COB-RGB

 

 

 

 

 

Policy and Legislation Committee Agenda

 

 

 

29 January 2020

 

 

 

 

 


ALL INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN VARIOUS FORMATS ON REQUEST

city@busselton.wa.gov.au

 

 


CITY OF BUSSELTON

MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA – 29 January 2020

 

 

 

TO:                  THE MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS

 

 

NOTICE is given that a meeting of the Policy and Legislation Committee will be held in the Committee Room, Administration Building, Southern Drive, Busselton on Wednesday, 29 January 2020, commencing at 10.00am.

 

The attendance of Committee Members is respectfully requested.

 

 

DISCLAIMER

Statements or decisions made at Council meetings or briefings should not be relied on (or acted upon) by an applicant or any other person or entity until subsequent written notification has been given by or received from the City of Busselton. Without derogating from the generality of the above, approval of planning applications and building permits and acceptance of tenders and quotations will only become effective once written notice to that effect has been given to relevant parties. The City of Busselton expressly disclaims any liability for any loss arising from any person or body relying on any statement or decision made during a Council meeting or briefing.

 

 

 

Mike Archer

 

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

 

23 January 2020


CITY OF BUSSELTON

Agenda FOR THE Policy and Legislation Committee MEETING TO BE HELD ON 29 January 2020

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

ITEM NO.                                        SUBJECT                                                                                                                              PAGE NO.

1....... Declaration of Opening and Announcement of Visitors. 4

2....... Attendance. 4

3....... Public Question Time. 4

4....... Disclosure Of Interests. 4

5....... Confirmation and receipt of Minutes. 4

5.1          Minutes of the Policy and Legislation Committee Meeting held 12 November 2019. 4

6....... Reports. 5

6.1          REVIEW OF COUNCIL POLICY: BEACH AND FORESHORE AREAS - ACCESS BY THE HOLDER OF A COMMERCIAL FISHING BOAT LICENCE. 5

6.2          REVIEW OF BUILDING INSURANCE POLICY. 9

6.3          REVIEW OF EVENTS POLICY. 18

6.4          LOCAL PLANNING POLICY REVIEW - REVOCATION OF LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES LPP1A, LPP1E, LPP1G, LPP1H AND LPP8B. 41

6.5          REVIEW OF COUNCIL POLICY: PUBLIC ARTWORK. 63

6.6          MEDIA AND PUBLIC STATEMENTS COUNCIL POLICY. 80

7....... General Discussion Items. 87

8....... Next Meeting Date. 87

9....... Closure. 87

 


Policy and Legislation Committee                                  4                                                                  29 January 2020

 

1.               Declaration of Opening and Announcement of Visitors

 

2.               Attendance  

Apologies

 

3.               Public Question Time  

 

4.               Disclosure Of Interests

 

5.               Confirmation and receipt of Minutes

5.1             Minutes of the Policy and Legislation Committee Meeting held 12 November 2019

Recommendation

That the Minutes of the Policy and Legislation Committee Meeting held 12 November 2019 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

   


Policy and Legislation Committee                                  6                                                                  29 January 2020

6.               Reports

6.1             REVIEW OF COUNCIL POLICY: BEACH AND FORESHORE AREAS - ACCESS BY THE HOLDER OF A COMMERCIAL FISHING BOAT LICENCE

STRATEGIC GOAL

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

6.1 Governance systems, process and practices are responsible, ethical and transparent.

SUBJECT INDEX

Council Policies

BUSINESS UNIT

Environmental Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Ranger & Emergency Services Coordinator - Ian McDowell

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Council Policy: Beaches and Foreshore Areas - Access by the Holder of a Commercial Fishing Boat Licence  

  

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council rescinds Council policy ‘009/6: Beaches and Foreshore Areas – Access by the Holder of a Commercial Fishing Boat Licence’.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A review of Council Policy 009/6: Beaches and Foreshore Areas: Access by the Holder of a Commercial Fishing Boat Licence (the Policy) has been undertaken. Following the review it has been determined by officers that the Policy is not strategic in nature and, as such, should be administered by the City as an internal guideline. This report seeks to rescind the Policy. A copy of the Policy is attached (Attachment A).

 

BACKGROUND

A review of the Policy has been undertaken in accordance with the City’s policy review schedule.

 

Since the last review of the Policy in November 2017, the City implemented a Policy Framework document, the purpose of which is to provide a structure for the development and maintenance of documents intended to guide the City’s approach to decision-making, namely Council Policies, Operational Practices, Work Processes and Guidelines.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

Under the City’s policy framework structure, a Council policy should provide a strategic statement of the Council’s direction. Following a review of the Policy it has been determined by officers that its content provides supporting information more aligned to the administrative function of issuing permits rather than a strategic statement of the Council and as such, the development of an Operational Practice or an internal guideline document is more appropriate.

 

Statutory Environment

Pursuant to section 2.7(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1995, a role of Council is to determine the local government’s policies.

Pursuant to section 2.1(1) of the City of Busselton Local Government Property Local Law 2010:

“Unless under the authority of a permit or determination a person must not take or cause a vehicle to be taken onto or driven onto local government property”.

Local government property includes beaches and foreshores, except where land is in private ownership, or is managed by the State Government’s Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (DBCA).

The authority to administer the provision of Local Laws, including issuing permits, is delegated to the Chief Executive Officer under the provisions of the section 3.18 of the Local Government Act 1995. Accordingly, there is no need to have a Council Policy for what is essentially an administrative function.

Relevant Plans and Policies

There are no relevant plans or policies to consider in relation to this matter.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications associated with the officer recommendation.

Stakeholder Consultation

No external stakeholder consultation was required or undertaken in relation to this matter.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place. No risks of a medium or greater level have been identified.

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation the Council could:

1.    Retain Council Policy 009/6: Beaches and Foreshore Areas: Access by the Holder of a Commercial Fishing Boat Licence; and

2.    Ask that officers present a revised policy for Council’s consideration at a later point in time.

CONCLUSION

Following a review of Council Policy 009/6: Beaches and Foreshore Areas: Access by the Holder of a Commercial Fishing Boat Licence it has been determined by officers that the policy is not strategic in nature and as such, can be administered by the City as an Operational Practice or similar internal guideline. This report recommends to rescind the Policy.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

If the Officer Recommendation is endorsed by the Council, the Policy will be immediately rescinded.


Policy and Legislation Committee

8

29 January 2020

6.1

Attachment a

Council Policy: Beaches and Foreshore Areas - Access by the Holder of a Commercial Fishing Boat Licence

 


 


Policy and Legislation Committee                                  11                                                                29 January 2020

6.2             REVIEW OF BUILDING INSURANCE POLICY

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

6.4 Assets are well maintained and responsibly managed.

SUBJECT INDEX

Asset Management

BUSINESS UNIT

Corporate Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager Governance and Corporate Services - Sarah Pierson

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director Finance and Corporate Services - Tony Nottle

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Revised Building Insurance Policy

Attachment b    Current Building Insurance Policy  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council adopts the revised Council policy ‘Building Insurance’ as per attachment A to replace the current policy at Attachment B.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report presents a revised Building Insurance Policy (Attachment A) (the Policy) for Council’s consideration, with the current policy amended as part of the City’s ongoing policy review process.

 

BACKGROUND

In 2011, the Council resolved to adopt an approach of taking out different levels of insurance for City building assets on a Service Level Hierarchy (SLH) basis, with all buildings and improvements on land owned or managed by the City allocated a level of insurance appropriate to its SLH, its current condition and planned future use. At its meeting held on 23 March 2011, the Council resolved (C1103/091) the following:

 

1.    Adopt an approach of taking out different levels of insurance for City owned building assets based on Service Level Hierarchy approach and building condition.

2.    Apply different levels of insurance for the 2011/ 2012 financial year being; Demolition, Indemnity and Replacement / Reinstatement …

3.    Provide for the insurance needs of buildings valued at under $50,000 through the existing Buildings Reserve Fund and thus not take out an insurance policy in respect of any buildings within the Shire that are valued at under $50,000 unless the CEO considers it necessary due to special circumstances to take out a separate policy of insurance in respect of a particular building.

4.    Via the Policy and Legislation Committee develop a policy in relation to insurance of City owned buildings that encapsulates the philosophy of the approach identified in this resolution and report including appropriate CPI indexing of building values.

5.    Request the CEO to review the costs and need of insuring buildings for demolition value only and only take out this form of insurance where a cost benefit analysis justifies insuring.

 

A policy adopting the above approach was presented to and adopted by Council on 24 July 2013 (C1307/192). The policy outlined the rationale for the different insurance levels and detailed the calculation of the SLH. It also formalised the requirement for lessees to reimburse the City for the costs of insurance. The Policy was again reviewed in 2016 as part of the City’s ongoing policy review process, with no substantive changes identified or made to the policy (see current policy version at Attachment B).

The Policy has undergone a further review as part of the City’s policy review process and is presented for Council’s adoption.

OFFICER COMMENT

When reviewing the City’s policies, officers consider several factors, including the purpose and relevance of the policy, the City’s policy framework, any other associated policies, plans and procedures, and whether the content and format can be amended for improved readability.

 

The Policy is considered of ongoing relevance, and to have an important purpose; providing strategic guidance and clarity as to the various levels of insurance and in what circumstances they will be applied.

 

In 2017, the City engaged John M. Woodhouse to conduct a review of the City’s governance systems and procedures (GSR), one of the recommendations being that policies “should deal with higher level objectives and strategies” and “should not deal with any operational matters, employee matters or other matters which are the responsibility of the CEO”.

 

A proportion of the content of the current policy is considered to be operational in nature, as it sets out in detail the calculation of the SLH. Pursuant to the recommendations of the GSR and current City practice, the proposed Policy has been revised to remove this detail. The Policy instead refers to the Building Asset Management Plan, an operational-level document which contains the detailed breakdown of the SLH. This provides officers with an overarching policy guideline which can be read in conjunction with a discrete, more flexible operational document, and aligns with the GSR recommendation that “any existing Council Policy should be deleted where it could, more sensibly, be dealt with by an OPP adopted by the CEO (this is so particularly where the purpose is to give directions to employees as to the manner in which operational matters are to be carried out)”.

Statutory Environment

Under section 2.7(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act), the local government’s policies are determined by the Council. The Council fulfils this role with the recommendations of the Policy and Legislation Committee, established under section 5.8 of the Act.

 

The officer recommendation supports the general function of a local government under the Act to provide for the good government of persons in its district.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The Policy aligns with the City’s policy framework, intended to provide guidance as to the intent, scope and language of a Council policy (versus an operational document), and has been developed using the City’s policy template, intended to provide a consistent format across all City policies.

The officer recommendation is intrinsically linked to the Asset Management Plan which details the City’s Service Level Hierarchy.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications associated with the officer recommendation as the Policy does not seek to change the way in which building insurance is currently allocated.

Stakeholder Consultation

No external stakeholder consultation was required or undertaken in relation to this matter.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place.  No risks have been identified.

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation the Council could:

1.    Not endorse the Policy as revised;

2.    Suggest further amendments to the Policy; or

3.    Rescind the Building Insurance Policy with the CEO to determine the approach to be taken from time to time in relation to insurance.

CONCLUSION

This report presents a revised Building Insurance Policy for Council to consider. The Policy continues to provide guidance to City officers in allocating the appropriate insurance level to City-owned buildings and improvements on land owned and managed by the City.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The revised Policy will be implemented and published within one week of the Council’s endorsement.  


Policy and Legislation Committee

13

29 January 2020

6.2

Attachment a

Revised Building Insurance Policy

 


 


Policy and Legislation Committee

17

29 January 2020

6.2

Attachment b

Current Building Insurance Policy

 


 


 


 


Policy and Legislation Committee                                  22                                                                29 January 2020

6.3             REVIEW OF EVENTS POLICY

STRATEGIC GOAL

4. ECONOMY Diverse, resilient, prosperous

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

4.3 Events and unique tourism experiences that attract visitors and investment.

SUBJECT INDEX

Events and Governance

BUSINESS UNIT

Corporate Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager Governance and Corporate Services - Sarah Pierson

Events Coordinator - Peta Tuck

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director Finance and Corporate Services - Tony Nottle

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Events Policy - Revised

Attachment b    Events Policy - Current

Attachment c    DA1- 25 Delegation  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council adopts the Council policy ‘Events’ as per Attachment A, to replace the current policy (Attachment B).

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report presents a revised Events policy (Attachment A) (the Policy) for Council consideration, with the current policy being amended in response to recent amendments to the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act) requiring all local governments to adopt a policy that deals with matters relating to the attendance of council members and the CEO at events.  As opposed to creating a second stand-alone policy for this purpose, the current Events policy has been reviewed to be more strategic in nature and to include these requirements.  It is now recommended for Council approval.

 

BACKGROUND

The original Events policy was adopted by Council on 12 April 2006 to improve management of the event application and approval process.  The policy was part of an overall events application package developed to help inform applicants about the various approvals required and to assist the City to meet its legislative responsibilities.

 

The policy was reviewed in September 2016 to include reference to the objectives and goals of the Events Strategy prepared in April 2012, and to document improvements in the event application process. Provisions of a Surfing Events and Competition Policy, and the Meelup Regional Park Special Event Conditions were also incorporated, with those policies rescinded.

 

The current policy is very operational in nature, detailing the event application process and setting out specific conditions for the use of various sites around the district for events.  In accordance with an initiative to ensure policy documents are strategic in nature, the Policy has been moved into the current policy format and significantly reviewed to remove operational level detail.  This operational detail will be included in an Operational Practice which can be made available to both staff and members of the public as required.

 


 

Additionally, on 18 October 2019 amendments to the Act came into force requiring local governments to prepare and adopt a policy that deals with matters relating to the attendance of council members and the CEO at events.  Importantly, local governments are able to approve, in accordance with the policy, attendance at an event, and in doing so, exclude as a closely associated person a person who provided a gift in the form of the ticket or invitation to attend the event.  This is further discussed in the Officer Comment and Statutory Environment sections of this report. 

OFFICER COMMENT

The attraction, development and promotion of events is a key strategic objective for the City of Busselton, with events an important contributor to the achievement of a robust and prosperous economy, and the creation of vibrant places and an inclusive community. 

 

In recognition of events as a strategic driver the City has adopted the brand ‘Events Capital WA’ and developed an events strategy (currently under review).  Through this strategy the City seeks to achieve the following objectives, as outlined in the Policy:

 

·      generation of direct and indirect economic benefits to the community;

·      generation of social benefit, vibrancy, and promotion of cultural diversity and inclusion;

·      creation of a calendar of events which brings visitors and provides activation of the district year round; and

·      positive promotion of the City of Busselton district and the South West region of WA.

 

Events are considered to be either a Hallmark, Major, Regional or Community event dependant on their ability to achieve the City’s objectives with the Policy containing a guide as to how events will be categorised.   The Policy also sets out the ongoing role for the Marketing and Events Reference Group to make recommendations to Council with respect to the allocation of sponsorship funds towards Events.

 

While the Policy recognises the importance of events, it also acknowledges the potential for events to impact adversely on community safety, amenity and the environment; and thus maintains the requirement for events within the City of Busselton district to be approved.  The event application process has however been removed from the Policy but will be outlined in an Events Application Operational Practice. 

 

Attendance at Events

Section 5.90A of the Act requires all local governments to prepare and adopt a policy that deals with matters relating to the attendance of council members and the CEO at events. 

 

Section 5.87A and 5.87B of the Act requires a Councillor or CEO respectively to declare any gift received in the course of their duties with a value of more than $300, or where the cumulative value of one or more gifts received from a donor is more than $300. 

 

Further, under Section 5.62(1)(eb) and (ec), a person who gives, in any capacity, a gift or gifts to a Councillor or CEO with a value (single or cumulative) of over $300, becomes a closely associated person, in relation to which interests must be declared. 

 

Section 5.62 (1A) and (1B) provide an exclusion to this requirement which is where the gift is a ticket to, or otherwise relates to the attendance at an event as defined in section 5.90A(1), and where the local government approves, in accordance with the local government’s policy under section 5.90A, the Councillor or CEO’s attendance at the event.

 


 

The Policy is proposed to be the City’s policy under section 5.90A of the Act.  It outlines the value of having Council members and the CEO attend events, as a means of supporting and reinforcing the City’s strategic positioning as the ‘Events Capital WA’, and to strengthen the City’s ability to assess events for their benefit and ongoing relevance.

 

While the Policy does provide scope for the CEO to purchase tickets for the purposes of representation at events, attendance by Council members and the CEO will generally be approved where invitations / tickets are provided by event organisers to the City.  The Policy provides criteria by which applications to attend events will be assessed and pre-authorises attendance (where tickets are available) by Councillors at a number of established Hallmark and Major events.  The Policy supports the provision of invitations / tickets to a Council member’s / the CEO’s partner for events held outside of normal business hours.

 

In conjunction with the Policy it is recommended that a delegation be provided from Council to the CEO for the purposes of section 5.62 (1B) such that he can approve, in accordance with the local government’s policy under section 5.90A, the relevant person’s attendance at an event.  The proposed delegation is attached at Attachment C.  The alternative is for each relevant person’s attendance at an event (where the attendance is a gift over $300 and where an exclusion to the financial interest disclosure requirements are sought) to be approved by Council (the local government).  It is expected that this will be impractical in a lot of instances, and the delegation also seeks to create efficiencies, reducing the need to prepare Council reports.  The delegation is conditioned, requiring the CEO to seek written approval from the Mayor for his own attendance. 

Statutory Environment

In accordance with Section 2.7(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 it is the role of the Council to determine the local government’s policies.  The Council does this on the recommendation of a Committee it has established in accordance with Section 5.8 of the Act. 

 

There is no dedicated legislative framework under which event approvals are provided.  The staging of an event will generally trigger the need for one or more approvals under various pieces of legislation, such as the Public Health Act 2016 and the Health (Public Buildings) Regulations 1992, the Liquor Control Act 1988, and the Road Traffic Act 1974 and Road Traffic Code 2000.  The City’s centralised event approval requirement and process ensures that the relevant approvals for an event are obtained in an efficient manner, for both the City and the event organiser, and provides the City with the additional ability to apply appropriate risk mitigation strategies.

 

Recent changes to the Act, as detailed already above, have resulted in the Policy dealing with attendance at events by Councillors and the CEO.  The relevant clauses are detailed below: 

 

5.62 Closely associated persons

(1)  For the purposes of this Subdivision a person is to be treated as being closely associated with a relevant person if —

….

(eb)       the relevant person is a council member and the person has given a gift to which this paragraph applies to the relevant person since the relevant person was last elected; or

 

(ec)        the relevant person is a CEO and the person has given a gift to which this paragraph applies to the relevant person since the relevant person was last employed (or appointed to act) in the position of CEO;

 

(1A) Subsection (1)(eb) and (ec) apply to a gift if —

(a) either —

(i) the amount of the gift exceeds the amount prescribed for the purposes of this subsection; or

(ii) the gift is 1 of 2 or more gifts made by 1 person to the relevant person at any time during a year and the sum of the amounts of those 2 or more gifts exceeds the amount prescribed for the purposes of this subsection; and

 

(b) the gift is not an excluded gift under subsection (1B).

 

(1B) A gift is an excluded gift —

(a) if —

(i) the gift is a ticket to, or otherwise relates to the relevant person’s attendance at, an event as defined in section 5.90A(1); and

 

(ii) the local government approves, in accordance with the local government’s policy under section 5.90A, the relevant person’s attendance at the event;

 

5.90A. Policy for attendance at events

(1) In this section —

event includes the following —

(a) a concert;

(b) a conference;

(c) a function;

(d) a sporting event;

(e) an occasion of a kind prescribed for the purposes of this definition.

 

(2) A local government must prepare and adopt* a policy that deals with matters relating to the attendance of council members and the CEO at events, including —

(a) the provision of tickets to events; and

(b) payments in respect of attendance; and

(c) approval of attendance by the local government and criteria for approval; and

(d) any prescribed matter.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City has a policy framework which was developed and endorsed by Council in response to the recommendations of the Governance Services Review carried out in 2017.  The framework sets out the intent of Council policies, as opposed to operational documents such as Staff Management Practices and operational procedures.

Financial Implications

Adoption of the Policy does not have any direct financial implications as the City is not proposing in practice to adjust its current approach to the management of event attendance and specifically is not proposing to allocate additional funds towards event attendance.

Stakeholder Consultation

The Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries (DLGSC) have released an operational guideline and template policy to assist local governments in the drafting of their policies.  The City’s policy aligns broadly to the template, while being tailored to suit the City’s specific practices.  No other external stakeholder consultation has been undertaken. 


 

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place.  No risks of a medium or greater level have been identified, with the Policy helping to mitigate the risk of attendance at events being seen as inappropriate or unnecessary; and removing the risk of event attendance, where approved for valid reasons, creating a financial conflict of interest. 

Options

Council could decide not to adopt the Policy or to require further amendments to the Policy. 

CONCLUSION

A revised Events Policy is presented for Council’s approval.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The Policy will be placed on the City’s website within one week of adoption.

 


Policy and Legislation Committee

27

29 January 2020

6.3

Attachment a

Events Policy - Revised

 


 


 


 


 


Policy and Legislation Committee

39

29 January 2020

6.3

Attachment b

Events Policy - Current

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Policy and Legislation Committee

40

29 January 2020

6.3

Attachment c

DA1- 25 Delegation

 


Policy and Legislation Committee                                  47                                                                29 January 2020

6.4             LOCAL PLANNING POLICY REVIEW - REVOCATION OF LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES LPP1A, LPP1E, LPP1G, LPP1H AND LPP8B.

STRATEGIC GOAL

2. PLACE AND SPACES Vibrant, attractive, affordable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

2.3 Creative urban design that produces vibrant, mixed-use town centres and public spaces.

SUBJECT INDEX

Development Control Policy

BUSINESS UNIT

Statutory Planning

REPORTING OFFICER

Senior Development Planner – Policy - Stephanie Navarro

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Planning and Development Services - Paul Needham

NATURE OF DECISION

Legislative: to adopt legislative documents e.g. local laws, local planning schemes, local planning policies

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   LPP 1A : Canal Lots

Attachment b    LPP 1E : Grouped and Multiple Dwellings and Habitat

Attachment c    LPP 1G : Kalgaritch Estate

Attachment d   LPP 1H : Abbey Green Estate

Attachment e    LPP 8B : Social Impact Statements  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council:

1.         Revoke the following Local Planning Policies as set out below:

·           LPP 1A : Canal Lots;

·           LPP 1E : Grouped and Multiple Dwelling and Habitat;

·           LPP 1G : Kalgaritch estate;

·           LPP 1H : Abbey Green Estate; and

·           LPP 8B : Social Impact Statements

2.         Advertise the notice of revocation in a newspaper circulating within the Scheme area in accordance with Clause 6 of Part 2 of Schedule 2 – Deemed Provisions for Local Planning Schemes of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City has commenced a review of its local planning policies (LPPs). Stage 1 of this review in March 2018 was policy neutral and converted the LPPs into a new format. This review took the LPPs from the existing manual structure and separated them into individual policies.

 

The City has now commenced Stage 2 of the process which involves reviewing the content and relevance of all LPPs. As part of this stage, the City has already revoked three LPPs which were considered to be redundant due to changes in legislation. It is proposed as part of this stage that another five LPPs be revoked.

 

The LPPs proposed to be revoked as part of this report are as follows:

 

·         LPP 1A : Canal Lots;

·         LPP 1E : Grouped and Multiple Dwelling and Habitat;

·         LPP 1G : Kalgaritch estate;

·         LPP 1H : Abbey Green Estate; and

·         LPP 8B: Social Impact Statements.

BACKGROUND

The Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations) provide that LPPs may be prepared by a local government in respect of any matter related to the planning and development of the Scheme area.

 

The intention of an LPP is to provide guidance to applicants and developers in regards to the decision making process as well as to the local government when exercising discretion under the Scheme. LPPs must be consistent with the intent of the relevant Scheme provisions, including the R-Codes, and cannot vary development standards or requirements set out in a Scheme or impose any mandatory requirements upon development.

 

LPPs are to be given due consideration in the assessment of development and are listed as a “matter to be considered” when making a determination of a development application under Clause 67 of Schedule 2 of the Regulations – ‘Deemed Provisions for Local Planning Schemes’ (Deemed Provisions).

 

In March 2019, the City commenced the first stage of the LPP review. This stage was policy neutral and did not alter the intent or provisions within the LPPs, however reformatted the LPPs into a new, easier to read template and took the LPPs out of a manual structure, separating them into individual policies.

 

These changes were adopted by the Council at its meeting held on 27 March 2019 (C1903/053).

 

The City has now commenced the second stage of this process and is reviewing the content and relevance of its LPPs. Due to the number of LPPs and the complexity of issues which need to be addressed, this review is intended to be broken down into a number of stages.

 

At its meeting held on 30 October 2019, the Council resolved (C1910/208) to revoke three LPPs that were considered to be redundant and it is now proposed that another five LPPs be revoked for the reasons outlined in the report below.

 

As part of this stage, the following LPPs have been identified as being redundant and are recommended to be revoked:

 

·        LPP 1A: Canal Lots;

 

·        LPP 1E: Grouped and Multiple Dwelling and Habitat;

 

·        LPP 1G: Kalgaritch estate;

 

·        LPP 1H: Abbey Green Estate; and

 

·        LPP 8B: Social Impact Statements.

A further, more comprehensive description of each of the above LPPs and the reasons why they are considered to be redundant is provided within the Officer Comment section of this report. The LPPs will be revoked following a Council resolution via a notice of revocation published in a local newspaper.


 

OFFICER COMMENT

Below is a description of each of the LPPs that City officers are recommending be revoked and the reasons why they are now considered redundant.

 

LPP 1A: Canal Lots

LPP1A was adopted as part of ‘LPP1 – Residential Development Policy’ (previous policy manual format) by the Council at its meeting on 17 October 2007 (C0710/236). LPP1A was introduced to ensure consistent standards were achieved for residential development which fronted onto canals. At the time that LPP1A was adopted there were no setback provisions for buildings to canals within the Scheme.

 

LPP1A provides guidance in relation to setbacks from canal lot frontages where a lot has more than one frontage (or boundary) to a canal. In these instances, one canal is required to be nominated by the City as the “primary canal frontage”. This frontage is required to achieve a minimum setback of 4.5m and average setback of 6m. The other canal frontage shall be deemed the “secondary canal frontage” and therefore is not required to achieve the 6m average however a minimum setback of 4.5m will still apply.

 

It is noted that the only canal lots within the City are located within the Port Geographe Development Special Control Area and therefore the provisions of clause 5.9 – Port Geographe Development Area of the Scheme and LPP4B – Port Geographe Village Centre apply to these lots. Clause 5.9.2(g) of the Scheme includes provisions for setbacks from canal walls and states as follows:

 

No building shall be erected closer than 4.5 metres from the landward side of the stabilised canal edge, subject to an average setback of 6.0 metres and the general appearance of the canal being maintained. Engineering certification will also need to be provided with a building licence application ensuring that no additional structural loads are placed on the canal walls.

 

The requirements within LPP1A are therefore consistent with the Scheme with the exception of the requirement to not meet the 6m average where the canal is deemed to be the “secondary canal frontage”.  An aerial review of the Port Geographe Development Area indicates that there are 21 canal lots within Port Geographe with more than one canal frontage. 13 of these lots have already been developed with 8 of these lots still vacant.  Given the small number of lots with dual canal frontages and the likelihood that any variation sought (through a development application) to the secondary frontage setbacks would be minor in terms of neighbour and visual amenity, the setback provision in the policy is considered unnecessary.

 

The LPP also provides guidance in relation to appropriate setbacks for shade sails on canal lots.  The R-Codes define ‘pergolas’ (which for the purposes of this discussion includes shade sails) as “an open framed structure covered in water permeable material or unroofed which may or may not be attached to a dwelling”.  Pergolas are not considered ‘buildings’ under the R-Codes and therefore are not subject the street setback or lot setback requirements at Parts 5.1.2 of Volume 1 of the R-Codes which specifically relate to building setbacks.  The installation of a shade sail in a Residential zone does not typically require any development approval on this basis.  As such, it is considered inappropriate to introduce de facto setback controls for shade sails associated with Single Houses through this policy.

 

For the reasons above, the Policy is considered to superfluous to the Scheme requirements and other LPP requirements and it is recommended that LPP1A be revoked.

 


 

LPP 1E: Grouped and Multiple Dwelling and Habitat

On 14 December 2005, the Council resolved to develop a consolidated residential development Policy. This LPP was to supersede the Dual Occupancy Development Policy (1994) and contain only the provisions within the Residential Development Policy (1994) which had not become redundant through the gazettal of the District Town Planning Scheme No. 20 in 1999 and the introduction of the Residential Design Codes of WA in October 2002 (C0512/387).

 

Through the development of the LPP an Environmental Reference Group was consulted who suggested that the policy should incorporate provisions to protect native vegetation on private property, particularly Agonis flexuosa (WA Peppermint Trees) and other vegetation that forms important habitat for the Western Ringtail Possum (WRP). Provisions were developed and incorporated into the LPP whereby the design of infill development in Busselton and Dunsborough would be encouraged to minimise the impact of development on WA Peppermint trees.

 

It was considered at the time that applying these provisions to Single Houses would be difficult to introduce without further detailed assessment as to the impact the controls may have on development. It was therefore considered that this was beyond the scope of the policy. The LPP did however propose that Grouped and Multiple Dwelling development aim to reduce the impacts of development by retaining trees with a trunk diameter greater than 10cm, requiring 3m buffer areas around trees as well as incorporating new WA Peppermint trees in landscaping within the lot and/or verge to create habitat and habitat connections for WRP. The final version of the LPP containing these provisions was adopted by the Council at its meeting held on 17 October 2007 (C0710/236 refers). It is noted however that the Policy carries no significant statutory weight given no formal tree controls exist in Residential areas and there is no direct reference to the matter of tree retention for such development in the Scheme.  

 

It is considered that the current provisions within the LPP will become redundant with the introduction of Scheme Amendment 42 which proposes to introduce a ‘Western Ringtail Possum Habitat Special Control Area.’ Amendment 42 was initiated by the Council at its meeting held on 10 April 2019 and is currently with the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage awaiting consent to advertise. It is anticipated that Amendment 42 will be advertised in early 2020 and at such time it will be considered to be a ‘seriously entertained’ planning document and therefore can be given due regarding in the assessment of development application.

 

Amendment 42 proposes to introduce into the Scheme a Special Control Area within which a development application will be required prior to the removal of native trees of a certain size. The Special Control Area will include the Residential zoned areas within Busselton and Dunsborough which currently do not have controls around clearing within the Scheme. It is proposed that an associated LPP will be developed in conjunction with Amendment 42 that will include provisions for the assessment of development applications within the Special Control Area and require in the first instance the removal of native trees be avoided and/or minimised and where this is not possible it will include specific requirements for replacement planting.

 

With the initiation of Amendment 42, and proposed associated LPP, it is considered that this Policy will become redundant and once advertised Amendment 42 will be considered a ‘seriously entertained planning document’ and therefore can be considered in the assessment of development application. It is therefore recommended that that the policy be revoked.

 


 

LPP 1G: Kalgaritch Estate

LPP1G was adopted on 8 July 1992 and was introduced to ensure the protection of properties from potential flooding and to preserve residential amenity of former lots 170 and 171 Queen Elizabeth Avenue, Beachlands (subsequently subdivided and known as ‘Kalgaritch Estate’).

 

‘Kalgaritch Estate’ is zoned Residential with a residential density of R2.5. Under the R-codes the minimum lot size at this density is 4,000m2. It is noted however that the range of lot sizes within this Estate is from 2,000m2 to 4,000m2 and therefore the Policy was introduced to allow concessions for reduced setbacks of 3m for outbuildings or similar structures to the side and rear setbacks. The deemed-to-comply criteria of R-codes requires 7.5m to side and rear boundaries at an R2.5 density. By removing these provisions, the City may still award these concessions considered through the assessment of a proposal against the Design Principles of the R-codes.

 

In addition to the above, the LPP1G also prescribes a 21 metre buffer strip to the Sub “A” Drain along Queen Elizabeth Drive for the purposes of overland flow in event of flooding. The lots which abut the Sub “A” Drain along Queen Elizabeth Drive have drainage easements along the rear of 10m or 20m which are considered to be sufficient in ensure development does not occur within this area and unreasonably interfere with overland flow paths should the Sub “A” Drain flood.  It is further noted that should such a matter be considered sufficiently important to warrant development control, it should always be contained within the Scheme itself given the limited statutory weight given to LPPs.

 

It is therefore considered that this Policy is redundant and it is recommended that it be revoked.

 

LPP 1H: Abbey Green Estate

LPP 1H applies to former lots 100 to 133 Ray Avenue, Broadwater which were subsequently subdivided into 34 individual green title lots. These lots have been developed as Single Houses however function in association within the neighbouring aged person’s facility ‘Ray Village’. There are restrictive covenants over these properties which limit the age of occupants to persons over 50.

 

The original version of this LPP titled ‘Abbey Green Housing and Development – Ray Avenue Broadwater’ was originally adopted on 26 June 1997. The previous version of this LPP included provision for the following:

 

·         Building envelopes;

·         Architectural style;

·         Finishes;

·         Vehicle parking;

·         Fencing;

·         Driveways;

·         Landscaping;

·         Clothes lines;

·         Screening of rubbish bins;

·         TV antennas;

·         Storerooms/sheds;

·         Solar water heaters; and

·         Air conditioners.


 

As part of a review of the LPPs in 2009 the above LPP was amended and only two provisions within the original LPP were retained which related to height of development, being limited to single storey, and the retention of mature Agonis Flexuosa - WA Peppermint. These provisions were inserted into Element H ‘Abbey Green Estate’ of LPP1 – Residential Development Policy with the following commentary relating to these changes inserted into the background notes:

 

The Abbey Green Performance Standards have been significantly reduced in scope in recognition of the ineffectiveness of the earlier version of the policy to control the matters which it was originally designed to control. The Abbey Green component of the policy now only seeks to restrict two matters, being: the restriction of redevelopment to single storey; and the removal of habitat trees (specifically the mature Agonis Flexuosa - WA Peppermint).

 

These changes to the LPP were adopted by the Council at its meeting held on 14 October 2009 (C0910/354).

 

The lots which are covered by this LPP have now all been developed in accordance with these requirements. It is considered that as there is no planning basis for the height controls by the LPP and that an LPP is not the appropriate mechanism to control height.  Furthermore, it is considered that the vegetation controls are inconsistent with the requirements for other similar adjoining residential areas which do not have any such ‘controls’.

 

It is noted that the City has initiated Amendment 42 which will include these lots in a ‘Western Ringtail Possum Habitat Protection Special Control Area’ which intends to impose consistent controls around the clearing of vegetation throughout the City.

 

It is therefore considered that this Policy is redundant and is recommended that it be revoked.

 

LPP 8B: Social Impact Statements

In 1996 a local planning policy was adopted by the Council that required the preparation of a Social Impact Statement (SIS) for significant development proposals. This LPP was subsequently amended by Council at its meetings held on 9 September 1998 and again on 17 October 2007. As part of these amendments, the application of this LPP was broadened to include all development proposals which require advertising as well as strategic development projects. In addition, the requirements regarding the content of the SIS were modified.

 

The intention of this Policy was to outline those matters which should be considered in the assessment of a development application. These matters included economic, social, transport, ecological, cultural and other potential cumulative impacts. The Policy also includes a pro-forma SIS for minor development proposals such as Residential Enterprise, Cottage Industry or Bed and Breakfast Accommodation.

 

The Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 (the Regulations) contains at Clause 67 ‘Matters to be considered by local government’ for development applications.  Amongst other things, Clause 67 includes:

 

(n) the amenity of the locality including the following —  

(i) environmental impacts of the development;

 (ii) the character of the locality; 

(iii) social impacts of the development; (emphasis added)

 


 

Given the introduction of the ‘Matters to be considered’ in the Deemed Provisions of the Regulations, the requirements of LPP8A have effectively been superseded.  It is further noted the detailing of such requirements is better suited to an information sheet and/or checklist that can be submitted by the applicant with their development application, and is not necessary to be addressed within an LPP.

 

In addition, LPP8A outlines procedures for different levels of ‘stakeholder and community consultations’ for different types of applications. This is considered to be a procedural issue in the assessment of development applications and therefore better suited to an internal procedure and not an LPP.

 

It is therefore considered that this Policy is redundant and is recommended that it be revoked.

 

Statutory Environment

The key statutory environment is set out in the Planning and Development Act 2005 and related subsidiary legislation, including the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21 (Scheme) and the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, especially Schedule 2 (Deemed Provisions) of the Regulations, which form part of the Scheme.

 

The Deemed Provisions include procedures for the creation, amendment and revocation of an LPP. Clause 6(b) of Part 2 of Schedule 2 of the Deemed Provisions allows a local planning policy to be revoked by a notice of revocation prepared by the local government and published in a newspaper circulating in the Scheme area.

 

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications associated with the officer recommendation.

 

Stakeholder Consultation

Part 2, Division 2 of the Deemed Provisions requires that a local government undertake consultation before adopting or amending a local planning policy (although a minor amendment can be made without consultation). At least 21 days must be allowed for the making of submissions.

 

The Deemed Provisions do not require the same consultation when a LPP is to be revoked and an LPP can be revoked via a notice of revocation published in a newspaper circulating in the Scheme area.

 

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the risks associated with the implementation of the officer recommendations has been undertaken using the City’s risk assessment framework. No risks of a medium or greater level have been identified.

 

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation, the Council could choose to not revoke one or more of the LPPs recommended to be revoked as part of this report.

 

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that the Council support the proposed policy changes and initiation as described in this report.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Implementation of the officer recommendation would involve advertising the policy revocations. It is expected that this will occur within one month of the Council decision.


Policy and Legislation Committee

48

29 January 2020

6.4

Attachment a

LPP 1A : Canal Lots

 


Policy and Legislation Committee

50

29 January 2020

6.4

Attachment b

LPP 1E : Grouped and Multiple Dwellings and Habitat

 


 


Policy and Legislation Committee

51

29 January 2020

6.4

Attachment c

LPP 1G : Kalgaritch Estate

 


Policy and Legislation Committee

52

29 January 2020

6.4

Attachment d

LPP 1H : Abbey Green Estate

 


Policy and Legislation Committee

62

29 January 2020

6.4

Attachment e

LPP 8B : Social Impact Statements

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Policy and Legislation Committee                                  64                                                                29 January 2020

6.5             REVIEW OF COUNCIL POLICY: PUBLIC ARTWORK

STRATEGIC GOAL

1. COMMUNITY: Welcoming, friendly, healthy

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

1.3 A community with access to a range of cultural and art, social and recreational facilities and experiences.

SUBJECT INDEX

CMTY016: Community Programs

BUSINESS UNIT

Community Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Cultural Development Officer - Jacquie Happ

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Revised Policy - Public Artwork

Attachment b    Current Policy - Public Artwork

Attachment c    Public Artwork Guidelines  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council adopts the Council policy ‘Public Artwork’ as per Attachment A, to replace the current policy (Attachment B).

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report presents a revised version of Council policy Public Artwork (the Policy) (Attachment A) for Council approval. The Policy has been amended as part of the City’s overall review of its Council policies and with regard to the recommendations of the Governance System Review (GSR) carried out by Mr John Woodhouse in 2017.

 

BACKGROUND

In March 2018, Council adopted a policy in relation to public artworks on City owned or managed land that are commissioned by the City or through Developer Contributions, received by donation or on loan. 

The City has developed and implemented a policy framework, which sets out the intent of Council policies, as opposed to operational documents such as Operational Practices. The Policy has been transferred to the new Council policy template and reviewed by officers. Being considered of continuing importance, it is now presented for Council’s consideration.

OFFICER COMMENT

The purpose of the Policy is to convey the importance and relevance of public artwork in the City, and highlight that there are processes in place that guide the City in acquiring, managing and decommissioning public artworks on City owned or managed property.

 

The Policy has been amended to remove repetition of clauses, operational aspects and simplify definitions. The Policy refers to and operates in conjunction with the Public Artwork Guidelines which are provided at Attachment C for reference.

Statutory Environment

In accordance with Section 2.7(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act) it is the role of the Council to determine the local government’s policies.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City has a policy framework which was developed and endorsed by Council in response to the recommendations of the GSR.  The framework sets out the intent of Council policies, as opposed to operational documents such as Operational Practices.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications associated with the officer recommendation.

Stakeholder Consultation

No external stakeholder consultation was required or undertaken in relation to this matter.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place. No risks of medium or greater level were identified.

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation the Council could:

1.    require further amendments to the Policy; or

2.    choose to rescind the Policy, noting public artwork guidelines would remain in place.

CONCLUSION

The report presents a revised Council policy ‘Public Artwork’ for approval by Council.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The Policy will be placed on the City’s website within one week of adoption.

 


Policy and Legislation Committee

66

29 January 2020

6.5

Attachment a

Revised Policy - Public Artwork

 


 


Policy and Legislation Committee

71

29 January 2020

6.5

Attachment b

Current Policy - Public Artwork

 


 


 


 


 


Policy and Legislation Committee

79

29 January 2020

6.5

Attachment c

Public Artwork Guidelines

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Policy and Legislation Committee                                  80                                                                29 January 2020

6.6             MEDIA AND PUBLIC STATEMENTS COUNCIL POLICY

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

6.2 Council engages broadly and proactively with the community.

SUBJECT INDEX

Council Policies

BUSINESS UNIT

Governance Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Public Relations Coordinator - Meredith Dixon

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director Finance and Corporate Services - Tony Nottle

NATURE OF DECISION

Executive: substantial direction setting, including adopting strategies, plans and policies (excluding local planning policies), tenders, setting and amending budgets, funding, donations and sponsorships, reviewing committee recommendations

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Media and Public Statements  

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council adopts the Council policy ‘Media and Public Statements’ as per Attachment A.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report presents a proposed Policy ‘Media and Public Statements’ (the Policy) (Attachment A) for Council approval. The purpose of the Policy is to establish protocols for the release of public statements (including media statements) issued by the City of Busselton; to ensure the City is professionally and accurately represented and to maximise a positive public perception of the City.

 

BACKGROUND

The issuing of media and public statements by the City of Busselton has to date, been guided by the City of Busselton Code of Conduct; the Local Government (Rules of Conduct ) Regulations 2007, the Local Government Act 1995, and various internal procedural documents.

 

With a heightened focus on communications and engagement both across the sector and within the City of Busselton, it is timely that the City adopt a formal position on the issuing of media and public statements.

 

The review of existing procedures and formalisation of a media and public statements policy has been prompted by discussions at Council inductions (post the 2019 Local Government Elections) and a workshop held with Council in early December to look at communication and engagement strategies.  While this workshop was primarily focused on engagement (i.e. consultation and the two-way flow of information) the need to formalise roles and responsibilities regarding the issuing of media and public statements (including on social media) was evident.

 

The Policy will underpin and inform the development of a broader Community Stakeholder Framework for the City including development of a Community Engagement Policy and associated engagement planning guidelines.  Public and media statements are an essential component of stakeholder communication.  Formalising roles and responsibilities in relation to the issuing of such statements is a practical first step toward improved communication and engagement. 

 

 

OFFICER COMMENT

The Policy guides the issuing of media statements and public statements pertaining to City of Busselton business, with particular reference to the roles and responsibilities of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor, Elected Members and the CEO (or authorised officer/s). 

The Policy outlines the purpose of issuing media and public statements and the modes through which such statements will generally be made, including social media.   

 

The Policy outlines the City’s approach to responding to official media enquiries and seeks to formalise sector wide and current practice at the City which sees media enquiries directed to the CEO such that information can be coordinated (usually by members of the Public Relations team) to support the release of an official response.

 

It is noted, however, that the Mayor in his / her official capacity as spokesperson for the City, can provide statements directly to the media if he / she elects to do so.

Statutory Environment

The officer recommendation supports the general function of a local government under the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act) to provide for the good government of persons in its district.   Specific references to the roles and responsibilities of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, Elected Members and the CEO as per the Act are referenced in the Policy.

Relevant Plans and Policies

There are no relevant plans or policies to consider in relation to this matter.

Financial Implications

There are no financial implications associated with the officer recommendation.

Stakeholder Consultation

No external stakeholder consultation was required or undertaken in relation to this matter however a review of a number of similar local government policies was undertaken.

Risk Assessment

An assessment of the potential implications of implementing the officer recommendation has been undertaken using the City’s risk management framework, with risks assessed taking into account any controls already in place. The Officer recommendation serves to mitigate the currently identified risk of inconsistent and potentially incorrect information and/or inappropriate commentary being relayed to the public by Elected Members and employees, helping to ensure the risk is reduced from a high (likelihood of likely) to a medium level risk.

 

Inconsistent and potentially incorrect information and/or inappropriate commentary being relayed to the public by Elected Members and City of Busselton employees. 

Risk Category

Risk Consequence

Likelihood of Consequence

Risk Level

Reputation

Moderate

Possible

Medium

Options

Council could choose:

1.    Not to adopt a policy in relation to the subject matter; or

2.    To amend the Policy.

CONCLUSION

This Policy formalises the City of Busselton’s position on the issuing of public and media statements.  It contains guidelines that will help ensure Elected Members and City Officers respond to public and media enquiries relating to City of Busselton business in a way that is consistent, professional and maximises the positive perception of the City.  

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The officer recommendation will be effective immediately upon adoption, with the Policy published to the City’s website within one week.


Policy and Legislation Committee

86

29 January 2020

6.6

Attachment a

Media and Public Statements

 


 


 


 

 


Policy and Legislation Committee                                  87                                                                29 January 2020

7.               General Discussion Items  

 

8.               Next Meeting Date

 

9.               Closure