

To seek adoption of the budgeting strategies and economic parameters to guide the preparation of the 2021/22 Draft Budget.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council adopt the following budgeting strategies and economic parameters for the preparation of the 2021/22 Draft Budget:

1. Principal budgeting strategies:

a. The budget will not result in an unrestricted cash deficit.

b. Prioritise funding in the following order:

i. Provide sufficient funding for all continuing services.

ii. Continue Council’s commitment to asset renewal.

iii. Continue a program of capital improvements at similar budget levels and ratios.

iv. Provide funding for recommended service expansions.

c. Maintain or improve Council’s financial and asset management performance indicators reported in the annual financial statements.

d. Maintain an adequate working funds balance.

2. Economic parameters:

a. Rates are increased by 2.6% to cover known additional costs in 2021/22 with the additional loan repayments funded from reduced capital expenditure.

b. User fees and charges are increased by 2%.

c. Salaries and wages will be increased by 2%.

d. Materials and other expenditures increased by 0.50%.

e. The capital works program has the same level of general funding as 2020/21, with the additional loan repayments for the new loans in 2020/21 funded from this allocation.

f. Borrowing for capital works is limited to Council businesses where an external funding source for the loan repayment can be identified.

g. Should the need arise during the year for additional borrowings, the following options in priority order will be considered:

i. Internal borrowing opportunities.

ii. Low cost loan initiative.

iii. External loans not subsidised by the low-cost loan initiative.

Options

1. Adopt the recommendation as printed

Implications: The budget preparation can commence

2. Suggest and alternate recommendation

Implications: The budget preparation can commence

Background

In response to feedback received from Councillors that they be engaged earlier in the budget preparation process each year, it is proposed that Council’s budget preparation process be amended to include the following:

· An executive summary of the state of Council’s assets

· Adoption of a high-level budget strategy and economic parameters by Council;

· Preparation of detailed operating and capital budgets by staff, guided by the adopted budget and economic parameters;

· Comprehensive management review and development of options to balance the budget;

· Councillor workshops on both the operating budget and capital works program and options to balance the budget

· Presentation of the draft budget to the Council;

· Final consideration and adoption of the draft budget for inclusion in the draft Operational Plan for public exhibition; and

· Adoption of the annual budget following consideration of any submissions from public exhibition of the draft Operational Plan.

With much work needed to be undertaken in January to enable an earlier presentation of the draft budget to Council, adoption of the budget strategy and parameters by the Council now is a new step in budget preparation cycle that will enable staff to undertake that work in January with an improved level of confidence that the draft budget, when discussed at budget workshops and ultimately presented formally for consideration, will meet Councillors expectations. It is also considered that this additional step makes the budget preparation more transparent and efficient with strategic priorities and budget constrains being identified further in advance.

Summary of the State of Council’s Assets

Council’s annual report on Infrastructure assets, which is included in the financial statements, identifies that:

· Asset Gross replacement cost (GRC) is $3,587M and written down value (WDV) is $2,213M. That is Councils assets are on average have expired 38.3% of their expected life and a large number of assets are in poor to very poor condition which is below customer expected levels of service.

· Council assets require annual maintenance of $73M and Council currently is funding $64M a funding gap of $9M annually. Each financial year that required maintenance is not being fully funded increases risk and customer satisfaction decreases as these services being provided from the assets become less fit for purpose, reliable, safe and secure.

Asset Maintenance Ratio = Actual Asset Maintenance

Required Maintenance

Target 100%

2020 2019

General Fund 78.19% 80.14%

Water Fund 99.95% 99.93%

Sewer Fund 99.97% 99.99%

· Each financial year the number of assets in poor to very poor is increasing. The current estimated backlog cost is $56M to bring Poor and Very Poor assets to a satisfactory condition/ standard and to meet the community’s needs identified in the Community Strategic plan (CSP).

Asset in Poor to Very Poor Condition:

Roads 8.8%

Stormwater 11.0%

Open Space and Recreation 21.3%

Other 6.0%

Water 3.0%

Sewerage 3.0%

Asset in Satisfactory Condition

Roads 28.8%

Water 20.0%

Open Space and Recreation 21.1%

Other 46.0%

Sewerage 20.0%

Stormwater 25.0%

Note: With Maintenance being underfunded in the General Fund, these assets are likely to fall into the Poor to Very Poor Condition in the coming years.

Proposed Budget Strategies and Parameters

Management is seeking Council to adopt the following principal budgeting strategies for the preparation of the 2021/22 budget:

1. The budget will not result in an unrestricted cash deficit (i.e., a balanced budget)

2. Prioritise funding in the following order:

a. Provide sufficient funding for all continuing services

b. Continue Council’s commitment to asset renewal

c. Continue a program of capital improvements at similar levels as previous years

d. Provide funding for unavoidable cost increases and agreed service expansions

3. Maintain or improve Council’s financial and asset management performance indicators reported in the annual financial statements.

4. Maintain an adequate working funds/liquidity balance.

The following economic parameters are recommended for adoption.

General Rates Increase

The table below illustrates options for rates increases ($’000).

	2020/21 Permissible income (+0.5% growth)	Rate Increase Options
		Option 1	Option 2	Option 3	Option 4
		Rate Peg Only	Cover known increases (exc. additional loan repayments)	Cover known increases (inc. additional loan repayments)	Fully Recover SRV Catch up
		2.00%	2.60%	4.38%	4.98%
Rates Yield	79,950	81,549	82,029	83,449	83,932
Total rate increase		1,599	2,079	3,499	3,982
$ SRV (increase above Rate Peg)			480	1,900	2,383
Remaining $SRV catch up		2,383	1,903	483	0

Please note that Council has an approved SRV that wasn’t taken up last financial year and can apply S511 of the Local Government Act to catch up on the shortfall, the four options explore the amount of SRV and remaining catch up. The total of the catch up is $2,383K.

Option 1 – Rate Peg Only

The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) has announced that the Rate Peg for the 2021/22 year is 2.0%. The Local Government Cost Index for the year ending 30 June 2020 is 1.8% and an adjustment of 0.2% for the cost of the 2021 local government elections has been added. The 0.2% for elections equates to $160K, compared to the estimated cost of the election for Shoalhaven City Council of $663K in 2021/22 (0.83% additional rate increase).

A rate increase of 2.0% will be insufficient to compensate for the reduction in interest income and to fund an increase in employee costs (Award increase) and other known additional costs for 2021/22 outlined in Option 3.

Option 2 – 2.6% increase – cover known increases (excluding additional loan repayments)

This option will generate additional revenue of $2.1M, including an additional $480K SRV, leaving $1.9M remaining to catch up in future years.

This option is considered to be the most appropriate as the 2.6% increase will cover the known increases in operational expenditures outlined in option 3 below, except for the additional loan repayments that can be covered by a reduction in the capital works program.

2.6% is the minimum rates increase required for the Council to have a balanced budget and maintain consistent capital works program.

Option 3 – 4.38% increase – cover known increases (including additional loan repayments)

This option will cover Council’s known net cost increases (summarised below)

Component	Increase (‘000)
Labour 2%	$650
Materials & other expenses 0.5%	$220
Loan Repayments	$1,234
Reduction in Interest Income	$1,041
Election Expense	$373
	$3,518

The above items are funded from rates revenue or affect the general-purpose revenue of Council.

The award labour increase for 2020/21 is 2%, Council currently has $31.5M of labour costs funded from general rates.

Materials and other expenditure funded from general rates is $43M, an increase of 0.5% has been applied. This increase is in line with the pricing indicators, as outlined below in Economic Parameter 4.

There is a large borrowing program for capital works in 2020/21, some of the additional loan repayments will be funded from additional revenue or reserves (Holiday Haven and Waste Management). For the remaining loans, the additional loan repayments for 2021/22 is $1.2M.

The interest that Council earns on investments is decreasing. Applying an interest rate of 1% will reduce the expected interest by $1M. The last known cost is the local government elections, Council has $145K in the budget for 2020/21 and $518K for 2021/22 (increase of $373K from 2020/21).

If all of these known increases are funded by rates, an increase of 4.38% is required. This will result in $1.9M of SRV, leaving $483K remaining to catch up.

Option 4 – 4.98% increase – fully recover SRV catch up

This option is the maximum that Council can increase rates by. This will result in a total rate increase of $4M, with the full SRV of $2.4M being caught up.

After the known additional costs are funded, $891K will be available to be spent on additional renewal, expansion, or other improvements.

Recommendation – Economic Parameter 1

Option 2 - Rates are increase by 2.6% to cover known additional costs in 2021/22 with the additional loan repayments funded from reduced capital expenditure.

User Fees and Charges

Council’s fit for the future submission included a strategy to increase user fees and charges by 4% each year to allow these services to move towards full cost recovery. This strategy has been followed for fees that are not set by legislation.

It is considered that this higher than CPI increase has reached the affordability limit of the public and Council is starting to see a decline in visitations. It would be reasonable to increase these by the rate peg. This will cover the anticipated costs including increase in employee costs in these areas and ensure affordability for the community.

Recommendation – Economic Parameter 2

User fees and charges are increase by 2%

Employee Costs

The salaries and wages increase are published in the Local Government (State) Award, the current Award has an increase of 2% for the 2021/22 financial year. Salaries and wages operational budget for the General Fund is $81 million and 2% increase will result in $1.6 million of additional costs.

Please note that the superannuation guarantee is planned to increase from 9.5% to 10% on 1 July 2021. This increase can be absorbed by a reduction in the defined benefits employees who retire during the year and from any vacancies.

Recommendation – Economic Parameter 3

Salaries and wages will be increased by 2%

Materials and Other Expenditure

With the current downturn in the economy the inflation rate is quite low. The following table illustrates the change in some of the pricing indicators for the year to September 2020:

CPI	0.26%
Other heavy and civil engineering construction Australia	0.94%
Heavy and civil engineering construction Australia	0.51%

A realistic materials and other expenditure rate to adopt would be 0.5%, this will allow Council to continue to focus on stimulating the economy and improving the level of service to the community.

Recommendation – Economic Parameter 4

Materials and other expenditures increase by 0.5%

The Capital Budget

General funding

The 2020/21 financial year saw a large capital budget being adopted by Council. It is Council’s aim to complete these works by the end of June 2022.

General Fund		$’000
	Buildings and Property	14,444
	Commercial Undertakings	8,377
	Community and Culture	1,316
	Economic Development	8,213
	Environmental Management	1,595
	Fire Protection and Emergency Services	1,376
	Internal Corporate Services	8,984
	Land Use Planning	11
	Open Space, Sport and Recreation	19,556
	Regulatory Services	53
	Roads and Transport	40,726
	Waste and Recycling Program	22,219
	Water and Sewer Services	459
		127,329
Water Fund
	Internal Corporate Services	1,093
	Water and Sewer Services	22,717
		23,810
Sewer Fund
	Water and Sewer Services	20,080
		20,080

The Capital Works Program was funded the following way:

Funding Source	$'000
General Fund	18,710
Loans	40,751
Grants	24,989
Special Rates Variation	7,915
Waste Management	7,219
Plant Replacement	6,299
S711 recoupment	6,058
Other Reserves	15,388
	127,329
Water Fund	23,810
Sewer Fund	20,080

As the year progresses the timing of the capital projects will be assessed and reforecast into the 2021/22 financial year during the quarterly budget reviews.

This large capital budget also saw large borrowings with an annual impact on the general funds of over $1.2M for the repayments over the next 10 years. Assuming rates increase of 2.6% or less, in order to maintain a balanced budget it is strongly recommended that the additional loan repayments be funded from the future capital works program allocation.

The general fund component of the capital works program was $19M, it is good practice to ensure similar funding is provided. The general fund component of the capital works program should be to the amount funded in 2020/21. The detailed funding strategy for the new loans taken up in 2020/21 will need to be considered as part of the Councillor budget workshops.

Recommendation – Economic Parameter 5

The capital works program has the same level of general funding as 2020/21, with the funding strategy for the additional loan repayments for the new loans taken up in 2020/21 to be considered during the Councillor budget workshops.

New Borrowings

The 2020/21 capital works saw the largest borrowings for general fund since the entertainment centre was built during 2007. These large borrowings result in large repayments. Some of the loan repayments will be funded through additional income generation or through reserves. There are $21.5M of loan projects in the 2020/21 capital program that will need to be repaid with general revenue.

Whilst the current environment for borrowings is favourable with low interest rates being offered, the current year’s large capital works program, the larger borrowings, natural disasters and pandemics has put a strain on Council finances and it is recommended that Council borrows when an external funding source for the loan repayments can be identified.

Should the need arise during the year for additional borrowings, the following options in priority order will be considered:

1) Internal borrowing opportunities

2) Low cost loan initiative

3) External loans not subsidised by the low-cost loan initiative.

Recommendation – Economic Parameter 6

Borrowing for capital works is limited to Council businesses where an external funding source for the loan repayment can be identified.

Recommendation – Economic Parameter 7

Should the need arise during the year for additional borrowings, the following options in priority order will be considered:

1) Internal borrowing opportunities

2) Low cost loan initiative

3) External loans not subsidised by the low-cost loan initiative.

Conclusion

As continually reported through the quarterly budget reviews, and as evidenced in the June 2020 Financial Statements, Council’s financial position remains solid – despite the series of natural disaster experienced in the Shoalhaven in recent times. Prudent financial management is a key priority for both staff and councillors in maintaining this solid financial and the improved transparency in the budget setting process is a further step forward in retaining and strengthening community confidence in Council’s systems, processes and procedures.

Strategy and Assets Committee – Tuesday 08 December 2020

Page 1

SA20.243 Request for Seed Funding - Local RFS Capital Works Program

HPERM Ref: D20/469241

Approver: Paul Keech, Director - City Services

Reason for Report

Update Council on the revised priorities and status of RFS unfunded capital projects and to provide an option for Council to support the RFS and provide “seed funding” to advance projects to a “shovel ready” status.

Recommendation

That Council:

1. Note that at the Rural Fire Service Strategic Planning Committee meeting on 14 May 2020 the committee adopted the following priority list for station developments:

· Currarong Station

· Conjola Station

· Manyana Station

· Tomerong Station

· Wandandian Station

· Basin View Station

· Training/Logistics/SMSS Facility (TLSF)

· Huskisson Station, and

· Beaumont Station.

2. Allocate $100,000 in the Draft 2020/2021 budget to allow for advanced design work to be completed and thus maximise the possibility of obtaining sufficient State Government funding to develop these stations – noting that design funding will be part of any funding arrangement.

Options

1. Accept the recommendation.

Implications: Allows RFS priority projects to develop to “shovel ready” status.

2. Provide another level of Seed Funding

Implications: Allows RFS priority projects to develop to “shovel ready” status.

3. Provide Seed Funding over two financial years.

Implications: Allows RFS priority projects to develop to “shovel ready” status.

4. Not accept the recommendation

Implications: RFS priority projects will not progress to “shovel ready” status.

Background

The Rural Fire Service (RFS) and Shoalhaven City Council (SCC) have been working collaboratively over many years to deliver infrastructure vital to the service’s delivery needs.

At the NSW RFS Shoalhaven District Liaison Committee meeting on 10 September 2020 the Director City Services provided a capital update report on current RFS station works. Highlights included.

· Completion of the Shoalhaven Heads building extensions, with finalisation of the occupation certificate issued July 2020 well ahead of schedule.

· Issuing of a Staged Development consent and application of Construction Certificate for the Broughton Vale stage 1 earthworks, providing a platform for the future brigade building.

Other projects include Tabourie Station extension where a cost estimate has been prepared; however, this project requires a budget of $30,000 to progress to “tender ready” documentation. A requirement of the service to be considered for funding.

Minutes of the Rural Fire Service Strategic Planning Committee 14 May 2020, report RF20.3 “Rural Fire Service – Future Works” details the requirement for all future projects to be “shovel ready” to meet eligibility criteria for any capital funding.

The minute called for the updated status of unfunded capital works projects; however also highlighted the need for funding to get RFS projects “shovel ready”.

REPORTS

Clr Pakes, Mark Williams and Marc Donnelly had met and discussed the current projects and their ranking in the future works list. Significant funding opportunities were expected soon and it was imperative that RFS projects are “shovel ready” to be eligible for this funding. Councillor Pakes intended to lobby Council for funding to get the RFS projects “shovel ready”.

Mark Williams noted that the projects on this list should be ranked as follows: (i) Currarong Station extension (ii) Conjola Station extension; (iii) Manyana Station; (iv) Tomerong Station alterations; (v) Wandandian Station extension; followed by the remaining projects.

It was noted that:

· It had been previously agreed that funds would not be spent on the Bendalong or Cunjurong Point stations but rather on the new station for the combined brigade;

· Concerns were also raised with respect to the District training station as it was in a poor state of repair and that the District should try to secure SMS funds for the state-of-the-art Training, Logistics and SMSS Facility, and

· There was an expectation that funds donated by the community would be used for local capital works on RFS stations.

The recommendation was amended to provide for reprioritised list of capital works.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That the Rural Fire Service Strategic Planning Committee notes the update on the status of unfunded capital works projects.

RESOLVED (Mark Williams / Chris Palmer)

That the Rural Fire Service Strategic Planning Committee notes the update on the status of unfunded capital works projects.

CARRIED

Subsequently, at the Rural Fire Service Strategic Planning Committee on 10 September 2020, an updated list including the status of unfunded capital works projects was submitted for information. The following unfunded projects will remain in the Shoalhaven Capital Expenditure Program:

· Currarong Station

· Conjola Station

· Manyana Station

· Tomerong Station

· Wandandian Station

· Basin View Station

· Training/Logistics/SMSS Facility (TLSF)

· Huskisson Station, and

· Beaumont Station.

Details of these project are included below:

September 2020 Revised Priorities – Future RFS Stations

Rural Fire Service Future Works

Project

Scope of Works

Estimated Cost

Proposed Year

Currarong

Possible two stage project with an emphasis on ensuring that the station is suitable for the new generation Category 1 Tanker while also upgrading station facilities including a multifunction room.

Seed funding estimate (shovel ready):
$100,000.00. Total project estimate (not including seed costs): $750,000.00 – rough estimate.

Pending budget allocation

Conjola

Community funding has been offered for multifunction room build, following recent impacts of the Currowan Fire, it has been identified that further works including an additional tanker bay would be beneficial.

Seed funding estimate (shovel ready):
$100,000.00. Total project estimate (not including seed costs): $750,000.00 – rough estimate.

Pending budget allocation

Manyana

The recent impacts of the Currowan Fire, it has been identified that the current facilities are being quickly outgrown by our volunteers. The District Manager has identified a suitable, greenfield, location between the villages of Bendalong and Manyana/Cunjurong Point that would provide a very effective location for a future fire station. Lot 7051 DP 1101639 is located on the south eastern side of the Inyadda Drive and Bendalong Road intersection. The land is vacant Crown Land. It is proposed that a portion of the land, approximately 100m x 100m (1 ha) be subdivided to allow for the future fire station to have frontage to both Inyadda Drive and Bendalong Road.

Seed funding estimate (shovel ready):
$150,000.00. Total project estimate (not including seed costs): $1,500,000.00 – rough estimate.

Pending budget allocation

Tomerong

Proposing to increase number of tanker bays to accommodate significant growth of brigade membership and incident responses.

Seed funding estimate (shovel ready):
$100,000.00. Total project estimate (not including seed costs): $500,000.00 – rough estimate.

Pending budget allocation

Wandandian

Centrally located within the District, with direct highway access and within close proximity to approved RFS training grounds in the Yerriyong State Forest, Wandandian Station provides a perfect location for major incident staging and district training activities. The proposed project would include large multifunction room, additional storage and tanker bay, and formalised parking area.

Seed funding estimate (shovel ready):
$100,000.00. Total project estimate (not including seed costs): $750,000.00 – rough estimate.

Pending budget allocation

Basin View

To extend, renovate and merge the existing station buildings to provide for housing of a partitioned kitchen, office, multifunction area and increased storage.

Approx Design/Survey/Invest/Proj M't Cost =$50k Approx Const Cost = $500k (ex major site works)

Pending budget allocation

Training, Logistics, SMSS Facility (TLSF) (new)

Pending budget allocation

Huskisson

To extend and renovate the existing station building to provide for an increased multifunction area, locker room and increased storage.

Approx Design/Survey/Invest/Proj M't Cost =$50k Approx Const Cost = $500k (ex major site works)

Pending budget allocation

Beaumont

To extend and renovate the existing station to provide for housing of a larger fire appliance (2013 Category 1 dual-cab build specification); a partitioned kitchen, office, multifunction area and increased storage.

Approx Design/Investigation/Proj M't Cost = $70k construction $700k (ex major site works) seed funding required

Pending budget allocation

Minutes of the Rural Fire Service Strategic Planning Committee 10 September 2020, report RF20.4 “Rural Fire Service - Future Works” provide record of the RFS District Superintendent explaining the RFS service would no longer allocate “seed funding” to prepare the project to a “shovel ready” state.

RF20.4 Rural Fire Service - Future Works

HPERM Ref: D20/380837

The Currarong Station project had been added back into the RFS’s future capital works table as there was no funding available to get the project “shovel ready”.

The District Superintendent explained that the RFS Head Office was no longer allocating “seed funding “ for capital works. RFS branches were now required to get projects “shovel ready” before the RFS would award funding to complete the project. The District Superintendent had made representations to Council to secure “seed funding” to get projects “shovel ready” and eligible for State funding. A report would be submitted to Council on the matter.

This report has been prepared and submitted to Council in consideration of the above minute RF20.4 of the RFS Strategic Planning Committee, 10 September 2020.

Considering the majority of projects detailed in the revised priorities list require seed funding to a minimum of $100,000 and that “RFS Head office” / “State” requires RFS branches to have their projects “shovel ready” in order to qualify for RFS capital funding, this report puts forward to Council the option to support an allocation of $100,000 as a loan to provide “seed funding” for the planning and approval process of the highest priority projects.

Community Engagement

Community engagement is conducted on a regular basis with RFS brigades through the Shoalhaven RFS District Liaison and the RFS Strategic Planning Committees.

Policy Implications

The $100,000 provided for Seed Funding would be in accordance with Council Policy POL 17/72 Loans Advance to Community Groups Policy

Financial Implications

No implications for the current budget, or future budgets assuming the design costs are reimbursed.

Risk Implications

The primary risk for Council relates to the contingent nature of the RFS branch infrastructure development and the service it provides to the local communities. The majority of RFS brigade members are volunteers and residents of the Shoalhaven communities.

Providing support enabling this infrastructure development may contribute to increase awareness and voluntary resources to protect communities in an emergency situation.

There also exists a financial risk to Council in the event that the RFS branch is unsuccessful in obtaining Capital Funding Contributions for the unfunded station projects. The loan would remain in perpetuation until repaid to council.

Strategy and Assets Committee – Tuesday 08 December 2020

Page 1

SA20.249 South Mollymook Coastal Protection cost benefit analysis and impact assessment implementation

HPERM Ref: D20/471380

Section: Environmental Services

Approver: Phil Costello, Director - City Development

Attachments: 1. South Mollymook Beach Cost Benefit & Distributional Analysis for Coastal Protection Works, Origin Capital Group 2020 (under separate cover) ⇨

Reason for Report

Advise Council of results of the final cost benefit analysis (CBA) and recommend to progress with detailed design, Environmental Impact Statement, and approval process.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1. Acknowledge the South Mollymook Beach Cost Benefit & Distributional Analysis for Coastal Protection Works prepared by Origin Capital Group 2020;

2. Seek a NSW State Government coast & estuary grant for detailed design for Option 4 – Seawall Protection Plus Amenity Nourishment 50 year design life for South Mollymook Beach to understand the full budget implications and inform further community consultation and Council’s future policy direction in relation to this matter;

3. Investigate public private partnership opportunities for funding the construction of replacement and future maintenance of the coastal protection structures at South Mollymook Beach; and

4. In the interim, Council continue to monitor and maintain the existing structures by implementing emergency action sub plan under the Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) for the Shoalhaven Coastline 2018.

Background

Mollymook is a particularly attractive spot in the Shoalhaven LGA featuring a sandy and patrolled beach. However, the current mix of seawalls that run from the buried sewage pumping station just south of the golf club through to the surf club boat ramp, about 295 metres, are in danger of being undermined by a major East Coast Low storm event. The probability of this happening is increasing over time as beach recession stemming from natural erosion and rising sea levels continues.

The 2016 storm event was significant along the NSW coast where the Shoalhaven suffered significant damage particularly at Currarong. Mollymook was already recognised as a vulnerable site with the 2006 and 2009 Coastal hazard studies undertaken by SMEC as part of the Shoalhaven coastal management investigations. Other relevant investigations include the Shoalhaven Public Asset Coastal Risk Management Review (BMT WBM, 2012) and earlier investigations undertaken for the seawall at Mollymook Golf Club (MHL, 1992 and Maunsell, 2008). Maunsell (2008) established that the Club premises were at risk from coastal erosion over a 50-year period.

Maunsell found that the beach frontage at the Club was protected by a gabion revetment but of insufficient capacity to provide 50 year protection due to a low and unacceptable Factor of Safety (FOS) against downslope failure, and because the fabric of the mattress could not be guaranteed for a further 50 years. It was found that the structure could be enhanced to meet the 50-year criterion by using it as an underlayer for a more robust cover protection. Extensions to the Golf Club building used piled foundations and avoided the strengthening of the gabion wall at that time.

Exposure of the gabion mattresses fronting the Golf Club as a result of the 2016 east coast low, triggered investigations for upgraded foreshore stabilisation at South Mollymook Beach (Royal HaskoningDHV, 2016) due to public risk. Little is known about the design and construction of the three other seawalls at south Mollymook Beach. According to PWD (1987), the 1974 storms destroyed part of the road at the corner of Golf venue and Ocean Street. The block stone wall in this area was “not designed to resist major storm wave attack and although its foundations are reported to be tied into stiff clay, the size of the rock (blockwork) is inadequate”. There is also a major stormwater outlet at this location which aggravates sand loss from the beach in storms and within the stormwater pipeline system under the road.

Concerns regarding the ongoing erosion risk saw additional studies undertaken. Royal HaskoningDHV “Mollymook CBA Coastal Hazard Assessment” dated 17 September 2018 assesses in detail the impact of coastal forces on South Mollymook beach. This Cost Benefit and distributional analysis (“CBA”) is a requirement under the NSW Coastal Manual to justify remediation costs above $500,000.

As previously reported, Council, with the support from the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (“DPIE”), commissioned the Royal HaskoningDHV’s assessment of coastal hazards and the preparation of this CBA. The completed CBA is contained in attachment 1. The following options were assessed as part of the CBA.

· Option 1 – Base Case “Business as Usual” This involves the retention of the existing seawall structures and their continued piece-meal maintenance until they experience 100 per cent damage due to storms. Shoalhaven City Council’s existing “make safe-make good” strategy continues.

· Option 2 – Adaptive Land Use – This option allows the shoreline to advance landward. As the shore erodes, buildings and other infrastructure are either demolished or relocated inland with vacated areas rehabilitated for public use allowing for continued access to the shoreline.

Option 2 is similar to Option 1, but for the earlier and less costly removal of the seawalls at 30 per cent damage (conventional coastal engineering measure for full structural failure) instead of waiting for 100 per cent damage (the structure is completely destroyed and all but washed away). After the earlier removal of the seawalls in Option 2, the beach width returns while in Option 1 the dilapidated and effectively failed seawalls have not been removed and beach width is reduced for a longer period;

· Option 3 – Seawall Protection – A new seawall based on Royal HaskoningDHV 2016 concept design is constructed to protect 295m of shoreline from the southern end of South Mollymook beach to the Mollymook Surf Life Saving Club boat ramp; and

· Option 4 – Seawall Protection Plus Amenity Nourishment – This option is Option 3 with new seawall protection plus sufficient beach nourishment to deliver a minimum Mean High Water (“MHW”) beach width of 10 metres. Beach nourishment campaigns of 5 metres are assumed to take place once the beach width recedes to the minimum 10 metre MHW beach width.

In the real world of complex trade-offs and difficult to measure considerations, this CBA cannot be a definitive decision-making tool. Instead, it can inform stakeholders and their representatives of key implications of the choices to be made by assessing and comparing the options considered. The options demonstrate the essential trade-offs faced by the Shoalhaven community.

Replacement of the current inadequate seawalls with new seawalls having a 50-year design life can protect the key shoreline assets along this section of the coast for the next 50 years. However, such protection is a double-edged sword in that the renewed seawalls would fix the location of the shoreline and in combination with rising sea levels, the beach would narrow reducing its attraction and the reason for visiting it. Hence, the number of beach users would be reduced (Beach Use Value) as well as the value the LGA community places on maintaining the current beach width (Beach Non-use Value).

Royal HaskoningDHV in its report “Mollymook CBA Coastal Hazard Assessment” dated 17 September 2018 has assessed the impact of coastal forces on the South Mollymook Beach for a number of options developed and agreed by the Shoalhaven City Council and DPIE. Royal HaskoningDHV have analysed the probabilities for key measures of beach erosion impacts on coastal foreshores and structures which include in order of progression:

I. Zone of reduced foundation capacity (“ZRFC”) leading at some point to an unstable structure;

II. Zone of slope adjustment (“ZSA”) leading to the undermining of foundations; and

III. Zone of wave impact (“ZWI”) directly impinging upon structures including seawalls.

In addition, Royal HaskoningDHV has analysed the probabilities for beach width reduction under the various options.

Previous investigations have developed a concept design for upgraded foreshore stabilisation at South Mollymook Beach (Royal HaskoningDHV, 2016). The concept design comprises four-sections to protect 295 m of shoreline which are shown in the table below. Given the inadequacy of all of the existing seawalls in a design storm, the analysis assumes the new seawalls are constructed simultaneously at the outset of the study period providing community certainty and to minimise disruption.

Table 1: Description of Potential Sea Walls

Section No.	Metres from South End	Existing Seawall	Proposed 50-year Seawall
2	0 m – 150 m Fronting the Golf Club	Gabion revetment	Replace with a rock revetment
3	150 m – 190 m Northern end of Golf Club site	Gabion revetment	40m stepped concrete or stepped sandstone wall and include showers.
1	190 m – 245 m Corner Golf & Pacific	Sandstone block wall	Retain existing sandstone wall while incorporating appropriate backfill works and repairing the stormwater outlet.
4	245 m – 295 m Partially fronting the Surf Club	Concrete (Sandstone) block wall	50m stepped wall in front of existing concrete wall.

The major beneficiary of both New Seawall Options is the Mollymook Golf Club as a result of the protection afforded by the new seawall preventing the loss of its buildings, carpark and other associated property.

The next major beneficiary is the Shoalhaven City Council who benefits from avoiding costs such as:

i. Additional sewerage pumping station to service the properties in the corner area of Golf and Pacific;

ii. Cost of cul-de-sacing Golf and Pacific;

iii. Loss of foreshore parkland; and

iv. Loss of rates for the 1 Golf Avenue strata units.

Therefore, it is recommended that Option 4 be fully costed through obtaining a NSW Coast & Estuary grant for detailed design, so that Council can consider the budget implications and investigate public-private partnerships to fund construction.

Community Engagement

Draft reports were submitted to Councillors and presented to the Golf Club executive. The Golf Club executive were also consulted from inception of the project and provided input including building valuations.

Detailed design needs to be completed in partnership with NSW DPIE through a NSW Coast & Estuary grant so that the full budget implications are understood and can be considered by Council and community. Community consultation on options and costs can then be undertaken to inform council’s future policy direction on this matter.

Policy Implications

The precise rate and extent of sea level rise is not currently known with certainty, however the upper and lower bounds of such changes have been estimated and in conjunction with local conditions, a range of probabilities for sea level rise have been estimated. As detailed above, progressing to detailed design to quantify costs will inform future community consultation, public-private funding investigations to inform Council’s future policy direction on this matter.

Financial Implications

Benefit Cost Ratios have been analysed for Options 2, 3 and 4 based on an assessment of the costs and benefits of the schemes, applied over a 20 and 50-year planning period and a discount rate of 7% pa as required by the NSW Treasury. The results of the 50-year Cost Benefit Analysis are presented in the table below.

Table 3: Results of the 50-year Cost Benefit Analysis

The results show that:

Option 2 – Adaptive Land Use has the highest Benefit Cost Ration and a positive NPV.

Option 3 – New Seawall Protection with a Benefit Cost Ratio of less than one and an NPV of $1.78 million less than the Base Case, does not generate an overall benefit to the community.

Option 4 – New Seawall Plus Amenity Nourishment generates almost the same results as Option 3 – primarily because the beach nourishment exercise is insufficient to avoid the loss of the Beach Non-use Value caused by the new seawall. Beach nourishment costs are than offset by the improvement in Beach Use Values however the NPV effect is small as nourishment occurs late in the period analysed. The benefit would be larger if the nourishment program occurred earlier.

Each of the options were analysed over 20 and 50-years however, regardless of the period, the results are consistent and lead to the same conclusions.

Graph 1: CBA NPV and BCR Results

Risk Implications

The deterioration of the gabion sea wall fronting the golf club is being witnessed currently with significant emergency works @ $40,000 required again following the August 2020 storms, without the influence of a major coastal storm.

Plate 1 & 2 – Beach Scrapping South Mollymook Beach

The Base Case probabilities of key assets being affected by the relevant coastal hazards are shown in the table 4 below.

Table 4: Base Case Probability of being affected by Relevant Hazard

The table shows that the sewerage infrastructure and Golf Club building are currently at serious risk, increasing dramatically by 2038. In the case of the Sewerage Pump Station this risk is almost completely mitigated by the strength of the structure and its embedment in rock. In the case of the Rising Main, it has reached the end of its life and as is intended to be replaced in 2021 and relocated such that it will be unaffected by beach recession once relocated.

The risk for the Surf Club and 1 Golf Ave rises over time and is significant and serious by 2038 and 2068, respectively.

Strategy and Assets Committee – Tuesday 08 December 2020

Page 1

SA20.252 Shoalhaven Family Day Care - Fees and Charges - Adopted

HPERM Ref: D20/526007

Section: Recreation Community & Culture

Approver: Kevin Norwood, Shoalhaven Swim & Fitness Manager

Reason for Report

To provide a further report to Committee on the outcomes from public exhibition of proposed changes to Shoalhaven Family Day Care fees and charges.

Recommendation

That Council endorse the changes to fees and charges for Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service to take effect from 1 January 2021 being:

a. Educator Fee Parameters - $8.00 to $20.00 per hour

b. Educator Levy - $0.30 per hour

c. Educator Registration Fee - $50.00

d. Educator Training Fee - $400.00 (one-off fee)

e. Family enrolment fees:

i. $25.00 1^st child

ii. $20.00 2^nd child

iii. $15.00 3^rd child

iv. Nil 4^th child

f. Parent Administration Levy - $1.35 per child per hour

All fees are GST exclusive

Options

1. Adopt the recommendation as written.

Implications: The recommendation is consistent with Council’s approach to maintain Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service as being financially viable and sustainable, reducing the level of financial support needed from Council and enhancing this quality service to the Shoalhaven community.

2. Not endorse the changes to fees and charges and provide an alternative direction.

Implications: May result in a negative financial impact on Council, affecting the viability of Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service.

Background

A Councillor Briefing was held in February 2020 outlining the way forward for fees and charges of Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service.

An educator consultation and information session was held on 1 July 2020, outlining proposals from Council to improve the financial viability of the service moving forward. Educators and families were also emailed information, inviting feedback.

Council, at its Ordinary meeting on Tuesday 22 September 2020 after this extensive community consultation process, approved the increase and changes to the fee structure for Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service.

At its Ordinary meeting held on 22 September 2020, Council made the following resolution (MIN20.646):

“That:

“1. Council support the following changes to Shoalhaven Family Day Care fees and charges:

· Educator Fee parameters $8-$20 per hour

· Educator Levy of $0.30 per hour

· Educator Registration fee of $50 per year

· Educator Training Fee of $400 one-off

· Family enrolment fee $25 1^st child, $20 2^nd child, $15 3^rd child, 4^th child free

· Parent Administration levy $1.35 per child per hour

“2. Council exhibit the proposed changes to fees and charges for 28 days and report back to Council on the outcome following the public exhibition period.

“3. Any new fees and charges that are adopted will come into effect from 1 January 2021, noting the current Government imposed fee freeze for childcare services which is currently imposed up to 27 September 2020.”

This report is in response to Part 2 of the above resolution, as the exhibition period noted by Council has now closed, with one submission being received. Council exhibited the changes to fees and charges from Monday 26 October until Monday 23 November 2020.

· The documents were made available on Council’s website

· Council created a Newsfeed on Council’s website pointing to the ‘Documents on Exhibition’ Page promoting the proposed changes to fees and charges

· All educators – current and inactive – were emailed information with a link to MIN20.646 on the 16 October 2020, and another email with link to ‘Documents on Exhibition’ Page on 26 October 2020

· All families were emailed information with a link to MIN20.646 on 19 October 2020 and another email with link to ‘Documents on Exhibition’ Page on 26 October 2020

One submission was received during the Exhibition Period from a current Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service Educator which is outlined below.

The community was provided an opportunity to comment on the proposed changes to fees and charges. Feedback provided from the Public Exhibition showed minimal objection to the proposed fee changes.

This report recommends that changes to Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service fees and charges be adopted, to come into effect from 1 January 2021.

Service Overview

· Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service is run by Shoalhaven City Council

· Under the licence, Council’s Chief Executive Officer is the ‘Provider’ and the Nominated Family Day Supervisor coordinates day-to-day operations of the service

· Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service organises, monitors and supports local home-based childcare services across Shoalhaven LGA

· Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service staffing needs to be compliant with the Regulation ratios of 1:25 (or part thereof) coordinator per educator

· Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service currently has 30 educators providing care to 195 children from 186 families in the Shoalhaven

Federal Funding

Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service currently receives Federal Funding which supplements the income raised by the Service; however, this funding through the Community Child Care Fund was approved on a sliding scale over three (3) years, giving Services the opportunity to become financially sustainable prior to the funding ceasing.

The funding will be reduced to $0 in the 2021 / 22 financial year. Current Funding provided is:

2018 / 19	2019 / 20	2020 / 21	2021 / 22 and onwards
$112,390	$82,651	$68,725	No Funding

There is a need to find efficiencies and ways to replace, at least in part, the Federal Funding to meet the performance targets to deliver the Service at as close to cost-neutral as possible.

Existing Fees and Charges

Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service, in conjunction with Council’s City Performance Directorate, has assessed the current financial situation and mapped a way forward for the fees to be changed to help fund the shortfall created by reduction of the Government subsidies.

Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service has, historically, only increased fees and charges each year by approximately $0.05 per hour.

The Child Care Subsidy (CCS) has increased annually, giving families greater rebates; however, Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service has not increased its fees in line with the Child Care Subsidy increase: for example, in the 2018 / 19 financial year, the Child Care Subsidy increased by $0.20 per hour but Council fees were only raised by $0.05.

Proposed Fees and Charges

· Currently, Educators pay $22.00 per week Educator Levy regardless of the size of their service:

o The proposal to charge $0.30 per child per hour makes the fee more equitable

o Based on an average of 4 children per day over 4 days, the levy would be $38.40 per week instead of $22 - a rise of $16.40 per week

· The Educator Registration Fee is currently $35.00 to cover administration associated with registration:

o The proposal is to increase this to $50.00 per year to cover ongoing administrative costs

· The Educator Training Fee provides educator access to training resources for new starters:

o Currently $340.00 per annum and the proposal is to increase to $400.00 per annum

· The Family Enrolment Fee is currently $35.00, which is payable as a one-off fee, regardless of the number of children attending:

o It is proposed to change this to a fee per child as a sliding scale for siblings with the 4th child being free

§ 1st child $25.00

§ 2nd child $20.00

§ 3rd child $15.00

§ 4th child+ free

· The Parent Administrative Levy is paid by parents and is currently $1.20 per child per hour:

o It is proposed to increase this to $1.35 per child per hour

· Educator Fees are based on an hourly rate of between $8.00 and $12.00 per hour

o Council sets the parameters; however, Educators set their own fees within these parameters

o It is proposed to amend the Guidelines to enable Educators to charge between $8.00 and $20.00 per hour

o This new structure would enable Educators to absorb the proposed costs if they choose or to be able to provide out of hours service.

Table 1: Summary of proposed fee changes

A review and benchmarking of other Family Day Care Service fees and charges shows that these fee changes are not unreasonable, or out of range of those which other Services charge throughout NSW, for example, Camden Family Day Care Service’s Family Enrolment Fee is $55.00 per year plus each additional child is $15.00.

Community Engagement

The proposed fees and charges were placed on Public Exhibition for 28 days - one submission was received from a Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service Educator:

Submission Received

Submission

Council Response

26 October 2020 - Educator

States that fee increase will triple the amount she pays, as an Educator to Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service

This is incorrect. Currently educators pay $22 per week regardless of the size and scope of their service.

The fee structure will see an increase in educator levy dependent on the number of children in care.

For example, for 4 children per day over 4 days the levy will rise from $22 per week to $38.40 per week. A rise of $16.40/week.

This equates to a rise of $787.20 per annum (based on 48 weeks per year operation)

However, educators can raise their hourly fees to compensate. Raising fees by just $0.15 per hour would cover the levy rise.

For 4 children in care 5 days per week the fee increases to $48 per week: a rise of $26 per week. This is an annual increase of $1248.

A small fee rise would cover this increased levy.

Educator registration fee will rise from $35 per year to $50 per year; an increase of just $15 per year.

Council’s response

· Currently, Educators pay $22.00 per week regardless of the size and scope of their service

· The fee structure will see an increase in Educator Levy, dependent on the number of children in care:

o For example, for 4 children per day over 4 days, the Levy will increase from $22.00 per week to $38.40 per week – an increase of $16.40 per week

o This equates to an increase of $787.20 per annum (based on 48 weeks per year operation)

o However, Educators can raise their hourly fees to compensate

o Raising fees by just $0.15 per hour would cover the Levy increase

· For 4 children in care 5 days per week, the fee increases to $48 per week – an increase of $26.00 per week and annual increase of $1248.00

· A small fee rise would cover this increased Levy.

· Educator Registration Fees will increase from $35.00 per year to $50.00 per year - an increase of just $15.00 per year.

Financial Implications

The recommended fees have been estimated to support Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service to achieve financial sustainability and reduce the amount of financial input needed from Council. These are dependent upon educator and children numbers at the Shoalhaven Family Day Care Service.

Should Council wish to proceed with operating the service at the current fees and charges and not adopt the proposed changes, there are financial risks related to the ability of the service to maintain sustainability into the future, with the amount of financial input needed from Council.

Strategy and Assets Committee – Tuesday 08 December 2020

Page 1

SA20.253 Access Areas For Dogs Policy - Summary of Investigation and Consultation - Shoalhaven Heads and Dolphin Point / Burrill Lake

HPERM Ref: D20/487439

Section: Recreation Community & Culture

Approver: Kevin Norwood, Shoalhaven Swim & Fitness Manager

Attachments: 1. Shoalhaven Heads Community Forum Submission - Dog Policy Review - Dog Off-leash Area Investigation ⇩

2. Survey - Shoalhaven Heads Dog Off-Leash Area Investigation ⇩

3. Survey - Dolphin Point / Burrill Lake Fenced Dog Off-leash Area Investigation ⇩

4. Lions Park Burrill Lake Landscape Masterplan ⇩

Reason for Report

This report is submitted to Council for consideration in response to MIN20.288 and MIN20.531 in relation to dog off-leash area investigations, summarising feedback received during the community consultation undertaken in relation to these investigations.

Recommendation (Item to be determined under delegated authority)

That Council:

1. Endorse the provision of a new fenced dog off-leash park at Lions Park, Burrill Lake and fund the fencing of the off-leash dog area from the existing budget allocation for dog off-leash area embellishments.

2. Amend the dog off-leash area at Jerry Bailey Oval, Shoalhaven Heads in accordance with the new fenced area and increase hours of operation to 24-hour dog off-leash access.

3. As part of the Access Areas for Dogs Policy review:

a. Further investigate establishment of fenced dog off-leash areas in Burrill Lake (McDonald Parade and Rackham Crescent Reserves)

b. Investigate potential for a dog off-leash beach south of Ulladulla and north of Bawley Point

c. Further investigate extension of the Seven Mile Beach off-leash area to the north, including:

i. Seek community feedback in relation to the northern extension; and

ii. Seek advice from National Parks & Wildlife Services and other relevant Government stakeholders.

Options

1. Adopt the recommendation as written.

Implications:

· By accepting the recommendation in full, Council will be responding positively to the majority aspiration of the Burrill Lake / Dolphin Point dog-owner community and to the majority of the Shoalhaven Heads dog-owner community

· The recommendation provides for a combination of fenced off-leash areas, and further investigation for off-leash beaches

2. Proceed with an alternative recommendation.

Implications: Depending on the alternative recommendation, it may not align with expectations of the communities of Burrill Lake / Dolphin Point and Shoalhaven Heads, and other community members who were involved in community surveys in relation to these investigations.

Background

At Council’s Strategy & Assets Committee meeting of 11 June 2019, Council resolved (MIN19.390) (item 2), that:

2. Staff research and consult with [the] community providing additional off-leash areas on a case by case basis, and report back findings to Council with estimated costings in the first half of 2020.

Since then, Council have resolved to investigate the establishment of various new off-leash areas. This report deals with investigations undertaken within the Shoalhaven Heads and Burrill Lake / Dolphin Point localities.

Shoalhaven Heads

Background

In February 2020, Shoalhaven Heads Community Forum submitted a request to Council which included a “Dogs Review Policy” document for Council review and implementation – see Attachment 1. The Forum’s submission provided recommendations for additional dog off-leash areas and extended dog access hours to existing off-leash areas in Shoalhaven Heads. Subsequently, a Notice of Motion was considered at Council’s Ordinary Meeting on 28 April 2020, where Council resolved (MIN20.288) to:

1. Engage with Shoalhaven Heads Community Forum to review the off-leash Dog areas in Shoalhaven Heads.

2. Review to include

a. Extension of current off-leash areas

b. Hours of off-leash areas

c. Proposal for new areas including fenced areas

3. Provide a further report back to Council on the outcomes of the review.

In response to the above resolution, Council staff undertook a comparison of existing dog off-leash areas in Shoalhaven Heads as per the Access Areas for Dogs Policy and the submission provided by the Forum. In addition, Council staff met with representatives from the Forum and coordinated a community survey to seek community feedback on the current off-leash areas, the way in which the community uses them and other locations which they would like to use for a dog off-leash area – see Attachment 2.

Review of Shoalhaven Heads Community Forum Submission

At present, there are three existing dog off-leash areas in Shoalhaven Heads, including a timed off-leash area at Jerry Bailey Oval, 24-hour area on Shoalhaven River Foreshore and 24-hour area on Seven Mile Beach. These areas are illustrated in Figure 1 below which is from Council’s Dog Off-Leash Guide.

Figure 1 – Dog Are Designation Map, Dog Off-Leash Guide

The submission provided by the Shoalhaven Heads Community Forum recommends:

· Extension of the Seven Mile Beach and Jerry Baily Oval off-leash areas:

o (Suggestion 1) – extension to the existing off-leash area increasing the area 100.0 metres southward, plus an extension north of an existing off-leash area up to the boundary between the Golf Course and National Park

o (Suggestion 2) – extension to the south of the existing off-leash area for a new timed off-leash area from 4pm to 8am from 1 October to 30 April 2020, and 3pm to 10am from 1 May to 30 September 2020

o (Suggestion 3) – fencing of Jerry Bailey Oval for a fenced dog off-leash park

Maps and explanations of the suggestions provided are delated in the submission in Attachment 1.

Community Survey

As per Council’s MIN20.288, a community survey was made available on Council’s Get Involved webpage from 31 July to 31 August 2020, prepared in consultation with Shoalhaven Heads Community Forum after an on-site meeting, held between Council staff and the Shoalhaven Heads Forum President – see Attachment 2. The survey’s primary aim was to identify dog owners, their resident location, knowledge of existing areas and preference to those areas. The method and tools used to advise of the survey were:

· Get Involved webpage containing Council Newsfeed and Survey

· Council project webpage linking to Get Involved webpage

· Council Newsfeed post linking to the Get Involved webpage

· Email to Shoalhaven Heads Community Forum, with links to the Get Involved webpage and survey, for distribution to areas of their community through member networks

· Social Facebook posts linking back to the Get Involved page

· Letters posted to over 300 landowners in Dolphin Point and Burrill Lake

During the Survey period, a total of 181 survey responses were received. It was also noted that the Get Involved page received 165 new requests to stay informed in the broader Access Areas for Dogs Policy review process. The below summary is provided in relation to the survey responses received:

· 170 survey participants have a dog or take care of one regularly

· Responses indicated that majority of off-leash activity occurs at Seven Mile Beach (81), followed by Jerry Bailey Oval (26)

· 15 survey participants felt that more dog friendly-areas were needed in Shoalhaven Heads in comparison to 7 survey participants who felt that there were adequate dog off-leash facilities in Shoalhaven Heads – the remaining survey participants did not respond to this question

· 6 survey participants felt that better governance, enforcement and signage was needed for dog off-leash areas

· 100 responses indicated that they would like a fenced dog off-leash park at Jerry Bailey Oval, while 81 people preferred Seven Mile Beach as a place to exercise their dogs

· 79 survey participants indicated that they would use Jerry Bailey Oval fenced off-leash area, while 102 indicated that they would not

· In relation to Jerry Bailey Oval, only 1 survey participant believed that fenced off-leash areas were safer and only 2 people wanted to extend the access times during the day

· A total of 37 responses indicated that they “had concerns about the potential extensions of (existing) dog off-leash areas” of the Seven Mile Beach off-leash area – of these 37 responses, 9 people preferred the beach to be off-leash 24-hours

· 11 responses were concerned about the negative impact to flora and fauna of extending the dogs on beach area and 1 response requested no dogs on beach areas at all

Recommendations

Regarding the request for an extension southward of the existing off-leash area on Seven Mile Beach, Community and Recreation staff consulted with staff from Council’s Environmental Services and NSW National Parks & Wildlife Service. he advice received was that the southern end of Seven Mile Beach is a known nesting site for various shorebirds and has other environmental values.

Whilst shorebirds have not been recorded at this location consistently, a cluster of records have been verified at this location and it still remains a suitable nesting location based on its habitat descriptors for shorebirds that are protected by the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth). The current arrangement, which includes an approximate 350m on-leash area between the off-leash section of the beach at the prohibited area, provides a suitable buffer to protect the bird species which can be vulnerable to off-leash dogs.

Regarding the request for an extension northward of the existing off-leash area on Seven Mile Beach, there is potential for this area to be further explored. Consultation with National Parks & Wildlife Service will be required to ensure suitable buffer distances are implemented from the boundary to the start of the Seven Mile Beach National Park, and to determine whether there are any other environmental constraints preventing this area being considered for extension of the off-leash dog area.

Given that the community indicated some concern of extending the existing off-leash area on Seven Mile Beach, and the Survey did not explore this initiative, it is recommended that this be further investigated as part of the Policy Review which is expected to be reported to Council in early 2021. Part of this investigation include liaison with National Parks & Wildlife Service.

In relation to Jerry Bailey Oval, this proposal is considered to be reasonable and consistent with a recent successful grant application via the Federal Local Roads & Community Infrastructure Fund. The successful funding is for fencing of the dog off-leash area at Jerry Bailey Oval, Shoalhaven Heads, generally in accordance with the area specified in the submission in Attachment 1, however, and in accordance with field size as per the relevant Cricket Australia Community Cricket Facilities Guidelines.

Given the fencing of this area, it is recommended that the off-leash area be reduced to the confines of the fencing, with the hours of operation extended to 24-hours. It is noted that this area is used for junior cricket by Berry Shoalhaven Heads Cricket Club. During training or games, the off-leash area should be temporarily suspended until training and games have concluded, in order to reduce conflict of the two uses. These works can be delivered during the 2020 / 21 financial year.

Burrill Lake / Dolphin Point Investigation

Background

A community petition containing 1,101 signatures was presented at Council’s Strategy & Assets meeting on 9 June 2020, requesting a new dog off-leash area at Dolphin Point. The majority of signatures were from residents of Burrill Lake, Dolphin Point, Kings Point, Ulladulla, Mollymook and Milton.

The proposal was for a timed off-leash area consistent with other timed off-leash areas in Shoalhaven and stated the area subject to the proposal would:

· Provide a flat and accessible walking area for all local residents including those who may not be able to drive the 10 kilometres to Colliers or Narrawallee Beaches, and those from other local areas who may have mobility issues accessing Colliers Beach or Ulladulla Harbour Beach

· Foster the responsible sharing of the area between all users; provide an enjoyable environment for exercise and recreation for non-dog owners and dog owners alike and better cater for the growing number of tourists that travel to the area with their dogs.

In response to the petition, a report was presented to the Ordinary Council meeting on 28 July 2020, outlining, in summary:

· The location proposed for the dog off-leash area was within Burrill Lake estuary and included the eastern section of Lions Park and the Lake foreshore down to the inlet at Dolphin Point Reserve

· It was noted that the location of the proposed dog off-leash area is highly frequented by residents and visitors for recreation pursuits including walking, picnics, fishing and swimming

· Importantly, the proposed site is located within the coastal zone and has been noted as habitat and nesting sites for threatened shorebirds

· There is only one designated dog off-leash area south of Ulladulla Harbour in the Shoalhaven Local Government Area (LGA) which is approximately 25 minutes’ drive south at Cormorant Beach, Bawley Point

· While the area, subject of the petition, is unsuitable as a dog off-leash area, there may be merit in considering a new dog off-leash area between Ulladulla Harbour and Cormorant Beach off-leash areas, particularly given the concentration of dog off-leash areas in other parts of Shoalhaven

In response to the staff report, Council resolved (MIN20.531) to:

1. Accept the report for information.

2. Council undertake further investigations into the suitability of all locations across Dolphin Point and Burrill Lake for fenced dog off-leash areas.

3. Consult with petition organisers, Ulladulla Forum, landowners, Paws4Shoalhaven and broader community members and groups to seek feedback on locations for fenced dog off-leash areas. As part of the consultation with all groups, allow the opportunity to suggest locations between Ulladulla Harbour and Cormorant Beach for consideration for dog off-leash areas.

4. Following consultation and investigations, prepare a report back to Council.

Community Survey

As per Parts 2 and 3 of the above MIN20.531, a Survey was established via Council’s Get Involved webpage, made available from Wednesday 7 October to Friday 30 October 2020 – see Attachment 3. The method and tools used to advise of the survey were:

· Get Involved webpage containing the Newsfeed and Survey

· Council project webpage linking to Get Involved webpage

· Council Newsfeed post linking to the Get Involved webpage

· Email to all Community Consultative Bodies, with links to the Get Involved webpage and Survey, for distribution to their communities through their networks

· Specific email letter to all Ulladulla & Districts Forum and community groups (Paws4Shoalhaven and Burrill Lake Action Group) via email (as per Council resolution)

· Social Facebook posts linking back to the Get Involved webpage

· Letters posted to over 300 landowners in Dolphin Point and Burrill Lake

Over the survey period, there were 681 page-visits, 126 survey responses and one written submission received, a summary of which is provided below:

· Majority of survey participants (82) did not believe fenced off-leash areas were a good idea, while 44 respondents indicated that they were a good idea

· The survey responses which did not agree that fenced off-leash areas were a good idea generally suggested that off-leash beaches were preferred to fenced dog off-leash parks

· Various locations were suggested for fenced off-leash areas with broad suburb areas including Burrill Lake, Dolphin Point, Ulladulla, Narrawallee, Mollymook, Milton and Sanctuary Point

· Specific suggestions included:

Tenderer	Location
Affective Services (Aust.) Pty Ltd	Wollongong NSW
Antoun Civil Engineering (Aust.) Pty Ltd	Seven Hills NSW
Cleary Bros Pty Ltd	Port Kembla NSW
Coastwide Civil Pty Ltd	Kiama NSW
Donnelley Civil Pty Ltd	Wollongong NSW
Jirgens Civil Pty Ltd	Bomaderry NSW
Land & Marine Ocean Engineering Pty Ltd	Cammeray NSW
MGM Civil Pty Ltd	Hemmant QLD

Tenderer	Location
Advisian	Level 17, 141 Walker Street North Sydney, NSW 2060
Rhelm	50 Yeo Street Neutral Bay, NSW 2089
Royal Haskoning DHV	Level 14, 56 Berry Street, North Sydney, NSW 5000
JBPacific	Suite 46, The Johnson Hotel, 477 Boundary Street, Spring Hill, QLD 4000

	New NOM (1 July to 25 Nov 2020)	Incomplete NOM (prior to 1 July 2020)
Total NOM as at 25 Nov 2020	67	24
Reported as ‘Completed’	29	10
Reported as ‘In Progress’	38	14