RICHMOND VALLEY COUNCIL€¦ · That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Richmond Valley Council, held on 15 April 2008, ... hard job if you care about what you do. The City of

RICHMOND VALLEY COUNCIL

Minutes

Ordinary Meeting

Tuesday, 20 May 2008

RICHMOND VALLEY COUNCIL PAGE 1

MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF RICHMOND VALLEY COUNCIL, HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CNR WALKER STREET AND GRAHAM

PLACE, CASINO, ON TUESDAY, 20 MAY 2008 AT 2.00 P.M.

PRESENT

Crs. C.J. Cox (Mayor), N.J. Thomas, R.A. Mustow, N.M. Wise, R.F. Jeffery, C.J. Sullivan and Cr. S.N. Wheatley. The General Manager, Director Environmental Development Services, Director Corporate Services, Manager Strategic Planning, Executive Assistant (Roslyn Townsend) and Administrative Assistant (Helen Bebbington) were also in attendance. PRAYER AND NATIONAL ANTHEM

Those present at the meeting stood for the prayer by Reverend Wall Constable and the singing of the National Anthem. PRESENTATION TO STAFF (STAFF TRAINING)

The Mayor advised that presentations were to be made to eleven of Council’s staff members, who, for the past two years have been undertaking study in Certificate IV Frontline Management through TAFE North Coast Institute. The staff involved have spent many hours of their own time studying and learning and have also had the full support from Council during that time. The modules studied have prepared them with the underpinning knowledge for leadership and supervisory roles within Council. The Mayor welcomed Steve Hapgood, who was the Teacher for this course and invited him to address the meeting. Mr. Hapgood congratulated Council for offering excellent support to the staff over the period of the course stating that such support is necessary for the success of any work based training course. He congratulated the staff on their commitment and enthusiasm during the course and on their outstanding success. Presentation of certificates were made to course participants Lenore Anderson, Bruce Coleman, Mick Fava, Alan Irvine, Arthur Kent, Kevin Lowe, Fran Morrow, Narelle Phelps, Steve Sauer, Neil Schneider and Mark Smith. Congratulations were then extended to the staff by the Mayor, Councillors and management staff.

MINUTES – ORDINARY MEETING 20 MAY 2008


APOLOGIES

Apologies were tendered on behalf of Cr. S.G. Humphrys, Cr. P.W. McLennan and Mr. Ross Knox (Aboriginal Mentee). 2008-119 RESOLVED (Cr. Mustow/Cr. Sullivan) That such apologies be accepted and leave of absence granted. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

2008-120 RESOLVED (Cr. Thomas/Cr. Wise) That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Richmond Valley Council, held on 15 April 2008, the Minutes of the Reserve Trust Meeting of Richmond Valley Council, held on 6 May 2008 and the Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting of Richmond Valley Council, held on 6 May 2008, be taken as read and confirmed as true records of proceedings. MATTERS ARISING OUT OF THE MINUTES (ORDINARY MEETING, 15 APRIL 2008)

Heritage Agreement (Page 2 of the 15/4/2008 Minutes) Cr. Jeffery enquired whether Council had received any feedback in relation to talks with the Heritage Office. The General Manager advised that a very favourable response had been given by Minister Sartor at recent discussions and that since then Council had received an updated copy of the Draft Heritage Agreement which is currently being looked at. There were still some issues to be sorted out, however the Executive Director of the Heritage Office indicated that she was very keen for matters to move forward. It was therefore anticipated that any issues can be resolved. Code of Conduct (Pages 120-121 of the 15/4/2008 Minutes) Cr. Jeffery stated that in respect to his written question, the General Manager had responded with a bureaucratic answer. Cr. Jeffery commented on his attempts to identify the person who had generated the written complaint against him and that even under Freedom of Information he had not been allowed the privilege of finding out that information. However, he acknowledged that Cr. Mustow had now advised that he was the accuser. Cr. Jeffery also stated that he would accept the General Manager’s bureaucratic answer.



With the Mayor’s permission, Cr. Mustow responded to comments made by Cr. Jeffery, stating that he had not been present during the time of Cr. Jeffery’s question to the General Manager (indicated by Cr. Jeffery to have been around March 2007) and at the Meeting in March 2008 the question had been directed to the General Manager according to the rules of the meeting. His first opportunity to let Cr. Jeffery know that he had been the accuser was at the April 2008 Meeting. Acquisition of Property (for Prefabrication Workshop) (Page 124 of the 15/4/2008 Minutes) Cr. Jeffery enquired of the progress with the property acquisition. The General Manager advised that Council was in the process of exchanging contracts on the property. DECLARATION OF INTERESTS

Cr. Mustow declared a non-pecuniary interest in the Matters for Determination Report “Request to Close Council Controlled Road Reserve – Rileys Hill Road Broadwater” (adjoining land owner) - (Minute 2008-124). Cr. Mustow declared a pecuniary interest in the Matters for Information Report “Development Applications Approved under Delegated Authority” (land owner – indicated he would leave the room if the matter was debated) – (Minute 2008-150). The General Manager declared a pecuniary interest in the Matters for Information Report “General Manager’s Contract Renewal – Performance Agreement” – (Minute 2008-150). 2008-121 RESOLVED (Cr. Sullivan/Cr. Thomas) That the declarations of interest of Cr. Mustow and the General Manager be noted. DELEGATES’ REPORTS

Submitted by Councillor Wheatley Subject Matter of Attendance: Australian Local Government Women’s Association 2008 Annual Conference at Rockdale Council 3 to 5 April 2008. Precis/Summary of Issues Discussed/Considered: The theme ‘Rock To Success’, looked at issues facing councillors in an election year. The official opening and first speaker was The Hon Anthony Albanese MP. Points of interest in his address were:



• The increased number of females elected in the recent Qld. Elections, 177, which is one third of elected representatives.

• Local Government being the grassroots, dealt with garbage, libraries, child care and DA’s and many other issues (we already knew that)

• FAGS 1.8B dollars this year. • Constitutional recognition, he will work toward seeing that happens • He would like to see more women in politics, elected and in management. A question on funding for libraries was difficult to answer, he was aware of the role and importance of libraries but couldn’t promise funding. He told of the pool in Marrickville was to cost ten million dollars, is now eighteen million, they will cut back on the new library! Another question was on ACC’s and Regional Development Boards, committee members are being left out of the information loop. Regional Partnership programmes were mentioned, it was obvious that LG were in the best position to advise on local issues. Keynote speaker was Monica Attard OA, Journalist and ABC radio and TV Presenter - The title of her address was The Power Of One. She spoke of her experience and the difficulty of being the first female to be posted to Moscow as the ABC’s Russian correspondent, where this had traditionally been male dominated. Her local council is Canada Bay; she told how one lady in her community worked to improve the life of children by convincing council to improve the parks and playgrounds. This did not happen overnight, but persistence paid off, the world is changing, but slowly. One person can make a difference! Organisations make a difference in local communities, she mentioned Rotary and their contribution to the school library. A Panel Discussion, “Does being a woman in government have its advantages?” - This was lively and entertaining with Cr John Davis Mayor of Orange and Cr Helen Westwood and Lara Kirchner a director from Canterbury Council putting their views forward. Cr Davis suggested a good councillor was someone with fire in the belly and a sharp edge, not a retired 75 year old looking for something to do in retirement. He said to look good could be a benefit, but not essential. Twelve of the best could be men OR women! Lara Kirchner said success often comes down to opportunity. Equality, as a boss she would like to be a good boss, not a good or bad female boss. Females were good at time, and financial management. Helen Westwood the Councillor said women bring a different aspect to council, they are nurturers, they encourage and include, they are non combative. The role of the media is important in how women are portrayed, she mentioned the lady from Wollongong named in the recent ICAC enquiry. She mentioned bullying which is often part of the male role in councils. • Mr Ross Woodward Deputy Director, Dept. of LG touched on many subjects,

which included.



• Staff changes in the department since moving to Nowra, 95%. Public service review, risk management, the roll of the Department of Local Government is strong.

• New directions in LG, women’s awards, LGMA Women’s forum • Reviews, support resources. promoting diversity, expenses & facilities,

removing barriers, policies on child care and carers of others (the elderly) Code of meeting practice, this is under review, bullies and meeting practice, PD training after election, GM contracts, Meeting times.

• An interesting question time followed. The Hon Paul Lynch, Minister for Local Government, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Minister assisting the Minister for Health (Mental Health) - A lot of what Mr Lynch said was similar to the previous speaker. On the code of conduct, he said Mayors and General Managers will be off the committee. He said he maintains an active relationship with ALGWA; there are challenges for women. Strong communities require strong leadership. In the 2004 election, 30% of candidates were female, only a quarter of these were elected. He mentioned the “Becoming A Councillor” publication. Again a lively question time followed. The conference heard from Peter Christopher, GM, St George and Sutherland Shire Leader. Editor in Chief, Fairfax Community Newspapers NSW. “Using the right techniques to get your message out.” Neryl East, Manager Media and Communications, Shellharbour CC - Her topic was, “Getting your message across with impact”. And yet another speaker on communication, Candy Tymson, Author, Communications and Public Relations Consultant. Get your message, how, when, where why, send it to the chief of staff, don’t misuse your PR. Media is not the enemy. Important to foster a good relationship. You need the press to get a message out , the press need your story (Peter Christopher). Neryl East said it’s not true that the media have the perpetuation of used car salesmen. Candy Tymson said it’s a challenge to get the message out correctly. She spoke of relevance, the unbelievable and perceptions. The Hon Frank Sartor MP - Mr Sartor said he was an accidental politician, he told of his time as a LG councillor, the good times and the difficult times. It’s a very hard job if you care about what you do. The City of Sydney Council was a financial basket case, they found this out nine months after the election. He got the blame. The difference between success and failure is very small, watch the finances. He had a vision for the city, there was opposition, the patch or the personalities, don’t argue over this, the locals have self interest, can work with locals when you work out what they want. The Olympics saw footpaths dug up, lots of complaints and inconvenience. Pick the time for big reforms, small reforms can take place anytime. Next lesson, think ahead. Opposition to amalgamation. Great



achievements, recycling hall, pools, child care, writers festival, renovation/ restoration of the Capitol Theatre, footpaths. Greatest achievement was the setting up of the State Cancer Institute. He had a very personal insight to this terrible disease with the loss of his partner to cancer. Mr Sartor is not a Buddhist, but likes to live by the six Buddhist principles - generosity, patience, joyous effort, wisdom, concentration, ethics, and have courage. He did mention planning, said the upgrade of the hospital was easy, but the Anvil Hill development was a nightmare, seven hundred people sold their homes. He had many sleepless nights. In planning one size won’t fit all. He said he doesn’t go to work each day to make decisions just to upset people. I saw a very human side of Frank Sartor. Question time was on planning. This is only a small report on what he said, his allotted time was forty five minutes, he spoke for an hour and a half. Associate Professor Graham Sanson, Director at the Centre for Local Government, spoke on compelling issues facing local government now and into the future. He had a power point presentation. Darriea Turley, topic Life Post Politics - Darriea was a councillor at Broken Hill from 1995 until Broken Hill Council was sacked. She is very busy and committed to her community. One doesn’t have to be an elected representative to work in the community, she also serves on a number of state committees. This was an interactive workshop. Penny Holloway, GM North Sydney Council; President, LGMA NSW - The Gender Agenda. The review of the National Framework for Women in LG in 2007 found that there are strategies in place to support women’s participation in LG, however these have not led to more women in elected or senior professional positions. National review comments from women employed in LG were: Change has been slow in LG. Concern with lack of career structures. Men’s skills were valued more than those of women. Family friendly policies are needed in workplaces. Workplace culture is a big issue. The “Boy’s Club” is still alive and kicking. Leadership from male leaders is vital for a change of culture. There is a big need for training, networking and mentoring. This topic was covered by a power point presentation. I felt it pertained mainly to staff in Local Government but could be very valuable to elected women. The speakers at this conference were very good and I haven’t mentioned all of them. I have pages of notes I can refer to, or share with anyone who is interested. Cr. Wise and myself attended this conference for just a day and a half with the sessions being very informative. I thank Council for the opportunity to attend.



Outcomes/Actions Required by Council: -- Submitted by Councillor Thomas Subject Matter of Attendance: Australian Local Government Women’s Association 2008 Annual Conference at Rockdale Council 3 to 5 April 2008. Precis/Summary of Issues Discussed/Considered: • The Federal Minister for Local Government Anthony Albanese MP, spoke on

the many changes in local government in the past 23 years and has expressed the Rudd Government’s intention to work with local government to get constitutional recognition and get more women into local government. He wants local government to be on the Advisory Board for “Infrastructure Australia” Councils of Australian Local Government to be established.

• The State Minister for Local Government, Paul Lynch MP, spoke on working

with a new Government and discussed Code of Conduct revision. He said Mayors and General Managers should not be on that Committee and trivial matters should not be pursued and that Union matters should be dealt with outside Council. He also spoke on political donations and also announced that the publication “Becoming a Councillor” has just been printed and released and “Hands Up for Women” is being updated.

• An extremely interesting speaker was Frank Sartor MP, Minister for Planning

and Local Member for Rockdale who spoke on “Surviving the Bearpits and Hunting Grounds” with tactical suggestions for political success:

- Must watch finances.

- Don’t argue on persons, have it on facts - Parliament wanted to extend the role of Sydney Regional Planning so established Sydney City.

- Know when to reform and when not to - you have to change the culture of the place. The Olympics was an opportunity to rebuild infrastructure in the city (Sydney).

- Learn from your predicament. You can always work with locals, you can’t work with ideologists.

- Think ahead, be careful of short term expediation. - Needs policy and/or political expediency. - People have self interests and politicians have to balance properly. - Stick to the highway, don’t take the byways - if you fight with someone you

lose track of what you want to do. - Aspire to generosity, patience, have courage - there are too many

regulations and planning reforms are there for people to get DAs through. Forty councils don’t charge Section 94s - some charge $60,000.

• A popular feature was the panel discussion “Does being a woman in

government have its advantages. Speakers were Helen Westwood MP; Lara Kirchner, Director Corporate Services, Canterbury City Council; and Mayor John Davis of Orange City Council. It was entertaining and questions from the floor were numerous.



• Monica Attard, a journalist and ABC radio and ABC Media Watch presenter

was the keynote speaker and spoke of the “Power of One” and mentioned how women have come a long way by being true to themselves.

• “Using the right technique to ensure that your message gets out there and

gets heard” was an interesting topic dealt with by Peter Christopher, Editor Fairfax Community Newspapers NSW and Neryl East, Manager of Communications, Shellharbour City Council. Peter said you need to form relationships with the media and that they are your friend, not your enemy. Not all media is the same, community newspapers are less aggressive. If you feel you are unfairly dealt with go and see the Editor, send emails to journalists and use websites to access background information.

• Neryl said the media is an opportunity to get your message across free and is

a tool to reach mass audiences in one go. Journalists are looking for conflict, controversy and confrontation. Good answers are “I can’t speculate on that but my point today is” or “on the contrary the fact is” or “that’s one view, but my position is”. If you do not know the answer say so and don’t lie.

• A popular motivating speaker was Candy Tymson whose company won the

contract to organise the “City to Surf” with 50,000 runners. Naturally it has to be run like clockwork and the key is communication and the different styles and you must be aware of people’s perception of messages and their relevance. Men want to talk - women want to be heard.

• The Annual Meeting was held and the new President is Cr Christine Jeffery

from Shellharbour City Council. Locally, Cr Norma Thomas of Richmond Valley Council was re-elected to the Executive.

• ‘Hot Spots’, a popular programme was again held and the Committee has

agreed to increase the length of time for this item as it is an opportunity to air one’s opinions on various aspects of Local Government.

This conference was attended by Crs. Wise, Wheatley and Thomas and I would like to thank Council for the opportunity to attend. Outcomes/Actions Required by Council: -- Submitted by Councillor Wise Subject Matter of Attendance: Australian Local Government Women’s Association 55th NSW Annual Conference in Sydney on 4-5 April 2008. Precis/Summary of Issues Discussed/Considered: I thank Council for the opportunity of attending this very busy and interesting Conference. I am submitting a brief overview of the messages conveyed by the various speakers. 1. The Hon. Anthony Albanese, MP, Minister for Local Government - officially

opened the Conference and spoke about his intention to work closely with



local government. He would like to see more women involved. Strong communities need strong local government.

2. Monica Attard, OA, Journalist and ABC Presenter - encourage Aboriginal

women on to community committees to help make decisions. Women who have views and are outspoken are considered “aggressive” by men. Men doing the same thing are ‘leaders’.

3. John Davis, Mayor of Orange – “Being a woman is an advantage because

they are usually better money managers, they are ‘caring’ and have more commonsense.”

4. Lara Kirchner, Director Corporate Services, Canterbury – opportunity is the

key. Women can be the target of unfair scrutiny and they should use all the skills they possess.

5. Helen Westwood, Bankstown – it is imperative to have women in all levels of

Government. Women bring different approaches; they are ‘nurturers’. Support women who are being bullied – speak up.

6. Ross Woodward, Deputy Director General, Department of Local Government

– spoke about the Code of Conduct Review, meeting behaviour and practices, strategic planning and managing culture change. There will be compulsory training after the election for all Councillors. The Department will bring training out to all areas.

7. The Hon. Paul Lynch, MP, Minister for Local Government – the Minister

advised that he is close to releasing the report on Code of Conduct. He has caused the delay until he has clarification of the ‘political donation’ issue. A 10 year strategic plan on climate change is being done.

8. Peter Christopher, Editor in Chief, Fairfax Community Newspapers, and 9. Neryl East, Media and Communication, Shellharbour – both gave ideas on

how to understand and how to work with the media. 10. Candy Tymson (Mrs. Jeremy Bingham), Author and Public Relations

Consultant – gave a very animated presentation titled “What’s the Most Important Thing to You?”

11. The Hon. Frank Sartor, Minister for Planning, Member for Rockdale – the

Minister gave a very interesting personal story of his life and his rise to fame. This was followed by:

a) Get the finances right. (Have arguments over vision and outcomes, not

over personalities.) b) Know when and when not to reform. (Cultural changes are more

powerful than most other things. Pick the right time to do reforms.) c) Keep learning - attend local public meetings, answer questions as often

as possible. d) Always think ahead ….. Will this be okay in 5 years. Have strong

convictions.



e) Don’t trust the media. f) Politics and policy – start with good policy then, maybe, compromise. He then spoke on the importance of mining in all states and on planning

reforms of which he believes 80%-90% will work well. 12. Graham Sansom, Associate Professor, Director, Centre for Local

Government – are we prepared to reform the sector in a sensible way? The Rudd Government’s “War on Inflation” won’t allow much money. Local Government in NSW is heading to crisis (Percy Allan Report). Productivity Report will show that rates must rise considerably. Local Government must be seen to have – Relevance, Capacity, Credibility.

13. Darriea Turley, Chair, National Women’s Rural Coalition – how to make a

positive difference in your community even if you are not the elected person. 14. Penny Holloway, President, Local Government Managers’ Association – “The

Gender Agenda” Review of National Framework “Women in Local Government.” 65% said the workplace culture needs to change. Need for female leadership, elected and staff.

Outcomes/Actions Required by Council: -- Submitted by Councillor Thomas Subject Matter of Attendance: Richmond River County Council Meeting at Lismore on 9 April 2008. Precis/Summary of Issues Discussed/Considered: Election of Chairman and Deputy Chairman took place resulting in election of Cr. John Chant (Lismore City Council) and Cr. Norma Thomas, OAM (Richmond Valley Council) respectively. Reports from the Estuary Management Committee and the Richmond Floodplain Committee were received and noted. Shires Association ‘A’ Division Meeting held at Bellingen was attended by the General Manager and Chairman John Chant representing Richmond River County Council while Councillors John Felsch and Norma Thomas were also in attendance. A Draft Management Plan was submitted and adopted. It was noted that during the January flood there was a landslip at Swan Bay approximately 20 square metres in area. The Chairman moved and it was adopted as policy that Councillors and former staff of the previous term be invited to the annual Christmas function following each general local government election. (Our General Manager is retiring this year.)



Council has received $2,201.49 so far from its claim of $17,416.85 from HIH casualty and general insurance. Further payments are to come. Council has confirmed its support for the Catchment Activity Model project and included $7,000 in the 2008/2009 budget as part of the Estuary Management Program. Council has repaired all damage that was accessible after the small flood event early February and all debris has been removed from headworks to have them operational. Outcomes/Actions Required by Council: Delegate to monitor. Submitted by Councillor Mustow Subject Matter of Attendance: Rous Water Meeting at Lismore on 16 April 2008. Precis/Summary of Issues Discussed/Considered: Some of the following items were on the agenda: ¬ Election of Chairman/Deputy Chairman. There was no change in the position

of Chairman. The new Deputy Chairman is Cr. Staples from Byron Council. ¬ Financial Analysis Report – March 2008. ¬ Quarterly Review of Management Plan. ¬ Dunoon Dam Project Steering Committee. ¬ Ballina Highway Bypass. ¬ NSW Green Business Program. Outcomes/Actions Required by Council: -- Submitted by Councillor Mustow Subject Matter of Attendance: Far North Coast Weeds Meeting at Lismore on 23 April 2008. Precis/Summary of Issues Discussed/Considered: I was unable to attend this meeting, however some items on the agenda were: ¬ Election of Chairman and Deputy Chairman – no change. ¬ Financial Analysis Report – March 2008. ¬ Financial Review as at 31 March 2008. ¬ Dead trees in road reserve. ¬ Chief Weeds Officer. ¬ Equipment Replacement. Outcomes/Actions Required by Council: --



Submitted by Councillor Thomas Subject Matter of Attendance: DTRAC Meeting at Legume on 1 May 2008. Precis/Summary of Issues Discussed/Considered: Meeting attended by three Members of Parliament, Thomas George (State), Janelle Saffin (Federal) and Tony Windsor (Federal), who are arranging a combined meeting for extra funding for the three bridges due to increased costs by widening to 8.3 metres. New tenders will have to be called and Richmond Valley Council has another opportunity to tender for this work. Councillor Lindsey Passfield was elected Chairman again and Tenterfield Council the Secretariat. DTRAC had written to all major users of the road, Frazers, Wickham Freight Lines, Kyogle Grain Supplies, Lamb Transport, Scofields Transport, Northern Co-operative Meat Company and CEFN Transport who use this road to cart pigs to Booyong. Reports were given by these companies as to the amount of freight carried and of benefit if it was improved. Northern Co-operative Meat Company processes about 3,000 head of cattle and 2,000 pigs a week. Owners spoke of government policy to address driver fatigue and duty of care for their drivers and other disadvantages with the road condition. Outcomes/Actions Required by Council: Delegate to monitor. RECOMMENDATION Recommended that the Delegates’ Reports be received and noted. 2008-122 RESOLVED (Cr. Thomas/Cr. Wise) That the above recommendation be adopted. COUNCIL WORKSHOPS Reference: Governance – Council Meetings, Councillors Prepared by: General Manager

Background The current schedule of Council Workshops has been set to June 2008. Report Issues In order to have days allocated for future Workshops, it is proposed that Council adopt the following dates:



¬ 1 July 2008 ¬ 5 August 2008 Conclusion The allocation of workshop dates provides for the scheduling of Council commitments. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that Council adopt the Workshop dates listed in the report. 2008-123 RESOLVED (Cr. Sullivan/Cr. Thomas) That the above recommendation be adopted. (Cr. Mustow, having declared an interest in the following matter, retired from the meeting at this stage, the time being 2.23 p.m.) REQUEST TO CLOSE COUNCIL CONTROLLED ROAD RESERVE – RILEYS HILL ROAD BROADWATER Reference: Roads – Road Closures; Rileys Hill Road, Broadwater Prepared by: Design Team Leader

Background Council has received a request from Mrs C. Keough seeking to close an unconstructed road reserve that runs through Lots 100 and 101 Deposited Plan (DP) 1107939 at Broadwater. During the preparation of DP 1107939, it became evident that the constructed road (Rileys Hill Road) did not reside within the existing road reserve. With the registration of DP 1107939, a new road reserve was dedicated to the public, so that the new road reserve now wholly contains the constructed section of Rileys Hill Road. The section of road reserve proposed to be closed is approximately 630 metres long with a total area of approximately 1.2 hectares. Mrs. Keough has already lodged an application to close these sections of Council controlled road reserve, but her application was stopped as the road reserve in question is controlled by Council.



Report Issues The section of road reserve proposed to be closed has not had any road constructed upon it nor is there any road likely to be constructed within it in the future. The property on both sides of the road is part of the same lot and will not result in any parcels of land becoming land locked. A map indicating the area concerned has been distributed separately to each Councillor. Legal Only Council can lodged a road closure application for a Council controlled road reserve. This application may be made by Council on behalf of a third party. Policy At present there is no adopted policy relating to closure of unformed council controlled road reserves and each request is assessed on a case by case situation. Environmental No change from the existing land use is anticipated, although future building envelopes for Lots 100 and 101 may alter if the proposed road closure is approved, and the closed road is consolidated with the surrounding land. This would be subject to a development application. Asset The closure of this road reserve would result in a reduction in Council’s unconstructed road network. This is not expected to have a detrimental effect on access in the area. Council does not have any assets within the area of the proposed road closure. Social The closure of this section of road reserve would benefit the adjoining property owners and allow greater flexibility of their property. Consultation There is only one adjoining landowner to the section of road reserve subject to the proposed road closure. This road closure is being made at their request.



Economic The applicant would be required to pay all costs associated with the road closure application. Mrs Keough has already lodged a road closure application with the Department of Lands, and DP 1107939 indicates the sections of road proposed to be closed. As this road reserve does not contain a constructed road within it, Council will not benefit financially from the road closure. In accordance with Section 38 Roads Act 1993, any road vested in Council (upon which no construction has ever taken place) will revert to the Crown upon closure. Staff Richmond Valley Council staff will be required to liaise with the Department of Lands in relation to the road closure application. Conclusion It is a benefit to Council to rationalise unconstructed sections of its road network. Attachments Map indicating the location of the proposed road closure. RECOMMENDATION Recommended that: 1. Council consent to the closure of the unconstructed section of Rileys Hill

Road as indicated in the report. 2. The consent be conditional that the section of road proposed to be closed be

consolidated with Lots 100 and 101, DP 1107939, respectively. 2008-124 RESOLVED (Cr. Jeffery/Cr. Wheatley) That the above recommendation be adopted. (Cr. Mustow returned to the meeting at this stage, the time being 2.25 p.m.)



STATUS OF POTENTIAL FUNDING FOR SEWERAGE TREATMENT PLANT PROJECTS Reference: Sewerage and Drainage - Programs Prepared by: Water and Sewer Planning Development Engineer

Background At the February 2008 Council Meeting, a report was tabled giving an update on the funding commitment by the State Government for a number of sewerage projects in Evans Head, Woodburn and Broadwater and how this funding process would affect the timing of these projects. This report is to give a further update on the funding process and a revised timetable for these projects. Report Issues Procurement Management The Department of Commerce (DOC) has been engaged to project manage the procurement process for these projects. The projects include: • Broadwater sewerage scheme • Evans Head and Woodburn Effluent Reuse Scheme (excluding the irrigation

systems) • Evans Head and Woodburn Sewerage Upgrades In order to meet the State Government requirements for funding, DOC will be preparing a Project Development Plan (draft completed), engaging a suitable consultant to prepare an estimate of scheme costs, prepare tender documents and call tenders through an Expression of Interest (EOI) process. Timing of Projects The procurement process has determined that the most beneficial way to procure these projects is to combine them into a single tender with four separable parts. This tender package will include Broadwater sewerage, Evans Head/Woodburn effluent re-use and Woodburn sewerage upgrade but will exclude Evans Head sewerage upgrade. This is because the strategy for Evans sewerage upgrades is still being finalised and will hold up the other projects. The Evans Head sewerage upgrades will be tendered separately. Based on this philosophy, DOC has prepared a program of works giving the anticipated timeline for each project milestone. The program of works, which has been distributed separately with this report, shows that at best, tenders will not be awarded until the middle of March 2009 (including Evans Head sewerage upgrades). This is a best case scenario assuming all deadlines are met. Regular



monthly meetings are continuing involving Council, DOC and Council’s design consultants (GHD and Geolink) to manage this process and to update progress of work. As mentioned in the previous Council report on this issue, the promise of funding from the State Government and the resultant extra time added to the procurement of these projects will particularly impact on Council’s commitment to sewer Broadwater by 30 June 2009. It will not be possible to meet this commitment now and at best this date could be extended by another 12 months or more. Recent contact with departmental officials indicates that some subsidy offers may be forthcoming shortly and may be available before the end of the 2007/2008 financial year. The agreement will require application of Council’s Seal. If offers are received prior to the May meeting, a late report may be submitted seeking approval to affix the Seal. The same may apply to Coraki effluent reuse. Projects A project update meeting was held on 23 April 2008 between Council, DOC, GHD and Geolink to review the progress of the above projects. The following is an update on the progress of these projects. Broadwater Sewer The design for Broadwater Sewerage is being done by GHD with design plans and documentation now planned for completion by mid June 2008. This date has been extended as design/documentation issues have arisen that has needed to be addressed by GHD due to the complexity of the scheme. In July 2006, Council adopted the timetable for providing a sewerage system to Broadwater by 30 June 2009. Given the funding commitment now made by the State Government and the extended time by the consultant to complete the designs, the adopted timeframe for this project will not be met. At this stage, a realistic estimate for completion of the sewerage system has now been pushed out by at least 12 months, with completion in 2010. Once the designs have been completed another community meeting will be held to update the Broadwater residents on the progress of the sewerage scheme. Woodburn/Evans Head Sewerage Augmentations The design work for these augmentations is being carried out by GHD. The Concept strategy for the Woodburn augmentations has now been completed and design plans and documentation now planned for completion by mid June 2008. The preferred concept allows for the connection of Riverside Village into the sewerage system. The Concept Strategy for the Evans Head augmentations is still in development and a draft report for review has been submitted by GHD. Council has provided comments on the draft report and GHD are currently updating the report.



Depending on the outcomes of the strategy, at this stage, it is estimated that design plans and documentation are planned for completion in October 2008. As this part of the scheme will not be receiving State Government funding it will be tendered separately so that the delay in finalising the Evans Head Strategy will not impact on the timeframe for the delivery of the other projects. Woodburn/Evans Head Re-Use The design work for this work is being undertaken by Geolink. Designs are progressing with design plans and documentation now planned for completion towards the end of June 2008. This date has been extended due to the complexity of the scheme and the design/documentation issues that have needed to be addressed by Geolink. There is no Pollution Reduction Program (PRP) currently outstanding on this part of the reuse scheme. The Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC) has been kept fully informed about the progress and likely completion dates. Program of Works A copy of the Program of Works has been issued separately to Councillors. Financial Implications As stated in previous Council reports, the amount of financial assistance that Council may expect to receive from State Government funding for these projects is in the order of $7 million. This also includes retrospective funding for the Evans Head STP Stage 1 augmentation. Department of Water and Energy have recently advised Council that payment for this retrospective funding may be made in the 2007/08 financial year. Conclusion Council has been advised that funding for sewer projects in Evans Head, Woodburn and Broadwater will be available under the Country Towns Water Supply and Sewerage Program. This includes retrospective funding for the Evans Head Sewerage Treatment Plant Stage 1 construction. Delays will be expected in the delivery of these projects as Council is required to follow a defined procurement path to obtain this funding. This report updates the funding process and gives a revised timetable for these projects. If an offer is received prior to the May Council meeting, additional information will be submitted seeking approval to accept the offer and affix Council’s Seal. Attachments Program of Works.



RECOMMENDATION Recommended that the information be received and noted and that the General Manager be delegated authority to assess the appropriateness of any offer and affix the Seal of Council to documentation relating to any offer that is to be accepted. The General Manager advised that since the completion of the report last week Council had received advice and some documentation from Minister Rees, the Minister for Water, making an offer to Council in regard to 21.9% of the preconstruction, design, construction and project construction management costs of the Evans Head-Woodburn Sewerage Treatment Plant; those dollars are in the order of $2,463,616 and that amount is available to be accepted by Council. There are some provisions in the documentation which Council will need to clarify with the Department but they are in regard to issues that Council is currently progressing, for example, implementing a Trade Waste Policy, implementing a Demand Management Plan and implementing an Integrated Water Cycle Management Strategy. The outcome will be that 10% of the subsidy amount will be withheld pending completion of the conditional items but the balance of the money should be paid to Council before the end of this financial year. The General Manager stated that the recommendation as presented still stands. 2008-125 RESOLVED (Cr. Thomas/Cr. Jeffery) That the information be received and noted and that the General Manager be delegated authority to assess the appropriateness of any offer and affix the Seal of Council to documentation relating to any offer that is to be accepted. CASINO BAND HALL Reference: Council Properties – Maintenance; P3976 Prepared by: Engineering Support Officer

Background Council, in a collaborative effort with Environmental Employment and Training (EnviTE) and the local Work for the Dole participants, will be repainting the Casino Band Hall on River Street as part of EnviTE’s Casino Work for the Dole Program. The Band Hall has an existing mural in very poor condition. The existing mural is believed to be some 20 years old and potentially linked to the original Beef Week celebrations. All attempts to contact the original artist have been unsuccessful. It is believed that the original artist has since moved out of the Northern Rivers area. EnviTE and the local Work for the Dole participants will be repainting the Casino Band Hall on River Street.



The Band Hall has a current allocation of $3,000 and it is estimated that the proposed repainting would not require any additional allocation to complete these works. Council at its Meeting on 18 March 2008 resolved that “the Band Hall be repainted back to its original heritage colours." Report Issues As a result of heightened public awareness due to press coverage relating to the painting over of the mural, the Member of Clarence, the Hon. Steve Cansdell MP, who is also a Graphic Artist, has offered to reinstate the mural back onto the Casino Band Hall after the painting has been completed. The painting of the Casino Band Hall is scheduled to start the first week of June 2008. A copy of Council’s Policies on “Management of Community Volunteers (other than Council Volunteers)”, Occupational Health and Safety and Council’s “Community Group/Individual Project“ form have been sent to Mr. Cansdell. These documents outline the practices and policies that must be considered and incorporated into any arrangements made in relation to this project. Mr. Cansdell has requested Council’s Community Projects Officer to contact a local youth group to seek their assistance in the repainting of the mural. Mr. Cansdell believes the youth involvement will ensure that youth of the town take ownership of the artwork and hopefully this will deter vandalism. Approvals and Heritage Assessment The Casino Band Hall is not on the current Casino Local Environmental Plan (LEP) Heritage register nor is it proposed in the new Heritage register for the future LEP. The repainting works are, therefore, exempt development. Consultation Public consultation has been undertaken by Council. No submissions on the future of the mural were received during the exhibition period, however, some members of the community did express concern via the local media and a letter to Council as to the loss of the mural on the building. Financial Implications The Band Hall has a current allocation of $3,000 and it is estimated that the proposed repainting of the Band Hall would not require any additional allocation to complete these works. However, this estimate does not include any costs for reinstating the mural. The previous report to Council identified that a major cost is the erection and maintenance of scaffolding and security fencing that would be required for the duration of the mural painting. No funds are provided for this



purpose and Mr Cansdell will have to address access/safety in considering how the mural will be reinstated. Sustainability (ESD Principles) The repainting works are consistent with ESD principles. Conclusion Photographs of the mural will be taken before the repainting works commence. Arrangements have been made with Environmental Employment and Training (EnviTE) and the local Work for the Dole participants to commence the work of repainting the Casino Band Hall on River Street as part of EnviTE’s Casino Work for the Dole Program the first week in June 2008, after which Mr. Cansdell (if all Council’s requirements are met and he has gained approval status from Council), can commence on the mural replacement. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that Council express its appreciation to the Hon. Steve Cansdell MP, Member for Clarence, for his offer to reinstate the Band Hall mural. 2008-126 RESOLVED (Cr. Wheatley/Cr. Thomas) That the above recommendation be adopted. CASINO FLOODPLAIN RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (2002) Reference: Sewerage and Drainage - Planning; Development and Building

Controls – Registration; P4755; DA2004.0082 Prepared by: Senior Administration Engineer

Background A development application (DA 2004.0082) was lodged 21 August 2003 for the construction of a dwelling at 26 Charles Avenue, Casino. The submitted plans included the proposed floor level of RL 29.15 metres Australian Height Datum (AHD). Assessment of the application was carried out, and as the proposed development was above the minimum habitable floor level for that location of RL 29.0 m AHD (1 in 100 year design flood level of RL 28.5m AHD) no additional specific condition was added to the consent.



Development consent (with conditions) was issued for the dwelling 9 September 2003. Richmond Valley Council was then no longer involved in the development as the developer had engaged a Private Certifier. Issue of the Construction Certificate (dated 25 September 2003) and inspections during construction were carried out by Contech Building Consultants Pty Ltd as the Private Certifier. Council staff became aware via a counter enquiry of what appeared to be “something not right” about the floor level of the dwelling and advised Contech 3 February 2004 “As a matter of professional courtesy the above concerns are brought to your attention.” Contech’s Building Consultants Pty Ltd reply of 25 February 2004 included certification by the survey firm used by the builders of the finished floor level of the dwelling, i.e. RL 29.206 m AHD. Whilst this appeared to place the floor level above the minimum requirements, field observations revealed that the floor level was considerably lower than any of the other houses in the area constructed to the same minimum level of RL 29.0m AHD. Contech Building Consultants Pty Ltd advised that the matter had been referred to the builders for confirmation of the levels. Council were formally advised in a letter from Contech Building Consultants Pty Ltd of 29 July 2004 that the building had not been constructed in accordance with relevant development standards. Included in that documentation was reference to the actual level of the dwelling slab of RL 28.559 m AHD. This places the floor level at just 59mm above the 1 in 100 year design flood, not the adopted standard of 500mm. Since that time there have been ongoing discussions between the external parties involved – private certifier, builder, surveyor, owner – as to how to resolve the non compliance in order to meet the development standards. Without compliance with the development standards, the dwelling cannot receive a Final Occupation Certificate. Report Issues The dwelling has not been constructed in accordance with the adopted standards, i.e. at a minimum floor level of RL 29.0m AHD. The dwelling has only 59mm freeboard, not the required 500mm. The “simplest” way to rectify the non compliance is for the entire building to be demolished and reconstructed. Other options, such as a bund wall around the site, have been considered by the external parties with meetings held with Richmond Valley Council to gauge whether Council would accept such alternatives in lieu of complete reconstruction. Legal The error in the construction levels are a matter for the external parties. Plans were submitted with the development application that met the relevant



development standards. Development consent was issued with conditions (not specifically on minimum floor level as the plans indicated compliance) with all subsequent dealings being the responsibility of the Private Certifier Contech Building Consultants Pty Ltd. Council has received a Section 96 application (Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979) to modify the development consent (Development Application 2008.0082) by “construction of a structural fence as per attached drawings and engineers designs and details to provide protection of wave action of flood water (freeboard allowance) above min. AHD 28.50”. The fence is to protect the property from wind driven wave run up or wash from vehicles or boats, as the floor level is above the 1 in 100 year design flood level but does not provide a sufficient margin for error. Processing of the Section 96 application for a structural fence around the rear of the lot as an alternative to demolition of the building, and the subsequent issue of a Final Occupation Certificate would be an approval for a floor level that was a variation to Council’s adopted policy defined in the Casino Floodplain Risk Management Plan (2002). The other issue for consideration is the long term retention and maintenance of the proposed fence to ensure it performs structurally. Council could require an assessment by a competent person (structural engineer) on a regular frequency (say five years) to ensure the fence always performs its function and is appropriately maintained. Policy The Casino Floodplain Risk Management Plan (2002) requirement for residential development is that the floor level must be 500mm above the 1 in 100 year design flood. Asset A Council sewer main runs across the rear of the lot. A Council stormwater pipeline runs along the northern boundary of the lot. There are not normally any specific requirements for fences of colourbond style and the like. However as this fence is of a more structural standard with deeper footings, requirements will be placed on any approval in order to satisfy protection of the sewer and stormwater lines. Social There has been considerable social disruption to the original owners of the property who engaged the original dwelling constructors. Council’s records indicate that the builder is now the owner of the property.



Statutory/Policy Implications Council’s Casino Floodplain Risk Management Plan (2002) has been prepared in accordance with the New South Wales’ Floodplain Management Manual: the management of flood liable land. The adopted reference flood is the 1 in 100 year design flood. Freeboard is applied to that design flood to determine the minimum habitable floor level. 2001 Guideline: “Freeboard – a factor of safety typically used in relation to the setting of floor levels, levee crest levels, etc. It is usually expressed as the difference in height between the adopted flood planning level and the flood used to determine the flood planning level. Freeboard provides a factor of safety to compensate for uncertainties in the estimation of flood levels across the floodplain, such and wave action, localised hydraulic behaviour and impacts that are specific event related, such as embankment and levee settlement, and other effects such as “greenhouse” and climate change.” Conclusion The floodwaters in the vicinity of the lot are backwaters within the “Round Swamp” area. This is supported by the flood modelling that shows 1 in 100 year design flood velocities in the area are very low i.e. less than 50mm per second. Consequently there will be no surge hydraulic effects from fast flowing water. Mortgage insurance and property valuations compare the floor levels with the 1 in 100 year design flood. Consequently there should be no financial implications for owners as the floor level is still above the 1 in 100 year design flood. There are approximately 330 houses in the urban area of Casino with floor levels below the 1 in 100 year design flood. Minimum floor level requirements were not imposed on development until after the production of the first Casino Flood Map in 1980. The possible impacts on the lot are: 1. the inaccuracies in the flood modelling. This is significantly reduced due to

the use of 2D flood modelling of the Casino area. The Casino model was one of the first to use the new software and is now the “standard” for detailed modelling. (Richmond Valley Council is working with Richmond River County Council to undertake 2D modelling from Casino, Lismore and Bungawalbin to Broadwater to improve the earlier modelling undertaken for the Mid Richmond.)

2. wave action may be the most significant impact as the direct distance across

the flood surface is more than 500 metres. It is possible, depending on wind direction that the wind distance could be up to 4 kilometres.

3. levee and embankment settlement. Not applicable in this location.



4. “greenhouse” and climate change. Future modelling updates will take into account possible changes to rainfall patterns for the catchment. At this point it is not known if the patterns will be drier, or wetter, or more or less intense within in the catchment. The area is well above any influences of sea level rise.

The proposal is to construct a fence of sufficient strength to withstand the wave action at the level of the 1 in 100 year design flood. The fence is not water proof as this would then pose problems of allowing water to flow off the site. The baffle type fence would ensure that the flood waters around the dwelling are only those determined by the volume of water associated with the flood and not by the other uncertainties detailed in the Guidelines. Floods higher than the 1 in 100 year design flood will impact on the dwelling before any of the neighbouring houses, but as the land rises to the east there is an adequate evacuation route to higher ground. Council staff have discussed the proposed fence with neighbours and have addressed their concerns regarding height, “mowing strips”, etc. Such concerns will be included in the assessment of the application. The proposed fence would appear to address the main flood impact on the dwelling and is worthy of consideration as an alternative to complete demolition and reconstruction. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that: 1. Council process the Section 96 Application for a structural fence around the

rear of the lot at 26 Charles Avenue with the view to approving the work (with any additional conditions as appropriate) such that a Final Occupation Certificate can be issued for the dwelling.

2. A condition be included in any approval of the Section 96 Application

requiring the applicant to have registered on the title deed for the property those conditions of consent relating to maintaining the fence to ensure its long term stability and permanency; this will include a requirement to have the fence assessed by a structural engineer at an appropriate frequency for condition.

2008-127 RESOLVED (Cr. Wheatley/Cr. Wise) That the above recommendation be adopted.



ORGANISATION STRUCTURE – WORKS DIRECTORATE Reference: Corporate Management – Establishment, Reviewing; Personnel -

Establishment (DWS 240070) Prepared by: Director Works

Background At Council's Ordinary Meeting of 18 March 2008, Council considered a report prepared by the Manager Strategic Planning regarding a review of the strategic planning section structure within the Works Directorate to address changing work requirements for assets, assets systems and water/sewer management. It has now been realised that another component to the review was omitted from the report associated with the current trainee administrative position servicing the Works Directorate. Report Issues The current structure for Administrative Assistants for the Works Directorate includes an Administrative Assistant who is effectively the Director's Executive Assistant but provides administrative support to the entire department as well as a trainee Administrative assistant. The trainee position has been funded and in the structure for the last three years. The other position of Administrative Assistant/Data Entry, has been transferred to Water and Sewer, as part of the resolution of Council of the March 2008 report on the Works Directorate restructure. With the changes to the structure to better reflect the direct responsibilities of various staff it was previously identified that more certainty would be required within the section associated with relief for the administrative assistant and clarification of roles and responsibilities to support other staff as part of the core and multi-skilling duties for the administrative function. In this regard, there is a need to provide support at the Saleyards for data entry in the event of annual leave or staff shortages. Works administrative assistants also provide back up to customer services, as required, for both front counter assistance as well as being available to operate the Council switchboard, as required. The Works Directorate structure, including the Director and three Managers requires the full time services of qualified administrative assistants as the administrative work load has increased over time. As Council renumerates its trainees in accordance with the Award provisions the position of trainee Administrative assistant has been fully funded within the Works Directorate for approximately three years.



What is proposed is that the trainee position be deleted from the structure and it be replaced with a permanent administrative assistant. The classification for this position will be in keeping with the assessed Grade of the previous Administrative Assistant within Works. To avoid confusion in relation to position titles it is also appropriate to rename the position of the Administrative Assistant currently within the structure to Senior Administrative Assistant as the Position Description for this position makes them responsible for the trainee Administrative Assistant and they were also previously responsible for supervising the Administrative Assistant/Data Entry. Consultation Council will need to advise the Consultative Committee of the proposal to change the classification of the trainee position to a permanent administrative assistant position. Economic The position has been previously funded within the Works Directorate and, as such, the rate of pay under the trainee scales will be similar to the remuneration for a permanent position subject to the skills and competencies of the successful applicant. Staff The current traineeship for Works Administration expires in July 2008 and as such, would be an appropriate time to deal with the change. Strategic Links The need to service the requirements for the Works Directorate including providing appropriate trained relief staff for sections within Works, as well as other Directorates, is of paramount importance. Financial Implications The position of Administrative Assistant has previously been assessed at Grade 7 within Council's adopted Salary System. The remuneration for this position is between $730.00 and $840.00 per week. Council's current trainee is renumerated on age, qualification and experience at a rate of approximately $630.00 per week. The additional cost of the permanent position will be more than offset by increased productivity associated with the continuity of employment and experience.



Conclusion The position of Trainee Administrative Assistant needs to be made permanent as a result of other changes in the Structure and also increases in work loads in the Water/Sewer area, as well as to service the Council's needs associated with annual leave and absences from both within the Works Directorate and other Sections and Directorates within Council. A particular need exists in relation to Saleyards Data Entry but, in particular, the position is required to provide administrative assistance to Managers and Directors as well as other employees of the Works Directorate. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that: 1. The position of Trainee Administrative Assistant, within the Works

Directorate, become a permanent Administrative Assistant position. 2. The current position of Works Administrative Assistant be retitled Senior

Administrative Assistant. 2008-128 RESOLVED (Cr. Wheatley/Cr. Wise) That the above recommendation be adopted. REQUEST FROM MR JOHN MCPAUL TO JOIN THE SALEYARDS ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO REPRESENT LIVESTOCK CARRIERS Reference: Economic Development – Meetings (DWS 243446) Prepared by: Director Works

Background Council’s Saleyards Advisory Committee is a Category ‘A’ Committee with management and positions as detailed in the Committee and Delegates Information document adopted by Council on 18 September 2007. The function of the Committee is to advise on Saleyards policy and development/ improvement issues. Membership currently includes three Councillors, the Director Works, Saleyards Administrator, one representative each from the Casino Auctioneers Association and the Northern Co-operative Meat Company, four User representatives as well as a representative of the Casino Rural Lands Protection Board.



Historically, the four User representatives included three Vendor representatives and one Transport Representative. When the Committee positions were last declared vacant, following the appointment of the current Council, no nominations for a position as a Transport Representative were received. In light of this, given that four nominations were received from Vendor representatives, the membership of the Committee was changed to reflect four User representatives rather than identify representatives from either Vendors or Transport companies. The Casino Rural Lands Protection Board representative is a recent addition following on from communication between Council and the Casino Rural Lands Protection Board. Report Issues The function of the Committee, being to “advise on Saleyards policy and development/improvement issues”, is best served by having widespread representation. The real value of the Committee in recent years has been as a communication conduit that has enabled Council (in some detail), to explain how the Saleyards facility is funded and operated. In relation to curfews, ramp and access issues, safe loading/unloading of cattle, truck wash and other matters, it has always been desirable to have a Transport representative sitting on the Advisory Committee. In effect, the mix of the Committee needs to include Transport representatives as well as Vendor representatives. There are no administrative issues foreseen with increasing the Committee numbers and the cost to Council is minimal associated with the production of additional sets of agendas and minutes for Committee representatives. With this in mind, it is proposed that it is appropriate to increase membership to five User representatives and, in this regard, accept the nomination of Mr. John McPaul as a Livestock Carrier onto the Committee. In considering this request for membership, Council has a number of options to consider. The Committee membership will need to be reviewed as a component of the Review of Committees and Delegates following Council Election in September 2008. In this regard, nominations will be called again for User representatives and Mr McPaul would be more than welcome to nominate or be nominated to the Committee at this time. Another option available to Council is to enquire of the



current User representatives to ascertain whether or not they wish to continue as members of the Committee as this may create a casual vacancy. The next meeting of the Committee is not scheduled until early November 2008. Thus it is unlikely that council may have reviewed its Committee structure by this date. Legal Council is able to vary the membership of its Saleyard Advisory Committee being a Category ‘A’ Committee as it wishes via resolution. Policy The current membership of the Committee is as determined by the Committee and Delegates Information document adopted on 18 September 2007. Council is able to vary membership of the Committee as explained above. Council could wait until after elections and assess membership as part of the review of Committees and delegates. Council may also make a temporary appointment pending this review. Asset Having a Transport representative on the Advisory Committee should improve decision making associated with management of the Saleyards asset. Social It is desirable to ensure communication and effective representation on this Advisory Committee and, therefore, having a Transport representative is a good outcome. Consultation Theoretically, Council could publicly advertise for nominations to an additional position on the Committee. As this activity has been undertaken previously with no nominations being received from the transport industry and as Council will have the option of again reviewing its membership post 2008 local government elections, this matter can be reviewed at this time. Economic There is no economic impact other than production of additional documents associated with an additional Committee member. Staff There are no impacts on staff resources.



Strategic Links The proposal to increase membership by one is in keeping with the function of the Committee associated with a broad consultative base for the operation of the facility. Conclusion As indicated above, it is desirable to ensure broad representation on this Category ‘A’ Committee as it aids in communicating to the Users of the facility how it is financed and managed as well as providing an opportunity for specific User groups to air their views on the facility. Council has the opportunity to review membership following the 2008 Council Elections and, therefore, any other changes to membership can be addressed at this time. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that: 1. The request by Mr John McPaul for membership of the Saleyards Advisory

Committee as a Transport representative be accepted. 2. Mr. McPaul be provided with a copy of this report when advised of the

acceptance of his nomination. 2008-129 RESOLVED (Cr. Thomas/Cr. Sullivan) That the above recommendation be adopted. TENDER 130.08 2008 FOR MOBILE CRUSHING OF AGGREGATES AT WOODVIEW AND PETERSONS QUARRIES Reference: Commercial Activities - Tendering; Roads - Service Provision Prepared by: Purchasing Officer

Background Tender 130.08 2008 for Mobile Crushing of Aggregates at Woodview and Petersons Quarries was called to supply the required 102,000 tonnes of aggregates to Council for projected works and private sales.



Report Issues Tender 130.08 2008 for Mobile Crushing of Aggregates at Woodview and Petersons Quarries was advertised, closing at 2.00 pm on Friday, 9 May 2008. Due to operational requirements to commence this year’s crushing of aggregates as soon as possible, this tender will be included as additional information for consideration at the May 2008 Council Meeting. Conclusion A full report and evaluation of the tenders will be supplied to Councillors as additional information prior to the Meeting on 20 May 2008. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that additional information be considered. Additional Information Report Legal Tender 130.08: 2008 Mobile Crushing of Aggregates at Woodview and Petersons Quarries was advertised closing at 2. 00pm on Friday, 9 May 2008. Advertising of tenders was conducted within the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993, and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005. Economic Council’s Manager Civil Operations, Purchasing Officer, and Quarry Operations Foreman, have been involved in the development of specifications and assessment criteria processes of the tendered works. Tender No. 130.08 2008 Mobile Crushing of Aggregates at Woodview and Petersons Quarries – the following tender submissions were received.



Tenderer Tendered Amount inc GST

Northern Rivers Quarry and Asphalt

$1,371,600 $1,371,600 ( Alternate Tender )

M & M Quarries

$2,358,200 $1,683,000 ( Alternate Tender A ) $1,683,000 to $1,514,700 ( Alternate Tender B) $1,696,200 (Alternate Tender C)

McLennan Earthmoving

$1,573,700

Terragon Mobile Crushing

$1,298,000

Tender Analysis Council uses contractors to crush aggregates in the two operative Council Quarries; (Woodview and Petersons). Council has encountered several problems with contractors over previous crushing contracts. These problems can be categorised as: • Several of the contractors have struggled to produce the required quantities of

materials, because of supplying too small, or not enough, plant and equipment. • Several contractors have not met production volumes because their crushing

plant had too much down time due to breakdowns and mechanical failures. Typically caused by old plant and equipment.

• Previous contractors have had problems producing material that meets specification, because of supplying inappropriate plant that does not shape the aggregate stone to the specified shape.

• All of the previous contractors have had problems producing the ratio of different size aggregates specified by Council. This has led to overproduction of some aggregate sizes and shortfalls in others.

In part, some of the problems have been a result of engaging the lowest price tenderers, who are able to offer a low price to crush material because of their use of smaller or older plant and equipment. This has often resulted in the contractor’s machinery suffering breakages, and down time, with the resultant loss of production. In order to eliminate the use of old or inappropriate equipment in this tender, Council has required the tendering contractors to specify the age, type and size of crushing plant that they intend to use to obtain the required quantity and specification of material. This contract will require the successful tenderer to maintain a high rate of production of materials in a short time frame. The materials will also need to comply with strict NSW Roads and Traffic Authority specifications. The tender evaluation is therefore seeking to determine which tenderer is able to provide the most appropriate plant to crush the required material, and which



tenderer can provide the most appropriate referees to verify their experience crushing aggregates, and proven performance in a similar contract. Terragon Mobile Crushing Supplied three referees, however two of these referees were for supply of a different product. The remaining referee generally gave a fair report on Terragon’s production of aggregates, however, that contract was over three years ago, for a smaller quantity. Analysis of the offered crushing plant would indicate that the plant is only marginally sized to produce the required quantities at the out put rate required. Northern Rivers Quarry and Asphalt Northern Rivers Quarry and Asphalt is a business unit of Lismore Council, and was only able to supply an internal reference from that council. The offered plant was modern, however is much the same sized plant that previous tenderers have used and struggled to meet production requirements. McLennan Earthmoving Supplied two referees however one was Richmond Valley Council, and is not an external reference. The other referee was for sales of aggregates, not contract crushing, but did report excellent service and product. The offered plant is deemed adequate, however, there is no evidence to confirm that the required output rate can be achieved consistently. M & M Crushing Supplied three referees, however two were for a different product, however the remaining referee, Gold Coast Council, reports excellent performance on an extremely large current aggregate crushing contract. This tenderer offered the most comprehensive plant and equipment inventory. Their plant is all new, is the largest sized plant, and has multiple plant items to prevent downtime. M & M Crushing was the only tenderer to allow for the use of a vertical shaft impactor to ensure the finished product meets specifications. They have a proven track record with Richmond Valley Council of meeting and exceeding contract requirements. Financial Implications Conforming tenders: Terragon Mobile Crushing $1,298,000 Northern Rivers Quarry and Asphalt $1,371,600 McLennan Earthmoving $1,573,000 M & M Crushing $2,358,200



Alternative Proposals: All Council tenders have provision for the tenderer to lodge alternative proposals that demonstrate a benefit to Council, yet satisfy the commercial and legal requirements of the tender. Alternative proposals were received from: Northern Rivers Quarry and Asphalt $1,371,600 This alternative proposal offers the same pricing as their conforming tender, addressing quarry management issues that are beyond the scope of this tender. There is no demonstrated benefit to Council in this alternative proposal. M & M Crushing Alternative Proposal Option A – Addresses a problem that all previous contractors have had during previous crushes, that of achieving the desired ratio of aggregates in the total crush. This proposal seeks to vary the ratio of different sized aggregates produced, and as a trade off, M & M offers a lower price per tonne crushed. This option has been reviewed by Council’s Manager of Civil Operations and Council’s Quarry Operations Foreman and determined to be very beneficial to Council, with the variations falling within the scope of required production volumes. The tendered price on this proposal is $1,683,000. Alternative Proposal Option B – This proposal builds on Option A. M & M Crushing are offering to reduce the per tonne price on a sliding scale if their production of aggregates exceeds 200 tonnes per hour. This proposal also offers other considerations; M & M Crushing would load aggregates into Council trucks direct from the crusher at no cost, when the crushing was under way, thus saving the Council some of the cost of operating a front end loader and operator during the crush period. In this proposal M & M Crushing also offer to mix crusher dust into the road base as it is produced. Again, this would result in a saving to Council, as this operation has normally been carried out by Council with a front end loader and operator. This option has been reviewed by Council’s Manager of Civil Operations and Council’s Quarry Operations Foreman and it is considered to be the most beneficial to Council. The cost to produce the total crush would range from a maximum of $1,683,000 down to $1,514,700 depending on the output of material achieved. There is also the benefit that much of the front end loader work loading and mixing road base would be carried out by the contractor rather than Council. Alternative Proposal Option C – this proposal also builds on Option A offering to vary the pricing on aggregates and road base materials. This option has been reviewed by Council’s Manager of Civil Operations and Council’s Quarry Operations Foreman and is considered to be of no demonstrated benefit to Council. The cost to produce the total crush under this proposal would be $1,696,200.



Common Seal This contract may require the use of the Common Seal. Conclusion Overall the tenderer with the most suitable plant is M & M Crushing. They have the most modern plant and equipment offered, and the plant has the largest capacity of all the plant offered. M & M Crushing are currently engaged by Richmond Valley Council, crushing overburden for rural road repair material, having won Tender 127.08. This company has demonstrated the most professional attitude out of all previous contractors, evidenced by their ability to produce large volumes of material week by week. They have demonstrated a willingness to commit additional plant and equipment in order to increase production, and have provided the use of a front end loader and operator in the quarry to help when Council’s loader had been busy or undergoing maintenance. M & M Crushing’s alternative proposal Option B is overall the most beneficial of all tender offers to Council. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that: 1. M & M Crushing’s alternative proposal Option B, be accepted by Council. 2. The General Manager be authorised to affix the Common Seal of Council, if

required, to the contract documentation. 2008-130 RESOLVED (Cr. Wheatley/Cr. Jeffery) That the above recommendation be adopted. TENDER 129.08 FOR SUPPLY AND DELIVERY OF PRE-STRESSING WIRE Reference: Commercial Activities - Tendering Prepared by: Purchasing Officer

Background Tender 129.08 for the Supply and Delivery of Pre-Stressing Wire was advertised and closed on 24 April 2008. The tender was called to supply 600 tonnes of pre-stressing wire required by the Richmond Valley Council’s Concrete Products business unit.



There were no respondents to the Tender. Report Issues Council’s Concrete Products business unit requested a tender be called to secure the supply of approximately 600 tonnes of pre-stressing wire for projected works in the later half of 2008. Only one company currently manufactures pre-stressing wire in Australia, with several other companies supplying imported product. The global demand for pre-stressing wire is currently at record levels, with demand far outstripping supply. As a result of the global shortage, prices have risen dramatically from $1,250 per tonne at the start of 2008, and are currently approximately $1,600 per tonne, and are projected to be approximately $1,800 per tonne by late 2008. Council has been purchasing small quantities of pre-stressing wire from various suppliers as needed, on the spot market. In practice this has meant purchasing from whichever supplier had stock to supply. Given the volatility of world market for pre-stressing wire, it is understandable that all the suppliers were reluctant to commit to a supply guarantee and locked in contract price for this product. As a result, there were no respondents to the Tender, with suppliers unable to commit to the supply of product or pricing. Legal Tender 129.08 for the supply and delivery of Pre-Stressing Wire was advertised closing at 2.00 pm Thursday 24 April 2008. Advertising of tenders was conducted within the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993, and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005. Policy Council’s Purchasing Policy references the Local Government Act section 55 that requires that Council shall tender any contract with estimated expenditure of more than $150,000. Economic The Concrete Products business unit was seeking to lock in supply of pre-stressing wire to service current and pending contracts. It is not practical to postpone the purchase of the pre-stressing wire. The current global shortage of pre-stressing wire, and resultant price volatility, also means that calling fresh tenders will likely result in no response from the suppliers. Discussions with the suppliers of this product has yielded little interest in tendering, as they can neither guarantee supply, nor guarantee prices. Suppliers



indicate that they can currently sell all the wire they obtain, without having to respond to tenders. The suppliers also indicated that their only method of supplying the pre-stressing wire would be for Council to continue to spot purchase the product as it becomes available. At current prices of approximately $1,600 per tonne x 600 tonnes would result in an expenditure of $960,000. At projected prices of approximately $1,800 per tonne x 600 tonnes would result in an expenditure of $1,080,000. Statutory/Policy Implications Under the provisions of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 – Regulation 178 – Acceptance of Tenders: “(3) A council that decides not to accept any of the tenders for a proposed contract or receives no tenders for the proposed contract must, by resolution, do one of the following:

(a) postpone or cancel the proposal for the contract, (b) invite, in accordance with clause 167, 168 or 169, fresh tenders based on the same or different details, (c) invite, in accordance with clause 168, fresh applications from persons interested in tendering for the proposed contract, (d) invite, in accordance with clause 169, fresh applications from persons interested in tendering for contracts of the same kind as the proposed contract, (e) enter into negotiations with any person (whether or not the person was a tenderer) with a view to entering into a contract in relation to the subject matter of the tender, (f) carry out the requirements of the proposed contract itself.

(4) If a council resolves to enter into negotiations as referred to in subclause (3) (e), the resolution must state the following:

(a) the council’s reasons for declining to invite fresh tenders or applications as referred to in subclause (3) (b)-(d), (b) the council’s reasons for determining to enter into negotiations with the person or persons referred to in subclause (3) (e).”

Conclusion The only practical method of obtaining the required 600 tonnes of pre-stressing wire is for Council to spot purchase the product as it becomes available through various suppliers. In order to undertake this method of purchasing Council would need to resolve under the provisions of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 Reg 178 subclause (4): (4) If a council resolves to enter into negotiations as referred to in subclause (3) (e), the resolution must state the following:



(a) the council’s reasons for declining to invite fresh tenders or applications as referred to in subclause (3) (b)-(d), (b) the council’s reasons for determining to enter into negotiations with the person or persons referred to in subclause (3) (e).

There is little practical purpose to recalling fresh tenders or applications as the major suppliers did not respond to the initial tender application, and have indicated that they would have little interest in another tender, given the current volatility of the global market for pre-stressing wire. Council would need to resolve to enter into negotiations, including the reason for declining to invite fresh tenders, being that there is little practical chance of supplier response to another tender. Council would also have to resolve the reason for determining to enter negotiations with persons able to supply the subject pre-stressing wire, being that quotations would be sought from those suppliers able to supply the product on a best price as the product becomes available. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that Council resolve under the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 Reg 178 subclause (4) that: 1. The Council’s reasons for declining to invite fresh tenders or applications as

referred to in subclause (3) (b)-(d) is as follows. “Council does not propose to call fresh tenders as it foresees no likelihood of a

successful outcome to a fresh tender, given the lack of response to the first tender, and the current global shortage of the subject pre-stressing wire.”

2. The council’s reasons for determining to enter into negotiations with the person

or persons referred to in subclause (3) (e) is as follows. “Council proposes to enter negotiations with those suppliers able to supply the

subject pre-stressing wire at market prices, as the product becomes available to them. Council will obtain quotations from interested suppliers, in order to obtain the best value for Council, while meeting the Council’s necessity to obtain the required quantities of the subject pre-stressing wire.”

2008-131 RESOLVED (Cr. Thomas/Cr. Wheatley) That the above recommendation be adopted.



EDWARDS PARK CASINO – REMOVAL OF AMENITIES Reference: Council Properties – Acquisition and Disposal; P554 Prepared by: Senior Engineering Assistant - Administrative

Background Edwards Park is located at the intersection of Canterbury Street and Diary Street Casino. It has an amenities block which is a converted concrete tank and no other park facilities. On 19 August 2003 Council resolved (Minute 2003-534) to temporarily close the amenities block and provide access for community groups or individuals that demonstrate the need to use the facility. This proposed closure was the result of continual vandalism within the amenities facility. Report Issues Since the temporary closure of these toilet amenities no requests have been received to open the amenities. However, vandalism and anti-social behaviour continue to be an issue around these amenities. There are no current user groups which have an agreement with Council to use the park. Edwards Park is occasionally used by schools but they have never requested to have the amenities opened. These toilet amenities should be removed as they are no longer utilised and it would eliminate an area that encourages vandalism and anti-social behaviour. It will also allow Council to address the asset management plan for public conveniences more accurately following removal of unused assets. Community Consultation Prior to the removal of the amenities advertisements will be placed in local newspapers advising residents of the proposed removal. Conclusion The removal of the toilet amenities will eliminate an area which is subject to vandalism and anti-social behaviour. The amenities are currently locked and are not used by park users. Attachments Nil



RECOMMENDATION Recommended that: 1. Council advertise its proposal to remove the toilet amenities from Edwards

Park Casino. 2. Should no objections be received then Council remove the toilet amenities at

Edwards Park, Casino. 2008-132 RESOLVED (Cr. Wheatley/Cr. Jeffery) That the above recommendation be adopted. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL TO ACQUIRE LAND FOR THE PURPOSE OF PUBLIC ROAD – MANIFOLD ROAD BENTLEY Reference: Roads – Acquisition; Manifold Road Prepared by: Design Team Leader

Background Council has received a request from Mr D. and Mrs P. Stuart-Carberry for Council to accept Lot 13 Deposited Plan (DP) 721321. In 1987 a road plan was prepared to correct the road reserve alignment of Manifold Road at Bentley. DP 721321 closed sections of the former road reserve and severed sections of private property as a result of the road realignment. These sections of closed road reserve and severed land were transferred to their respective adjoining owners. In June 1987, Mr D. and Mrs P. Stuart-Carberry were notified that Lot 10 (562.3m2) and Lot 11 (1.105ha) being closed road and Lot 13 (19m2) being severed land were granted to them in compensation for the realignment of Manifold Road through their property. In 1994, DP844059 was registered as a result of a development application submitted to Council by Mr D. and Mrs P. Stuart-Carberry (DA76/93) being a subdivision creating four lots. Lots 10 and 11, DP 721321 were included in this subdivision plan but Lot 13 DP 721321 was omitted from the subdivision plan. The land surrounding Lot 13 DP 721321 was sold by Mr D. and Mrs P. Stuart-Carberry in 1996/1997. In May 2007 the Office of State Revenue informed Mr D. and Mrs P. Stuart-Carberry that Lot 13 DP 721321 remained in their ownership. Further enquiries with Council revealed that Lot 13 DP 721321 was being rated by Council. A request was made to Council to consider writing off of the outstanding rates applicable to Lot 13 DP 721321. This request was approved in October 2007 and Mr D. and Mrs P. Stuart-Carberry were advised that “it is the responsibility of the



owner/vendor and their solicitor/conveyancer/surveyor to ensure that all documentation lodged with the Department of Lands regarding the transfer of land is correct and to ensure that survey information lodged with the Council regarding the subdivision of land is accurate.” (18 October 2007). Report Issues Lot 13 DP 721321 is a triangular shaped lot that is located adjacent to Manifold Road at Bentley. It has dimensions of 7.745m (road frontage), 8.17m splay with a side boundary of 5.06m, with an area of 19m2. The existing road reserve is 20.115m wide and wholly contains the existing road formation. Mr D. and Mrs P. Stuart-Carberry's request for Council to acquire the land and dedicate it as road reserve follows on from failed negotiations with one of the adjoining property owners. No information has been provided from Mr D. and Mrs P. Stuart-Carberry in relation to negotiation with the other adjoining owner. A map indicating the land concerned has been distributed separately to each Councillor. Legal The deposited plan that created Lot 13, DP 721321 was carried out under the powers of the Public Works Act 1902. Policy At present there is no adopted policy relating to Council automatically accepting private property for the purpose of public road where there is no operational need for such land. Asset The acquisition of this road reserve would result in an increase in Council’s road reserve network. Given the location of the land in question, there is no beneficial outcome for Council in accepting Lot 13, DP 721321 for the purpose of public road. The parcel is situated adjacent a fill embankment and is fenced within adjoining land. Social The acquisition of Lot 13, DP 721321 would benefit Mr D. and Mrs P. Stuart-Carberry in their current situation.



Consultation Council has not consulted with other property owners adjacent to Lot 13 DP 721321. All discussions to date have been with Mr D. and Mrs P. Stuart-Carberry. Economic If the land acquisition of Lot 13 DP 721321 was to proceed, the applicant would be required to pay all costs associated with the transferral and dedication of the land as public road. Staff Council staff will be required to liaise with the applicant and the Department of Lands in relation to the land acquisition. Conclusion It is of no benefit to Council to acquire Lot 13, DP 721321 for the purpose of public road. Attachments Map indicating the location of the proposed road closure. RECOMMENDATION Recommended that Council decline accepting the request to acquire Lot 13, DP 721321 for the purpose of public road. The General Manager advised that the current land owner who lives in Melbourne has requested that this matter currently before Council for consideration be deferred to a future meeting subject to further discussions with the owner. 2008-133 RESOLVED (Cr. Mustow/Cr. Wise) That consideration of this matter be deferred until further discussions have been held with the owner. Cr. Thomas enquired whether it would be possible to inspect sites such as the one referred to in this report during a Works Committee inspection. The General Manager advised that arrangements could be made to inspect this site.



INTEGRATED WATER CYCLE MANAGEMENT (IWCM) STRATEGY PLAN REPORT Reference: Water Supply - Programs Prepared by: Administration Engineer

Background The then Department of Energy, Utilities and Sustainability (DEUS) now Department of Water and Energy (DWE) required that all NSW councils complete an Integrated Water Cycle Management Strategy (IWCM). Integrated Water Cycle Management (IWCM) is a way for local water utilities (councils or utilities covering several councils) to manage their water systems to maximise benefits. It involves the integration of a utility’s three main services – water supply, sewerage and stormwater – so that water is used optimally. It also involves the integration of these three services with other services (e.g. roads and drainage, tradewaste collection) and with various external requirements, particularly the NSW Water Reforms. (DEUS Integrated Water Cycle Management Guidelines for NSW Local Water Utilities 2004) Water use in developed countries like Australia is very high and continues to grow. At the same time the traditional source of the water is often fully allocated with water access capping being needed. The simplest way to deal with this problem is to use all available water resources in an integrated manner, such as using a proportion of stormwater to supplement the water supply, reducing potable water demand and increasing reuse. Furthermore, many local water utilities have the opportunity through existing growth demands or planned system augmentations to introduce integrated management so as to secure a long term supply of fresh water for their existing communities as well as for future growth. Additionally, State Government subsidies for water system upgrades will be tied to the adoption of integrated water cycle management to achieve cost effective management and State wide water use efficiencies. (DEUS Integrated Water Cycle Management Guidelines for NSW Local Water Utilities) Integration requires the linking of what are usually viewed as separate components of a water system. With integrated water cycle management, local water utilities or councils will become the central players in water system improvement, working more closely with State Government, Catchment Management Authorities, neighbouring utilities, industry and the community. (DEUS Integrated Water Cycle Management Guidelines for NSW Local Water Utilities) During the IWCM project a Project Reference Group (PRG) was used to review information, suggest and discuss solutions, choose options, propose a way forward and agree on a final IWCM strategy, prior to public consultation process. Twenty-four organisations including council’s, state government departments, local organisations, businesses and community groups formed the PRG.



Report Issues IWCM is a planning process developed by the NSW Department of Water and Energy (DWE) (formally known as NSW Department of Energy Utilities and Sustainability (DEUS)), with defined steps to effectively integrate water supply, sewerage and stormwater to achieve sustainable management of these services. IWCM deals with the complex linkages between the different elements of the water cycle. It addresses issues facing local water utilities as well as the more general issues facing the environment. An IWCM Strategy Plan considers issues such as: § The future urban water service needs and customer expectations; § The availability of water including water sources such as rainwater, effluent and

stormwater; and § The impact of town water use on other water users including the environment

and future generations. The DWE guidelines set out a three step process for developing an IWCM plan: § A concept study: What are the issues? § A strategy: How do we fix the problems? § An implementation phase: How do we know the problems are fixed? Council has completed the IWCM Concept Study and a draft IWCM Strategy Plan. Throughout the IWCM process, stakeholder consultation was undertaken to ensure that stakeholders contributed to the definition of water cycle management issues and the identification of potential solutions. This was achieved through the formation of a Project Reference Group (PRG) which included representatives from RVC, government agencies, local organisations and the community. The IWCM Concept Study identified catchment, water resource and urban water cycle management issues relevant to the management and operation of Council's water supply and sewerage businesses. These issues and potential solutions were identified through a stakeholder consultation program and the review of background information. The IWCM Strategy was developed through the building and assessment of a series of management strategies (scenarios) to address the issues defined in the Concept Study. Based on the outcomes of the Concept Study and a series of desktop analyses, a number of different management options were developed for each of the water cycle issues identified. Each of the options represents a different level of service to the environment and customers of Council’s urban water services. Similarly, each option is supported by a different asset management plan depending on the type of infrastructure required to deliver the level of service. This in turn means that each option will have different environmental, social and economic outcomes (both positive and negative).



Each of the scenarios was assessed to identify a preferred scenario for implementation. The different scenarios are assessed on their economic, social and environmental outcomes. The preferred scenario sets out a list of strategic actions to improve the management of the identified water cycle issues over a 30 year planning horizon. The preferred scenario was determined through consultation with the PRG, steering committee and the TBL assessment. Based on this integrated scenario 3 was identified as the preferred scenario for implementation. However, the PRG found that the implementation of this scenario will require a relatively long lead time due to the investigations, risk assessment and consultation required for the indirect potable reuse component. The PRG considered that the scenario “Integrated 1” should be adopted as a short term solution. Also, the PRG agreed that it was worth considering dual reticulation for new development (from Integrated scenario 2) if feasible. Therefore, a hybrid of Integrated Scenarios 1, 2 and 3 has been identified by Council as the preferred scenario. The preferred scenario is summarised below. IWCM Issues Strategies Preferred Scenario

Regional institutional arrangements

Conduct feasibility study into regional water supply arrangements including connection of Casino system to Rous Water and RVC management of Lower Richmond River supply

Demand management High level demand management (BASIX, pricing, education, UFW reduction, showerhead retrofit, business audit and water conservation order)

Regional demand management

Regional Demand Management Strategy

Treatment capacity Present WTP capacity 23 ML/d. No augmentation required.

Security of supply SBP cost allocation for augmentation. Alternate Source Investigation. Increase of security of supply through indirect potable reuse and/or dual reticulation (if feasible in future).

Emergency backup Include consideration of alternative emergency supplies in Alternate Source Investigation

Effluent management - Casino

Reuse at Golf Course and agricultural irrigation (Blue Dog), Blue Circle cement, sporting fields. In future, dual reticulation for new development and indirect potable reuse to be considered.

Effluent management - LRR

Coraki golf course, irrigation of sporting fields and open space areas. In future, dual reticulation for new development and recharge Woodburn aquifer to be considered.

Stormwater harvesting Encourage individual development / industry to harvest stormwater.

UFW reduction (metering)

Metering in distribution system.

UFW reduction (renewal) Condition based asset renewal.

1 Poor town water supply security

UFW reduction (leak detection)

UFW reduction as in Demand Management above.



IWCM Issues Strategies Preferred Scenario 2 Lack of ground

and surface water sharing plans. RVC must be involved in the water sharing process to ensure town water supplies are adequate.

Macro Water Sharing Plan (WSP)

Contribute to DNR Macro WSP development process.

Effluent management As in 1. 3 RVC must implement sustainable effluent reuse with end user requirements considered.

Education Education on effluent reuse when and if dual reticulation and/or indirect potable reuse are implemented.

On-site sewage management (design regulation)

Regulated on-site system design approval.

On-site sewage management (monitoring)

Implement existing program (RVC On-site Sewage Management Strategy).

On-site sewage management (improvement)

Incentives for better on site technologies.

Environmental flows Water sharing process as in 2, indirect potable reuse to increase base flows if implemented in future.

Stormwater quality improvement and management

Full implementation of Stormwater Management Plan (2005).

Salt water intrusion reduction

Water sharing process as in 2

Catchment management initiatives

Liaison with CMA to implement Northern Rivers CMA Catchment Action Plan.

Water Sharing Plan Water sharing process as in 2 Flood management Full implementation of Flood

Management Plan (2002). Blue-green algae management

As per Emergency backup in 1, environmental flows in 4, and regional institutional arrangement (via alternate source) in 1.

STP point source contamination control

Augment Casino, Coraki, Evans Head STPs, targeted renewals at Rileys Hill STP.

Point source contamination control

Liaison with DEC to enforce POEO licence requirements.

4 Existing land use practices and urban impacts are affecting surface water quality

Education Education on sustainable land management practices.

Financial management Update DSP and Financial Plan, apply full cost recovery pricing (Demand Management as in 1) and Designed to be self funding and less costly. Greater access to funds through diversified services and product delivery.

5 High operating and management costs for water and sewerage systems lead to relatively high typical residential bills Water and sewerage

asset renewals Condition based asset renewal.



IWCM Issues Strategies Preferred Scenario Treatment plant process upgrade - Casino

Current process includes sedimentation and filtration. Addition of PAC and KMnO4, review and adjust current operational procedure.

6 RVC must comply with current and future potable water standards.

Drinking water quality As per Rous water supply with quality compliance clause in Service Level Agreement.

Regional institutional arrangements

As in 1

Emergency backup As in 1 Demand management As in 1 Catchment management initiatives

As in 4.

7 Hydrologic stress in catchments contributes to unsustainable extraction particularly during low flows. Environmental flows As in 4

8 There is a need for sustainable management of onsite sewage systems.

On-site sewage management systems (design regulation, monitoring and incentives)

As in 4

9 Stormwater infiltration into sewerage system increases wet weather flows

Sewerage asset renewals

Infiltration / inflow reduction program and asset renewal as in 5.

Rainwater tanks As in demand management of 1 (BASIX).

10 There is a need for sustainable stormwater / rainwater reuse

Stormwater harvesting As in 1

Risk management Sensitivity analysis on yield with reduced rainfall.

11 Climate change may adversely alter the rainfall and temperature patterns of the study area

Alternative water sources As in 1 (Regional institutional arrangements, emergency back up, demand management, effluent management, stormwater harvesting, UFW reduction).

12 Non-conformances at Coraki and Rileys Head sewage treatment plants

Treatment plant process upgrades

As in 4 (STP point source contamination control)

Demand management As in 1 13 Poor demand management in terms of consumption and unaccounted for water

UFW reduction As in 1

New infrastructure to consider ASS impacts

Implement DCP5 - Acid Sulphate Soils: identification, assessment and management.

14 ASS soils in RVC urban areas potentially impact on sewer infrastructure

Renewal program to consider ASS impacts

Renewals to consider ASS impacts.



Consultation Public consultation has been undertaken by Council as a part of the draft strategy plan review process. The public consultation was undertaken in accordance with the DEUS Integrated Water Cycle Management Guidelines for NSW Local Water Utilities and Council policies. The Draft Integrated water Cycle Management Strategy Plan was place public exhibition for public comment from Thursday November 1, 2007 to Friday December 14, 2007. Three submissions on the Draft Integrated water Cycle Management Strategy Plan were received prior to the close of the exhibition period. It is noted that no submissions were made after this period. The three submissions are discussed in detail below. (Copies of the submissions have been distributed separately to Councillors.) Public Submission 1 – Donella Kinnish Item Submission Response

1. Appendices not provided on the website

Noted. Council will address in future public consultation periods. A full version of the strategy plan was available at both Council offices, including appendices, It was noted on the website that a full version was available by contacting Council. The website only contained the Strategy Plan and not the appendices. The Appendices of the IWCM Strategy Plan were not available via the website due technical difficulties with the webhost program. The new webhost/site will correct these technical difficulties in the future if/when it becomes available.

2. Technological issues with Council’s web site

Noted. Council will address in future public consultation periods A webpage (with cross references and hypo links contained within) was developed to provide technical information regarding the IWCM process, IWCM Issues, preferred scenarios etc to provide as much practical information possible as apart of the community consultation process. However, the current webhost program does not allow web pages (with cross reference and hypo links) to be uploaded and a number of technical difficulties occurred. The new website will correct these technical difficulties in the future if/when it becomes available. As a result the IWCM website was difficult to understand due the constraints of the webhost program.

3. Public consultation. The community consultation referred to is the public display and invitation to comment on the Draft IWCM Strategy Plan. In addition, the project reference group represented key community issues. (refer to item 2)



Item Submission Response

4. Population growth and demand.

Demand was determined using models developed by DWE (Water Demand Trend Tracking and Climate Correction Model and Decision Support System). The population growth of 1.2% p.a. is expected to result in an increase in demand of 36% over the next 30 years (30y x 1.2% = 36%), with the current demand management initiatives. This does not take account of any new water savings measures and only considers the town water usage. Only residential and non-residential use of town water (supplied by Council) is considered in this study. It is noted that current grow figures are consistent with this projected growth

5. Agricultural use Agricultural use is not considered as it is not a town water supply (i.e. not supplied by Council) and outside the scope of an IWCM Strategy.

6. Errors in cross-referencing The document uses automatic cross-references to figures and tables within the report. This seems to have been corrupted in the document production (website?). It does not refer to sources of data/references. The text on page 12 should read: “Figure 3-1 shows that the baseline average demand forecast would not be able to be met by the Jabour Weir extraction licence. This will not be the case under other WSPs. However, the consistency of water availability from Jabour Weir is a major concern (refer Section 4.3). The capacity of Casino WTP (23 ML/d) is sufficient for projected demand as shown in Figure 3-2. Based on current water demand trends, the current treatment capacity of the Casino STP is sufficient to meet future treatment demands until the end of the planning horizon (refer Figure 3-3).”

7. Casino STP augmentation The STP will be augmented (capacity increased) to allow for population growth by 2009/10.

8. Water Savings Programs The benefits of water saving measures (in terms of water saved) cannot be determined until the measures are implemented and the data are available. Council will analyse the success of the programs by monitoring demand and production on an ongoing basis. The Demand Management Plan is value added option as apart of the IWCM (Appendix J). The preferred scenario in the IWCM Strategy is for high level demand management strategy (BASIX, pricing, education, UFW reduction, showerhead retrofit, business audit and water conservation order) and will be adopted as apart of the Strategy Plan.

9. Appendix I To determine a budget expenditure for Council, 20% of the cost has been attributed to each of the 4 constituent Councils and Rous Water. The exact amounts are not yet known. Appendix




10. Item 4.4.3 The amount of $4m was earmarked by Council for future augmentation of the water supply source. It is a budget allocation only for the purposes of long term financial planning i.e. to ensure that sufficient funds are available for the required infrastructure works. RVC to comment on the “Promoting Better Practice Program”.

11. Appendices E, F The 30 capital works programs were provided as appendices with capital projects and expenditure amounts in each year. This allows for long term financial planning i.e. to ensure that sufficient funds are available for the required infrastructure works. RVC to provide appendices.

12. Table 10.1 The dollar values for each project/item are included in the capital works programs in Appendix E.

Public Submission 2 – Richmond/Wilson Freshwater and Tidal Water Users Association, (M. McDonald) Item Submission Response

1. Connection of Casino system to Rous Water

The preferred scenario does not include connection of the Casino system to Rous Water. One of the solutions to improve town water security was “Conduct feasibility study into regional water supply arrangements including connection of Casino system to Rous Water and RVC management of Lower Richmond River supply”. As discussed in Section 8.1, “This would be undertaken as part of a Regional Water Plan in conjunction with Rous Water, other regional water utilities and State Government departments and in accordance with actions from the Far North Coast Regional Strategy (NSW Department of Planning, 2006). The aim is to review future supply options to ensure long term regional water efficiencies and improved drought security.” Other water users, other water sources and licence restrictions would be considered in that study. There is no current proposal to amend the present Rous licence or reduce allocations to irrigators.

2. Aquifer sources As discussed in Section 4.4.2, an alternate source investigation is proposed. This would consider possible sources including groundwater.



Public Submission 3 – Evans Head and District Water Committee Incorporated (Dr Richard Gates) Item Submission Response

1. Appendices not available on website

Noted. Council will address in future public consultation periods. A full version of the strategy plan was available at both Council offices, including appendices, It was noted on the website that a full reversion was available by contacting Council. The website only contained the Strategy Plan and not the appendices. The Appendices of the IWCM Strategy Plan were not available via the website due technical difficulties with the webhost program. The new webhost/site will correct these technical difficulties in the future if/when it becomes available.

2. Errors in cross-referencing The document uses automatic cross-references to figures and tables within the report. This seems to have been corrupted in the document production. It does not refer to sources of data/references.

3. Approach The Strategy Plan follows the DWE guidelines for scope and content. As it is restricted to town water supply, a total catchment approach is not the aim of this strategy, nor is it possible given the limited responsibilities of Council as the town water supply authority. However, catchment considerations were taken into account in determining issues to be solved.

4. DWE Guidelines The DWE Guidelines that were current at the time of commencing the project was the 2004 version. The IWCM process has a strategic planning focus, with high level consideration of environmental aspects. Detailed environmental assessment would occur at the concept design stage of each project. As DWE is the regulator of town water and sewerage services, Council is required to comply with DWE’s guidelines. (Refer to Item conc.)

5. Consideration of environmental costs

The costs provided in the document are high level estimates only, designed to allow for strategic planning and providing direction for future projects. Environmental and project lifestyle costs and comparison of options would be considered in later stages such as feasibility and concept design, where relevant.

6. TBL assessment This is provided in Appendix H of the report. (Refer to Item 1)




7. Growth Strategy Changes in population growth, either increases or decrease, can significantly impact on the level of demand in a service area. Historical population information and existing population forecasts are one way of assessing the likely influence of population as a demand driver. In 2006, RVC updated its Strategic Business Plan for Water Supply and Sewerage services. These growth projections were based on statistics, the Department of Planning (former DIPNR) population projections, DWE data and the 2005 Urban Land Release Strategies (ULRS) for Casino. Although historical trends show a decline in population growth between the years 2000 and 2005, the number of approved new dwellings remained positive and growing during the same period. It is estimated that Casino will experience a growth rate of approximately 1.57% between 2005 and 2030. Council is obligated to plan for the expected growth to ensure that the continuity of the services that council provides is met into the future. Council controls growth by the Urban Land Release Strategies (require by the NSW Department of Planning) for the future development areas. Council has an obligation to ensure that these new development areas are undertake in ecologically sustainable manner and thus beyond the scope of the IWCM.

8. Source augmentation The amount of $4m was earmarked by Council for future augmentation of the water supply source. It is a budget allocation only for the purposes of long term financial planning i.e. to ensure that sufficient funds are available for the required infrastructure works. The Strategy Plan considers that increased funding is likely to be required, depending on the source chosen. Indicative costs estimates are provided in Section 4.4.3. As discussed in Section 4.4.3, “The possibilities of source augmentation options are numerous and there are a wide range of costs associated with the options. Evaluation of the suitability of the $4 million figure will need to be made when the results of the above investigations are known.” The demand analysis undertaken suggests that the source augmentation is not required until approximately 2033, based on the predicted average day demand. However, the probability of running out of water is high (0.5%) in any year which means a back up source would be required. A yield sensitivity analysis is required to determine the effects of climate change. The requirement for a back-up source is separate to the need for source augmentation, however, the investigations into both sources are likely to be undertaken concurrently.

9. Unsustainable extraction. Agreed. This contributes to the need for alternate sources.

10. High operating and maintenance costs

Capacity to pay is considered when Council determines the annual bills to be levied. The strategy plan only determines the typical residential bill (average customer who is not a pensioner or vacant lot) required to fund the works.

11. Corrections The only reference to ebb tide release is in section 4.2. The discussion of Evans Head STP augmentation will be updated.




12. Additional studies The Strategy plan provides direction for Council’s future planning but does not make any conclusions with regard to design considerations for individual projects as these will be undertaken in a later stage. The sensitivity analysis is required to understand the impact of climate change on the safe yield of Casino system so that the actual source requirements can be determined.

13. Rainwater tanks In areas other than Casino, water is supplied by Rous Water, not Council. This would be a consideration for the Rous IWCM Strategy.

14. Restrictions Agreed. Hence, alternate source investigations are recommended.

15. Desalination Noted. Any proposal for desalination would be subject to investigation of these issues. Environmental impacts of desalination would be required to be addressed if considered an option in the future.

16. Stormwater Stormwater harvesting has been considered as an alternative water source for new developments (Section 4.5.3) and stormwater quality is addressed in Council’s stormwater management plan and development control plans (Section 7.3).

17. Abattoir A representative from the abattoir was part of the project reference group. They indicated that effluent reuse was not appropriate for all of their operations. Council is awaiting the outcomes of the Inquiry into secure and sustainable urban water supply and sewerage services for non-metropolitan of NSW. Currently council has different water consumption charges for food producers within the Council area. However, Council is currently meeting best practice guidelines for consumption based charges.

18. Indirect potable reuse Noted. Priorities have not been determined at this stage but will be considered as part of the alternate source investigation.

Conc. ESD considerations The principles of ESD will be considered in the decision making of each individual project. As the final source/works to be adopted have not yet been investigated, it is premature to consider the aspects noted as part of ESD in a Strategy Plan. The Precautionary Principle is not an excuse to do nothing. Council needs to balance the current financial reality with demand for services and its other obligations. The New DWE Guidelines resulted from requests by Council’s to allow for individual or localised assessment to suit individual Council situations. Richmond Valley Councils process for the IWCM strategy is in accordance with the DWE 2004 guideline however undertook more extensive investigations to that which is required by the new guidelines. As such the New DWE Guidelines provides a less rigorous assessment.



Staff The Draft Integrated water Cycle Management Strategy plan does rely on staff to undertake significant works to implement the actions contained within the plan. Significant investigations and concept designs will to be undertaken to determine which of the preferred scenarios are developed further. Strategic Links The preferred scenario recommends involvement in the Regional Water Plan in conjunction with other regional water utilities and State Government departments and in accordance with actions from the Far North Coast Regional Strategy (NSW Department of Planning, 2006). The aim is to review future supply options to ensure long term regional water efficiencies and improved drought security. Other water sources and licence restrictions would be considered in that study. Financial Implications There are no financial implications as a result of adopting the Draft Integrated water Cycle Management Strategy plan. The Strategy plan provides direction for Council’s future planning and does not make any conclusions with regard to design considerations for individual projects as these will be undertaken at later stage with subsequent reports to Council regarding these individual projects. Conclusion Council has completed an Integrated Water Cycle Management Strategy (IWCM) to manage Council water systems. The Strategy plan has been developed in accordance with the DEUS Integrated Water Cycle Management Guidelines for NSW Local Water Utilities 2004. The preferred scenario sets out a list of strategic actions to improve the management of the identified water cycle issues over a 30 year planning horizon. The Strategy plan provides direction for Council’s future planning and does not make any conclusions with regard to design considerations for individual projects. All individual projects which are part of the Strategy plan will be undertaken at later stage with subsequent reports to Council regarding these individual projects. Attachments Three submissions on the Draft Integrated Water Cycle Management Strategy Plan and the Executive Summary of the Strategy Plan. RECOMMENDATION Recommended that Council adopt the Draft Integrated Water Cycle Management Strategy Plan. 2008-134 RESOLVED (Cr. Wheatley/Cr. Wise) That the above recommendation be adopted.



LEASE AND CLEANING OF TOILETS AT REAR OF OAK STREET ARCADE, EVANS HEAD Reference: Council Properties - Maintenance; P80302; P80303 Prepared by: Manager Strategic Planning

Background As the result of a perceived community need in the business area of Oak Street, Evans Head, Council has entered into a Lease Agreement to allow the toilets at the rear of the Oak Street Arcade to be used by the public from 8.00 am to 5.30 pm seven days per week. The Council also provides for the cleaning of the toilets by way of contract. The most recent two year lease has now expired and Parker and Kissane have approached Council to renew the lease for a further two year period. In addition, the cleaning contract for this toilet has also expired and arrangements are being made to attain quotations to commence a new contract. Report Issues Given the restrictions on funding for general maintenance, including toilets, it is time to review the cost and the need for the service. Under the Lease Agreement Council is obliged to pay a percentage of the rates, a rental figure, a contribution towards cleaning of the toilets during the week, any additional cleaning deemed necessary by the leaser, provision of materials such as toilet paper, handtowels, etc, legal fees, signage and the cost of any repairs. The approximate breakdown of costs to Council per annum is as follows:

Council cleaning and opening contract $15,000

Rental of toilets $2,400 Contribution towards rates $1,500 Contribution to Leasers cleaning fees $2,500

Provision of materials $500 Legal Fees $500

TOTAL $22,400

As can be seen, the annual cost to provide this service is significant. There is also an administrative burden in dealing with the complaints, issues and problems arising from this service that is not fully under the control of Council. The alternative to providing public access to toilets in the main street is via the toilets in the Silver Sands Caravan Park (SSCP) (adjacent the kiosk) which are



available seven days per week and at the Council Offices, adjacent to the Library, which are available five days per week. The distance to either of these facilities is approximately 100 metres. In 2008, with maintenance funds being an issue, it is not considered unreasonable to have to walk 100 metres to a set of toilets. By way of comparison, Council has recently made the decision to make available in Casino public toilets in the Civic Hall now that the toilets at the old Council Chambers in Walker Street have closed. The service to the people in Casino has obviously been affected and people are required to walk in excess of 100 metres. Given that there is likely to be a higher usage in Casino, having a population in excess of 12,000 people, there could have been more justification to provide an additional service in Casino, compared with Evans Head. Such an arrangement was not considered unacceptable by Council and as part of the change over to the use of the toilets at the Civic Hall, additional signage was installed in the main street to give people better direction to the public toilets. It should also be noted that both the toilets adjacent to the library and the new amenities block in the Silver Sands Caravan Park are available for disabled person, if required. For the purposes of comparison of costs for other public toilets the following is advised: • to clean toilets at Razorback Lookout, Shark Bay, Kalimna Park, old boat

ramp, new boat ramp, Airforce Beach, is $27,000 for 2007/08. • Cleaning of toilets at Stan Payne is built into the working expenses. • Contract price to clean the toilets at the Surf Club is $8,500 which SSCP

funds. • Cleaning of the toilets near the SSCP kiosk is included in the SSCP budget. • Cleaning of the public toilets at the council offices is included in the office

budget.

Consultation No consultation has been held with the community to hear their concerns. Financial Implications The potential savings from the non-renewal of this contract could be returned to the General Revenue Fund or could be distributed to provide an improved level of service to the toilets in Evans Head or throughout the Council area.



Staff Any decision regarding the non-renewal of this lease or the increase usage in the other toilets will not impact on staff as all of the work is undertaken by contract. Conclusion Given the restriction on funding and the high cost of provision of this service it is not considered unreasonable to expect to walk approximately 100m to public toilets. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that: 1. The lease for the public use of the toilets at the rear of the Oak Street arcade

not be renewed.

2. New signage be erected advising of the availability of public toilets adjacent to the library and adjacent the Kiosk at the Silver Sands Caravan Park.

3. Available funds from discontinuing this service be utilised for purposes of improving the condition of other public toilets in the Council area and frequency of cleaning.

MOTION (Cr. Thomas/Cr. Wheatley) That: 1. The lease for the public use of the toilets at the rear of the Oak Street arcade

not be renewed.



2008-135 AMENDMENT (Cr. Jeffery/Cr. Mustow) That: 1. Council advertise for public comment its intentions to discontinue the

availability of the toilets for “public” use.

2. If no objections are received then Council proceed in accordance with points 3, 4 and 5.



3. The lease for the public use of the toilets at the rear of the Oak Street arcade not be renewed.



The Amendment on being put to the meeting was approved. The approved Amendment on being put to the meeting as the Motion was carried. REVIEW OF RICHMOND VALLEY COUNCIL MANAGEMENT PLAN 2007/2010 AS AT 31 MARCH 2008 Reference: Corporate Management - Planning, Financial Management -

Budgeting Prepared by: Manager Finance

Background Clause 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Section 407 of the Local Government Act 1993 require within two months of the end of each quarter a report to be provided to Council on a review of the budget estimates and implementation of the management plan. Report Issues The quarterly review of Richmond Valley Council’s 2007/2010 Management Plan incorporating a review of the budget as at 31 March 2008, has been circulated separately to each Councillor. The document has been prepared on the basis of an analysis of the financial aspects with an incorporation of the review of Council’s strategies, actions and performance indicators. The budget review for the third quarter of the 2007/2008 financial year has seen the estimated budget result improve by $25,000 from the deficit of $25,000 as at the 31 December 2007 Budget Review to a balanced result as at the 31 March 2008 Budget Review. In overall cash terms, the estimated deficit in cash has decreased by $7,199,100 from a cash deficit of $7,769,200 as per the 31 December 2007 Budget Review to a cash deficit of $570,100 as at the 31 March 2008 Budget Review.



The revised estimates for Council are summarised in the table below with detailed explanations contained in the attachment to the business paper.

2007/2008 Budget Review Statement as

at 31 March 2008

Revised Estimate 31/12/07

Revote

Revised Estimate 31/3/08

Operating Revenue 45,341,400 3,001,400 48,342,800 Operating Expenditure 50,607,200 2,128,400 52,735,600 Operating Result – Surplus/(Deficit) (5,265,800) 873,000 (4,392,800) Add: Capital Revenue 3,096,900 -140,000 2,956,400 Change in Net Assets (2,168,900) 732,500 (1,436,400) Add: Non-Cash Expenses 10,083,600 0 10,083,600 Add: Non-Operating Funds Employed 6,762,100 726,300 7,488,400 Subtract: Funds Deployed for Non-Operating Purposes

22,446,000

(5,740,300)

16,705,700

Cash Surplus/(Deficit) (7,769,200) 7,199,100 (570,100) Restricted Funds – Increase/(Decrease) (7,744,200) 7,174,100 (570,100) Working Funds – Increase/(Decrease) (25,000) 25,000 0

Overall the estimated financial position of Council in the short term for the 2007/2008 financial year as at 31 March 2008 is satisfactory. The Budget Review as at 31 March 2008 contains a number of adjustments that have been able to improve the budget result by $25,000. The major variations to the budget result as at the 31 March 2008 Budget Review that have improved the estimated budget result by $25,000 include: Opening Budget Surplus/(Deficit) 31 December 2007 -25,000 Urban Stormwater Drainage

Increase in Drainage Maintenance -3,700

Economic Development/Promotion

Net Savings in Operating Expenditure 6,800

Economic Development/Promotion

Net Savings in Capital Expenditure 2,000

Regulatory Enforcement Increased Operating Revenue 24,000 Regulatory Enforcement Increased Operating Expenditure -3,000 Health Administration Net Reduction in Operating Revenue -7,800 Public Cemeteries Net Increase in Operating Revenue (net of

Perpetual Mtce Fees transfer to Reserve) 12,200

Human Resources Net Savings in Operating Expenditure (after reallocation of Support Costs)

20,000

Swimming Pools Savings in Operating Expenditure (net of Reserve Funding) (Risk Mgmt Plans)

12,000

Strategic Planning Net Savings in various Strategic Planning Projects

119,200

Environmental Protection Savings in Norco Weir Works 7,400 Works Depots Security Lighting -1,700 Public Libraries Additional Revenue - Room Hire 2,200 Unsealed Rural Roads & Bridges

Reduction in funding from RTA State Road Maintenance Reserve

-164,600

Closing Budget Surplus/(Deficit) 31 March 2008 0



Other adjustments are contained in the detailed explanations contained in the attachment to the business paper that are self funding and have no impact on the overall estimated budget result. As reported to Council in respect of the 31 December 2007 Budget Review, it was expected the remaining budget deficit of $25,000 would be found and this has been achieved with the proposed 31 March 2008 Budget Review. The capital works program has been reduced by a total of $5,624,800 representing the expected level of capital works that will not be achieved this financial year due to the refocus of activity in attending to restoration works as a result of the January 2008 flood. Provision for approved flood restoration works applicable for 2007/2008 have been included in the 31 March 2008 proposed Budget Review. Notwithstanding the above, it will still likely mean further reduction will be required in the 30 June 2008 Budget Review of the capital works program as the revised overall capital works estimate is only 59% expended. Provision has also been made to reinstate loan borrowings for sewerage for the 2007/2008 financial year to the original amount that was to be expended in 2007/2008. Even though the work is not likely to happen this financial year, Council should still consider taking up the loan borrowing approval for future works as the loan funds may be able to be drawn at an interest rate lower then what Council could invest. In essence a sinking fund could be created to assist the Sewerage Fund but this would only occur if the difference in interest rates for borrowing versus investing were favourable. This provision and the reduction in the capital works program proposed has had the effect of dramatically reducing the projected cash deficit for 2007/2008 to the result indicated in the proposed 31 March 2008 Budget Review. Conclusion As indicated earlier in the report, the detailed explanations of required budget adjustments are included in the Management Plan 2007/2010 Review as at 31 March 2008. The document also includes progress on implementation of Council’s 2007/2010 Management Plan objectives relating to the 2007/2008 financial year. Adoption of the management plan review and budget review as at 31 March 2008 by Council will ensure Council compliance with Clause 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Section 407 of the Local Government Act 1993 for the quarter ended 31 March 2008. Attachments Management Plan 2007/2010 Review as at 31 March 2008. RECOMMENDATION Recommended that Council adopt the revised 2007/2010 Management Plan and Budget Estimates as outlined for the 2007/2008 financial year as at 31 March 2008 and approve the variations thereto.



2008-136 RESOLVED (Cr. Mustow/Cr. Wheatley) That the above recommendation be adopted. Note: A copy of the Management Plan 2007/2010 Review as at 31 March 2008 was attached to the Minutes of this Meeting. RENEWAL OF AGREEMENT – ALFRESCO DINING - 14-16 OAK STREET, EVANS HEAD Reference: Council Properties – Usage; P23022 Prepared by: Governance Officer

Background In February 2007, Council resolved to grant the use of part of Oak Street, Evans Head, by Mid Richmond Plumbers and Suppliers Pty Ltd, for the purposes of Alfresco Dining for a 3 year period. Report Issues Mid Richmond Plumbers and Suppliers Pty Ltd has applied to continue the Agreement for a further 3 years with an option of a further 3 year period on similar terms and conditions as the existing agreement. The arrangement has been working satisfactorily with an amount of $1,019.30 per annum including GST being payable in this regard. The rental amount had been set previously by Council. It is considered that there would be minimal change (if any) to the previous valuation. Accordingly, it is proposed that Council renew the Agreement under the same terms and conditions. Common Seal Council’s authority is required for the affixing of the Common Seal to the Agreement.

Conclusion Mid Richmond Plumbers and Suppliers Pty. Ltd. has applied to continue the Agreement for Alfresco dining for a further 3 years with an option of a further 3 year period on similar terms and conditions as the existing agreement.



Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that: 1. Council renew the Licence Agreement with Mid Richmond Plumbers and

Suppliers Pty. Ltd. for the use of part of Oak Street, Evans Head, for the purposes of Alfresco Dining for a further 3 year period with an option of a further 3 year period.

2. The agreement be on similar terms and conditions as the existing Agreement. 3. Council authorise the affixing of the Common Seal of Council to the Licence

Agreement document. 2008-137 RESOLVED (Cr. Sullivan/Cr. Thomas) That the above recommendation be adopted. RENEWAL OF AGREEMENT – ALFRESCO DINING - 6 OAK STREET, EVANS HEAD Reference: Council Properties – Usage; P23027 Prepared by: Governance Officer

Background In December 2004, Council resolved to grant the use of part of Oak Street, Evans Head, by Paul and Allie Connolly, for the purposes of Alfresco Dining for a 3 year period. Report Issues Paul and Allie Connolly have applied to continue the Agreement for a further 3 years with an option of a further 3 year period on similar terms and conditions as the existing agreement. The arrangement has been working satisfactorily with an amount of $1,419.00 per annum exclusive of GST being payable in this regard. The rental amount had been set previously by Council.



It is considered that there would be minimal change (if any) to the previous valuation. Accordingly, it is proposed that Council renew the Agreement under the same terms and conditions. Common Seal Council’s authority is required for the affixing of the Common Seal to the Agreement.

Conclusion Paul and Allie Connolly have applied to continue the Agreement for Alfresco dining for a further 3 years with an option of a further 3 year period on similar terms and conditions as the existing agreement. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that: 1. Council renew the Licence Agreement with Paul and Allie Connolly for the

use of part of Oak Street, Evans Head, for the purposes of Alfresco Dining for a further 3 year period with an option of a further 3 year period.

2. The agreement be on similar terms and conditions as the existing

Agreement. 3. Council authorise the affixing of the Common Seal of Council. 2008-138 RESOLVED (Cr. Mustow/Cr. Thomas) That the above recommendation be adopted. SEGRA 2008 NATIONAL CONFERENCE Reference: Economic Development – Industries, Meetings (DWS 247250) Prepared by: Community Development Co-ordinator

Background

As previously reported to Council, the National Sustainable Economic Growth for Regional Australia (SEGRA) Conference is a conference aimed at bringing those interested in regional development together, in order to help progress regional issues and allow for interaction between practitioners from all over Australia.



In recent years Council’s Community Development Co-ordinator (Louise Ford) has attended SEGRA and found it to be of great benefit in increasing her knowledge and skills in the area of economic development and at the 2007 conference, Mrs Ford co-presented a paper with Dr. Peter Vitartas, School of Commerce and Management, Southern Cross University, entitled “Developing community and economic development strategies: perceptions of employment expansion – an assessment of small business operators’ stated intentions”. The paper endeavoured to understand employment changes in local government areas, in particular, projections of future employment as a central interest for Community Economic Development The paper presented the findings of small business operator’s perceptions of employment intentions, in contrast with previous employment history and intent to expand over a three year period, whilst taking into account implications for planning and policy. Report Issues The 12th National Sustainable Economic Growth for Regional Australia (SEGRA) Conference is to be held at Albury from 18–20 August 2008. The chosen theme of this year’s conference; Creative Solutions – expect them to be different, will endeavour to: § Identify latest trends impacting regional Australia § Review government, community, practitioner and commercial responses and

experiences § Showcase innovative policy responses, actions and decision techniques § Highlight key diagnostic techniques and implementation strategies for large

and small scale projects § Outline scenarios for regional futures § Propose strategies to influence the future economic advancement of regional

Australia Via Action Agenda’s covering such topics as: § Regional Australia and the National Agenda § Delivering sustainable economic development § Tools and models for regional development § Public/private partnerships § Challenges of river and corridor towns Once again there will also be an opportunity for conference delegates to participate in workshops and industry tours as part of the program.



Councillors should now be in receipt of a conference brochure and should note that in order to ensure flight availability and accommodation it is recommended that Delegates register as soon as possible. Policy Council policy in respect of conference attendance by Councillors supports the concept of attendance to promote awareness, learning and networking associated with their role as a Councillor. Economic As with previous years an allocation has been set aside within the 2008/09 economic development budget estimates and Councillors conference/training expenses. Strategic Links Attendance at this conference fits with management plan objectives. Financial Implications Estimated costs for conference delegates are as follows: Full registration (including all functions and industry tour) $1,730 Accommodation (3 nights - $150.00 per room per night) $ 450 Return airfare $ 483 Total per delegate $2,663 Conclusion Attendance at the National SEGRA conference by Council’s Community Development Co-ordinator has proven beneficial in past years in further developing skills and knowledge in regard to economic development. Attendance at such a conference fits with Council’s Management Plan objectives and within budgetary allocations. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that Council determine its Councillor delegates to the Conference. 2008-139 RESOLVED (Cr. Mustow/Cr. Wheatley) That Council not appoint a Councillor delegate to attend this Conference.



PROPOSED DELEGATION TO THE PORT OF BRISBANE PRECINCT Reference: Economic Development - Industries, Liaison, Planning, Policy,

Programs, Projects, Promotion, Service Provision, Trade (DWS 246706)

Prepared by: Community Development Co-ordinator

Background In line with Council’s Management Plan and Economic Development Unit (EDU) objectives Council’s EDU staff have been keen to pursue and grow networks between Richmond Valley Council and the Port of Brisbane Corporation in order to assist in the identification and progression of economic opportunities that may arise and ultimately have the capacity to increase employment and economic activity not only within the Council area, but also across the Northern Rivers Region. There is no doubt that the Richmond Valley LGA is growing and experiencing the direct and indirect effects of both the Sea and Tree Change phenomena, with Australia Bureau of Statistics data (18/12/07) showing that the local government area of Richmond Valley, population 22,172, experienced an annual growth rate of 2.8% for the period 2005/06. It is also of interest to note that there were: § 482 approved development applications for all categories (2004/05) within the

Council area, with approximately 64% of these occurring within the 2470 postcode area.

§ 467 approved development applications for all categories (2005/06) within the

Council area, with approximately 69% of these occurring within the 2470 postcode area.

This type of growth appears to fit with the New South Wales Government’s “Far North Coast Growth Strategy”, a 25 year plan looking at future land use, housing and employment and predicts that Casino will become a “major town” with a need for an additional 9,100 new dwellings by 2031 within the Council area. Taking into account this predicted level of growth, the identification of large stores of coal seam gas and the additional pressures that may be placed upon the coastal areas, the Casino area is logistically important in regard to the future provision of not only residential land but also employment lands. “…..land available for industries that generate export jobs is decreasing in the coastal area. The Region’s Western areas, however, have the capacity to provide land to support industrial development especially for those with an export focus. Casino and Kyogle are located on major transport routes with access to inter-state road and rail networks.” (New South Wales Government - Far North Coast Growth Strategy. December, 2006). These transport corridors lead to the Port of Brisbane.



Report Issues Further to Minute 2008-50 of 18 March 2008 (EDC.6 - Economic Development Committee Meeting), Council staff have now commenced planning, in liaison with Port of Brisbane Corporation staff, in order for the Port of Brisbane Corporation to host a delegation of Council representatives to the port precinct on Wednesday, 25 June 2008. The delegation will be comprised of staff and councillors with the main purpose being that of information sharing and strengthening of networks in regard to matters pertaining to economic development within the Richmond Valley Council area. In particular the Casino area, due to its location on the main Sydney to Brisbane rail line, connecting with the Port of Brisbane precinct, along with the potential for the development of future employment lands and associated growth, as identified within Council’s Urban Land Release Strategies and the NSW Government’s “Far North Coast Regional Growth Strategy”. Strategic Links This project fits with Council’s Management Plan and Economic Development Unit (EDU) objectives. Financial Implications The financial implications to Council, caused by this visit will be kept at a minimum as there will be no accommodation costs, transportation will be via Council vehicle and requirements relating to staff time will come from within existing budgetary allocations for salaries and on-cost. Conclusion Information gathering and strengthening of networks between the Port of Brisbane Corporation and Richmond Valley Council is seen as imperative in regard to strategic economic planning for the Richmond Valley LGA. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that Council nominate two Councillors to participate in the delegation to the Port of Brisbane Corporation/Port of Brisbane precinct and that this visit be scheduled to occur on Wednesday, 25 June 2008 (a date that is agreeable with the Corporation).



2008-140 RESOLVED (Cr. Wheatley/Cr. Wise) That Council nominate the Mayor and Deputy Mayor to participate in the delegation to the Port of Brisbane Corporation/Port of Brisbane precinct and that this visit be scheduled to occur on Wednesday, 25 June 2008 (a date that is agreeable with the Corporation). 2007/2008 LOAN BORROWING PROGRAM Reference: Financial Management - Loans Prepared by: Manager Finance

Background Upon adoption of the budget estimates for 2007/2008, Council proposed to borrow a total of $5,941,000 for ongoing sewerage infrastructure works. Specifically, the loan funds were to fund the following projects: • Evans Head Augmentation $4,441,000 • Broadwater Augmentation $1,500,000 A request for borrowings return was submitted to the Department of Local Government by the due date of 10 August 2007 for the abovementioned amount. Under the NSW State Government State Plan “Reducing Red Tape”, the Department of Local Government advised via Circular 07-35, that Ministerial approval for loan borrowings is no longer required. Before this change, all Councils required permission from the Minister to undertake loan borrowings. The new arrangements also provide that Council does not need to notify the Department of Local Government if borrowings approved for a given financial year are not undertaken (this was required previously) but Councils are still required in accordance with Clause 230 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 to advise the Department of Local Government the amounts drawn if loan borrowings are undertaken. Report Issues Given the current situation where Council is trying to secure financial assistance in the form of subsidy and hence the need to follow the requirements of the NSW Department of Water and Energy, this has caused the deferral of sewerage works that were to be funded by the proposed loan borrowings for 2007/2008. Indications are that these works will now not commence until possibly the 2009/2010 financial year. Therefore there is no real need for Council on the surface to take up the 2007/2008 loan borrowings proposed of $5,941,000. Notwithstanding this, Council



will be required to borrow possibly in the 2008/2009 and certainly in the 2009/2010 financial year for the same projects. There is the possibility though given where interest rates currently are and borrowing options now available for Council that it may be beneficial to undertake the loan borrowing allocated for 2007/2008 on a short term basis even though the funds are not required for expenditure but to then invest the loan for twelve months to possibly create a sinking fund scenario. A sinking fund can exist if borrowings are undertaken with a given interest rate for a loan period and then the loan is invested at a higher interest rate then the loan rate for the same period. The key to the sinking fund is that the investment return must always be higher than the interest payable on the loan. The advantage of this scenario is that it can be an additional source of revenue for sewerage works to assist the overall liquidity of the sewerage fund. The amount of revenue will obviously be contingent upon the difference between the interest rate on the loan and the interest rate applicable to the proposed corresponding investment of the loan. It may be possible for Council to achieve this given Council usually has a strong basis for loan borrowings as a low risk borrower which often provides Council with a lower loan interest rate then other borrowers could access. Then on the investment side, Council has the ability even post the Cole Inquiry report on Council investments to access investment products that comply with the new investment rules for Council s that are offering the security of principal invested now required and an attractive interest return. Investment providers are already producing new product to comply with the new Council investment rules. Financial Implications Council has been provided with an indicative scenario that may be of financial benefit in creating a sinking fund for 2008/2009. The indicative facts are as follows: • Loan principal to be borrowed $5,941,000. • Loan borrowing is for one year fixed with interest only payments with loan to be

refinanced after this time allowing then to lock in when works are expected to commence on a fixed interest rate with ongoing repayments of principal and interest. There are signs that economic activity in Australia is starting to slow and therefore interest rates may be lower in twelve months time. It may be more appropriate to lock a long term loan interest rate in at that time.

• Indicative interest rate for a one year fixed loan with interest only repayments is approximately 8.04%.

• Investment into a suitable investment post Cole Inquiry report and meeting the new Council investment rules could yield on current indications around 8.50% fixed for the same period.

The above indicative scenario provides Council with the following positive margin hence making the sinking fund concept valid as follows: • Interest rate applicable to borrowing for one year indicative 8.04%. Total

interest payable would be $477,657.



• Interest rate applicable to investment for one year indicative 8.50%. Total interest receivable would be $504,985.

Therefore under the above scenario, there is an interest rate margin of 0.46% and over the course of one year a net revenue gain for Council of $27,328. Whilst in the scheme of the overall sewerage program, $27,328 as illustrated in the above example may be small, it is still additional revenue for Council that if the above scenario eventuates would otherwise not be achieved. It must be noted that the above result is based on indicative interest rates which can change. If Council is to pursue this option, it would need to seek the best possible interest rates and would be subject to the interest rates applicable at the time quotations close. This could change the circumstances of the scenario above and could then make it invalid and therefore not worth pursuing. Policy The loan borrowings subject of this report were adopted by Council as part of the adoption of the 2007/2010 Management Plan. The loan borrowings estimates are also proposed to be reaffirmed as part of the 31 March 2008 Management Plan and Budget Review, subject to an additional report to this Ordinary Meeting of Council. Any investment if this proposal is valid is subject to Council’s Investment Policy and the indicative rules governing Council’s Investments in view of the Cole Inquiry report findings. Consultation Consultation of the proposed loan borrowings was undertaken as part of the submission period relating to the 2007/2010 Management Plan that was adopted by Council on 19 June 2007. Common Seal If the 2007/2008 loan borrowing is pursued, the Common Seal may be required to be affixed to any mortgage documentation associated with the loan. Conclusion Council should seriously consider undertaking the loan borrowings for 2007/2008 if it is possible to then reinvest these funds at a higher rate of interest. This will create the possibility of additional revenue for the Sewerage Fund. The indicative scenario contained in this report indicates what sort of revenue levels could be achieved. However, this whole proposal can only work if the interest rate applicable to the investment side of the transaction is greater and remains greater then the interest rate applicable to the loan. Given loan borrowings are not subject to the tendering requirements of Section 55 of the Local Government Act 1993, Council should at lease conduct quotations to find out various options on offer. After the closing date of the quotations, usually financial institutions will only hold interest rates on proposed loan borrowings of this size for a matter of hours so



Council will have to move quickly if the sinking fund scenario eventuates. This would require Council to give appropriate delegation to the Mayor and General Manager to execute any mortgage documentation required (if required) and to also apply the Council seal if required. If not the sinking fund scenario does not eventuate, there would be no need to undertake the borrowing proposed for 2007/2008. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that: 1. If after receipt of quotations, it is favourable for Council to borrow $5,941,000

being the proposed borrowing program for 2007/2008 and then invest the same amount in an authorised investment at a higher interest rate, then Council approve the borrowing of $5,941,000 for the 2007/2008 financial year.

2. Should the scenario contained in Recommendation One eventuate, Council

authorise the Common Seal to be affixed to any mortgage documentation associated with this loan borrowing and delegate authority to the Mayor and/or General Manager to sign relevant mortgage documentation related to this loan borrowing on Council’s behalf.

3. If the scenario contained in Recommendation One does not eventuate, then

Council not borrow any funds for the 2007/2008 financial year and then reduce the loan fund proceeds estimate of $5,941,000 in the 2007/2008 budget estimates to nil as part of the 30 June 2008 Budget Review.

4. A further report be provided to Council of the outcome of this process. 2008-141 RESOLVED (Cr. Mustow/Cr. Wheatley) That the above recommendation be adopted. POLICY - DEALING WITH DIFFICULT PEOPLE Reference: Customer Service – Policy, Procedures Prepared by: Director Environmental Development Services

Background A Draft Policy has been prepared to provide guidance for staff in dealing with ratepayers and residents/community members in how to deal with difficult people so that Council’s resources are used efficiently and effectively in responding to enquiries or complaints from the Richmond Valley Community.



Report Issues Council staff strive to meet the needs of our ratepayers, residents and community in a professional and ethical manner with courteous and efficient service. Staff, whenever possible, treat all people with respect and courtesy, listen to what residents/ratepayers have to say and respond to resident/ratepayer enquiries promptly and efficiently while acting with integrity and honesty when liaising with all members of the community. The development of a draft policy for dealing with abusive, rude or difficult people provides the staff with a tool that can be applied when dealing with difficult people. It should be noted that the proposed policy has been prepared based on documents utilised by other Councils and is included below. Conclusion The draft policy establishes a service standard that guide staff in their dealings with difficult people and ensure that actions taken are in relation to Council’s dealings with difficult people are open and transparent. RECOMMENDATION Recommended that the draft Policy - Dealing with Difficult People, be adopted. 2008-142 RESOLVED (Cr. Wheatley/Cr. Wise) That the above recommendation be adopted.

RICHMOND VALLEY COUNCIL POLICY REGISTER

Policy No:

Reference: Customer Service – Policy, Procedures

POLICY: DEALING WITH DIFFICULT PEOPLE FUNCTION: Governance OBJECTIVE: To provide information to Councillors and Staff in dealing with

difficult people DIRECTORATE: CORPORATE SERVICES POLICY PREAMBLE This policy will provide guidance to Councillors and staff in dealing with ratepayers, resident/community members in how to deal with difficult people, so that Council resources are being used efficiently and effectively on complaints from the Richmond Valley Community.



SERVICE COMMITMENT Councillors and staff will endeavour to: • Treat each person as a valued customer; • Give customers as much relevant information as possible, and ensure that it is

accurate; • Never be afraid to acknowledge and apologise for mistakes made by the Council; • Never be afraid to express appropriate concern and empathy for customer’s

problem or situation; • Try to put themselves in the customer’s position and try to see the situation from

that perspective; and • Explain the rational of any Council Policy, Protocol or Procedure to ensure that

Council is not hiding behind an inflexible system. POLICY THRESHOLD CONSIDERATIONS Councillors and staff must have complied with the provisions of the following Council Policies: • Access to information; • Complaints Management; and • Customer Service Charter Two further key threshold considerations must be considered before the provisions of this Policy are to be implemented: • Has the complaints policy been correctly implemented so far as possible to this

point and no material element of the complaint been overlooked or inadequately addressed?

OR • Has the behaviour of the person become so habitual, obsessive or intimidating that

it constitutes an unreasonable demand on Council’s resources? It is clearly inappropriate to limit access to services merely because they have made a complaint about Council or its staff. Internal Review or Appeal Procedures must be exhausted before service or access restrictions are placed on difficult people. DIFFICULT PEOPLE CATEGORIES 1. People who cannot be satisfied Despite the best efforts of Council, some members of the public will not be satisfied with the action taken or the service, despite the service or complaint action being properly implemented and exhausted in accordance with the relevant Council Policy/policies.



If in the opinion of the General Manager, a member of the public who cannot be satisfied and where all appropriate avenues of internal review or appeal have been exhausted and the person continues to write, telephone and/or visit council, the following actions may be taken:

Administrative Procedure The General Manager will notify the person in writing advising if the person continues to contact Council regarding the matter, Council may:

• Not accept any further calls from the person; or • Not grant any further interviews; • Require all further communication to be put in writing; and • Continue to receive, read and file correspondence but only acknowledge or

otherwise respond to it, if:

∗ The person provides significant new information relating to their complaint or concern; or

∗ The person raises new issues which, in the General Manager’s opinion, warrant fresh action.

The time period for this notification will be at the discretion of the General Manager.

The person shall be given an opportunity to make representation about Council’s proposed course of action to the General Manager. 2. People who make unreasonable demands

Members of the public who make unreasonable demands on Council, whether by amount of information or the nature and the scale of service they seek or the number of approaches they can make, can significantly and unreasonably divert Council’s resources away from its other functions or create an inequitable allocation of resources to other customers. Administrative Procedure The General Manager will notify the person in writing advising them of Council’s concerns and requesting that they limit and focus their requests and that if the customer continues to place unreasonable demands on the organisation, Council may: • Not respond to any future correspondence and only take action where, in the

opinion of the General Manager the correspondence raises specific, substantial and serious issues; or

• Only respond to a certain number of requests in a given period. The time period for this notification will be at the discretion of the General Manager. The person shall be given an opportunity to make representation about Council’s proposed course of action to the General Manager.



3. People who constantly raise the same issue with different staff

Members of the public who are dissatisfied with the action taken or service taken and constantly raise the same issue with different staff. If in the opinion of the General Manager, a member of the public who is constantly raising the same issue with different staff the following actions may be taken: Administrative Procedure The General Manager will notify the person in writing that: • Only a nominated person will deal with them in the future; • They must make an appointment with that person if they wish to discuss their

matter; and • All future contact with Council must be in writing.

The time period for this notification will be at the discretion of the General Manager.

The person shall be given an opportunity to make representations about Council’s proposed course of action to the General Manager. 4. People who are Rude, Angry and Harassing For a range of reasons, a small proportion of the public will display rude, angry or harassing behaviour in their interactions with Council staff. If in the opinion of any staff member, any person who makes rude, angry or harassing comments or statements in telephone conversations or interviews the following actions can be implemented:

Administrative Procedure • Warn the caller that if the behaviour continues the conversation or interview will be

terminated; and • Terminate the conversation or interview if the rude, angry or harassing behaviour

continues after a warning has been given. Where conversation or interview has been terminated in accordance with this procedure, the staff member must notify the relevant Director/Manager as soon as practicable with a report on the matter. It is the responsibility of the relevant Director/Manager to notify the General Manager of any reported incident. If in the opinion of the General Manager, any correspondence to Council which contains personal abuse, inflammatory comments or material clearly intended to intimidate, this correspondence will be returned to the sender and not otherwise acted upon. GENERAL MANAGEMENT OF POLICY Where the General Manager determines to withdraw service or limit/refuse access to Council in any categories specified in this policy, the General Manager must advise the Council as soon as possible of the relevant circumstances and the action taken.



Where appropriate, the General Manager should advise the Department of Local Government, ICAC and NSW Ombudsman of any relevant circumstance and the action taken.

VARIATION Council reserves the right to review, vary and/or revoke this Policy from time to time. POLICY - ENFORCEMENT UNLAWFUL ACTIVITY Reference: Laws and Enforcement - Policy, Procedures Prepared by: Director Environmental Development Services

Background The Promoting Better Practice Program Report (October 2007) undertaken by the Department of Local Government recommended that Council develop an enforcement policy which should include such things as the manner in which Council will carry out its functions, the procedural steps that may be included, the circumstances in which Council will institute Court proceedings and the manner and circumstances in which discretions may be exercised. Report Issues The NSW Ombudsman Office has produced a publication entitled “Enforcement Guidelines for Councils”. The Guidelines have been developed with the assistance of the Local Government and Shires Associations, the Independent Commission Against Corruption, Planning NSW and Privacy NSW. In his letter of introduction the Ombudsman states: “Many complaints we receive suggest that Councils have difficulties dealing successfully with complaints about unlawful activity. These difficulties cover both the complaint handling process and the outcomes that they are able to achieve. Some common complaints include: • failing to record complaints about unlawful activity • delaying or failing to investigate complaints about unlawful activity • failing to take appropriate enforcement action despite clear evidence of

unlawful activity. • Not informing complainants of outcome of investigations and the reasons for

decisions on enforcement actions. • Not responding consistently in similar situations. These ‘good practice’ guidelines have been developed to help Councils respond promptly, consistently and effectively to allegations of unlawful activity.



A draft Policy - Enforcement - Unlawful Activity has been prepared for Council’s consideration and is included below. Strategic Links This policy will play an over arching role in relation to Council’s regulatory enforcement of unlawful activities. Conclusion The draft Policy will be a regulatory enforcement tool which will assist in the level and nature of response to unlawful activities that occur within the Council area that are brought to Council’s attention as a result of a complaint being received. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that the Draft Policy - Enforcement – Unlawful Activity, be adopted. 2008-143 RESOLVED (Cr. Jeffery/Cr. Wheatley) That the above recommendation be adopted.

RICHMOND VALLEY COUNCIL POLICY REGISTER

Policy No:

Reference: Laws and Enforcement - Policy, Procedures

POLICY: ENFORCEMENT – UNLAWFUL ACTIVITY FUNCTION: Regulatory Control OBJECTIVE: To establish clear guidelines for the exercise of discretion in

dealing with action requests or complaints about unlawful activity.

DIRECTORATE: ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES POLICY PREAMBLE The policy is to establish clear guidelines for the exercise of discretion in dealing with action requests or complaints about unlawful activity. It provides workable guidelines on: • How to assess whether complaints of unlawful activity require investigation • Options for dealing with unlawful activity • How to decide whether enforcement action is warranted.



APPLICATION This policy applies to the investigation and enforcement of complaints about unlawful activity or failure to comply with the terms of conditions of approvals, licences and orders. While primarily directed at the regulation of development activity, the policy is also applicable to pollution control, regulation of parking and control over keeping animals. RESPONSIBILITY All council staff who deal with written and verbal action requests (complaints) alleging unlawful activity are responsible for implementing these policy guidelines. All notifications of alleged unlawful activity should be logged in Council’s Request Action Management system (or Document Management System) which are automatically, through the workflow process, directed to the responsible officer. DEFINITIONS Unlawful activity is any activity or work that has been or is being carried out: • Contrary to the terms of conditions of a development consent, approval,

permission or licence • Contrary to an environmental planning instrument that regulates the activities or

work that can be carried out on particular land • Contrary to a legislative provision regulating a particular activity or work • Without a required development consent, approval, permission or licence • Contrary to the requirements of a directional sign • Contrary to the requirements local government regulatory legislation ie.

Companion Animals Act, Protection of the Environment Operations Act etc. INVESTIGATING UNLAWFUL ACTIVITY Not all complaints will warrant investigation. Council will consider a range of factors when deciding whether to investigate. These include: • Is the matter within the jurisdiction of Council? • Is the complaint premature, eg: does it relate to some unfinished aspect of work

that is still in progress? • Is the activity or work permissible with consent, is there a consent in place? • Is it possible to determine from the information available to council whether the

activity or work is permissible without consent and/or whether all conditions of consent are being complied with?

• Is the complaint trivial, frivolous or vexatious? • Has too much time elapsed since the events of the subject of the complaint took

place? • Is there another body that is a more appropriate agency to investigate and deal

with the matter? • Is the activity having a significant detrimental effect on the environment or does it

constitute a risk to public safety?



• Does the complaint indicate the existence of a systemic problem, eg: if the complaint is one of a series, could there be a pattern of conduct or a more widespread problem?

• Has the person or organisation complained of been the subject of previous complaints?

• Does the complaint have special significance in terms of the Council’s existing priorities?

• Are there significant resource implications in relation to an investigation and any subsequent enforcement action?

• Is it in the public interest to investigate the complaint? If a decision is made not to investigate a complaint, this decision must be recorded with the reasons for that decision. RESPONDING TO COMPLAINANTS All Request Action Management (Complaints) about alleged unlawful activity should be acknowledged within 14 days and a report should be provided if possible, within a further 14 days on what action Council has taken or plans to take. The person the subject of the complaint should be advised that a complaint has been received and that an inspection will be undertaken by Council. OPTIONS FOR DEALING WITH CONFIRMED CASES OF UNLAWFUL ACTIVITY Council will try to use the quickest and most informal option to deal with unlawful activity wherever possible unless there is little likelihood of compliance with such options, or that option is not considered appropriate in the circumstances, eg. stronger action is warranted. APPROACHES TO BE CONSIDERED INCLUDE: • Negotiating with the person(s) subject of the investigation and obtaining some

undertakings to address the issues of concern arising from the investigation eg: an application for modification of development consent, ceasing activity which is subject of the complaint.

• Issuing a letter requiring work to be done or activity to cease in lieu of more formal action.

• Issuing a notice requiring work to be done under various legislation. • Issuing a notice of intention to serve an order or notice under relevant legislation,

followed by service of an appropriate order or notice (Local Government Act (LG Act) ss. 124-128, Environmental Operations Act (PEO Act) Pts 4.2-4.4 and 8.6)).

• Starting proceedings in the Land and Environment Court for an order to remedy or restrain a breach of the relevant Act or Regulation (s.673 LG Act; s.123 EPA Act)

• Seeking injunctions for the Land & Environmental Court or the Supreme Court • Issuing a summons in the local court • Issuing a penalty infringement notice • Taking proceedings for an offence against the relevant Act or Regulation (s.691

LG Act, s.125 EPA Act; C15 PEO Act) • Counselling the subject of the investigation to educate them on the relevant

council requirements



• Referring the complaint to an external agency for further investigation or prosecution

• Taking no action on the basis of a lack of evidence or for some other appropriate reason

All enforcement action will be monitored and a decision made in relation to non-compliance within 14 days of any deadline imposed. TAKING ENFORCEMENT ACTION When deciding whether to take enforcement action, Council will consider the circumstances of the case. These include: • Has the council created an estoppel situation? • Is the breach a technical breach only? • When was the unlawful activity carried out and for how long? • How has the unlawful activity affected the natural or build environment and the

health, safety and amenity of the area? • Would consent have been given if it had been sought? • Can the breach be easily remedied? • Does the person in breach show contrition? • Are there any particular circumstances of hardship affecting the complainant or the

persons the subject of the complaint? • What would be in the public interest? • Is there a draft planning instrument on exhibition that would make the unauthorised

use legal? • What are the costs and benefits of taking formal enforcement action as opposed to

taking informal action or no action? • What are the chances of success if the proposed enforcement action was

challenged in court? • What are the costs and benefits of taking formal enforcement action as opposed to

taking informal action or no action? • Would an educative approach be more appropriate than a coercive approach? • Has the person the subject of the complainant received warning or other non-

coercive approach or has formal legal action been taken? • What action would reasonable and proportionate in this case? DELEGATIONS FOR ENFORCEMENT ACTION Each member of Council staff who initiate various levels of enforcement action are to have the appropriate delegations to enable the conduct of such enforcement action. VARIATION Council reserves the right to review, vary and/or revoke this Policy from time to time.



NSW RURAL FIRE SERVICE AERODROME AIRBASE FACILITY Reference: Emergency Services – Services Provision; Traffic and Transport -

Service Provision; P1000442 Prepared by: Director Environmental Development Services

Background The NSW Rural Fire Service has been undertaking a review of Council’s two aerodromes in relation to the establishment of an airbase for use in bush fire fighting operations. The review has determined that the Casino Aerodrome is the most suitable location to establish this facility. Report Issues The NSW Rural Fire Service is seeking approval to establish and operate an airbase at the Casino aerodrome. The airbase is proposed to be located within the Casino SES operations facility which will enable pilots on standby to use meal rooms and toilets. The Service would also like to explore the possibility to locate bulk water tanks for aircraft use. There may be a possibility for treated effluent from the adjoining CMCA site to also be used as well. This matter has not been discussed with the CMCA and would be therefore dependent on their approval and requirements. Legal The airbase facility would be under the control the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) with the RFS appointing an Aviation Safety Advisor and Air Base Manager for the management of all airbase operations. All aircraft will have been selected through an expression of interest or are contracted to the RFS, which means that all machines have appropriate insurances and maintenance coverage and are approved operators to the Service. Policy The proposed aviation use of the Casino aerodrome is consistent with the aerodrome operational plan. Environmental When the airbase becomes active, there will be a large volume of vehicular traffic, large quantities of water and retardants being pumped and loaded onto aircraft,



with some spillage. Additionally there will storage and use of large volumes of aviation fuel in either drums or tankers and heavy movement of aircraft. No aircraft movements would occur during the night with standard Visual Flight Rules applying to all operations. Financial Implications The cost of establishing the airbase facility will be borne by the NSW Rural Fire Service. Climate Change It is expected that the Far North Coast /Northern Rivers regions will be subjected to increased bushfire activity and more intense bushfires. The establishment of an airbase facility at the Casino aerodrome will increase the capacity of the RFS to effectively respond as the aerodrome is geographically, centrally located in the region. Conclusion The establishment of an airbase for anticipated seasonal bushfire activity at the Casino aerodrome will provide a greater response and increased level of service to the communities of the Far North Coast/Northern Rivers area, in times of bushfire. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that Council advise the NSW Rural Fire Service of its support to investigate the establishment of an Airbase facility at the Casino Aerodrome. 2008-144 RESOLVED (Cr. Thomas/Cr. Mustow) That the above recommendation be adopted. SALE OF COUNCIL OWNED LAND – IRVING DRIVE, CASINO Reference: Council Properties - Acquisition and Disposal; DA2007.0281;

P202, P4591 Prepared by: Strategic Planning Officer

Background Council resolved on 19 September 2006 (Minute 2006-689) to adopt the recommendations from the Committee-of-the-Whole, whereby it was resolved to



proceed with the subdivision of industrial land, being Lot 534, DP1047352 and Lot 52, DP845660, Irving Drive, Casino, and the lodgement of a development application. Development Application No. 2007.0281 was granted conditional consent on 2 March 2007, for a 2 lot industrial subdivision and new road. The linen plan and S.88B instrument have now been prepared. Report Common Seal The purpose of this report is to have the Common Seal of Council fixed to the plan, instrument, and any legal documents associated with the registration of same, and for the sale of the land. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that the General Manager be authorised to fix the Common Seal of Council to all legal documents associated with the registration of the Plan of Subdivision for Lot 534, DP1047352 and Lot 52, DP845660, Irving Drive, Casino, and sale of land depicted thereon. 2008-145 RESOLVED (Cr. Thomas/Cr. Wheatley) That the above recommendation be adopted. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS (LOCAL GOVERNMENT (GENERAL) REGULATION 2005 - PART 10 MEETINGS - DIVISION 3)

The Mayor advised of two additional reports which he considered to be of an urgent nature. The reports related to: (i) Bridges and Prestressing – Major Contracts (ii) Compliance with Goods and Services Tax (GST) 2007/2008. The Mayor requested a motion for the items to be admitted for consideration at this meeting. 2008-146 RESOLVED (Cr. Jeffery/Cr. Mustow) That the additional reports be considered at this meeting as a matter of urgency.



BRIDGES AND PRESTRESSING – MAJOR CONTRACTS Reference: Commercial Activities – Reporting, Tendering Prepared by: Manager Concrete Products/Bridge Construction

Background Council previously received a report at the April 2008 meeting (Minute 2008-87) outlining details of discussions that were being held with Leighton Contractors regarding supply of prestressed concrete products for work on the Ballina Bypass. At that meeting Council resolved that: “the information be noted and the actions of staff in negotiating arrangements for the supply of concrete products to Pacific Highway upgrade works, including the necessary expansion of manufacturing capability in accordance with adopted business plans, be endorsed.” Report Issues Negotiations with Leighton Contractors, and also additional negotiations with AbiGroup for other work associated with the Northern Busway Project in Brisbane have been progressing. Council is now in receipt of final contract documents for supply agreements with both companies. These contract documents require signature in order for the contracts to be executed. Legal Entering into such contracts will commit Council to supply the goods and/or services to the principal of the contract in accordance with the documented conditions of contract. Failure of Council to meet its obligations under the contracts may result in Council being held liable for damages under the conditions of the contracts. Policy Council has no defined policy regarding delegation for committing Council to enter into a contract with another party where Council is to be the supplier of the goods or services. Economic All tendered/quoted prices for the work have been prepared in accordance with Council’s adopted business plan for the Concrete Products/Bridge Construction activities of Council.



Financial Implications As described above failure of Council to meet its obligations under the contracts may result in Council being held liable for damages under the conditions of the contracts. Common Seal These contract documents may require the affixing of Council’s Common Seal for execution. Conclusion The two contracts described above represent a significant opportunity for Council’s Concrete Products/Bridge Construction Section and will help ensure the ongoing viability of the section through continuity of work. These contracts will also assist in providing a return to Council from the activities of the Concrete Products/Bridge Construction Section. To execute these documents Council needs to endorse the action of entering into the supply contracts. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that: 1. Council endorse the action of entering into a supply contract with Leighton

Contractors for supply of components relating to the Ballina Bypass Project. 2. Council endorse the action of entering into a supply contract with AbiGroup

for supply of components relating to the Northern Busway Project. 3. The General Manager be delegated the authority to sign the contract

documents for these two supply contracts 4. Council’s Common Seal be affixed to the contract documents if required. 2008-147 RESOLVED (Cr. Mustow/Cr. Sullivan) That the above recommendation be adopted. The General Manager advised that Council staff had been dealing with issues associated with contract matters on a daily basis since 16 April 2008. He explained that Council operates under a NAPSA (Notional Agreement Preserving the Local Government (State) Award), however, with some of the contracts



Council must comply with the National Code of Construction but because the Local Government (State) Award makes mention of trade unions, it is not compliant. For Council to sign a contract it must have a compliant Award or compliant Agreement. Over the past month representations have made to the Government through the Unions and initiatives have been taken through the LGSA (Local Government and Shires Associations) and the Master Builders Association to try to get issues resolved. As of Monday afternoon (19 May) the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations had indicated that they may have a solution. At the request of the Department, Council had made application that morning (20 May) for them to consider that solution and it was anticipated a response would be received later that day or the next day. It was hoped that the response would provide Council with the compliance needed so that the contracts would be able to be signed on Thursday (22 May). COMPLIANCE WITH GOODS AND SERVICES TAX (GST) 2007/2008 Reference: Financial Management - Tax Prepared by: Manager Finance

Background A report was provided to the July 2005 Ordinary Council Meeting outlining the changed reporting requirements to the Department of Local Government in respect of Council’s compliance and management of Goods and Services Tax (GST) obligations. Historically since the introduction of Goods and Services Tax (GST) on 1 July 2000, Council was required to have its Goods and Services Tax (GST) systems subject to external audit on an annual basis. Commencing for the 2005/2006 financial year, Council no longer is required to seek verification by external audit of its management of Goods and Services Tax (GST) obligations but instead is able to provide certification to the Department of Local Government by way of Council resolution that Council has met its Goods and Services Tax (GST) obligations by 1 June each year. Report Issues Council has been reminded by the Department of Local Government via email dated 10 May 2008 regarding compliance with Goods and Services Tax (GST) for the 2007/2008 financial year. Specifically Council is required to certify that:



• Voluntary GST has been paid by Richmond Valley Council for the period 1 May 2007 to 30 April 2008.

• Adequate management arrangements and internal controls were in place to enable Council to adequately account for its GST liabilities and recoup all GST input tax credits eligible to be claimed.

• No GST non compliance events by the Council were identified by, or raised with the Australian Taxation Office.

For the benefit of Council’s information, for the period 1 May 2007 to 30 April 2008, all applicable Goods and Services Tax (GST) has been recognised as either payable to the Commonwealth by way of Goods and Services Tax (GST) collected or receivable to Council by way of input tax credits. All Business Activity Statements during this period have been lodged by the monthly deadlines and Goods and Services Tax (GST) control accounts are reconciled as at 30 April 2008. The certificate to be forwarded to the Department of Local Government regarding compliance with Goods and Services Tax (GST) obligations is specifically required to be signed by the Mayor, a Councillor, General Manager and Responsible Accounting Officer. Conclusion Whilst it is no longer mandatory that Council subject its Goods and Services Tax (GST) systems to external audit, existing policy and procedures are still being followed that have previously passed external audit. Council has also maintained adequate documentation to support Goods and Services Tax (GST) liabilities and receivables during the period of certification for 2007/2008 and there is no reason why the certificate should not be signed and returned to the Department of Local Government prior to 1 June 2008 outlining the certification as listed above. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that: 1. Council certify for the period 1 May 2007 to 30 April 2008 that:

• Voluntary GST has been paid by Richmond Valley Council for the period 1 May 2007 to 30 April 2008.

• Adequate management arrangements and internal controls were in place to enable Council to adequately account for its GST liabilities and recoup all GST input tax credits eligible to be claimed.

• No GST non compliance events by Council were identified by or raised with the Australian Taxation Office.



2. Council authorise the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, General Manager and

Responsible Accounting Officer to sign such certification on Council’s behalf. 2008-148 RESOLVED (Cr. Jeffery/Cr. Thomas) That the above recommendation be adopted. CORRESPONDENCE FOR INFORMATION

The following correspondence is submitted for information. Department of Local Government - Forwarding Circular 08-13, advising that the report on findings from the 2004 Local Government Election Results Survey has been completed and a complete report is available from the Department’s website under DLG publications. (A copy of the summary of the main findings from the survey were circulated to Councillors on 15 April 2008.) Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations - Responding to Council’s email concerning Croc festival events in 2008 in the Northern Rivers region advising as follows: “Following an open and competitive selection process, five organisations have signed funding agreements to produce fifteen festivals under the Community Festivals for Education Engagement program in 2008, eight more than in previous years. This means that more Indigenous communities and people in different locations and regions will have the opportunity to participate and benefit from events provided by a range of different festival event providers. The successful organisations are: • Music Outback Foundation with festivals in the Northern Territory at Laramba,

Tanami and Alice Springs; • Broome Aboriginal Media Association with a festival in Western Australia in

Broome; • Wakakirri Limited with festivals in the Northern Territory and Queensland at

Yuendumu, Bloomfield and Cunnamulla; • TAFE New South Wales North Coast Institute with festivals in New South Wales at

Lismore, Coffs Harbour and Taree; and • Vibe Australia in New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia, South

Australia and Victoria with festivals in Coonamble, Rockhampton, Kalgoorlie, Port Augusta and Mildura.

The festivals will promote contemporary and traditional Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture, with activities including access to role models, and workshops focusing on literacy, numeracy, confidence building, teamwork, sustainability and tolerance. There will also be information and advice on health and well being, careers and educational opportunities.



The Australian Government is committed to building new partnerships to close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. I encourage the Richmond Valley Council to continue its support for Indigenous Australians through the community festivals taking place later this year in your region.” Rous Water - Advising that its Ordinary Meeting held on 20 February 2008, Rous Water resolved that Council: “1. Identify the Regional Country Council Model (Option 3) as its preferred option for

the delivery of water and sewerage services across NSW. 2. Submit to the Reform Inquiry in support of this position. 3. Advise our constituent Councils of this position.” Andrew Stoner MP, NSW Leader of the Nationals - Advising that the Liberal/Nationals Coalition will be pursuing the Iemma Government over their mishandling of Council Investments, advising as follows: “Many NSW Local Councils properly relied on investment advice provided through ‘The Ministerial Investment Guidelines’ developed by the NSW Treasury and signed off by the Minister for Local Government. The Guidelines allowed investment in Collateralised Debt Obligations (CDOs) and sub-prime instruments. The Cole Report released in April 2008 estimates that financial losses in excess of $100 million could be realised by a range of councils through these investments. Following sustained pressure from the Liberal/Nationals Coalition, the NSW Treasurer Michael Costa confirmed in Parliament that the NSW Treasury had developed advice in relation to CDOs and decided that these products were inappropriate for investment needs. We are now seeking an explanation as to when NSW Treasury developed this advice, and why, in turn, ‘The Ministerial Investment Guidelines’ was not updated. We believe NSW Treasury had a responsibility to pass on this information on to Local Councils and there is a possibility that some financial losses could have been avoided if they had done so. If you have any information that you believe would assist us in our efforts please do not hesitate to contact us. We would also greatly appreciate it if you could table this letter at your next council meeting for the information of all Councillors.” Local Government and Shires Associations of NSW - Advising that the Minister for Planning released draft exposure bills that contain over 200 pages of changes to the NSW planning system which include legislative amendments to three main Acts - the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, the Building Professional Board Act and the Strata Management Act - and a number of minor amendments to other Acts. The Associations have advised that they have serious concerns with many aspects of the legislation as communities will lose their right to have a say over local development, councils’ role in the development process will be significantly reduced, and funding of local infrastructure is under threat and stating that the time frame the Minister has provided (to 24 April) for review and comment on the draft legislation is too short and clearly designed to short cut any proper



consultation with Local Government, stakeholders and the community. (A detailed response is available on the website www.lgsa.org.au). Steve Cansdell MP, Member for Clarence - Forwarding a copy of correspondence to the Minister for Planning, the Hon Frank Sartor MP, advising of his strong support in relation to Council’s application for project funding under the NSW Coastline Cycleway Program and requesting Mr. Sartor’s support for the proposed cycleway route from Evans Head to Woodburn. Northern Rivers Regional Organisation of Councils - Forwarding a Media Release of 22 April 2008, in regard to the State Government’s report of the Rural and Regional Taskforce. (A copy of the Media Release has been circulated separately to Councillors.) Department of Local Government - Forwarding Circular 08-20 reminding Councils of the requirements of the Act and the Model Code of Conduct regarding secondary employment, conflict of interest and pecuniary interest. (A copy of the Circular has been circulated separately to Councillors.) Department of Local Government - Forwarding Circular 08-19 advising that the Local Government Skills Shortage Scholarships will again be offered in 2008, outlining the key objectives as follows: • “seed” councils in the development of their own scholarship initiatives • help councils to address skills shortages in the short term • encourage the development of relationships between councils and tertiary

education providers • create awareness of Local Government as a career opportunity amongst

students • promote employment opportunities in skills shortage areas • promote local government as an employer to tertiary institutions. (A copy of the Circular has been circulated separately to Councillors.) NSW Sport and Recreation - Forwarding a copy of the NSW Sport and Recreation Industry Five Year Plan ‘Game Plan 2012’ that was recently launched by the NSW Sport and Recreation Advisory Council, the NSW Sports Federation, and the Parks and Leisure Australia (NSW) at an industry breakfast for Chief Executive Officers and Directors of State sporting bodies and NSW peak industry organisations. Advising that the plan, developed in consultation with representatives of the sport industry, local councils and government agencies, aims to strengthen the industry through building on existing structures and programs with the key focus area being:

• active community • new vision for volunteers • innovative funding • fresh approach to facilities.

http://www.lgsa.org.au)



The Hon Frank Sartor MP, Minister for Planning - Forwarding an independent Report of the Review of Public Library Funding. The independent report was commissioned by the Minister on 21 August 2007; the findings and views expressed therein do not necessarily reflect those of the Minister of the New South Wales Government. Richmond River County Council - Forwarding a copy of correspondence sent to the Director General, Department of Local Government advising that all three constituent Councils (Ballina Shire, Lismore City and Richmond Valley) have agreed to the revision of that Council’s Proclamation and seeking advice on the formal action required to bring about the implementation of the revised Proclamation. Byron Shire Council - Advising that at its Ordinary Meeting on 27 March 2008, Byron Shire Council resolved that: 1. Council present the prepared submission to the Inquiry into secure and

sustainable urban water supply and sewerage services for non-metropolitan NSW.

2. Council provide a copy of its submission to: a) Rous Water b) Lismore City Council c) Richmond Valley Council d) Ballina Shire Council (Note: A copy of Rous Water’s submissions has been received.) Department of Local Government - Responding to Council’s letter of 14 March 2008 attaching a copy of the progress report on implementation of the recommendations made in the Promoting Better Practice Review Report on Richmond Valley Council, stating that overall the Department is satisfied with the progress that the Council has made and the timetable for further action and noting that a number of actions will be completed over the coming months and look forward to receiving Council’s next progress report in October 2008. Department of Local Government - Forwarding Circular 08-17 reminding Councils of their legal and community obligations in the safe exercise of their service functions, as follows: “Tragically a young boy was killed in 2007 when a recycling collection truck, while reversing, collided with him. The inquest into the death of the boy was finalised in December 2007. The Deputy State Coroner made the following recommendations to the Minister for Local Government: “ Local councils who are responsible for waste collection (either directly or through

contractual arrangements) conduct a review and feasibility study in regard to the installation of rear vision camera systems capable of recording and storing images.



Further to the above, that a feasibility study be undertaken into relocating the monitor screen in waste disposal vehicles to an internal position between the steering wheel and the external rear vision mirror in use.”

Councils may owe a legal duty of care to some persons in certain circumstances. Actionable liability may attach to a council in any one or more of its functional capacities, including landowner or provider of services or facilities. Risk management and preventative action are important strategies in the safe delivery of council services and in minimising a council’s exposure to liability. Councils are encouraged to consider the Deputy State Coroner’s recommendations as part of a systematic, proactive approach to risk minimisation and public safety.” Parliament of New South Wales Committee on the Office of the Ombudsman and the Police Integrity Commission - Drawing Council’s attention to the Local Government section of the New South Wales Ombudsman’s Annual Report of 2005-2006, particularly in regard to the issue of complaints about development applications and forwarding the relevant section relating to the Annual Report. The Presidents, Local Government and Shires Associations of NSW - Advising that the Associations strongly support the call for honesty in the debate around planning changes and stating that Minister Sartor’s Media Release of 28 March 2008 was misleading the community. (A copy of the Associations’ correspondence has been circulated separately to each Councillor.) Northern Rivers Regional Organisation of Councils - Advising that at past meetings NOROC members have been keeping a ‘weather-eye’ on the Federal Government’s intentions regarding the upgrading of national rail infrastructure, and that an article by the Federal Minister for Infrastructure, Mr. Anthony Albanese, showing that the Federal Government is moving to substantially invest in an inland route between Melbourne and Brisbane (which may well affect the future level of investment in our existing coastal rail line) can be viewed at www.minister.infrastructure.gov.au/aa/releases/2008/March/AA025 2008. Department of Local Government - Forwarding Circular 08-22 informing Councils about a Councillor Development Strategy that is being prepared to assist councillors elected on 13 September 2008 to undertake their role. (A copy of the Circular has been circulated separately to each Councillor.) Department of Local Government - Forwarding Circular 08-23 advising that during 2007 the Department of Local Government undertook a review of the ‘Comparative Information Publication 2006-2007’, the purpose of which was to reduce red tape and reduce duplication of supplying, collecting and/or publishing information, and to streamline the publication. (A copy of the Circular has been circulated separately to each Councillor.) The Hon Gary Gray AO MP - Responding to Council’s correspondence dated 31 March 2008, regarding the Australian Government’s election commitment to funding the Casino Town Centre Revitalisation project and the Casino Community Centre project advising that these projects are to be managed by the Australian Government Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and

http://www.minister.infrastructure.gov.au/aa/releases/2008/March/AA025



Local Government. Asking Council to also be mindful that the Government’s commitment to these projects do not constitute contracts, and are not to be relied upon as confirmation of the terms upon which funding will be made available and that any work commenced on the Casino Town Centre Revitalisation project and the Casino Community Centre project will be Council’s own risk. Lismore City Council - Arising from the failed attempt by NOROC to establish a fully supported position among its members, Lismore City Council will be submitting its own proposal to the Ministerial Water Industry Review, if pursued, will have impacts on all Councils except Clarence Valley. Also advising: “In short, Lismore proposes the creation of a Regional Water Authority to service the Council areas of Tweed, Byron, Kyogle, Richmond Valley, Lismore and Ballina. The governance structure would be broadly consistent with a County Council although some change to the standard representation arrangements is canvassed. Lismore Councillors are cognisant that this proposal conflicts with the position taken by its local peers but their determination to take a proactive stance was influenced by the recent research undertaken for the evaluation of the Lismore/Rous resource sharing venture. The consensus among Lismore personnel is that the status quo is far from optimal when viewed from a sustainability perspective. It is noted that Rous County Council subscribes to a somewhat lesser model however that option has been rejected by the Lismore Councillors on the grounds of inadequacy for the long term.” Lance Kirkley - Expressing appreciation to the Mayor and Council for the opportunity to hold his recent photographic exhibition at the Platypus Gallery and saying how grateful he was for the advice and information so freely given by Peter Byrne and Tricia Howard and the ongoing enthusiasm and assistance given by the hard working volunteers, particularly Rosie, Melissa, Bindy, Alison and Tony. Janelle Saffin MP, Federal Member for Page - Forwarding the final report ‘Thinking Big’ on the outcomes from the Page Electorate 2020 Summits held on 4 and 5 April 2008. (A copy of the report has previously been circulated to Councillors.) The Presidents, Local Government and Shires Associations of NSW - Advising that StateCover Mutual Limited (StateCover) is a specialised workers compensation insurer set up by the LGSA in association with Jardine Lloyd Thompson with the aim of reducing the cost of workers compensation by improving OHS in councils, reducing the incidence of works compensation claims, improving return to work outcomes and proactive claims management and also that StateCover will continue to focus on improving workers compensation outcomes for councils and thus reducing the cost of workers compensation. Also forwarding a copy of the actuarial report outlining the total premium savings StateCover has provided to member Councils since 1 July 2001 (a combined total saving of $26.5 million over the last six years, an average saving of 8.8% per annum on the WorkCover gazetted premiums that Scheme Agents are required to charge).



Morris Iemma MP, Premier and Minister for Citizenship - Thanking Council for its contribution to the work of the Rural and Regional Taskforce and forwarding a copy of the completed Taskforce Report. RECOMMENDATION Recommended that the above correspondence be received and noted. 2008-149 RESOLVED (Cr. Mustow/Cr. Wise) That the above recommendation be adopted. LEGAL SERVICES STATUS REPORT Reference: Legal Services - Advice Prepared by: General Manager

Background Council has various issues being progressed via its legal representatives. A quarterly report is provided to Council on the status of various matters. Items that involve specific legal advice will be reported separately to Closed Council. Report Issues The following status summary is provided on legal items at the end of March 2008; in that regard previous reports have indicated the history/status of issues: 1. Iron Gates Pty. Ltd. (in liquidation) and G. A. Ingles The Plaintiffs served their amended reply to Council’s Defence to the Second Amended Statement of Claim on 8 March 2008. A trial date is to be listed for early 2009. 2. Sale to Ex-Services Home, Ballina Matter in abeyance until contamination issues resolved. 3. Acquisition of Land – Woodburn Street, Evans Head Land valuation processes to be resolved.



4. Richmond Valley Council and Ors ats Duus – Insurance Application (Supreme Court of QLD No: BS of 8745/04) It would appear this matter is now complete. Awaiting finalisation. 5. Acquisition of Land – Sextonville/Old Dyraaba Roads Proposed road closure. Awaiting response from Department of Lands. 6. Acquisition – Tatham Bridge Matter finalised. 7. Land Acquisition – Backmede Road, Backmede Council Officer to update status of acquisition with Solicitor. 8. Road Widening for Casino-Coraki Road, Tatham Plan has been executed; awaiting response from executors of estate. 9. Sale of Land – Ppty: Casino Airport Contract extended to 11 October 2008. (To be finalised on registration of plan.) 10. Sale of Industrial Land - Casino Industrial Estate Contracts exchanged. Awaiting registration of plan. 11. Lease to Evans Head Living Museum Inc. Matter finalised. 12. Lease to Casino Neighbourhood Centre Draft lease received from the Department of Lands. Amendments to be made. 13. Proposed Sale 1/619161 - Old Toilet Block Area, Graham Place Contracts exchanged on 18 April 2007. Further action pending Land and Environment Court Appeal. 14. Evans Head Memorial Aerodrome – Contamination No change since previous report. 15. Sale of Industrial Land - Casino Industrial Estate Advice to Solicitors, 12 March 2008 on status of matter.



16. Acquisition of Easement Council to provide further advice to Solicitors. 17. Local Court Proceedings – Development Carried out Without Consent Matter resolved prior to Hearing. 18. Supreme Court Proceedings - Land Sale Matter listed for Mention, 7 April 2008. 19. Sale of Land to Richmond River County Council Matter finalised. 20. Transfer of Title – Jumbunna Transfer to Torrens Title being pursued. Council to provide further information. 21. Quarry Matters Matter progressing. 22. Land and Environment Court Proceedings (ALDI) Section 34 Conference held on 3 March 2008. Separate report provided to March 2008 Council Meeting. 23. Assault on Staff Member Matter progressing. 24. Sewer Plan Agreement Further correspondence to be forwarded on behalf of Council. 25. Retirement Facility at Coraki Matter finalised. 26. Development Without Consent A brief is being prepared for Barrister; this will determine direction on enforcement proceedings. 27. Plan of Subdivision – Irving Drive, Casino Section 88B Instrument forwarded to Consultants.



28. Registration of Plan of Easement – Richmond River, Casino Plans returned to Council, 25 March 2008 for execution by Crown Lands Office. Conclusion This report provides information on the progression of various legal issues. Should Councillors require detail on any item, contact can be made with the General Manager prior to the Meeting. Attachments Nil PERSONNEL – ACCRUED ANNUAL LEAVE Reference: Personnel - Leave Prepared by: General Manager

Background A quarterly report is provided to Council in relation to excessive annual leave balances. Report Issues The General Manager reported the following summary in relation to excessive leave balances as at 29 March 2008. Outstanding Balance

(Hours)

Limit (Hours) Comment

403.33 280.00 Employee aware of issue and has commenced reducing leave

459.35 304.00 Letter sent to employee 307.25 304.00 Minimal excess 324.25 304.00 Letter sent to employee previously 294.72 280.00 Minimal excess (on Maternity Leave) –

arrangements made to reduce 328.46 280.00 Employee aware of issue (letter sent) 320.75 304.00 Letter sent to employee previously 298.05 280.00 Leave scheduled 281.00 280.00 Minimal excess 343.25 304.00 Letter sent to employee 342.18 280.00 Letter sent to employee 342.17 280.00 Letter sent to employee



339.75 304.00 Letter sent to employee 336.50 304.00 Letter sent to employee 325.18 280.00 Letter sent to employee 320.32 280.00 Letter sent to employee 316.05 304.00 Letter sent to employee 299.04 280.00 Letter sent to employee Conclusion The report provides information on excessive annual leave balances. Attachments Nil CLIMATE CHANGE SEMINAR Reference: Environmental Management – Planning, Policy, Programs Prepared by: General Manager

Background On 11 April 2008, the General Manager attended a Climate Change Seminar facilitated by Local Government Managers Australia (NSW). Report Issues The focus of the seminar was on presenting a local government risk management approach to the issue of climate change. That approach was outlined from environment, insurance and legal perspectives. A summary of the points/issues raised at the seminar is as follows: ¬ climate change challenges are becoming increasingly more urgent; there are

expectations from the community that local government will address issues.

¬ greenhouse effects, increasing global temperature, changing sea levels, decreasing snow and increasing storm levels are all factors that will have future impact.

¬ the role of local government is to be seen as acting responsibly, e.g. implementing carbon reduction strategies, carbon trading, responding to physical risks of extreme weather events – asset management, public liability risks, adequate infrastructure to meet demands.

¬ financiers and insurers are seeking greater distribution of climatic change related risks; insurance cover is shared globally.



¬ need to reassess stormwater/sewer/bush fire/building standard strategies.

¬ the issue is a risk profile that needs to be managed.

¬ risk drives insurance premiums; weather related risks will increase – building codes will need to respond to same.

¬ the Insurance Council of Australia is undertaking advanced risk modelling.

¬ the defence of claims will be similar to current risk exposure.

¬ as a development approval authority, Council will be a target for legal action.

¬ risk management should identify, assess and prioritise actions to address the risks arising from climate change.

¬ whether you believe the science of climate change or not, the community expects that the matter will be dealt with. Therefore, there is potential future liability for not responding/or appropriately responding to climate change.

Overall the forum provided a lateral view of climate change and what it can mean for local government. Conclusion The seminar contents will be utilised as part of the preparation of a Climate Change Policy that will be presented to Council. Attachments Nil FLY-IN EVENT – EVANS HEAD MEMORIAL AERODROME Reference: Council Properties – Meetings; Recreation and Cultural Services

– Event Management; Traffic and Transport – Service Provision Prepared by: General Manager

Background At the April 2008 Meeting, Councillor Jeffery enquired about the information regarding the Fly-In dragging on. Report Issues There are two issues regarding the 2007 Fly-In:



¬ regarding operational matters in respect to the Fly-In “booking” of the Aerodrome. A response on these matters has been received by Council’s Works Directorate and is being followed up as part of usual processes.

¬ the event sponsorship issues are being pursued via Tourism staff. In that

regard, at the time of preparation of this report, the acquittal for funding was still to be received. An extension of time had been granted due to health problems with an organising committee member and also the need to complete details regarding operational arrangements (see above).

Extensions of time have been granted in other cases (when circumstances

have required same.) Conclusion This report provides a response to a question raised by Councillor Jeffery at the April Meeting. Attachments Nil REQUEST ACTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (RAMS) Reference: Customer Service - Reporting Prepared by: General Manager

Background The Request Action Management System (RAMS), since its introduction in 2004, has been used to track and record information in relation to “action requests” received by Council.

Report

Issues A Summary of RAMS information has been prepared for the period 1 July 2007 to 31 March 2008 and a copy has been circulated separately to each Councillor. During the period requests have been received by a variety of methods, with 59% received via the telephone, 15% being lodged at the front counter, 8% received via after hours calls, 14% recorded via Environmental Development Services administration processes, with the balance being received by a variety of other methods such as verbal, facsimile, letter and email. The majority of requests received (96%) had been recorded as requests for work to be carried out, with 3% being recorded as a complaint and 1% being recorded as an enquiry.



Of the total of 4,250 requests received during the July 2007 to March 2008 period, 93% had been completed, 6% were overdue and 1% had been referred for further action. Statistics indicate that 75% of all requests/complaints received were completed with specified timeframes. Conclusion

The RAMS statistical information is provided to Council for notation.

Attachments

RAMS Report and Statistics Summary (1 July 2007 to 31 March 2008). LIVESTOCK EXCHANGE STATISTICS Reference: Economic Development – Service Provision Prepared by: Saleyards Administrator

Report Issues The following is a summary of Saleyard statistics. Grown Cattle

2007/08 2006/07 2005/06 2004/05 2003/04

July 14,382 9,666 12,478 9,059 9,994 August 10,348 9,770 13,024 8,372 11,357 September 5,901 6,075 9,507 12,626 12,051 October 5,236 2,568 8,485 7,466 9,442 November 8,064 5,641 11,347 7,457 8,358 December 6,388 2,267 4,659 5,254 6,737 January 11,659 8,162 7,166 7,392 6,914 February 15,174 11,189 11,726 11,756 10,810 March 17,167 20,095 18,230 8,489 11,351 April 11,001 8,591 8,792 15,863 9,862 May 14,351 11,433 9,644 9,606 June 14,487 8,554 10,419 11,970 TOTAL 105,320 112,862 125,401 113,797 118,452

Bobby Calves

2007/08 2006/07 2005/06 2004/05 2003/04

July 264 183 218 220 240 August 247 290 153 248 232 September 151 213 224 230 214 October 187 145 188 144 302 November 108 195 207 127 178 December 83 105 114 61 202 January 219 384 202 174 210 February 199 280 170 257 174 March 220 280 247 462 420



April 295 168 197 269 195 May 340 271 327 236 June 167 223 285 209

TOTAL 1,973 2,750 2,414 2,804 3,712 Conclusion This report provides information on Saleyard throughput. Attachments Nil STATUS OF ENGINEERING WORKS Reference: Corporate Management – Planning Prepared by: Operations Engineers Background This report provides an update on the works undertaken within the month of April. Report Issues A. State Roads Maintenance and Construction Works Routine maintenance was undertaken on the State Highway network. Bitumen sealing works were undertaken on the Summerland Way at Nammoona. The sealing of a bus turning facility on the Summerland Way at Ryans Road has been completed. Heavy patching works have been undertaken on the Summerland Way at Nammoona and Leeville to correct damage as a result of the extended wet weather in January. Rehabilitation of the pavement, shoulders and drainage structures damaged in the January 2008 floods on the Summerland Way in the vicinity of Baraimal Lane have been completed. Rehabilitation of the pavement on the Bruxner Highway in the vicinity of Irvington Wharf Road has been completed



B. Regional Roads – Block Grant Routine maintenance was undertaken on the Regional Road network. Heavy patching of MR 145 (Casino – Woodburn Road) at Codrington to repair pavement damaged due to saturation following the January Floods has been undertaken. Heavy patching of MR 153 (Woodburn – Evans Head Road) at Doonbar to repair severely damaged pavement has been undertaken. C. Local Roads Routine maintenance was undertaken on the local road network. Pavement and Concrete works are being carried out on a number of new bus stops in the North Casino area. Bitumen sealing of the works and the placement of the shelters has been delayed and is now programmed for May. Drainage works associated with the Reardons Lane pavement rehabilitation is currently being undertaken. Roadworks will commence in early May Gravel resheeting works, required as a result of the recent flooding, have been undertaken on: Broadheads Road Skaines Road Clearfield Road Humphrys Lane Edenville Road Johnsons Road Brookers Road Temporary grading works to improve driveability have been undertaken on: Benns Road Skaines Road Myrtle Creek Road Hannigans Road Creightons Road Elfords Road Taylors Lane McMullens Bridge Road Marks Road TR Benns Road D. Urban Works Routine maintenance was undertaken on the Urban Road network. Asphalting has been undertaken on the extension of Irving Drive in the Industrial Estate in Casino. Asphalting has been undertaken in Woodburn Street, Woodburn and Wharf Street, Broadwater. All works associated with the Railway Parade and Colches Street upgrade have been completed including the final asphalt wearing surface. Footpath replacement works have been completed in Adams Street, Coraki and Centre Street, Casino



E. Water Sewer Water Main Construction Works - Casino construction crews are currently replacing the existing Ø100mm fibro main with Ø100mm uPVC main and new house services in Hickey Street, Casino. The Lower River construction crew is replacing a section of Ø100 AC water main with Ø100mm uPVC main along Riley’s Hill Road, Broadwater. Sewer Construction Works - Manhole maintenance has continued in the Lower River area, while a number of junction modification/repairs have been undertaken within the Casino area. Routine CCTV inspections have also been carried out during the past month. Private Works - Completed:

• Irving Drive Subdivision - Sewer and Water extensions • Supply of 2000 Bolboschoenus Bulbs from the Casino Wastewater

Treatment Works to Bluedale Nursery Upcoming Works

• Water Service and Meter Installation – Cedars Nursing Home – Gitana/North Streets

Crews are undertaking RAMS and other maintenance as required in both the Lower River and Casino areas. Conclusion This report is an update of status of work activities undertaken by the operational section of Council’s Works Directorate. Attachments Nil CONTRACT BRIDGEWORK AND COMPONENT ORDERS Reference: Commercial Activities - Contracting, Reporting Prepared by: Manager Concrete Products/Bridge Construction Report Issues Doolan Decks Flowers Bridge (4 units) Kyogle SC - Complete awaiting delivery Krugers Road Bridge (3 units) Esk SC - In Progress



Culmaran Creek No1 Bridge (3 units) Kyogle SC - In Program Culmaran Creek No2 Bridge (3 units) Kyogle SC - In Program Tunglebung Creek Bridge (3 units) Kyogle SC - In Program Bottle Creek Rd Bridge (2 units) Kyogle SC - In Program Precast/Prestressed Products Giddys Bridge Planks (39) Tweed SC - Complete awaiting delivery Coldwater Creek Planks (17) Coffs H CC - Complete awaiting delivery Perch Creek Bridge Planks (15) Tweed SC - Complete awaiting delivery Little Creek Bridge (15) Kyogle SC - In Program In-situ Construction Little Ck Bridge Planks Kyogle SC - In Program Culmaran Ck No.1 Bridge Kyogle SC - In Program Culmaran Ck No.2 Bridge Kyogle SC - In Program Tunglebung Ck Bridge Kyogle SC - In Program Bottle Ck Rd Bridge Kyogle SC - In Program Design Design Tuncester Bridge Lismore CC - In Program Design of O’Shea Gully Bridge Ipswich CC - In Progress Design of McGrath’s Bridge Laidley SC - In Progress Design of Culmaran Ck No1 Bridge Kyogle SC - In Program Design of Culmaran Ck No2 Bridge Kyogle SC - In Program Design of Tunglebung Creek Bridge Kyogle SC - In Program Design of Little Creek Bridge Kyogle SC - In Program Design of Bottle Creek Rd Bridge Kyogle SC - In Program Jobs Tendered For

• Quotation to Northern Busway Alliance (Abigroup) for supply of PSC plank units (220 units), negotiations still underway.

• Quotation to Ballina Bypass Alliance (Leightons) for supply of various precast /prestressed products and fabricated steelwork, negotiations still underway.

Conclusion This report is an update of work activities being undertaken by the Concrete Products / Bridge Construction Section of Council’s Works Directorate. Attachments Nil



EVANS HEAD SEWERAGE PROJECTS Reference: Environmental Management – Monitoring, Programs; Parks and

Reserves – Design and Construction; Sewerage and Drainage – Meetings, Monitoring

Prepared by: Services Planning Engineer

Background The Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC) has developed a number of Pollution Reduction Programs (PRP) to specify parameters and timeframes for the augmentation of the Evans Head Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) and sewage reticulation system. In addition, Council has committed to a number of other projects in Evans Head to improve the performance of the sewerage system. An update report by the Services Planning Engineer was submitted to the April 2008 Council meeting, detailing the various components of the Evans Head Sewerage Augmentation which have not received Department of Water and Energy (DWE) funding. This report provides an update of those projects. Report Issues 1. Effluent Irrigation Systems Council adopted the Evans Head Effluent Reuse Strategy at the December 2006 meeting. Think Water, previously known as Rothwells Pumps and Irrigation, were appointed to construct Stage 1 of the irrigation systems at the December 2007 Council meeting. Construction of the Woodburn Oval Irrigation System has still not commenced due to the ongoing sporadic wet weather. As the soccer season has now commenced, scheduling of construction for this site will be difficult. Stage 1 of construction at Woodburn Public School is complete. Construction commenced during the school holidays, but was delayed slightly by the weather. The contractor and school principal negotiated to complete construction during the first week of school. Stage 2 of construction at Evans River K-12 School commenced during the school holidays, however a combination of wet weather and unexpected ground conditions delayed construction. Completion of this work is tentatively scheduled for the July school holidays, weather permitting. 2. Effluent Release Investigation DECC required Council to conduct an investigation into an alternate sustainable effluent release. Connell Wagner has now completed investigations, and submitted the Draft Final Report to Council for comment. The Draft Final Report was forwarded to DECC for comment in January 2008. DECC provided their comments on the Draft Final Report late in April 2008. Council has reviewed DECC’s comments and forwarded them to Connell Wagner, allowing finalisation of the Final report.



3. Salty Lagoon Rehabilitation Strategy A nine (9) point plan for the rehabilitation of Salty Lagoon was adopted by Council at the August 2006 Council meeting. The following table provides a summary of Council’s progress with the rehabilitation project.

Task Progress 1) Implement dry weather

reuse Construction of the Stage 1 irrigation schemes commence in January 2008. Effluent reuse should commence early in 2009, depending on progress of the DWE funding process.

2) Develop and implement an ecosystem monitoring program

The first round of ecosystem monitoring was conducted in April 2008. Three wallum frog species and three other native frog species were identified in and around the STP drainage channel and Salty Lagoon, with cane toads identified in the vicinity of the Waste Transfer Station. The distribution of four of the six frog species will serve as good indicators of water quality and wetland health. The macro invertebrate study in the drainage channel revealed high abundance but low diversity, which is indicative of a high nutrient, low oxygen environment. Increasing macro invertebrate species diversity will indicate increasing wetland health. The fish survey was dominated by Gambusia (mosquito fish), but also revealed a good diversity of both fresh and saltwater species. Fish species composition may not be as good an indicator of lagoon health, as it is greatly influenced by connectivity to the ocean.

3) Implement STP augmentation

The augmentation Evans Head STP is now complete.

4) Consider reed harvesting

This will be considered for implementation after Steps 1 and 3 have been completed, depending on the outcome of Step 2.

5) Consider implementing revegetation

This will be considered for implementation after Steps 1 and 3 have been completed, depending on the outcome of Step 2.

6) Implement the preferred wet weather release option

Council adopted the preferred wet weather release strategy at the October 2006 meeting. Investigations are currently underway to determine the precise location and mode of release.

7) Review the monitoring program

To be conducted throughout the monitoring program (see Step 2).

8) Consider closure of the artificial channel

This will be considered for implementation after Steps 6 and 7 have been completed.

9) Reassess after 5 years of monitoring

This is scheduled for 2012.



4. Future PRPs Early in May 2008, DECC advised Council that they will be issuing a PRP to regulate the current and future Evans Head Sewerage Projects: • Effluent Reuse Scheme – Council and DECC are currently negotiating the

precise wording of the PRP, which is likely to involve regular reporting of Council’s progress, any delays, and the reasons for the delays.

• Effluent release investigations – This PRP will be based on the recommendations of the Stage 2 Effluent Release Investigations Final Report, which is yet to be finalised. As such, the wording of this PRP has not bee discussed.

• Salty Lagoon Rehabilitation Strategy – Council and DECC are currently negotiating the precise wording of the PRP, which is likely to involve regular reporting of Council’s progress with the nine point plan, and detailed reporting of the Ecosystem Recovery Monitoring Program results.

5. Beachwatch Beachwatch monitoring is being conducted at Evans Head, with samples collected weekly from Airforce Beach, Main Beach, Evans River and Shark Bay. Council is able to provide a rating of the water quality at each location. “Good” and “Fair” ratings are suitable for swimming, while “Poor” and “Bad” ratings are not recommended for swimming. The ratings for the previous reporting periods are contained in the table below.

Date Airforce Beach Main Beach Evans River Shark Bay 8/04/2008 Good Good Good Good 15/04/2008 Good Good Good Good 22/04/2008 Good Good Good Good 29/04/2008 Good Good Good Good 6/05/2008 Good Good Good Good

Sustainability (ESD Principles) All projects are being conducted in accordance with the principals of Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD):

• The precautionary principle; • Inter-generational equity; • Conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity; and • Improved valuation, pricing and incentive. Conclusion The augmentation of the Evans Head Sewage Treatment Plant and sewage reticulation systems are progressing in accordance with the directions of DECC and the PRP attached to the Evans Head STP Environmental Protection Licence. Attachments Nil



FLUORIDATION OF CASINO WATER SUPPLY Reference: Water Supply - Monitoring Prepared by: Water and Sewer Support Engineer

Background Council has received direction to fluoridate the Casino water supply from the Director General of NSW Health as gazetted on the 13 April 2007. This decision was made after Council resolved to refer the matter to NSW Health for determination as one of several options that were put forward to Council. Subsequently, NSW Health resolved to commence fluoridation of the Casino water supply and gave a deadline for completion by 31 December 2008. NSW Health has increased subsidies available under the Fluoridation Capital Works Program from 50% to 100% for approved works at the least capital cost option. This report is to give a brief update on the progress of this project to date. Report Issues Fluoridation of a public water supply is regulated by the NSW Department of Health. Stringent policies, guidelines, legislation and codes of practice have been developed to protect human health and standardise the procedures for water supply authorities to implement and manage fluoridation. Council has commenced the planning process and consultation with Rous Water was initiated with a meeting on 14 November 2007 to discuss options for a co-operative approach to developing the regions fluoridation of public water supplies. There may be opportunities for cost savings and skills sharing if a co-operative arrangement can be implemented between Council and Rous Water. This arrangement would be a great opportunity, but is not essential to the establishment of the Casino fluoridation plant. As part of the approval process a minimum of two staff are required to be trained to operate the plant to enable continued fluoridation in the event of sickness, leave etc. Enquiries have been made and details of the training locations and staff have been booked in for training in September 2008. Also as part of the approval process is the completion of Form 1 which has been approved by the Department of Water and Energy (DWE). The approval process will now focus on the specification for the fluoride plant. The tender specification has been sent to DWE for assessment and the results should be received within weeks.



When DWE provides details of the tender specification and is accepted, Council will call tenders or quotes depending on expected cost. Council is also required to develop a communication/notification strategy for the public as part of the implementation process. Advance notices on issues associated with fluoridation will commence shortly. Conclusion This report is to provide a brief summary of the fluoridation process to date and to provide information about the approval process. Council has been directed to implement fluoridation of the Casino Water Supply by 31 December 2008. Attachments Nil NEW SOUTH WALES COASTLINE CYCLEWAY – 2007/2008 GRANT FUNDING Reference: Roads – Programs; DWS 247273 Prepared by: Senior Engineering Assistant - Administration

Background In September 2007, Council submitted an application to the New South Wales Department of Planning for funding under the New South Wales Coastline Cycleway. The nominated route for the NSW Coastline Cycleway is from Evans Head south through the Bundjalung National Park. As part of the submission an alternative route from Evans Head to Woodburn was proposed. Report Issues Council has received correspondence advising the application was unsuccessful. As part of this correspondence comments (see below) were included as to why the submission was not considered for project funding. "This project is not on the NSW Coastline Cycleway alignment as indicated by the maps held by the Department of Planning. The NSW Coastline Cycleway Assessment Team considers that further work needs to be undertaken prior to altering the agreed alignment of the NSWCC route. This further work should include consideration of route options in relation to the objectives of the NSWCC as well as discussions with the relevant land owners/managers.



Should further funding be announced it is recommended that Council work with the Department of Planning to undertake the required work prior to developing the project bids." Conclusion Council staff will liaise with the Department of Planning to continue to develop and promote the alternative route from Evans Head to Woodburn for the NSW Coastline Cycleway. Attachments Nil FINANCIAL ANALYSIS REPORT - APRIL 2008 Reference: Financial Management - Investments Prepared by: Manager Finance

Background Clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 requires Council to be provided with a monthly report concerning Council’s investments. Traditionally, Council in addition, is also provided with balances of Council’s bank accounts, outstanding sundry debtors, outstanding rates and water/sewerage charges. Report Issues The Financial Report for April 2008, included with this report, continues the new format which aims to disclose greater information regarding Council’s investment portfolio along with balances of Council’s bank accounts, outstanding sundry debtors, outstanding rates and water/sewerage charges. The major ongoing change to this report in disclosure of Council’s investments is the provision of fair value for each of Council’s Fixed Interest Securities. Council is now able to receive indicative market valuations on these investments monthly (where available) and this can be compared to the face value or original cost of the investment when purchased. The notion of fair value is to comply with Australian Accounting Standard AASB 139. The market valuations or fair value valuations are an indication only of what a particular investment is worth at a point in time and will vary from month to month depending upon market conditions. Councillors may be aware of recent and continued volatility in financial markets which is currently impacting negatively on Council’s fixed interest securities and



managed fund investments as indicated in the report on the following page. Current valuations reflect this negativity. That being said, it appears investment markets during April have recovered to a degree. For Council this means around $530,000 in capital value has been restored to Council’s investments as it may appear the worst of the liquidity crisis has passed and known valuations in the main have improved. Credit ratings of investments are still going under scrutiny by the rating agencies of Standard & Poors and Fitch. Resulting from this, one of Councils CDO investments known as Quartz has been downgraded from A to A-. Technically this means Council would need to liquidate this investment as soon as practicable under the current investment order, however this is now not clear since the release of the Cole Inquiry report where investments can now be ‘grandfathered’. The new investment order has not been released by the Department of Local Government incorporating the Cole Inquiry recommendations at the time of writing this report. It has previously been indicated in prior reports and published in the media that Council’s managed funds have had negative returns. Whilst this has been the case, the month of April has reversed this trend where fund manager performance ranged from positive 7.05% to 16.05% annualised for the month. It is hoped that April is the start of a recovery in investment markets and this is sustained thus recouping some of the indicative ‘paper’ losses Council has experienced on its investments over the last ten months. Further changes in financial markets and investments will be reflected in future financial reports provided to Council each month. Legal Council must maintain its investments in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993, NSW Minister for Local Government’s Investment order issued from time to time and Clause 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005. This report certifies Council’s investments are held in accordance with these legislative requirements. Policy Council has adopted Policy 1.4.3 regarding investments. Conclusion It must be remembered investment performance needs to be measured over the life of a particular investment, not only in isolation of a one or two month return. Council has long term investments designed to be held to maturity where it would be expected market conditions will be different at maturity then currently exists. This report is also provided to Council in the aim of satisfying current legislative requirements regarding investment reporting. Attachments Nil



Current Current Original Current Fair % of CapitalInvestment Investment Investment Maturity Interest Interest Interest Rate Interest Rate Investment Investment Valuation Total Guarantee

Investment Name Source Type Rating Date Date Basis Frequency Per Annum for Month Value Fair Value Date Portfolio MaturityCash at CallCommonwealth Bank Cash Deposit Commonwealth Bank 11am at Call AA Variable Quarterly 7.20% 0.60% N/A 1,000,000.00 30/04/2008 3.82% No

Total Cash at Call 1,000,000.00 3.82%Term DepositsI3 Fixed Term Deposit Summerland Credit Union Term Deposit N/A 2/02/2008 2/05/2008 Fixed for Term Quarterly 6.50% 0.54% N/A 772,718.83 31/03/2008 2.95% No

Total Term Deposits 772,718.83 2.95%Managed FundsMacquarie Income Plus Fund No 1 Macquarie Bank Managed Fund AAf Variable Monthly 7.05% 0.59% N/A 5,526,239.08 31/03/2008 21.10% NoAberdeen Cash Plus Fund Aberdeen Managed Fund AAf Variable Monthly 15.75% 1.31% N/A 4,736,516.62 31/03/2008 18.09% NoBlackrock Diversified Credit Fund Blackrock Managed Fund AAf Variable Monthly 16.05% 1.34% N/A 3,860,806.35 31/03/2008 14.74% No

Total Managed Funds 14,123,562.05 53.93%Fixed Interest SecuritiesMagnolia Finance Ltd 2005-14 (Flinders) Lehman Brothers CDO2 AA 10/02/2005 20/03/2012 3mth BBSW + 1.50% Quarterly 9.28% 0.77% 1,500,000.00 1,275,000.00 30/04/2008 4.87% NoBeryl Finance Limited (Esperance 2) Lehman Brothers CDO AA+ 20/03/2006 20/03/2013 3mth BBSW + 1.30% Quarterly 9.48% 0.79% 1,000,000.00 616,000.00 30/04/2008 2.35% NoHerald Ltd Series 24 (Quartz) Lehman Brothers CDO A- 31/08/2005 20/12/2010 3mth BBSW + 1.50% Quarterly 8.80% 0.73% 500,000.00 373,200.00 30/04/2008 1.43% NoNexus 4 Topaz Notes (Nexus 4) Lehman Brothers Listed CDO AA- 11/07/2005 23/06/2015 6mth BBSW + 4.42% Half Yearly 11.78% 0.98% 997,900.00 748,425.00 30/04/2008 2.86% YesSelect Access FRN 2005-4 (Titanium) Macquarie/RIMSEC CDO AAA 31/05/2005 14/12/2010 3mth BBSW + 0.80% Quarterly 8.69% 0.72% 500,000.00 489,500.00 22/04/2008 1.87% NoSelect Access FRN 2005-5 (Sails) ABN-AMRO Morgans Bank CDO AA 26/07/2005 14/12/2010 3mth BBSW + 0.80% Quarterly 8.69% 0.72% 500,000.00 491,870.00 30/04/2008 1.88% NoOctagon PLC (EMU Note) FIIG Securities CPPI - Hedge AAA 25/10/2005 25/10/2015 50% performance Yearly 6.77% 0.56% 500,000.00 497,500.00 31/03/2008 1.90% YesAB Svensk Exportkredit - (All Seasons) FIIG Securities CPPI - Hedge AA+ 29/06/2006 29/08/2014 8.00% Yearly 8.00% 0.67% 500,000.00 472,450.00 30/04/2008 1.80% YesPhoenix Trust - (Focus Notes) Westpac Bank CPPI - Equity AA 20/12/2006 20/12/2012 6mth BBSW Half Yearly 7.49% 0.62% 500,000.00 472,154.50 30/04/2008 1.80% YesLongreach Fund 1-2006 Longreach Capital Protect Fund AAAf 29/09/2006 29/09/2011 2.00% + capital growth Half Yearly 2.00% 0.17% 1,000,000.00 942,600.00 30/04/2008 3.60% YesCredit Suisse - (Aquaduct Note) FIIG Securities Capital Protect Fund AA- 22/12/2006 21/06/2010 7.00% Quarterly 0.00% 0.00% 500,000.00 469,200.00 30/04/2008 1.79% YesMomentum CDO Europe - (Trio) Calyon CDO AA- 6/03/2007 30/09/2010 3mthBBSW + 0.50% Quarterly 7.61% 0.63% 1,000,000.00 600,000.00 31/12/2007 2.29% NoSirens BV 2007-2 [B1.a] - (Cargo II) Citigroup Wealth Advisors Commodity Link Note AAA 28/03/2007 28/03/2012 3mthBBSW + 1.40% Quarterly 8.67% 0.72% 1,000,000.00 976,400.00 21/04/2008 3.73% NoUBS Series 25 (CPIN) Longreach Capital Protect Note AA+ 4/04/2007 4/04/2014 7.00% Half Yearly 7.00% 0.58% 500,000.00 348,200.00 30/04/2008 1.33% YesANZ Executors & Trustee Co - (Asprit 2) ANZ Investment Bank CPPI - Fund AA 29/05/2007 30/03/2013 50% perform max 10% Yearly N/A N/A 200,000.00 176,772.00 30/04/2008 0.68% YesAphex Pacific Capital - (Phoenix) ABN-AMRO Morgans Bank FRN AAA 14/08/2007 10/11/2011 3mth BBSW + 2.05% Quarterly 9.35% 0.78% 500,000.00 479,650.00 30/04/2008 1.83% NoAveron CPP Limited - (Averon II) ANZ Investment Bank CPPI -Fund AAA 13/07/2007 13/07/2014 BBSW + 1.50% Quarterly 0.00% 0.00% 500,000.00 368,500.00 30/04/2008 1.41% YesSeries 33 - STIRM 2 Longreach Capital Protect Note AA 31/03/2008 10/05/2013 Variable Maturity N/A N/A 500,000.00 492,800.00 30/04/2008 1.88% Yes

Total Fixed Interest Securities 12,197,900.00 10,290,221.50 39.30%

Bank Accounts Total Investment Portfolio at Face Value 28,094,180.88Balance $ Total Investment Portfolio at Fair Value 26,186,502.38

Account Name 30-Apr-08General Fund Bank Account 667,062.14 Overall Average Interest Rate Annualised - Portfolio 7.91%Trust Fund Bank Account 775,882.72 One Month Bank Bill Index Annualised 8.24%

Total 1,442,944.86

Rates & Charges Collection (excluding Water and Sewerage) Outstanding Debtors (All Types)Balance $ Debtor Type Outstanding $30-Apr-08 30-Apr-08

Rates & Charges Arrears 1/7/2007 591,846.45 Sundry Debtors 404,631.22Add: Levies to 30/4/2008 8,563,451.71 Rates & Charges 2,133,247.88Total Outstanding 9,155,298.16 Water & Sewerage Charges 2,593,328.59Less: Collections to 30/4/2008 7,022,050.28 Total 5,131,207.69Balance Outstanding at 30/4/2008 2,133,247.88

Percentage Collected 76.70%

At CallAt Call

RICHMOND VALLEY COUNCIL FINANCIAL REPORT AT 30 APRIL 2008

At Call

At Call



GRANT APPLICATIONS Reference: Grants and Subsidies - Applications Prepared by: Governance Officer

Background From time to time Council applies for various grants. Council has sought regular information on same. Report Issues This report provides information on grant applications submitted and grant application outcomes received during the month of April 2008. Applications Sent Nil Outcomes Received Refer to separate report regarding Cycleway Program. Conclusion This report indicates details of grant applications being pursued by Council. Attachments Nil GENERAL MANAGER’S CONTRACT RENEWAL - PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT Reference: Personnel - Contracting, Employment Conditions; DWS 221747 Prepared by: Director Corporate Services

Background As a requirement of the General Manager’s employment contract renewal, a Performance Agreement was to be negotiated between Council and Mr. Brian Wilkinson. The Agreement was to be based on the Process and Outcomes Model developed by the Local Government and Shires Associations which was in a similar format to that which had been developed previously for the original employment contract.



Report Issues The Performance Agreement has been completed and the format and process agreed to with Mr. Wilkinson and the Mayor on behalf of Council, and in accordance with the conditions of the employment contract. Legal The completion of the Performance Agreement will satisfy the legal requirements in respect of the General Manager’s Contract of Employment with Mr. Wilkinson. It is proposed that the previous arrangements for the performance review of the General Manager be implemented. This consists of a six monthly monitoring review which takes the form of a meeting with the Council and the full annual review which incorporates an analysis of objectives, responsibilities and performance measures of the Performance Agreement. Conclusion The completion of the Performance Agreement has ensured compliance of the terms of the Contract of Employment by both Council and Mr. Wilkinson. Attachments Nil SPONSORSHIP OF CASINO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY INC 2008 BUSINESS OF THE YEAR AWARDS Reference: Community Relations – Sponsorship; DWS 237817, DWS 248388 Prepared by: Community Development Co-ordinator

Background Council at its Ordinary Meeting held on 15 May, 2007 (Minute 2007-265) agreed to be a “Gold Sponsor” of the 2007 Casino Business of the Year Awards and in doing so an additional award was created; “Richmond Valley Apprentice/Trainee of the Year”. Following the 2007 Awards, two additional reports were presented to Council (16 October and 20 November, 2007).



Report Issues Further to Council’s resolution of 16 October 2007, Council staff have commenced negotiations with representatives from the Casino Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc. in regard to Council’s “Gold Sponsorship” of the 2008 awards. Strategic Links As with the 2007 awards, Council’s sponsorship fits with the objectives of Council’s Current 2007 -2010 and proposed 2008 – 20011 Management Plans – Economic Affairs, Economic Development/Promotion program. Financial Implications Funds are available within Council’s current 2007/08 budget, and an allocation has also been made within Council’s 2008/09 draft budget estimates. Conclusion Council’s ongoing support of the Casino Business awards, in particular the “Richmond Valley Apprentice/Trainee of the Year” will ensure that younger members of the business community may have an additional opportunity to be recognised for their contribution to the local economy and provide a showcase for their professional achievements. Attachments Nil LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Reference: Economic Development – Projects Prepared by: Community Development Co-ordinator

Background As previously reported to Council an economic development strategy is to be developed by Council staff with support from Southern Cross University. The creation of the strategy will: • Ensure Council’s Economic Development Unit is able to progress in an

appropriate manner. • Provide a “usable” tool/action plan to assist economic growth and

sustainability within the LGA.



The strategy will require a 10 year timeframe in order to integrate and be consistent with Council’s Management and Social Plans as well as any future Department of Local Government guidelines. Funding for the strategy has been included in the 2007/08 Management Plan and an estimate has been also provided for consideration as part of the 2008/09 budgetary process. Report Issues The following project progress relates to Stage One of the project action plan: • Initial mail-out to all known businesses and industries throughout the LGA,

along with a mail-out to key stakeholders and local Members of Parliament has now been completed.

This has resulted in approximately 50% of the key stakeholders contacted,

replying and expressing their interested in participating. A response rate of approximately 13% was received from the local business

community. The majority of which (10 - 11%) responded positively towards the development of the strategy.

• A review leading to the update of the business database for Council’s “in-

house use only” is progressing with additional information obtained via the expression of interest process.

This review will not only lead to a more refined business data-base but also

cost savings associated with dissemination of information, (for example postage), in regard to economic development programs and projects.

• Literature review/search continues Conclusion Work is progressing on the development of an economic development strategy for the Richmond Valley Local Government Area. Further reports will be provided to Council as this project progresses. Attachments Nil



DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY Reference: Development and Building Controls – Development Applications Prepared by: Director Environmental Development Services

Report Issues This report presents to Council a summary of Development Applications approved (or refused) under delegated authority for the period 1 April 2008 to 30 April 2008. DA No 2008/0184 Applicant Ardill Payne & Partners Owner(s) RA Mustow Parcel Description Lot 1 DP 936363 Location 89-93 Pacific Highway BROADWATER Development Boundary Adjustment to create 3 lots Approval Date 01/04/2008 Estimated Cost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0268 Applicant CA Gillespie Owner(s) CA Gillespie & CL Gillsepie Parcel Description Lot 5 Section 2 DP 758403 Location 11 Heath Street EVANS HEAD Development Shed Approval Date 01/04/2008 Estimated Cost $16,500.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0266 Applicant JP McCormick Owner(s) JP MJ & RJ McCormick Parcel Description Lot 14 DP 727326 Location 1 Wiangarie Street CASINO Development Strata Subdivision Approval Date 03/04/2008 Estimated Cost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0202 Applicant B MILLS Owner(s) BE & KA Mills Parcel Description Lot 16 DP 1113025 Location Nowlan Place CASINO Development Dwelling & Shed Approval Date 03/04/2008 Estimated Cost $277,753.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0346



Applicant Richmond Valley Council Owner(s) Woodburn Memorial Hall Local Parcel Description Lot 456 DP 755624 Location River Street (Pacifc Hwy) WOODBURN Development Painting Exterior of Building Approval Date 03/04/2008 Estimated Cost $5,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0309 Applicant PJ Partridge Owner(s) PJ Partridge Parcel Description Lot 69 DP 755630 Location 135 Tatham Ellangowan Road TATHAM Development Farm Shed Approval Date 04/04/2008 Estimated Cost $50,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0322 Applicant Splash Pool Installations Owner(s) SJ & SA Fraser Parcel Description Lot 2 DP 732051 Location 3960 Bruxner Highway WOODVIEW Development Swimming Pool Approval Date 04/04/2008 Estimated Cost $23,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0210 Applicant G Tamaki Owner(s) AL & AM Battistuzzi Parcel Description Lot 1 DP 603073 Location 455 Johnsons Road YORKLEA Development Dwelling Additions Approval Date 04/04/2008 Estimated Cost $49,302.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0109 Applicant P Brown Owner(s) S & M Mohammed Parcel Description Lot 5 DP 868425 Location 4 Horrie Drive CASINO Development Shed Approval Date 07/04/2008 Estimated Cost $10,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0325 Applicant AA Photiou Owner(s) Austar Evans Head Pty Ltd Parcel Description Lot 73 DP 877481 Location 2 Sir Valston Hancock Drive EVANS HEAD Development Industrial Building Approval Date 07/04/2008



Estimated Cost $20,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0291 Applicant LF Binney Owner(s) LF Binney Parcel Description Lot 1 SP 64654 Location 1/40 Riverview Street SOUTH EVANS HEAD Development Carport Approval Date 08/04/2008 Estimated Cost $10,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0312 Applicant GM Johnstone Owner(s) GM Johnstone Parcel Description Lot 12 DP 717998 Location 115 Swan Bay School Road SWAN BAY Development Farm Shed Approval Date 08/04/2008 Estimated Cost $10,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0140 Applicant Richmond Valley Council Owner(s) Richmond Valley Council Parcel Description Lot 12 DP 1051659 Location Cnr Walker St & Graham Place CASINO Development Shelving in Archive Room Approval Date 09/04/2008 Estimated Cost $1,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0185 Applicant Spanline Northern Rivers Pty L Owner(s) WL Olsson Parcel Description Lot 1 DP 500757 Location 4 William Street CASINO Development Carport Approval Date 09/04/2008 Estimated Cost $3,400.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0281 Applicant DP Writer Owner(s) CA & DP Writer Parcel Description Lot 1 DP 1090991 Location 29-33 Martin Street CORAKI Development Dwelling Approval Date 09/04/2008 Estimated Cost $70,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0320 Applicant TJ Elley Owner(s) All Saints Church & Others Parcel Description Lot 1 DP 724364



Location 20 Woodburn Coraki Road WOODBURN Development Awning Approval Date 10/04/2008 Estimated Cost $6,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0171 Applicant JA Coote Owner(s) JD & JA Coote Parcel Description Lot 4 DP 5405 Location 11 Nandabah Street RAPPVILLE 2469 Development Dwelling Approval Date 11/04/2008 Estimated Cost $70,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0334 Applicant PJ Radnidge Owner(s) PJ Radnidge Parcel Description Lot 6 DP 21331 Location 39 Lennox Street CASINO Development Subdivision Approval Date 11/04/2008 Estimated Cost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0163 Applicant Ardill Payne & Partners Owner(s) PF & AI Connolly Parcel Description Lot 1 DP 790146 Location 39 Woodburn Street EVANS HEAD Development Demolition of Existing Service Station, Construction

of Supermarket, refurbishment of existing 4 shops Approval Date 15/04/2008 Estimated Cost $920,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0297 Applicant M Stebbings Owner(s) A & RM Flegler Developments Pt Parcel Description Lot 10 DP 1118254 Location Pennefather Close YORKLEA Development Dwelling & Swimming Pool Approval Date 15/04/2008 Estimated Cost $241,133.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0304 Applicant RWJ Murray Owner(s) RWJ & RK Murray Parcel Description Lot 11 DP 1118254 Location Pennefather Close YORKLEA Development Dwelling Approval Date 15/04/2008 Estimated Cost $262485.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -



DA No 2008/0315 Applicant TG Aleckson Owner(s) WD & TJ Rooney Parcel Description Lot 11 DP 5105 Location 17 Colches Street CASINO Development Dwelling Additions Approval Date 15/04/2008 Estimated Cost $36,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0316 Applicant NJ Wall Owner(s) NJ & RL Wall Parcel Description Lot 11 DP 1063513 Location Hereford Drive NORTH CASINO Development Dwelling & Swimming Pool Approval Date 15/04/2008 Estimated Cost $280,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2007/0373 Applicant Envirolink Consulting Owner(s) AW Lamont Parcel Description Lot 1 DP 590689 Location 85 Schielers Road CLOVASS Development Boundary Adjustment Approval Date 17/04/2008 Estimated Cost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0318 Applicant W Forster Owner(s) J Roots Parcel Description Part Lot 355 DP 755624 Location 59 Donaldson Street WOODBURN Development Garage Approval Date 17/04/2008 Estimated Cost $24,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0324 Applicant Ballina Pool Shop Owner(s) R Webster Parcel Description Lot 7 Section 34 DP 758403 Location 77 Beech Street EVANS HEAD Development Swimming Pool Approval Date 17/04/2008 Estimated Cost $36,340.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0333 Applicant Perry Homes (Aust) Pty Ltd Owner(s) PJ Huet & MA Brymer Parcel Description Lot 367 DP 845394 Location 16 Thomas Crescent CORAKI Development Dwelling



Approval Date 17/04/2008 Estimated Cost $195,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0158 Applicant Ryan'O Constructions Pty Ltd Owner(s) Days Machinery Centre Pty Ltd Parcel Description Lot A DP 310394 Location 106 North Street CASINO Development Change of Use (Retailing of Steel Products) Approval Date 18/04/2008 Estimated Cost $3,500.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0335 Applicant Bovis Lend Lease Owner(s) MA & L Rotunno Parcel Description Lot 14 DP 1067252 Location 119 Barker Street CASINO Development Internal renovations Approval Date 18/04/2008 Estimated Cost $130,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0145 Applicant Perry Homes (Aust) Pty Ltd Owner(s) GW Hawkins Parcel Description Lot 2 DP 842106 Location 12-14 McDonald Street BROADWATER Development Dwelling Approval Date 21/04/2008 Estimated Cost $126000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0295 Applicant The Manager Blue Circle South Owner(s) The Manager Blue Circle South Parcel Description Part Lot DP 758236 State Rail Authority Lease 0061 Location RAILWAY LANDS CASINO Development Alterations & Additions to cement receipt & dispatch

facility Approval Date 21/04/2008 Estimated Cost $274,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0311 Applicant BJ Boulton Owner(s) BJ Boulton & BM Felton Parcel Description Lot 109 DP 755612 Location 1660 Coraki Ellangowan Road ELLANGOWAN Development Shed Approval Date 21/04/2008 Estimated Cost $30,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0331 Applicant RJ Hayes



Owner(s) SA & HC Todd Parcel Description Lot 508 DP 755624 Location 3 Ocean Street EVANS HEAD Development Dwelling Additions Approval Date 21/04/2008 Estimated Cost $35,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0347 Applicant P Robson Owner(s) Allen Taylor & Co Ltd Parcel Description Lot 1 DP 1106028 Location 25 Dargaville Drive CASINO Development Storage Shed Approval Date 21/04/2008 Estimated Cost $200,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0257 Applicant Coral Homes (Bris) Pty Ltd Owner(s) MR SJ RH & CD Trustum Parcel Description Lot 12 DP 1087247 Location 18 Casuarina Drive SWAN BAY Development Dual Occupancy Approval Date 23/04/2008 Estimated Cost $179,847.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0289 Applicant Newton Denny Chapelle Owner(s) S McLeod Parcel Description Lot 2 DP 830789 Location 380 Busbys Flat Road LEEVILLE Development Subdivision to create 2 lots Approval Date 23/04/2008 Estimated Cost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0337 Applicant Newton Denny Chapelle Owner(s) Tarongo Land Pty Ltd Parcel Description Lot 1 SP 74323 Location 1/24 Boundary Street CASINO Development Strata Subdivision Approval Date 23/04/2008 Estimated Cost - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0349 Applicant GG Barling Owner(s) JT & DA Lindsay Parcel Description Lot 6 DP 238125 Location 9 Lancaster Street CASINO Development Dwelling Alteration Approval Date 23/04/2008 Estimated Cost $16,000.00



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0279 Applicant Coastplan Consulting Owner(s) JP Benson Pty Ltd & Others Parcel Description Lot 1 DP 1112302 Location 169 Canterbury Street CASINO Development Extenions & Alterations to existing

WoolworthsSupermarket Approval Date 24/04/2008 Estimated Cost $2,100,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0330 Applicant Manifold School Owner(s) Dept of School Education Parcel Description Lot 1 DP 206580 Location Manifold Road NORTH CASINO Development Shade Sail & Storage Shed Approval Date 24/04/2008 Estimated Cost $20,620.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0338 Applicant S Pring Owner(s) S Pring Parcel Description Lot 3 DP 1087247 Location 19 Casuarina Drive SWAN BAY Development Dwelling Approval Date 28/04/2008 Estimated Cost $210,500.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DA No 2008/0277 Applicant Ryan'O Constructions Pty Ltd Owner(s) SB & TM Duncan Parcel Description Lot 38 DP 717545 Location 1170 Caniaba Road MCKEES HILL Development Farm Shed Approval Date 30/04/2008 Estimated Cost $29,785.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Conclusion Value of Delegated Applications Approved - $5,972,165.00 Attachments Nil



REVIEW OF CUSTOMER SERVICE Reference: Customer Service – Profiles, Standards; Corporate Management –

Planning Prepared by: Customer Service Co-ordinator

Background In accordance with Council’s Management Plan, this report provides an update on the functions and activities within Council’s Customer Service Section. Customer Service has been a corporate priority since 2003 and as such, has been the focus of management for a number of years. Report Issues The standards set out in Council’s Customer Service Charter applies to all Council Services and outlines the response the community and visitors can expect from Council staff. Results from the Ratepayer Resident Survey 2006 showed that on the whole, Council staff were considered courteous, helpful and professional in both face to face and phone contact with Council. Service Level Agreements between Customer Service and each Directorate were introduced in December 2005; the document clearly states the level of service and assistance provided by both parties. The agreement is updated annually in consultation with all stakeholders and signed off by Directors. While the number of customer requests received has increased since the introduction of RAMS, the number of payments made at the Casino and Evans Head Offices has declined. This is due to an increase in direct debits, B-Pay payments and Post Office availability. The table below shows the decline:

Year Casino Office Evans Head Office Remittance Payments 2002/2003 14,916 1,961 5,763

2003/2004

12,916 1,725 5,730

2004/2005

11,182 1,687 4,862

2005/2006

12,754 1,615 4,422

2006/2007

9,463 1,266 4,386

For the financial year 2006/2007, the average receipts issued at Evans Head Office was 6 receipts per day, and 38 receipts per day at the Casino Office. Development Applications received by Council in 2006/2007 totalled 462,351 were receipted at the Casino Office, 51 at the Evans Head Office and 60 applications were received by mail.



RAMS statistics consistently show that 15% of requests are received by Customer Service Counter Staff. Of the 754 Regulatory Control enquiries (dog and cat complaints, overgrown blocks and straying cattle) recorded in RAMS during the 2006/2007 period, 603 were received at the Casino Office compared to 1 recorded at the Evans Head Office. 150 calls were logged in After Hours Calls. Other key areas:

• Customer Service staff attend training courses and workshops to ensure they have the skills and knowledge to deliver quality Customer Service. Training may be in-house or by an external source.

• As part of ongoing improvements in the delivery of service, staff have been compiling a list of ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ which will be a valuable tool to assist staff with enquiries and in future on-line help for customers

• The compilation of Fact Sheets has been an ongoing project and will be available on-line in 2008.

• Customer requests (RAMS) are reported to Council on a quarterly basis, outlining the number of requests received by each Directorate, the status of requests and the method of receipt.

• Implementation of the new Customer Request System has commenced and will be introduced in October 2008.

It should be noted that customer service is an increasingly important component of “business” operations. Accordingly, the ongoing development and review of customer service issues should continue as a corporate priority of Council. Conclusion This report is an update of functions and activities undertaken by the Customer Service Section. Attachments Nil RICHMOND VALLEY HERITAGE STUDY – INFORMATION UPDATE Reference: Land Use and Planning - Programs Prepared by: Strategic Planning Officer

Background Council received a report, on 20 March 2007, for the Richmond Valley Council – A Community Based – Heritage Study, (Feb. 2007), prepared by Mrs Jane Gardiner. Council resolved to place the document and recommendations, along with the Thematic History, on public exhibition and to receive submissions. It also resolved



to notify all landowners of properties containing nominated heritage items or those that were located within nominated conservation areas. The exhibition and notification process was undertaken in June 2007 with submissions being accepted until 14 September 2007. Two hundred and ten (210) submissions were received. A draft Council report has been prepared that contains a summary of submissions, and makes recommendations on nominated heritage items and conservation areas. Report Issues As a courtesy and due to the significant interest in this matter, an advanced copy of the draft Council report was circulated to those persons/organisations that made submissions on the heritage study. As a result, 16 persons/organisations have requested indicated their desire to address Council on the issue. Due to the number seeking to address Council, it has been decided to defer presentation of the report until the Ordinary Meeting to be held on Tuesday, 17 June 2008, and to invite those persons wishing to address Council to do so at the Councillor Workshop to be held on Tuesday, 10 June 2008. Attachments Nil RECOMMENDATION Recommended that the items submitted for information be received and noted. 2008-150 RESOLVED (Cr. Wheatley/Cr. Mustow) That the above recommendation be adopted. COUNCILLORS’ QUESTIONS (IN WRITING)

The following questions had been presented to the General Manager in accordance with Council’s Code of Meeting Practice. Staff Numbers and Salaries Cr. Jeffery - “Could staff numbers and total salaries from each of the following indoor departments be provided to me (Corporate Services, Environmental Services, Works, Finance Department and Tourism)?; that’s for the 2007/2008 financial year.” The General Manager advised that the information can be provided.



Staff Wages and General Rates Cr. Jeffery – “Could the total Staff wages of the whole of Richmond Valley Council for 2007/2008 and the total amount of general rates collected for Richmond Valley Council be available to me?” The General Manager advised that the information can be provided. The Meeting closed at 3.18 p.m. CONFIRMED – 17 June 2008 CHAIRMAN

Documents

RICHMOND VALLEY COUNCIL€¦ · That the Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Richmond Valley Council, held on 15 April 2008, ... hard job if you care about what you do. The City of