Ordinary Council Meeting Wednesday 28 June 2017 at 7.00pm ... · 6/28/2017 · Recommendation: That the Mayor’s report be received. 6. PETITIONS Pursuant to Council's Local Law

Council Meeting Agenda Ordinary Council Meeting Wednesday 28 June 2017 at 7.00pm Gisborne Administration Centre 40 Robertson Street, Gisborne

Public Question Time: Written questions submitted by the public will be considered at 7.45pm. Question forms will be available at the entrance to the meeting room and will be collected at approximately 7.30pm. Recording of Council Meetings: The recording of Council Meetings, either visually or by sound, or the taking of photographs in Council Meetings is not permitted without first obtaining the consent of Council or the Chairperson.

Attachments: All attachments are available for viewing or downloading from Council’s website, mrsc.vic.gov.au

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page 1 of 2

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO.

1.

Prayer 1

2.

Present 1

3. Apologies 1

4. Declaration of Conflicts of Interest

1

5. Mayor’s Report

2

6. Petitions

2

7. Adoption of Minutes

2

8. Record of Assemblies of Councillors

2

9. Deputations and Presentations to Council

8

Persons (applicant and objectors) who have made a submission on a land use and development application to be considered at this meeting may address the Council. The Chairperson will call for submissions in order of the items listed below and submitters will have three minutes only. At the conclusion of each submission, Councillors may wish to ask questions of the submitter.

10. Director Planning and Environment PE.1 Application for Planning Permit

PLN/2017/141 Waiver of 34 car parking spaces for a 100 seat restaurant at 10 Robertson Street, Gisborne

PE.2 2017/18 Events and Festivals Grant

Program PE.3 Climate Change Action Plan (2017-2027)

9

19

28

11. Chief Executive Officer’s Reports CX.1 Community Satisfaction Survey results for

2017 CX.2 Small Community Grant Scheme –

Consideration of grant applications

40

45

CX.3 Hanging Rock Strategic Advisory Committee – Report to Council from meeting on 29 May 2017

CX.4 2017-2018 Community Funding Scheme –

Recommended funding allocations CX.5 Adoption of 2017/18 Budget CX.6 Adoption of 2017/18 Strategic Resource

Plan

48

55

65

93

12. Director Corporate Services CS.1 Contracts to be awarded as at 28 June 2017

94

13. Director Community Wellbeing CW.1 Dissolving Section 86 Committees

96

14.

Director Assets and Operations AO.1 Draft 2017-2021 Domestic Animal

Management Plan AO.2 Proposed closure of McKim Road,

Gisborne AO.3 McDonalds, Howard and Sundowner Lane, Riddells Creek Special Charge Scheme AO.4 Priority listing Calder Highway

improvements

99

103

107

111

15. Notices of Motion No. 29/2016-17 – Councillor Bleeck No. 30/2016-17 – Councillor Anderson

115

115

16. Urgent or Other Business

115

17. Confidential Reports

115

18. Division 1A: Conduct and Interests

Reproduced as the concluding pages at the back of Notice Paper

Ordinary Council Meeting – Wednesday, 28 June 2017

Page 1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY

To start the official proceedings I would like to acknowledge that Macedon Ranges Shire Council is on Dja Dja Wurrung, Taungurung and Wurundjeri Country whose ancestors and their descendants are the traditional owners of this Country. We acknowledge that they have been custodians for many centuries and continue to perform age old ceremonies of celebration, initiation and renewal. We acknowledge their living culture and their unique role in the life of this region. 1. PRAYER Almighty God, we humbly beseech thee to vouchsafe thy blessing upon

this Council. Direct and prosper its deliberations to the advancement of thy glory, and the true welfare of the people of the Shire of Macedon Ranges.

2. PRESENT 3. APOLOGIES 4. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTERESTS Councillors’ attention is drawn to Division 1A Sections 76-81 of the Local

Government Act 1989 regarding interests. The relevant sections are reproduced and attached to the back of this Notice Paper.

Councillors are reminded that:

1. Disclosures of Conflicts of Interest must be declared immediately before the consideration of the item Section 79 (2) (a) (i); and

2. They should classify the type of interest that has given rise to the conflict of interest, and describe the nature of the interest Section 79 (2) (b) (c).

5. MAYOR’S REPORT

This item in each Council Notice Paper offers an opportunity for the Mayor to provide a brief report on recent Council activities and initiatives of a shire wide nature.

Councillor reports on any meetings they have attended as a Councillor delegate are provided at Councillor Briefings or via email communications. Any matters requiring Council deliberation/decision are considered by Council via a report to a Council Meeting.


Page 2

Recommendation: That the Mayor’s report be received.

6. PETITIONS

Pursuant to Council's Local Law No. 9, Meeting Procedure, a Councillor may present a petition or joint letter to the Council. A petition or joint letter presented to the Council must lay on the table until the next Ordinary Meeting of Council and no motion, other than to receive the petition or joint letter may be accepted by the Chairperson, unless the Council agrees to deal with it earlier. A Councillor presenting a petition or joint letter will be responsible for ensuring that they are familiar with the contents and purpose of the petition or joint letter and that it is not derogatory or defamatory.

7. ADOPTION OF MINUTES

Any Councillor whether in attendance or not at the subject meeting can move and second the adoption of the minutes, however accepted practice is that Councillors who were in attendance moved and second these motions.

Ordinary Council Meeting: Wednesday 24 May 2017 Special Council Meetings: Wednesday 7 June 2017 and Wednesday 21 June

2017

Recommendation:

That the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Macedon Ranges Shire Council held on Wednesday 24 May 2017 and the minutes of the Special Meetings of the Macedon Ranges Shire Council held on Wednesday 7 June 2017 and Wednesday 21 June 2017 as circulated be confirmed.

8. RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES OF COUNCILLORS – JUNE 2017

1. Summary / Purpose The purpose of this report is to provide the record of any assembly of Councillors, which has been held since the last Council Meeting, so that it can be recorded in the minutes of the formal Council Meeting. 2. Policy Context An amendment to the Local Government Act 1989, which came into effect on 24 September 2010 requires the record of any assembly of Councillors to be reported to the next practicable Council Meeting and recorded in the minutes (Refer Local Government and Planning Legislation Amendment Act 2010 – No. 58 of 2010 – Section 17).


Page 3

3. Background Information The Local Government Act provides a definition of an assembly of Councillors where conflicts of interest must be disclosed. A meeting will be an assembly of Councillors if it considers matters that are likely to be the subject of a Council decision, or the exercise of a Council delegation and the meeting is: 1. A planned or scheduled meeting that includes at least half the Councillors (5) and a member of Council staff; or 2. Is an Advisory Committee of the Council where one or more Councillors are present. Note: Advisory Committee means any committee established by the Council, other than a special committee, that provides advice to (a) the Council, or (b) a special committee, or (c) a member of Council staff who has been delegated a power, duty or function of the Council under Section 98. Note: Only matters that are the subject of discussion and consideration at an Assembly will be listed. Incidental updates and information on matters will not be recorded. This requirement for reporting provides increased transparency and the opportunity for Councillors to check the record, particularly the declarations of conflict of interest. 4. Report Outlined below are the details of assemblies of Councillors held since the last meeting.

1. Date / Time Type of Assembly

22 May 2017 9.30am Councillor Briefing

Venue Gisborne Administration Centre

Present – Councillors Anderson, West, Radnedge, Twaits, Pearce

Present – Officers Sophie Segafredo, Rick Traficante, Robert Szymanski

Items Discussed Briefing by Applicants on the Old Kyneton Hospital Redevelopment

Conflicts of Interest declared by Councillors and record of them leaving the meeting when the matter about which they declared the conflict of interest was discussed.

Nil Did they leave the assembly? N/A

Conflicts of Interest declared by officers



Page 4


24 May 2017 2.30pm Councillor Briefing


Present – Councillors Bleeck, Gayfer, West, Radnedge, Twaits, Anderson, Pearce Mees (arrived 5.12pm) Jukes (arrived 5.35pm)

Present – Officers Peter Johnston, Sophie Segafredo, Karen Stevens, John Hausler, Dale Thornton, Stephen Mahon, Gareth Hately, Jill Karena

Items Discussed Loddon Campaspe Regional Partnership In the Framing Zone Strategy Presentation by RMCG Presentation by Macedon Ranges Network of Neighbourhood Houses Section 86 Community Halls Planning Matters

- Old Kyneton Hospital - 5-50 Aitken Street, Gisborne - 426 Kerrie Road, Romsey - Green Avenue, Macedon

Councillor Items/Officer Updates - Delegates Reports - Monitoring and Evaluation of Strategies

Hanging Rock Strategic Advisory Committee Update


Cr Radnedge declared a potential conflict of interest in the item associated with Section 86 Community Halls due to her past position on the Stanley Park Committee which she relinquished upon her appointment to Council Did they leave the assembly? Yes




31 May 2017 Councillor Briefing


Present – Councillors Anderson, Gayfer, Radnedge, West, Pearce

Present – Officers Dale Thornton, Shane Power

Items Discussed Kyneton Airfield Matters - Planning permit requirements for hangar

construction - Service Agreement with Aero club - Noise Study - Classifications of airspace


Page 5

- CASA regulations - Master Plan






7 June 2017 1.00pm Councillor Briefing


Present – Councillors West, Radnedge, Anderson, Pearce Twaits (arrived 1.09pm) Jukes (arrived 1.20pm) Bleeck (arrived 1.28pm) Gayfer (arrived 1.55pm) Mees (arrived 3.11pm)

Present – Officers Peter Johnston, Sophie Segafredo, Karen Stevens, John Hausler, Dale Thornton, Stephen Mahon, Anne-Louise Lindner, Althea Jalbert, Rick Traficante, Michelle Wyatt, Kylie Lethbridge, Shane Caruana

Items Discussed Community Satisfaction Survey Draft Domestic Animal Management Plan Gisborne South NBN Fixed Wireless Tower Macedon Ranges Tourism Plan Review of Delegations Planning Matters including

- 89a Piper Street, Kyneton - VicSmart

Councillor Items / Officer Update - Community Funding Scheme & Events and

Festivals Procedure / Small Community Grants - Kyneton Primary School - Regional Partnerships - Calder Highway Improvement Committee Priority

Listing


Nil


Page 6

Did they leave the assembly? N/A


Nil Did they leave the assembly? n/a


14 June 2017 10.15am Councillor Briefing


Present – Councillors Pearce, Bleeck, West Gayfer (arrived 10.23am) Radnedge (arrived 12.08pm) Jukes (arrived 1.20pm) Mees (arrived 2.45pm)

Present – Officers Peter Johnston, Dale Thornton, Karen Stevens, Shane Power, Matt Irving, Stephen Mahon, John Hausler, Sophie Segafredo, Rick Traficante, Kylie Lethbridge, Shane Caruana, Kerry Haby, Leon den Dryver

Items Discussed Road Management Plan Black Forest Sawmill Update Planning Matters (1st Session)

- Kyneton South Framework Update - In the Framing Zone Strategy Update - Statutory Planning Advertising Process

Presentation by Macedon Ranges Rural Australians for Refugees Presentation by Bike Safe Debrief of Management of Increased Autumn Visitation in Macedon and Mt Macedon Daylesford Macedon Ranges Tourism (DMR Representative) Budget / Strategic Resource Plan / Council Plan / Councillor Allowances Community Funding Scheme Events & Festival Grants Program Councillor Items / Officer Updates Reports to be presented to the June Ordinary Council Meeting Three Chain Road (Roadside Management) Gilbert Gordon Oval Clubroom Plan Romsey Five Mile Creek Willows Calder Highway Improvement Committee Priority Listing

Conflicts of Interest declared by Councillors and record of them leaving the meeting when the matter about which they declared the conflict of

Nil


Page 7

interest was discussed. Did they leave the assembly? N/A




21 June 2017 10.15am Councillor Briefing


Present – Councillors Gayfer, West, Radnedge, Anderson, Pearce Twaits (arrived 11.15am) Jukes (arrived 12.30pm) Mees (arrived 1.30pm) Bleeck (arrived 1.51pm)

Present – Officers Peter Johnston, Anne-Louise Lindner, Karen Stevens, Sophie Segafredo, John Hausler, Stephen Mahon, Rick Traficante, Kylie Lethbridge, Bridgette O’Brien, Shane Caruana, Michael Dyt, Gareth Hately, Leanne Manton, Elon McCormick, Michelle Wyatt, Silvana Predebon, Matt Irving, Kerry Haby, Fiona Alexander

Items Discussed Meeting Procedure Local Law Working Group Council Meeting Agenda Items / Questions Council Website Redevelopment Update DELWP Consultation Localised Planning Statement presentation New Tobacco Reforms – Smoke Free Outdoor Dining Intersection Main Road (Melbourne-Lancefield Road) and Barry Street, Romsey Report on Gender Assessment of Policies Due for Review Review of Occasional Care Program Council Plan and Budget Planning Matters

- Stevens Street, Gisborne - Mt Macedon Road Tree Removal


Cr Radnedge declared a potential conflict of interest in the Ordinary Council Meeting agenda item associated with the Stanley Reserve Section 86 Committee due to her past position on the Stanley Park Committee which she relinquished upon her appointment to Council Did they leave the assembly? Yes


Page 8


Anne-Louise Lindner declared a direct conflict of interest in the Ordinary Council Meeting – Community Funding Scheme grants matter specifically with the Hesket Woodend Football / Netball Club application due to a conflicting duty created through her membership of this club. Did they leave the assembly? No

Officer Recommendation:

That Council endorse the record of assemblies of Councillors as outlined in this report.

9. DEPUTATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS TO COUNCIL

Generally there is no opportunity for members of the public to address an Ordinary Council Meeting. In specific circumstances including where a planning matter is being considered at an Ordinary Council Meeting for the first time or a prior request to the Mayor has been made and approved, a member of the public may be provided the opportunity to address the Council. In such circumstances the presentation will be limited to three minutes unless otherwise approved.

RECOGNITION OF QUEEN’S BIRTHDAY HONOUR RECIPIENTS In recognition of their achievements and service to the community the following two Macedon Range Shire residents were recently presented with 2017 Queen’s Birthday Honours Awards:

Frank Bell from Kyneton was recognised for service to the Mount Macedon Memorial Cross Trust Committee and duties at Anzac House being a trustee and providing assistance to veterans and widows in the community; and

Frank Donovan from Woodend was recognised for his significant contribution to veterans by establishing a counselling service together with his role in the Anzac Day Dawn Service at Mount Macedon.

The 2017 Queen’s Birthday Honours Award recipients have been invited to attend this meeting to receive a letter under the Common Seal of Council in recognition of their awards. Officer Recommendation: That a letter under the Common Seal of Council be presented to Frank Bell OAM and Frank Donovan OAM in recognition of their 2017 Queen’s Birthday Honour Awards.


Page 9

10. PE.1

Officer: Christo Crafford, Town Planner File Ref: PLN/2017/141

Council Plan Relationship: An inspiring place – Our lifestyle, culture and

sense of place are strengthened by best practice planning and development

Attachments: 3

Applicant: Powerhouse Projects Date of receipt of Application: 26 April 2017

Trigger for report to Council: Waiver of car parking Synopsis:

The site is located on the north eastern corner of Robertson Street and Brantome Street in Gisborne within the northern edge of the business area. The building has a frontage of 15.24m to Robertson Street and 31.09m to Brantome Street. The site contains a new single storey building that was approved as a retail tenancy (shop) but has been unoccupied since construction. The subject building has a floor area of approximately 354m². There is existing 90 degree parking provided along the Brantome Street frontage as well as parallel parking on Robertson Street. The building is part of the larger Coles supermarket complex and parking is also available within the complex.

The land is zoned Commercial 1 and is affected by a Land Subject to Inundation Overlay (LSIO) and Development Contribution Plan Overlay Schedule 2 (DCPO2). The surrounding land is occupied by various business uses such as retail, restaurant, veterinary clinic and medical uses.

The application is for the waiver of 34 car parking spaces for a 100 seat restaurant. No external works are proposed and only internal shop fitting is required. A restaurant is a Section 1 use in the Commercial 1 Zone (no permit required), however under Clause 52.06 of the Macedon Ranges Planning Scheme, a new use may not commence until the required parking has been provided or a permit has been issued to reduce the required number of parking spaces.

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT PLN/2017/141 WAIVER OF 34 CAR PARKING SPACES FOR A 100 SEAT RESTAURANT AT 10 ROBERTSON STREET, GISBORNE


Page 10

10. PE.1

Car parking for a restaurant has been set at 0.4 car spaces per patron in Clause 52.06 of the Planning Scheme. The proposal is for a 100 seat restaurant and the parking requirement theoretically is therefore 40 spaces. It is noted that the previously permit granted for the building as a shop also granted a parking waiver for 8 parking spaces. The existing approved building, has based on floor area, a credit of 14 spaces but minus the previously approved waiver of 8 spaces the existing building therefore has only a credit of 6 spaces. Therefore 34 spaces are proposed to be waived in consideration of the change of use. Provisions in the Planning Scheme provide for a reduction or a total waiving of the requirements in specified circumstances, so long as the applicant can justify the waiver. The applicant has provided a Traffic Engineering Assessment that suggests sufficient parking spaces are available in the locality to adequately accommodate the expected demand of the 100 seat restaurant. Officers agree with the assessment in the Traffic Engineering Assessment that a restaurant land use typically generates its peak car parking demand during the dinner time evening period, with a lesser demand of approximately 50% of the peak demand during the lunchtime period. Lunchtime demand is typically lower as patrons attending a restaurant often walk to the site from the nearby area either as local employees on their lunch break or as part of another visit to the area, such as for shopping. In addition, restaurants typically do not attract the same number of patrons at lunch time periods compared to evening meals. Ample opportunity exists for on street parking after normal business hours. In addition the Complex car parking area (which contains the Coles supermarket) also provides opportunity for parking which is connected to this building via a covered walkway. It is noted that the Council’s engineering section is also satisfied with the proposal in respect to the car parking waiver. In summary, the proposal responds to the strategic land use objectives contained within the Macedon Ranges Planning Scheme. The proposal is further considered acceptable given the zoning of the site and the need to strike a reasonable balance between the expectations and interests of residents and those of commercial activities. The proposed restaurant will assist in strengthening the retail base of Gisborne’s primary trade area and provide additional services and employment. The proposal for the waiver of the car parking requirement for the proposed 100 seat restaurant is considered appropriate and in light of the above it is recommended that the application be supported subject to the relevant conditions being included.

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT PLN/2017/141 - 10 ROBERTSON STREET GISBORNE (Continued)


Page 11

10. PE.1

Officer Recommendation: That a planning permit is granted for a car parking waiver of 34 spaces for a 100 seat restaurant for the land at 10 Robertson Street Gisborne, Lot 1 on TP111604K subject to the following conditions: 1. The layout of the use on the endorsed plans must not be altered

unless with the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. 2. No more than 100 seats shall be made available to the public at any

one time, unless with the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. This permit will expire if the use is not commenced within 2 years of

the date of this permit. The Responsible Authority may extend this period if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within 6 months afterwards.



Page 12

10. PE.1

Existing conditions and relevant history The site is located on the north eastern corner of Robertson Street and Brantome Street in Gisborne within the northern edge of the business area. The building has a frontage of 15.24m to Robertson Street and 31.09m to Brantome Street. The site contains a new single storey building that was approved as a shop, but has not been occupied since construction. The building has a floor area of approximately 354m². There is existing 90 degree parking provided along the Brantome Street frontage and parallel parking in Robertson Street. The building is part of the larger Coles supermarket complex and parking is also available within the complex.

The land is zoned Commercial 1 (C1Z) and is affected by a Land Subject to Inundation Overlay (LSIO) and Development Contribution Plan Overlay Schedule 2 (DCPO2).

The surrounding land is occupied by various business uses including retail, restaurant and a veterinary clinic.

Registered restrictive covenants and/or Section 173 Agreements affecting the site A current copy of title has been provided with the application which shows no Covenants, Section 173 Agreements or restrictions have been registered on the title to this property. Previous planning permit history A search of Council’s records has found the following permit history:

The Proposal The application is for the waiver of 34 car parking spaces for a 100 seat restaurant. No external works are proposed and only internal shop fitting is required. A restaurant is a Section 1 use in the Commercial 1 Zone (no permit required), however under Clause 52.06 of the Macedon Ranges Planning Scheme, a new use may not commence until the required parking has been provided or a permit has been issued to reduce the required number of parking spaces.


PLN/2014/275

Buildings and works to demolish the existing building and construct a new building, waiver of car parking.


Page 13

10. PE.1

Relevant Macedon Ranges Planning Scheme controls

SPPF

Clause No. Clause name

11.03-2 Activity Centre Planning

11.07-1 Regional planning

17.01-1 Business

18.02-5 Car parking

LPPF


21 Municipal Strategic Statement

21.13-1 Gisborne and New Gisborne

Zone


34.01 Commercial 1 Zone

Overlays


44.04 Land Subject to Inundation

45.06 Development Contribution Plan Overlay (Schedule 2)

Particular Provisions


52.05 Advertising signs

52.06 Car Parking

52.07 Loading and unloading of vehicles

52.29 Land adjacent to a Road Zone, Category 1

52.34 Bicycle Facilities

General Provisions


Clause 65 Decision guidelines

Permit Trigger

Clause No Details

52.06-3 A new use must not commence until the required car spaces have been provided.



Page 14

10. PE.1

Cultural Heritage Management Plan Assessment

Assessment Criteria Assessment Response

1 Is the subject property within an area of cultural heritage sensitivity as defined within the cultural heritage sensitivity mapping or as defined in Part 2 Division 3 or 4 of the Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007?

No.

2 Does the application proposal include significant ground disturbance as defined in Regulation 4 Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007?

No.

3 Is the application proposal an exempt activity as defined in Part 2 Division 2 Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007?

No.

4 Is the application proposal a high impact activity as defined in Part 2 Division 5 Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007?

No.

Based on the above assessment, a cultural heritage management plan is not required in accordance with Part 2 Division 1 Regulation 6 Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007. The Process to Date Referral

Authority (Section 55) Response

None.

Authority (Section 52) Response

MRSC Engineering Unit No objection and supports proposal.

MRSC Economic Development Unit No objection and supports proposal.

Advertising Under Clause 52.06-4 of the Planning Scheme an application is exempt from notice requirements if the application is only for a waiver of the car parking requirements.



Page 15

10. PE.1

Officer Assessment

State Planning Policy Framework

The proposed restaurant use is an as-of-right use in the Commercial 1 Zone. A permit is only required to reduce (in this case waive) the parking requirement. The application to change the use from shop as per the current endorsed plans to restaurant is considered an intensification of the commercial use given the different nature of the business and the reflected higher parking requirement prescribed by the Macedon Ranges Planning Scheme. State Planning Policy aims to encourage intensification of business development and therefore the intensification of existing development and use in existing activity areas. Relevant State Planning Policy provisions are as follows:

Under Clause 11.03-2 (Activity Centre Planning) the objective is: “To encourage the concentration of major retail, residential, commercial, administrative, entertainment and cultural developments into activity centres which provide a variety of land uses and are highly accessible to the community.” Under Clause 11.07-1 (Regional planning) it is also an objective: “To develop regions and settlements which have a strong identity, are prosperous and are environmentally sustainable.” This clause states that this can be achieved by inter alia:

“Strengthening settlements by ensuring that retail, office-based employment, community facilities and services are concentrated in central locations.

Limiting urban sprawl and directing growth into existing settlements, promoting and capitalising on opportunities for urban renewal and redevelopment.”

Under Clause 17.01-1 (Business) it is an objective: “To encourage development which meet the communities’ needs for retail, entertainment, office and other commercial services and provides net community benefit in relation to accessibility, efficient infrastructure use and the aggregation and sustainability of commercial facilities.” Clause 18.02-5 (Car parking) has an objective “To ensure an adequate supply of car parking that is appropriately designed and located”. The proposal is considered to respond favourably to the broad objectives of the State Policy. Issues relating to design, safety and landscape have previously been addressed in the development application permit. It is considered that the proposed intensification in the use is in accordance with State Planning Policy provisions and suited to this commercial area. Parking provision will be discussed in more detail further below.



Page 16

10. PE.1

Local Planning Policy Framework Within the MSS, Gisborne is recognised as one of the major centres in the municipality and it is promoted as a location where higher order retailing and associated commercial and entertainment activities must reflect the demand of the local community and wider trade catchment area. The proposal will promote this role of the town. In response to these overriding MSS objectives, the proposal will provide for economic growth, local employment and services within the Gisborne Township. In addition, the proposed restaurant is located within the town centre and (within the Commercial 1 Zone) as directed by Clause 21.13-1 and the Gisborne Structure Plan, thus further reinforcing the concentration of commercial facilities in an appropriate location. Zone Intensification of business development is further encouraged under the Purpose of Clause 34.01 (Commercial 1 Zone) which includes: “To create vibrant mixed use commercial centres for retail, office, business, entertainment and community uses.” The proposed use for a Restaurant “as-of-right” pursuant to the provisions of the Commercial 1 Zone and the proposed use is therefore entirely consistent with the objective of this clause. Decision guidelines relating to Buildings and Works have previously been addressed. The relevant decision guideline(s) under Use in the Commercial 1 Zone include:

“The effect of traffic to be generated on road.” The provision of car parking will be discussed in detail below. Overlays The land is affected by the Land Subject to Inundation Overlay (LSIO). The provisions of this clause are not relevant to this application. The land is also affected by the Development Contributions Overlay Schedule 2 (DCPO2). Given no development is proposed the provisions of this clause are not relevant to this application.



Page 17

10. PE.1

Car parking requirement Car parking for a restaurant has been set at 0.4 car spaces per patron in Clause 52.06 of the Planning Scheme. The proposal is for a 100 seat restaurant and the parking requirement theoretically is therefore 40 spaces. It is noted that the previously permit granted for the building as a shop also granted a parking waiver for 8 parking spaces. Based on floor area the existing approved building would have a credit of 14 spaces. However, accounting for the previously approved waiver of 8 spaces, the existing building has a credit of 6 spaces. Therefore 34 spaces are proposed to be waived in consideration of the change of use.

Provisions in the Planning Scheme provide for a reduction or waiving of the requirements in specified circumstances, so long as the applicant can justify the waiver. The applicant has provided a Traffic Engineering Assessment that suggests sufficient parking spaces are available in the locality to adequately accommodate the expected demand of the 100 seat restaurant. The report notes that the statutory car parking requirement of 0.4 spaces per patron permitted is considered to be appropriate in this instance for the peak parking demand associated with the proposed restaurant use given that the site has limited access to public transport and a reliance on access by private vehicle is to be expected. Officers agree with the assessment in the Traffic Engineering Assessment that a restaurant land use typically generates its peak car parking demand during the dinner time evening period, with a lesser demand of approximately 50% of the peak demand during the lunchtime period. Lunchtime demand is typically lower as patrons attending a restaurant often walk to the site from the nearby area either as local employees on their lunch break or as part of another visit to the area, such as for shopping. In addition, restaurants typically do not attract the same number of patrons at lunch time periods compared to evening meals. Ample opportunity exists for on street parking after normal business hours. In addition the Complex car parking area (which contains the Coles supermarket) also provides opportunity for parking which is connected to this building via a covered walkway. It is noted that the Council’s engineering section is also satisfied with the proposal in respect to car parking provision and has commented as follows: “Key Findings: a) There is sufficient spare capacity in “accessible” (within 100m of the

development) off and on-street parking facilities to accommodate additional parking demands from the restaurant for weekday lunch and dinner.



Page 18

10. PE.1

b) Saturday demand for parking between the times of 10:30am and 2pm

surrounding the development approached or reached “at-stress” level (at or over 85% occupancy rate). If the range of accessible parking for the development is extended further (from 100m to 120m) to include the off-street car park at the northern end of Brantome Street, any additional parking demand may readily be accommodated. Council’s survey results indicate that the existing car park is currently under-utilised (peak occupancy rate of 46% between 10am and 11am was observed on a weekday and weekend).

c) There should be sufficient spare capacity in accessible parking facilities

surrounding the development to accommodate parking demands during the weekend dinner period.

d) The subject development will need to rely on the existing Coles car park

to meet its parking requirements.”

Given the backing of a traffic engineering assessment and the support of the Council’s engineers a car parking waiver for the 34 spaces for the 100 seat restaurant is considered acceptable and support should be forthcoming.



Page 19

10. PE.2 2017/18 EVENTS AND FESTIVALS GRANT PROGRAM

Officer: Kylie Lethbridge, Manager Economic Development & Tourism

File Ref: F739 Council Plan Relationship: An empowered community.

Our economy is diverse, strong and

prosperous. Our community is inclusive and

connected and enjoys strong mental and physical health and wellbeing.

Attachment: Events and

Festivals Grant Program 2017/2018 Guidelines

Synopsis: The 2017/18 Events and Festivals Grant Program was adopted at the

Ordinary Council Meeting on 22 March 2017.

This is the second year of the Events & Festivals Grant Program after being successfully introduced in 2016/17. The total budget for this year’s program is $75,000, $10,000 of which is already committed through a multi-year agreement approved from the 2016/2017 Events & Festivals Grant Program. The remaining $65,000 and in-kind support was available to the 35 applications received this year. All applications were reviewed, assessed and scored against the criteria by a cross-organisational panel with 27 applications recommended for funding and/or in-kind support. The cash awarded in excess of the $75,000 budget represents contributions from the Small Community Grants Scheme.

This report outlines the process undertaken and details the applications

recommended for support.


Page 20

10. PE.2 2017/18 EVENTS AND FESTIVALS GRANT PROGRAM (Continued)


That Council:

1. Approves the events and festivals identified in this report for

funding and in kind support.

2. Approves the transfer of $4,385 from the Small Community Grants Scheme to the Events and Festivals Grant Program.


Page 21


BACKGROUND The 2017/18 Events and Festivals Grant Program was adopted at the Ordinary Council Meeting on 22 March 2017. This is the second year of the program which was introduced in 2016/17. In the first year of the program 30 of the 40 applications were granted either cash and/or in-kind support for their event. A total of $96,638 of funds were awarded, with Council transferring $21,638 from the Small Community Grants Scheme to the 2016/17 Events and Festivals Grant Program. The program is designed to enable events and festivals to apply to the most appropriate level of support depending on their size and focus. Three levels of funding available follows: TIER 1 - IN-KIND SUPPORT (up to a maximum value of $1,000) This category is designed to support any eligible events and festivals that are not for profit. In-kind support includes: the provision of rubbish bins, assistance with the development of an event plan, assistance with completing an external funding application, waiver of Activity on a Road Permit and additional cleaning of Council public toilets. TIER 2 – CASH ONLY (up to a maximum value of $6,000) This category is designed to support commercial and not for profit events and festivals that satisfied the following criteria:

• Provide a strong economic or community benefit to the shire. • Support participation and celebration of our community.

TIER 3 – SINGLE OR MULTI-YEAR AGREEMENT (Cash only - for events and festivals seeking support greater than $6,000 up to a maximum of $10,000 per year) This category is designed to support commercial and not for profit events and festivals that satisfied the following criteria:

• Major, large scale events and festivals. • Provide significant economic or community benefit to the shire. • Have a state, national or international profile. • Able to demonstrate that the event extends Council’s contribution

further e.g. branding, marketing and promotion of the Shire than could not otherwise be done with Council resources alone.


Page 22


To note:

1. Tier 3 grants are allocated up to a maximum of 2 years with one multi-

year agreement available per program. 2. All applicants were made aware of the guidelines relating to the difference

between this program and the Community Funding Scheme relating to no partial funding.

The total budget for the 2017/18 program was $75,000, $10,000 of which is already committed through a multi-year agreement approved from the 2016/2017 Events & Festivals Grant Program (for the Woodend Winter Arts Festival). The remaining $65,000 and in-kind support was available to the 35 applications received. An extensive Communication Plan was implemented alongside the Community Funding Scheme which aimed to raise awareness of the new program and the support provided by Council. The program opened for applications on 1 April 2017 and closed on 1 May 2017. Guidelines and application forms were available on Council’s website, at Customer Service Centres or upon request in hard or soft copy. Supported by grant writing workshops, all applicants were required to contact the Events and Festivals Officer to discuss their application and were given the opportunity to seek assistance with navigating the criteria. APPLICATIONS RECEIVED In the first year of the program 40 applications were received with the total funds requested being $176,864 plus in-kind. All successful recipients received their funds and acquitted their grants (with the exception of those events that have just taken place or are coming up). A small number of events did not claim their in-kind support. This year 35 applications were received, with the total amount of funds sought being $160,734 plus $11,459 in-kind support requested. The following provides a breakdown of the applications per category:

TIER 1: One application received for Tier 1 support only.

23 Tier 2 applications also applied for Tier 1 support. In total 24 Tier 1 in-kind applications were received.

TIER 2: 34 applications were received.


Page 23


TIER 3: There were no Tier 3 applications received this year, however as

part of last year’s program, the Woodend Winter Arts Festival was granted a multi-year agreement of $10,000 for a 2 year period. 2017/2018 is the second year of this agreement.

ASSESSMENT PROCESS Applications were assessed by a cross-organisational panel with each member also being a part of Council’s internal Events Group. The panel reviewed, evaluated and scored all applications against the guidelines and a scoring matrix providing a fair, transparent and consistent process. EVENTS & FESTIVALS RECOMMENDED FOR CASH AND/OR IN-KIND SUPPORT Details of the applications recommended for support are outlined below. TIER 1 (in-kind support)

# ORGANISATION NAME

EVENT NAME IN-KIND TYPE

1 Macedon Ranges Sustainability Group

Macedon Ranges Sustainable Living Festival

1. Bin hire 2. Waiver of Activity on a Road Permit Fees 3. Additional Cleaning of Toilet Facilities

(Value $335)

2 Kyneton Daffodil & Arts Festival

Kyneton Daffodil & Arts Festival

1. Bin hire 2. Waiver of Activity on a Road Permit Fees 3. Additional Cleaning of Toilet Facilities (Value $335)

3 Riddells Creek Neighbourhood House Inc.

Riddells Creek Street Festival


(Value $335)

4 Tylden Hall Committee of Management

Festival of Small Halls (FOSH) Tylden Hall


(Value $251)


Page 24


# ORGANISATION NAME


5 Malmsbury Village Fayre

Malmsbury Village Fayre


(Value $360)

6 Kyneton Contemporary Inc

Kyneton Contemporary Art Triennial

1. Bin hire 2. Waiver of Activity on a Road Permit Fees

(Value $285)

7 Eastern Veteran Cycling Club

Eastern Veteran Cycling Club open handicapped bicycle race

1. Waiver of Activity on a Road Permit Fees (Value $165)

8 Annual Picnic Car Display at Hanging Rock

Annual Picnic Car Display at Hanging Rock

1. Waiver of Activity on a Road Permit Fees 2. Assistance with completing a funding

application (Value $585)

9 Macedon Ranges Suicide Prevention Action Group

Macedon Ranges Suicide Prevention Action Walk

1. Waiver of Activity on a Road Permit Fees 2. Assistance with the development of an

event plan (Value $585)

10 Malmsbury Fire Brigade

Malmsbury Motor Festival


(Value $310)

11 The Great Association Inc

Gisborne Arts and Family Fun Festival


(Value $310)

12 Macedon Ranges Music Festival Inc

Macedon Ranges Music Festival

1. Bin hire (Value $120)

13 Openhouse Macedon Ranges

LGBTQI Roadshow and Openhouse Macedon Ranges Family Fun Day

1. Bin hire 2. Assistance with the development of an

event plan 3. Assistance with completing a funding


14 Gisborne Vintage Machinery Society Inc

Steam Rally, Tractor Pull & Family Fun Day


15 Macedon Ranges Health

2017 Gisborne Colour Run & Walk


16 Carlsruhe Fire Brigade

Carlsruhe Food & Wine Festival



Page 25


# ORGANISATION NAME


17 Gisborne & District Lions Club

Gisborne Christmas Festival


(Value $360)

18 Rotary Club of Kyneton

Taste of Kyneton


event plan 3. Assistance with completing a funding


19 Macedon Village Volunteers Inc

Macedon Family Christmas Party


20 Macedon Ranges Reconciliation Group

MRRG Indigenous Culture Market


event plan (Value $540)

21 Macedon Ranges Wellness & Longevity Group

Wellness Expo 1. Bin hire 2. Additional Cleaning of Toilet Facilities

(Value $37)

22 Kyneton Agricultural Society

Kyneton Agricultural Show

1. Additional Cleaning of Toilet Facilities (Value $150)

23 Mount Macedon & District Horticultural Society

Gardens Lovers Fair 1. Bin hire

(Value $120)

24 Romsey Region Business and Tourism Association

Romsey Community Christmas Carols

1. Bin hire 2. Assistance with completing a funding


TOTAL $8,099

TIER 2 (cash support up to $6,000) Please note these are in order of ranking from highest to lowest in regard to how they scored against the criteria.

# ORGANISATION NAME EVENT NAME AMOUNT

1 Macedon Ranges Sustainability Group

Macedon Ranges Sustainable Living Festival

$6,000

2 Vocal Ranges Inc Vocal Ranges Festival $6,000

3 Kyneton Agricultural Society Kyneton Agricultural Show $6,000


Page 26


# ORGANISATION NAME EVENT NAME AMOUNT

4 Mount Macedon & District Horticultural Society

Garden Lovers Fair $6,000

5 Kyneton Daffodil & Arts Festival Kyneton Daffodil & Arts Festival $6,000

6 Kyneton Music Festival Kyneton Music Festival $6,000

7 Riddells Creek Neighbourhood House Inc.

Riddells Creek Street Festival $1,682

8 Macedon Ranges Music Festival Inc Macedon Ranges Music Festival $6,000

9 Macedon Ranges Vignerons Association

Macedon Ranges Food & Wine Festival Budburst

$6,000

10 Tylden Hall Committee of Management

Festival of Small Halls (FOSH) Tylden Hall

$3,000

11 Malmsbury Village Fayre Malmsbury Village Fayre $6,000

12 Kyneton Contemporary Inc Kyneton Contemporary Art Triennial

$6,000

13 Openhouse Macedon Ranges LGBTQI Roadshow and Openhouse Macedon Ranges Family Fun Day

$2,603

14 Macedon Ranges Suicide Prevention Action Group

Macedon Ranges Suicide Prevention Action Walk

$1,000

15 Macedon Village Volunteers Inc Macedon Family Christmas Party $1,100

TOTAL $69,385

NEXT STEPS All applicants will be notified of the outcome of their application via letter which offers an option from Council of the outcome of their application. Applicants are provided with an opportunity to contact the Events and Festivals Officer for feedback. All successful applicants will be invited to attend a Celebration and Grant Presentation on 19 July 2017 which will be held in conjunction with the Community Funding Scheme. A thorough review of the second year of the program will then take place so the process and support Council provides continues to evolve. This will include consideration of opening the application period a month earlier to allow additional time to:


Page 27


1. Work with applicants to ensure their documentation is complete; 2. Ensure the assessment panel has sufficient time to review and process

applications; 3. To ensure there is sufficient time to discuss options with Council.

This would mean that applications were open from the 1 March to 1 April with adoption by Council still scheduled for June. The Macedon Ranges Event & Festival Planning Guide which is a 2016/17 Council Plan action, will be introduced from July and aims to provide further support and assistance for event organisers. CONCLUSION The second year of the Events and Festivals Grant Program improved on the first year by addressing feedback and making refinements/improvements. Applicants found the process easy to navigate, the panel found the assessment process more effective and a wide variety of events have been recommended for funding or in-kind support.


Page 28

10. PE.3 CLIMATE CHANGE ACTION PLAN (2017-2027) Officer: Silvana Predebon File Ref: D17-36576 Council Plan Relationship: Our environment and landscape is

protected and sustained. To mitigate, plan for and adapt to

climate change. Prepare a Climate Change Action

Plan for Council activities by 30 June 2017.

(Council Plan 2013-2017)

Attachments: 1.Climate

Change Action Plan (2017-2027);

2.Summary of survey responses; 3.Summary of submissions and officer response.

Synopsis:

The Climate Change Action Plan (2017-2021) was developed to guide Council works and activities to meet Council’s adopted emissions reduction target of 25% by 2020-2021 from 2014-2015 baseline levels. The development of the Action Plan was informed by data analysis and discussions with relevant internal staff and key community stakeholders including Council’s Health and Wellbeing Committee and Agribusiness Forum. Investigations into potential works for reducing emissions undertaken in late 2016 indicated that a total investment of approximately $2.2M between 2015 and 2021 would achieve the reduction target and deliver ongoing savings to Council of approximately $250,000 per year. The draft Action Plan was placed on public exhibition from 18 April to 9 May 2017. Feedback was received as 122 responses to an online survey and ten written submissions. Feedback from the community generally indicated a high level of support for proposed actions regarding Council infrastructure and for working more closely with the community in climate change action. A key theme from written submissions was for Council to adopt a more ambitious emissions reduction target for its operations. In response, it is recommended that in addition to the existing adopted target, Council adopt a further target to reduce greenhouse emissions by 50% by 2026-2027 from the 2014-2015 baseline year. This timeframe is consistent with the ten year outlook of the Council Plan.


Page 29

10. PE.3 CLIMATE CHANGE ACTION PLAN (2017-2027) (Continued) The final Climate Change Action Plan (2017-2027) is now presented to

Council for adoption. It has been amended from the draft Action Plan in response to community feedback and external drivers facilitating climate change action, and includes an indicative works program to meet the increased emissions reduction target.


That Council:

1. Acknowledge the input received from the community during the development of the Climate Change Action Plan and write to submitters to thank them for their input and suggestions.

2. Adopt the Climate Change Action Plan presented as Attachment 1 to this report, acknowledging that formatting and graphical changes may be made as well as corrections to typographical errors after adoption.

3. Progress with implementation of the Climate Change Action Plan (2017-2027).


Page 30

10. PE.3 CLIMATE CHANGE ACTION PLAN (2017-2027) (Continued) 1. Corporate Planning Framework

The Climate Change Action Plan (2017-2027) directly responds to a stated action in the Council Plan 2013-2017 (Year Four), namely: “Prepare a Climate Change Action Plan for Council activities by 30 June 2017” The action relates to other aspects of the Council Plan as outlined below: Objective: To mitigate, plan for and adapt to climate change Goal: Our environment and landscape is protected and sustained Vision: An inspiring place In adopting the Environment Strategy in June 2016, Council committed to reducing greenhouse emissions from its operations by 25% by 2020-2021, from the baseline year 2014-2015. The Climate Change Action Plan provides a guide for Council to meet this target, and includes an additional target to progress climate change action into the future. 2. Legislative Framework The Victorian State Government passed the Climate Change Act 2017 in February 2017. The Act embeds a long term emissions reduction target of zero net emissions for Victoria by 2050, and states policy objectives, guiding principles and requirements for addressing climate change in decision making. The Act also provides for interim emissions reduction targets to be established, with the first target due to be set by 31 March 2020 for the period 2021-2025. There are several other state government initiatives that have informed the development of the Climate Change Action Plan, including:

the key policy guide Victoria’s Climate Change Framework;

the Renewable Energy Roadmap for Victoria;

the Inquiry into community renewable energy; and

the establishment of the pledge program TAKE2. Council became a founding member to the program in August 2016, pledging to achieve its adopted emissions reduction target.

While there are no legal requirements for local government to address climate change, Council’s recognition and support to the Victorian State Government’s initiatives and its commitment to showing leadership to the community has informed the development of the Climate Change Action Plan.


Page 31

10. PE.3 CLIMATE CHANGE ACTION PLAN (2017-2027) (Continued) 3. Policy Framework In context of the plan hierarchy at Council, the Climate Change Action Plan (2017-2027) links to the Environment Strategy, sitting below the overarching Council Plan.

Both the Council Plan (2013-2017) and the Environment Strategy commit to the development of a Climate Change Action Plan. The Environment Strategy includes six policy statements for climate change. Two key policy statements are listed here in relation to Council and community action:

Council acknowledges the greenhouse emissions generated by its daily work activities and will work towards reducing greenhouse emissions as a means of contributing to climate change mitigation.

Council acknowledges the work of community groups and networks extending from community hubs like neighbourhood houses in facilitating action to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

The adoption and subsequent implementation of the Climate Change Action Plan will result in development of new policies for Council (for example, in relation to management of assets) and amendments to existing policies (for example, in relation to sustainable procurement) to enable climate change to be addressed across different parts of the organisation. 4. Community consultation Preliminary consultation The development of the draft Climate Change Action Plan (2017-2021) was informed by discussions with the following external stakeholders:

Health and Wellbeing Committee - 8 February 2017

Agribusiness Forum - 3 April 2017

Macedon Ranges Sustainability Group - 7 March 2017

Kyneton Transition Hub - 21 April 2017

Neighbourhood House coordinators - March 2017

Additionally, a discussion with Councillors was held on 10 March 2017 regarding how Council can support the community to reduce greenhouse emissions. Public exhibition The draft Climate Change Action Plan (2017-2021) was placed on public exhibition from 18 April to 9 May 2017. The document was accompanied by a summary fact sheet outlining key initiatives of the plan and an online survey to guide responses from the community. Feedback was invited via the following channels:


Page 32

10. PE.3 CLIMATE CHANGE ACTION PLAN (2017-2027) (Continued)

Promotion in Council’s half page advertisements in the Midland Express and the Star Weekly;

Articles in community newsletters;

Advertisements on Council’s Facebook page;

Promotion in the Environment e-News;

Email notification to key agency stakeholders (local and regional); and

Email notification to key community groups (local and regional).

Altogether Council received 122 online survey responses and ten written submissions. Of the submissions received, eight are from residents and two are from community groups, namely the Macedon Ranges Sustainability Group and Kyneton Transition Hub. A summary of the online survey results is provided in Attachment 2 to this report. A summary of the comments raised in submissions and the officer’s response is presented in Attachment 3, which also includes comments raised in discussions with the Health and Wellbeing Committee and the Agribusiness Forum. Overall, there is a high level of support for the actions in the draft Action Plan. Key outcomes from the community consultation include:

84% of survey respondents support Council initiatives to install solar panels on Council buildings.

81% of survey respondents support trialling a Council-community partnership revolving energy fund project for renewable energy generation.

80% of respondents support Council investigating large scale renewable energy generation on Council land or buildings.

75% of respondents support reviewing Council’s emissions reduction target in mid 2018 with a view to setting a sub-target for renewable energy generation.

Almost 20% of survey respondents strongly encourage Council to adopt a higher emissions reduction target, supported by 8 out of 10 written submissions.

55% of survey respondents stated that the key barrier to reducing their greenhouse emissions is financial.

Only 38% of survey respondents strongly support using existing communication channels to promote climate change action, with greater support demonstrated for more proactive activities such as grants (61% strongly support) and local community climate change planning (52% strongly support).

Approximately 10% of survey respondents indicated that they did not believe in climate change and that Council should not take any action to address the issue.


Page 33


Other matters raised through the public exhibition process include:

The importance of making stronger links between the management of organic waste and emissions reduction.

The importance of transport infrastructure to facilitate healthier forms of transport like walking and cycling.

The importance of retaining and promoting local food production and marketing systems to build local sustainability and minimise emissions associated with “food miles” into the future.

The importance of infrastructure and services to facilitate sustainable behaviour (for example, public place recycling bins, improved bus services in towns).

5. Key Issues The emissions reduction target As noted above, almost 20% of people who provided comment to the open

question in the survey strongly encouraged Council to adopt a higher

emissions reduction target, supported by 8 out of 10 written submissions.

Additionally 75% of survey respondents supported the recommendation for

Council to review its target in mid 2018 with the view to setting a sub-target for

renewable energy. It is assumed that these respondents would also support

strengthening the target upon review. Some people urged Council to become

carbon neutral by 2020, while others suggested Council adopt a target to

reduce emissions by 50% by 2020-2021, then become carbon neutral in the

following Council term.

The 25% emissions reduction target was adopted in June 2016. Since then there has been strong action on climate change by the Victorian Government including:

A legislated target for a zero net emissions Victoria by 2050, with an

interim emissions reduction target to be set by 31 March 2020.

A legislated target for renewable energy generation, namely that 25% of

the state’s electricity is to be from Victorian built renewable energy

generation by 2020, and 40% by 2025. This means that over time, as a

greater proportion of purchased electricity is generated from renewable

energy, the greenhouse emissions associated with electricity consumption

will decrease.


Page 34


Victorian Government support to community energy, including funding for

the establishment of three community energy centres in Bendigo, Ballarat

and the LaTrobe Valley. The appointed Renewable Energy Advocate has

publicly stated support to partnership projects that align economic

development outcomes and community benefits with renewable energy

generation. This is likely to translate to more streamlined processes for

community - council partnerships in local renewable energy generation

that could assist in emissions reductions and deliver returns to the

community.

An increase in the feed-in tariff for solar power to 11.3c / kWh from 1 July

2017, making it more financially attractive to install solar panels.

Additionally, technology for energy efficiency is rapidly improving and becoming more cost effective (solar panels, electric vehicles, and battery storage) thereby increasing the feasibility of acting to reduce greenhouse emissions.

At the local government level:

On 12 May, the MAV tabled a motion declaring a state of climate emergency, which was supported by 77% of voting councils. This indicates a collective drive at the local government level to reduce emissions.

Neighbouring councils have adopted stronger targets than proposed in Council’s draft Climate Change Action Plan. These targets were referred to in several online comments and submissions:

- The City of Greater Bendigo has a target to reduce emissions by 50% by

2020 from the 2010-2011 baseline year.

- Mount Alexander Shire Council has committed to becoming carbon neutral

between 2025 and 2040, with the aim to achieve this goal in 2025.

- Hepburn Shire Council is currently considering options for adopting an

ambitious target to reduce emissions from its operations. It is also

conducting community workshops to develop carbon neutral township

plans, and has a program of emissions reduction activities for Council and

the community.

The drivers outlined above provide a supportive context for Council to

consider increasing its adopted emissions reduction target.


Page 35


Council acknowledges that some members of the community would like to see

Council become carbon neutral by 2020-2021. While the intent of this goal

may be admirable, implementing all the energy efficiency and renewable

energy projects that achieve high emissions reductions (the “low hanging

fruit”) will only reduce Council’s emissions by between 25% to 50%.

Therefore, achieving 100% emissions reductions within a four year time frame

would require Council to purchase a substantial amount of external offsets to

compensate for emissions that are difficult to reduce (e.g. emissions

associated with plant and fleet). While purchasing offsets is a legitimate

method of achieving carbon neutrality under the National Greenhouse and

Energy Reporting Scheme (NGERs), this is not Council’s preferred option as

the validity of offsets can be difficult to verify, they direct rate payer funds

away from the shire and they do not result in actual emission reductions from

Council’s operations.

A more feasible target would be to reduce Council’s greenhouse emissions by

50% by 2026–2027. This target provides a long term aim for Council in

addition to its existing short term adopted target of 25% emissions reductions

by 2020-2021. This ten year outlook is consistent with the timeframe adopted

for the Council Plan. Additionally, progress towards the targets will be

measured on an annual basis, allowing Council to amend the program and/or

targets in response to the rapidly changing technological, political and

economic context for addressing climate change and consider budget

allocations.

Details of how Council can achieve 50% emissions reductions by 2026-2027

is outlined below. It is noted that Council is likely to be able to achieve this

target without purchasing a large quantity of carbon offsets.

The inclusion of a longer term target requires the outlook for the Climate Change Action Plan to be increased from 2021 to 2027. Achieving a 50% reduction by 2026-2027 Achieving the 50% target requires Council to reduce greenhouse emissions by a total of 3,820 tonnes CO2-e below 2014-2015 levels, and to maintain this reduction on an annual basis into future years. Through investment in works to infrastructure and fleet, a reduction of 2,010 tonnes CO2-e can be achieved. This is slightly more than the 1,910 tonnes CO2-e required to achieve the adopted emissions reduction target of 25%, leaving an additional 1,810 tonnes CO2-e to be reduced to achieve a 50% emissions reduction target.


Page 36


It may be possible to further reduce emissions through the following additional actions: 1. Converting cost shared street lights to LEDs. The conversion of lights

shared with VicRoads (major and minor roads) to LEDs could result in emissions reductions of approximately 90 tonnes CO2-e at a cost of approximately $220,000, and provide average annual savings to Council of approximately $14,500 per year over the 20 year life of the LEDs.

2. Upgrading the gas boilers at the two aquatic centres and at the Kyneton

Mechanics Institute. This is unlikely to happen until after 2022 when the boilers, installed approximately five years ago, approach the end of their life. While costs and savings are difficult to predict as future prices are unknown, an indicative cost for replacing the gas boilers at both of the aquatic centres is $180,000, to deliver combined ongoing savings of $30,000 per year and a reduction in emissions of approximately 150 tonnes CO2-e per year (based on analysis undertaken in mid 2015).

3. Converting outdoor metered lighting to LEDs, for example, at sports

fields, in carparks or as feature lighting. This is unlikely to occur at a sizable scale until after 2025, as many lights at sports fields have been recently replaced or due for replacement in the near future. Also, it is a relatively new area of works for emissions reductions, with initial estimations for a reduction in energy consumption of up to 40% yet to be proven. The capital cost of installation is considerably higher than the cost of like-for-like replacement of lights, with a long payback period (approximately 15 years in a current case at Yarra Ranges). This means that this action is not financially viable at present, however, the business case is likely to be much more favourable in future years as technology improves and costs reduce.

In addition, implementation of a new fleet management system will reduce the emissions accounted for within Council’s emissions profile by re-allocating emissions associated with private travel from the organisation to private individuals. This recognises that Council cannot influence emissions associated with the private travel choices of staff other than by improving the energy efficiency of its fleet as recommended in the draft Action Plan. Another option for reducing emissions is for Council to generate renewable energy at a large scale. Council could use available roof space or land to establish a large solar array, and have the power it generates offset emissions from its operations. The establishment of a large scale renewable energy project can take many forms (for example, land could be rented to a commercial provider or community group who would own and operate the solar array and sell power back to Council, or Council itself could become the power generator and retain or sell renewable energy certificates), requiring detailed analyses of options. A longer timeframe for a higher emissions reduction target provides time for Council to explore this option.


Page 37


Depending on the final emission reductions associated with the above activities, Council may still need to purchase a small amount of offsets to meet the 50% target.

Recommendation: That Council update the Climate Change Action Plan to include the following changes: An additional target to reduce greenhouse emissions from Council’s operations by 50% by 2026–2027, from the baseline year of 2014–2015. Revision to the outlook of the Plan from 2021 to 2027 to align with the 50% reduction target and the Council Plan. Amendment to Recommendation 5.3 to clarify the intent to monitor progress towards the targets on annual basis, and review and potentially amend the targets in mid 2020 to account for external drivers in climate change action.

The proposed shared vision for a zero net emissions shire by 2050 There were several community members who suggested that this vision should be set as a target and that the timeline should be brought forward to 2030 or 2040. Setting an emissions reduction target for the shire implies establishing a baseline emissions profile that captures the activity of all shire residents and businesses. It also requires implementation of processes to enable the community’s emission reductions to be measured. It is difficult to do this accurately at this point in time due to poor availability and reliability of emissions data according to postcode and sectors (residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, transport etc). The resources required to measure and monitor the community’s emissions profile would be substantial and could be better directed towards actions that support the community to take action.

Recommendation: Retain the vision as stated in accordance with the Victorian Government target.


Page 38


Community-wide engagement Discussions with key community stakeholders during the development of the Climate Change Action Plan emphasised the need for Council to identify barriers and triggers for climate change action amongst different sectors of the community, and subsequently customise communications and engagement to target audiences. The Victorian Government has recently commenced some work in this area which may provide a foundation for Council to respond to this need. Additionally, the high level of support to recommendations regarding Council working more closely with the community to address climate change suggests the need for increasing community engagement. Recommendation: Add the following new recommendation to the Action Plan:

Develop a Climate Change Communications and Engagement Plan to reach all sectors of the community and connect them to climate change, including youth, business, agribusiness, aged, low income households, sports clubs, etc. Recommendations from the Climate Change Action Plan relevant to different community sectors can be included in the Communications and Engagement Plan, for example, to trial a Council – community partnership project for solar panel installation, and to establish a pilot local climate change plan. 6. "Whole of Government"

The implementation of the Climate Change Action Plan (2017-2027) will affect the work of other parts of Council over the next four years and beyond. The development of the plan involved consultation with relevant staff to obtain agreement on the inclusion of proposed actions in the Action Plan. 7. Budget Implications

The approximate cost of achieving a 50% emissions reduction target is comprised of three components:

$450,000 for works above funds committed to mid 2018, required to meet the reduction target of 25% (estimated 2010 tonnes CO2-e). The total investment of approximately $2.2M (from 2017-2021) will deliver ongoing savings of around $250,000 per year, based on financial data in late 2016. Improvements in technology and decreases in costs along with financial incentives like an increased solar feed-in tariff are likely to mean lower costs and greater savings for Council in undertaking these works;

$400,000 to upgrade gas boilers at the aquatic centres and convert cost-shared street lights to LEDs, reducing emissions by a further 240 tonnes CO2-e; and

$70,000 (estimated maximum) to purchase offsets for up to 1,570 tonnes CO2-e, required to meet the 50% reduction target.


Page 39


The amount of offsets that will need to be purchased will depend on the impact of works that could potentially be conducted to mid 2021, and then beyond to mid 2027 (for example, if cost shared street lights are changed over to LEDs, or panels are installed on existing or future Council buildings that are not listed in the Action Plan); upon efficiency gains in distribution of electricity (for example, emissions factors will decrease as more renewable energy is fed into the electricity grid); and upon potential changes to accounting systems (for example, if emissions from work travel are excluded from Council’s emissions profile, or if emissions from contracted services are included in the profile). The cost of offsets will depend on the type and mix that Council elects to purchase. Offsets will need to be purchased annually to maintain the target. 8. Communication

The adoption of the Climate Change Action Plan (2017-2027) will be promoted via:

Direct notification to key agency stakeholders and community groups

Media release

Council’s website and social media

Notification in environment, youth and business e-newsletters

An article in Shire Life

There will also be communications and consultations with key stakeholders over the life of the plan, to record and measure the impacts of completed actions, to inform and resource implementation of future actions and to ensure integration of implementation with other work across Council.

9. Evaluating the Success or Failure The Action Plan includes several recommendations for monitoring the effectiveness of the plan and keeping it valid. Progress towards implementing projects and meeting the emissions reduction target will be reported annually in an environment report to Council, and promoted to the community through key media channels.

10. Conclusion

The Climate Change Action Plan (2017–2021) was based on a rigorous analysis of Council’s emissions profile and emission reduction opportunities. The amended Action Plan will guide Council works to reduce greenhouse emissions from its operations by 25% by 2020–2021 and 50% by 2026-2027. The work plan included reflects Council’s commitment to investing in climate change mitigation works for its own operations and will deliver ongoing savings to the organisation. The Climate Change Action Plan (2017-2027) also provides a foundation for working more closely with the community to facilitate emissions reduction across the shire.


Page 40

11. CX.1 COMMUNITY SATISFACTION SURVEY RESULTS FOR 2017 Officer: Peter Johnston, Chief Executive Officer File Ref: F1654 Council Plan Relationship: A high performing organisation –

We proactively engage with, and demonstrate accountability to, the community; and build and sustain financial strength Attachment: Local Government

Community Satisfaction Survey Synopsis:

The Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey measures residents’ perceptions about the performance of their Local Government Authority. The survey has been undertaken since 1998 with Local Government Victoria coordinating it on behalf of all participating councils.

In 2011 Local Government Victoria reviewed the survey in consultation with the sector. As a consequence of the changes that came from the review, the 2012 survey was undertaken with a significantly different methodology and the results provide a new benchmark that cannot be compared to previous results. This year’s survey represents the sixth year of this new methodology and provides Council with the opportunity to make a comparative assessment against our 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 results.

Council recognises and accepts these findings as one of the numerous forms of community feedback, with results indicating the perceptions of the community during a specific period. The 2017 Macedon Ranges results are above or equal to all of the core performance indicators for Large Rural Councils.


That Council notes the 2017 Community Satisfaction Survey results.


Page 41

11. CX.1 COMMUNITY SATISFACTION SURVEY RESULTS FOR 2017 (Continued)

Introduction: The Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey measures residents’ perceptions about the performance of their Local Government Authority during a specific period. Local Government Victoria’s review of the survey in 2011 resulted in a number of significant changes to the methodology and content of the survey, including:

The sample change from ‘head of household’ to a person 18+ years of age with quotas on age and gender;

An increase in the sample size from 350 to 400;

The introduction of weighting based on current Australian Bureau of Statistics age and gender ratios;

Inclusion of mobile phone contacts (previously limited to fixed lines); and

Improvements to the questionnaire, in particular: o inclusion of a measure of ‘importance’ of the services o use of a simpler scale of measurement, i.e. very good, good etc o splitting the questionnaire into core questions and the flexible

component

As a consequence of these changes, the 2012 survey was undertaken with a significantly different methodology and the results provided a new benchmark that could not be compared to previous results. This year we can make a comparative assessment against our 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 results. 400 residents aged 18 years or over were surveyed between 1 February and 30 March 2017. Macedon Ranges Shire Council is classified as a Large Rural council according to the following classification list: Metropolitan, Interface, Regional Centres, Large Rural, and Small Rural. Councils participating in the Large Rural group along with the Macedon Ranges are Bass Coast, Baw Baw, Campaspe, Colac Otway, Corangamite, East Gippsland, Glenelg, Golden Plains, Horsham, Macedon Ranges, Mitchell, Moira, Moorabool, Mount Alexander, Moyne, South Gippsland, Southern Grampians, Surf Coast, Swan Hill, Wangaratta and Wellington.


Page 42


Wherever appropriate, Macedon Ranges Shire Council has been compared against other participating councils in the Large Rural group and on a state-wide basis. Please note however, that Council groupings changed in 2015. As such, comparisons to previous council group results cannot be made within reported charts.

Results for 2017

Detailed below are our core performance measures for 2017 in comparison with the Large Rural group and state-wide average results.

Performance Measures

Macedon Ranges

2012

Macedon Ranges

2013

Macedon Ranges

2014

Macedon Ranges

2015

Macedon Ranges

2016

Macedon Ranges

2017

Large Rural 2017

State Wide 2017

Overall performance

58 60 59 59 55 56 54 59

Community consultation

54 55 47 52 51 52 52 55

Advocacy 52 53 50 53

49 52 51 54

Making community decisions

N/A N/A N/A 52 49 52 51 54

Sealed local roads

N/A N/A N/A 51 51 48 43 53

Customer service

69 70 69 65 65 67 66 69

Overall Council direction

49 52 48 54 48 52 52 53

Comment on Core Performance Measures Results

The Overall Performance index score of 56 represents a one point increase on the 2016 result. On the Overall Council Direction index our score of 52 represents a four point increase on the 2016 result ( which is considered a statistical significant change ) and places Council in line with the ‘large rural’ grouping result for 2017.


Page 43


Other notable results include the improvement in the ‘ Advocacy ‘ and ‘ Making Community Decisions ‘ categories, the reduction in the ‘Sealed Local Roads Category ( noting that Council is still significantly higher than the State average for Large Rural Councils ), and the continued consistency and improvement with the organisations collective Customer Service. By way of background in 2016 the results across the sector declined quite significantly and when reporting on the survey results in June 2016 the following comments were made ‘… The consistency of the ‘Overall Performance and Direction’ indicator decline across the Large Rural Councils grouping is interesting and in discussion with colleagues across the sector there is a view that the ongoing discussion of rate capping – both from the State Government on its rationale for its introduction and from the sector on its concerns with its implementation has impacted community perceptions. The underlying connotations of these discussions are negative, i.e. some councils are increasing rates unreasonably, there is some waste and inefficiency in Council activities and the State Government’s policy on rate capping will result in service and program reduction. However a major consideration is that in every indicator both the statewide and large rural categories decreased in 2016 compared to 2015, a statewide reduction. Over the last 12 months there has been an acceptance of working within the rate capping requirements and results for both the Macedon Ranges and across the sector have seen improvement.

Individual Service Areas Results Detailed below are our individual service area performance results.

Individual Service Area Performance Measures

Macedon Ranges

2013

Macedon Ranges

2014

Macedon Ranges

2015

Macedon Ranges

2016

Macedon Ranges

2017

Large Rural 2017

Emergency & disaster management

68 72 73 70 73 70

Waste management 72 76 72 71 72 68

Recreational facilities

68 71 70 69 69 66

Appearance of public areas

69 71 69 71 72 69

Arts Centres & libraries

69 70 69 67 68 70

Community & cultural activities

65 66 68 63 65 69


Page 44


Individual Service Area Performance Measures

Macedon Ranges

2013

Macedon Ranges

2014

Macedon Ranges

2015

Macedon Ranges

2016

Macedon Ranges

2017

Large Rural 2017

Family support services

64 64 64 64 65 65

Elderly support services

66 67 64 64 66 67

Business & community development & tourism

61 63 63 59 61 60

Enforcement of local laws

64 64 62 61 61 63

Parking facilities 62 62 61 60 58 60

Disadvantaged support services

61 61 59 60 58 61

Informing the community

58 55 57 56 56 60

Lobbying on behalf of the community

53 50 53 49 52 51

Condition of local streets and footpaths

51 52 53 54 52 53

Consultation and engagement

55 47 52 51 52 52

Planning for population growth

52 50 51 49 47 48

Town planning policy

53 49 50 48 47 54

Planning permits 46 47 48 43 43 48

Maintenance of unsealed road

40 45 47 46 42 42

Roadside slashing and weed control

44 42 46 51 44 50

Comment on Individual Service Area Results Council’s performance in 2017 across the 21 core individual service measures has seen an improvement in 10 areas, a maintenance of the 2016 result in 4 areas and a decrease in 7 areas. Council’s results are general above or consistent with the large rural grouping.


Page 45

11. CX.2 SMALL COMMUNITY GRANT SCHEME – CONSIDERATION OF GRANT APPLICATIONS

Officer: Trudy Campbell, Governance Administration Officer File Ref: F737

Council Plan Relationship: A high performing organisation – We

proactively engage with, and demonstrate accountability to, the community; and build and sustain financial strength.

Synopsis:

Council at its March 2013 Ordinary Council Meeting endorsed the guidelines which govern the Small Community Grant Scheme. Not-for-profit community groups can apply for small financial donations via this scheme. Applications are evaluated and presented to Council as they are received. The grants are offered to assist projects/initiatives that are unlikely to be funded through existing funding schemes. Applications can be made at any time of year1 and generally are processed within 3–4 weeks.


That Council endorse the following applications for funding:

a. Kyneton Men’s Shed—equipment for test and tagging: $1,000 b. Bullengarook Adult Rider’s Club—showjumping equipment:

$1,500 c. Malmsbury Town Hall—inaugural jazz and swing ball: $1,000 d. Young Voices of Macedon—Terra Australis concert: $500

1 except in a General Election year, specifically from 1 July to the date of the election and during the Community Funding Scheme open for application period annually


Page 46

11. CX.2 SMALL COMMUNITY GRANT SCHEME – CONSIDERATION OF GRANT APPLICATIONS (Continued)

Officer Comment: The following guidelines govern the use and administering of these funds:

1. Application for funding is via an online application form.

2. The maximum grant is $1,500.

3. All applications will be presented to Council for determination.2

4. A group can receive funding only once in a financial year.

5. Funding:

a. must be for a ‘one off’ project or activity (not the basis for ongoing funding)

b. will not be offered to individuals

c. can be offered to government and non-government schools; however the purpose of the request must be outside the accepted responsibilities of the school and the State Government, i.e. all curriculum-related activities, student welfare activities and other functions that are generally performed by schools

d. community/township festivals and events are eligible

e. associated with works to a Council facility or building must be approved by the relevant building manager

f. shall not be used for political purposes

g. must be identified as being consistent with Council Plan

h. is for projects that will commence and finish in the same financial year

i. Applications will not be accepted and works/undertakings shall not occur, in the period between 1 July and the date of a General Election of that same year.

6. Once funding is approved, all parties are required to sign a partnership agreement.

7. Any funds not spent on the specified project/activity will be returned to Council.

2 Only eligible applications will be presented.


Page 47

11. CX.2 SMALL COMMUNITY GRANT SCHEME – CONSIDERATION OF GRANT APPLICATIONS (Continued)

The following applications are presented for consideration:

Applicant: Kyneton Men’s Shed

Date received: 19 May 2017

Project: Equipment for test and tagging

Amount requested: $1,500

Amount recommended: $1,000

Previous funding received for group/project:

Yes

Compliant with guidelines: Yes

Officer comment: Eligible

Officer recommendation: To be funded

Applicant: Bullengarook Adult Rider’s Club

Date received: 30 May 2017

Project: Show jumping equipment




Yes




Applicant: Malmsbury Town Hall

Date received: 5 June 2017

Project: Inaugural jazz and swing ball




Yes




Applicant: Young Voices of Macedon

Date received: 7 June 2017

Project: Terra Australis concert


Amount recommended: $500


Yes





Page 48

11. CX.3 HANGING ROCK STRATEGIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE – REPORT TO COUNCIL FROM MEETING ON 29 MAY 2017 Officer: Stephen Mahon, Manager Council & Customer Services File Ref: F3545 Council Plan Relationship: Responsible governance –

Transparent accountable leadership and democratic decision making

Synopsis:

The Hanging Rock Strategic Advisory Committee (HRSAC) is an Advisory Committee of the Macedon Ranges Shire Council. It was established by resolution of Council on 27 July 2016 to provide advice to Council in its capacity as the Committee of Management of the Hanging Rock Reserve, a State Government asset under the Crown Lands (Reserves) Act 1978. The charter and membership of the HRSAC was confirmed by resolution of Council on 23 November 2016. The minutes of all HRSAC meetings incorporating any recommendations to Council from the HRSAC will be formally presented to the next available Ordinary Council Meeting. Any such recommendations shall be presented to Council with a Council Management comment.


That the unendorsed minutes of the Hanging Rock Strategic Advisory Committee meeting of 29 May 2017 be received, and the recommendations to Council be accepted.


Page 49

11. CX.3 HANGING ROCK STRATEGIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE – REPORT TO COUNCIL FROM MEETING ON 29 MAY 2017 (Continued)

Hanging Rock Strategic Advisory

Committee Meeting - Minutes

Monday 29 May 2017 at 6.30 pm

Gisborne Administration Centre

Present: Nathan Alexander ( Chair ), Helen Relph, Penelope Roberts, John Williamson, Peter Bishop, Val Pollard

Officers – Sophie Segafredo – Director Planning & Environment, Karen Stevens – Director Community Wellbeing , Stephen Mahon – Manager Council & Customer Services,

Welcome

The Chairperson welcomed all Members and made some general comments regarding the

functioning of the Advisory Committee. He encouraged strong relationships of trust between

the members and the shire staff, and encouraged all the people involved to be friendly,

forward looking, frank and fearless.

Apologies - Jon Dight, Rodney Carter, Geoff Caine

1. Confirmation of Minutes of the Hanging Rock Strategic Advisory Committee – 1

May 2017

The Manager Council & Customer Services advised that 1 May minutes had been presented to the last Ordinary Council Meeting held on the 24 May 2017

The minutes of the 1 May Meeting were confirmed.

2. Actions Completed and Outstanding

Distribute Draft 2017/18 budget – Karen Stevens – completed

Distribute Project Evaluation slides – Peter Bishop – completed

Distribute Council Capital Works / Projects Evaluation Criteria – Karen Stevens –

completed

Distribute Shelter Landscape Plans & Depot Site Plans – Rod Clough – completed

Reserve Asset Data – Rod Clough – outstanding

3. Status of the Masterplan release, commencement of consultation & Future of

DELWP funding

Due to Geoff Caine’s absence this matter was not considered.


Page 50


4. Information Matters

4.1 Hanging Rock Operational Budget 2017/18 – there was general discussion

regarding the level of detail provided and the Committee requested that further

information be provided. Action - Karen Stevens to circulate information to

Committee

4.2 Shelter Landscape Plans and Depot Site Plans – It was noted that the existing

trees planted at Shelter A would be removed and in response to a question about

possible tree planting to screen the pavilions from the Rock viewing points it was noted

that Officers were awaiting the completion of Masterplan prior to contemplating such

matters. It was noted that the concept of the indigenous / traditional owner groups

assisting with the naming of shelters would be desirable pending the completion of their

Connections Project. It was noted that he picnic shelter tables were disability compliant.

It was noted that the depot site plan was referenced in the Environmental Management

Plan with a requirement to maintain a 15 metre buffer zone between the site and the

creek / riparian zone

Action – Karen Stevens to confirm if fence already up and if not to confirm that it be at

least 15 m from creek

Council Capital Works / Projects Evaluation Criteria – Noted

Reserve Asset Data – To be provided in due course

Officers provided a brief overview of the following documents that had been requested by

the Chairman. Hanging Rock Viewing Areas 2009 / Hanging Rock Development &

Investment Plan 2013 / Victoria Heritage Database Report 2017 / Hanging Rock

Economic Assessment – Final Report 2013 / Hanging Rock Design Guidelines, draft

2016.

Action – Stephen Mahon to distribute all documents to Committee before the next

meeting

5. Quarterly Report

In line with the Charter of the Advisory Committee a Quarterly Activity Report for the

Reserve was circulated that provided information on attendance, events and significant

and planned activities at the Reserve.

6. Distribution of Administration Comments

The Chairman briefly explained the rationale behind the proposed motion to introduce a

process that enabled the Advisory Committee members to be informed of any

‘Administration Comment ‘ that the Council Executive made in response to

recommendations by the Advisory Committee to Council.


Page 51


It was moved and seconded

That the Hanging Rock Strategic Advisory Committee (HRSAC) recommend to

Council that it request the Manager Council & Customer Services, that when the

administration prepares any written comments on recommendations by the HRSAC

to Council, to be included in the Council Meeting Agenda papers, that these

comments be distributed to the HRSAC members for their information, and that the

distribution occur when the agenda papers are finalised, or at the latest at the

same time as they are distributed to Councillors.

Carried Unanimously

Council Management Comment – This request can be accommodated.

7. Possible Capital Works projects and Policy Development Work at Hanging Rock

The Chairman introduced an extensive list of projects (works and policy) that he had

assembled. There was general discussion regarding the relative merits of focussing on

possible projects emanating from the proposed Masterplan and the adopted

Environmental Management Plan. In response to a question regarding the costing of

projects in the Masterplan the Committee was advised that depending on the final

masterplan direction and options these projects will be costed to the extent appropriate

and consistent with their timeframe. It was noted that projects in the Masterplan

potentially inconsistent with the Environmental Management Plan had remained in the

Masterplan to test their validity and current community views on these matters. It was

noted that whilst the draft Masterplan to be placed on exhibition does not have costing the

communications plan that will guide the consultation program will explain the likely

funding sources and timeframes for the various options and projects.

Action – Penny Roberts to reconfigure and suggest more detailed categories to be

considered at the next meeting

8. Criteria for evaluating and prioritising projects

Peter gave an overview of the circulated document ‘Hanging Rock Master Plan –

Selection of Features and Projects – Draft Assessment Methodology ‘. Peter advised that

he had tested the methodology against a number of projects / scenarios and that he

would circulate these to members for information. It was noted that all aspects of the

methodology could be adjusted (criteria, weightings etc) and some discussion occurred

around the environmental and cultural criteria and the view that these may perhaps be

better treated as ‘ gateways ‘ to ensure projects ‘fully satisfy‘ these requirements before

proceeding to be evaluated against further criteria. Whether these matters should remain

in the general criteria as well as gateways was also considered.


Page 52


It was agreed that a Working Group comprising Nathan Alexander, Peter Bishop and

Penny Roberts would meet to discuss and refine the methodology and report back to a

future meeting.

Action – Peter Bishop to circulate within the next few days Project Feature Selection

Criteria and spread sheets for scenarios #1, #2 and #3 showing the output from the use

of the selection process for some example projects using different weightings

Action - Working Group comprising Nathan Alexander, Peter Bishop and Penny Roberts

to meet to discuss and refine the methodology and report back to the next meeting.

9. Committee priorities for the expenditure of the DELWP $250k for the 2017/18

financial year

Karen Stevens provided the Committee with an overview of the proposed projects

selected for the DELWP 2017/18 funding of $250k. No other projects were considered as

these projects are part of a plan agreed by Council and DELWP at the beginning of the

grant period several years ago. There was general discussion regarding the merits of

and detail of the three identified areas of expenditure ie replacement of the east paddock

fencing $150k, Environmental / tree works and path works. The funds for the fencing

include a minor component to determine an appropriate vermin-proof fence. Depending

on the fence selected, the funds may be sufficient to fence several hundred metres only.

Helen Relph was concerned that the gates / fencing do not create a high security feel to

the Reserve. Karen agreed to provide the Committee further information on the detail of

the proposed environmental works.

Action – Karen Stevens to provide Committee with further detail on the proposed

expenditure of $75k on environmental works either before or at the next meeting.

It was moved and seconded

That the Chairman convene a Working Group comprising himself, Penny Roberts

and Helen Relph and any other people invited by the Chair, to recommend capital

works projects to be funded by DELWP’s next $250k grant for the Hanging Rock

Reserve, and that the Working Group report back to the next meeting of the HRSAC

with recommendations for its consideration. CARRIED

Council Management Comment – Whilst Officers have developed and briefed the

HRSAC on the proposed capital works project plan to be funded by the DELWP

grant in 2017/18 any recommended changes to the proposed plan received at the 3

July 2007 HRSAC Meeting will be considered.


Page 53


10. Strategic planning during the master plan hiatus

The Chairman provided a brief overview of his circulated discussion paper on potential

strategic work to inform the masterplan which led to a general discussion on the

fundamental challenge facing the Reserve ie that of sustainably maintaining the existing

infrastructure in addition to any proposed new infrastructure proposed in the Masterplan.

There was discussion on the possible final direction of the Masterplan that may include a

minimalist or ‘do nothing‘ option that focussed on maintaining existing infrastructure,

planning for asset replacement and relocation and improving environmental aspects of

the reserve. In this context Sophie informed the Committee that the masterplan process

would address the economics of the Reserve and that SGS the economics sub

consultants on the project could be invited to the next Committee meeting to explore this

issue with members.

The proposed process to be followed from here was outlined which included:

public consultation, including detailed comms to tease out issues such as

community appetite to fund major projects

Committee to consider site economics prior to/during this period

a report outlining submissions, their implications and recommendations for the

final masterplan, to provide the basis for HRSAC and Council discussion

preparation of final documentation based on agreements made above

final revision and report to Council for consideration

referral to Minister for Environment

Committee members were comfortable with this outline.

Action – Consultants to be invited to next meeting of the Committee – Sophie Segafredo

11. Other Business

Nathan tabled an example of a maintenance schedule regime for information

John requested that any background information associated with an historic incident in

the Reserve be provided to the Committee.

Action – Karen Stevens to investigate and provide

Helen queried the potential impact of the impending release of the Foxtel remake of

Picnic at Hanging Rock ‘as a TV series, filmed at the Reserve and requested that a brief

report on this be provided

Action – Karen Stevens to provide a report to the next meeting on the likely implications

for the reserve from the Foxtel TV series release and any proposed responses by the

reserve management


Page 54


12. Statement of Actions from this meeting

Stephen Mahon read out the actions agreed to at the meeting

13. Next Meeting

Future meetings to be typically held on the first Monday of each month

Next meeting to be Monday 3 July 2017 6.30 pm – Gisborne Administration Centre 40

Robertson Street, Gisborne.

The meeting closed at 9.12 pm


That the unendorsed minutes of the Hanging Rock Strategic Advisory Committee meeting of 29 May 2017 be received, and the recommendations to Council be accepted.


Page 55

11. CX.4 2017–2018 COMMUNITY FUNDING SCHEME – RECOMMENDED FUNDING ALLOCATIONS

Officer: Kate Strahan, Governance Project Officer File Ref: F736-03

Council Plan Relationship: An empowered community - Our

community is inclusive and connected and enjoys strong mental and physical health and wellbeing

Synopsis:

At the 22 March 2017 Ordinary Meeting, Council endorsed the Community Funding Scheme guidelines for the 2017/2018 year. The total funds available for the Community Funding Scheme for 2017–2018 are $85,000 with a further $15,000 being contributed by the Victorian Tavern Trust towards appropriate applications. This report details the process of evaluation in accordance with the scheme guidelines and relative to standards recommended in the Administration of Grants, Better Practice Guide prepared by the Australian National Audit Office.


That Council:

1) Approve the transfer of $17,103 from the Small Community Grants

Scheme budget 2016/17 to the Community Funding Scheme

budget 2017/18; and

2) Adopt the 2017–2018 Community Funding Scheme allocations

detailed in the report.


Page 56

11. CX.4 2017–2018 COMMUNITY FUNDING SCHEME – RECOMMENDED FUNDING ALLOCATIONS (Continued)

Background The 2017–2018 Community Funding Scheme Guidelines were adopted at the 22 March 2017 Ordinary Council Meeting. The key changes to the 2017–2018 guidelines were: Reinstating a refined economic selection criterion

Strengthening the Health and Wellbeing criteria to align with the Victorian

Public Health and Wellbeing Plan 2015–2019 priorities of healthier eating

and active living, tobacco-free living, reducing harmful alcohol and drug

use, improving mental health, preventing violence and injury and

improving sexual and reproductive health

Requiring organisations that provide services or facilities for children to

demonstrate how they comply with their requirement to implement Child

Safe Standards to protect children from harm

Refining the scoring matrix to reflect changes to the criteria.

Open for application The scheme was declared open on 1 April 2017 with applications closing on 1 May 2017 at 2pm. Nominated council officers were available during this period to discuss projects with groups. Application forms could be accessed on the website, at customer service centres or upon request, in hard or soft copy. Promotion The scheme was promoted in conjunction with the Events and Festivals Grant program through various media channels with an emphasis placed on electronic promotion and information dissemination in order to reduce paper use. Two grant writing workshops were conducted in the lead up to the open for application period. The workshops were free and conducted in Woodend, a total of 26 people attended these workshops. Feedback was sought via survey monkey from all attendants and is used to improve and/or alter the format of future workshops. Why do we fund not for profit groups? Local not-for-profits provide services that are responsive, relevant and accountable—they connect people and contribute to a diverse and vibrant community. “Community not for profit organisations play an important role in combating social exclusion and enhancing the economic, social, cultural and environmental wellbeing of society.”3

Not-for-profits in large part drive our local community, and those not-for-profit groups are almost exclusively run by volunteers. People engage in volunteerism for a variety of reasons they want to help, contribute, make a difference, connect with their community and feel valued by their community.

3 http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/not-for-profit/report/not-for-profit-report.pdf

http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/not-for-profit/report/not-for-profit-report.pdf


Page 57


Volunteers act without the expectation of material reward and often at personal expense. Volunteering is defined as:

having a direct benefit to the community and the volunteer

undertaken by choice

unpaid4.

The Community Funding Scheme is designed to assist not-for-profit groups and the invaluable work of the volunteers that run these organisations. In 2011, the volunteer participation rate in the Macedon Ranges was 24%, which is higher than the national (17.8%), Victorian (17.7%) and regional Victorian rate (23.4%)5. Working with our community The Community Funding Scheme gives not-for-profit organisations in our community the opportunity to tell Council what their groups are doing well, what they would like and are best placed to do. Grants offered to not-for-profit groups operating in the Macedon Ranges contribute to participation in social and civic activities and gives these groups some control6 over particular outcomes. Growing the health of our community Volunteers are more likely to be involved in other aspects of community life than those who do not volunteer, are more likely (82%) than non-volunteers (55%) to attend a community event, and are almost three times more likely to have provided a service or activity in the local area7. VicHealth links volunteering to lower rates of hospitalisation, improved mental health, boosting resistance to illness and boosting satisfaction with life.8 The two Health and Wellbeing priority areas for the Council Plan 2013-2017: Year Four are mental health and wellbeing and obesity.

All activities of not-for-profits contribute to the mental health and wellbeing of our community and 45% of community funding scheme applications are projects which will contribute to some extent to reducing the incidence of obesity-related conditions.

4 A volunteer may be reimbursed for expenses paid associated with their role 5 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census of Population and Housing 2011 6 http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/4159.0 7 http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Latestproducts/4441.0Main%20Features22010?opendoc

ument 8 VicHealth, Volunteering Indicator overview, November 2012

http://www.abs.gov.au/census

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/4159.0

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Latestproducts/4441.0Main%20Features22010?opendocument

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Latestproducts/4441.0Main%20Features22010?opendocument


Page 58


Socially inclusive nature of volunteering The Community Funding Scheme includes access and inclusion as an assessment criteria. In total, 43% of applicants submitted projects which had socially inclusive priorities.

Volunteering Australia identifies the following as characteristics which facilitate social inclusion9:

Peer learning and support

Responsiveness to individual strengths and weaknesses

Flexibility in job role and design

Partnership between sectors

Relationships between volunteers

However, systemic obstacles to socially inclusive volunteerism continue to exist—“recent research has found women are under-represented in all sectors, comprising 26 per cent of the members of Australian not-for-profit boards and committees10. This is despite substantial research showing that increased gender diversity on boards leads to better corporate performance11. Council is currently researching an effective means to encourage gender equity practices in our grant making programs. Economic value of volunteers In 2010, formal volunteering (excluding travel) was worth $25.4 billion to the Australian economy12 and “for every $1 invested in volunteering $4.50 in benefits are returned to the community.”13 However, not all volunteer work can or should be measured by hours contributed or dollars saved. Applications received In total, 44 applications were received requesting $219,627 in funds for $481,836 in project value. The number of Community Funding Scheme applications received over the previous six funding rounds is as follows:

9 http://www.volunteeringaustralia.org/wp-content/uploads/State-of-Volunteering-in-Australia-

2012.pdf 10 https://www.communitydirectors.com.au/icda/tools/?articleId=1447 11 http://www.ausport.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/531165/Mandatory_Sports_Governance_Principles_FINAL.pdf 12 http://www.volunteeringaustralia.org/wp-content/uploads/VA-Key-statistics-about-Australian-volunteering-16-April-20151.pdf 13 https://volunteeringwa.org.au/assets/downloads/vwa_report%20book_web.pdf

https://www.communitydirectors.com.au/icda/tools/?articleId=1447

http://www.ausport.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/531165/Mandatory_Sports_Governance_Principles_FINAL.pdf

http://www.ausport.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/531165/Mandatory_Sports_Governance_Principles_FINAL.pdf

http://www.volunteeringaustralia.org/wp-content/uploads/VA-Key-statistics-about-Australian-volunteering-16-April-20151.pdf

http://www.volunteeringaustralia.org/wp-content/uploads/VA-Key-statistics-about-Australian-volunteering-16-April-20151.pdf

https://volunteeringwa.org.au/assets/downloads/vwa_report%20book_web.pdf


Page 59


2017-18 2016-17 2015-16 2014-15 2013-14 2012-13

Number of applications received

44

44

81

78

70

82

Average grant amount requested

$4992

$4551

$4809

$4532

$4192

$4240

Total monies requested $219,627 $200,267 $389,518 $353,468 $293,466 $343,468

Number of applications recommended for funding

28 (64%)

27 (61%)

57 (70%)

55 (70%)

52 (74%)

65 (79%)

Number of applications not recommended for funding

16 (36%)

17 (39%)

24 (30%)

23 (30%)

18 (26%)

17 (21%)

Applications recommended for full funding

17 (38%)

22 (50%)

19 (33%)

25 (45%)

23 (44%)

19 (29%)

Table 1: Applications received

Assessment The evaluation of applications was undertaken by an assessment panel of Council officers. Applications were individually assessed by each assessment officer against the scoring matrix. The aggregate score of each application was then reviewed and discussed collectively. The assessment process promotes cross organisation understanding and awareness of community groups, activities and needs whilst ensuring that each application is assessed to a standard. Assessment panel recommendations were informally discussed at the 14 June 2017 Councillor Briefing. Officers were present to provide additional information and clarification where required. Funding allocation The breakdown of 2017–2018 applications received and recommendations for funding allocations are provided in the following table:

Applications received

Recommended for funding*

Amount awarded

Average amount awarded

Not recommended for funding

Additional funds**

44 28 $117,103 $4182 16 $17,103 Table 2: 2017–2018 Recommended funding

*Not all applications recommended for funding were awarded full funding. **the funds awarded in excess of the $100,000 (including the Victoria Tavern Trust) budget allocation represent contributions from the Small Community Grants Scheme.


Page 60


Unsuccessful applicants All unsuccessful applicants are notified in writing of the outcome of their application. They are encouraged to contact a council officer for feedback and to discuss the outcome of their application. Community Celebration All successful applicants will be invited to attend a Celebration and Grant Presentation evening on Wednesday 19 July 2017.

Measuring the performance of the Scheme. Council undertakes a number of measures to gauge the success / performance of the scheme. Detailed below are these in respect to the 2017 and 2016 schemes – 1. Number of new applicants 2017: 6 (14%)

2. Number of new/innovative services/activities 2017: 12 (27%)

3. Type of funded activities (see graph below)


Page 61


4. Location of funded activities 2017 (see graph below)

5. Number of funding agreements issueD in 2016 funding round: 27

6. Number of project variations received in 2016 funding round: 1

7. Number of acquittals received for 2016 funding round: 1214

8. Feedback from applicants for 2016–2017 funding round.

All applicants for the 2016–2017 funding round were sent a link to a survey monkey feedback online form.

There were seventeen (38% of all applicants) feedback survey responses. Of the applicants that completed the survey, nine were successful in receiving funding (33% of successful applicants), four were unsuccessful (23% of unsuccessful applicants) and four were anonymous.

14 Funded groups can submit an acquittal up to the end of June 2017 or when the project is

completed.


Page 62


Sample of feedback received:

“Provide an option to skip sections that do not relate to specific projects.”

“The time frame needs to be extended to allow for reference and approval letters, and quotes (tradies don't hurry).”

“The format makes you think about what you are trying to achieve, see it through the eyes of the community as well as your group. This is a good thing as it helps groups see outside their own membership for the implications of a project to its effect on the broader community.”

Summary of feedback received:

64% of respondents heard about the Scheme through print or online

media

60% thought promotion of the Scheme was excellent

0% thought promotion of the Scheme was poor

The average number of grants each respondent applies for annually is 4

The average number of grants received by respondents was 2

The average amount of total grant monies awarded to respondents in the

last year was $8,690

70% of respondents indicated that completing the online form was not

easy

64% of respondents indicated that it took between 3–10 hours to complete

the application form

100% of respondents indicated that their experience with the contact

officer was good or excellent

65% of respondents indicated that the evaluating criteria assisted them in

completing the application.

9. Complaints received by unsuccessful applicants for 2016–2017 funding

round: 0 (0%)


Page 63


Grants awarded The 2017 Community Funding Scheme Recommended Funding Allocations are listed below:

Community group Project title Recommended

funding

Friends of the Bluestone Theatre Big Town, Little Town—a community storytelling project $4,000.00

Friends of Kyneton Botanic Gardens Artist residency and online portal $5,760.00

Romsey Fire Brigade Community safety trailer $5,000.00

South Gisborne Tennis Club Facilities' access for disabled participants $5,808.00

Gisborne Rotary Club Music therapy program—Aged Care Gisborne Oaks $5,000.00

Woodend Hesket Football Netball Club

Seating at the nest $5,000.00

Parkrun Inc. Lancefield Parkrun startup costs $5,000.00

Woodend Neighbourhood House Inc.

Let there be light—building improvement. $6,000.00

Gisborne Soccer Club New goals for girls $6,000.00

Gisborne Men's Shed Purchase timber jointer planer $2,600.00

Romsey Mechanics Institute - CoM Solar panels $6,000.00

Greening of Riddell New interpretative sign Riddell Reserve, Riddells Creek. $1,600.00

Kerrie Hall Inc. Main hall floor upgrade $4,500.00

Upper Campaspe Landcare Network

Helping our network grow $2,118.00

This Farm Needs A Farmer This Farm needs a Farmer workshops $3,000.00

Newham Mechanics Institute Facility upgrade $4,500.00

Mt Macedon & District Horticultural Society

Library room shelving $2,700.00

Cry Wolf (Friends of the Bluestone Theatre)

Cry Wolf $3,900.00

Riddells Creek Lions Club Additional play equipment $6,000.00

Woodend Girl Guides Kitchen renovation $5,000.00

Woodend Tennis Club Inc PA system $3,900.00

Macedon Ranges Running Club Inc. Promoting the benefits of running and supporting our leaders $1,500.00

Lauriston Hall Committee of Management

Lauriston Hall kitchen upgrade: Stage 2 $5,577.00

Bullengarook Pony Club Junior riding area fencing upgrade $6,000.00

Carlsruhe Upper Campaspe Development & Protection Taskforce

Trailer for spraying weeds

$1,200.00

Kyneton Municipal Band Instrument upgrade $2,695.00


Page 64


Community group Project title Recommended

funding

Lancefield Playgroup Brighter play—building improvement $3,745.00

Lancefield Romsey Little Athletics Centre

Long jump run up and pit $3,000.00

Total Projects Funded 117,103.00


Page 65

11. CX.5 ADOPTION OF 2017/18 BUDGET Officer: John Hausler, Director Corporate Services File Ref: F2419-03


proactively engage with, and demonstrate accountability to, the community; and build and sustain financial strength

Synopsis: Section 127 of the Local Government Act requires councils in Victoria to prepare a budget for each financial year. In 2014, the Victorian Government published the Better Practice Guide to Local Government Planning and Reporting. The Guide states that “the budget is a short-term plan which specifies the resources required to fund a council’s services and initiatives over the next 12 months...At the strategic level, the budget details how the services and initiatives to be funded will contribute to the achievement of the strategic objectives in the council plan...At the operational level it should express the funding of services and initiatives through financial statements”. At the Council Meeting on 7 June 2017, Council received 79 budget submissions, including late submissions and heard 20 submitters who made a verbal presentation in support of their budget submission and resolved to – 1. Note the budget submissions and verbal presentations. 2. Refer the submissions to this meeting. 3. Prepare recommendations for consideration and determination at this

meeting. Therefore, the purpose of this report is to (1) make a determination on the submissions and (2) adopt the Budget, with or without amendment. It should be noted that there was an administrative error with rate in the dollar declared when the draft budget was adopted 26 April 2017. The error was identified and the draft budget was re-advertised on Monday 8 May 2017. The public notice period was extended as a result of this change. The adjustment to rates and charges declared are included in this report.


(1) That, having prepared the Draft Budget Report 2017/18, having placed it on public display and having received and considered all submissions, Council adopts the Budget with the following amendments –


Page 66

11. CX.5 ADOPTION OF 2017/18 BUDGET (Continued)

a. That the Budget be amended to increase the Financial Assistance Grant – general purpose funding income by $50,000 as a result of recent advice from the Federal Government.

b. That the Budget be amended to remove the contribution to the State Emergency Service (SES) of $28,668. The Victorian State Government has advised that they will make the contribution to the SES from 2017/18.

c. That the Budget be amended to reduce the School Crossing

grant income by $10,950 as a result of recent advice from the Victorian State Government.

d. That the Budget be amended to reduce the amount allocated to

the CEO recruitment by $15,000 due to some expenditure being brought forward to 2016/17.

e. That the Budget be amended to reduce the Club contribution

and increase the Council contribution to the Riddells Creek Tennis Court development by $20,000.

f. That the Budget be amended to allocate $5,000 to the

Malmsbury common project.

g. That the Budget be amended to increase the funding to support tourism services for the autumn leaves festival by $42,000.

h. That the Budget be amended to increase funding for the

Gisborne office window replacement by $60,000.

i. That the Budget be amended to allocate funding of $25,000 to support of the Equine Industry to provide for an economic development plan.

j. That the Budget be amended to allocate funding of $55,000 to

the IR Robertson Reserve pavilion development project.

k. That the Budget be amended to allocate funding of $80,000 from the Public Open Space – South financial reserve to the development of female change rooms at Gardiner Reserve.

l. That the Budget be amended to correct some minor

typographical errors identified.

m. That the Budget be amended to adjust Fee no. 313 in relation to Kyneton town hall hire commercial to include the specification of event staff cost as being from $55 p/h.


Page 67


(2) That the following amendments to the rates and charges declared at its meeting on 26 April 2017 be adopted.

a. That the amount intended to be raised by rates, the municipal

charge and various waste charges will be $45,262,672.

b. That five Differential Rates on the Capital Improved Value of rateable land will be applied as follows – 1. General Rate of 0.2965 cents in the dollar. 2. Agricultural Land Rate of 0.2372 cents in the dollar. 3. Commercial/Industrial Rate of 0.3558 cents in the dollar. 4. Recreational Land Rate of 0.1482 cents in the dollar. 5. Not for Profit Housing Rate of 0.1482 cents in the dollar.

(3) That Council give public notice of its decision to adopt its 2017/18

Budget; place the adopted Budget on public display; and provide the Budget to the Minister.

(4) That Council endorse the officer responses as shown in section 6 of this report plus the modifications as shown in 1 above.

(5) That Council write to all the Submitters and –

a. thank them for providing their concerns, objections, support and requests;

b. provide them with the appropriate responses; and c. advise them that the Budget was adopted with the amendments

as shown in 1 above. (6) That, having declared its rates and charges at its meeting on 26 April

2017 with amendments as shown in 7 and given notice of those rates and charges, they be levied by sending a “rate and charges notice” to the persons who are liable to pay, in accordance with section 158 of the Local Government Act 1989.


Page 68


1. Introduction At the Council Meeting on 26 April 2017, Council resolved to:

Declare the Rates and Charges 2017/18 and give public notice of the declaration.

Approve the Draft Budget Report 2017/18 for public display; give public notice that it is available; and invite written submissions;

Give any person who has made a submission the right to be heard in support of their submission at the Council Meeting to be held on 5 June 2017.

An administrative error with rate in the dollar declared was identified after the draft budget was adopted 26 April 2017. The error was identified and the draft budget was re-advertised on Monday 8 May 2017. The public notice period was extended as a result of this change.

2. Legislative requirements

The preparation of the Budget Report and declaration of Rates and Charges have been in accordance with – 1. The Local Government Act 1989.

2. The Local Government Amendment (Performance Reporting and Accountability) Act 2014.

3. The Local Government (Planning and Reporting) Regulations 2014.

3. Draft Budget The draft Budget which Council approved for public display, balanced the environmental, infrastructure and social needs with the community’s capacity to pay. When resources are limited it is essential that those resources are carefully allocated so Council is able to achieve its objectives and deliver its services. The draft Budget did this and therefore any subsequent adjustments to the budget also need to be balanced with a corresponding adjustment.

4. Rates and Charges

As outlined in the background, there was an administrative error identified with the rate in the dollar rate in the dollar declared was identified after the draft budget was adopted 26 April, 2017. The error was corrected and the submission period extended. The corrected rates in the dollar are: 1. General Rate of 0.2965 cents in the dollar. 2. Agricultural Land Rate of 0.2372 cents in the dollar. 3. Commercial/Industrial Rate of 0.3558 cents in the dollar. 4. Recreational Land Rate of 0.1482 cents in the dollar. 5. Not for Profit Housing Rate of 0.1482 cents in the dollar.

Although the change to the rate in the dollar results in only a minor increase per property, overall income from rates is $124,000 higher than the initial draft budget. Council’s amended total budgeted income from rates and charges for 2017/18 is $45,262,672.


Page 69


5. Grants Since the draft budget was adopted further information has been provided by the State and Federal Governments in relation to 2017/18 grant funding. It is proposed that the draft budget be amended to reflect these changes which are as follows:

Increase Financial Assistance Grants – general purpose +$50,000

Saving in expenditure due to SES contribution being paid by the State Government +$28,668

Decrease in budget for State Government School Crossing grant income -$10,950

6. Submissions

The submissions and petition are available as attachments to the Agenda for the Council Meeting held on 7 June 2017. Therefore they are not attached to this agenda. The following table provides a summary of each submission and the response from Council officers:

No. Summary of submissions

Officer response

No. Summary of submissions Officer response

1-4. 6.

Request for funding of $38,000 for an upgraded learning centre at Kyneton Pony Club.

There are currently no significant works planned with Councils building maintenance schedule for this facility in the coming years. The project should be referred to the upcoming Leisure Strategy process to determine its priority against other desired equestrian facilities. An example of need is the condemned IR Robertson facility that Council have allocated $25,000 to replace because those clubs have no shelter etc. Prior to considering such a funding request further Council should also understand what the requested funds are for to ensure any necessary requirements are considered and met.

5.

Submission denotes appreciation for the financial contribution to lighting at Tony Clarke Reserve Macedon.

This submission supports the budget inclusion of a $428,000 project to improve the lighting at Tony Clarke Reserve Macedon, working with both the State Government and the local community to fund the outcome.


Page 70


7. Request for an extra soccer field / pitch at Dixon Park / Reserve.

It is recognised that there is increasing participation in soccer. This and the pressure on soccer pitches at Dixon Field will be referred to Council's Leisure Strategy process that will considered by Council later in 2017. The Leisure Strategy will guide Council's priorities in sport and recreation provision for the next 10 years and the community will have a chance to provide comment to that process.

8.

Request for Council to investigate Federal funding for Climate mitigation projects instead of using Council funds

Council advocates to the State and Commonwealth Governments for greater support and resources for local government as appropriate, including through the Municipal Association of Victoria. Most recently Council made a submission to the Commonwealth’s Review of Climate Change Policies Discussion Paper seeking, amongst other things, more direct support to local government and community groups for renewable energy generation. In lieu of greater Commonwealth and State Government action and support, Council, alongside many other local government Councils, feels it is important to act as a leader by investing in initiatives that reduce the organisation’s greenhouse gas emissions and which generate significant cost savings to Council and the community in the medium term.

9.

Submission is supportive of the proposed investment in walking and cycling and requests Council play a role in corralling the many various cycling interest groups to improve visibility of activities and infrastructure.

Cycling groups and the general community will have the opportunity to provide input into the cycling and walking initiatives outlined in the 2017/18 budget and in particular the planning studies. Council also currently works with cycling groups on initiatives such as cycling safety signage.

Request for Council to have a focus on whole of life cost consideration or life cycle costing when implementing environmental initiatives (as well as striving to implement demonstration projects.

All capital works projects, including solar panel installations and other environmental upgrades, include analysis to determine the life cycle costing. This includes analysis to determine the initial capital and ongoing maintenance, operational and renewal costs for an asset over its lifecycle. For environmental initiatives the payback period for the works or asset is also considered.

10. Request for funding for lighting upgrades at Lancefield Tennis Courts.

Council notes the fantastic efforts of the Lancefield Tennis Club to improve its facilities through the planning of multi-purpose courts on the site of the old asphalt courts utilising State Government and local funding and also the detailed submission to Council’s budget process. The issue of the provision of new additional tennis courts across the shire is one that will be considered in the Leisure Strategy 2017-2027 for which community consultation will be undertaken in the latter half of 2017. As such the lighting of these proposed additional courts can be considered as part of that strategic planning and retro fitted if required with funding that can be potentially facilitated though Council (i.e. Sport and Recreation Victoria funding). Council can also assist in investigating solutions and potential funding for the replacement of the lighting system to the current courts.


Page 71

11. CX.5 ADOPTION OF 2017/18 BUDGET (Continued) 11. Support for the

construction of footpaths at Nursery Road Macedon – Stage 2 and Stage 3.

As requested in this submission the budget includes funding for the continuation of a new footpath in Nursery Road, Macedon. This includes $29,000 for Stage 2: From Broad Walk to Craven Street and $20,000 for Stage 3: From Craven Street to path in front of school.

12.

Request for ongoing funding towards Daylesford Macedon Ranges Tourism (DMRT).

DMRT has been through a change in its funding and delivery models moving toward a fee for service model rather than an untied contribution via a MoU. The draft 2017/18 Budget includes an allocation for supporting tourism businesses in line with what has been provided to Daylesford Macedon Ranges Tourism Board in the past. Council will therefore be in a position to purchase services from DMRT which continue to support industry buy in as appropriate.

13. Suggestion of bias in allocation of funding towards Kyneton

As part of the annual budget process Council looks at capital works priorities across the entire Shire. Capital works priorities are influenced by a number of factors including the age of existing Community assets in an area, infrastructure usage, environment factors and population growth. In some years there may be more capital projects in some towns than others, however, over the longer term there is a spread of projects across the Shire. It also needs to be noted that projects included within Councils budget are not only being completed using Council funds, but also successfully sought State and Commonwealth funding and also often significant local community contributions.

Question regarding what functions the increase of 14 staff relate to

The key areas of staff growth in the draft budget are in the Early Years (preschools) area, maternal child health and in Statutory Planning. Most of the growth in staff is offset by user fees and grants as the number of people using our services is also growing.

Question regarding a large decrease in Capital Grants and Budgeted Capital Works for “Parks ,Open Spaces and Streetscapes” and what impact this would have

Grants for parks, open space and streetscapes are not ongoing. Each year capital projects are prioritised and then grant applications are made for specific projects. This results in some fluctuations in grant funding each year depending on the projects in the budget.

Question regarding the CEO salary

The Chief Executive Officer area of the budget includes the CEOs employment costs and salaries for administration staff who perform a range of functions across Council. It also includes other non-employee budget items to fund cross organisational costs that is not specifically budgeted in other Departments.


Page 72

11. CX.5 ADOPTION OF 2017/18 BUDGET (Continued) Request for more funding

for cleaning up rubbish from our open spaces and roadsides as well as more roadside slashing

The roadside slashing program is annually reviewed by the Municipal Fire Management Planning Committee to ensure that those roadsides that are strategic fire breaks are included in the annual program. Council has increased funding towards roadside slashing for fire prevention purposes over the last two years. If a concern exists about a particular area this can be referred to the Fire Management Officer for further investigation. If a concern exists about rubbish in particular areas of our open space on our roadsides then please report these to our Customer Service staff who will be happy to lodge a request for our staff to arrange for removal. In regard to rubbish clean up, the feedback is noted and no additional funds are required to patrol this area. Concerns raised will be passed on to our Operations staff and the patrolling crews.

Support for funds committed to footpaths and bike tracks

The 2017/18 new footpath construction program includes the construction of five individual projects totalling $193,000 in the East ward. This equates to just under a third for the total spend for the footpath program in the whole of the shire. Projects are selected based on priority factors including improved connectivity to major activity centres like schools, medical centres, recreation facilities, M&CH facilities and business precincts. The prioritisation of footpath projects will continue to be based on these factors in future budgets.

Support for allocated roads funding

Council has committed to ensuring the funding of road renewal and upgrade projects. This includes $7.275 million in the 2017/2018 Capital Works Budget and includes $4.450 million from grants and contributions.

14. Objection to the design of the new change rooms at the Gilbert Gordon Oval.

The proposed pavilion at Gilbert Gordon oval will bring Council’s recent direct investment into the facilities at this oval to approximately $2M – more than any other funding Council has invested into a single oval to date. The pavilion is designed to AFL community standards and allows for potential future stages such as social club rooms which is a club responsibility. Council sought but was unsuccessful in obtaining a State Government contribution and as a result is allocating additional funds in its 2017/18 budget. The pavilion will be publicly tendered to ensure value for money and consultation has occurred on the design and look, including with the expected users of the facility.

15.

Proposal to develop an enclosed off-leash dog park at the Gisborne Fields area on Tovey Drive.

Council is currently preparing a new four year Domestic Animal Management Plan with a draft plan to be considered by council at the June Ordinary Council Meeting. One of the activities included in the draft plan is to investigate the feasibility of introducing an Order that identifies dog on and off lead areas in the shire. The possible identification and establishment of off lead parks would be considered as part of this study. It is proposed that this be considered in 2018/19. Residents are encouraged to provide feedback on the draft plan once it is released by Council for community consultation.


Page 73


16. Support for New Gisborne Regional Sports Fields Project

The feasibility study for the New Gisborne Regional Sports field project is being undertaken by Council in 2016/17 and should be completed prior to June 30 2017 to enable the project to be considered by other levels of government for funding. The project has been identified as a strategic project for the Shire and funding has been allocated in 2017/18 to undertake a feature survey of the site to make the project more “shovel ready”. Note that Council does not normally place funds into a “special project account” prior to a project being approved to commence.

17. Support for further funding for strategic planning to implement the outcomes of the Macedon Ranges Protection Advisory Committee recommendations.

The Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning have been tasked with working in partnership with Macedon Ranges Shire to implementing the recommendations of the Macedon Ranges Protection Advisory Committee. Adequate funding has been allocated in the 2017/18 Budget to achieve this outcome consistent with the timelines and contributions of the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning.

Support for review of the Romsey Structure Plan.

The 2017/18 proposed budget includes funding to review the Romsey Outline Development Plan subject to external funding from the Victorian Planning Authority. This project has been identified as a priority to ensure that Council’s planning policies are relevant and up to date.

18. Request for $25,000 of funds to join the local government leadership group of alliance for gambling reform.

Whilst Council commends and supports the work of the Alliance for Gambling Reform, our data and significant community consultation has not identified problem gambling as the highest priority health and wellbeing issue in our municipality. Council has considerable financial constraints in preparing this annual budget due to rate capping and other challenges in the current economic climate. Consistent with the need to prioritise the funding of initiatives and align available funds with the current needs of our community, officers would recommend that we decline the opportunity to financially contribute to the alliance in 2017/18.

19. 28. 30. 32-34. 36-37. 40 42 44-46. 56.

Support for funding allocated to leverage state and federal funding to prepare a master plan for the redevelopment of the current Kyneton Primary School site for community use.

Council has received multiple submissions supporting the budget inclusion of $10,000 to leverage state and federal funding to prepare a master plan for the redevelopment of the current Kyneton Primary School site for community use. Council agrees that this is a vitally important project and ensuring that the redevelopment of the property provides for a positive community outcome is a high priority. Ongoing advocacy to the State Government to retain the property in public ownership is also a high priority to Council.


Page 74


20. Submission requesting information on Councils planned equine facilities.

Whilst Council resolved not to pursue the business case for an equine centre, it is Council’s formal position to:

1. Investigate the importance of accessible, safe and high

quality equestrian facilities for recreational equestrian participants in the Shire and consider appropriate improvements in those areas as part of the Council's new Leisure Strategy.

2. Support the equine industry through appropriate future economic strategies and tactical initiatives.

3. Respond to opportunities for business development and consider them as they present themselves.

21. 38. 73-75.

Submissions requesting and supporting new playground in Gisborne at the reserve at the intersection of (Buckland and Tovey Street).

The draft budget allows $100,000 towards the development of the park at Tovey Drive, Gisborne for all of the reasons outlined in the submission. This will include a playground at a “local “level as outlined in the Council’s Playground Strategy and other park infrastructure and plantings as required. The community will be consulted with in terms of the design.

22. 25.

Submissions support the digitisation of Councils permanent records at the Woodend squash courts and any potential future redevelopment of the area.

Council has received two submissions supporting the digitisation of permanent records. Council holds a large quantity of records that are considered to be permanent under the Public Records of Victoria’s Retention and Disposal Authorities. This project will enable Council to carry out the important work towards the preservation and transfer of permanent records to the State Archive of Victoria whilst also retaining access to digital copies for future use. The submissions support the need to protect and store Council records whilst at the same time creating an opportunity for the former Woodend Squash Courts to be demolished and the site redeveloped for community use. This digitisation project will begin removing permanent records from the Woodend Squash Courts that will when completed enable this site to be used for other purposes.

23. Submission requests more playground equipment / skate park at Tony Clarke reserve.

Tony Clarke reserve is a valued and popular recreational and sporting precinct in Macedon and additional playground equipment and a skate park would enhance the reserve further. This would be best guided by a master plan for the reserve that is currently out of date. The priority for that master plan will be considered as part of the development of the Council’s Leisure Strategy 2017-2027 to occur later in 2017.


Page 75

11. CX.5 ADOPTION OF 2017/18 BUDGET (Continued) Submission requests more

money for walking and cycling.

There is currently $860,000 (new footpaths $710,000 walking and cycling design and planning $100,000, Walking & Cycling strategy implementation $50,000) dedicated directly from Council funding to walking and cycling projects and planning in the draft budget. In comparing any expenditure across differing services provided by Council, it is important to note that amounts allocated within a given year will not always be equally proportionate due to the long term nature of Councils assets. More specifically in regards to the noted $1 million allocated to tennis projects in the 2017/18 budget, only $365,000 is from Council funds and the remaining from club and State Government funding. As such there is substantially more of Councils funding being directed to walking and cycling in the 2017/18 draft budget.

Submission suggests that we are no longer supporting free green waste at Council refuse sites and that is should be made free again.

Council has retained its commitment to allowing residents to drop residential quantities of green waste at its refuse sites for free as outlined within Appendix B3 – Customer Fees and Charges 2017/18 within Councils 2017/18 draft Budget document.

24. Submission supporting the construction of new change rooms at the Gilbert Gordon Oval.

Council has proposed an additional $350,000 of funds in 2017/18 be directed towards the completion of the Gilbert Gordon oval pavilion and building upgrade works to the social rooms which will include completing new change rooms for the precinct. The support of the submission is noted.

26. Submission supporting the investment by Council in cycling.

Council is investing $150,000 into priorities of the walking and cycling strategy in 2017/18. This includes $50,000 of funds into the community’s priority outcome of the Walking and Cycling Strategy to undertake concept design, costing and consultation on the development of a shared trail between Riddells Creek, Gisborne and Macedon. It is also proposing $50,000 investment to further investigate the Hepburn to Macedon Ranges trail and the Woodend to Hanging Rock trail and consider other potential opportunities in the shire for lower cost trails that capitalise on existing infrastructure where possible. In addition to this planning, $50,000 will be spent on implementing additional actions of the Walking and Cycling Strategy including safety signage and other supporting infrastructure to paths and trails.


Page 76


27. Submissions has requested the following outcomes:

Council to play a role in road safety and awareness;

A request for more signage on popular routes for cyclists; and

A request for more rail trails.

Council continues to work in partnership with authorities and user groups including Victoria Police and Bike Safe Macedon to educate road users on a range of road safety matters including Councils continued support in the ‘Share the Road’ campaign. The 2017/18 Budget contains $50,000 towards implementing Walking and Cycling actions including signage and other supporting infrastructure to paths and trails. The draft budget allows for detailed planning into off-road recreational trails including rail trails. In particular a trail from Riddells Creek through to Gisborne and Macedon will be scoped and Woodend to Kyneton with a rail trail to Daylesford.

28. The submissions has noted the funds committed to Councils Arts and Culture strategy and queried if funds are also intended to be committed to Kyneton’s Bluestone Theatre in 2017/18.

Submission also supports the project to replace existing outdated and non-compliant theatrical infrastructure that has been identified as a Health and safety risk to employees, contractors and community members.

No budget has been allocated for capital improvements to the Bluestone Theatre in 2017-18 although Council will continue to undertake necessary maintenance. A combination of Council ($90,000), State Government ($290,000) and community ($20,000) investment funded major upgrades to the Bluestone Theatre in 2015. In 2016-17 a further $50,300 has been committed by Council to upgrading the heating system for the Theatre. Safety upgrades have been undertaken on the seating in consultation with the manufacturer and ‘front of house’ training has been provided to user groups to assist in improving patron safety.

Significant Council staff time is provided to support groups using the Bluestone to hold their events and officers are currently working with the Friends of the Bluestone Theatre to address access and flexibility of space issues.

Council is also undertaking a consultation with existing and potential user groups to identify a future management model for the facility that meets the needs of community groups, Council and other stakeholders.

Council has included $140,000 in its draft budget for Kyneton Town Hall Occupational, Health and Safety Compliance works.

Submission raises questions about the future of the Kyneton primary school site including the expected scope of outcomes, Councils views on usages and future possibilities for this site.

Councils’ consideration of this matter is only preliminary and its inclusion of this item in the budget is to seek funding to be further informed about the future possibilities for this site, prior to making any further decisions.


Page 77

11. CX.5 ADOPTION OF 2017/18 BUDGET (Continued) Submission is supportive of

Councils investment in solar panels, however has raised concern about the ongoing commitment required to achieve Councils goal of zero carbon emissions prior to 2050.

Council is committed to working with the State Government and the community to achieve the State’s zero emissions target by 2050. An overview of Council’s role in reducing its own emissions and supporting community action is detailed in Council’s Climate Change Action Plan which will be considered by Council for adoption on 28 June 2017. Council also actively advocates to the State and Federal Governments for greater resources and support for local government. There is currently $450,000 allocated to Climate change adaption for solar panels and other energy efficiencies in the draft budget. Councils Plan also included the year one key action to continue to reduce Councils greenhouse gas emissions.

Submission requested the sealing of an unsealed section of Batters Lane, Kyneton between Pipers Creek Road & Baynton Road.

Council does not currently have a 100% Council funded program for the upgrade of unsealed roads to a sealed standard. The completion of such works is carried out under the provisions of a special charge scheme. A special charge scheme requires a contribution from the affected property owners to complete these type of upgrade works. Should any resident wish for Council to investigate the possible implementation of a special charge scheme to upgrade Batters Lane, Kyneton between Pipers Creek Road and Kyneton Baynton Road, residents should make a formal request in writing.

29. 48. 50. 59.

Submissions denote a lack of information in the budget regarding tourism actions, targets and plans. Submissions either suggests concern that funding for the Daylesford and Macedon Ranges Tourism Inc is proposed to be withdrawn, or are in favour of its retention.

DMRT has been through a change in its funding and delivery models moving toward a fee for service model rather than an untied contribution via a MoU. The draft 2017/18 Budget includes an allocation for supporting tourism businesses in line with what has been provided to Daylesford Macedon Ranges Tourism Board in the past. Council will therefore be in a position to purchase services from DMRT which continue to support industry buy in as appropriate. The draft Tourism Industry Master Plan has been presented to Council and will be released to the community for feedback through an extensive consultation process. This will provide another opportunity to seek broad industry and community input and will allow the organisation to weigh up and assess all options before allocating resources.


Page 78


31. The submission queries the establishment and balances of the Asset Conversion Financial reserve and the Commercial Development Commercial financial reserve. Questions have also been raised in regard to the movement in balances of financial reserve between balances list in the 2016/17 Budget and the 2017/18 Draft Budget.

As stated in the submission, the Financial Reserves policy was adopted by Council in November 2014. Prior to the adoption of the policy the “Management Property Reserves” financial reserve contained funds received from the sale of Council owned lots in the New Gisborne Industrial Estate and the proceeds of the sale of minor Council properties (excludes open space). Following the adoption of Financial reserve policy the balances from the Management Property Reserves were split out into the Commercial Development reserve, which held the balances of the lots sold in the New Gisborne Industrial Estate and the Asset Conversion reserve which held all other balances. The reason these two components were split out was that the funds in the reserves were to be used for different purposes. As is clearly stated in the source of funds definitions in the reserves policy, the asset conversion reserve excluded the proceeds from the sale from the development of commercial/industrial land which is covered under the Commercial Development reserve. The proceeds from the sale of other Council properties were used to comprise the asset conversion reserve. In regard to the movement in balances of financial reserve between balances listed in the 2016/17 Budget and the 2017/18 Draft Budget. Budgets (including reserve movements) are based on assumptions that are made before the start of the financial year. The final reserve balances are confirmed and presented in our annual audited financial statements. The balances of the reserves are impacted by factors such as contributions from developers, the timing of land sales and major plant purchases (e.g. trucks, graders, etc.). These factors are difficult to predict and will in most instances result in variations to the published budget. In essence: 2016/17 Budget Balance as at 30/6/2017 + Movements occurring post budget preparation (within audited financial statements) will equal the actual Balance as at 01/07/2017. Due to the timing of preparation of budgets it is not possible to include an accurate final figure in budgeted financial statements. This final balance will be recorded in the 2016/17 annual audited financial statements.


Page 79


35. Submission denotes a number of matters relating to how Tourism is outlined within the budget document and specifically identifies their ongoing support for funding Daylesford Macedon Ranges Tourism and also identifies the need for a review of the provision of visitor information services.

DMRT has been through a change in its funding and delivery models moving toward a fee for service model rather than an untied contribution via a MoU. The draft 2017/18 Budget includes an allocation for supporting tourism businesses in line with what has been provided to Daylesford Macedon Ranges Tourism Board in the past. Council will therefore be in a position to purchase services from DMRT which continue to support industry buy in as appropriate. MRSC proposes to undertake a review of visitor servicing in 2017/18 as illustrated by the funding identified in the draft budget under new initiatives. The draft Tourism Industry Master Plan has been presented to Council and will be released to the community for feedback through an extensive consultation process. This will provide another opportunity to seek broad industry and community input and will allow the organisation to weigh up and assess all options before allocating resources.

39. The submission requests Council set aside further appropriate heritage funding to cover a range of towns in the Shire including historic homes in Macedon and Mount Macedon.

Council is currently progressing the Kyneton, Gisborne and New Gisborne Heritage Study. Implementation of the study through the application of the heritage overlay is likely to occur in the 2017/18 financial year. The 2017/18 proposed budget includes funding to assist with the statutory implementation through the planning scheme amendment process. The strategic planning team will be in a position to commence further heritage studies in the 2018/19 financial year. Woodend, Macedon/Mount Macedon and Lancefield have been identified as priorities.

41. 43.

These submissions requests that the site of the Kyneton primary school be turned into a community centre and that community groups be provided with an allocated space.

Councils’ consideration of this matter is only preliminary and its inclusion of this item in the budget is to seek funding to be further informed about the future possibilities for this site, prior to making any further decisions.

47. This submission seeks an additional amount of $40,000 to contribute to the development of the Riddells creek tennis court development.

Council notes the detailed submission by the Riddells Creek Tennis Club and its outstanding efforts to date to progress stage 2 of the redevelopment of tennis courts in Riddells Creek. The current scope of works has been agreed by all parties and funding bodies associated with the Riddells creek tennis court development. Notwithstanding that scope could be revisited to fit a reduced budget, this would take a significant amount of consultation to come to a new agreement on revised scope and put the timing of this project at risk. Any additional allocated funding by Council would need to take into account the principal that providing increased funding sets for other clubs balanced against the opportunity to get an outcome that is supported by the community, and other key funding partners.


Page 80

11. CX.5 ADOPTION OF 2017/18 BUDGET (Continued) 49. This submission seeks a

change to the mix of resourcing representation in dealing with tourism and an increase in the level of stakeholder engagement. The submission also supports ongoing association with the Regional Tourism Board.

We acknowledge the importance of tourism to the shire by the range of programs and services the Council offers including hosting, management and marketing of visitmacedonranges.com, the naturally cool social media platform and visitor servicing infrastructure. The draft budget also provides support for the tourism industry via; the festivals and events grant program, business awards, business seminars and training program and funding for implementation of the tourism industry master plan. The draft Tourism Industry Master Plan has been presented to Council and will be released to the community for feedback through an extensive consultation process. This will provide another opportunity to seek broad industry and community input and will allow the organisation to weigh up and assess all options before allocating resources. The Economic Development & Tourism Department has hosted a local learning tour (visitor information centre volunteers) that included the submitters business. Council officers have offered to provide support for the submitter’s new development with facilitation of plans and permits when the project was ready and two members of the tourism unit have also booked services at the submitters business that included discussions about opportunities for business that are offered by Council. There are also other members of the Economic Development and Tourism Department, including the Manager who have experienced the service the submitters business provides. DMRT has been through a change in its funding and delivery models moving toward a fee for service model rather than an untied contribution via a MoU. The draft 2017/18 Budget includes an allocation for supporting tourism businesses in line with what has been provided to Daylesford Macedon Ranges Tourism Board in the past. Council will therefore be in a position to purchase services from DMRT which continue to support industry buy in as appropriate. MRSC also proposes to undertake a review of visitor servicing in 2017/18.


Page 81


51. This submission supports the allocation of $150,000 for walking and Cycling initiatives in the 207/18 draft budget. It also more specifically highlights the scope of where funds should be spent on the shared path from Riddells Creek –Gisborne-Macedon, requests an on-road cyclist advisory route, requests a dedicated walking and cycling shire officer and to consider the challenges with a Macedon Ranges Rail Trail and ensure these funds are utilised appropriately.

Council notes the detailed submission. The planning for the Riddells Creek to Gisborne to Macedon off road trail and the Daylesford to Macedon Ranges off road trail incorporating a link to Hanging Rock will take into account a range of factors and will seek community input. The employment of a dedicated Walking and Cycling Officer is not warranted. As the planning for an off road cycling route from Woodend to Hanging Rock will be further progressed in 2017/18 the provision of an advisory cycling route will not be advanced at this stage.

52-53. 66. 70.

These submissions supports the allocation of funds towards the digitisation of Councils permanent records. The submissions also support the Arts and Culture strategy development. The support for both these projects in the draft budget relate to the benefits they bring to considering redevelopment of the Woodend community centre.

Council holds a large quantity of records that are considered to be permanent under the Public Records of Victoria’s Retention and Disposal Authorities. This project will enable Council to carry out the important work towards the preservation and transfer of permanent records to the State Archive of Victoria whilst also retaining access to digital copies for future use. The submissions support the need to protect and store Council records whilst at the same time creating an opportunity for the former Woodend Squash Courts to be demolished and the site redeveloped for community use. This digitisation project will begin removing permanent records from the Woodend Squash Courts that will when completed enable this site to be used for other purposes. These submissions also support the $60,000 allocated to the Arts and Culture strategy in the draft budget.

54. Submission predominantly relates to further use of local tree species in our developments and projects, especially in Gisborne.

Council is currently progressing the Gisborne Neighbourhood Character Study. The purpose of the study is to identify the valued characteristics of Gisborne’s residential neighbourhoods, determine preferred character and then make recommendations on the most appropriate planning controls to protect the character of Gisborne. The 2017/18 proposed budget includes funding to assist with the statutory implementation of this study in the planning scheme. Council’s street tree policy is currently in draft and will go out for public consultation during 2017. The draft currently includes a focus on local species.


Page 82

11. CX.5 ADOPTION OF 2017/18 BUDGET (Continued) 55. The Submissions request a

Council contribution of $85,000 of funding towards a new multi-purpose building to house the existing clubs and user groups at IR Robertson Reserve.

Council applauds the work of the IR Robertson user groups on its submission, in raising a significant community contribution ($145,000) and pro-actively and professionally working with Council to replace the condemned facilities. Council has previously resolved to: 1. Investigate the importance of accessible, safe and high

quality equestrian facilities for recreational equestrian participants in the Shire and consider appropriate improvements in those areas as part of the Council's new Leisure Strategy.

2. Support the equine industry through appropriate future economic strategies and tactical initiatives.

3. Respond to opportunities for business development will be considered as they present themselves.

57. This submission expresses support and appreciation for the opportunity to progress the Kyneton Tennis Club Lighting and Court Development project.

Council notes the support of the Kyneton Tennis Club regarding the court lighting and refurbishment project proposed in the 2017/18 Council budget and applauds the significant contribution of $270,000 being made by the club towards this project.

58. Submission requests a new Toilet block in Gisborne, adjacent to the Gisborne Adventure Playground.

Council will be conducting a review of its public toilet asset base over the next year to determine the needs for such facilities within the community. This work will include the identification of locations where new public toilets may be required to service the community. Following the review, works associated with the construction of new and upgrade of existing facilities will be prioritised in a business case for consideration in future capital works budgets. This submission will be used during the review process as a possible site for the construction of a new public toilet facility.


Page 83


60. Submission denotes that whereby funds are allocated to Tourism industry bodies that there should be clear and transparent goals and KPI’s set that become a condition of ongoing support.

The budget, Council Plan and Strategic Resource Plan that are currently on exhibition have been informed by two rounds of community consultation, collated and refined with Councillors before going to the public for feedback. The draft budget provides support for the tourism industry via; the festivals and events grant program, visitor information centres and visitor servicing material, hosting and development of visitmacedonranges.com and business seminars and training program and funding for implementation of the tourism industry master plan. DMRT has been through a change in its funding and delivery models moving toward a fee for service model rather than an untied contribution via a MoU. The draft 2017/18 Budget includes an allocation for supporting tourism businesses in line with what has been provided to Daylesford Macedon Ranges Tourism Board in the past. Council will therefore be in a position to purchase services from DMRT which continue to support industry buy in as appropriate. The draft Tourism Industry Master Plan has been presented to Council and will be released to the community for feedback through an extensive consultation process. This will provide another opportunity to seek broad industry and community input and will allow the organisation to weigh up and assess all options before allocating resources. Suggestions regarding more stringent Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) and reporting on those KPI’s is a sound suggestion and could be considered as part of future discussions regarding funding for the tourism board.


Page 84


61. Submission denotes the importance of Tourism and bemoans lack of budget detail presented regarding Tourism. The submission specifically requests a number of outcomes including:

Continued funding for DMR;

Provisions for upgrading minerals springs experiences;

Provision to support a DMR Regional Wellness festival;

Provisions to advance projects in the DMR Regional Product development Plan;

A review of visiting servicing;

Enhancements to visitmacedonranges.com

Assurances regarding the future presentation of budget information.

The budget, Council Plan and Strategic Resource Plan that are currently on exhibition have been informed by two rounds of community consultation, collated and refined with Councillors before going to the public for feedback. The Council Plan will be revised where relevant based on feedback through this public exhibition process. We acknowledge the importance of tourism to the shire by the range of programs and services the Council offers including hosting, management and marketing of visitmacedonranges.com, the naturally cool social media platform and visitor servicing infrastructure. The draft budget also provides support for the tourism industry via; the festivals and events grant program, business seminars and training program and funding for implementation of the tourism industry master plan. DMRT has been through a change in its funding and delivery models moving toward a fee for service model rather than an untied contribution via a MoU. The draft 2017/18 Budget includes an allocation for supporting tourism businesses in line with what has been provided to Daylesford Macedon Ranges Tourism Board in the past. Council will therefore be in a position to purchase services from DMRT which continue to support industry buy in as appropriate. The draft Tourism Industry Master Plan has been presented to Council and will be released to the community for feedback through an extensive consultation process. This will provide another opportunity to seek broad industry and community input and will allow the organisation to weigh up and assess all options before allocating resources. MRSC proposes to undertake a review of visitor servicing in 2017/18 as illustrated by the funding identified in the draft budget under new initiatives. The presentation of information within Council’s budget document is consistent with the current mandated required level of disclosure for this document. Whilst key aspects of Council’s operations can be highlighted within Section 3 of the budget document, generally the document will not get into an operational level of detail.


Page 85


62. This submission provides support for a number of initiatives relating to bike and walking paths, maintained parks, public toilets roads and paths. The submission also calls for:

Further disclosure of more Tourism $ information.

Funding for programs to assist the sector;

More funding (above current reserves) allocated to future outcomes from hanging Rock Masterplan;

Funding for more social media and Instagram tools and products;

Funding for improved quality of VIC products and better tech at VIC’s;

Funding to allow product packaging for sale; and

Funding for support for association development and establishment.

The presentation of information within Councils budget document is consistent with the current mandated required level of disclosure for this document. Whilst key aspects of Councils operations can be highlighted within Section 3 of the budget document, generally the document will not get into an operational level of detail. Council has not allocated any spending from the Hanging Rock Financial Reserve for 20017/18 so that it may be considered for use as leveraging funding once the directions of the Master Plan are clear. Once the Master Plan is completed, projects and potential funding sources will be considered. In regards to any request for further funding for specific tourism activities such as funding programs, social media, Instagram and VIC products these would need to be further evaluated before comment. More specifically: The tourism industry groups currently work well to develop packages for the consumer which we feel is primarily an industry responsibility and ultimately a business decision. MRSC has supported this concept over the years by providing workshops and seminars for the industry specific to product packaging and will continue to respond to industry needs in this area through the business seminars and training program. MRSC currently supports local producers through the Agribusiness and Tourism services it provides. Council currently supports a number of industry groups – some of which include: the Agribusiness Forum, Tourism Macedon Ranges Inc, the Home Based Business Network, Macedon Ranges Vignerons Association and individual businesses by offering a range of programs including: the business awards, the annual seminars, networking and training calendar.


Page 86


63. Submission seeks the following items which have budget implications:

ongoing commitment to fund the Regional Tourism Board (DMR);

commitment to complete the Local Planning Scheme as recommended by MRPAC;

Reform of the operations of both the Planning and Economic Development Units;

The development of an industry body.

The budget, Council Plan and Strategic Resource Plan that are currently on exhibition have been informed by two rounds of community consultation, collated and refined with Councillors before going to the public for feedback.

The draft budget provides support for the tourism industry via; the festivals and events grant program, visitor information centres and visitor servicing material, hosting and development of visitmacedonranges.com and business seminars and training program and funding for implementation of the tourism industry master plan.

We do acknowledge the importance of the tourism industry and would highlight that the latest research referenced was undertaken as a result of Councils MOU with Tourism Macedon Ranges Inc. and project managed by the Economic Development & Tourism department.


The Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning have been tasked with working in partnership with Macedon Ranges Shire to implementing the recommendations of the Macedon Ranges Protection Advisory Committee.

It is noted that the MRPAC report recognises the importance of tourism businesses to the shire and the resulting policy works will also recognise that and provide for their continued success.

Council continually reviews the operations of all of its service areas to ensure that the units are trained and resourced to deliver the adopted outcomes of both the Council Plan and Macedon Ranges Planning Scheme. The budget recommends additional resources for planning service delivery enhancing the timeliness for decision making.

The draft Tourism Industry Master Plan will be discussed with Councillors in June and will then be released to the community for feedback and input. This will provide another opportunity to seek broad industry and community input and will allow the organisation to weigh up and assess all options before allocating resources or prioritising, developing or rationalisation of industry bodies.


Page 87

11. CX.5 ADOPTION OF 2017/18 BUDGET (Continued) 64. Submission seeks the

following items which have budget implications:

Confirmation of ongoing commitment to fund the Regional Tourism Board (DMR);

Provisions to advance projects in the DMR Regional Product development Plan including Hanging Rock and Mineral Springs; and

Assurances regarding the future presentation of budget information.

The budget, Council Plan and Strategic Resource Plan that are currently on exhibition have been informed by two rounds of community consultation, collated and refined with Councillors before going to the public for feedback.

The draft budget provides support for the tourism industry via; the festivals and events grant program, visitor information centres and visitor servicing material, hosting and development of visitmacedonranges.com and business seminars and training program and funding for implementation of the tourism industry master plan.

We do acknowledge the importance of the tourism industry and would highlight that the latest research you reference was undertaken as a result of Councils MOU with Tourism Macedon Ranges Inc. and project managed by the Economic Development & Tourism department.


The projects relevant to the Macedon Ranges that form part of the regions Product Development Plan have been translated in to the draft Macedon Ranges Tourism Master Plan and have been supported through discussions with State Government and through assistance provided to Holgates Brewhouse (note recent funding announcement) though the new Tourism Pipeline Funding program.

Funding for the Hanging Rock Master Plan implementation has also been identified in the list of priorities for the Tourism Pipeline Funding and will be further scoped with State Government when the Master Plan is complete. Daylesford Macedon Ranges Tourism were given funding to undertake the regional Mineral Springs Master Plan however was unable to complete this at the time given the number of other feasibility projects they were working on. Discussions are still continuing between DMRT and the state government as to the allocation of funding to this project. The draft Tourism Industry Master Plan has been presented to Council and will be released to the community for feedback through an extensive consultation process. This will provide another opportunity to seek broad industry and community input and will allow the organisation to weigh up and assess all options before allocating resources. The presentation of information within Councils budget document is consistent with the current mandated required level of disclosure for this document. Whilst key aspects of


Page 88

11. CX.5 ADOPTION OF 2017/18 BUDGET (Continued) Councils operations can be highlighted within Section 3 of the

budget document, generally the document will not get into an operational level of detail.

65. The submission requests more funding for projects at Malmsbury including:

Reinstating and implementing plans for the “Common” to become a groomed walking track;

A footpath connection between Moto Bean Coffee Roasters and Malmsbury General Store on Ellesmere Place; and

A plastic bag free town.

The community’s proposal for a Malmsbury Heritage Trail that includes the Common aligns well with several key Council priority areas including environmental protection and enhancement, improving walking and cycling infrastructure, improving accessibility of community places, and strengthening relationships with the traditional owners/custodians of the land. In relation to the Malmsbury Heritage Trail proposal, we suggest that the Malmsbury community work with Council in 2017/18 under the guidelines of the Places for People Program (PPP) which provides opportunities for community groups and organisations to work with Council to implement community infrastructure projects. Note that the Walking and Cycling strategy is silent on paths in the “Common” but does support the requested footpath along Elsmere Place. In regards to footpaths Council currently has a 10 year program of prioritised future footpaths for future development. Council will follow this plan in the addition of new footpaths for the community out of the proposed funding in the 2017/18 Budget. Council is happy to support community lead initiatives to create plastic bag free towns, including in Malmsbury. This should be pursued in collaboration with the Loddon Mallee Waste and Resource Recovery Group who have facilitated similar initiatives elsewhere in the region.

67. Submission calls for funding for Gardiner Reserve in the 2017/18 Budget. Specifically:

At least $500,000 for change room upgrades at Gardiner Reserve; and

$80,000 for materials and services for a female change facility.

Council acknowledges the need to improve change room facilities at Gardiner Reserve and has submitted a funding application to the State Government to upgrade the football and umpire change rooms at a cost of $400,000-500,000 in 2018/19. There is no currently funding included in the 2017/18 budget for a female change room facility. Any work that Council may support for female change rooms in this precinct would need to be compliant and completed to the required standard.

68 Submission supports the commitment of $50,000 to volunteer support resources.

Council recognises the significant role that Neighbourhood Houses have in supporting and promoting volunteering in our community. Neighbourhood Houses will be engaged as key stakeholders in planning and consultation for the volunteer support initiative.


Page 89

11. CX.5 ADOPTION OF 2017/18 BUDGET (Continued) 69 Submission requests that the

$50,000 allocated for the Walking and Cycling Strategy Implementation works be allocated to not only signage but also safety education campaigns.

The funds allocated in the 2017/18 relate to enhancing the shared path network as per reference 7 in the Walking and Cycling Strategy. Council will continue also to support further safety signage on roads for cyclists. Council currently engages extensively with this group on education campaigns. Based on the ongoing demonstrated interest of this group a further opportunity exists to specifically engage and leverage this group in the development and implementation of a communications plan regarding the project. A project of this nature this would include media releases and other promotional opportunities to raise awareness around safety for cyclists. Council will continue to lobby the State government to increase safety education as it is clear that a Statewide approach is needed.

71. Submission requests funding for a second Kyneton bridge over the Campaspe River.

Council is collecting infrastructure contributions from the 341 residential lot development located south of the Campaspe River. The contribution will assist fund the cost of constructing the Edgecombe Street bridge. Future funding options are also being investigated as part of the development of the framework plan for the Kyneton south investigation area. Council also actively advocates to State and federal governments for funding for the bridge whenever opportunities arise.

72. Submission requests funding in the 2017/18 Budget for three specific items:

$30,000 - $40,000 for the development of an equine strategy;

$25,000 for an equine centre business case; and

$5,000 for ongoing activities including Facebook management, workshops and seminars.

Earlier in 2017 the Council resolved to undertake a number of activities relating to the equine industry in the Macedon Ranges: 1) Acknowledge that the Equine Strategy 2012-2016 has now expired and will no longer be referred to for current strategic direction; 2) Acknowledge the importance of the equine industry to the economic interests of the Macedon Ranges and continue to support those interests through appropriate future economic strategies and tactical initiatives; 3) Acknowledge the importance of accessible, safe and high quality equestrian facilities for recreational equestrian participants in the Shire and consider appropriate improvements in those areas as part of the Council's new Leisure Strategy; 4) Acknowledge the previous work of Macedon Ranges Equine Industry Network (REIN) and support the continued existence of this group to provide input into the strategies that support the economic and recreational aspects of the industry; 5) Note that continued support for any ongoing or partly-completed tactical initiatives from the Equine Strategy 2012-2016 will be considered as part of Council's usual budgeting processes;


Page 90

11. CX.5 ADOPTION OF 2017/18 BUDGET (Continued) Although the five year strategy is now considered to be at an

end, Council continues to acknowledge the importance of the equine industry and will support those interests through appropriate future economic strategies and tactical initiatives. Council also acknowledges the importance of accessible, safe and high quality equestrian facilities for the recreational participants in the shire and will consider improvements in those areas as part of Council’s new Leisure Strategy which will commence in 2017/18. The budget, new Council Plan and Strategic Resource Plan that you have responded to has been informed by two rounds of community consultation, collated and refined with Councillors before going to the public for feedback. The Council Plan and budget will be revised where relevant based on feedback through this public exhibition process.

76. Submission seeks further specific footpath and parking works to be completed in Macedon and Mount Macedon.

Council currently has a 10 year program of prioritised future footpaths for future development. Council will follow this plan in the addition of new footpaths for the community out of the proposed funding in the 2017/18 Budget. The current footpath priorities for Macedon and Mount Macedon have been identified in consultation with the community. A new 10 year footpath plan is being prepared for community consultation during 2017/18.

77. Submission raises a query in regard to movements in the balances of the Commercial development reserve and Asset conversion reserve between the adopted budget and the actuals reported in the December Quarterly report.

Establishment of the Commercial Development and Asset Conversion reserve is covered in response to submission 31. The balance of these reserves increase when properties are sold as the net sales proceeds are transferred to the reserve. The reserve balances decrease when use of reserve funds are approved and balances are subsequently transferred out of the reserve, e.g. to fund a project. The budgets are based on assumptions that are made before the start of the financial year. The timing of actual property sales are often different to the budget assumptions and this has resulted in the movements outlined in the submission.

78. This submission requests funds of $2,500 for Chaplaincy support services for Gisborne Secondary College Chaplaincy Support Group.

Council recognise and acknowledge the important role of the school chaplaincy programs have in support the wellbeing of young people in our shire. Since the National School Chaplaincy Program was initiated by the Commonwealth Government in 2006, Council made an annual allocation of $2000 to the School Chaplaincy programs in Kyneton and Gisborne up until last year. With the introduction of rate capping for all local councils in Victoria, Council has needed to reduce spending in order to continue operating our core programs and activities within the constraints of reduced income from rates. As a result Council has not allocated funds to contribute to the chaplaincy programs since 2015-16. Council continues to support student wellbeing within the secondary schools in the municipality through our Live4Life program and associated activities such as Mental Health First Aid training for students, teachers and parents.


Page 91


79. Submission supports investment in bike paths in Riddells Creek.

The 2017/18 draft budget includes $50,000 of funds into the community’s priority outcome of the Walking and Cycling Strategy to undertake concept design, costing and consultation on the development of a shared trail between Riddells Creek, Gisborne and Macedon.

Indicates submission was received after 11am on Monday 5 June.

7. Summary of proposed budget changes

The proposed budget changes are based on the community feedback received. The differences between the initial draft Budget and the Adopted Budget are summarised below.

Balanced Draft Budget

Increase in rates income as a result of the adjustment to the rate in the dollar

+124,000

Increase Financial Assistance Grants – general purpose

+$50,000

Saving in expenditure due to SES contribution being paid by the State Government

+$28,668

Decrease in budget for State Government School Crossing grant income

-$10,950

CEO recruitment budget

+$15,000

Riddells Creek Tennis Court Development

-$20,000

Malmsbury Common Project

-$5,000

Increase in Funding to support tourism services for the autumn leaves festival

-$42,000

Gisborne Office Window Replacement Project completion for environmental benefit and financial savings

-$60,000

Support of the Equine Industry to provide for an economic development plan.

-$25,000

IR Robertson Reserve Pavilion Funding

-$55,000

Female change rooms at Gardiner Reserve ($80,000 expenditure offset by $80,000 from the Public Open Space – South financial reserve

$0

Net change

-$282

2017/18 Budget Surplus $1623


Page 92


8. Conclusion Having prepared the draft Budget Report 2017/18 in accordance with the Local Government Act, and having made it available for public inspection, and having received and considered all submissions, Council should now adopt its 2017/18 Budget Report with the amendments as outlined in the recommendations. The Director Corporate Services will, in accordance with section 223 of the Local Government Act, prepare a written response to the comments raised by each Submitter. The written response will be based on section 6 and all Submitters will be thanked for their submissions and in particular for taking the time to provide Council with their observations, opinions, recommendations and requests for funding. The Director Corporate Services will undertake the other legislative requirements associated with the adoption of the 2017/18 Budget Report.


Page 93

11. CX.6 ADOPTION OF 2017/18 STRATEGIC RESOURCE PLAN Officer: John Hausler, Director Corporate Services File Ref: F983-03



Synopsis:

The purpose of the Strategic Resource Plan is to outline the financial resources and non-financial resources that are required to maintain the financial sustainability of the Council. Section 126 of the Local Government Act requires councils in Victoria to adopt a Strategic Resource Plan each year. In 2014, the Victorian Government published the Better Practice Guide to Local Government Planning and Reporting. The Guide states that “the strategic resource plan is the key medium-term financial plan produced by councils, on a rolling basis, that summarises the resourcing forecasts for at least four years...it summarises the financial and non-financial resources required to achieve the strategic objectives and strategies in the council plan and expresses these through financial statements…and it should also describe the key assumptions underlying the forecasts”. The draft Strategic Resource Plan complements the Council Plan and it has been written in a manner that ensures Council meets it legal obligations.

At the Council Meeting on 26 April 2017, Council resolved to approve the draft Strategic Resource Plan for public display. Public notice was given in all local newspapers and any person who wished to make a submission was invited to do so. No submissions were specifically received in relation to the Strategic Resource Plan. Officer Recommendation: 1. That, having prepared its Draft Strategic Resource Plan 2017/18 and

having placed it on public display, Council adopts it with the proposed adjustments for changes to the 2017/18 budget outlined in section 7 of the Adoption of the Budget report in this agenda;

2. That Council give public notice of its decision to adopt the Strategic Resource Plan 2017/18; place the adopted Plan on public display; and provide the Plan to the Minister for Local Government;

3. That the Plan be provided to the Minister; and 4. That the Plan be made available to the public at the Council Offices

and Service Centres and on Council's website.


Page 94

12. CS.1 CONTRACTS TO BE AWARDED AS AT 28 JUNE 2017 Officer: Corinne Farley, Contracts Coordinator File Ref: 60/03/01



Synopsis:

Council’s delegated authority to its officers to award a contract is controlled by the financial value of the contract. The various financial limits of the authority are specified in Appendix 1 of the Procurement Policy. The following report indicates whether or not delegated authority to award the contract is expected to exist. It also presents Council with the opportunity to (a) specifically grant delegated authority to the Chief Executive Officer and (b) specifically review delegated authority in any instance where Council deems it appropriate. Officer Recommendation: That Council notes that the following contracts will be awarded by Council officers under delegated authority:

C17.865 Public Toilet Upgrade Hanging Rock Reserve

Q17.870 Sports Hub Feasibility


Page 95

12. CS.1 CONTRACTS TO BE AWARDED AS AT 28 JUNE 2017 (Continued)

12.1 Background Information Council’s delegated authority to its officers to award a contract is controlled by the financial value of the contract. The various financial limits of the authority are specified in Appendix 1 of the Procurement Policy.

12.2 Opportunity to review delegated authority This report provides Council with a very brief summary of proposed contracts, which are being advertised and also indicates whether or not delegated authority to award the contract is expected to exist. This report also provides Council with the opportunity to (a) specifically grant delegated authority to the Chief Executive Officer and/or (b) specifically review the delegated authority to award a contract(s). C17.865 Public Toilet Upgrade Hanging Rock Reserve The project will renovate and extend two existing toilet blocks located east and west of the Hanging Rock Reserve main entrance and will provide safe and accessible toilet and picnic facilities that are DDA compliant for users of Hanging Rock Reserve.

Q17.870 Sports Hub Feasibility Proposals are being sought from consultants to undertake a detailed and extensive study to develop a fully researched and supported business plan and conceptual design for a multi-use sports hub in the Macedon Ranges.


Page 96

13. CW.1 DISSOLVING SECTION 86 COMMITTEES Officer: Jill Karena, Manager Community & Culture Council Plan Relationship: A high performing organisation:

To ensure that our community benefits from the efficient delivery of our regulatory and operational responsibilities.

Synopsis: The purpose of this report is to seek Council agreement to dissolve 10 Section 86 committees following the establishment of Macedon Ranges Community Halls Incorporated (MRCH Inc.). The only remaining Section 86 Committee is for Stanley Park. This too has been identified through Council’s Internal Audit as being required to transition to a ‘Friends of Stanley Park’ group. Officer Recommendation: That Council: 1. Approves of the dissolving of 10 Section 86 Committees being-

Baynton Hall Bolinda Hall Bullengarook Hall & school building Clarkefield Hall Gisborne Community Hall Jubilee Hall Kerrie School Lauriston Hall Malmsbury Town Hall Tylden Hall

2. Continues supporting Macedon Ranges Community Halls Inc. to

ensure success for the new governance model.

3. Undertakes a process to transition the Stanley Park Committee to an alternative governance structure such as a ‘Friends of Stanley Park’ group.

4. Approves of the subsequent dissolving of the Stanley Park Section 86 Committee effective 31 October 2017.


Page 97

13. CW.1 DISSOLVING SECTION 86 COMMITTEES (Continued)

Background

A Section 86 Committee (named for Section 86 of the Local Government Act) can be appointed by Council as a special committee and delegated certain powers, functions, obligations and roles. Generally, special committees are responsible for the day to day management and administration of facilities which Council own, eg public halls and recreation reserves. Dissolution of a Section 86 committee requires a resolution of Council. Council has had a number of community facilities managed under Section 86 committees for many years. Most of these facilities are community halls but Stanley Park at Mount Macedon is also managed by a Section 86 Committee. The Crowe Horwath 2013 Audit Report identified a medium to high risk to Council if the current Section 86 Committees of Management of these places continued. The Local Government Act legislative requirements with regards to the Instrument of Delegation (IOD) requires a great deal of paper work. Understandably, these small voluntary committees struggle to understand the need for, or adhere to, many of the compliance requirements. This in turn places Council at risk. Officers came up with three options: 1. Establish each individual hall as an incorporated body. (This doesn’t

reduce the paperwork and hasn’t worked in other Councils) 2. Identify an incorporated body to take over the running of the hall. i.e. local

CFA (The chances of finding existing incorporated bodies for each of the halls was limited).

3. Incorporating one body and sitting the ten halls under the one organisation. This is the option that Council choose to pursue.

Working in close consultation with the hall committee members, Council has completed the transition from Section 86 committees to incorporation under MRCH Inc. for 10 halls:

Baynton Hall

Bolinda Hall

Bullengarook Hall & school building

Clarkefield Hall

Gisborne Community Hall

Jubilee Hall

Kerrie School

Lauriston Hall

Malmsbury Town Hall

Tylden Hall


Page 98

13. CW.1 DISSOLVING SECTION 86 COMMITTEES (Continued) The MRCH Inc. has now received a Certificate of Incorporation, new leases have now been established and the halls will start trading under the new incorporated body from 30 June 2017. As the halls are now incorporated under MRCH Inc, the old Section 86 committees are now redundant. Stanley Park The one remaining Section 86 Committee is the Stanley Park Committee. As recommended by the Audit Committee, it is proposed that this be dissolved and potentially transitioned into a ‘Friends of Stanley Park’ group with the assistance of Council’s environment unit. The implementation of the adopted Environmental Management Plan would be coordinated through Council’s Environment Unit in partnership with the local community and the Friends Group. Without such proposed change to Council’s management of Stanley Park, a number of onerous obligations within the local government act will need to be observed by both Council and the committee. Section 86 obligations under the local government act relate to the following prescribed matters:

Role of Council in delegating functions, duties or powers to special committees;

Role of Council in appointing and removing members;

Requirement for meetings to be open to the public;

Voting processes;

Guidelines for conduct of meetings, existence of quorums, evidence of minutes;

Validity of proceedings;

Minutes of meetings;

Finance controls, payments and bank accounts;

Rules of conduct;

Code of conduct; and

Conflicts of interest. In the circumstances of Stanley Park, it is difficult to see a basis for any delegated responsibility. The required formalities and administrative overhead associated with being a Section 86 committee are more onerous than is necessary for this activity. The current group of volunteers do valuable work for Stanley Park, however, this work can continue without the requirements of a Section 86 committee. A Council-supported Friends group is an appropriate and effective way to get the same outcomes for the Park. This is also in line with the recommendation of Council’s Internal Audit Committee.


Page 99

14. AO.1 DRAFT 2017 – 2021 DOMESTIC ANIMAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

Officer: Anne-Louise Lindner, Manager Community Safety File Ref: F474 Council Plan Relationship: Our community is well prepared

resilient and safe

Attachment: Draft Domestic

Animal Management Plan

Synopsis:

The purpose of this report is to seek endorsement for the attached Draft 2017-2021 Domestic Animal Management Plan (DAMP) for the purposes of consultation only. This report also responds to the Petition presented to the May Ordinary Council meeting requesting that Mount Gisborne Reserve be declared a “No dogs” reserve. All Victorian Councils are required by the Domestic Animals Act 1994 to prepare and implement a four year Domestic Animal Management Plan to guide decision making in relation to animal management.

This new four year plan builds on the previous plan (2012-2016) and provides the framework for the planning, development, and evaluation of animal management services and programs delivered by Council and complies with the requirements of the Domestic Animals Act 1994. Community consultation has been undertaken in line with council’s community consultation framework to inform the development of the draft plan. Additional consultation is now recommended to ensure the draft plan meets community needs. The petition that was received about Mount Gisborne Reserve has been considered in the development of activities in the plan. Officer Recommendation:

1. Endorse the release of the Draft Domestic Animal Management Plan

for the purposes of community consultation for a minimum period of four weeks.

2. Give consideration to any relevant feedback on the plan prior to adopting the final plan in October 2017, in accordance with the consultation matrix.

3. Inform the first named petitioner of the outcome of this report.


Page 100

14. AO.1 DRAFT 2017 – 2021 DOMESTIC ANIMAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (Continued)

Introduction All Victorian Councils are required by the Domestic Animals Act 1994 to prepare and implement a four year Domestic Animal Management Plan to guide decision making in relation to animal management. This new four year plan builds on the previous plan (2012-2016) and provides the framework for the planning, development, and evaluation of animal management services and programs delivered by Council and complies with the requirements of the Domestic Animals Act 1994. All councils have been given an extension until 3 November 2017 due to the election of new councils in October 2016 to develop the next plan. Background Section 68A of the Domestic Animals Act 1994, prescribes what must be included in the Domestic Animal Management Plan. The plan must address the following:

Set out a method for evaluating whether animal control services provided by council are adequate to give effect to the requirements of the Act and regulations

Outline programs for the training of authorised officers

Outline programs, services and strategies to: Promote and encourage responsible pet ownership of dogs and cats Ensure that people comply with the Act, regulations and legislation Minimise risk of attacks by dogs on people and animals Address over-population and high euthanasia rates for dogs and cats. Encourage the registration and identification of dogs and cats. Minimise the potential for dogs and cats to create a nuisance; and Effectively identify all dangerous, menacing and restricted breed dogs

and ensure these dogs are kept in compliance with the Act and regulations

Provide for review of existing orders and Local Laws made under the Act

Provide for the review of any other matters related to the management of dogs and cats.

Provide for periodic evaluation of the plan

Council recognises that pets play an important role in the day to day lives of many people, and strives to support pet owners and promote the health and social benefits of responsible pet ownership. This is done in conjunction with making sure that our environment and lifestyle is protected from any potential negative impacts of domestic animals.


Page 101


The aim of the plan is to ensure that people and pets can live harmoniously in our community. The plan recognises and carefully balances the needs of pets, pet owners and those who don’t own pets. The plan is designed to respond strategically to the needs of the community as a whole. Community Consultation A community consultation and communications plan was developed to guide the consultation on the draft plan. The methods used to consult on the development of the draft plan were in line with council’s community consultation matrix. An internal Council reference group helped guide the review of the previous plan and develop the new plan. The draft plan details how the plan was developed. A Community survey was undertaken to gain feedback on a range of topics associated with responsible pet ownership. We received 480 responses, including on-line and hard copy responses. We sought feedback from industry stakeholders such as vets, animal welfare agencies, dog training organisations, and shelters via an industry survey with 18 responses. We held focus groups with the Agribusiness Forum and Wildlife Network and one on one meetings with the Lost Dogs Home (council pound and shelter provider for dogs) and Woodend Veterinary Centre (council pound and shelter provider for cats). The input gathered from these consultations, along with the requirement to address the strategic directions set by the Domestic Animals Act have informed the development of our objectives and activities in the draft plan. A petition was also presented at the May Ordinary Council meeting from the Friends of Mount Gisborne Nature Reserve requesting that the reserve be designated a “no dogs” reserve. This petition has been considered in the development of activities in the draft plan. The Draft Domestic Animal Management Plan will be available for public comment for a minimum period of four weeks; copies will be available at Council Offices and via Council’s website. Articles advertising the consultation period will be prepared for the local newspapers and local community newsletters. All survey respondents who provided their details and asked to be kept up to date with the development of the new plan will be advised that the plan is now available for public comment and encouraged to provide feedback. Our industry partners will also be advised of the release of the draft plan with follow up meetings/focus groups with them to gain their feedback on the proposed partnership activities.


Page 102


Next steps Upon conclusion of the public consultation period for the Draft Domestic Animal Management Plan, the internal reference group will consider the feedback received and provide advice to council as to whether amendments should be made. There is a commitment to respect the diverse range of interests and views which may exist around this plan. Timeline for next steps

July – community consultation

August/September – Consideration of feedback, review and finalising of the plan

October – adoption of the Domestic Animal Management Plan at the Ordinary Council Meeting.

November – provide a copy of the plan to the Secretary of the Department Economic Development, Jobs, Training and Resources.

Conclusion The Domestic Animal Management Plan aims to ensure that people and pets can live harmoniously in our community. The plan recognises and carefully balances the needs of pets, pet owners and those who don’t own pets. The plan is designed to respond strategically to the needs of the community as a whole. Releasing the draft plan for community consultation allows the community the opportunity to let us know whether we have been able to strike the right balance across the animal management spectrum.


Page 103

14. AO.2 PROPOSED CLOSURE OF MCKIM ROAD, GISBORNE

Officer: Matthew Irving, Manager Engineering and Projects File Ref: STR1650 Council Plan Relationship: An inspiring place – Our

infrastructure supports the needs of future generations

Attachments: 1. Planning Permit P99-0607 2. Development Plan DP/2013/6 3. Submission 1 4. Submission 2 5. Road Closure Design

Synopsis

This report recommends that Council commences the process to permanently close to traffic McKim Road, Gisborne between the property boundaries of number 3 and 7 under Section 207 and Schedule 11 of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act). The permanent road closure is to be undertaken to meet a planning permit condition for Planning Permit P99-0607 Jacksons Creek Estate Subdivision (Attachment 1) and improve road safety at the intersection of McKim and Station Road. In accordance with Section 207A and 223 of the Act, the closure is to be publicly advertised and written submissions and/or objections in relation to the closure of McKim Road which are received within 28 days of the date of this notice, must be considered and heard by Council or, a Committee of Council, if requested. A letter advising all adjoining residents will be sent out on the same day. An initial temporary road closure will be installed under delegated authority so as to restrict recent increased vehicle traffic volumes generated on McKim Road by the subdivision of Jacksons Creek Estate. Officer recommendation

That Council:

1. Gives notice of its intention to undertake the permanent road closure of McKim Road, Gisborne between the property boundaries of number 3 and 7 in accordance with Section 207, 223 and Schedule 11 of the Act;

2. In accordance with Section 207A of the Act, advises in the notice that written submissions and/or objections in relation to the closure of McKim Road which are received with 28 days of the date of the notice will be considered and heard by Council or, a Committee of Council if requested; and

3. Endorse the temporary road closure of McKim Road at said location under delegated authority.


Page 104

14. AO.2 PROPOSED CLOSURE MCKIM ROAD, GISBORNE (Continued) Background Planning Permit P99-0607 Jacksons Creek Estate Subdivision was originally issued on 14 June 2000 and included the following condition issued by VicRoads, to be completed by Council under the provisions of the Act and at the cost of the applicant/owner:

“Cherry Lane (Now McKim Road) is permanently closed by Council to vehicular traffic at a point east of the two existing residences on the west end of Cherry Lane to prevent access to the Gisborne-Kilmore Road (Station Road) from any property further east along Cherry Lane. The point of closure should be approximately 125 metres east of the Gisborne – Kilmore Road (Station Road) eastern right of way boundary.”

The condition was originally incorporated to minimise the amount of traffic utilising the intersection of Station Road and McKim Road as the standard of this intersection is poor when compared to the intersections of Station Road at Morrow Road and Wallaby Run respectively. McKim Road is a single lane unsealed road and the closure is necessary to facilitate and enforce road safety throughout the development area.

Due to the length of time to complete the works for Planning Permit P99-0607 a further three properties have now been constructed on McKim Road. The road closure will force them to utilise Wallaby Run in the interim, whilst in the long term access will become available via Morrow Road in accordance with the Development Plan DP/2013/6 (Attachment 2). This development plan also indicates that in the long term McKim Road will eventually be completely closed to Station Road, forcing all properties on McKim Road to either access Station Road from Wallaby Run or Morrow Road.


Page 105

14. AO.2 PROPOSED CLOSURE MCKIM ROAD, GISBORNE (Continued) Initial Consultation Council Officers have completed an initial round of consultation with surrounding property owners that would be affected by the closure. This included an advertisement in the local Sunbury & Macedon Ranges Star Weekly newspapers and a letter drop to nearby residents. It should also be noted that these residents were aware of the intention to completely close McKim Road as per DP/2013/6. Two responses were received from residents; of McKim Road (Attachment 3) and (Attachment 4). Council Officers subsequently met with these residents to discuss their concerns, which are noted below:

Access will now be restricted to Station Road;

Emergency service vehicles will not be able to access their property during an event;

Traffic congestion may result at the Wallaby Run intersection; and

Garbage service vehicles will no longer be able to access their properties.

Officer comments for each of these concerns are provided below:

Access to Station Road will still be available from Wallaby Run in the short term and via Morrow Road in the long term, subject to planning approval of the subdivision at 8 McKim Road. The use of the Wallaby Run intersection towards Gisborne will only require travelling approximately an extra 250m.

Police, CFA, SES and Ambulance emergency services from Gisborne will also only have to travel the previously mentioned extra 250m to reach the properties at 5 and 7 McKim Road. Should the closure progress information regarding this will be sent to all emergency services so as to allow these organisations to appropriately update their systems. Council Officers will also notify Google Maps of the closure so that their online mapping system can be updated.

Congestion at the Wallaby Run intersection is considered to be negligible as the quality of the Wallaby Run/Station Road intersection is of a much higher standard and provides a much safer option than the unsealed single lane McKim Road and Station Road intersection. When the Morrow Road and McKim Road link is constructed as per DP/2013/6 vehicles will also be able to enter and exit via Morrow Road, dissipating any significant congestion concerns.

Garbage services will be able to access these properties using the alternative route through Wallaby Run. Consultation has occurred with Council’s Waste Management Unit and there are no barriers for this to occur. A fully constructed turning area will be provided at the closure point to facilitate the turning movements of the vehicle.


Page 106

14. AO.2 PROPOSED CLOSURE MCKIM ROAD, GISBORNE (Continued)

Comment was also sought from VicRoads in relation to the proposed road closure. They confirmed that they support the road closure in accordance with the planning permit condition. Formal Closure Process Council’s power to permanently close a road comes from Clause 9 of Schedule 11 of the Act. One part of Clause 9 requires Council to consider a report from VicRoads prior to closing a road. Given that this is a condition from VicRoads and recent correspondence still indicates that they want the closure installed, a report is deemed unnecessary. Section 223 of the Act requires Council to publish a public notice advising of the road closure and in accordance with Section 207A of the Act that written submissions and/or objections in relation to the closure of McKim Road received within 28 days of the date of this notice must be considered by Council. Any person who makes a written submission and/or objection to Council and requests to be heard in support of the written submission and/or objection is entitled to appear in person, or by a person acting on their behalf, before Council. A design of the road closure (Attachment 5) has been prepared. This includes provisions for turning movements of service and other vehicles and mitigates the concerns noted by adjoining residents. The design will also cater for pedestrian movement with a 1.2m wide opening provided. It is proposed that the closure of McKim Road in line with the attached design is undertaken by Council in accordance with Section 223 of the Act. Summary Planning Permit P99-0607 Jacksons Creek Estate Subdivision requires the closure of McKim Road, Gisborne at the property boundaries of number 3 and 5 McKim Road. A design for this closure which is to be implemented by the developer of this subdivision has been completed. Council as the coordinating road authority are required to undertake the formal closure of McKim Road in accordance with the relevant policies and legislative requirements. The road closure will improve road safety at the intersection of Station Road and McKim Road and is consistent with the overall development plan for the area. Alternative access will be immediately available at via Wallaby Run and in the future via Morrow Road, subject to planning approval for the subdivision of 8 McKim Road. Initial consultation undertaken by Council Officers raised various concerns from affected residents which have been appropriately dealt with through the design of the closure and liaison with relevant authorities. It is recommended that the temporary closure of McKim Road occurs under delegation, and the statutory process for the permanent road closure commences in accordance with the relevant legislation.


Page 107

14. AO.3 MCDONALDS, HOWARD AND SUNDOWNER LANE, RIDDELLS CREEK SPECIAL CHARGE SCHEME

Officer: Matthew Irving, Manager Engineering and Projects

File Ref: F3945 Council Plan Relationship: An inspiring place – Our

infrastructure supports the needs of future generations.

Synopsis:

A recent survey process identified that 71% of benefiting property owners supported a proposal to instigate a special charge scheme for the sealing of McDonalds, Howard and Sundowner Lane, Riddells Creek. This is 5% above the minimum requirement for Council to consider the possible implementation of a special charge scheme.

This special charge scheme would have very localised community benefit with the majority being received by the affected property owners as there is no through traffic present on these roads. This type of scenario would normally require affected property owners to contribute 90% of the total costs of the project. However the current policy limits the amount any one property owner can be charged for a special charge scheme to a maximum of $11,070 exc GST per lot. This results in Council taking on 82% of the costs to the amount of $1.18 million exc GST.

Given the localised benefit it is considered unreasonable for the broader community to subsidise $1.18 million exc GST for the upgrade of McDonalds, Howard and Sundowner Lane from an annual shire wide roads program of $3.55 million. It is recommended that a special charge scheme is not commenced by Council at this stage. Officer Recommendation:

That Council:

1. Does not proceed with the development of a special charge scheme for the upgrade of McDonalds, Howard and Sundowner Lane to a rural sealed standard; and

2. Advises all property owners in writing of the decision.


Page 108

14. AO.3 MCDONALDS, HOWARD AND SUNDOWNER LANE, RIDDELLS CREEK SPECIAL CHARGE SCHEME (Continued)

Background In January 2017 Council Officers received a request from the residents of McDonalds, Howard and Sundowner Lane, Riddells Creek to investigate the feasibility for the development of a special charge scheme to upgrade these roads. In accordance with the policy Council Officers undertook an initial analysis to determine the estimated costs and apportionment between property owners and Council of such scheme. Details of this are provided below:

Length of works – 3.7 Km

Proposed sealed road width – 5.4 m

Existing traffic volume – Approximately 150 vpd

Number of properties impacted by the scheme – 24

Total estimated capital cost of the scheme - $1,446,630 exc GST

Total estimated capital cost to property owners - $265,680 exc GST

Total estimated capital cost to Council - $1,180,950 exc GST

A map indicating the proposed roads for upgrade is provided below

Initial Consultation In February 2017 this information in conjunction with a survey was sent to each of the affected property owners. Each property owner was given the opportunity to provide a response to the survey indicating if they supported or did not support the further development of a special charge scheme to upgrade McDonalds, Howard and Sundowner Lane, Riddells Creek. The survey process closed on 3 March 2017.


Page 109


Consultation Results

Council received 24 responses back from the 24 benefiting property owners. Of these respondents 17 advised they supported the further development of a special charge scheme and 7 advised they didn’t. If no response is received it is deemed that this property owner does not support the further scheme development in accordance with Council’s policy. This was not applicable in this situation as all affected property owners provided a response. Based on the responses received 71% of effected property owners were in support for the further development of the scheme. As a result the minimum requirement under the policy for 66% or greater support was achieved during the initial consultation phase. Effected Property Owners and Wider Community Benefits

Apportionment between Council and benefiting property owners is derived from the benefits these two parties gain when a special charge scheme is implemented. The principle factor for identifying benefits of a road upgrade project is the volume of through traffic generated on the road.

It is considered that a large part of the benefit rests with the affected property owners should none of the traffic generated on a specific road not travel through to other roads ie Courts or No Through Roads. The benefit that Council and the wider community may gain in these circumstances is reduced maintenance activity and improved access to the properties for Council services such as refuse collection. As the amount of through traffic increases, it is considered that the benefit to the wider community is increased resulting in a more even distribution of the total benefits gained. The split between cost apportionment based on the derived benefits as a result of the through traffic generated is provided in the table below:

Through Traffic Owners Contribution

Nil (e.g.courts, etc) 90% of cost

up to 50% of traffic volume 50% of cost

51% – 75% of traffic volume 25% of cost

76% – 100% of traffic volume 0% of cost

Based on the apportionment principles it would be deemed appropriate that the proposed road upgrade works on McDonalds, Howard and Sundowner Lane, Riddells Creek would incur a 90% contribution from the benefitting property owners due to the limited benefit the wider community would gain.


Page 110


Total Capital Costs The section of road to be upgraded is 3.7 Km long and 24 benefitting properties are located along the section of road. The total estimated capital cost to complete the works is $1.45 million exc GST. The volume of traffic generated on these roads comes solely from the benefiting properties and no through movements occur to other roads. Based on the apportionment formula adopted in Council’s policy affected property owners would be required to pay 90% of the total costs. However due to the current requirement within the policy to restrict property owners to a maximum contribution of $11,070 exc GST, the total obtainable contribution amount from all 24 property owners is $265,680 exc GST. This contribution figure is 18% of the total cost and falls well short of the 90% benefit these property owners will gain from the road upgrade project. The remaining $1.18 million exc GST is to be funded out of Council’s Capital Works Budget allocation, which is financed through rates income. Based on apportionment principles it has been deemed that the wider community of the shire should incur a benefit of 10% for a project of this nature. However the requirement to fund 82% of the total estimated project cost far exceeds this derived benefit.

Summary The consultation phase garnered 71% support from benefiting property owners for the further development of a special charge scheme to upgrade McDonalds, Howard and Sundowner Lane, Riddells Creek. The total estimated costs which will be attributed to these 24 benefitting property owners will be $265,680 exc GST with the remaining $1.18 million exc GST of the total estimated project cost to be funded by Council. Given the localised benefit it is considered unreasonable for the broader community to subsidise $1.18 million for the upgrade of McDonalds, Howard and Sundowner Lane from a shire wide roads program of $3.55 million. Under Council policy a benefiting property, can only be charged a maximum levy of $11,070 exc GST, which has been calculated using the Special Rates and Charges Ministerial Guidelines. This capping requirement is causing the significant disparity between the estimated capital costs and benefit received for each party. The resulting gap between the total estimated costs for Council and the limited wider community benefit to be gained, causes this project to become financially unfeasible for the use of Council funding. It is therefore recommended that the implementation of special charge scheme to upgrade McDonalds, Howard and Sundowner Lane, Riddells Creek does not proceed.


Page 111

14. AO.4 PRIORITY LISTING CALDER HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS

Officer: Matthew Irving, Manager Engineering and Projects File Ref: F2905 Council Plan Relationship: An inspiring place – Our

infrastructure supports the needs of future generations.

Synopsis:

The Calder Highway Improvement Committee (CHIC) has requested for Council to provide a list of priorities for possible improvements on this road. This report provides the recommended priority listing of Council for upgrade works on the Calder Highway.


That:

1. Council endorse the following listing of Calder Highway improvements for further consideration by the Calder Highway Improvement Committee: a. Interchange at Burton Avenue, Kyneton; b. Completion of Sunbury Road Bulla By Pass, Bulla; c. Additional Traffic Lanes – Melton Highway to Keilor Park Drive,

Keilor; d. Additional Interchange at Calder Park Drive, Taylors Lake; and e. Interchange at Sunshine Avenue, Keilor.

2. Council officers write to VicRoads Regional Officers seeking

guidance on how their design and project delivery systems protect wildlife, address environmental impacts and consider the wider impacts on the surrounding road network.


Page 112


Background

The Calder Highway Improvement Committee exists to provide the vision and commitment to drive significant improvements in the safety and operation of the Calder Highway by securing total funding commitments from Mildura to Melbourne. This committee includes the following member councils:

Moonee Valley City Council Brimbank City Council Hume City Council Macedon Ranges Shire Council (MRSC) Mount Alexander Shire Council

City of Greater Bendigo Loddon Shire Council Buloke Shire Council Rural City of Mildura

The committee meets quarterly and includes both Councillors and Council officers from each of these member councils. At the committee meeting held on 31 March 2017 it was resolved that a request would be made for each member council to identify its priorities for improvement works on the Calder Highway. Current Calder Highway Improvement Committee (CHIC) Priorities CHIC currently have a prioritised list of improvement projects for member Council’s to review. This list is presented below: 1. Interchange at Calder Park Drive, Taylors Lake;

2. Benetook Avenue heavy vehicle bypass, Mildura;

3. Additional traffic lanes - Melton Hwy to Keilor Park Drive, Keilor;

4. Duplication, Irymple to Red Cliffs, Sunny Cliffs;

5. Interchange at Fogarty's Gap Road, Ravenswood South;

6. Interchange at Sunshine Avenue, Keilor;

7. Facilitate improved commercial links by constructing additional lanes in the

region north and south of Ouyen; and

8. Recognition of the need, planning and design for a new section of freeway from Ravenswood to Bridgewater to bypass Lockwood South and Marong.


Page 113


Macedon Ranges Priority Listing

A review of this regional listing has been undertaken to identify a set of priorities for the local community of Macedon Ranges. This listing as presented below considers improved safety and movement outcomes for the residents of Macedon Ranges Shire Council. 1. Interchange at Burton Avenue, Kyneton

Includes the removal of at grade interchanges at Burton Avenue and Wards Lane and construction of a new diamond interchange. The benefits would include improved road safety and increased freight efficiency through this section of the Calder Freeway. This is the only interchange within the Macedon Ranges Shire Council which remains at grade.

2. Completion of Sunbury Road Bulla By Pass, Bulla

The Sunbury Precinct Structure Plan identifies the Sunbury Road Bulla By Pass as a priority project. However there is no funding to ensure its construction and it is not currently listed in VicRoads Infrastructure Program. A southern access road is proposed as an interim solution. Delays in bringing forward the Sunbury Road Bulla By Pass will impact on the functioning of the Calder Hwy (Fwy) and Sunbury Road, which will impact on residents living in Macedon Ranges.

3. Additional Traffic Lanes – Melton Highway to Keilor Park Drive, Keilor

Includes the provision of three lanes in each direction. This would allow for increased freight efficiency through this section of the Calder Freeway. It would also improve commuter vehicle movement efficiency for residents of MRSC accessing Melbourne.

4. Additional Interchange at Calder Park Drive, Taylors Lake

Includes the provision of a new diamond interchange at this intersection removing the at grade interchanges present through this section of the Calder Freeway. This would allow for increased freight efficiency and improved road safety through this section of the Calder Freeway. It would also improve commuter vehicle movement efficiency for residents of MRSC accessing Melbourne.

5. Interchange at Sunshine Avenue, Keilor

Includes the provision of a new diamond interchange at this intersection removing the at grade interchanges present through this section of the Calder Freeway. This would allow for increased freight efficiency and improved road safety through this section of the Calder Freeway. It would also improve commuter vehicle movement efficiency for residents of MRSC accessing Melbourne.


Page 114


In conjunction with presenting these priorities to the CHIC, Council officers will also seek guidance from VicRoads Regional Officers on what processes they use to consider protection of wildlife, environmental impacts and impact to the surrounding road network when undertaking any further review of road projects.

Conclusion A preferred priority listing for improvement projects on the Calder Highway has been developed for consideration by the CHIC. This submission will be utilised by the CHIC in the development of their regional priority listing and subsequent advocacy for funding to both State and Federal Government. Council officers will also seek guidance from VicRoads Regional Officers on what processes they use to consider protection of wildlife, environmental impacts and impact to the surrounding road network when undertaking any further review of road projects.


Page 115

15. NOTICES OF MOTION

Notice of Motion No. 29/2016-17 – Councillor Bleeck That Council resolve to allow the annual budget allowance for Councillor development funds to be pooled by all Councillors, rather than only for an individual Councillor’s use, until such time as the Councillor Support Policy is reviewed. Notice of Motion No. 30/2016-17 – Councillor Anderson That Council:

1. Establish a Community Reference Group (CRG) to assist with and

inform the planning scheme review, as outlined in Appendix B1 Summary of New initiatives in the 2017/18 MRSC Budget;

2. Determine the CRG Terms of Reference and application process and assessment via a report to Council at the July Ordinary Council Meeting;

3. Discuss the proposed process with the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) and work in conjunction with DELWP to ensure the planning scheme review work aligns with the recommendations of the Macedon Ranges Protection Advisory Committee recommendations;

4. Following expressions of interest, determine the make up of the CRG at the September Ordinary Council Meeting; and

5. Following development of a brief with Councillors and DELWP employ an independent expert to facilitate the planning scheme review in conjunction with the CRG.

16. URGENT AND OTHER BUSINESS

In accordance with Council's Local Law No. 9 Meeting Procedure, business which has not been listed on the Agenda may only be raised as urgent or other business by resolution agreed by Council.

17. CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS

Nil

18. DIVISION 1A – CONDUCT AND INTERESTS

76B. Primary principle of Councillor conduct

It is a primary principle of Councillor conduct that, in performing the role of a Councillor, a Councillor

must—

(a) act with integrity; and

(b) impartially exercise his or her responsibilities in the interests of the local community; and

(c) not improperly seek to confer an advantage or disadvantage on any person.

76BA. General Councillor conduct principles

In addition to acting in accordance with the primary principle of Councillor conduct specified in

section 76B, in performing the role of a Councillor, a Councillor must—

(a) avoid conflicts between his or her public duties as a Councillor and his or her personal

interests and obligations;

(b) act honestly and avoid statements (whether oral or in writing) or actions that will or are likely

to mislead or deceive a person;

(c) treat all persons with respect and have due regard to the opinions, beliefs, rights and

responsibilities of other Councillors, Council staff and other persons;

(d) exercise reasonable care and diligence and submit himself or herself to the lawful scrutiny that

is appropriate to his or her office;

(e) endeavour to ensure that public resources are used prudently and solely in the public interest;

(f) act lawfully and in accordance with the trust placed in him or her as an elected representative;

(g) support and promote these principles by leadership and example and act in a way that secures

and preserves public confidence in the office of Councillor.

76C. Councillor Code of Conduct

(1) A Council must develop and approve a Councillor Code of Conduct for the Council within 12

months after the commencement of section 15 of the Local Government Amendment

(Councillor Conduct and Other Matters) Act 2008.

(2) A Council must review the Councillor Code of Conduct within the period of 12 months after a

general election.

(3) A Councillor Code of Conduct—

(a) must include the Councillor conduct principles;

(b) may set out processes for the purpose of resolving an internal dispute between

Councillors;

(d) must include provisions in respect of any matter prescribed for the purpose of this

section;

(e) may include any other matters relating to the conduct of Councillors which the

Council considers appropriate.

(5) A Councillor Code of Conduct must not be inconsistent with any Act or regulation.

(5A) A Councillor Code of Conduct is inoperative to the extent that it is inconsistent with any Act

or regulation.

(6) A copy of the current Councillor Code of Conduct must be—

(a) given to each Councillor;

(b) available for inspection by the public at the Council office and any district offices.

(7) On and from the commencement of section 15 of the Local Government Amendment

(Councillor Conduct and Other Matters) Act 2008, a Councillor Code of Conduct is taken

to include the Councillor conduct principles.

76D. Misuse of position

(1) A person who is, or has been, a Councillor or member of a special committee must not misuse

his or her position—

(a) to gain or attempt to gain, directly or indirectly, an advantage for themselves or for

any other person; or

(b) to cause, or attempt to cause, detriment to the Council or another person.

Penalty: 600 penalty units or imprisonment for 5 years or both.

(2) For the purposes of this section, circumstances involving the misuse of a position by a person

who is, or has been, a Councillor or member of a special committee include—

(a) making improper use of information acquired as a result of the position he or she

held or holds; or

(b) disclosing information that is confidential information within the meaning of section

77(2); or

(c) directing or improperly influencing, or seeking to direct or improperly influence, a

member of Council staff in contravention of section 76E; or

(d) exercising or performing, or purporting to exercise or perform, a power, duty or

function that he or she is not authorised to exercise or perform; or

(e) using public funds or resources in a manner that is improper or unauthorised; or

(f) failing to disclose a conflict of interest as required under this Division.

(3) This section—

(a) has effect in addition to, and not in derogation from, any Act or law relating to the

criminal or civil liability of Councillors or members of special committees; and

(b) does not prevent the institution of any criminal or civil proceedings in respect of that

liability.

76E. Improper direction and improper influence

(1) A Councillor must not improperly direct or improperly influence, or seek to improperly direct

or improperly influence, a member of Council staff in the exercise of any power or in the

performance of any duty or function by the member.

(2) A Councillor must not direct, or seek to direct, a member of Council staff—

(a) in the exercise of a delegated power, or the performance of a delegated duty or

function of the Council; or

(b) in the exercise of a power or the performance of a duty or function exercised or

performed by the member as an authorised officer under this Act or any other Act; or

(c) in the exercise of a power or the performance of a duty or function the member

exercises or performs in an office or position the member holds under another Act; or

(d) in relation to advice provided to the Council or a special committee, including advice

in a report to the Council or special committee.

(3) This section does not apply to a decision of the Council or a special committee that is made

within the powers, duties or functions conferred under this or any other Act.

77. Confidential information

(1) A person who is, or has been, a Councillor or a member of a special committee, must not

release information that the person knows, or should reasonably know, is confidential

information.

(2) For the purposes of this section, information is “confidential information” if—

(a) the information was provided to the Council or a special committee in relation to a

matter considered by the Council or special committee at a meeting closed to

members of the public and the Council or special committee has not passed a

resolution that the information is not confidential; or

(b) the information has been designated as confidential information by a resolution of the

Council or a special committee which specifies the relevant ground or grounds

applying under section 89(2) and the Council or special committee has not passed a

resolution that the information is not confidential; or

(c) subject to sub-section (3), the information has been designated in writing as

confidential information by the Chief Executive Officer specifying the relevant

ground or grounds applying under section 89(2) and the Council has not passed a

resolution that the information is not confidential.

(3) Confidential information referred to in sub-section (2)(c) ceases to be confidential at the

expiry of the period of 50 days after the designation is made unless sub-section (2)(a) or (2)(b)

applies to the information.

77A. Direct and indirect interests

(1) A relevant person has a conflict of interest in respect of a matter if the relevant person has a

direct interest or indirect interest in the matter.

(2) A relevant person has a direct interest in a matter if the relevant person has an interest of a

kind described in section 77B.

(3) A relevant person has an indirect interest in a matter if the relevant person has—

(a) a close association as specified in section 78; or

(b) an indirect financial interest as specified in section 78A; or

(c) a conflicting duty as specified in section 78B; or

(d) received an applicable gift as specified in section 78C; or

(e) become an interested party as specified in section 78D; or

(f) a residential amenity that may be altered as specified in section 78E.

(4) A relevant person does not have a conflict of interest in a matter if the direct interest or

indirect interest of the relevant person is so remote or insignificant that the direct interest or

indirect interest could not reasonably be regarded as capable of influencing any actions or

decisions of the relevant person in relation to the matter.

(5) A relevant person does not have a conflict of interest in a matter if the direct interest or

indirect interest the relevant person holds—

(a) is held as a resident, ratepayer or voter and does not exceed the interests generally

held by other residents, ratepayers or voters; or

(b) is held in common with a large class of persons and does not exceed the

interests generally held by the class of persons.

(6) A relevant person does not have a conflict of interest in a matter if the relevant person—

(a) does not know the circumstances that give rise to the conflict of interest; and

(b) would not reasonably be expected to know the circumstances that give rise to the

conflict of interest.

77B. Direct interest

(1) A person has a direct interest in a matter if there is a reasonable likelihood that the benefits,

obligations, opportunities or circumstances of the person would be directly altered if the

matter is decided in a particular way.

(2) Without limiting subsection (1), a person has a direct interest in a matter if—

(a) there is a reasonable likelihood that the person will receive a direct benefit or loss

that can be measured in financial terms if the matter is decided in a particular way;

(b) the person has, or the person together with a member or members of the person's

family have, a controlling interest in a company or other body that has a direct

interest in the matter.

(3) A person who has a membership in a club or organisation that has a direct interest in a

matter—

(a) does not, by reason of that membership, have a direct interest in the matter under

subsection (1); and

(b) does not have an indirect interest in the matter, by reason of that membership, unless

the person has an indirect interest in the matter under section 78A, 78B or 78C.

(4) In subsection (2), controlling interest has the same meaning as it has in section 72(2) of the

Payroll Tax Act 2007.

78. Indirect interest by close association

(1) In this section—

daughter means a biological daughter, step-daughter, adopted daughter, or female child for

whom the person has custodial responsibilities;

direct relative means the spouse, domestic partner, son, daughter, mother, father, brother or

sister of the person;

domestic partner of a person means—

(a) a person who is in a registered relationship with the person; or

(b) an adult person to whom the person is not married but with whom the

person is in a relationship as a couple where one or each of them provides

personal or financial commitment and support of a domestic nature for the

material benefit of the other, irrespective of their genders and whether or not

they are living under the same roof, but does not include a person who

provides domestic support and personal care to the person—

(i) for fee or reward; or

(ii) on behalf of another person or an organisation (including a

government or government agency, a body corporate or a

charitable or benevolent organisation);

family member means—

(a) a spouse or domestic partner of the person; or

(b) a son, daughter, mother, father, brother or sister that regularly resides with

the person;

relative means—

(a) a direct relative of the person;

(b) a direct relative of a person who is the direct relative of the person;

son means a biological son, step son, adopted son or male child for which the person has

custodial responsibilities.

(2) A person has an indirect interest by close association in a matter if—

(a) a family member of the person has a direct interest or an indirect interest in a matter;

or

(b) a relative of the person has a direct interest in a matter; or

(c) a member of the person's household has a direct interest in a matter.

(3) For the purposes of the definition of domestic partner in subsection (1)—

(a) registered relationship has the same meaning as in the Relationships Act 2008; and

(b) in determining whether persons who are not in a registered relationship are domestic

partners of each other, all the circumstances of their relationship are to be taken into

account, including any one or more of the matters referred to in section 35(2) of the

Relationships Act 2008 as may be relevant in a particular case; and

(c) a person is not a domestic partner of another person only because they are co-tenants.

78A. Indirect interest that is an indirect financial interest

(1) A person has an indirect financial interest in a matter if the person is likely to receive a benefit

or incur a loss, measurable in monetary terms, as a consequence of a benefit received or loss

incurred by another person who has a direct or indirect interest in the matter.

(2) Without limiting subsection (1), a person has an indirect financial interest that is a conflict of

interest if—

(a) the person has a beneficial interest in shares of a company or other body that has a

direct interest in the matter, except in the circumstances specified in subsection (3);

(b) the person is owed money from another person and that other person has a direct

interest in the matter.

(3) If a person, and family members of the person, hold shares in a company or body that has a

direct or indirect interest in a matter with a combined total value that does not exceed $10 000

and the total value of issued shares of the company or body exceeds $10 million, the person's

indirect financial interest is not a conflict of interest.

(4) Subsection (2)(b) does not apply if the other person is an authorised deposit-taking institution.

(5) For the purposes of determining the value of shares under this section, the share value is to be

taken from—

(a) the close of business on the most recent of 30 June or 31 December; or

(b) if the person has lodged an ordinary return since the most recent of 30 June or 31

December, the close of business on the date the return was submitted.

78B. Indirect interest because of conflicting duties

(1) A person has an indirect interest in a matter because of a conflicting duty if the person—

(a) is a manager or a member of a governing body of a company or body that has a direct

interest in a matter;

(b) is a partner, consultant, contractor, agent or employee of a person, company or body

that has a direct interest in a matter;

(c) is a trustee for a person who has a direct interest in a matter.

(2) A person has an indirect interest in a matter because of a conflicting duty if the person held a

position or role specified in subsection (1) and, in that position or role, dealt with the matter.

(3) A person does not have an indirect interest because of a conflicting duty if—

(a) the person is, or has been, only an employee in the service of the Crown or of a body

established by or under any Act for a public purpose and the person has no current or

expected responsibilities as that employee in relation to a matter;

(b) the person only holds a position in a not-for-profit organisation for which the person

receives no remuneration and the person was appointed to the relevant special

committee of the Council to be a representative of the non-for-profit organisation;

(ba) the person only holds a position, with the Council's approval as a representative of

the Council, in an organisation for which the person receives no remuneration;

(c) the person is only a Councillor who holds a position in the Municipal Association of

Victoria or in another body that has the purpose of representing the interests of

Councils;

(ca) the person is only a member of the Planning Application Committee established

under Part 4AA of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 or a member or co-

opted member of a subcommittee of that Committee;

(d) the person only holds a position that has been prescribed for the purposes of this

section.

78C. Indirect interest because of receipt of an applicable gift

(1) In this section, applicable gift means one or more gifts with a total value of, or more than, the

gift disclosure threshold, received from a person or persons specified in subsection (2) in the 5

years preceding the decision or the exercise of the power, duty or function but does not

include—

(a) reasonable hospitality received by the person at an event or function the person

attended in an official capacity as the Mayor, a Councillor, a member of Council staff

or a member of a special committee; or

(b) a gift, other than an election campaign donation, that was received by the person

more than 12 months before the person became a Councillor, a member of Council

staff or a member of a special committee.

(2) A person has an indirect interest in a matter if the person has received an applicable gift,

directly or indirectly, from—

(a) a person who has a direct interest in the matter; or

(b) a director, contractor, consultant, agent or employee of a person, company or body

that the person knows has a direct interest in a matter; or

(c) a person who gives the applicable gift to the person on behalf of a person, company

or body that has a direct interest in the matter.

(3) For the purposes of determining when a person became a Councillor or member of a special

committee under subsection (1)(b), if the person is re-elected or reappointed as a Councillor or

a member of a special committee, on completion of his or her term of office, the previous term

of office served by that person as a Councillor or member of a special committee must be

counted as continuous service with any service completed by the person after the person's re-

election or reappointment.

78D. Indirect interest as a consequence of becoming an interested party

A person has an indirect interest in a matter if the person has become an interested party in the matter

by initiating civil proceedings in relation to the matter or becoming a party to civil proceedings in

relation to the matter.

78.E Indirect interest because of impact on residential amenity

A person has an indirect interest in a matter if there is a reasonable likelihood that the residential

amenity of the person will be altered if the matter is decided in a particular way.

79. Disclosure of conflict of interest

(1) If a Councillor or member of a special committee has a conflict of interest in a matter which is

to be considered or discussed at a meeting of the Council or the special committee, the

Councillor or member must, if he or she is attending the meeting, disclose the conflict of

interest in accordance with subsection (2).

(2) A Councillor or member of a special committee who has a conflict of interest and is attending

the meeting of the Council or special committee must make a full disclosure of that interest—

(a) by either—

(i) advising the Council or special committee at the meeting of the details

required under paragraphs (b) and (c) immediately before the matter is

considered at the meeting; or

(ii) advising the Chief Executive Officer in writing of the details required under

paragraphs (b) and (c) before the meeting; and

(b) classifying the type of interest that has given rise to the conflict as either—

(i) a direct interest; or

(ii) an indirect interest and specifying the particular kind of indirect interest

under section 78, 78A, 78B, 78C, 78D or 78E; and

(c) describing the nature of the interest; and

(d) if the Councillor or member advised the Chief Executive Officer of the details under

paragraph (a)(ii), the Councillor or member must make a disclosure of the class of

interest only to the meeting immediately before the matter is considered at the

meeting.

(3) For the purposes of section 79(2)(a)(i), if a Councillor or member of a special committee has a

conflict of interest in two or more matters which are to be considered or discussed

consecutively at a meeting of the Council or the special committee, the Councillor or member

may make a full disclosure of each of those interests immediately before the first matter is

considered at the meeting.

(5) The Chief Executive Officer must—

(a) keep written disclosures given to him or her under this section in a secure place for 3

years after the date the Councillor or member of a special committee who made the

disclosure ceases to be Councillor or member of a committee; and

(b) destroy the written disclosure when the 3 year period referred to in paragraph (a) has

expired.

(6) While the matter is being considered or any vote is taken in relation to the matter, the

Councillor or member of a special committee must—

(a) leave the room and notify the Mayor or the Chairperson of the special committee

that he or she is doing so; and

(b) remain outside the room and any gallery or other area in view or hearing of the room.

(7) The Mayor or the Chairperson of the special committee must cause the Councillor or member

of a special committee to be notified that he or she may return to the room after—

(a) consideration of the matter; and

(b) all votes on the matter.

(8) If a Councillor or member of a special committee discloses a conflict of interest, the Chief

Executive Officer or the Chairperson must record in the minutes of the meeting—

(a) the declaration of the conflict of interest; and

(b) the classification of the interest that has given rise to the conflict, and if the

Councillor or member has disclosed the nature of the interest to the meeting, the

nature of the interest.

(9) Unless section 80 applies, a Councillor or member of a special committee who fails to comply

with this section is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding 120 penalty units.

79B. Conflicting personal interest

(1) This section does not apply to a Councillor or member of a special committee who has a

conflict of interest in the matter.

(2) If a Councillor or a member of a special committee considers that he or she has a personal

interest in relation to a matter that is in conflict with his or her public duty in relation to the

matter, the Councillor or member may, immediately before the matter is considered at the

relevant meeting, apply to the Council or special committee to be exempted from voting on

the matter.

(3) If a Councillor or member of a special committee makes an application under subsection (2),

he or she must give reasons in support of the application.

(4) A Council or special committee may consent to an application made under subsection (2) and

must not unreasonably withhold consent.

(5) If a Council or special committee consents to an application under subsection (4), sections

79(6), 79(7), 79(8) and 79(9) apply as if the personal interest that is the subject of an

application under subsection (2) were a conflict of interest specified under this Act.

79C. Certain situations where Councillor taken to not have a conflict of interest

(1) A Councillor is taken to not have a conflict of interest for the purposes of this Division if the

matter only relates to—

(a) the nomination or appointment by the Council of the Councillor to a position for

which the Councillor will not be remunerated;

(b) the election of the Mayor under section 71 or the appointment of an acting Mayor

under section 73(3);

(c) a decision in relation to the payment of allowances to the Mayor or Councillors under

section 74 or 74C(2);

(d) the adoption of a policy under section 75B in relation to the reimbursement of

expenses;

(e) the adoption of a Councillor Code of Conduct under section 76C;

(f) an application to a Councillor Conduct Panel or VCAT under Division 1B;

(g) an application for an exemption under section 80;

(h) the appointment of members and Chairpersons of special committees;

(i) a resolution that has the effect of making the Councillors eligible or ineligible for the

superannuation guarantee under taxation legislation;

(j) the conduct of a Councillor with respect to—

(i) an internal dispute that involves the Councillor;

(ii) an allegation of misconduct or serious misconduct (as defined in section

81A) by the Councillor;

(k) a submission provided to an electoral representation review under section 219F;

(l) a submission provided for the purposes of a subdivision review conducted under

section 219N.

(2) If a budget or revised budget to be approved by a Council includes funding for a matter in

respect of which a Councillor has a conflict of interest the Councillor is taken to not have a

conflict of interest for the purposes of approving the budget or revised budget if—

(a) the Council previously approved the matter and the proposed funding for the matter

for inclusion in the budget or revised budget; and

(b) the Councillor disclosed the nature of the conflict of interest under section 79

when the decision in respect of the matter and the proposed funding for the matter

was previously considered and made.

(3) If a Council Plan to be approved by a Council includes a matter in respect of which a Councillor

has a conflict of interest, the Councillor is taken to not have a conflict of interest for the

purposes of approving the Council Plan if—

(a) the Council previously approved the matter for inclusion in the Council Plan; and

(b) the Councillor disclosed the nature of the conflict of interest under section 79 when

the decision in respect of the matter was previously considered and made.

(4) If a Councillor with a conflict of interest referred to in subsection (2) or (3) notifies the Mayor or

Chairperson prior to the consideration of the budget, revised budget or Council Plan of the

conflict of interest, the Mayor or Chairperson must allow a prior motion to be put that the matter

or funding be considered for inclusion in the budget, revised budget or Council Plan.

79D. Person may make submission despite conflict of interest

(1) Subject to subsection (2), a relevant person who has a conflict of interest in a matter and who

has made a written submission under section 223 in respect of the matter, may present his or

her submission under section 223(1)(b) to the Council or committee of the Council.

(2) The relevant person who has a conflict of interest in a matter must not be at the meeting of the

Council or committee of the Council any longer than is required for the person to be heard in

support of the person's written submission.

Documents

Ordinary Council Meeting Wednesday 28 June 2017 at 7.00pm ... · 6/28/2017 · Recommendation: That the Mayor’s report be received. 6. PETITIONS Pursuant to Council's Local Law