Please note:  These minutes are yet to be confirmed as a true record of proceedings

CITY OF BUSSELTON

MINUTES FOR THE Council MEETING HELD ON 10 June 2020

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM NO.                                        SUBJECT                                                                                                                              PAGE NO.

1....... Declaration of Opening aCKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY / ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF Visitors / DISCLAIMER / NOTICE OF RECORDING OF PROCEEDINGS. 3

2....... Attendance. 3

3....... Prayer. 4

4....... Application for Leave of Absence. 4

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

6....... Announcements Without Discussion.. 4

7....... Question Time For Public. 4

8....... Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes. 5

Previous Council Meetings. 5

8.1          Minutes of the Council Meeting held 27 May 2020. 5

Committee Meetings. 5

8.2          Minutes of the Audit Committee Meeting held 27 May 2020. 5

8.3          Minutes of the Policy and Legislation Committee Meeting held 27 May 2020. 5

9....... RECEIVING OF Petitions, Presentations AND DEPUTATIONS. 5

10..... QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN (WITHOUT DISCUSSION). 5

11..... Items brought forward.. 6

ADOPTION BY EXCEPTION RESOLUTION.. 6

12.1        Audit Committee - 27/05/2020 - REGULATION 17 REVIEW... 7

12.2        Policy and Legislation Committee - 27/05/2020 - RESCISSION OF COUNCIL POLICY 074: MARKETS. 65

12.3        Policy and Legislation Committee - 27/05/2020 - AMENDMENT TO COUNCIL POLICY: COMPLIANCE. 74

12.6        Policy and Legislation Committee - 27/05/2020 - RESCISSION OF COUNCIL POLICY: 025 BUILDING CONTROL - STANDARD OF SITE CLASSIFICATION FOR SUBDIVISIONS. 82

16.1        LONG TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2020/21 to 2029/30. 88

17.1        COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN.. 148

ITEMS TO BE DEALT WITH BY SEPARATE RESOLUTION (WITHOUT DEBATE). 154

12.4        Policy and Legislation Committee - 27/05/2020 - AMENDMENT TO COUNCIL POLICY AND DELEGATION: PURCHASING.. 154

12.5        Policy and Legislation Committee - 27/05/2020 - DELEGATION OF POWER TO DISPOSE OF PROPERTY AND LEASE AND LICENCE PREMISES. 183

14.1        RFQ 22-20 BUSSELTON LIBRARY UPGRADE. 193

15.1        APPOINTMENT OF ELECTED MEMBER TO BUSSELTON JETTY REFERENCE GROUP. 198

ITEMS FOR DEBATE. 200

16.2        SCHEDULE OF FEES & CHARGES - 2020/21 FINANCIAL YEAR. 200

13..... Planning and Development Services Report. 242

18..... Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given.. 243

19..... urgent business. 243

20..... Confidential Reports. 243

21..... Closure. 243

 


Council                                                                                      6                                                                         10 June 2020

MINUTES

 

MINUTES OF A Meeting of the Busselton City Council HELD IN Council Chambers, Administration Building, Southern Drive, Busselton, ON 10 June 2020 AT 5.30pm.

 

1.               Declaration of Opening aCKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY / ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF Visitors / DISCLAIMER / NOTICE OF RECORDING OF PROCEEDINGS

The Presiding Member opened the meeting at 5.32pm.

 

2.               Attendance

Presiding Member:

Members:

 

Cr Grant Henley     Mayor

Cr Kelly Hick             Deputy Mayor

Cr Sue Riccelli

Cr Ross Paine

Cr Kate Cox

Cr Paul Carter

Cr Phill Cronin

Cr Jo Barrett-Lennard

Cr Lyndon Miles

 

Officers:

 

Mr Mike Archer, Chief Executive Officer

Mr Oliver Darby, Director, Engineering and Works Services

Mr Paul Needham, Director, Planning and Development Services

Mrs Naomi Searle, Director, Community and Commercial Services

Mr Tony Nottle, Director, Finance and Corporate Services

Mrs Emma Heys, Governance Coordinator

Ms Melissa Egan, Governance Officer

 

 

Apologies:

 

Nil

 

 

Approved Leave of Absence:

 

Nil

 

 

Media:

 

“Busselton-Dunsborough Times”

 

 

Public:

 

3

3.               Prayer

The prayer was delivered by Pastor Simon Holmes of the Busselton Baptist Church.

 

4.               Application for Leave of Absence

Nil

 

5.               Disclosure Of Interests

Nil

 

6.               Announcements Without Discussion

Announcements by the Presiding Member

 

The Mayor noted and provided his congratulations to local recipients of awards in the 2020 Queens’s Birthday Honours List. Mrs Kristine Carter received a Medal of the Order of Australia for service to women and the community, and Mr Warren Day, of the Busselton Volunteer Fire and Rescue Service, received an Australian Fire Service Medal for 36 years of service as a firefighter.

 

7.               Question Time For Public

Response to Previous Questions Taken on Notice

 

Nil

Question Time for Public

 

Nil


 

8.               Confirmation and Receipt Of Minutes

Previous Council Meetings

8.1             Minutes of the Council Meeting held 27 May 2020

COUNCIL DECISION

C2006/039              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor P Cronin

 

That the Minutes of the Council Meeting held 27 May 2020 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

CARRIED 9/0

 

Committee Meetings

8.2             Minutes of the Audit Committee Meeting held 27 May 2020

COUNCIL DECISION

C2006/040        Moved Councillor J Barrett-Lennard, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Minutes of the Audit Committee Meeting held 27 May 2020 be noted.

CARRIED 9/0

 

8.3             Minutes of the Policy and Legislation Committee Meeting held 27 May 2020

COUNCIL DECISION

C2006/041              Moved Deputy Mayor K Hick, seconded Councillor K Cox

 

That the Minutes of the Policy and Legislation Committee Meeting held 27 May 2020 be noted.

CARRIED 9/0

 

9.               RECEIVING OF Petitions, Presentations AND DEPUTATIONS

Petitions

 

Nil

Presentations

 

Nil

Deputations

 

Nil

 

10.             QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN (WITHOUT DISCUSSION)

Nil

11.             Items brought forward

ADOPTION BY EXCEPTION RESOLUTION

At this juncture the Mayor advised the meeting that, with the exception of the items identified to be withdrawn for discussion, the remaining reports, including the Committee and Officer Recommendations, will be adopted en bloc, i.e. all together.

 

COUNCIL DECISION

C2006/042              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor J Barrett-Lennard

 

That the Committee and Officer Recommendations in relation to the following agenda items be carried en bloc:

               

12.1        Audit Committee - 27/05/2020 - REGULATION 17 REVIEW

 

12.2        Policy and Legislation Committee - 27/05/2020 - RESCISSION OF COUNCIL POLICY 074: MARKETS

 

12.3        Policy and Legislation Committee - 27/05/2020 - AMENDMENT TO COUNCIL POLICY: COMPLIANCE

 

12.6        Policy and Legislation Committee - 27/05/2020 - RESCISSION OF COUNCIL POLICY: 025 BUILDING CONTROL - STANDARD OF SITE CLASSIFICATION FOR SUBDIVISIONS

 

16.1        LONG TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2020/21 to 2029/30

 

17.1        COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 


Council                                                                                      16                                                                      10 June 2020

12.             Reports of Committee

12.1           Audit Committee - 27/05/2020 - REGULATION 17 REVIEW

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

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

SUBJECT INDEX

Risk 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

Noting: the item does not require a decision of Council and is simply for information purposes and noting

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Risk Management Framework

Attachment b    Internal Control Review

Attachment c    Legislative Compliance LG Act Review  

 

This item was considered by the Audit Committee at its meeting on 27 May 2020, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

COUNCIL DECISION AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

C2006/043              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor J Barrett-Lennard

 

That the Council note the contents of this report and endorse as required by Regulation 17 of the Local Government (Audit) Regulations 1996 the appropriateness and effectiveness of the City’s systems and procedures in relation to:

1.      Risk Management

2.      Internal Control

3.      Legislative Compliance

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Regulation 17 of the Local Government (Audit) Regulations (the “Audit Regulations”) requires the Chief Executive Officer to review the appropriateness and effectiveness of a local government’s systems and procedures in relation to risk management, internal control and legislative compliance. The results of the review are to be reported to the Audit Committee for review and deliberation, prior to formal presentation to the Council.

 

BACKGROUND

In February 2013, several amendments to the Audit Regulations were made. At this time, a new Regulation number 17 was effected, requiring the CEO to review the appropriateness and effectiveness of a local government’s systems and procedures in relation to risk management, internal control and legislative compliance; with the results of the review to be reported to the Audit Committee.

 


 

In order to be compliant with the new review and reporting requirements, the initial review was presented to the Audit Committee on 11 December 2014 and then to the Council on 28 January 2015; with each aspect the subject of a separate report. In accordance with Regulation 17 requirements (at the time) for systems to be reviewed at least once every two calendar years, a second review was presented to the Audit Committee on 26 October 2016 and then to Council at its ordinary meeting on 9 November 2016.

 

In June 2018, Regulation 17 was amended with the period of review changed to be at least once every 3 financial years. This report is provided in accordance with that amended requirement and covers all aspects of the review (risk management, internal control and legislative compliance).

OFFICER COMMENT

As per the previous two reviews, this review has been undertaken internally by relevant areas; with overall coordination and oversight by Governance. The Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries (the DLGSC) Local Government Operational Guideline 9 - ‘Audit in Local Government’ - has been used as a reference point, with other more specific tools relevant to each aspect utilised for the assessment. The results of formal audits have also been considered, such as the more recent Office of the Auditor General (OAG) focus audit on creditor master files. 

 

Overall, the review concludes that we have appropriate and effective systems and procedures in place to manage risk. This is achieved through our risk management framework and the embedding of risk identification and assessment processes in our planning; through our internal control systems where we have effective decision making processes, appropriate segregation of duties and systems which provide necessary checks and balances; and through the employment of staff who are qualified and skilled in the application of the various pieces of legislation we operate under.

 

As detailed in all of the guidelines referred to in conducting this review, a local government’s systems and procedures will be implemented, monitored and reviewed. It is acknowledged that reviews vary due to the size and nature of individual local governments.

 

A more detailed synopsis of the review and its findings in relation to each aspect, noting that there can be overlap between all three, is provided under relevant sub-headings below.

 

Risk Management

The City’s formal risk management system is outlined in the City’s Risk Management Framework (Attachment A). This framework contains the City’s risk reference tables, the City’s risk tolerance levels, and the City’s risk management processes and procedures. The Risk Management Committee, made up of officers representing each directorate, is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the Risk Management Framework and for championing a risk management culture within the City of Busselton. 

 

Risks are most commonly identified formally at an operational level, either through annual business planning processes or as they arise during the year. Risks may also be identified through organisational processes such as safety inspections or investigations or in the process of planning for significant projects. 

 


 

All identified risks are assessed to determine a residual risk rating, that is the risk level taking into account current controls); being either low, medium, high or extreme, dependant on the likelihood of an event occurring resulting in a specific consequence. The consequence of the event is measured in terms of one or more of the following consequence categories:

 

·    Public Health

·    Occupational Safety and Health

·    Financial

·    Operational

·    Reputational

·    Environmental

 

Risks are formally ‘accepted’ by the relevant Manager / Director, as appropriate to the level of risk.  By ‘accepting’ a risk an officer is indicating that the risk is within acceptable tolerance levels once all reasonable and practical treatment options are considered. Where a risk is not considered acceptable a treatment plan is generally approved and adopted to reduce the risk rating to within acceptable tolerance levels over a period of time. Acceptance of the risk will also be dependent on the effectiveness of the controls in place. 

 

A risk with a rating of medium which has adequate controls will usually be accepted, while a risk with a rating of low will usually be accepted, irrespective of the effectiveness of the controls.  High rated risks may be accepted by a Director if it has adequate controls.  Alternatively a treatment plan may be put in place to reduce the level of risk, although it should be noted that given the City’s statutory responsibilities in a number of areas, there is sometimes no choice but to ‘accept’ high risks and manage them in the best and most practical and reasonable manner.  Extreme rated risks could be accepted by the Senior Management Group where they have adequate controls. The City currently has no extreme risks. 

 

As at 18 May 2020, the City has 95 risks formally captured within its risk management system. 

 

 

The majority of risks, as shown by the green bars, have been assessed, evaluated and accepted and are now being monitored. Risks are reviewed at least three yearly (timing dependant on risk level), the purpose of the review being to ensure that changing environmental factors have not impacted on the level of risk and that any controls identified continue to be in place and effective. 

 


 

Risks in the red bars are either previously accepted risks or risks with a treatment plan that are overdue for a formal review; or risks that have been recently identified. The orange bar shows risks with an active treatment plan. The City has currently identified two high level risks:

 

·    Bushfire; and

·    Aviation accident.

 

In addition, the City maintains and reports on a separate hazard profile through its Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Management System (which is effectively a risk mitigation system).  The City’s current hazard risk profile is shown below, with two hazards recorded as high level risks - uneven ground and manual handling.

 

 

These hazards are rated as high risk as, due to the nature of the works being undertaken by employees, they have a high likelihood of having what is a relatively minor level consequence.

 

Risk reports are provided to the Senior Management Group and Managers group regularly detailing the City’s risk profile, the high level risks, and risks that are overdue for review or have treatment plans in place.  Included also are the following targets:

 

·    All extreme and high risks are assessed within 14 days; and

·    All medium and low risks are assessed within 30 days.

The targets, reported on by Business Unit, are generally met, noting that we have had instances of medium and low risks not being assessed within 30 days. On these occasions, Managers and Directors responsible for these areas are notified.

 

The effectiveness of the City’s Risk Management systems and processes was assessed using the evaluation sheet attached.  The systems and processes were assessed as effective overall, with all system aspects either in place or partially embedded.  Areas identified for ongoing focus were:

 

·    Further embedding of formal risk identification and assessment into business processes;

·    Increased monitoring of risk controls and escalation of control failures;

·    Improved timeliness of risk reviews; and

·    Ongoing communication and championing of the Risk Management Framework.

 


 

While we continue to encourage and embed use of the City’s formal risk management system and framework it is acknowledged that City Officers also identify and treat risks using other, less formalised processes. During business planning for instance, operational risks are identified that have previously, through management practices, had controls put in place to mitigate them, and are managed as core business. Not all of these risks are formally identified and assessed, and are therefore not translated through to the formal risk register. For instance, risks associated with the loss of key personnel and skills. Similarly, project risks are not always formally identified through project planning processes; with this being an area identified for improvement.

 

Summary

In summary, the City’s risk management processes are considered effective and appropriate, taking into account the City’s size, complexity, and level of resources, both dedicated to risk management and more generally. There remains scope for the City to further integrate and mature its risk management system. With limited direct risk management resourcing, a growing community, and a busy program in terms of projects and service delivery, it is considered important that actions aimed at further enhancing the City’s risk management systems do not result in the system becoming overly complicated or prescriptive. 

 

Recommended improvement actions are as follows: 

 

·    Additional and more regular review of strategic risks through the Strategic Community Plan review process;

·    Review of the City’s risk management software system to determine whether there is a more efficient and effective system;

·    Provision of more regular refresher training for staff on the City’s risk management framework; and

·    Ongoing review of the City’s project planning processes with regards to risk management (review of project management processes is currently in progress).

 

Internal Control

Review of the City’s systems and procedures in relation to internal control has been undertaken with reference to the Department’s Operational Guideline – Audit in Local Government – and, in more detail, the Local Government Accounting Manual (the Manual); also developed by the Department. 

 

The Local Government Operational Guideline – ‘Audit in Local Government’ - suggests that aspects of an effective internal control framework will ideally include the following:

 

·    Delegation of authority;

·    Documented policies and procedures;

·    Trained and qualified employees;

·    System controls;

·    Effective policy and process review;

·    Regular internal audits;

·    Documentation of risk identification and assessment; and

·    Regular liaison with auditor and legal advisors.

 

The guideline acknowledges that the extent to which internal controls are implemented, monitored and reviewed will be impacted by, amongst others, the size and nature of individual local governments.

 


 

The Local Government Accounting Manual further lists a range of key control and monitoring activities which local governments should be reviewing on an ongoing basis. The Manual, like the guideline, also infers that the achievement of regulatory compliance (further discussed under the Legislative Compliance sub-heading) should be viewed as the fundamental goal of an effective internal control system, with further enhancement being ongoing as part of an overall organisational risk management process.

 

In the absence of any specific guideline as to how the review of internal control is to be undertaken, a review of the City’s performance against each of the listed control and monitoring activities in the Manual has been considered as a reasonable basis for carrying out this review.  Attachment B to this report lists each activity, provides a synopsis of the City’s current processes and procedures, and highlights further actions required where identified. 

 

Moreover, as evidenced through the Regulation 17 review and this report, the City is able to demonstrate effective systems in relation to all of the listed inclusions; specifically the City:

 

·    has a delegations register, reviewed annually, that provides for a well-balanced and effective approach to decision making;

·    has well documented policies and procedures across most areas, and has an active program of review to continually improve this;

·    employs qualified and experienced staff and invests in training, with 1.5% of gross salaries and wages allocated to a training and development pool;

·    has robust systems and internal system controls;

·    has an established risk management framework and processes, as outlined under the Risk Management subheading;

·    undertakes regular auditing, with the majority of audits being conducted externally.  The City does not currently have internal auditing resources.

 

Areas identified for particular focus (as against the listed controls and monitoring activities in the Manual) are those below.

 

3.(i)

Rates/debtors officers are competent for their assigned tasks, adequately trained and supervised.

 

Employees responsible for rates and / or sundry debtor activities are experienced and have generally been in their roles for a number of years. In order to ensure appropriate succession planning is in place, planning has commenced to ensure staff are more broadly trained in key rating / debtors functions.

 

4.(vii)

All receipts, cash and cheques, deposited on a regular and timely basis.

 

 

4. (viii)

Reconciliation of daily deposit total to receivable posting and cash sales is prepared and reviewed.

 

Front counter operations, and outstation banking, is completed and banked in a timely manner. Deposits are reconciled, reviewed and signed off by supervisory staff, and banked on a daily basis. Notwithstanding this, current processes and procedures documentation in relation to accounting activities are not centrally held in some instances. It is recommended that all areas dealing with cash and banking formally update associated accounting processes and procedures, and that these documents be authorised by the respective Director, with a copy to be provided to the Finance Department.


 

5.(i)

Personnel responsible for the purchasing, shipping, receiving and payable functions are competent, adequately trained and supervised.

 

Staff responsible for purchasing and accounts payable functions are fully competent, adequately trained and are supervised as required. Separation of duties measures are implemented widely.  A new operational practice to identify/ enforce requirements associated with the addition of a new creditor and amendments to an existing creditor is in the process of being finalised. 

 

5. (iv)

The purchasing policy clearly defines who can issue purchase requisitions/orders and to what dollar limit.

 

5. (vi)

Spending limits are set by budget or individual levels of authority.  These limits are monitored by the system or manually.

 

The Council’s adopted Purchasing Policy details dollar thresholds for quotation requirements, but does not define individual purchasing limits (as this is not the intent of the policy).  Individual purchasing limits are determined by business need, and are approved by each staff member’s supervisor. Purchasing limits are only established/ updated in the corporate system upon receipt of a valid authorisation request.

 

The ability to raise purchase requisitions in the system, and the associated value of the same, is controlled by system parameters. Verification of this authority is undertaken by Finance staff (at multiple levels) prior to the associated payment being processed.

 

While the current processes are working well, there is currently no overarching control documentation detailing the required processes to be undertaken, including the purchasing authorisation limit approval process. As part of this review, it has been identified that an OP should be established for this purpose. Additionally, the ability to approve one’s own requisition in the system requires further review. 

 

5. (xxiii)

The accounting policy for when goods should be capitalised is documented and clearly understood by accounting personnel.

 

Accounting personnel dealing with the capitalisation of assets are fully aware of the applicable standards and associated thresholds (as per significant accounting policies). However, there is currently no endorsed control documentation available for the wider organisation, other than that issued as part of the draft budget compilation process. An Asset Capitalisation Operational Practice and Procedure, which clearly sets out the City’s capitalisation thresholds and associated requirements, is under development.  

 

8. (i)

Management regularly reviews all grant income and monitors compliance with both the terms of grants and Council’s grants policy (including claiming funds on a timely basis).

 

The expenditure of funding in line with associated grant conditions, and subsequent grant acquittal, is administered by responsible Business Unit staff and management, with various roles providing a degree of oversight (from a financial and a strategic projects focus).  To assist in this oversight functionality a centralised and detailed grants register is being developed.

 

Summary

In summary the internal control review has identified several instances whereby the formal documentation/ development planning of associated processes and procedures needs to occur.  Outside of this finding however the review has verified that the City’s internal control systems and processes are sound. 

Legislative Compliance

As per previous years, when reviewing systems and processes around legislative compliance, officers have considered the outcome of the Annual Statutory Compliance Audit Return, conducted in March 2020. This return was presented to Council at its ordinary meeting held on 11 March 2020 and approved.  The high level of statutory compliance noted in the Annual Statutory Compliance Audit Return should give the Council confidence in the internal systems and procedures of the City which are aimed to ensure legislative compliance. 

 

In addition, officers have undertaken a broader longer term review of compliance with the Local Government Act 1995 and associated regulations utilising the format of the older version of the Statutory Compliance Audit Return, which used to include questions in relation to a much larger number of provisions of the Local Government Act and regulations. 

 

The results are contained in Attachment C and demonstrate an overall high level of statutory compliance, with only minor issues noted such as the review of two local laws being slightly behind schedule, noting both are currently in the process of being reviewed.

 

While the City is formed as a statutory body under the Local Government Act 1995, there are a broad range of other State and Federal laws that the City carries out statutory processes under or which otherwise impact on the City’s operations. 

 

A small snapshot of some of the other Acts that the City implements or adheres to is provided below:

 

·   Bush Fires Act 1954

·   Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds Act 1995

·   Cat Act 2011

·   Cemeteries Act 1986

·   Dog Act 1976

·   Emergency Management Act 2005

·   Environmental Protection Act 1986

·   Public Health Act 2016

·   Land Administration Act 1997

·   Liquor Control Act 1988

·   Litter Act 1979

·   Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960

·   Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984

·   Planning and Development Act 2005

·   Public Interest Disclosure Act 2003

·   Rail Safety Act 2010

·   State Records Act 2000

·   Strata Titles Act 1985

 

There are a variety of processes and procedures that the City has in place in respect of these pieces of legislation and a variety of ways in which the City ensures that it complies with them. For example, many of the City’s development consent and scheme amendment processes are carried out in accordance with the Planning and Development Act 2005 and the City of Busselton Local Planning Scheme No. 21 which is delegated legislation made under that Act. Those statutory processes are reflected in a number of the City’s business systems which are automated through the City’s information technology systems, including document retention and retrieval process and online applications.  Similarly with respect to obligations and responsibilities under the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984, the City has an OSH management system consisting of many practices and procedures outlining ways in which the City will comply with its obligations.

 

Further, the City relies on employing qualified staff who are trained in and are aware of these statutory requirements and the requirement for this knowledge is reflected in the position descriptions for those staff, as is their authority to act in accordance with these laws.  A similar approach is taken in respect of almost all pieces of legislation that the City has to comply with.  For instance the City employs qualified Environmental Health Officers to carry out processes under the Public Health Act 2016 and an OSH and Risk Officer who must be qualified and have sufficient knowledge in respect of the legislative requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984.

 

These are examples of some of the ways in which the City ensures compliance with the requirements and processes of the various other pieces of legislation which it is involved in the implementation of or has to comply with.  

 

While not directly linked to legislative compliance, from a broader governance perspective it is worth noting that the City has, since the last Regulation 17 review in 2016, been involved in two independent reviews of its governance systems – one undertaken by Mr John Woodhouse (engaged by the City) and one as part of an Australian Institute of Company Directors review of local government governance.  The City’s governance systems were considered as sound in both reviews; and the City has, since 2017 been actively implementing recommendations aimed at further improving our governance systems.

 

Summary

Ultimately, the City relies on a combination of properly structured and configured IT business systems, documented processes and procedures and appropriately qualified, knowledgeable and authorised staff (whose position descriptions reflect the necessary qualifications and skills for their role) to ensure it complies with the many and varied laws impacting on its operations.  While officers are comfortable that legislative compliance is being achieved, this review has highlighted the benefits that a central governance / compliance system could bring, enabling a central repository of information and for governance to more easily track delegation usage, returns, policy expiries and potentially even qualifications of key staff.  This is something being explored as an improvement initiative, although would require funding.

Statutory Environment

Regulation 17 of the Local Government (Audit) Regulations states:

 

“17. CEO to review certain systems and procedures

(1)  The CEO is to review the appropriateness and effectiveness of a local government’s systems and procedures in relation to –

(a)  risk management; and

(b)  internal control; and

(c)   legislative compliance.

(2)  The review may relate to any or all of the matters referred to in subregulation (1)(a), (b) and (c), but each of those matters is to be the subject of a review not less than once in every 3 financial years.

(3)  The CEO is to report to the audit committee the results of that review.”

 


 

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City of Busselton Risk Management Policy was adopted by Council on 10 May 2006. It was subsequently reviewed and the updates endorsed by Council on 27 July 2011, the 12 August 2015, the 12 October 2016 and the 12 December 2018. 

 

To provide guidance to local governments in the completion of the review requirements, in September 2013, the Department of Local Government and Communities (the Department) released an updated version of Local Government Operational Guideline 9 – ‘Audit in Local Government’. This guideline includes a section specifically relating to the review, and exemplifies the types of activities that could potentially be undertaken as part of the review process.

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. This review of the City’s systems and procedures in relation to risk management, internal control and legislative compliance found no material risks of a medium or greater level.

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation the Council could:

1.    request that the CEO provide additional information to demonstrate the appropriateness and effectiveness of the City’s systems in relation to one or more of risk management, internal control or legislative compliance;

2.    request the CEO to undertake specific actions in relation to risk management, internal control or legislative compliance.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the review undertaken and documented in this report concludes that we have appropriate and effective systems and procedures in place to manage and mitigate risk; through our risk management framework, through our internal control systems, and through the employment of qualified staff and the implementation of robust internal management systems. While we can continue to enhance our systems and processes, the review has not identified any issues of significance, with recommended improvements instead part of ongoing development and maturation of the City’s systems and processes. 

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Systems and processes in relation to all aspects of risk management – risk, internal control and legislative compliance will be monitored on an ongoing basis and improved as part of general business planning and operations.

 

 

 

 


Council

21

10 June 2020

12.1

Attachment a

Risk Management Framework

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

49

10 June 2020

12.1

Attachment b

Internal Control Review

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

64

10 June 2020

12.1

Attachment c

Legislative Compliance LG Act Review

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council                                                                                      67                                                                      10 June 2020

12.2           Policy and Legislation Committee - 27/05/2020 - RESCISSION OF COUNCIL POLICY 074: MARKETS

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

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

SUBJECT INDEX

Council Policies

BUSINESS UNIT

Commercial Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager, Commercial Services - Jennifer May

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   Current Council Policy 074: Markets

Attachment b    Council Policy Events  

 

This item was considered by the Policy and Legislation Committee at its meeting on 27 May 2020, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council rescinds Council Policy 074: Markets (Attachment A), effective immediately.

 

COUNCIL DECISION AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

C2006/044              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor J Barrett-Lennard

That this item be deferred to the next Policy and Legislation Committee meeting to allow officers to consider the addition of relevant detail from the Council Policy 074: Markets into the Council Policy Events.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 

Reasons:              The Committee felt it was important that Council retained some strategic direction and oversight in relation to the operation of markets, with the deferral enabling officers to further consider the content of the Markets Policy and the addition of any relevant detail from the Markets Policy into the Events Policy.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report recommends the rescission of Council policy 074: Markets (the Policy) (Attachment A), with the Policy having been reviewed as part of the City’s overall review of its Council policies. It is recommended the Policy be rescinded, and its contents and objectives carried over into an Operational Practice. This will allow the City to respond more readily to changes in market locations or respond to any new market requests, particularly as we enter into a COVID-19 recovery phase.

 

BACKGROUND

The objective of the Policy is to ensure that markets held on City owned or managed land (City Land) do not adversely impact on local business and are successful, sustainable and appropriately accessible to the public. The Policy outlines market locations and frequencies and sets out the requirement for markets to be approved under the City’s Events Policy and event approval process. 

 

The Policy was reviewed in 2013, in response to an increase in the number of requests to hold new markets in various locations across the district. The Policy was again reviewed in November 2014 with minor amendments made to market locations in the district and to provide for alternative venues for markets in Busselton.   

 

The Council policy ‘Events’ (Attachment B) was reviewed, amended and endorsed by Council at its meeting on 12 February 2020 (C2002/034). While, as per the Policy, markets have always been processed as an ‘event’, as part of the review, the definition of “Event” was expanded to expressly include “Markets” in the scope of the policy. Outside of this, however, no specific references / limitations were incorporated into the Events policy. 

OFFICER COMMENT

Markets are well established and function successfully within the City of Busselton. Given that, officers consider that the objectives of the Policy are capable of being managed administratively under the direction of the CEO. The contents of the Policy can be translated to an Operational Practice which can be adjusted as required to meet changing demands and circumstances. This ability to more readily respond is particularly important as we enter a COVID-19 recovery phase, with well managed outdoor markets a possible sustainable alternative to traditional retail.    

 

In the event that Council would prefer to maintain high level strategic guidance in relation to markets, officers would recommend that an additional clause is added to the Events Council policy, outlining maximum market numbers / locations. Officers do not believe a stand-alone Council policy in relation to markets is necessary.

Statutory Environment

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

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 practices.

 

The Council policy ‘Events’ is relevant as outlined.

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.    Choose to rescind the Policy and direct the CEO to incorporate maximum market numbers / locations into the Events Council policy, or

2.    Choose to retain the Policy and request it be translated into the new policy framework.

 

CONCLUSION

As the contents and objectives of the Policy are now contained in the recently endorsed Council policy Events and associated Operational Practices, it is recommended the Policy be rescinded.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The Policy will be rescinded and removed from the website within one week of Council’s endorsement.

 

 


Council

68

10 June 2020

12.2

Attachment a

Current Council Policy 074: Markets

 


Council

73

10 June 2020

12.2

Attachment b

Council Policy Events

 


 


 


 


 


Council                                                                                      75                                                                      10 June 2020

12.3           Policy and Legislation Committee - 27/05/2020 - AMENDMENT TO COUNCIL POLICY: COMPLIANCE

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

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

SUBJECT INDEX

Council Policies

BUSINESS UNIT

Legal and Property Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager Legal and Property Services - Martyn Cavanagh

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   Compliance Policy (current)

Attachment b    Compliance Policy (proposed)  

 

This item was considered by the Policy and Legislation Committee at its meeting on 27 May 2020, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

COUNCIL DECISION AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

C2006/045              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor J Barrett-Lennard

 

That the Council agree to amend the Compliance Policy by adopting the amended Compliance Policy at Attachment B.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council’s Compliance Policy that was adopted in September 2018 (the Policy) refers to Prosecution Guidelines that were made in 2005 and have been replaced with new Prosecution Guidelines.  This Report recommends amending the Policy to refer to the current Guidelines.

 

BACKGROUND

In late August 2018, a report to Council (the Report) recommended that Council replace its Enforcement and Prosecutions Policy with a new Compliance Policy. Council adopted the recommendations of the Report, thereby adopting the Policy with effect from 12 September 2018.

The Policy makes reference to the Director of Public Prosecutions ‘Statement of Prosecution Policy and Guidelines 2005’ (“the 2005 Guidelines”).

 

At the time the Report was being prepared for and submitted to Council, the Director of Public Prosecutions was finalising replacement guidelines for the 2005 Guidelines. Those replacement guidelines were made under Section 24(1) of the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1991. The replacement guidelines were published in the Gazette of 31 August 2018 and became operative on 1 September 2018.

OFFICER COMMENT

City officers have considered the Statement of Prosecution Policy and Guidelines 2018 (“the 2018 Guidelines”), as they relate to considering the ‘prima facie case’ and ‘public interest’ aspects of a prospective prosecution action.

 

City officers recommend that Council replace, in the Policy, the reference to the 2005 Guidelines with a reference to the 2018 Guidelines.

 

Underpinning the Policy is recognition of the importance of voluntary compliance by citizens with regulatory laws. City officers can contribute to voluntary compliance by providing information (distinct from ‘advice’) about the nature of regulatory laws. Regulatory laws set ‘minimum’ standards of behaviour in a community. Regulatory laws do not confer a positive ‘right’ to do what is not prohibited. 

 

City officers also recommend minor amendments of form to the Policy, as indicated in the draft amended Compliance Policy (at Attachment B).

Statutory Environment

The enforcement of regulatory prohibitions is a necessary part of providing for ‘good government’ by maintaining acceptable standards of behaviour in the community.

 

Council is the governing body of a local government and is responsible under s 2.7 of the Local Government Act 1995 for the performance of local government functions, including by determining the local government’s policies.

Relevant Plans and Policies

Council adopted the Ranger and Emergency Services Approach to Regulatory Functions Policy in 2018. The CEO has made Operational Guidelines that support the City’s administration in implementing the Ranger’s Policy.

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

No such risks have been identified.

Options

No reasonable alternative to the proposed recommendation has been identified.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that Council adopt the amended Compliance Policy at Attachment B.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The amended Compliance Policy will be effective as of the making by Council of a resolution to adopt it.


Council

78

10 June 2020

12.3

Attachment a

Compliance Policy (current)

 


 


 


Council

81

10 June 2020

12.3

Attachment b

Compliance Policy (proposed)

 


 


 


Council                                                                                      84                                                                      10 June 2020

12.6           Policy and Legislation Committee - 27/05/2020 - RESCISSION OF COUNCIL POLICY: 025 BUILDING CONTROL - STANDARD OF SITE CLASSIFICATION FOR SUBDIVISIONS

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

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

SUBJECT INDEX

Council Policies

BUSINESS UNIT

Development Control

REPORTING OFFICER

Development Control Coordinator - Ronald Wildschut

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Engineering and Works Services - Oliver Darby

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 025: Building Control Standard Site Classification Subdivision  

 

This item was considered by the Policy and Legislation Committee at its meeting on 27 May 2020, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

COUNCIL DECISION AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

C2006/046            Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor J Barrett-Lennard

 

That the Council rescinds Council policy ‘Building Control - Standard of Site Classification for Subdivisions’ (Attachment A).

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report recommends the rescission of Council policy ‘Building Control – Standard of Site Classification for Subdivisions’ (the ‘Policy’, Attachment A), with the Policy having been reviewed as part of the City’s overall review of its Council policies, and the objectives of the Policy having been found to be achieved through alternative means.

 

BACKGROUND

The Policy outlines the parameters for the use of suitable fill-in subdivision development within the City of Busselton district. The Policy outlines the requirements of a site classification of ‘A’ to enable purchasers of lots within new subdivisions to build using minimum construction standards, without the need for individually engineered slabs and foundations.

 

The Policy further provides developers with the ability to, where they can demonstrate that achieving a site classification of ‘A’ is not practicable, seek City approval for a lesser site classification, through submission of certified designs for slabs and footings and the application of a Section 70A notification on the title of the subject lot/s.


 

OFFICER COMMENT

The requirement for lot site classification is addressed through the building licence application process. Further, the Australian Building Code requires “the foundation where the footing is to be located must be classified in accordance with AS 2870-2011 (Residential Slabs and Footings)”. City engineering officers monitor the standard of fill being imported into new subdivisions and review and approve the site classification, through the West Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) subdivision process.

 

The WAPC have standard conditions for subdivisions, with developers required to submit a pre-works geotechnical report, completed by a professional structural/geotechnical engineer. This report provides advice regarding the in situ ground conditions for the subdivision and recommendations on how to improve the ground conditions to achieve an acceptable site classification. City engineering officers then ensure that these recommendations are applied to the engineering designs submitted for that subdivision. At the completion of all subdivision works, and prior to clearances, a condition requiring the developer to submit a post-works geotechnical report has to be satisfied. This report will provide, among other details, a general site classification for the subdivision as a whole.

 

In reviewing the Policy, officers consider the objectives of the Policy are currently being met through this WAPC subdivision process and through the City’s building licence application process. As a result, officers recommend that the Policy be rescinded.

Statutory Environment

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

 

The subdivision process set out by the West Australian Planning Commission provides the framework within which the City can monitor and control the standard of controlled fill being imported and approve practicable site classification.

 

The City is also able to manage the required site classification at the building licence application stage. The Australian Building Code requires, for each individual lot, “the foundation where the footing is to be located must be classified in accordance with AS 2870-2011 (Residential Slabs and Footings)”.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City has a policy framework which was developed and endorsed by Council in response to the recommendations of the 2017 Governance Service Review. 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 a medium or greater leave have been identified.


 

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation the Council could:

1.    Retain the policy in its current form; or

2.    Retain and make amendments to the Policy.

CONCLUSION

The Policy has been reviewed and it is recommended that it be rescinded, as general site classification for new subdivisions are addressed through the WAPC subdivision application and clearance process, and site specific classification is addressed at the building licence application stage as a requirement of the Australian Building Code.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The Policy will be removed from the City’s website within one week of Council’s endorsement of the officer recommendation.

 

 

 


Council

87

10 June 2020

12.6

Attachment a

Council Policy 025: Building Control Standard Site Classification Subdivision

 


 


 


Council                                                                                      94                                                                      10 June 2020

16.             Finance and Corporate Services Report

16.1           LONG TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2020/21 to 2029/30

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

6.4 Assets are well maintained and responsibly managed.

SUBJECT INDEX

Long Term Financial Plan ("LTFP")

BUSINESS UNIT

Finance and Corporate Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Director Finance and Corporate Services - Tony Nottle

Strategic Financial Management Accountant - Ben Robinson

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Chief Executive Officer - Mike Archer

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   2020-2030 Long Term Financial Plan - Version A  

    

COUNCIL DECISION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

C2006/047              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor J Barrett-Lennard

 

That the Council:

1.  Acknowledges and receives the Draft Long Term Financial Plan 2020/21 to 2029/30 (Version A – Pre COVID-19) as provided in Attachment A as a guiding document for the City of Busselton;

2.  Acknowledges that further remodelling of an updated Long Term Financial Plan 2020/21 to 2029/30 will need to occur that takes into consideration the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the City’s operations and the 2020/21 Annual Budget; and

3.  Acknowledges the recommended projects and priorities listed within the above plans may be subject to change given the uncertainty in relation to future revenue and government funding due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The draft Long Term Financial Plan (“LTFP”) has been rigorously reviewed and analysed over a 12 month period, followed by a series of four Councillor workshops. Following the workshops in February and March 2020, this report now presents the LTFP for formal consideration and endorsement by the Council as a guiding document.

 

The draft plan was prepared prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and therefore is suggested that Council consider this as a guiding document, while further development of a new LTFP taking into consideration these impacts takes place.

 

The Draft LTFP was also developed on the basis that it considered the Council’s desire and subsequent CEO KPI to identify areas where savings could be made, to place downward pressure on the estimated annual rate increase to ratepayers.

 

BACKGROUND

The development of the current draft LTFP began in 2019 following extensive work updating the previous version of the LTFP to include the updated capital programs, methodologies and assumptions. As a result of this process, officers chose to redevelop the LTFP from the existing model to rebuild it from scratch. This model was presented to Council and reflected a LTFP that is balanced and provides a clearer picture of the ensuing 10 years.

 

Council was presented with the first draft LTFP in the new format at a workshop on 26 February 2020. Along with the draft document, Council were also provided with an overview of the document and a presentation on the key aspects of the LTFP, including a detailed explanation of the proposed capital program.

 

Council participated in a further three workshops and subsequently officers made amendments to the LTFP based on feedback and advice from Council. A final draft was produced which is attached as Attachment A. This document would be used to develop the 2020/21 draft budget.

On 16 March 2020, both Victoria and Western Australia declared a State of Emergency in relation to the spread of COVID-19 into Australia. This particular issue, and the subsequent measures that have taken place since this announcement, have had an impact on the LTFP’s projections and assumptions. In light of this, a second version is now being developed with revised assumptions to give both staff and Council a snapshot of what the impacts the pandemic may have on the City’s finances. This version will be a working document and will continue to be refined as more is known about the impacts of COVID-19.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

Local governments are required to plan for the future of their districts in accordance with the Local Government Act 1995. This is achieved by adhering to the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework (IPRF) developed by the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries (DLGSC) which incorporates the development and adoption of a number of key documents, including a Strategic Community Plan (SCP), a Corporate Business Plan (CBP) and the LTFP.

 

Whilst a SCP sets out the community’s aspirations, visions and objectives over a 10-year period, a more detailed CBP identifies and prioritises the principal strategies and activities required to achieve the higher level SCP outcomes, over a four-year time frame.

 

The LTFP component is required to demonstrate a local government’s financial capacity to resource its identified CBP actions, and also its ability to resource its asset management plan obligations and projected workforce growth requirements, as detailed in the relevant plans. The Financial Plan also identifies major areas of income and expenditure anticipated over the balance of the 10-year time frame.

 

At the City of Busselton, the LTFP is used as a high-level ‘top-down’ strategy-setting tool. As it is guided by the SCP, the end result of the LTFP informs the operations of the City. It allows the City to “look over the horizon” when making day-to-day decisions, in order to evaluate lifetime impact and ensures today’s decisions are affordable into the future.

 

LTFP Development

The LTFP has been developed from the ground up and uses the 2019/20 Annual Budget as the base year. The plan applies a number of assumptions which are used to extrapolate the LTFP out for a 10-year period.


 

Some of these broad assumptions included for the first three years are:

 

 

2020-21

2021-22

2022-23

Nature or Type

1

2

3

 

 

 

 

Revenue Drivers

 

 

 

Rates

2.75%

2.95%

3.50%

Operating grants, subsidies and contributions

2.00%

2.00%

2.00%

Fees and charges

2.00%

2.00%

2.00%

Interest on Investments

1.50%

1.50%

1.50%

Other revenue

2.00%

2.00%

2.00%

 

 

 

 

Expenditure Drivers

 

 

 

Consumer Price Index

2.50%

2.50%

2.50%

Employee costs

2.25%

2.50%

2.50%

Materials and contracts

2.50%

2.75%

2.75%

Utility charges (electricity, gas, water etc.)

5.00%

5.00%

5.00%

Insurance expense

3.00%

3.00%

3.00%

Other expenditure

2.50%

2.50%

2.50%

 

These assumptions were made based on economic forecasts from WALGA and WA Treasury Department.

 

The LTFP continues to invest funds into the improvement of the City’s built assets with an increase in funds applied to specific Reserve Accounts. These sources of funds are then used to increase investment in the City’s assets. In addition funds are also allocated to ensure that new assets received from developers and the community are adequately funded and maintained. This is a continuation of the Council’s long term strategy for its asset management.

 

The LTFP operates on a series of conservative assumptions with revenue set to grow modestly, whilst costs are set to grow quite significantly. As the LTFP is subject to a holistic review on an annual basis, assumptions are updated with each revision. Prudent fiscal management would suggest that the LTFP should plan for a scenario with a less than optimistic outcome; in the case that performance exceeds expectations, adjustments can be made at that time, but not before.

 

Following on from the approach in previous years, the LTFP remains a cornerstone of the decision-making process of the Council. Consequently, it is a ‘living document’, and is updated on a regular basis. It is constantly stress-tested to ensure financial decisions are made responsibly.

 

In addition, Council had also set a KPI for the CEO to present options to Council endeavouring to limit rate increases; that identify cost reduction measures including but not limited to savings in operational, capital, asset management and replacement methodologies and expenditures.

 

The CEO and senior staff embarked on a 12-month process and a series of workshops to discuss these options including the reworking of the capital works program, timing of asset management, keeping employee costs to a minimum and prudent budgeting of projects. As a result, the draft plan had been built on a significantly reduced rates increase throughout the 10-year period when compared with Council’s previously adopted LTFP.


 

The following table indicates the comparison of rating increases from the draft plan to the 2017/18 LTFP:

 

 

This table outlines the effect that the work undertaken in developing the draft LTFP has had a significant impact on reducing the predicted rate increases into the future, effectively meeting Council’s expectations. This has been achieved while still accounting for a healthy capital works program which includes the construction of the Busselton Entertainment Arts and Cultural Hub (BEACH) and the Sporting and Recreation Strategy.

 

Capital Works Program

A key component of the LTFP is the capital works program. This section outlines individual project proposed to be undertaken over the next 10 years. These are based on the known projects listed in various existing City strategies and plans. This section is split into 7 categories being:

1.    Asset Management, Renewal & Minor Upgrades

2.    Waste Management

3.    New & Continuing Projects – Organisational

4.    New Projects - Recreational Strategy

5.    Major Projects – Cultural

6.    Busselton / Margaret River Airport – Development; and

7.    Potential New Projects – Initiatives

 

In particular, category 4 has included the Sport and Recreation Strategy which was endorsed by Council in May 2020. The LTFP assumes very little revenue being applied to these projects due to the uncertainty and competitive nature of the Community Sport and Recreation Facility Fund (CSRFF). Category 7 provides a list of projects that may not necessarily be funded, however Council may consider them into the future, lobby government for increased funding or require further consultation with the community.

 

Overall, the City plans to invest over $304M in capital projects over the next 10 years. It is even more important that the City continues to embark on a steady capital program particularly in light of the current COVID-19 pandemic as capital works programs are able to stimulate the local economy.

 

Long Term Borrowings

The City’s loan borrowings include loans specifically for assets as well as some self-supporting loans for community groups. With existing loan borrowing rates available to the City at approximately 1.8 – 2.5% the LTFP includes borrowings for major projects such as the BEACH, upgrades to existing and new sporting facilities in accordance with the Sport and Recreation Strategy.

 

The City’s borrowings will peak in year 5 of the LTFP ($32.5M). However, the City will finish paying significant loans after year 5 which will see the outstanding loan balance reducing to $23.4M in year 10 and $4.9M in year 15.

 

City Reserves

The LTFP includes the existing 74 reserve accounts maintained which carry a total amount ranging from $36.7M in year 1 to $63M in year 10.  A large number of these reserves are established in order to maintain key assets within the City such as the Busselton Jetty, Busselton Airport, Geographe Leisure Centre, City buildings, footpaths and cycle ways and road asset infrastructure. Each reserve is established for a purpose to ensure that no burden is placed on rates increases for unexpected expenditure.

 

The LTFP shows expenditure from Reserve funds totalling $198.9M over the life of the plan on City projects and assets.

 

Rates growth and projections

The City of Busselton is in a fortunate position where consistent growth is experienced within the annual rates base as the population grows within this popular region of the South West. The LTFP has taken an average rates growth rate of its rate base of 1.5%. This is a rate that is reviewed annually. In addition, rates levels have been set to allow for the City’s asset management commitment and requirements. Rates increases range between 2.75% in year 1 to 3.5% in year 10.

 

Employee Costs

The City’s largest category in its operating expenditure costs are the employee costs. These costs range from 2.25% in year 1 to 3% in year 10. These assumptions were based on WA Treasury forecasts. The City has also committed to additional services predominately around the BEACH, and employee growth is expected to focus on this area of the operating expenses in the first 4 years of the plan.

 

Annual Surplus / Deficit Position

The annual surplus and deficit position of the LTFP maintains modest levels with peak deficit of $603k in year 7 to a peak surplus of $262k in year 9. As these levels are well outside the 4 year planning cycle for the CBP, these levels are not of any great concern. As the LTFP is also adjusted annually, further changes can be made to rectify the net position at a later stage. At no stage does the surplus or deficit position move above or below 1% of rateable income.

 

Development of LTFP Versions A & B

Currently, Australia is grappling with the public health and economic consequences of COVID-19. In terms of the economy, recent optimistic assumptions by KPMG in March 2020 expect that Australia's economic growth will decline by 0.9 per cent in 2020, amounting to a $17B hit before slowly recovering in 2021. Given that the LTFP was expected to be adopted after the workshops from February through March, the assumptions used to build the LTFP are now outdated.

 

Due to the slow economic growth experienced in 2019, coupled with high household debt and low wage growth, the LTFP had already seen a number of revisions to previous overly optimistic growth assumptions in revenue, and arguably marginal increases to costs.

 

In preparation for the inevitable, City staff are also preparing a new version of the LTFP with revised assumptions on the understanding that this will be further developed once the full impact of COVID-19 on the City’s operations is known. What is clear is that revenue is likely to be impacted and growth in certain areas of the plan will now be arrested. There will also be requirement for the City to consider assistance packages and expenditure in non-traditional areas to assist the community.

 

The new version of the LTFP will consider a 0% rate increase for 2020/21, 0% increase in fees and charges and revised assumptions around interest earned off investments and a revision of salaries and wages costs.

 

Once Council prepares and endorses its budget for 2020/21, this will be used as the new base year for the reworked model of the LTFP where further extrapolation of the assumptions will be undertaken. This is likely to affect the capacity to fund capital works and operations moving forward on the current Version A (Pre COVID-19) Plan.

Statutory Environment

Local government are required as per Section 5.56 of the Local Government Act 1995 to plan for the future of its district. Regulations 19C and 19DA of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 provide specific guidance to local governments in relation to planning for the future.

 

The DLGSC has issued an Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework and Guidelines, and the LTFP is consistent with these requirements.

 

The IPRF looks to integrate matters relating to resources, including asset management, workforce planning and also long-term financial planning.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The LTFP has been constructed and informed by the City’s current SCP, Workforce Plan, 2019/20 Annual Budget and the current CBP.

Financial Implications

The financial implications of the LTFP are detailed within the Plan but endorsing the Plan does not result in approval being given to implement any actions contained within it. Priorities will be included within the City’s annual budget which will be considered in July 2020. The LTFP reflects the Council’s broad strategic financial direction over the next ten year period, in line with its SCP and CBP.

Stakeholder Consultation

The LTFP reflects the community’s aspirations, vision and objectives as included in the SCP 2017 (Review 2019), and is consistent with the principal strategies and activities within the CBP 2019 - 2023. Consequently, no specific (external) consultation has been undertaken in relation to the content of the LTFP, as the projects incorporated will more than likely be the subject of further consultation and review.

 

Workshops were also held with Councillors and the Senior Management Group on 26 February, 4 March, 10 March and 18 March 2020.

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 following risks have been identified:

Risk of Financial Misstatement

Risk Category

Risk Consequence

Likelihood of Consequence

Risk Level

Financial

Insignificant

Possible

Low

 

The LTFP is a guiding document only, and as such is designed as a planning tool to aid Council in making decisions regarding the funding and planning of City development. It is also a living document, with a formal adoption each year being just that; a formality, as the LTFP continues to be updated weekly and even daily at times. Business developments occurring from week to week can be tested in the document to determine whether preliminary decisions can be made with agility.

 

Nevertheless, due to the inherent nature of a financial forecast, the risk that projections may differ in comparison to reality is a real and likely possibility. Assumptions about linear growth, interest rate fluctuations and identified timeframes for capital project completion may not be achieved in reality. 

 

Therefore, the LTFP should be used as a guide only.

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation the Council could:

·    Further amend the content of the LTFP as it currently stands.

·    Delay a formal adoption of the LTFP in favour of allowing the completion of the 2021 LTFP, which is reliant upon the 2020/21 base budget.

CONCLUSION

The LTFP has been developed over a period of approximately 18 months and as such has been through many iterations. It has been updated to reflect the outcomes of Council workshops. It is however, early days in relation to the known impacts of the COVID-19 crisis and therefore further remodelling of Version B will be carried out upon the adoption of the 2020/21 annual budget.

 

It is important to effectively “draw a line in the sand” at the point in time where significant work was undertaken to develop the LTFP. This allows Council to set a direction and guidance to staff as the City’s plans and actions are developed in the short to medium term.

 

It is recommended that the Council acknowledges and receives the LTFP as presented, with an understanding that further remodelling of a new LTFP is underway to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Subject to endorsement, the LTFP will act as a guiding document in developing the Council’s 2021/22 budget.


Council

147

10 June 2020

16.1

Attachment a

2020-2030 Long Term Financial Plan - Version A

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 


Council                                                                                      148                                                                    10 June 2020

17.             Chief Executive Officers Report

17.1           COUNCILLORS' INFORMATION BULLETIN

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

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

SUBJECT INDEX

Councillors' Information Bulletin

BUSINESS UNIT

Executive Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Reporting Officers - Various

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director Finance and Corporate Services - Tony Nottle

NATURE OF DECISION

Noting: the item does not require a decision of Council and is simply for information purposes and noting

VOTING REQUIREMENT

Simple Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Current Running SAT Reviews

Attachment b    Correspondence from LGIS  

 

COUNCIL DECISION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

C2006/048              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor J Barrett-Lennard

 

That the items from the Councillors’ Information Bulletin be noted:

17.1.1       State Administrative Tribunal Reviews 

17.1.2     Correspondence from CEO, LGIS

CARRIED 9/0

En Bloc

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides an overview of a range of information that is considered appropriate to be formally presented to the Council for its receipt and noting. The information is provided in order to ensure that each Councillor, and the Council, is being kept fully informed, while also acknowledging that these are matters that will also be of interest to the community.

 

Any matter that is raised in this report as a result of incoming correspondence is to be dealt with as normal business correspondence, but is presented in this bulletin for the information of the Council and the community.

INFORMATION BULLETIN

17.1.1       State Administrative Tribunal Reviews 

 

A summary of the current State Administrative Tribunal reviews is attached.

17.1.2       Correspondence from CEO, LGIS

 

Correspondence from the Chief Executive Officer, LGIS, is attached.

 


Council

151

10 June 2020

17.1

Attachment a

Current Running SAT Reviews

 


 


 


Council

153

10 June 2020

17.1

Attachment b

Correspondence from LGIS

 


 

 

 


Council                                                                                      159                                                                    10 June 2020

ITEMS TO BE DEALT WITH BY SEPARATE RESOLUTION (WITHOUT DEBATE)

12.4           Policy and Legislation Committee - 27/05/2020 - AMENDMENT TO COUNCIL POLICY AND DELEGATION: PURCHASING

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

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

SUBJECT INDEX

Council Policies

BUSINESS UNIT

Corporate Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Contract & Tendering Officer - Lisa McDonald

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

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Purchasing Policy - Current Version

Attachment b    Purchasing Policy - Amended (clean)

Attachment c    Purchasing Policy - Amended (tracked)

Attachment d   DA 1-07 - Current Version

Attachment e    DA 1-07 - Amended (clean)

Attachment f    DA 1-07 - Amended (tracked)  

 

This item was considered by the Policy and Legislation Committee at its meeting on 27 May 2020, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

COUNCIL DECISION AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

C2006/049              Moved Deputy Mayor K Hick, seconded Councillor R Paine

 

That the Council:

1.         Adopts the amended Purchasing Policy as per Attachment B, replacing the current Purchasing Policy (shown as Attachment A); and

 

2.         Adopts the amended Delegation DA 1-07 as per Attachment E, replacing the current delegation (shown as Attachment D).

CARRIED 9/0

BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

As a result of legislative amendments made by the State Government to the framework that regulates purchasing of goods and services by a local government, City officers are recommending minor amendments to Council’s Purchasing Policy and Delegation Instrument DA 1–07 ‘Inviting, Rejecting and Accepting Tenders’.

BACKGROUND

As part of its response to the current State of Emergency (COVID-19) declared under the Emergency Management Act 2005 (EM Act), the State government is effecting a range of legislative amendments.

 

One aspect of local government operations that has been impacted by these amendments is the ‘purchasing’ framework that regulates the purchase of goods and services by a local government.

The Local Government (Administration) Amendment Regulations 2020 (Amendment Regulations) were published in the Government Gazette on Thursday 9 April 2020. 

 

The key changes to the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 (FG Regulations), which came into effect on 10 April 2020, are:

 

1.         to include a definition of a state of emergency declaration to reflect the EM Act (new FG Regulation  11(1A));

2.         to increase the threshold value of contracts required to be advertised for public tender from $150,000 to $250,000 (amended FG Regulation 11(1));

3.         in addition to exceptions previously provided for in the FG Regulations, tenders now do not have to be publicly invited if:

a.    the supply of the goods or services is associated with a state of emergency (new FG Regulation 11(2)(aa) ); or

b.  the local government seeks to renew or extend a contract that is to expire within 3 months and the renewal or extension will be for no more than 12 months and the renewal or extension is entered into during the state of emergency (new FG Regulation 11(2)(ja)).

 

The increase of the tender threshold amount is not limited to a time of a state of emergency, and will continue to apply after the current State of Emergency is over.

 

There is also an amendment relating to indigenous-related purchasing contracts, and to the extension or renewal of current contracts in connection with the state of emergency.

 

Regulation 11A of the FG Regulations requires a local government to adopt a “purchasing policy” in relation to contracts where the consideration is expected to be less than $150,000. It is understood that an amendment to this regulation is in the process of being implemented, to increase the amount to $250,000. This would then integrate with the increase to the tender threshold amount.

 

Purchasing Policy

Council’s current Purchasing Policy (Attachment A) makes a number of references to a threshold of $150,000. The Policy also refers to exceptions in Regulation 11(2) of the FG Regulations.

 

An amended Purchasing Policy (Attachment B) has increased these thresholds to $250,000 and included reference to the new exceptions, in particular the ‘emergency’ exceptions.

 

Delegation DA 1-07

Delegation from Council to CEO of the power to determine whether exemption in Regulation 11(2)(aa) applies

The new exception to when tenders have to be publicly invited in Regulation 11(2)(aa) states that tenders do not have to be publicly invited if the supply of goods or services is associated with a state of emergency. A state of emergency has the meaning as given in the EM Act. Therefore a ‘test’ has to be applied. The local government must “consider that the goods or services are required for the purpose of addressing a need arising from the hazard, or from the impact or consequences of the hazard, to which the state of emergency declaration relates”. 

 

This report recommends that Council delegates to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) the power to determine whether this exception applies.


 

Delegation of power to enter into contracts where Regulation 11(2) applies (subject to usual $500,000 limit)

The current delegation instrument was adopted in August 2019 and replaced a delegation instrument having reference LG3J. The form of that previous instrument expressly provided for the delegation of the power to enter into a contract where an exception to the tender regulations applied.

 

In the course of Council adopting the delegations in the instrument DA 1–07, and as part of the simplification of the delegations register generally, the words relating to entering into contracts have been omitted.

 

In addition, the Amendment Regulations have introduced a new exception to when tenders must be invited.

 

This report recommends that Council adopt the amended delegation instrument DA 1-07 (Attachment E) to reflect the intention of Council that, in addition to delegating to the CEO the powers and duties to carry out tenders, it also delegates the powers and duties to apply exceptions to the tender requirements and to, in this instance, enter into contracts with a value not exceeding the pre-determined threshold specified in DA 1-07. 

 

While the delegation instrument as it stands delegates Regulation 11, inclusive of sub part (2), for reasons explained in the officer comment section of this report, it is considered beneficial to, in this instance explicitly expand on this to ensure Council’s intent is clear.

OFFICER COMMENT

Purchasing Policy

The amended Purchasing Policy (Attachment B) provides for replacing references to “$150,000” with references to “$250,000” and also including reference to the new exceptions, including the ‘emergency’ exceptions. These amendments are required to ensure the Purchasing Policy aligns with the legislative changes discussed in the Background section of this report.

 

WALGA recently circulated various changes to their template purchasing policy to reflect the changes to the FG Regulations. City Officers have reviewed the WALGA template purchasing policy changes, and at this time do not recommend any additional changes to Council’s Purchasing Policy.  Further consideration can be given to the template in due course. However it is noted that in 2018, in response to the City of Busselton Governance Services Review by Mr John Woodhouse, the City revised its Purchasing Policy to move a considerable level of detail into CEO ‘Operational Practices’.  City officers are not anticipating the making of recommendations that would depart from this approach.

 

It is also noted that there is an emphasis in the WALGA template on ‘best value for money’. City officers reviewed the Purchasing Policy at length in 2018 and recommended that Council base its policy on a ‘most advantageous’ test. This aligns with the legislative approach in respect of tenders [see FG Regulations 18, 20 and 24AH)].  The ‘best value for money’ concept is understood to have its origins under the State Supply Commission Act 1991, and does not apply to local governments. City officers are not recommending any change to the Purchasing Policy in this regard.


 

Amendment to Delegation DA 1-07

Delegation from Council to CEO of the power to determine whether exemption in Regulation 11(2)(aa) applies

The new exception to when tenders have to be publicly invited, inserted by Regulation 11(2)(aa), is enabled where a ‘test’ (set out in new Regulation 11(3)) is satisfied. This test is that the local government must “consider that the goods or services are required for the purpose of addressing a need arising from the hazard, or from the impact or consequences of the hazard, to which the state of emergency declaration relates”.

 

While there may be an argument that “local government” in this regulation includes the CEO [see s 4 definition of “local government” in the Interpretation Act 1984, and see Columbia Holdings Pty Ltd – v – City of Armadale [2012] WASC 422], the safer course is to delegate this power to the CEO.

 

The current Delegation 1-07 refers generally to the whole of Regulation 11, and so this would include Regulation 11(2). Where a delegation instrument refers to a power under a regulation or section of an Act, and that regulation or section is amended, the delegation instrument applies only to the power as it was at the time the delegation instrument was made and does not automatically extend to the regulation or section as amended. Accordingly the delegation instrument DA 1-07 should be amended by Council to include the new exceptions under Regulation 11(2) which came in effect on 10 April 2020.

 

Delegation of power to enter into contracts where Regulation 11(2) applies (subject to usual $500,000 limit)

Although Regulation 11(2) of the LG Regulations specify a number of exceptions to the requirement to invite tenders for procurement of goods and services, it does not expressly confer the power to the CEO to enter into contracts under circumstances where an exception applies. As the CEO currently under DA 1-07 has the power to accept tenders where the contract value does not exceed $500,000, it is recommended that the power to enter into contracts under circumstances where an exception applies, is also delegated to the CEO, subject to abovementioned limit of $500,000.

 

As outlined in the Background section of this report, the current delegation instrument DA 1-07 was adopted in late 2019 as part of simplification of the City’s delegation register.  The opportunity exists to amend the delegation instrument DA 1-07 to better reflect the intention of Council, that is, in addition to the power to enter into contracts pursuant to a tender process, to more expressly delegate to the CEO the power to enter into contracts under circumstances where a tender exception applies, subject to a $500,000 limitation.

 

Through consultation, the governance and legal business units have settled on the proposed amendments to DA 1-07 (Attachment E).

 

Summary

In summary, it is recommended that Delegation instrument DA 1-07 be amended by Council to delegate power to the CEO to:

(a)  Determine whether an exception under Regulation 11(2) as amended (which will include the new Regulation 11(2)(aa) of the FG Regulations) applies; and 

(b)  Where an exception under Regulation 11(2) applies, negotiate and enter into contracts with suppliers where the contract value does not exceed $500,000.

Statutory Environment

In accordance with Section 2.7(2)(b) of the Act, 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 that Act.

 

Regulation 11A(1) of the LG Regulations requires a local government to implement a purchasing policy in relation to contracts for the supply of goods or services where the consideration under the contract is, or is expected to be, $150,000 or less. Such a policy must, among other things, make provision in respect of:

·    the form of quotations acceptable;

·    the minimum number of oral and written quotations that must be obtained; and

·    the recording and retention of purchasing records.

 

Section 3.57(1) of the Act requires a local government to invite tenders before it enters into a contract of a prescribed kind under which another person is to supply goods or services. Section 3.57(2) provides that regulations may make provision about tenders.

 

Regulations 11 – 21A deal with matters relating to tenders, including when and how tenders have to be invited and requirements for assessing and accepting and/or rejecting tenders.   

 

Section 3.18 of the Act provides for the City to do all things necessary or convenient for carrying out its functions. Entering into contracts for the purchase of goods and serves is necessary for the City to perform its functions.

 

Under s 5.42 of the Act a local government may, by instrument in writing, delegate (by absolute majority) to the CEO the exercise of any of its powers or the discharge of any of its duties under the Act, subject to specified limitations.

 

Sections 58 (performance of functions by a delegate) and 59 (the effect of a delegation) of the Interpretation Act 1984 apply, subject to subsection 3(1) of that Act, to delegations made under the LG Act.

 

Under s 5.43 of the Act, a local government cannot delegate the power to accept a tender which exceeds an amount determined by the local government for the purposes of this paragraph. Under DA 1-07 this threshold is currently $500,000.

 

In relation to procurement of goods or services where the exceptions under Regulation 11(2) of the LG Regulations apply (that is where a local government is exempted from inviting tenders) the Act does not have a similar requirement - there is no requirement for a local government to determine, for purposes of a delegation to the CEO, an amount above which the CEO cannot enter into a contract under circumstances where an exception applies. It appears that this might have been an oversight when the relevant legislative provisions were drafted. WALGA recommend that a threshold be applied to procurement where a tender exception applies and the City has also contacted the Department of Local Government enquiring whether a relevant regulation may be appropriately made under s 5.43(i) of the Act. In the meantime, it would be prudent for Council to limit, for this type of procurement, the CEO’s delegated power to enter into contracts to an amount not exceeding $500,000 (effectively implementing an internal process similar to the process for accepting tenders).

 

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City has a policy framework which was developed and endorsed by Council in response to the recommendations of the 2017 Governance Service Review. 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.

 

The officer recommendation reduces legal risk by properly identifying that the power to contract is being delegated, in addition to the performance of regulatory duties prior to a contract being entered into.

Options

As an alternative to the proposed recommendation the Council could:

1.    Request further or different amendments be made to the Purchasing Policy; or

2.    Request further or different amendments be made to Delegation DA 1-07.

 

CONCLUSION

Due to the legislative amendments made by the State Government to the purchasing of goods and services by a local government, minor amendments to Council’s Purchasing Policy and Delegation Instrument DA 1–07 ‘Inviting, Rejecting and Accepting Tenders’ are recommended.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

The amended Purchasing Policy (Attachment B) and the amended delegation instrument DA 1-07 (Attachment D) will have effect into force immediately upon Council’s endorsement of the officer recommendations.

  


Council

166

10 June 2020

12.4

Attachment a

Purchasing Policy - Current Version

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

172

10 June 2020

12.4

Attachment b

Purchasing Policy - Amended (clean)

 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

179

10 June 2020

12.4

Attachment c

Purchasing Policy - Amended (tracked)

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

180

10 June 2020

12.4

Attachment d

DA 1-07 - Current Version

 


Council

181

10 June 2020

12.4

Attachment e

DA 1-07 - Amended (clean)

 


 


Council

182

10 June 2020

12.4

Attachment f

DA 1-07 - Amended (tracked)

 

 


Council                                                                                      187                                                                    10 June 2020

12.5           Policy and Legislation Committee - 27/05/2020 - DELEGATION OF POWER TO DISPOSE OF PROPERTY AND LEASE AND LICENCE PREMISES

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

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

SUBJECT INDEX

Delegations

BUSINESS UNIT

Legal and Property Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager Legal and Property Services - Martyn Cavanagh

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

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   DA 1 - 22 Disposing of Property (Current)

Attachment b    DA 1 - 22A Proposed

Attachment c    DA 1 - 22B Proposed  

 

This item was considered by the Policy and Legislation Committee at its meeting on 27 May 2020, the recommendations from which have been included in this report.

 

COUNCIL DECISION AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

C2006/050              Moved Councillor L Miles, seconded Deputy Mayor K Hick

 

That the Council:

1.         Rescind the instrument of delegation DA 1-22 (Attachment A);

 

2.         Delegate powers and duties relating to disposing of property by sale, by adopting the proposed delegation instrument at Attachment B; and

 

3.         Delegate powers and duties relating to leasing and licensing of land and buildings, by adopting the proposed delegation instrument at Attachment C.

CARRIED 9/0

BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Current delegation instrument DA 1–22 Disposing of Property deals with both land and non-land. It is directed at things that must be done before property is disposed of and it also refers to licensing (distinct from leasing) of land and buildings.

 

City officers recommend that the current delegation be rescinded and replaced with two distinct delegations that deal separately with, respectively, the sale of property (DA 1–22A: Attachment B) and the leasing/licensing of land/buildings (DA 1–22B: Attachment C).

 

BACKGROUND

Council has in force two delegations that apply respectively to ‘acquisition of property’, DA 1-21, formerly LG3B and ‘disposition of property’, DA 1–22, formerly LG3C.

 

Prior to these delegations, Council had in force a single delegation LG3K that had been in force since 2008.

 

In 2017, Council resolved to separate the delegation relating to ‘acquisition’ from the delegation relating to ‘disposal’ (C1706/151). This was to provide better distinction and clarity of the extent of the powers being delegated.

 

The delegation of powers relating to dispositions is instrument DA 1-22 (Attachment A). It provides for two distinct cases through the conditions imposed in the delegation: disposal by sale (whether land or otherwise), and leases/licences of property (land and/or buildings) in certain circumstances.

 

The express provision for leases/licences arises in connection with the City managing a large portfolio of land and buildings for the benefit of community and not for profit organisations and their causes. There are close to 100 of these. 

OFFICER COMMENT

While local governments have historically focussed on s3.58 of the Local Government Act (the Act) in connection with delegating powers of disposal, recent review and analysis by City officers has highlighted that s3.58 of the Act merely imposes certain obligations/restrictions on how or when property may be disposed of, rather than a power of disposal in itself. That is, s3.58 operates to impose statutory pre-conditions to the act of disposal.

 

That leads to the question of where the power to acquire or dispose of property is to be found in the Act. Section 5.43 of the Act expressly limits Council’s powers of delegation, including the power to acquire or dispose of property in excess of a determined amount as set by Council. Clearly the Act intends that Council can delegate power up to the relevant limit.

 

The source of power to acquire or dispose of property lies in the understanding that a local government is a body corporate with perpetual succession and the legal capacity of a natural person (s 2.5(2) and (3) of the Act). A natural person has, under common law, the capacity (power) to own (hold) property. Necessarily, a person must be able to acquire and dispose of property. So a local government therefore has this same capacity. 

 

The utilisation of this capacity is confirmed by s.3.18 of the Act, which is a conferral of power to do ‘necessary or convenient’ things for the purposes of conducting the affairs of the local government.  These powers may be augmented by provisions of other Acts. For example, under the Land Administration Act 1997, a local government may be given a power to grant a lease in respect of managed land.

 

Accordingly, officers from the property and governance teams have conferred, and agree that a better form of delegation of the power to dispose of property is by reference to both the source power under the Act as well as to the preconditions that must be satisfied in respect of certain disposals.

 

The opportunity also exists to delineate more clearly between ‘sale’ and ‘lease/licence’ transactions in the instruments of delegation. 

 

A proposed instrument of delegation for sale of property is at Attachment B. It provides for a general power to dispose of property (whether land or otherwise) by sale.

 

A proposed instrument of delegation for leasing or licensing of land and buildings is at Attachment C. It provides for a general power to lease or licence land and buildings in specified circumstances.

 


 

Disposition by sale

If the property is land, the land must be of a value that is not more than $20,000, other than where (b) applies. If the property is land that has been put to public auction or put out to tender and not sold, the land must be of a value of not more than $100,000.

 

If the property is property other than land, the property must be of a value that is not more than $100,000.

 

Disposition by lease or licence

By far the most common type of disposition relating to land is a lease or licence of the land. Typically this occurs in connection with making land or buildings available to not for profit organisations. The issue of short term residential tenancies (as with the aged housing units) and some low value commercial arrangements such as periodic alfresco licences (associated with adjacent business premises) and short-term commercial leases of the health suites at the GLC are also common scenarios.

 

Council has an established Council policy: Leasing of City Premises. This applies to land and buildings either owned by the City or managed under a management order under the Land Administration Act 1997.

 

The terms of the current delegation purport to extend to the granting of licences. In the context of a ‘disposition’ within the meaning of that word in s 3.58 of the Act, the better view is that the granting of a licence is not a disposition as only a non-exclusive personal right is being given.

 

In the case of a lease or licence of land to a charitable, sporting or other not-for-profit body, it would be an exception to the requirements of s 3.58 of the Act and therefore within the exception provided for in Regulation 30(2)(b) of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 (the Regulations).

 

In the case of a licence or a lease of 2 years or less that does not grant exclusive possession (be it in favour of a for, or not for, profit entity), Regulation 30(2)(e) of the Regulations provides an exemption to the requirement of s 3.58 of the Act.

 

The more important issue, for delegation purposes, is to provide for the power to enter into the lease or licence agreement. As with the power to sell property, this is found in s.3.18 of the Act.

 

Accordingly, a new delegation instrument is proposed to replace the current delegation in so far as it applies to leases and licences of land (Attachment C).

 

As with the current delegation, the delegation of powers and duties is to apply to land or buildings comprising sporting or community facilities and to land and new facilities under 100m2 required for storage purposes.

 

In keeping with the recently endorsed Council policy: Leasing of City Premises in relation to the duration of a lease or licence, the new delegation proposes a maximum term of 10 years (generally leases are granted for an initial 5-year term with an option to renew for a further 5 years).

 

The current delegation provides for a maximum term of 5 years unless the lease is a renewal of a lease by a sporting group or community group of an existing building in which case the renewed term could be 10 years.

 

As with the current delegation, the value of the land and buildings being leased or licensed is not to exceed $25,000 per annum.

These conditions mirror the conditions (limitations) of the previous delegation.

Statutory Environment

The officer recommendation supports the general function of a local government under the Local Government Act 1995 to provide for the good government of persons in its district.

 

Under s.3.18 of the LG Act, the City can do all things necessary or convenient for carrying out its functions. Entering into contracts for the purchase of goods and services is necessary for the City to perform its functions.

 

While not a ‘statutory’ component of the legal framework, a ‘licence’ of property does not confer a ‘proprietary’ interest and differs from a lease that will generally confer a right to exclusive possession.

 

Under s 5.42 of the LG Act, a local government may, by instrument in writing, delegate (by absolute majority) to the CEO the exercise of any of its powers or the discharge of any of its duties under the Act, subject to specified limitations.

 

Sections 58 (performance of functions by a delegate) and 59 (the effect of the delegation) of the Interpretation Act 1984 apply, subject to subsection 3(1) of that Act, to delegations made under the LG Act.

 

Under s 5.43(d) of the LG Act, a local government cannot delegate the power to dispose of property valued at an amount which exceeds the amount determined by the local government for the purposes of that paragraph.

 

Under s 50(1) of the Interpretation Act 1984, where a written law confers upon a person a power to do or enforce the doing of any act or thing, all such powers shall also be deemed to be conferred on the person as are reasonably necessary to enable him to do or enforce the doing of the act or thing.  Delegation of a power to lease or licence will include the power to sign relevant agreements without a need to look for an express conferral of ‘authority’ to sign.

Relevant Plans and Policies

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

 

The officer recommendation supports the administration of Council policy: Leases of City Premises, adopted May 2020.

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 decide to retain the current delegation instrument DA 1-22 (Attachment A).

 

CONCLUSION

Adopting the officer’s recommendation will result in the delegation of powers to dispose of property and enter into leases and licences being more transparent. This will facilitate the delegation of the leasing and licensing powers of the City to Directors to more efficiently implement the City’s Leases of City Premises Policy.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

If Council resolves to rescind the current delegation DA 1–22 and adopt the proposed delegations DA 1–22A and DA 1–22B (Attachments B and C), then the CEO will be able to immediately delegate the powers to relevant officers.

 

 


Council

189

10 June 2020

12.5

Attachment a

DA 1 - 22 Disposing of Property (Current)

 


 


Council

190

10 June 2020

12.5

Attachment b

DA 1 - 22A Proposed

 


Council

192

10 June 2020

12.5

Attachment c

DA 1 - 22B Proposed

 


 

 


Council                                                                                      197                                                                       10 June 2020

14.             Engineering and Work Services Report

14.1           RFQ 22-20 BUSSELTON LIBRARY UPGRADE

STRATEGIC GOAL

1. COMMUNITY: Welcoming, friendly, healthy

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

1.2 A community with access to life-long health and education opportunities.

SUBJECT INDEX

Tenders

BUSINESS UNIT

Major Projects and Facilities

REPORTING OFFICER

Manager Major Projects and Facilities - Eden Shepherd

AUTHORISING OFFICER

Director, Engineering and Works Services - Oliver Darby

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

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Published Under Separate Cover  Confidential RFQ 22-20 Evaluation and Recommendation Report - Busselton Library Upgrade  

 

COUNCIL DECISION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

C2006/051              Moved Councillor S Riccelli, seconded Deputy Mayor K Hick

 

That the Council:

 

1.    Pursuant to RFQ 22-20 Busselton Library Upgrade, accepts the quotation from Devlyn Australia Pty Ltd as the most advantageous quotation (Successful Contractor) for a contract value of $544,700.20 ex GST; and

 

2.    Delegates power and authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and agree with the Successful Contractor minor variations subject to such variations and the final terms not exceeding the overall project budget.

CARRIED 9/0

BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

RFQ 22-20 invited suitably qualified and experienced contractors to make submissions to enter into a contract for the upgrade of the Busselton Library in accordance with the Specification:

 

(a)  Demolition of existing offices and veranda;

(b)  Construction of new offices, storage and kitchen facilities;

(c)   Extension of plant room;

(d)  Roof construction;

(e)  Services installation (hydraulic, electrical, fire and mechanical system); and

(f)   Bathroom renovation.

 

This report recommends Devlyn Australia Pty Ltd as the most advantageous quotation (Successful Contractor).

 

BACKGROUND

The Busselton Library (600m2) was constructed in 1991. In 2012, a 300m2 extension was added to the adult area of the public library and, at the time, no improvements to staff offices were made. In 2012, the children’s area was reduced to accommodate a new Library Services Coordinator office and returns room. A small storeroom was converted into office accommodation for two (2) eServices staff members in 2018.

 

Since 2012, library memberships have grown from 14,511 (2012) to 20,943 (2019), a 45% overall increase, representing an average increase of 5.3% per annum. During this time, family attendance at “Story Time” sessions has doubled from 173 to 316. In 2019, 22 sessions with 316 children in attendance were held, a 54% increase in demand. “Baby Bounce” attendance increased from 160 babies and 125 adults to 238 babies and 222 adults. Since 2012, school holiday programs increased from 4 sessions with 97 children to 17 sessions with 610 children attending.

 

The current children’s area allows no room for growth and continues to place a constraint on the number of programs and services the Busselton Library is able to provide to the community. Workspace for library staff remains extremely overcrowded and noisy with staff having to share desks and teams are split up, resulting in inefficiencies. Inadequate storage space and work preparation areas negatively impacts workflows.

 

During the detailed design phase, it was identified that the allocated project budget would be insufficient to provide a facility to meet current and future staff and public needs.  For this reason the scope of works were split into two stages:

 

·    Stage 1 works provides for future staffing requirements, with a reduced children’s area.

 

·    Stage 2 works provides for both current and future needs for staff and families, including improvements to the children’s area.

 

The City sought tenders via a Request for Tender (RFT) process for RFT 02-20 Busselton Library Upgrade, in March 2020. Three (3) tender submissions were received from tenderers outside of the Busselton area.

 

In the meantime the City, in accordance with Regulation 24AB Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996, established a panel of pre-qualified suppliers for supplying building/construction services to the City (PQS03/20).  The Successful Contractor is a preferred supplier under that panel.  In an attempt to offer the works to a local Contractor during the COVID-19 climate, and to obtain a more affordable offer for the City, the decision was made to re-advertise via the Pre-Qualified Supplier panel PQS 03-20.

 

This report includes information pertaining to evaluation of RFQ 22-20.

OFFICER COMMENT

Assessment Process

The City issued the RFQ by upload to Vendorpanel and received a total of 3 submissions as follows:

1.              Company

·  B & F Ryan (WA) Pty Ltd T/A Ben Ryan Building

·  Devlyn Australia Pty Ltd

·  Pindan Projects Pty Ltd

 

In accordance with the City’s procurement practices and procedures, assessments were carried out by an evaluation panel comprising City officers with relevant skills and experience.

 

The assessment process included:

·    Assessing submissions received against relevant compliance criteria. The compliance criteria were not point scored. Each submission was assessed on a Yes/No basis as to whether each criterion was satisfactorily met. All tenders were deemed compliant.

·    Assessing submissions received against the Qualitative Criteria and each Criteria was given a score in accordance with the rating scale detailed below.

 

Qualitative Criteria

Weighting

(a)

Relevant Experience

20%

(b)

Local Benefit

5%

(c)

Key Personnel Skills and Experience

10%

(d)

Demonstrated Understanding

25%

 

Summary of Assessment Outcomes

Of the three (3) compliant submissions received for RFQ 22-20, Devlyn Australia Pty Ltd ranked first (1st) on the Qualitative Criteria and ranked first (1st) in the Weighted Cost Criteria, providing a well-documented and detailed submission.

 

This decision is based on the following:

·      All three (3) submissions received were processed through to qualitative criteria assessment on the basis that all terms and conditions and mandatory requirements of the RFQ had been met.  

·      The submissions were scored according to the qualitative criterion outlined above.

·      The net price was scored using the ‘Average Based Scoring Method’ recommended by WALGA in the ‘Local Government Purchasing and Tender Guide’.

·      The panel members individually assessed the qualitative criteria for each schedule, then met and applied an average to provide a final ranking. The scores were then added together to indicate the rankings.

In order to achieve a design that caters for current and future staff and public needs, proceeding with Stage 1 & 2 works is the preferred outcome.

Statutory Environment

In terms of section 3.57 of the Local Government Act 1995 WA (Act), a local government is required to invite tenders before it enters into a contract of a prescribed kind under which another person is to supply goods and services to the local government. Part 4 of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 (Regulations):

•     Requires that, unless  an exception applies, tenders be publicly invited for such contracts where the cost of providing the required goods and/or service is in excess of (or is reasonably expected to exceed) $250,000 [Regulation 11(1)]; and

•     Stipulates that tenders do not have to be publicly invited if the goods or services are to be supplied by a pre-qualified supplier [Regulation 11(2)(k)].

In accordance with Regulation 24AB, the City established a panel of pre-qualified suppliers to supply building/construction services to the City over the term of the panel (PQS 03/20). The term of PQS 03/20 commenced on 20 April 2020 and, subject to the City’s right to early termination, is as follows:

·    Initial term: Three (3) years from the commencement date.

·    Further term: Two (2) further terms of twelve (12) months each to be extended at the City’s option.

The recommended supplier, Devlyn Australia Pty Ltd, has been duly accepted as a preferred supplier under PQS 03/20.

 

With regard to RFQ 22-20, City officers have complied with the relevant legislative requirements.

Relevant Plans and Policies

The City's purchasing policies and its occupational health and safety, asset management and engineering technical standards and specifications were all relevant to the RFQ, and have been adhered to in the process of requesting and evaluating responses.

Financial Implications

The project is funded in the draft capital works budget 2020-21 with $603,000 allocated for the Busselton Library Upgrade, sourced from a combination of the Busselton Library Reserve, New Infrastructure Development Reserve and Buildings Asset Renewal Reserve as outlined below:

Budget summary: Draft Capital Works Budget 2020-21

Reserve

Budget Allocation

Busselton Library (407)

$100,000.00

New Infrastructure Development (127)

$223,000.00

Buildings Asset Renewal (106)

$280,000.00

Total

$603,000.00

 

Project Budget Allocation

The estimated total value of the project over the full contract term is:

Item

Budget allocation

Stage 1 and 2 works (Contract value)

$544,700.20

Landscape, external works and fit-out (by City)

$58,299.80

Total

$603,000.00

 


 

Stakeholder Consultation

No external stakeholder consultation outside of the RFQ process 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 assessment framework, with the intention being to identify risks which, following implementation of controls, are identified as medium or greater. There are no such risks identified, with the preferred tenderer assessed as being capable of delivering the services to a suitable service level and in line with the agreed cleaning schedule.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that Council accept the quotation of Devlyn Australia Pty Ltd as the most advantageous to the City, subject to minor variations to be negotiated by the CEO, not exceeding $544,700.20.  In relation to RFT 02-20, the City will decline all tenders. 

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Negotiations with the Successful Contractor will commence immediately after Council has endorsed the Officer Recommendation, with a contract entered into in accordance with the Officer Recommendation within two weeks.

  


Council                                                                                      199                                                                    10 June 2020

15.             Community and Commercial Services Report

15.1           APPOINTMENT OF ELECTED MEMBER TO BUSSELTON JETTY REFERENCE GROUP

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

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

SUBJECT INDEX

Council Committees

BUSINESS UNIT

Community and Commercial Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Director, Community and Commercial Services - Naomi Searle

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

Nil

 

COUNCIL DECISION AND OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

C2006/052              Moved Councillor J Barrett-Lennard, seconded Councillor P Carter

 

That the Council:

1.    notes the resignation of Cr Riccelli as a member of the Busselton Jetty Reference Group;

2.    appoints Cr Grant Henley as Member of the Busselton Jetty Reference Group; and

3.    requests the Chief Executive Officer to develop a Terms of Reference for the Busselton Jetty Reference Group.

CARRIED 9/0

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council is required to appoint an Elected Member to the Busselton Jetty Reference Group following advice Cr Riccelli has relinquished her membership.

 

BACKGROUND

The Council currently has six Council committees established under the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act), one established under the Emergency Management Act WA 2005 and one established under the Bush Fires Act 1954.  The Council has also over the years formed many working groups to assist with progressing various initiatives and is additionally represented on a number of local community committees and working groups. 

 

The Busselton Jetty Reference Group (BJRG) is a working group and was established as a forum for discussion on jetty related matters, specifically in relation to the Busselton Jetty licence agreement between the City and the Busselton Jetty Inc. (BJI).  As a working group, the BJRG is not able to make recommendations direct to Council, but works with City officers, led by the CEO (or his delegate), in support of decision making and the formulation of recommendations to Council where required.

 

At the Special Meeting of Council held on 21 October 2020, Council resolved (C1910/201) to appoint the following Elected Members to the BJRG:

i.              Members: Cr Cronin, Cr Riccelli

ii.             Deputies: 1. Cr Miles, 2. Cr Carter.

OFFICER COMMENT

On 28 May 2020, Cr Riccelli tendered her resignation from BJRG and as such the vacancy now requires filling.

Statutory Environment

The Officer Recommendation supports the general function of a local government under the Local Government Act 1995 to provide for the good government of persons in its district.

 

While BJRG is a non-statutory working group, with a current vacancy Council must consider the future membership of the BJRG.

 

Relevant Plans and Policies

Appointing members of the Council to Committees is subject to the requirements of Council Policy - Swearing in of Elected Members.

 

In accordance with Council Policy - Fees, Allowances and Expenses for Elected Members, Elected Members are entitled to be paid a travelling allowance for attending meetings of community groups or other external organisations of which the Elected Member has been appointed as the Council's representative.

Financial Implications

There are no specific financial implications associated with the appointment of members to Committees/groups as the costs associated with attendance at these Committees/groups have been recognised in the current budget.

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 determine that it requires more or less members on the BJRG.

CONCLUSION

The appointment of members to all Council Committees and working groups is normally made at the Special Council Meeting immediately following the Council election. However, with a resignation from the BJRG, Council is required to formally elect a new member(s).

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Membership of BJRG will become effective upon being elected.  


Council                                                                                      205                                                                    10 June 2020

ITEMS FOR DEBATE

16.2           SCHEDULE OF FEES & CHARGES - 2020/21 FINANCIAL YEAR

STRATEGIC GOAL

6. LEADERSHIP Visionary, collaborative, accountable

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

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

SUBJECT INDEX

Financial Management: Financial Operations

BUSINESS UNIT

Finance and Corporate Services

REPORTING OFFICER

Finance Coordinator - Jeffrey Corker

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

Absolute Majority

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment a   Draft Schedule of Fees and Charges - 2020/21  

 

Cr Carter foreshadowed an amended recommendation prior to the meeting. In accordance with the City’s Standing Orders Local Law 2018, the amended recommendation was moved prior to the Officer Recommendation, which was:

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

That the Council endorses the Fees and Charges as detailed in the “Schedule of Fees and Charges - 2020/21” as per Attachment A – Draft Schedule of Fees and Charges, effective from and including 1 July 2020.

 

COUNCIL DECISION AND AMENDED RECOMMENDATION

C2006/053              Moved Councillor P Carter, seconded Councillor L Miles

 

That the Council endorses the Fees and Charges as detailed in the “Schedule of Fees and Charges - 2020/21” as per Attachment A – Draft Schedule of Fees and Charges, effective from and including 1 July 2020, with the following amendments to Attachment A “Schedule of Fees and Charges”:

a.       inclusion under the heading ‘Busselton Jetty Entry Fees’ on Page 24 of a new fee “Resident & Ratepayers Annual Jetty Pass” of $4 per annum; and

b.      an amendment to page 15 ‘Fee on Rejected Payments’ to delete the words “plus Any / All Financial Institution Fees Incurred”.

CARRIED 9/0

BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY

 

Reasons:              Recommendation part (a)

Through briefings received from Busselton Jetty and feedback received from community members, many residents and ratepayers object to paying to walk on the Busselton Jetty on the basis that (rightly or wrongly) they are already paying for the Jetty through their rates.

 

Based on Busselton Jetty figures the opportunity cost in loss of income to Busselton Jetty, and the resulting reduction in licence fee that is paid to the City (and allocated to the Busselton Jetty Reserve) will be relatively minor.

 

 

The estimated loss of income from Ratepayer Walk Tickets of $5,316.36 (ex GST) plus the loss of income from Annual Walk Pass Tickets of $4,494.54 (ex GST) will total $9,810.90 (exc. GST).  The impact on the City of the loss of 25% of this amount would equate to $2,452.73 shortfall in allocations to the Busselton Jetty Reserve.

 

I believe the cost to the City of Busselton in loss of licence fee income may well be offset by an increase in licence fee revenue due to an anticipated increase in visitation by friends and family of local residents and ratepayers.

 

It is anticipated that an Annual Jetty Pass for residents and ratepayers will:

·         increase ratepayer and resident visitation to the jetty;

·         encourage ratepayers and residents to visit the jetty with friends and relatives who will then pay the entry fee; and

·         be an act of goodwill to the local community, and support visitation to any new and expanded operations on the Busselton Jetty.

 

Recommendation part (b)

The amendment is recommended so that the amount of $25.00 is inclusive of any financial institution fees incurred.  The amount of $25.00 plus a Direct Debit option dishonour fee of $10.00 would be an excessive charge and it is suggested that the $25.00 fee, inclusive of any financial institution fees incurred, would be a more appropriate figure.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In accordance with Regulation 5(2) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations, a local government is to undertake a review of its fees and charges regularly, and not less than once in every financial year. This report provides Council with a recommended Schedule of Fees and Charges to apply for the financial year commencing on 1 July 2020.

 

BACKGROUND

Section 6.16 of the Local Government Act (the Act) states that a local government may impose and recover a fee or charge for any goods or services it provides or proposes to provide, other than a service for which a service charge is imposed.

 

Section 6.17 of the Act further states that in determining the amount of a fee or charge for goods and services, a local government is to take in to consideration the following factors:

a)         The cost to the local government of providing the service or goods;

b)        The importance of the service or goods to the community; and

c)         The price at which the service or goods could be provided by an alternative provider. 

Section 6.18 of the Act clarifies that if the amount of any fee or charge is determined under another written law, then a local government may not charge a fee that is inconsistent with that law.

 

The above matters have been considered as part of the annual fees and charges review and the fees and charges recommended are in accordance with recent planning and discussions relating to the City’s Long Term Financial Plan. 

 


 

Finally, whilst Section 6.16(3) of the Act states that a schedule of fees and charges is to be adopted by the Council when adopting the annual budget, fees and charges may also be imposed during a financial year. In order for the 2020/21 schedule of fees and charges to be effective from the commencement of the new financial year, the Council is required to adopt its schedule in advance of 30 June 2020, such that any statutory public notice periods (including gazettals where required) can be complied with.

 

OFFICER COMMENT

The 2020/21 Draft Schedule of Fees and Charges has been guided by a NIL general escalation over currently adopted fees and charges. Accordingly, there has been NO increase applied generally. This methodology is in response to the impact of COVID-19 upon our local community. 

Notwithstanding this however, in some limited instances this principle is not appropriate, with other factors also requiring consideration. The following provides an overview, by Directorate, of noteworthy instances where the extrapolation has not been utilised, whilst also discussing, where relevant, newly proposed fees and charges.

Planning and Development Services

Health Related Fees

·    Water Sampling Fees

A new fee has been added for “Overdue service fee – correspondence”.

Ranger & Fire Service Related Fees

·    Beach Shelter and Other Impounded Goods

The heading has been altered to reflect that Shelters and structures are not the only items a Ranger may impound on the beach. This is further supported by the introduction of a fee for “Other Impounded Goods” which will include items such as camping equipment, pushbikes or other personal effects.

 

·    Ranger & Fire Services - Miscellaneous

A daily charge for temporary parking has been included in addition to the previous application fee, as some contractor works can take up to 10 days. The Annual Permit for beach etc. access has been deleted, leaving the 3 year permits only.

Engineering & Works Services

Waste Disposal and Sanitation Fees

·    General

The terminology of a large number of fees have been modified to make it less ambiguous for both the client as well as the gatekeeper administering the fee or charge.

 

·    Domestic Waste (Busselton and Dunsborough)

Other Miscellaneous Charges

A number of fees have been restructured to provide further clarity to the site gatekeeper. For example the fees for the disposal of tyres has been split into whether or not the tyre is still attached to its rim. The fees to dispose of animal carcasses have been split into domestic and commercial origins, with domestic origins having been reviewed downwards.

          

·    Busselton non-residential or weighbridge unavailable

Miscellaneous Commercial Charges

 

The fees to dispose of animal carcasses have been split into domestic and commercial origins. Fees in the Commercial category are similar or less than the fees listed generally last year.

Finance & Corporate Services

Rates & Finance Charges

·    Rates / property Related Matters

New Instalment Option Administration Fees have been introduced in alignment with the new rates payment options being offered in 2020/21.

Hire Facilities – All

·    General

A trial is to be conducted of online booking platform “SpacetoCo” over a number of Council facilities. Alterations to the booking structure of these facilities are required to meet the capabilities of the booking platform.

 

·    Facility Hire Bonds

Terminology has been added to the bond descriptions to provide risk category descriptions.

 

·    Miscellaneous Facility fees

The Cancellation fee has been increased from 10% of the venue hire to 30% to align with other Councils and make the exercise worth the resource cost.

 

·    High Street Hall

Booking structure altered for online booking trial.

 

·    Undalup Room

Booking structure altered for online booking trial. It has been heavily simplified to a basic hourly charge in three usage categories for weekdays and weekends with a minimum four hour charge. The charge to hire the Dance Floor has been increased as the fee did not adequately cover the resources required.

 

·    Busselton Community Resource Centre

Booking structure altered for online booking trial. It has been heavily simplified to a basic hourly charge for each room for weekdays and weekends with a minimum two hour charge.

 

·    Busselton Youth and Community Activity Building

Booking structure altered for online booking trial. It has been heavily simplified to a basic hourly charge for each room for weekdays and weekends with a minimum two hour charge.

Community & Commercial Services

Events – Equipment Hire & Signage

·    Hire of Grandstands

New charges have been introduced for the hire of the portable grandstand seating units.

Naturaliste Community Centre

·    Multi-Purpose Activity Room (Half)

The use of the projector and screen now forms part of the room hire so the fee has been discontinued.

 

·    Family Activity Centre

The “Community per hour” rate is for the hire of the Crèche and in the past has been very low in comparison to other hire charges at the NCC for the community. The proposed increase reflects a more equitable comparison to other hired areas of the centre.

 

 

 

·    Kitchen Servery Area

The single booking fee structure has been discontinued due to the lack of bookings. The Commercial is increased as currently undercharging compared to other similar operators.

 

·    Vacation Care

Compared to other local providers the NCC is much cheaper. It is recommended to increase by 10% to maximise revenue whilst also maintaining affordability for families.

Geographe Leisure Centre

·    Vacation Care

Compared to other local providers the GLC is much cheaper. It is recommended to increase by 10% to maximise revenue whilst also maintaining affordability for families.

ArtGeo Cultural Complex

·    Complex Hire and Bonds General

Fees have been reordered to group together separate facility hire related charges, exhibition hire related charges and commission rates. The number of separate charges has been reduced and hire fees changed to hourly rates. The Facility Hire Bond and Cancellation Fee are to be removed as they are listed in other schedules. Studio, Fodder Room and Bond Store fees aligned to the same hourly rate. Costs for event hire and exhibition separated and the Old Courtroom hire fees have been deleted as this is now the retail space. The bond store including the Marine Terrace Garden has been added as event space hire rate.

 

Statutory Environment

Sections 6.16 to 6.19 of the Act refer to the imposition, setting the level of, and associated administrative matters pertaining to fees and charges. The requirement to review fees and charges on an annual basis is detailed within Regulation 5 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations.

Relevant Plans and Policies

There are no relevant plans or policies to consider in relation to this matter, other than the Long Term Financial Plan which is discussed in the subsequent Financial Implications section.

 

Financial Implications

Whilst fees and charges revenue includes items that the Council has no authority to amend (Statutory Charges set by external bodies), it is important that, where possible, controllable fees and charges are appropriately indexed on an annual basis, to assist in offsetting the increasing costs of providing associated services. This may include increases beyond normal indexation in particular cases in line with Section 6.17 of the Act.

The Council’s currently endorsed Long Term Financial Plan reflected an annual increase in Fees and Charges revenue of 2.0%. However, in light of the impact of COVID-19 upon our community, a general increase has not been recommended. This will be reflected in the 2020/21 budget and included in future Long Term Financial Plan revision and development.

Stakeholder Consultation

Business Unit Managers are responsible for reviewing fees and charges associated with activities under their control. As part of the review process, consultation may occur with other local government authorities, in addition to a review of prices offered by alternate service providers (pursuant to Section 6.17 of the Act).

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

Council may determine to recommend amendments to the Draft Schedule of Fees and Charges as it deems appropriate.

CONCLUSION

As part of the annual fees and charges review, the currently adopted fees and charges have been reviewed in line with the requirements of the Local Government Act and other relevant legislation as applicable.

 

Consequently, it is recommended that Council endorses the draft Schedule of Fees and Charges for 2020/21 as proposed, for subsequent consideration by the Council.

TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Consequent to adoption by the Council, the Schedule of Fees and Charges for 2020/21 will become effective from and including 1 July 2020.


Council

228

10 June 2020

16.2

Attachment a

Draft Schedule of Fees and Charges - 2020/21

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council                                                                                      242                                                                    10 June 2020

13.             Planning and Development Services Report

Nil


Council                                                                                      243                                                                    10 June 2020

18.             Motions of which Previous Notice has been Given

Nil  

 

19.             urgent business

Nil

 

20.             Confidential Reports  

Nil

 

21.             Closure

The Presiding Member closed the meeting at 5.49pm.

 

 

 

 

 

THESE MINUTES CONSISTING OF PAGES 1 TO 243 WERE CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD ON Wednesday, 24 June 2020.

 

 

DATE:_________________  PRESIDING MEMBER:         _________________________