M I N U T E S · The organisational review which commenced in late 2011, Council’s review of road...

Our Vision:Connected - Sustainable - Creative

M I N U T E S

Extraordinary Meeting

Wednesday 19 February, 2014

Bellingen Council Chambers

Commencing 9.00 am

BELLINGEN SHIRE COUNCIL – MINUTES - EXTRAORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 19 FEBRUARY, 2014

of 37

MINUTES: Extraordinary Meeting of Council held in the Council Chambers, Bellingenon Wednesday 19 February commencing at 9.02am.

PRESENT: Councillors Garry Carter, Steve Klipin, Gordon Manning, Domin ic King,Desmae Harrison and Mark Troy (Mayor).

IN ATTENDANCE: Liz Jeremy, General Manager, Michelle McFadyen, Deputy GeneralManager Corporate and Community, Stephen Taylor, Deputy General Manager Operations,Mr Kris Kershaw, Accountant and Symone Williams.

1. APOLOGIES

01.002/14RESOLVED (Cr Klipin/Cr Carter)That an apology be received for Cr David Scott.

UNANIMOUS

2. DECLARATION OF INTEREST

NIL

3. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

NIL

4. MATTERS ARISING

NIL


of 37

A G E N D A

1 APOLOGIES2 DECLARATION OF PECUNIARY AND NON-PECUNIARY INTEREST3 MINUTES

NIL

4 PUBLIC ACCESS/PRESENTATIONS ........................................................................... 45 MAYORAL MINUTE....................................................................................................... 46 NOTICE OF MOTIONS .................................................................................................. 47 REPORTS BY GENERAL MANAGER........................................................................... 57.1 INTEGRATED PLANNING AND REPORTING DOCUMENTATION – SPECIAL RATE VARIATION........................... 5

8 REPORTS BY DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER OPERATIONS ................................. 369 REPORTS BY DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY... 3610 MINUTES FROM ADVISORY COMMITTEES .............................................................. 3611 CORRESPONDENCE .................................................................................................. 3612 AUTHORITY TO AFFIX THE COMMON SEAL OF COUNCIL FOR ITEMS NOT

INCLUDED IN REPORTS ............................................................................................ 3613 ITEMS FOR INFORMATION........................................................................................ 3614 MATTERS OF AN URGENT NATURE......................................................................... 3615 QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE ........................................................................................ 3616 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.................................................................................... 3617 REPORT ATTACHMENTS........................................................................................... 37


of 37

4 PUBLIC ACCESS/PRESENTATIONS

There were no public access or presentations requested at the time of preparation ofthis Agenda.

5 MAYORAL MINUTE

There are no Mayoral Minutes for this meeting.

6 NOTICE OF MOTIONS

There were no Notices of Motions received at the time of preparation of this Agenda.


of 37

7 REPORTS BY GENERAL MANAGER

7.1 INTEGRATED PLANNING AND REPORTING DOCUMENTATION – SPECIALRATE VARIATION

File/Index: Special Rate Variation/Integrated Planning and ReportingAuthor: Liz Jeremy, General Manager

Anton Juodvalkis, Acting Deputy General Manager Corporate andCommunityStephen Taylor, Deputy General Manager Operations

REPORT SUMMARY:

Council resolved in November 2013 to engage with the community with regard to the backlogfor transport infrastructure. Following community engagement on the issue, Council resolved inJanuary 2014 to adopt draft Integrated Planning and Reporting documents which contain theoptions for a 2.3% and 11.8% general rate increase and to carry out a further round ofcommunity engagement around these two options.

The draft Integrated Planning and Reporting (IP&R) documents (Long Term Financial Plan(LTFP), Delivery Program (DP) and Revenue Policy (RP)) and other documents also relevant tothe SRV (Town Rating Maps) were placed on public exhibition from Wednesday 15 January2014 to Tuesday 11 February 2014 and public submissions on the documents invited.

This report considers community submissions received regarding those documents and on theSpecial Rate Variation (SRV) proposal generally. Revised versions of the documents areattached. The report also makes recommendations that Council adopt the revised documentsand submit an application to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) for apermanent Special Rate Variation of 11.8% in accordance with Section 508(2) of the NSWLocal Government Act 1993.

REPORT DETAIL:

Background

On 11 November 2013 Council considered a report which outlined a gap between therequirements to renew Council’s transport infrastructure and Council’s capacity to finance thatrenewal. The report outlined information from:

The Independent Local Government Review Panel,T-Corp’s review of Council’s financial position and outlook,The NSW Local Government Infrastructure report,The organisational review which commenced in late 2011,Council’s review of road and bridge infrastructure ,Council’s financial position,The capacity to pay of our community,The impact of any rate variation on ratepayers,Priority capital works which would be enabled by an a Special Rate Variation (SRV),The SRV and Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme (LIRS) process, andA proposed community engagement strategy.


of 37

As a consequence, Council resolved as follows:

An intensive series of engagement initiatives during November and December 2013 providedour community with further detailed information on the current and expected future condition ofCouncil’s transport (road and bridge) infrastructure and on Council’s financial position andoutlook. Input was sought from the Community with respect to:

The Community’s views on the matter Possible solutions to rectify the infrastructure backlog, and Feedback on proposed options, including future efficiency measures and four revenue

proposals.

The results of the community engagement process were reported to Council on 13 January2014.

The January 2014 Council report and associated planning documents incorporated extensivedetail on:

Community needs, views and priorities, Achievements in productivity and efficiency improvements, Cost containment strategies, Revenue sources for Council, Alternative funding options, What can be achieved in road and bridge works for each of the rate scenarios, Community support for a Special Rate Variation, and The community’s capacity to pay, and the affordability of rate increases.

At a high level the community feedback indicated that there is acceptance of the need for roadand bridge infrastructure work, that some increase is justified, but that Council should enablesome of the work on roads and bridges through improved efficiency, cost cutting and resultantredirection of revenue/expenditure. As a result, the report considered by Council specificallyaddressed future improvement initiatives and committed to presenting opportunities forefficiencies and cost savings of at least $150,000 per annum for three years.

The report also committed Council to a high level of transparency and accountability foroutcomes for revenue from a SRV, specifically an Enablement Plan that would include:

Short and long term works programs Milestones Delivery process

07.016/13RESOLVED (Cr Scott/Cr Klipin)

1. That Council resolves to notify IPART of its intention to lodge an application for a specialrate variation

2. That Council resolves to commence community engagement and IPR processes(Delivery Program, Long Term Financial Plan, Revenue Policy revision) to support thespecial rate variation application through provision of four scenarios these being 1) arate peg of estimated 2.4%, 2) 8.4%, 3) 11.90% and 4) 17.4%.

3. That Council resolve to apply for Local Infrastructure Renewal Scheme (LIRS) funding,with this application subject to special rate variation approval

4. That Council write to the Division of Local Government highlighting issues with timing ofdeterminations relating to SRV and LIRS applications (June and May 2014 respectively).

UNANIMOUS


of 37

Indicators Reporting processes

As a result of considering the report, Council resolved as follows:

Public exhibition of the draft IP&R documents inclusive of the two options, including one toaddress the asset backlog commenced on 15 January 2014 with written submissions accepteduntil 11 February 2014.

Alterations to documents as a result of engagement

A total of 19 submissions were received. A detailed response to each of the submissions madeis provided in the engagement section of this report.

Set out below are the specific amendments to the Integrated Planning and Reportingdocuments.

Revenue Policy

Two submissions (Respondents 7 and 13) were received in relation to ratings categories.As a consequence, the following explanation of the rating categories has been included in theamended Revenue Policy:

1. Rating Structure and Categories (page 5)

“The objective of the NSW Local Government Act 1993 with regard to rating is to providea system of local taxation, based on the fair imposition of rates levied on property, whichis simple, fair, broadly uniform, and which promotes local accountability. Rates, as a taxhas no direct requirement that Council returns an equivalent amount of direct service toan individual ratepayer. However Council does endeavour to develop a rating structurethat is equitable to all ratepayers within our local government area.

Due to the diversity of Bellingen Shire Council local government area, land values varysignificantly from the seaboard, valleys to plateau. In order to achieve an equitable ratebase, where rates are distributed fairly over properties with similar characteristics, it isnecessary to sub-categorise the various localities. If the rate structure were simplified toonly have one residential rate and one business rate category applied to all propertieswithin BSC, land owners on the seaboard would effectively be subsidising land ownerson the plateau where land values remain lower.

07/001/14RESOLVED (Cr Klipin/Cr Troy)

1. That Council adopt the draft Long Term Financial Plan that includes options for a 2.3%and an 11.8% general rate increase

2. That Council adopt the draft Delivery Program that includes options for a 2.3% and an11.8% general rate increase

3. That Council adopt the draft Revenue Policy that includes options for a 2.3% and an11.8% general rate increase

4. That Council adopt the draft town boundaries as they relate to rating categories5. That these documents be publicly exhibited for 28 days6. That any submissions be considered by Council at its Extraordinary General Meeting

to be held on 19 February 2014, prior to adoption of final documents.

FOR: Cr Harrison, Cr Manning, Cr Klipin, Cr TroyAGAINST: Cr Scott, Cr Carter


of 37

A comparison of average lands value by locality is provided below:

Bellingen 201,422Dorrigo 101,317Mylestom 230,410Urunga 246,6201

Where a general re-valuation occurs, every three years, thorough analysis is undertakenon the change in land values and impact across all categories and sub-categories. Due tothese changes it is not possible to ascertain the rate structure Council will adopt in2023/2024.

Regardless of the rate structure adopted by Council, rate revenue is capped by ratepegging.”

2. Pro rating of Charges

In addition as part of overall stakeholder engagement, a further review of the revenuepolicy was undertaken to include pro-rating of charges as follows:

ANNUAL CHARGES - WATER SUPPLY SERVICES (page 11)Assessments that are connected to Council’s water main during the year will becharged at a pro rata rate based on the full year annual charge for each meterconnected.

ANNUAL CHARGES - DOMESTIC WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICES (page 18)Properties/occupancies that commence a domestic waste service during the year willbe charged at a pro rata rate based on the full year annual charge for each serviceprovided. For example, a property/occupancy with one existing service and oneservice added during the year would be charged one full year annual charge and onepro rata charge based on the number of days the second service is available.

ANNUAL CHARGES - COMMERCIAL WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICES(page 19)Properties that commence a commercial waste service during the year will becharged at a pro rata rate based on the full year annual charge for each serviceprovided. For example, a property with one existing service and one service addedduring the year would be charged one full year annual charge and one pro ratacharge based on the number of days the second service is available.

Delivery Program

No submissions were received on the Delivery Program. A minor typographic error on page 4 isthe only change from the draft.

Town Boundaries

No submissions were received in relation to town boundaries.

1 Source: Rateable revaluations from the NSW Valuer-General


of 37

Long Term Financial Plan

1. Affordability

As a consequence of engagement with stakeholders, additional information has beenincluded in Council’s Long Term Financial plan around affordability (page 13) as follows.“As indicated above, Bellingen Shire’s SEIFA2 index indicates a capacity to pay that ishigher than average for the Mid North Coast Region of councils. Household income dataindicates that incomes are more concentrated around middle income levels ($600 -$2,500 per week) in comparison to other councils in the Mid North Coast Region ofcouncils. The data indicates that the proportion of low income households in the BellingenShire is lower than the Mid North Coast Region of councils.

Additionally, comparative rating data (2010/11) indicates similar rating averages to itsneighbouring councils (with the exception of Taree LGA). It should be noted that a numberof those councils have received Special Rate Variation increases since that time.

A comparison using Australian Bureau of Statistics data was undertaken against similarmeasures, i.e. utility costs, residential rates and charges in Australian capital cites(average), and as a contribution to household expenditure. The comparison indicates thatthe prosed SRV of 11.8% had a cumulative 3 year increase of 14.13% that comparedfavourably with projected increases for utilities of 22.1%.

The 3 year cumulative increase of 14.13% due to the SRV also compared favourably withthe Australian capital cities average projected increase of 20.2% for residential rates andcharges.

With regard to household expenditure, it has been calculated that the SRV contribution tohousehold expenditure is, on average, an increase of 0.1%.

In summary, the foregoing analysis draws favourable conclusions about the Community’scapacity to pay and that a Special Rate Variation of 11.8% is affordable by the communitygenerally.”

2. Long Term Financial Plan Amendments

The Long Term Financial Plan contained some transposition errors which resulted infigures appearing on incorrect expenditure lines, for example some materials andcontracts were incorrectly allocated to employee benefits and on-costs.

2 Socio-Economic Indexes for the Areas (SEIFA)


of 37

The errors were subject to an enquiry from a member of the community and routinechecking. This enquiry is outlined in the engagement section of this report. As aconsequence the errors have been reviewed and corrected by Council’s Finance Managerwho has advised that there was no impact on the overall budget and the impact onCouncil’s financial ratios was not significant.

The Long Term Financial Plan has now been amended. Details of the impact on financialratios are included in Attachment J.

Governance Framework

The report to Council of 10 January 2014 foreshadowed the development of a worksenablement plan as well as a program identifying cost savings. Within the context of an overallgovernance framework which is outlined below, two programs will be created:

Transport (Road and Bridge) Infrastructure Sustainability Program to implement the SRVrolling works program

A Financial Sustainability Program to realise benefits from efficiency, productivity, andcost containment initiatives across Council

Both programs will adopt a formal program management methodology with key processes for:

Management Control Benefits Management Financial Management Stakeholder Engagement Risk Management Organisational Governance Resource Management

Council will adopt a portfolio management approach (via the Executive Team) to managingthese and other programs through integration with, and enhancement of, Council’s existingIntegrated Planning and Reporting Framework.

To provide the requisite Council direction, oversight, and evaluation of the SRV works programthis report proposes the establishment of a new Council Sustainability Committee (withmembership to comprise the entire council). It is anticipated that the committee will meet on aquarterly cycle at the same time as the quarterly review of the Operational Plan. Once Councilendorses the establishment of this new committee a report to Council will be prepared toformally constitute the committee, outline its terms of reference, and formally establishmembership.

Additional strategic direction and oversight of specific programs that relate to financialsustainability, asset management and the transport infrastructure backlog, will be provided bythe Council Sustainability Committee.

Transport (Road and Bridge) Infrastructure Sustainability ProgramThe program’s enablement plan will incorporate:

Short and long term works programs Milestones Delivery process Indicators Reporting processes


of 37

A cross functional project team for the program has been established and is being led by theDeputy General Manager Operations. The 10 year rolling works program in the DeliveryProgram will form the basis for the long term works program, and the annual Operational Planwill incorporate detail on the shorter term works program.

The Delivery Program and Operational Plan have existing reporting periods and mechanismsthat will facilitate reporting to Council and community without duplicating effort. The OperationalPlan for works related to the SRV will incorporate expanded data points for key performanceindicators, goals (and progress), and milestones to satisfy the commitment to greatertransparency and accountability.

Council’s draft 2014-2015 Operational Plan, encompassing SRV related works, is beingdeveloped and will be presented to Council for consideration prior to the commencement of the2014/15 financial year.

Financial Sustainability ProgramThis program, which is a refinement of the Service Delivery Review Program initiated in 2013,by its nature will cross many organisational boundaries in achieving its vision to:

Identify, develop, assess, implement, and coordinate change initiatives across Councilrelating to efficiency, productivity and cost containment to improve service delivery andCouncil’s financial sustainability.

The program will incorporate a number of existing and new projects, such as:

Property portfolio rationalisation Overdue rates reduction Roads and Bridges Reviews projects initiation (reform programs) A Review of Council revenue sources including fees and charges New efficiency, productivity and cost containment initiative (a key ongoing activity)

Benefits of this program include:

Prioritisation and coherence of initiatives Focus on benefits realisation Integration with current Delivery Programming and Operational Planning Cross-divisional coordination Long term financial sustainability of Council

Goals for the program are in development, and currently include:

Goal 1: Identify saving of $150,000 per annum for three years Goal 2: Address Council’s operating deficit (long term)

SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT:

Activities and projects outlined in the DP are linked to the themes contained in the CommunityVision. The Community Vision has been built on the quadruple bottom line – that is, the pillarsof sustainability of economy, community, environment, and civic leadership. The plans willreinforce the imperative of the integration of sustainability into Council’s core business asoutlined in the DP.


of 37

ENGAGEMENT:Community engagement activities undertaken since November 2013 include the following:

Resident letter drop, Community forums in Dorrigo, Bellingen and Urunga, A combined Chambers of Commerce forum, An online self-completion survey, Availability of the self-completion survey in printed form for those unable to submit their

response electronically, Implementation of an online Council “Special Rate Variation Information Centre” that

included fact sheets, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ’s), press releases, communityforum presentations, links to feedback mechanisms, and other related documents. Theinformation detailed a broad range of matters regarding council operations, andproductivity and cost savings initiatives. In addition, information was also providedaround the proposed SRV, including the process, rationale and the impact on thevarious rating categories,

Various printed material, including fact sheets, was also made available at variouscouncil facilities across the shire including council’s administration centre and libraries,

Media releases, Media advertising, Mayoral mentions, Newspaper articles, Media reporting, Newsletter article to coincide with rates notice distribution in late January 2014, Public exhibition and relevant notifications for the LTFP, DP, RP and Town Rating Maps, Acceptance of public submissions.

Throughout the engagement process Council responded to community questions and enquriesthrough media releases and the development and dissemination of FAQ fact sheets.

Written Submissions

Nineteen formal submissions were received, and are summarised below, with responses(complete submissions are included at attachment G).

Note that submissions 1- 5 were received between 20 November 2013 and 15 December 2013via Council’s online “Have your say” facility in response to the first round of communityengagement. Unfortunately due to a technical issue with Council’s upstream web site provider,which was beyond the control of Council, these submissions were not available forincorporation in the January 2014 Council report. The delayed submissions are of a similarnature to the submissions reported in the January 2014 report and have been included in theconsideration of submissions in the current round of community engagement.

Further, Submission 6 was received in January 2014 in response to the first round ofcommunity engagement, but after close off for inclusion in the January 2014 report to Council. Italso has been included for information and consideration.


of 37

Issue ResponseRespondent 1

Objects to imposition of SRV onratepayers. No doubt Council will beapplying for maximum 2.4% rate risethe following year. Enough is enough.

Noted.

The cost for Council to deliver services to thecommunity rises each year due to price increases onitems such as wages and materials, and it would not bepossible for Council to continue to deliver the samelevel of service to the community without acorresponding increase in revenue.

Council’s Long Term Financial Plan revenueprojections incorporate future rate peg increases. Noapplication to IPART is required for annual applicationof the rate peg.

Respondent 2

Would like Council to make efforts tocut costs and reduce waste. Seems alot of money spent on managementand not enough on roads, bridges andimportant works. Raleigh works depotis a perfect example of waste.

Noted.

The January 2014 Council report outlined the extensivereform process that has been undertaken to date aswell as key outcomes.

As indicated in the body of this report Council willidentify opportunities for savings of $150,000 perannum for 3 years, with a further review to beconducted at that time) supported by an ongoingprogram of efficiency, productivity and costcontainment identification and implementation.

Further detail on the program and its governance isincluded in the section of this report entitledGovernance Framework.

Response to Respondent 12b provides additionalinformation in relation to the Raleigh Works Depot.

Respondent 3

As a pensioner the biggestcomponent of my annual expendituregoes on rates. Constant rate hikesare not the way to look after people ofthe shire.

Noted.

Council has a range assistance measures forpensioners and ratepayers experiencing financialhardship.

Pensioner concessions of up to $250 on rates, $87.50for water charges, and $87.50 for sewerage chargesare available.

Ratepayers experiencing financial hardship are able toapply for a regular payment agreement and write-off ofaccrued interest.

Council also accepts regular payment directly fromCentrelink payments via CentrePay.


of 37

Issue ResponseRespondent 4

Agrees an increase in ratesnecessary to maintain and extendinfrastructure. However, pleasepresent your case to ratepayers byusing a comparison with expenditureof similar sized businesses asBellingen Council.

Consider sealed off-road walkwaybetween Dorrigo township and theNational Park

Noted.

Service Delivery Reviews which are currentlyundertaken by Council and are further addressed in thesection of this report entitled Governance Frameworkincorporate benchmark comparisons (benchmark isdependent on the type of service being reviewed) indetermining service levels and cost structures.

The opportunity to construct a pathway between thetownship of Dorrigo and the National Park, andbetween Dorrigo and Dangar Falls has beencontemplated by Council on a number of occasions inthe past, including seeking funding. This matter wassubject to a report to Council in late 2012 in relation toa Regional Development Australia funding round.Council staff will continue to pursue grant opportunitiesfor this initiative.

Respondent 5

Fully support a rate increase, andunderstand the amount of work tolook after roads with a smallpopulation. Make sure extra revenueaccounted for and used on shireinfrastructure.

Noted.

Extra revenue from a Special Rate Variation will beheld in an externally restricted reserve for use on roadand bridge infrastructure. Council is developingcommunity reporting for the Special Rate Variationworks as part of the Governance Framework which isdetailed in this report.

Respondent 6

Opposes rises above the peg rateand the impact of additional rates willcause financial strain to many in theShire

Noted.

The Long Term Financial Plan provides an assessmentof the community’s capacity to pay.

Modelling suggests reseals andreconstruction are not directlyproportional to any proposed increasein income

Noted.

There are a number of existing funding sources forroad and bridge projects in addition to the proposedSRV. The program for 11.8% scenario allows for theexisting funding sources to fund road improvements,such as seal extension and urban road improvementsand well as major bridge replacements. Without theSRV these projects will need to be significantlyreduced as the existing funding will be required to fundreseals and reconstruction. Total project expendituresare more appropriate as a comparison between thescenarios rather than a specific element of theprogram.

Understands cost shifting but ratherthan raising rates and seeking fundsfrom ratepayers Council should becreative to improve financial situation,plus continue lobbying to havefunding reinstated.Some ways:

Noted.

See responses to respondents 7 and respondent 13.


of 37

Issue ResponseSell off non-core property assets,for example - Urunga shops,residential property, FundaClose, Youth Hub

Property portfolio review will commence in 2014 as acomponent of a Financial Sustainability Program torealise benefits from efficiency, productivity, and costcontainment initiatives across Council as outlined in thesection of this report entitled Governance Framework.

Charge for internet at libraries Council provides public internet access via anarrangement with the State Library of NSW. TheLibrary Act entitles any person to free access to anylibrary material (including information accessible via theinternet).

Become more efficient in roadand bridge maintenance, orconsider contracting work out

Council has carried out a service review regarding itsroads and bridges, the results of which will be reportedto Council Q2 2014. A Financial SustainabilityProgram to realise benefits from efficiency,productivity, and cost containment initiatives acrossCouncil is outlined in the section of this report entitledGovernance Framework.

Removable guide posts toprevent herbicide spraying andmake roadside slashing moreefficient

Referred to the Deputy General Manager Operationsfor consideration.

Become more energy efficient Council has a current Bellingen Emission ReductionProgram with a target of reducing Council’s emissionsto 40% of 1990 levels by 2020. Energy is a primarysource of Council’s emissions and many initiatives arebased on energy efficiency.

During 2012/13 Council was successful in receiving agrant for approximately $80,000 to implement energyefficiency projects across Council and communitybuildings to reduce energy consumption and thereforegreenhouse gas emissions.

Detailed energy audits have also been completedacross eight representative buildings and key energyefficiency opportunities have now been identified andare being actively pursued. These opportunities inpartnership with other business units in Council suchas Information Technology Services and Water &Sewer to implement upgrades such as virtualisation ofthe IT server, making improvements at our water andsewer facilities (which are Council’s largest energyconsumers) and implementing repairs to Council’scommunity buildings to improve energy efficiency.

In addition the Bellingen Emissions Reduction Programprogressed via upgrade of the variable speed drivepumps at Bellingen Treatment Plant, as well asinvestigating an upgrade of the IT sever to improveenergy efficiency.Other examples involve energy efficient lighting atCouncil’s depots, water treatment plants, sewerageplants and at Council’s libraries.


of 37

Issue ResponseReduce staff numbers whereverpossible

Council conducted an organisational review in 2012with regular reporting to Council during 2012 and 2013.Council reaffirmed its organisation structure inSeptember 2013. Further reviews are underway or areplanned in the areas of Planning and RegulatedServices, Finance, and Water and Waste Water.

Lobby other government agencies topay rates

Council has and will continue to make very strongrepresentations to other agencies on its own account,through Mid North Coast Region of Councils, andthrough Local Government NSW

Improve project management Council received certification against ISO 9001, AS4801 and AS/ISO14001 in 2013, which involved thedevelopment of a Works Integrated ManagementSystem which enables best practice projectmanagement.

Respondent 7

Sees merit in some form of SRV, butviews 11.8% as too much too soon

Noted.

Council considered 4 options for a Special RateVariation in its January 2014 report.

73% of respondents favouredincrease of 8.3% or less – ignoringthis view will only add to cynicismexpressed about function of Council

Noted.

When making its resolution, Council considered arange of factors which were outlined in the report of 13January 2014, including:The need and purpose of a SRV in relation to theinfrastructure works required to be undertaken, andcurrent financial forecastsCommunity feedback and sentimentThe community’s capacity to payThe impact on affected ratepayersThe proposed Delivery Program and Long TermFinancial PlanProductivity improvementsCost containment strategies

In particular the January 2014 report had regard to thefeedback from the community (which indicated that at ahigh level there is acceptance of the need for road andbridge infrastructure work, that some increase isjustified, but that Council should spend more money onroads and bridges through improved efficiency, costcutting and resultant redirection ofrevenue/expenditure). As a consequence Counciladopted the draft IP&R documents with the options fora 2.3% and an 11.8% general rate increase.

Council’s staffing increased 40% from2000/01 – 2011/12, populationincreased 5.5%, Council should focuson improving efficiency and reducingcosts, and over shorter time framethan provided in forward estimates

Noted.

Over the last decade there has been significantincrease in the transfer of service and regulatoryresponsibilities given to local government requiringcouncils to appropriately resource themselves for theseresponsibilities. This is referred to as "cost shifting".


of 37

Issue ResponseCost shifting describes a situation where theresponsibility for, or merely the costs of, providing acertain service, concession, asset or regulatoryfunction are "shifted" from a higher sphere ofgovernment on to a lower sphere of governmentwithout the provision of corresponding funding or theconferral of corresponding and adequate revenueraising capacity. This definition is based on thedefinition originally used in the survey undertaken forthe Independent Inquiry into the Financial Sustainabilityof NSW Local Government in 2006. Local GovernmentNSW carries out a cost shifting survey annually.

The following is an extract from the LGNSW Websiteas at 11 February 2014 in relation to the most recentsurvey:

“The survey results confirm that cost shifting continuesto place a significant burden on councils' financialsituation. Despite the recognition of cost shifting and itsadverse impacts on NSW Local Government, costshifting remains at a high level (around 6 per cent ofcouncils' total income before capital amounts).Contributions to the Fire and Rescue NSW, NSW RuralFire Services and NSW State Emergency Service, lackof adequate funding for public libraries and the failureto reimburse councils for mandatory pensioner rebatesare major examples. Furthermore, councils are notgiven sufficient financial resources for theirresponsibilities to assess development applications,regulate companion animals, manage contaminatedland, control noxious weed, manage flood controls, oradminister environmental regulation."

For rural councils the cost shifting percentage is 3.88%which for Bellingen equates to $1.085 million.

The above context is important when considering anyincrease in staffing levels at Council. Council recordsfrom the Financial Year ending 2004 up to the end ofthe Financial Year 2013 show an increase in Council'sFull Time Equivalent (FTE) staffing of approximately17.9%.

A couple of observations can be offered related toCouncil's staffing levels and the changes that haveoccurred over the last decade. For example, Bellingenhas 3 separate waste transfer stations along with 3library locations currently under its management.Additionally we have a number of positions that areexternally funded, including some 15 staff allocated tothe RMS Waterfall Way contract, 4 staff based at theDorrigo Support Centre dedicated to supporting variouscommunity and social groups in that location, and aRiver and Biodiversity position which is also externallyfunded. These functions or services are either notprovided for in other council structures or the service


of 37

Issue Responserequirements are different.

Council should target reduction inlabour, materials and contractingcosts, and other operating costs of1% per annum

Noted.

The section of this report entitled GovernanceFramework outlines an overall governance frameworkinclusive of the following programs:

A Road and Bridge Sustainability Program toimplement the SRV rolling works program

A Financial Sustainability Program to realisebenefits from efficiency, productivity, and costcontainment initiatives across Council

Council’s materials and contracting costs are higherthan many other similar councils on account ofCouncil’s contract with RMS and flood restorationworks all of which are funded externally.

Revenue that was allocated to roadsprior to 1996/97 (when 5% SpecialRoads Levy introduced) has beenallocated to other purposes,contributing to the backlog

Noted.

Council annually sets its budget based on its incomemix, including State and Federal grant arrangements,and priorities for its Operations and Works programs.

Proposes 8.4% increase, with reviewat end of 4 years

Noted.

Council considered a range of options at its meeting on13 January 2014.

Revenue Policy should explainreasons for various ratingscategories, differing ad valorem ratelevels, and continuing relevance.Existing complexity points to scopefor reform

The Revenue Policy has been updated to provide anexplanation of ratings categories. See the section ofthis report in reference to alterations to the RevenuePolicy.

Asset consumption has not beenmatched by assetreplacement/renewal. Diversion offunding away to recurrent expenditureitems. Community survey (2012)highlights the importance communityplaces on service assets.

Noted.

It is correct that asset consumption has not beenmatched by asset renewal. However, it is not correctthat resources were diverted away from keeping“capital stock intact towards recurrent expenditureitems”. The issue is that the required level of assetrenewal is greater than the available resources.

Additionally, costs for asset renewal have increaseddue to regulatory requirements – e.g. Workers’ Healthand Safety requirements.

The SRV proposal seeks to generate dedicated capitalfunds for transport infrastructure (roads and bridges) toaddress the backlog.


of 37

Issue ResponseCouncil should be open andtransparent with the community

Council should listen to thecommunity’s concerns

Council should act on the informationit receives

Noted.

Council is committed to community engagement and ithas expressed this commitment through theimplementation of a community engagement policy,strategy and toolkit. These documents are based onthe principles of the International Association for PublicParticipation.

Council will continue to refine and mature its executionagainst these documents and actively seek new waysin which to involve the community in planning anddecision making.

Council needs to reorder priorities toensure further backlogs developing,implying:A condition based asset managementframeworkRisk assessment and managementprocess

Noted.

Council has an asset management framework inclusiveof policy, strategy, and plans. The plans are routinelyreviewed over time to ensure currency.

Council’s revised Road Asset Management Plan(RAMP) (which will be submitted to IPART as part ofCouncil’s application in the event that Council resolvesto submit an application) has assessed the roadnetwork in a broad sense and indicates that thereneeds to be a greater emphasis on asset renewal asopposed to asset upgrades or improvements. TheRAMP also includes a broad risk assessment of thenetwork. On this basis the projects selected under theSRV focus on undertaking reseals and reconstructionon the existing network and reducing the risksassociated with bridge deficiencies.

Increased capital investment over time will allow areduction in the whole of life cost by facilitatingintervention at the appropriate points in the assetlifecycle. This will have the effect over the medium tolong term of moving expenditure from reactivemaintenance to proactive preventative maintenanceactivities.

Council should undertake to:Direct additional SRV revenue toroad, pathways and bridgesReport annually to IPART and thecommunity on progressReport annually on cost outcomescompared to projections in Council’sLTFP

Noted.

Extra revenue from a Special Rate Variation will beheld in an externally restricted reserve for use on roadand bridge infrastructure. Council is developingcommunity and agency reporting for the Special RateVariation works.


of 37

Respondent 8

The submission comprised a flyer andone page petition to the NSWGovernment.

Flyer:No to a rate rise, calls foradministration. Neglect ofinfrastructure and redirection of ratesto multimillion dollar investment fund.

Rates consumed by bureaucracy,acceptance of cost shifting, inability tolive within its means, redirection offunds.

Petition: to NSW Premier, DeputyPremier, Minister for LocalGovernment, IPART.

Noted.

This document, which is not addressed to councilappears to be incomplete in terms of signatures. Inaddition it was not formally submitted to Council.However it was provided to some Councillors at themeeting of 13 January 2014 and has been includedhere in the interests of completeness.

Respondent 9

Petition: Protest that rate rise isneither reasonable nor affordable forsingle recipients of the age pension ordisability pension. Rents will followthe rate rise and would create morehardship. We cannot afford yourproposal.

7 signatories

Noted.

Council has a range of assistance measures forratepayers experiencing financial hardship.

Pensioner concessions of up to $250 on rates, $87.50for water charges, and $87.50 for sewerage chargesare available.

Ratepayers experiencing financial hardship are able toapply for a regular payment agreement and write-off ofaccrued interest.

Council also accepts regular payment directly fromCentrelink payments via CentrePay.


of 37

Respondent 10

Hopes that Council will very seriouslyconsider not proceeding with theSRV. Have yet to find any person inDorrigo (excluding Councillors) infavour of the proposition.

The great majority find this proposal,in the present economic situation, tobe nothing short of 'kicking us whilewe are down'.

Gives two examples of small projectsthat are examples of financial wasteand unacceptable time frames, makesCouncil look unprofessional andaffects local business productivity.

We feel that the challenge for yourCouncil is not to pass on a furtherimpost to the community, but to findsavings & efficiencies within your ownbudget.

Noted

The savings and efficiency issues outlined in thissubmission are addressed in the section of this reportentitled Governance Framework.


of 37

Respondent 11

Running a Council is no different torunning a business or running yourhousehold budget. You have to livewithin your budget.I do not wish to pay another 12%.Too many office staff and not enoughout door workers who actually do thejob. Get rid of the surplus office staffand employ more out door staff andlive within your means. You shouldnot ask the rate payers to fix theproblem that the Council has created.Opposed to any increase in our ratesother than the normal increase.

Noted.

Council has undertaken an extensive process oforganisational review which has been progressivelyreported to Council.

The savings and efficiencies generated through thisprocess were canvassed in detail in the reportconsidered by Council on 13 January 2014.

This report also outlines a governance structure inrelation to the delivery of works as well as financialsustainability initiatives in the report section entitledGovernance Framework.

It should be noted that of the 68 indoor roles atCouncil, 60% (41) are roles that are directly involved inproviding services or support to our communityincluding:

Community planningAged and disability support via our Dorrigo SupportCentreLibrary staffYouth Centre managementVisitor Information ServicesEngineers and PlannersHealth and Building SurveyorsSustainability and Natural Resource ManagementEconomic & Business Development including sourcinggrant fundingFront office customer service staff

The remaining “indoor roles” (27) are primarily relatedto fulfilling Council’s regulatory and legislativerequirements such as the management and reportingof Council’s finances, the collection of rates, technicaland records management services, corporategovernance, procurement, human resources andworkplace health and safety.


of 37

Respondent 12.a

A number of questions were raisedthat are not directly related to theSRV or IP&R documents and will beaddressed separately to this report.The following questions are related tothe SRV/IP&R:

Can you give examples of recentcosts imposed on the council by theState government and not funded byit?

Noted.

Cost shifting was covered above in the response toRespondent 7.

The Cost Shifting Survey carried out by LGNSWlooked at 26 functional areas as follows:Contribution to NSW Fire BrigadeContribution to NSW Rural Fire ServiceContribution to NSW State Emergency ServicePensioners rates rebatesVoluntary conservation agreementsPublic library operationsShortfall in cost recovery for regulation of on-sitesewerage facilitiesShortfall in cost recovery for administration of theCompanion Animal Act (NSW) 1998Shortfall in cost recovery for administration ofContaminated Land Management Act (NSW)1997Shortfall in cost recovery for functions under theProtection of the Environment Operations Act (NSW)1997Shortfall in cost recovery for functions as controlauthority for noxious weedFunctions under the Rural Fires Act (NSW) 1997Immigration services and citizenship ceremoniesShortfall in cost recovery for administering food safetyregulationProvision of educational servicesCommunity safetyFlood Mitigation programTransfer of responsibilities for roads under recent RTAroad reclassification reviewsMedical servicesRoad safetyCommunity and human servicesWaste levySewerage treatment system license feeWaste management site license feeTaking away of revenue from crown reserve land undercouncil managementShortfall in cost recovery for processing ofdevelopment applications

For rural councils the cost shifting percentage is 3.88%of total income before capital which for Bellingenequates to $1.085 million.


of 37

Do councillors regularly bring to theattention of the administrationmaintenance needs within thecommunity or does this only happenas a result of a complaint?

Noted.

Councillors routinely make representations either onbehalf of their constituents or in a proactive mannerregarding a range of matters, both of a specific and ageneral nature.

Respondent 12.b

Feels the survey is flawed as it did notoffer sufficient opportunities for reply,was slanted, was open to duplicationof responses, and was too small aresponse to be acceptable

Noted.

Council carried out a community satisfaction survey in2012, the results of which were reported to council.

The 2012 survey addressed a broad range of issuesincluding resident preference for expenditure of anyadditional funds that may be generated. The findingsfrom this survey presented clear direction in terms ofthe infrastructure backlog.

Council conducted a self-completion survey in late2013 following discussions with IPART on the basis ofthe size of the council and ability to resource additionalcostly research. In addition a range of engagementinitiatives provided opportunity for communityfeedback, including:Community forums in Dorrigo, Bellingen and UrungaA combined Chambers of Commerce forumImplementation of an online Council “Special RateVariation Information Centre” that included fact sheets,FAQ’s, press releases, community forum presentation,links to feedback mechanisms, and related documentsPublic exhibition and relevant notifications for theLTFP, DP and RPAcceptance of public submissions

Further detail is provided in the CommunityEngagement section of this report

Interpretation of the response wasflawed and served only to produce thedesired result.

Noted.

In making its resolution in January 2014, Councilconsidered the following:The need and purpose of a SRV in relation to theinfrastructure works required to be undertaken, andcurrent financial forecastsCommunity feedback and sentimentThe community’s capacity to payThe impact on affected ratepayersThe proposed Delivery Program and Long TermFinancial PlanProductivity improvementsCost containment strategies


of 37

The community forums left insufficienttime for proper discussion and inputwith approximately half the time beingtaken up with council’s preliminarypresentation

Noted.

Council conducted a range of community engagementinitiatives in relation to consideration of the special ratevariation as follows:Resident letter dropCommunity forums in Dorrigo, Bellingen and UrungaA combined Chambers of Commerce forumAn online self-completion surveyImplementation of an online Council “Special RateVariation Information Centre” that included fact sheets,FAQ’s, press releases, community forum presentation,links to feedback mechanisms, and related documentsMedia releasesMedia advertisingMayoral mentionsNewspaper articlesMedia reportingNewsletter article to coincide with rates noticedistribution in late January 2014Public exhibition and relevant notifications for theLTFP, DP and RPAcceptance of public submissions

The interpreted 52% in favour of anincrease of more than the peg goescompletely against the mood of theforums and the “AdditionalComments” of the respondents to thesurvey

Noted.

In making its resolution regarding the proposed SRV inthe January 2014 meeting Council considered thefollowing:The need and purpose of a SRV in relation to theinfrastructure works required to be undertaken, andcurrent financial forecastsCommunity feedback and sentimentThe community’s capacity to payThe impact on affected ratepayersThe proposed Delivery Program and Long TermFinancial PlanProductivity improvementsCost containment strategies


of 37

The need for a SRV is almostcertainly a result of the $440,000 paneeded to fund the borrowings for the$4.5m works depot upgrade severalyears ago. The impact of that decisionon future services was inferred incomments at the time by theEngineering Director in their report tocouncil on that matter

Noted.

It is understood that the 2004-2008 Council identifiedthe need to upgrade the Raleigh Works Depot on thebasis of Work Health and Safety obligations andapplied for a Special Rate Variation to the Minister forLocal Government.

The Minister declined the application and in so doingadvised the Council that the occupational health andsafety of staff must remain a high priority for theCouncil and its management.

Work health and safety is a legislated mandatoryobligation for all employers and employees, andCouncil was required to address serious concernsabout the safety of the work environment at RaleighDepot before a serious injury or fatality occurred.

As a consequence the Council proceeded with theproject which was completed in 2012.

Applications for Special RateVariations are against the intent of thelegislation that arose originallybecause NSW Councils were livingbeyond their means

Noted.

Section 508 of the NSW Local Government Act 1993provides a mechanism for the approval of Special RateVariations. The current process involves detailedassessment and approval of the grounds for theSpecial Rate Variation by IPART as an independentassessor.

Section 495 of the Local GovernmentAct appears to give council the abilityto apply a special rate for worksbenefiting a section of the communityon that section of the community, egthe Newry Island bridge and thebridges on Darkwood Road

Noted.

It is considered that road and bridge infrastructureserves the community generally in terms of transportand infrastructure needs.This SRV is aimed at investment in assets that servethe community as a whole.

Rate pegs have historically exceededCPI to the detriment of people whoseincomes are related to CPI. This isthe reason so many respondentscomplained they could not afford anSRV increase

Noted.

Council’s Revenue Policy provides an explanation ofthe calculation of the rate peg percentage by IPART.The rate peg is based on a Council Cost Index (CCI).The council cost index has historically been somewhathigher than the Consumer Price Index (CPI), howeverit more accurately reflects the increasing costs toconduct Council business and service provision to thecommunity.


of 37

Community emphasis is shifting topeople services rather than propertyservices but property is beingexpected to pay. This is the reasonfor growing antagonism in the ratepaying community. Some othermeans must be found to provide forpeople services rather than taxingproperty owners

Noted.

Over the past two years a major review of the localgovernment sector has been undertaken by theIndependent Local Government Review Panel.

The work of the panel has been subject to numerousreports to council during that time.

The final report of the Panel was released for commentin early 2014. A submission is currently beingformulated.

The final report acknowledges that the funding formulafor local government requires review.

An “Special Variation” is by definition“one off” or “unique” but it is obviouslycouncil’s intent to make this proposedincrease the new base for ongoingincreases in the future

Noted.

Council is considering a permanent Special RateVariation of 11.8% under section 508(2) of the NSWLocal Government Act 1993

Respondent 13

Concedes that there is aninfrastructure backlog but is notconvinced that giving thisAdministration extra money will solvethe problem.

Requests that Councillors voteagainst the proposed Special RateVariation for the following reasons:

Noted.

Cost of living – Council has nomandate to impose further burden onratepayers. Response details anindividuals calculation of rateincreases over time against CPI andnotes staffing increases.Submission also cites concernsregarding increased cost of localgovernment services for no apparentimprovement.

Noted.

Council has undertaken a detailed analysis around thecommunity’s capacity to pay which is detailed in theLong Term Financial Plan.

Individual property increases will vary from averageincreases as a consequence of any revaluation andwhether they access water and sewer.

Cost shifting to local government is addressed inresponses to submission numbers 7 and 12.

Staffing numbers are addressed in the responses tosubmissions 7 and 11.

The report to Council in January 2014 provideddetailed information in relation to organisationalreforms.


of 37

Bloated administration – Council’sAdministration has done some goodwork in recent years, particularly inrelation to Workplace Health andSafety. However an organisation thatis asking for extra money from thecommunity should be able todemonstrate that is has doneeverything it can to contain costs.

Noted.

Please see response to Respondents 7 and 11.

The report to Council in January 2014 provideddetailed information in relation to organisationalreforms.

The Long Term Financial Plan details past activitiesand future plans regarding cost containment. The focusof the Financial Sustainability Program discussed inthis report will be on efficiency, productivity, and costcontainment initiatives and realising benefits to improveCouncil’s bottom line.

Capacity to deliver – does notbelieve the Administration has theskills or experience to effectivelydeliver its programs. Cites examplesof ratings anomalies over the pastthree years.

Noted.

Council’s organisational reform program aims toaddress capability and capacity to deliver services, andto focus the organisation on customer service.

Successful delivery of the program of works for theproposed SRV is a key commitment to the community,and a governance framework is being implemented tooversee the process. See the section on GovernanceFramework in this report.

Amalgamation – Council has notdemonstrated that it has thoroughlyexamined all options open to it, e.g.amalgamation

Noted.

Council has actively participated in an industry reformprocess which involves a range of reviews includingthe Independent Local Government Review Panel, theLocal Government Acts Taskforce and the PlanningReview.

Each of these processes have been the subject of anumber of reports to council throughout 2012 and2013.

Council has considered a number of reports from theState Government regarding the state of infrastructureacross the state as well as the financial sustainability ofCouncils.

In addition Council is an active participant in the MidNorth Coast Region of Councils who are activelyaddressing key issues facing Council’s across the stateand in particular resource sharing and service delivery.

MIDROC has formulated a governance model and theCouncils within the Region of Councils have resolvedto support a corporatised model.


of 37

Revenue strategy - therecommended increase is arbitrary.Community’s clear preference is ratepeg increase. Will Council be seekingfurther SRV in future years? HasCouncil done any projections toassess what the long termsustainable ordinary rate level shouldbe? Would Council consider phasingin an increase over a number of yearsto lessen the impact on ratepayers?

Noted.

As part of its deliberations around the SRV, councilundertook a detailed assessment of the asset backlog.The option of an 11.8% increase is not arbitrary.Council, in making its determination in January 2014,considered the following:

The need and purpose of a SRV in relation tothe infrastructure works required to beundertaken, and current financial forecasts

Community feedback and sentiment The community’s capacity to pay The impact on affected ratepayers The proposed Delivery Program and Long Term

Financial Plan Productivity improvements Cost containment strategies

The Long Term Financial Plan has been amended toinclude additional information and analysis on thecommunity’s capacity to pay.

In addition, Council will continue to focus on efficiency,productivity, and cost containment to deliver financialsustainability. The section on the FinancialSustainability Program in this report provides details onthis issue. Part of that program will involve assessingappropriate service and rating levels.

Rating equity – Why is proposedSRV to be applied equally to allassessments? Opines that the pricenon-urban ratepayers pay for Councilservices is out of proportion to thecost of providing those services.Questions the scope of the review ofratings categories for 2014/15

Noted.

The Rate Category Review which is nearingcompletion is for the purpose of ensuring rateassessments are categorised appropriately - accordingto the current dominant use of the land. Council hasnot previously undertaken a full review of rateassessments and over time actual use of the land canchange significantly. The purpose of the review is toensure the correct application of rating categories toland parcel and ensure equity amongst ratepayers.

The review will not result in changes to the proposedrates in Council’s Draft Revenue 2014/2015 Policy.Land that is re-categorised as a result of the review willbe rated in 2014/2015 as per the newly adopted ratecategory, not the rate category that was applicable in2013/2014. Land that is re-categorised will likelyreceive a variation in rates according to the newcategory applied as well as other contributing factorsincluding the general re-valuation and proposed specialrate variation. This may result in an increase or adecrease in rates payable but will vary for eachassessment.


of 37

Works program – questionscredibility of the works program citingan example at Hillside Drive, priorityof the Works depot over Newry Islandbridge

Noted.

Councils routinely prepare rolling works programswhich are reviewed annually and as part of thatprocess, priorities are reassessed in accordance withaccepted professional engineering principles andpractices. As a result some projects may bereprioritised within the program.

Respondent 14

I wish to object to the proposed rateincrease up and above the cappedrate. I suggest that you cut your suitto the cloth you have, in other wordsonly spend the money that you have.You could save money by cuttingback on administration staff andcommunity events. I'm a veteran andon a pension and I can't ask veteranaffairs for more money because youwish to ask for a special rateincrease.

Noted.

Council has undertaken a significant program oforganisational reform which has been dealt with indetail in Council’s report of 13 January 2014, a copy ofwhich is attached to this report. In addition, Council isdeveloping a governance framework.

The response to Respondent 9 provides additionalinformation in relation to assistance for ratepayersexperiencing financial hardship.

The responses to respondent 7 and 11 provideadditional information in relation to staffing.

Respondent 15

Does not agree with rate rises ofabout 12%The current generation of ratepayersshould not be made to pay formismanagement by past councils.Bellingen Council is top-heavy andtherefore costly. Trim!Improved roads and bridges willbenefit future populations. Borrow thenecessary money needed to upgradeand repay it in the future.

Noted.

Council has undertaken a significant program oforganisational reform which has been dealt with indetail in Council’s report of 13 January 2014, a copy ofwhich is attached to this report. In addition, Council isdeveloping a governance framework.

The SRV proposal is based on providing future fundsfor repayment of a loan to address the backlog in roadand bridge infrastructure


of 37

Respondent 16

Submission relating to the RevenuePolicy, and specifically the DomesticWaste Management Service charge.Asks Council to consider amendingthe Act to give ratepayers the optionof declining the use of the service

Noted.

The local government industry is undergoing a processof major reform. This includes work being undertakenby the Independent Local Government Review Panelas well as by the Local Government Acts taskforce.Both of these reports have been recently released andwill be subject to future reports to council. Informationregarding both of these reviews is available atwww.dlg.nsw.gov.au. Individuals are able to makerepresentations to the NSW State Government inrelation to these reviews and NSW legislationgenerally.

The enactment and amendment to legislation is a StateGovernment function. Council waste charges areestablished to cover the costs associated with wastemanagement and are audited annually.

Respondent 17

Whilst understanding Council'sfinancial difficulties, I wonder if thetrue financial burden this increase willplace on rate payers alreadystruggling to pay rates, has been fullyconsidered. The proposed increaseand the additional yearly CPI increasewill severely affect rates payerscapacity to pay their rates.

Noted.

Council carefully considered the affordability ofproposed rate increases and the community’s capacityto pay at its meeting in January 2014. Details of theanalysis appear in the minutes of that meeting and inCouncil’s Long Term Financial Plan.

The Long Term Financial Plan has been amended toinclude additional information and analysis on thecommunity’s capacity to pay.

Council has a range of assistance options available toratepayers experiencing financial hardship which aredetailed elsewhere in this report.

Respondent 18

Votes for 2.3% rate increase, As apensioner cannot afford such a hugerate rise.Let bridge users pay for all their useand upgrades

Noted.

It is considered that road and bridge infrastructureserves the community generally in terms of transportand infrastructure needs.

This SRV is aimed at investment in assets that servethe entire community. See also response torespondents 9 and 17 regarding affordability.


of 37

Comprehensive liaison with IPART has occurred in relation to the SRV application process andassessment criteria, particularly in relation to timeframes, community engagement, and IP&Rprocesses and documentation.

Consultation was undertaken with all Council Departments to review the relevant documents.The revision of the LTFP involved senior staff and managers participating in budget preparationand review. It should be noted that this condensed the routine budget process, but that theroutine Council engagement process has still been accommodated and that workshops andopportunities for feedback occurred during the exhibition period via a dedicated Councillorbriefing on infrastructure and the IP&R documents, and Council meetings.

Changes to IP&R documentation as a result of engagement with all stakeholders during theexhibition period in January/February 2014 are detailed throughout this report.

SHIRE OF BELLINGEN 2030 COMMUNITY VISION ALIGNMENT:This project/initiative aligns with the following strategic directions within the Shire of Bellingen2030 Community Vision:

Community Wellbeing:We are connected, safe and healthy with a strong sense of community:

We have programs, services and infrastructure to ensure a safe and healthy community

Places for People:We have services, infrastructure, and development that connects, supports andstrengthens our community for the future:We have a system of safe, well-maintained roads including car calming infrastructure

Civic Leadership:Council is an organisation that embraces business excellenceFinancial sustainability is maintained through effective short and long term financialmanagementHigh quality services to the community and cost effective solutions are delivered

Respondent 19Respondent identified an error in theLong Term Financial Plan related toconsolidated reports.

The Long Term Financial Plan contained sometransposition errors which resulted in figures appearingon incorrect expenditure lines, for example somematerials and contracts were incorrectly allocated toemployee benefits and on-costs.

As a consequence the errors have been reviewed andcorrected by Council’s Finance Manager who hasadvised that there was no impact on the overall budgetand the impact on Council’s financial ratios was notsignificant.

The Long Term Financial Plan has now beenamended. Details of the impact on financial ratios areincluded in Attachment J.

A response was provided to the respondent during theexhibition period.

Council thanks the respondent for their feedback.


of 37

The community is engaged in decision-making and implementation using moderncommunication methodsOur community is informed and engaged with a strong sense of civic leadershipThe community is engaged in decision making and implementation.Council is proactive in representing the needs of our communityWe are consultative

CONCLUSION:The report presented to Council in January 2014 in relation to the proposed Special RateVariation concluded as follows:

“In forming the recommendation in this report, council officers have considered the following:

The need and purpose of a SRV in relation to the infrastructure works required to beundertaken and current financial forecastsCommunity feedback and sentimentThe community’s capacity to payThe impact on affected ratepayersThe proposed Delivery Program and Long Term Financial PlanProductivity improvementsCost containment strategies

In considering the above, and in particular having regard to the feedback from the community(which indicates that at a high level there is acceptance of the need for road and bridgeinfrastructure work, that some increase is justified, but that Council should spend more moneyon roads and bridges through improved efficiency, cost cutting and resultant redirection ofrevenue/expenditure), a recommendation was formed proposing that Council adopt the draftIPR documents with the options for a 2.3% and an 11.8% general rate increase.

Whilst it is the view of the Council officers that funds generated from a potential SRV of 17.3%would allow the infrastructure backlog to be addressed to a greater extent, the view of thecommunity that Council should be looking to efficiencies and cost containment strategies toassist in funding this backlog has also been well considered. Council’s commitment toefficiencies and cost containment is evident throughout this report however to assist inaddressing the infrastructure backlog, it is intended that Council will be presented withopportunities for efficiencies and cost savings to consider which will, if approved by Councilresult in at least $150 000 per annum for the first three years. This will be reviewed at theconclusion of the third year.”

As a consequence of considering the January 2014 report Council resolved to adopt theIntegrated Planning and Reporting documents, inclusive of options for both a 2.3% (rate peg)and 11.8% General Rate increase and undertake a further round of community engagement.

This process and its outcomes has been detailed throughout this report and most specifically inthe engagement section of this report, it being noted that the feedback that was received duringround one and round two of the engagement processes was similar.

In addition during the community engagement period consultation has been undertaken withother key stakeholders which has resulted in some further refinements to the documentationparticularly around Capacity to Pay.

Having carried out this additional analysis and engagement it is concluded that the sentimentsexpressed in the January 2014 report, as detailed above remain relevant and appropriate in thecircumstances.

That said it is well understood that the community engagement process elicited a range ofsentiments around the issue of a special rate variation and in particular around productivity andcost efficiencies.


of 37

Whilst extensive details were provided in the January 2014 report to Council regarding theproposed SRV around organisational reform this report has outlined a Governance Frameworkinclusive of the following:

Transport (Road and Bridge) Infrastructure Sustainability Program to implement the SRV rollingworks programA Financial Sustainability Program (which builds on the Service Delivery Review process thatwas initiated in early 2013) to realise benefits from efficiency, productivity, and cost containmentinitiatives across CouncilA portfolio management approach (via the Executive Team) to managing these and otherprograms through integration with, and enhancement of, Council’s existing Integrated Planningand Reporting FrameworkThe establishment of a Council Sustainability Committee to provide the requisite Councildirection, oversight, and evaluation of the SRV works.

Collectively the securing of a Special Rate Variation to facilitate investment in transportinfrastructure, will result in reduced whole of life costs by facilitating intervention at theappropriate points in the asset lifecycle. This will have the effect over the medium to long termof moving expenditure from reactive maintenance to proactive preventative maintenanceactivities. This projected outcome coupled with the organisational improvement initiativesachieved to date, and those proposed by the Governance Framework will assist council tomove towards addressing its operating deficit by continuing to strive toward best practice andmove to an improved position of financial sustainability.

On this basis this report recommends that Council submit an application to the IndependentPricing and Regulatory Tribunal for a permanent Special Rate Variation of 11.8% in accordancewith Section 508(2) of the NSW Local Government Act 1993

OFFICERS RECOMMENDATION:1. That Council adopt the attached Long Term Financial Plan that includes options for a

2.3% and an 11.8% General Rate Increase.2. That Council adopt the attached Delivery Program that includes options for a 2.3% and an

11.8% General Rate Increase.3. That Council adopt the attached Revenue Policy that includes options for a 2.3% and an

11.8% General Rate Increase.4. That Council adopt the town boundaries (as shown in attachment 7.1D) as they relate to

rating categories.5. That Council resolves to submit an application to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory

Tribunal for a permanent Special Rate Variation of 11.8% for 2014/15 in accordance withSection 508(2) of the NSW Local Government Act 1993.

ATTACHMENTS:7.1A Delivery Program7.1B Long Term Financial Plan7.1C Revenue Policy7.1D Town boundary maps7.1E MINUTES - EXTRAORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 11 NOVEMBER 20137.1F MINUTES - EXTRAORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 13 JANUARY 20147.1G Public submissions received7.1H Newsletter and Media releases7.1I Print media articles and letters to the editor7.1J Changes to Financial Ratios in the Long Term Financial Plan


of 37

07.002/14RESOLVED (Cr Klipin/Cr Harrison)1. That Council adopt the attached Long Term Financial Plan that includes options for a 2.3%

and an 11.8% General Rate Increase.2. That Council adopt the attached Delivery Program that includes options for a 2.3% and an

11.8% General Rate Increase.3. That Council adopt the attached Revenue Policy that includes options for a 2.3% and an

11.8% General Rate Increase.4. That Council adopt the town boundaries (as shown in attachment 7.1D) as they relate to

rating categories.5. That Council resolves to submit an application to the Independent Pricing and Regulatory

Tribunal for a permanent Special Rate Variation of 11.8% for 2014/15 in accordance withSection 508(2) (a one-off (single year) percentage increase that remains permanently inthe rate base) of the NSW Local Government Act 1993.

For: Cr Klipin, Cr King, Cr Manning, Cr Harrison and Cr TroyAgainst: Cr Carter


of 37

8 REPORTS BY DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER OPERATIONSThere are no reports from the Deputy General Manager Operations.

9 REPORTS BY DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER CORPORATE ANDCOMMUNITY

There are no reports from the Deputy General Manager Corporate and Community.

10 MINUTES FROM ADVISORY COMMITTEES

There are no Minutes to be presented from Advisory Committees.

11 CORRESPONDENCE

There are no items of correspondence to be discussed.

12 AUTHORITY TO AFFIX THE COMMON SEAL OF COUNCIL FORITEMS NOT INCLUDED IN REPORTS

There were no requests to affix the Common Seal of Council.

13 ITEMS FOR INFORMATION

There are no items for information.

14 MATTERS OF AN URGENT NATURE

There are no matters of an urgent nature.

15 QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE

There were no Questions with Notice received for this Agenda.

16 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

There are no items for the Committee of the Whole.


of 37

17 REPORT ATTACHMENTS

7.1A DELIVERY PROGRAM ................................................................................................ 347.1B LONG TERM FINANCIAL PLAN ................................................................................. 347.1C REVENUE POLICY...................................................................................................... 347.1D TOWN BOUNDARY MAPS.......................................................................................... 347.1E MINUTES - EXTRAORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 11 NOVEMBER 2013 ........ 347.1F MINUTES - EXTRAORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 13 JANUARY 2014............ 347.1G PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED ........................................................................... 347.1H NEWSLETTER AND MEDIA RELEASES.................................................................... 347.1.I PRINT MEDIA ARTICLES AND LETTERS TO THE EDITOR...................................... 347.1J CHANGES TO FINANCIAL RATIOS IN THE LONG TERM FINANCIAL PLAN .......... 34

Meeting concluded at 9.25am.

Signed:

Cr Mark TroyMAYOR

M I N U T E S · The organisational review which commenced in late 2011, Council’s review of road...

Documents

Transcript of M I N U T E S · The organisational review which commenced in late 2011, Council’s review of road...