Agenda of Ordinary Meeting

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Notices of Motion 9.1

Notices of Motion

Notice of Motion No. 9.1 Reducing Street Light Use

File No: I2019/1179

I move:

That Council receives a report on the implications and intricacies of turning off residential street lights and that the report considers:

a) The possible use of some streets to use as trial sites and engagement with those residing on these streets

b) The financial and emission savings

c) The human and environmental benefits

d) Any safety issues

e) Any regulatory issues

Signed: Cr Simon Richardson

Councillor’s supporting information:

Of all the energy-saving tips and house cost saving tips out there, probably the one most often repeated is to turn off the lights when you leave a room. I can hear my father’s voice saying this as I type. It’s good, simple and effective advice. However, most of us look at cities at night and bemoan the fact that every building is lit up making a city glow with light.

Our streets also contribute to this needless use of light - as all along our streets our streetlights stay on all night long, even when no one is on the street. In Australia, there are more than two million street lights illuminating the way for pedestrians and motorists: the lights burn all night and the energy bill is enormous. Consider how many street lights are permanently glowing across our Shire, consuming electricity when there is absolutely no-one in the vicinity of them; wasting electricity and releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Before and during the 2003 Northeast US blackout, a massive power outage that affected 55 million people. Photo by Todd Carlson

It is important for us to consider also the bigger picture. We humans, and the other species within the natural environment, are connected to the night sky. Protecting the night sky from light pollution is critical to the environment, wildlife, and our quality of life. Less than 100 years ago, everyone could look up and see a spectacular starry night sky. Now, millions of children across the globe will never experience the Milky Way where they live. The increased and widespread use of artificial light at night is impairing our view of the universe. When recently visiting my sister in Manhattan, my kids were both dismayed and disbelieving that one never saw the stars above and when we returned, the first thing we did we stop in the front yard and look up and soak up the night sky. It seemed almost instinctual. As celebrated by Dark Sky Tasmania, “Until recently, for all of human history, our ancestors experienced a sky brimming with stars – a night sky that inspired science, religion, philosophy, art, and literature, including some of Shakespeare’s most famous sonnets. The natural night sky is our common and universal heritage, yet it’s rapidly becoming unknown to the newest generations.

”For my part I know nothing with any certainty,

but the sight of the stars makes me dream.”

Vincent Van Gogh

Two solutions in particular are possible - one, to replace old High-Pressure Sodium (HPS) lightbulbs with new and energy-efficient Light-Emitting Diodes (LEDs) and 2; either turning the lights out entirely during the latter part of the night when fewer people are around or using sensor systems to only provide light when a pedestrian or car requires it.

It is time we consider turning off the lights when they are not needed. This is beginning to occur around the world.

Global Context

Today there are more than 280 million street lights in use around the world. That number is expected to rise to over 330 million by the year 2025.

According to the International Dark Sky Association and Dark Sky Tasmania, “In an average year in the U.S. alone, outdoor lighting uses about 120 terawatt-hours of energy, mostly to illuminate streets and parking lots. That’s enough energy to meet New York City’s total electricity needs for two years! IDA estimates that least 30 percent of all outdoor lighting in the US alone is wasted, mostly by lights that aren’t shielded. That adds up to $3.3 billion and the release of 21 million tons of carbon dioxide per year! To offset all that carbon dioxide, we’d have to plant 875 million trees annually.” (https://www.darkskytasmania.org)

Light pollution is a side effect of industrial civilisation and its effects in residential areas are significant, as the image illustrates

Image by Anezka Gocova, in “The Night Issue”, Alternatives Journal 39:5 (2013)

Europe is probably ahead of the game here, with a number of countries already installing smart street lights that have built in motion sensors.

The Netherlands' Delft University of Technology is experimenting with a new streetlight system on its campus, in which motion sensor-equipped streetlights dim to 20 percent power when no people or moving vehicles are near them. The system is said to reduce energy consumption and CO2 emissions by up to 80 percent, plus it lowers maintenance costs and reduces light pollution.

A strategy to shut off street lighting for three hours a night across Hampshire has recently been implemented, providing no lighting on residential roads between the hours of 1am and 4am every night. It will save £230,000 a year. It came into effect on April 1.

The decision will see a reduction in the authority’s carbon dioxide (CO2) output by 720 tonnes per year. Previously, the county council reduced its street lighting hours over the past few years through dimming lights on residential roads by 45 per cent from “switch-on” until 11.30pm, and 65 per cent from then until 5.30am when it’s then raised back to 45 per cent until “switch-off”.

This came after 5,444 people took part in a public consultation into the plans, as well as 141 organisations, businesses, and groups. From the report it was found that more than two-thirds of respondents supported the county council’s proposal to turn street lights off, and a 'dark period’ of between three and four hours, starting between midnight and 1am, was ‘widely supported’. The council said almost half of the respondents said that they would prefer lights to stay on at night in town and city centres, but were ‘most supportive’ of lighting being turned off in residential areas.

National Context

Adelaide is one of the first Australian jurisdictions to trial smart street lighting in Australia, with the city undertaking a trial in Pirie Street. 60 lights have been updated in Petrie Street and Hindmarsh Square.

If this trial is successful then it could lead to the technology being rolled out nationally.

Learn More:

Adelaide Smart City - Smart Lighting Trial

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZ3Cr8jR4J4

Local Context

Lowering our street light use and the resultant emission reductionists perfectly within Council’s Net Zero Emissions Strategy for Council Operations 2025.

To reduce that total greenhouse gas (GHG) figure down to net zero, Council’s strategy developed a seven-step roadmap to guide this reduction:

Step One: identify and measure emissions

Step Two: stocktake completed emissions reduction and renewable energy projects

Step Three: research potential new projects and explore implementation plan options

Step Four: research potential funding opportunities for new projects

Step Five: develop communication plans

Step Six: monitor and report annually on emissions and emissions reduction measures review

Step Seven: optimise internal processes and projects

In regards to street lighting, we have already completed Step One, identifying that within Council’s Total Emissions for 2017-2018, electricity used by Streetlights amounted to 633 tonnes, or 3.5% of the total.

It is now timely to move into Step Three and Four.

The seemingly simple but powerful act of just turning off the lights also falls within the Council’s commitment to follow its strategic decision-making hierarchy at every step of the way:

1) Avoid using energy in the first place

2) Reduce energy use of operations where possible.

I am sure that many residents would love the opportunity to participate in any trial being proposed. Perhaps a place to start could be those already identified within Council’s Sustainable Streets program.

Safety Considerations

What we don't want to do is compromise people's safety at the expense of actually looking at our environmental, financial and quality of life objectives.

Following is an extract from, IFL Science:

It seems logical to think that more people would be hit by cars and crime would rocket, if lights were turned off, but in a study looking into the public health implications of turning the lights out to save local authorities money, researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine found something quite surprising.

“We’ve got data on something like 20,000 kilometers [12,400 miles] of road, from 62 local authorities. And we have information on road traffic collisions and crime. So our analysis has got a lot of data, and we found no evidence for an increase in road traffic casualties or for crime at an area level – which wasn’t what we were expecting at all,” Dr. Phil Edwards, who co-authored the study, told IFLScience. “I was expecting to see an increase.”

This result seems counterintuitive, but when you look into it and start to pick it apart, there is some logic behind it all. “Because drivers are taking more care, they’re maybe driving into a road with no lights on and they might slow down a bit,” explains Edwards. “[It] may be that most drivers adapt their driving to the conditions. But, equally, maybe the lights going out means that there are fewer people walking down those streets. So maybe there are fewer people who could be injured.”

However, Edwards notes that there is a change that they couldn’t control for. “The other thing that we weren’t able to adjust for was that some local authorities may decide they need to improve the road in other ways,” says Edwards. “If they’re going to reduce the lighting, they might need to repaint the white stripes on the road, say, or improve signage or something.

“So if local authorities were to do those things, at the same time as the lights were changed, then we wouldn’t be able to disentangle the effect of those two things.”

The study, published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, managed to get data from local authorities on when they started either turning street lights off at midnight, dimming them by 25%, or switching from old-fashioned orange lights to newer white LEDs. They then used publicly available data on road traffic casualties and crime rates to map month by month when and where accidents and crimes occurred. They then looked at whether there was an associated change when the street lights changed. They found no difference.

Edwards does warn, however, that this doesn’t mean that local authorities should all start turning their street lights off to save on money and reduce their carbon footprint; each street will have to be assessed for other risks, such as how fast the traffic is at night on each particular road. They will also need to take into account the views of the local residents, as the study also found that people living in the country were far more open to having street lights turned off compared to those living in cities.

Learn More:

Turning Street Lights Off At Night Had No Effect On The Number Of Road Accidents Or Crime Rate

https://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/turning-street-lights-night-had-no-effect-number-road-accidents-or-crime-rate/

Environmental Considerations

Plants and animals depend on Earth’s daily cycle of light and dark rhythm to govern life-sustaining behaviors such as reproduction, nourishment, sleep, and protection from predators. Scientific evidence suggests that artificial light at night has negative and deadly effects on many creatures including amphibians, birds, mammals, insects, and plants.

Recently, a team of experts at York and Newcastle universities were interested in finding out how moths might be affected by switching off lights and new LED lighting, as they play an important role as night-time pollinators of a wide range of flowers, and have declined in abundance by 40% in 40 years.

Light pollution, from street lights and other sources, has been suggested as a possible cause of this decline, though there are other factors such as climate change and habitat loss.

Previous research showed that under HPS street lighting left on all night, moths were distracted from visiting flowers and instead flew higher up, around street lights. This resulted in less pollen being carried by moths in lit areas, and a subsequent study by Swiss researchers demonstrated that this actually caused reduced fruit production.

Now, data suggests that street lights are also directly thwarting night-time pollination, by attracting moths upwards, away from the fields and hedgerows. It was found that the abundance of moths at ground level was halved in lit areas, while flight activity at the height of the street light was nearly doubled. The diversity of species was also reduced at ground level, with 25% fewer moth species in lit areas, compared to places without street lighting.

This change is likely to disrupt nighttime pollination by moths, and indeed moths may carry less pollen, from fewer plant species, in lighted streets. This could mean that the impacts of street lights go beyond posing a health risk to moths. Plants that rely on moths for pollination would also suffer if their reproduction is impeded – and this might, in turn, affect organisms that eat those plants or drink their nectar.

There’s no evidence that the switch from HPS lights to LEDs increases the negative impacts of lighting on wildlife, and even better, switching to part-night lighting actually appears to reduce them. By switching lights off at midnight there is the potential to tackle two issues at once – reduce energy bills and the ecological impact of light pollution.

Learn More:

http://theconversation.com/pollinators-switch-street-lights-off-at-midnight-to-help-moths-and-nocturnal-wildlife-110114

Fatal attraction: how street lights prevent moths from pollinating, theconversation.com

Moving forward

It seems reasonable to follow these basic principles when it comes to providing street lighting whilst minimising the harmful effects of light pollution:

1. Only be on when needed

2. Only light the area that needs i

3. Be no brighter than necessary

To help get us there, it is important we undertake as much collaboration/coordination/partnerships between all levels of government in Australia as required. It is also important we connect and engage with regulators and residents to develop the case for change. We need to determine what, if any regulations may require amendment. We need to determine which roads are appropriate for change and how to incorporate street lighting being turned off within the existing infrastructure, and we need to determine the benefits.

If we can play a part in showing some leadership in how we can use street lights more appropriately, and help society in its journey to becoming carbon neutral, this may be a really good way forward.

Staff comments by Evan Elford, Acting Manager Works, Infrastructure Services:

(Management Comments must not include formatted recommendations – resolution 11-979)

Manager Works and Manager Environment & Economic Planning will coordinate a cross directorate response to identify key stakeholders, review legislative and resource requirements including financial and budget implications and report initial findings to Council for consideration.

Financial/Resource/Legal Implications:

The full extent of financial, resource and legal requirements are unknown at this stage.

Is the proposal consistent with any Delivery Program tasks?

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 1: We have infrastructure, transport and services which meet our expectations

1.2

Provide essential services and reliable infrastructure which meet an acceptable community standard

Community Objective 3: We protect and enhance our natural environment

3.2

Strive to become a sustainable community

3.2.1

Work towards Council's zero-emissions target

3.2.1.1

Implement Net Zero Emissions Strategy for Council Operations 2025

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - General Manager 13.1

Staff Reports - General Manager

Report No. 13.1 Licence to Scouts Australia NSW for occupation of the Mullumbimby Scout Hall

Directorate: General Manager

Report Author: Paula Telford, Leasing and Licensing Coordinator

File No: I2019/983

Summary:

The Scout Association of Australia trading as Scouts Australia NSW has requested a new two year licence with option of an additional two year over the Mullumbimby Scout Hall, 2 River Terrace Mullumbimby upon termination of their current licence on 30 September 2019.

The proposed licence and term is consistent with the Plan of Management over the land.

This report recommends that Council provide fully subsidised rent and other outgoings to Scouts Australia NSW. The report also recommends that the proposed licence authorise Scouts Australia NSW to hire out the Scout Hall, at its discretion (but consistent with the Plan of Management) to generate revenue to cover Licensee outgoings.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council grant a two year premises licence with a two year holding over option, for the purpose of a scout hall to The Scout Association of Australia t/as Scouts Australia NSW over part of Lot 321 DP 755692 known as the Mullumbimby Scout Hall.

2. That Council authorise the publication of the proposed two year licence with two year holding over option for the purpose of a scout hall for a period of 28 days for public comment.

3. That in the event that no comments to the proposed licence are received, Council delegate to the General Manager the authority to enter into the licence referred to in 1 above with the following minimum conditions:

a) term two years with a maximum two year holding over;

b) annual rent of $16,200 is fully subsidised by Council as a section 355 donation;

c) outgoings of general rates and fixed water and sewer charges be also fully subsidised by a section 355 donation;

d) all licence preparation fees be met by Council;

e) the Licensee pay outgoings of water, sewer and waste management user charges;

f) general maintenance costs be paid for by the Licensee;

g) authorise the Licensee to hire out the Mullumbimby Scout Hall at its discretion (but consistent with the Plan of Management) and annually report to Council on it hiring function.

4. That in the event that comments are received on the proposed licence a new report be tabled at Council’s October meeting.

REPORT

Community Land and Plan of Management:

Lot 321 DP 755692, 2 River Terrace Mullumbimby, is Council owned land classified as community land and categorised for general community use. The Mullumbimby Scout Hall, a Council owned building, is located on the land.

The Generic Plan of Management for Community Land Categorised as General Community Use – Community Facilities, (POM) expressly permits Council to grant a license for a term not greater than 21 years for purposes consistent with the core objectives of land categorised for general community use.

Core objectives requires the land to be used for the provision of facilities for current and future community needs in relation to public recreation and the physical, cultural, social and intellectual welfare or development.

A license to The Scout Association of Australia trading as Scouts Australia NSW for the purpose of providing youth development activities in the facility is consistent with the core objectives of general community.

The Propose License:

The current licence held by Scouts Australia NSW over the Mullumbimby Scout Hall will expire on 30 September 2019. Scouts Australia NSW requests a two year license with an option of an additional two years. The proposed license term is consistent with expressed authority in the POM.

In accordance with the POM, terms of the proposed license will require to Licensee to:

i. manage the facility that ensures multi and shared uses of the facility;

ii. generally maintain the facility;

iii. hire out the facility to other community groups for appropriate purposes; and

iv. annually report to Council the number of hires/users of the facility

Council staff recommends a two year premises license over the facility only with an option to hold over for an additional two years.

Subsidies:

a) Rent:

The Scouts Australia NSW is a registered charity (57 030 516 857) and is eligible for fully subsidised rent. Market rent for the facility is calculated on 6% of the unimproved capital value being $16,200. Council would need to provide fully subsided rent as section 356 donation to the fully value of $16,200.

In accordance with Council’s Policy section 356 donations – rates, water and sewerage charges, Council will also subsidise 100% of general rates and fixed water and sewer charges.

b) Outgoings:

The license will require Scouts Australia NSW, at its cost, pay for all water, sewer and waste management user charges and hold public liability insurance to the minimum value of $20 million. Scouts Australia NSW, at its cost, must insure all owned fitting and fixtures for full replacement value and meet the general maintenance costs to the facility. General maintenance will include facility cleaning including cleaning of gutters, repair of all broken glass, replacement of electric light bulbs, minor repairs to electricity points and switches, minor vandalism and all graffiti, annual pest inspection and pest control, plumbing blockages located within the facility, hygiene and sanitary services and supplies and facility security.

c) Hiring of the Facility

The POM expressly authorised the licensee to hire out the facility to community groups to ensure multi-and shared use of the facility. The licence will provide Scouts Australia NSW full discretion (but consistent with the Plan of Management) in hiring out the facility so that sufficient revenue can be generating to cover licensee outgoings.

Direct Negotiation:

A proposed license for a term of less than five years need not be granted by a tender under s46A (3) of the Local Government Act, where the license is granted to a not-for-profit organisation. Scouts Australia NSW is a registered charity.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	L2		CSP Strategy	L3		DP Action		L4		OP Activity
Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community		2.2	Support access to a wide range of services and activities that contribute to the wellbeing of all members of the Byron Shire community		2.2.2		Support and facilitate accessible, high quality early childhood education and activities	2.2.2.1	Improve direct service provision and sector development to provide quality accredited early childhood education

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

s46A Means of granting leases, licences and other estates

(1) A plan of management is to specify, in relation to the community land to which it applies, any purposes for which a lease, licence or other estate may be granted only by tender in accordance with Division 1 of Part 3.

(2) Nothing in this section precludes a council from applying a tender process in respect of the grant of any particular lease, licence or estate.

(3) A lease or licence for a term exceeding 5 years may be granted only by tender in accordance with Division 1 of Part 3, unless it is granted to a non-profit organisation.

s47A Leases, Licences and other Estates in respect of Community land Term of 5 Years of Less

(1) This section applies to a lease, licence or other estate in respect of community land granted for a period that (including any period for which the lease, licence or other estate could be renewed by the exercise of an option) does not exceed 5 years, other than a lease, licence or other estate exempted by the regulations.

(2) If a council proposes to grant a lease, licence or other estate to which this section applies:

(a) the proposal must be notified and exhibited in the manner prescribed by section 47, and

(b) the provisions of section 47 (3) and (4) apply to the proposal, and

(c) on receipt by the council of a written request from the Minister, the proposal is to be referred to the Minister, who is to determine whether or not the provisions of section 47 (5)-(9) are to apply to the proposal.

(3) If the Minister, under subsection (2) (c), determines that the provisions of section 47 (5)-(9) are to apply to the proposal:

(a) the council, the Minister and the Director of Planning are to deal with the proposal in accordance with the provisions of section 47 (1)-(8), and

(b) section 47 (9) has effect with respect to the Minister's consent.

s47 Leases, licences and other estates in respect of community land—terms greater than 5 years

(1) If a council proposes to grant a lease, licence or other estate in respect of community land for a period (including any period for which the lease, licence or other estate could be renewed by the exercise of an option) exceeding 5 years, it must:

(a) give public notice of the proposal (including on the council’s website), and

(b) exhibit notice of the proposal on the land to which the proposal relates, and

(c) give notice of the proposal to such persons as appear to it to own or occupy the land adjoining the community land, and

(d) give notice of the proposal to any other person, appearing to the council to be the owner or occupier of land in the vicinity of the community land, if in the opinion of the council the land the subject of the proposal is likely to form the primary focus of the person’s enjoyment of community land.

(2) A notice of the proposal must include:

• information sufficient to identify the community land concerned

• the purpose for which the land will be used under the proposed lease, licence or other estate

• the term of the proposed lease, licence or other estate (including particulars of any options for renewal)

• the name of the person to whom it is proposed to grant the lease, licence or other estate (if known)

• a statement that submissions in writing may be made to the council concerning the proposal within a period, not less than 28 days, specified in the notice.

(3) Any person may make a submission in writing to the council during the period specified for the purpose in the notice.

(4) Before granting the lease, licence or other estate, the council must consider all submissions duly made to it.

(5) The council must not grant the lease, licence or other estate except with the Minister’s consent, if:

(a) a person makes a submission by way of objection to the proposal, or

(b) in the case of a lease or licence, the period (including any period for which the lease or licence could be renewed by the exercise of an option) of the lease or licence exceeds 21 years.

(6) If the council applies for the Minister’s consent, it must forward with its application:

• a copy of the plan of management for the land

• details of all objections received and a statement setting out, for each objection, the council’s decision and the reasons for its decision

• a statement setting out all the facts concerning the proposal to grant the lease, licence or other estate

• a copy of the public notice of the proposal

• a statement setting out the terms, conditions, restrictions and covenants proposed to be included in the lease, licence or other estate

• if the application relates to a lease or licence for a period (including any period for which the lease or licence could be renewed by the exercise of an option) exceeding 21 years, a statement outlining the special circumstances that justify the period of the lease or licence exceeding 21 years

• a statement setting out the manner in which and the extent to which the public interest would, in the council’s opinion, be affected by the granting of the proposed lease, licence or other estate, including the manner in which and the extent to which the needs of the area with respect to community land would, in the council’s opinion, be adversely affected by the granting of the proposed lease, licence or other estate.

(7) On receipt of the application, the Minister must request the Director of Planning to furnish a report concerning the application within such period as the Minister specifies.

(8) After considering the application and any report of the Director of Planning, the Minister, if satisfied that:

(a) subsections (1), (2) and (6) have been complied with, and

(b) such consent would not contravene section 46, and

(c) in all the circumstances, it is desirable to grant consent,

may consent to the granting of a lease, licence or other estate in respect of the whole or part of the land to which the application relates, subject to such terms and conditions as the Minister specifies.

(8AA) The Minister may consent to a lease or licence referred to in subsection (5) (b) only if the

Minister is satisfied that there are special circumstances that justify the period of the lease or licence exceeding 21 years.

(8A) On request by any person, the Minister must provide that person, within 14 days of that request, with a written statement of reasons for consenting to, or refusing to consent to, the granting of a lease, licence or other estate in accordance with subsection (8).

(9) The Minister’s consent is conclusive evidence that the council has complied with subsections (1), (2) and (6).

(10) For the purposes of this section, any provision made by a lease or licence, or by an instrument granting any other estate, in respect of community land, according to which the council:

(a) would suffer a disadvantage or penalty if the same or a similar lease, licence or estate

were not to be granted, for a further term, after the expiry of the current lease, licence or other estate, or

(b) would enjoy an advantage or benefit if the same or a similar lease, licence or estate were to be so granted, is taken to confer an option for renewal for a term equal to the further term.

Financial Considerations

This report is proposing that Council grants a licence to Scouts Australia NSW with rent to the value of $16,200 per annum fully subsidised by Council via a section 356 donation.

The report also proposes that Council fully subsidise 100% of fixed general rates, water and sewerage charges payable per annum and licence preparation fee of $527 inclusive of GST.

The Licensee is required to pay outgoings of all user charges for water, sewer and waste management, provide requisite public liability insurance and insure all owned fixtures and fittings. The Licensee must also cover, at its cost, all general maintenance.

Consultation and Engagement

Council is required to publically advertise the proposed license to Scouts Australia NSW for period not less than 28 days, seeking public comment on the proposed licence in accordance with s47(2) of the Local Government Act 1993.

Should comments be received by Council during the advertising period, a new report must be tabled at Council’s October meeting so that Council may consider all comments received before resolving whether or not to grant the proposed license.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - General Manager 13.2

Report No. 13.2 Establishment of Alcohol Free Zones

Directorate: General Manager

Report Author: Ralph James, Legal Counsel

File No: I2019/1069

Summary:

At its Ordinary meeting of 23 May 2019, Council resolved (19-254) to authorise the General Manager to undertake the process as outlined in Section 642-644C of the Local Government Act 1993 to establish alcohol free zones in parts of Byron Bay, Mullumbimby, Brunswick Heads, Ocean Shores, New Brighton and Suffolk Park.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That in accordance with section 644B of the Local Government Act 1993, Council adopt the proposal to establish alcohol free zones in those parts of Byron Bay, Mullumbimby, Brunswick Heads, Ocean Shores, New Brighton and Suffolk Park, as are set out in the proposal, for a period of four years commencing 1 September 2019.

2. That operation of an established alcohol-free zone be suspended for approved footway restaurants (both present and future), where the operator requests suspension of the Alcohol-Free Zone to allow alcohol to be consumed with the footway restaurant, during the restaurant’s hours of operation.

Attachments:

1 Alcohol Free Zones Advertising, E2019/49762

2 Email to Matt Kehoe - Notice of the proposal to establish alcohol free zones in Byron Local Government Area, E2019/50406

3 Email to Licence Holders - Alcohol Free Zones, E2019/49554

4 Confidential - Licensed Premises - Byron Shire - Alcohol Free Zones, E2019/58707

REPORT

Purpose of Alcohol Free Zones

The establishment of Alcohol Free Zones have been an important measure used to curtail irresponsible behaviour by individuals on the streets, not only during New Year’s Eve and Easter, but throughout the year. Due to the transient nature of many of the visitors to our Shire, education alone is not considered to be an acceptable public safety alternative. The main aim of the Alcohol Free Zones is to deter the consumption of alcoholic substances in public places (other than parks and reserves) whilst ensuring that the right of members of the public to carry alcoholic substances. Alcohol-Free Zones affect streets, roads and footpaths identified as problem areas by an applicant, then following the notification and advertising period, a resolution of Council sanctions the zone for a particular time period.

Alcohol-Free Zones do not operate in parks and reserves. Council owned and managed parks and reserves are regulated separately under Section 632A of the Local Government Act 1993 (Alcohol Prohibition Area) which allows for the installation of notices which can prohibit the taking in or consumption of alcohol and is supported by a severe fixed penalty for offenders.

Preparation of an Alcohol Free Zones proposal

Section 644 of the Local Government Act 1993 provides that Council may prepare a proposal for the establishment of an alcohol-free zone of its own motion.

The proposal may provide for an alcohol-free zone to be established for a period not exceeding 4 years and for the zone to operate for the whole of that period or just for days on which particular special events occur.

Compliance with Section 644

At its Ordinary meeting of 23 May 2019, Council resolved (19-254) that Council authorise the General Manager to undertake the process as outlined in Section 642-644C of the Local Government Act 1993 to establish the following alcohol free zones for a period of four years commencing 1July 2019:

BYRON BAY

• Jonson Street from Bay Street to Browning Street including Main Beach car park

• Browning Street from Jonson Street to Tennyson Street

• Bangalow Road from the intersection of Browning Street and Tennyson Street to the southern property boundary of Byron Tourist Park on Bangalow Road

• Kingsley Street and Carlyle Street from Jonson Street to Cowper Street

• Marvell Street from Jonson to Massinger Street

• Byron Street and Bay Lane from Jonson Street to Middleton Street

• Middleton Street from Bay Street to Kingsley Street

• Bay Street from First Sun Caravan Park boundary fence to Middleton Street

• Fletcher Street from Bay Street to Kingsley Street

• Lawson Street from Butler Street to Massinger Street

• Lighthouse Road from Massinger Street to Captain Cook Lookout eastern boundary

• Jonson Street north carpark between Bay Street and Lawson Street

• Jonson Street south carpark between Lawson Street and Railway Park

• Tennyson Street between the Sandhill’s Estate and Browning Street

• Cowper Street between Carlyle Street and the Sandhill’s Estate

• Butler Street from Shirley Street to cover whole of new Bypass area through to Browning Street

• Somerset Street from Butler Street to Wordsworth Street

• Burns Street from Butler Street to Wordsworth Street

• Wordsworth Street from Somerset Street to Gordon Street

• Gordon Street from Wordsworth Street to Milton Street

• Milton Street from Gordon Street to Wentworth Street

• Wentworth Street from Milton Street to Skinners Shoot Road

• Shirley Street from Butler Street to Kendall Street

• Ewingsdale Road from Kendall Street to Banksia Drive at the Byron Bay Industrial Estate

• Kendall Street from Shirley Street to Border Street

• Border Street from Kendall Street to Childe Street

• Childe Street from Border Street to Manfred Street

• Manfred Street from Childe Street to the frontal dune at Belongil Beach

• Giaour Street from Childe Street to Belongil Creek

• Don Street from Border Street to the frontal dune at Belongil Beach

MULLUMBIMBY

• Station Street from the unnamed lane (Lane 9) opposite the Council Chambers to Tincogan Street

• McGougan’s Lane from the unnamed lane (Lane 9) behind the southern property boundary of the commercial premises on Burringbar Street to the intersection of Tincogan Street

• Stuart Street from Whian Street intersection to Tincogan Street intersection

• Stuart Lane from Whian Street intersection to Tincogan Street intersection

• Dalley Street from Whian Street intersection to Tincogan Street intersection

• Gordon Street from Burringbar Street intersection to Tincogan Street intersection

• Burringbar Street from Gordon Street intersection to Station Street intersection

• River Terrace from Burringbar Street intersection to Whian Street intersection

• Tincogan Street from Gordon Street intersection to Station Street intersection

• Whian Street from River Terrace intersection to Stuart Street intersection

• Brunswick Terrace from Burringbar Street to Mill Street, and Mill Street from Gordon Street to Station Street

BRUNSWICK HEADS

• Fawcett Street from Tweed Street to Park Street

• Park Street from Fawcett Street to Fingal Street

• Mullumbimbi Street from Tweed Street to the Terrace

• The Terrace from Mullumbimbi Street to Fingal Street

• Fingal Street from the Terrace to Tweed Street

• Tweed Street from Fingal Street to Fawcett Street

• South Beach Road (including the traffic bridge) between The Terrace and the end of South Beach Road including the Surf Club area

OCEAN SHORES AND NEW BRIGHTON

• Rajah Road between northern boundary of Lot 1 DP 626518 (approx 50 metres south of Bindaree Way intersection) and southern boundary of Lot 1114 DP241074 No 43 Rajah Road (approx 60 metres north east from Durroon Court)

• Ocean Shores Community Centre carpark (Lots 1154 and 1156 DP 116000)

• The Esplanade south from the intersection with The Strand to the southern boundary of Lot 5 Sec 3 DP 5318 (approx 200 metres south from the intersection)

• ‘North Head Road Carpark’ located on unnamed road New Brighton

SUFFOLK PARK

• Clifford Street between Broken Head Road and Alcorn Street

• Armstrong Street between Clifford Street and Wareham Street

• Brandon Street between Clifford Street and Wareham Street

• Alcorn Street between Clifford Street and southern boundary of the community titled property at No. 2 Alcorn Street

• Broken Head Road from Clifford Street to the northern boundary of the Serviceman’s Home property

• Beech Drive (south) from Broken Head Road to the northern property boundary of Lot 60 DP 817888 being the Council Reserve on Beech Drive

Notice of a Proposal

Section 644A of the Local Government Act 1993 provides that after preparing a proposal under section 644, Council may, by notice published:

(a) declare that it proposes to establish an alcohol-free zone, indicating the location of the zone and the proposed period or special events for which it will operate, and

(b) state the place at which, the dates on which and the times during which a copy of the proposal may be inspected, and

(c) invite representations and objections from persons and groups within the area, indicating that any representations or objections by them must be made within 14 days after the date on which the notice is published.

Council must give a copy of its proposal to each of the following persons, indicating that any representations or objections by the person must be made within 30 days after the date on which the copy is given:

(a) the officer in charge of the police station within or nearest to the proposed alcohol-free zone,

(b) each holder of a licence in force under the Liquor Act 2007 for premises that border on, or adjoin or are adjacent to, the proposed alcohol-free zone.

Council must consider all representations and submissions that are duly made to it under this section.

Compliance with Section 644A

A notice of the proposal was published in the Byron Shire Echo on 5 June 2019–see attachment 1. Submissions closed on Friday 5 July 2019.

On 24 May 2019 an email, attachment 2, was forwarded to Detective Inspector Kehoe, Officer in Charge Tweed Byron Police District.

On 27 May 2019 an email, the generic form of which is attachment 3 was forwarded to all of the persons/entities listed in confidential attachment 4.

A number of inquiries were received and responded to.

No submissions have been made.

Resolution to formally establish Alcohol Free Zones

Section 644B of the Local Government Act 1993 provides that after complying with the procedures set out in sections 644 and 644A, Council may, by resolution, adopt a proposal to establish an alcohol-free zone.

Council’s resolution has the effect of establishing the alcohol-free zone in accordance with the terms of the resolution.

After making the resolution, Council must, by notice published:

(a) declare that an alcohol-free zone has been established, and

(b) specify the period (or, in the case of a zone established for one or more special events, the day or days) for which the alcohol-free zone is to operate.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	L2	CSP Strategy	L3	DP Action	L4	OP Activity
Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community	2.4	Enhance community safety and amenity while respecting our shared values	2.4.3	Enhance public safety, health and liveability through the use of council's regulatory controls and services	2.4.3.1	Monitor, investigate and resolve complaints in relation to community safety, land use and the environment

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

The re-establishment of the Alcohol Free Zones allows the NSW Police and Council Enforcement Officers to continue to regulate street drinking within the declared roads and public car parks.

Local Government Act

642 Confiscation of alcohol in alcohol-free zones

(1) A police officer or an enforcement officer may seize any alcohol (and the bottle, can, receptacle or package in which it is contained) that is in the immediate possession of a person in an alcohol-free zone if:

(a) the person is drinking alcohol in the alcohol-free zone, or

(b) the officer has reasonable cause to believe that the person is about to drink, or has recently been drinking, alcohol in the alcohol-free zone.

(2) Any alcohol or thing seized under this section is, by virtue of the seizure, forfeited:

(a) if seized by a police officer--to the State, or

(b) if seized by an enforcement officer--to the council that employs the officer.

(3) Any alcohol seized under this section may:

(a) be disposed of immediately by tipping it out of the bottle, can, receptacle or package in which it is contained, or

(b) be otherwise disposed of in accordance with directions given by the Commissioner of Police or the council (as the case requires).

(4) In this section:

"enforcement officer" means an employee of a council authorised in writing by the Commissioner of Police to be an enforcement officer for the purposes of this section.

644 Proposal for establishment of alcohol-free zone

(1) A council may prepare a proposal for the establishment of an alcohol-free zone, either on its own motion or on the application of one or more of the following people:

(a) a person who the council is satisfied is a representative of a bona fide community group active in the area,

(b) a police officer,

(2) The application must be in the form set out in the guidelines in force under section 646 or, if there are no such guidelines, in the approved form.

(3) The proposal must comply with the guidelines (if any) in force under section 646.

(4) The proposed alcohol-free zone may comprise either or both of the following:

(a) a public road or part of a public road,

(b) a public place that is a car park or part of a car park.

(5) The proposal may provide for an alcohol-free zone to be established for a period not exceeding 4 years and for the zone to operate for the whole of that period or just for days on which particular special events occur.

644A Public consultation on proposal to establish alcohol-free zone

(1) After preparing a proposal under section 644, the council may, by notice published in a manner that the council is satisfied is likely to bring the notice to the attention of members of the public in the area as a whole or in a part of the area that includes the zone concerned:

(a) declare that it proposes to establish an alcohol-free zone, indicating the location of the zone and the proposed period or special events for which it will operate, and

(b) state the place at which, the dates on which and the times during which a copy of the proposal may be inspected, and

(2) The council must give a copy of its proposal to each of the following persons, indicating that any representations or objections by the person must be made within 30 days after the date on which the copy is given:

(a) the officer in charge of the police station within or nearest to the proposed alcohol-free zone,

(b) each holder of a licence in force under the Liquor Act 2007 for premises that border on, or adjoin or are adjacent to, the proposed alcohol-free zone.

(3) If required to do so by the guidelines in force under section 646, the council must also give a copy of its proposal to the Anti-Discrimination Board, indicating that any representations or objections by the Board must be made within 40 days after the date on which the copy is given.

(4) The council must consider all representations and submissions that are duly made to it under this section.

644B Establishment of alcohol-free zones

(1) After complying with the procedures set out in sections 644 and 644A, the council may, by resolution, adopt a proposal (with or without modifications) to establish an alcohol-free zone.

(2) The resolution has the effect of establishing the alcohol-free zone in accordance with the terms of the resolution.

(3) After making the resolution, the council must, by notice published in a manner that the council is satisfied is likely to bring the notice to the attention of members of the public in the area as a whole or in a part of the area that includes the zone concerned:

(a) declare that an alcohol-free zone has been established, and

(b) specify the period (or, in the case of a zone established for one or more special events, the day or days) for which the alcohol-free zone is to operate.

(4) An alcohol-free zone may be re-established from time to time, in accordance with this Part, for further periods each not exceeding 4 years.

644C Operation of alcohol-free zones

(1) An alcohol-free zone operates, in accordance with the terms of the resolution establishing the zone, for the whole of the period specified in the resolution or just for specified days on which particular special events occur.

(2) However, an alcohol-free zone cannot operate earlier than 7 days after the first publication of the relevant notice under section 644B.

(3) An alcohol-free zone operates only so long as there are erected at the outer limits of the zone, and at suitable intervals within the zone, conspicuous signs:

(a) stating that the drinking of alcohol is prohibited in the zone, and

(b) specifying the period (or, in the case of a zone established for one or more special events, the day or days) for which the alcohol-free zone is to operate, as specified in the resolution by which it was established.

(4) The signs must comply with the requirements of the guidelines (if any) in force under section 646.

645 Suspension or cancellation

(1) The council may, at the request of any person or body or of its own motion, suspend the operation of an alcohol-free zone by publishing notice of the suspension in a manner that the council is satisfied is likely to bring the notice to the attention of members of the public in the area as a whole or in a part of the area that includes the zone concerned.

(2) During the period indicated in such a notice as the period of suspension, the zone does not operate as an alcohol-free zone.

(3) In like manner the council may at any time cancel the operation of an alcohol-free zone.

Financial Implications

Signs for the existing alcohol-free areas already exist. More, and some larger signs, will be required.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - General Manager 13.4

Report No. 13.4 Lease for Massinger Street Treehouse

Directorate: General Manager

Report Author: Paula Telford, Leasing and Licensing Coordinator

File No: I2019/1071

Summary:

Council, by resolution (18-271) granted a one year lease the Ms Coppin for occupation of the Massinger Street Byron Bay road reserve for a children’s treehouse at a nominal rent of $1 per year. The current lease expires on 30 September 2019. Ms Coppin has requested a new lease.

Council resolved (19-225) to publically advertise a new one year lease to Ms Coppin for the treehouse for a period of 28 days. Council received one submission objecting to the grant of ongoing tenure for the treehouse asserting that Council is negligent by granting tenure for a children’s play equipment built on a public road and that the play equipment does not comply Australian Standards.

This report considers all issues raised in the submission and recommends that Council refuse to grant ongoing tenure to Ms Coppin for the children’s treehouse built on Massinger Street.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council, refuse to grant Ms Mell Coppin a new lease over part of the Massinger

Street Byron Bay road reserve adjoining 77 Massinger Street Byron Bay because:

a) compliance with Australian Standard AS 4685 for children’s play equipment is not possible; and

b) there remains uncertainty as to whether Ms Coppin can effect adequate public liability insurance coverage for the structure built on Council owned land.

Attachments:

1 Summary of Australian Standard AS 4685, E2019/52127

2 Confidential - Certificate of Currency, public liability insurance M Coppin for 2019-20 year., E2019/58712

3 Confidential - Signed letter to Mell Coppin re Council's position on refusing to grant a new lease for the treehouse on the Massinger St road reserve., E2019/52210

REPORT

Current tenure:

Ms Coppin holds a lease to occupy part of the Massinger Street road reserve adjacent to No. 77 for a children’s treehouse. The lease expires on 30 September 2019. Ms Coppin has requested a new lease.

Council resolved (19-225) at its 23 May 2019 meeting:

1. That Council authorise the General Manager to negotiate a licence with Ms Mell Coppin over an unused portion of road reserve adjoining 77 Massinger Street Byron Bay on the following terms:

a) term one (1) year;

b) for the purpose of a children’s treehouse; and

c) annual rent $1.00 if requested.

2. That Council authorise the publication of the proposed one year licence to Ms Mell Coppin for a period of 28 days in accordance with s154(2)(c) of the Roads Act 1993.

3. That in the event no submissions are received, Council delegate to the General Manager the authority to enter into a licence referred to in 1 above.

4. That if submissions are received that a new report be reported to Council at its August ordinary meeting.

Public consultation:

Council publically advertised the proposed licence from 5 June to 3 July 2019 and received one submission.

A summary of the submission is tabled below:

Objecting submission:	Council reply
The lease for a cubby house on a road reserve near a busy road is not a good idea for a playground. The cubby house is an inviting structure that may entice children to play in it and should be relocated.	Council notes the objection. Council acknowledges that the grant of a lease authorising a private structure on a Council owned road does set a precedent should future applications be lodged. Massinger Street is a collector road with a higher traffic flow than a local road due to access to the beach and lighthouse. Compliance with Australian Standard AS 4685 in regard to a soft fall impact zone under children’s play equipment is required. Council notes this objection. Electricity is not to be connected to the treehouse and Council will investigate. Timber used for children’s play equipment is limited by Australian Standard AS 4685:2014. Evidence that the timber structure is regularly maintained to prevent slitting and splintering would be required. Council notes this objection.
Objections based on 2 areas: A. A public road reserve belongs to the public and should not be leased to private sphere and to do so will establish a precedent for future leases over public land. The erecting of a cubby house on a public road reserve and then leasing it sets a precedent for anyone to erect a dwelling of any type to colonise a public road reserve and makes it difficult for Council to reject the next application. B. The safety of children, the likely users of the cubby house, under the following seven safety concerns: 1. Proximity of cubby house to a busy road is negligent. The cubby house is located 3 metres from a busy road, there is a danger of children running onto the road and being run-over, who is responsible if this occurs, Council or the lessee, either way it is negligent to have a cubby house on a busy road. 2. Cubby house does not comply with Australian Safety Standards (‘ASS’) being a structure higher than 0.5 metre then a soft fall should be installed to 1.4 metres out from the structure. The cubby house does not comply with ASS. 3. Lack of safety and compliance with the ASS. Under the cubby house are two large rocks that a person may hit should they fall from the cubby house. 4. A lease cannot supervise children playing in the cubby house. The cubby house is an inviting structure and may entice children to play in it, how will the lease supervise any child engaging in the cubby? 5. Serious safety issue with electricity connected to the cubby house for people playing in or near the cubby, how will the lease supervise to ensure no child comes to harm? 6. Is the cubby house sturdy, what happens if a child from the public plays in the structure and the timber splits, cracks or splinters the child, who is responsible 7. Cubby houses are built for children therefore how Council could possibly have approved a 12 month lease in the past for this structure. Aware of Council’s request to dismantle but not Council’s approval to lease the structure. Strongly object to the cubby house being in the location on grounds of safety and colonisation of public land by private people.

Objecting submission:

Council reply

The lease for a cubby house on a road reserve near a busy road is not a good idea for a playground. The cubby house is an inviting structure that may entice children to play in it and should be relocated.

Council notes the objection.

Council acknowledges that the grant of a lease authorising a private structure on a Council owned road does set a precedent should future applications be lodged.

Massinger Street is a collector road with a higher traffic flow than a local road due to access to the beach and lighthouse.

Compliance with Australian Standard AS 4685 in regard to a soft fall impact zone under children’s play equipment is required.

Council notes this objection.

Electricity is not to be connected to the treehouse and Council will investigate.

Timber used for children’s play equipment is limited by Australian Standard AS 4685:2014. Evidence that the timber structure is regularly maintained to prevent slitting and splintering would be required.

Council notes this objection.

Objections based on 2 areas:

A. A public road reserve belongs to the public and should not be leased to private sphere and to do so will establish a precedent for future leases over public land.

The erecting of a cubby house on a public road reserve and then leasing it sets a precedent for anyone to erect a dwelling of any type to colonise a public road reserve and makes it difficult for Council to reject the next application.

B. The safety of children, the likely users of the cubby house, under the following seven safety concerns:

1. Proximity of cubby house to a busy road is negligent. The cubby house is located 3 metres from a busy road, there is a danger of children running onto the road and being run-over, who is responsible if this occurs, Council or the lessee, either way it is negligent to have a cubby house on a busy road.

2. Cubby house does not comply with Australian Safety Standards (‘ASS’) being a structure higher than 0.5 metre then a soft fall should be installed to 1.4 metres out from the structure. The cubby house does not comply with ASS.

3. Lack of safety and compliance with the ASS. Under the cubby house are two large rocks that a person may hit should they fall from the cubby house.

4. A lease cannot supervise children playing in the cubby house. The cubby house is an inviting structure and may entice children to play in it, how will the lease supervise any child engaging in the cubby?

5. Serious safety issue with electricity connected to the cubby house for people playing in or near the cubby, how will the lease supervise to ensure no child comes to harm?

6. Is the cubby house sturdy, what happens if a child from the public plays in the structure and the timber splits, cracks or splinters the child, who is responsible

7. Cubby houses are built for children therefore how Council could possibly have approved a 12 month lease in the past for this structure. Aware of Council’s request to dismantle but not Council’s approval to lease the structure.

Strongly object to the cubby house being in the location on grounds of safety and colonisation of public land by private people.

Refusal to grant ongoing tenure:

Section 156(1) of the Roads Act 1993 demands that Council consider all submissions duly made in regard to the proposed tenure and may grant the tenure either with or without alteration, or may refuse to grant the tenure.

This report recommends that Council refuse to grant ongoing tenure to Ms Coppin for occupation of part of the Massinger Street road reserve for a children’s treehouse on the following grounds:

Compliance with Australian Standards for children’s play equipment.

In relation to Australian Standard AS 4685 the report author sought advice from Council’s Asset Maintenance & Inspection Officer.

Advice is that AS 4685 requires the installation of soft fall material in the fall impact zone under children’s play equipment built greater than 600mm above ground level. The size of the impact zone is relative to the height of the play equipment. The treehouse structure, at its highest point is 2.1 metres from the ground and 2.3 metres from the kerb of Massinger Street.

When calculating the fall zone for play equipment the fall impact zone is 2.5 metres minimum from the edge of the equipment. In this case the fall impact zone would need to factor in the possibility that a child could fall from the roof of the treehouse therefore the actual fall impact zone extends beyond the kerb onto the bitumen road surface.

Soft fall depth would also need to be > 350mm. Advice is that soft fall to this depth could not be contained without presenting drainage issues during heavy downpours.

As a result compliance with AS 4685 is not possible.

A summary of Australian Standard AS 4685 for playground equipment and surfacing is attachment 1.

Council may be exposed to an argument that it is not exercising reasonable care and skill in granting ongoing tenure for a children’s treehouse build on a public road. As stated above, the children’s treehouse is located, at its closest, 2.3 metres from the bitumen edge of Massinger Street, as shown below. There is a risk that children playing in or being attracted to the treehouse may accidentally run onto busy Massinger Street. It is open to argument that the risk of harm is foreseeable because of the location of the treehouse.

No barrier may be erected on the road reserve to prevent children playing in or being attracted to the treehouse from running onto the busy road because any barrier would also prevent the public accessing the road reserve.

Council is aware that the public uses the section of road reserve adjacent to 77 Massinger Street having previously received complaints about attempts to prevent public access at that location.

Council staff recommend that Council refuse to grant ongoing tenure for the children’s treehouse on the grounds that compliance with Australian Standard AS 4685 is not possible.

Public liability insurance

Council’s insurers have advised that the treehouse owner must provide public liability insurance that expressly states that the cover extends over Council owned land. The certificate of currency provided by Ms Coppin does not expressly state the coverage extends over Council owned land. It notes an interest by Council but falls short of an expression of coverage of the nature which Council has been advised to obtain.

A copy of the certificate of currency is confidential attachment 2.

There remains uncertainty that Ms Coppin can obtain adequate public liability insurance coverage for the treehouse built on Council owned land.

Procedural fairness

Council must afford Ms Coppin procedural fairness and a reasonable opportunity to put her case or to show cause why Council should not refuse to grant a further lease for the children’s treehouse.

Accordingly, Council wrote to Ms Coppin on 16 July 2019 detailing its position, in general terms as set out above, and requested that Ms Coppin provide written comment on or before 9 August 2019. Any comment which Ms Coppin chooses to make will be made available to Councillors in advance of its ordinary meeting.

The letter also advised Ms Coppin that she has opportunity to speak at public access by contacting Council.

A copy of Council’s letter is Confidential attachment 3.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	L2	CSP Strategy	L3	DP Action	L4	OP Activity
Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community	2.2	Support access to a wide range of services and activities that contribute to the wellbeing of all members of the Byron Shire community	2.2.1	Develop and maintain collaborative relationships with government, sector and community	2.2.1.2	Participate in and inform community planning

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

153 Short-term leases of unused public roads

(1) A roads authority may lease land comprising a public road (other than a Crown road) to the owner or lessee of land adjoining the public road if, in its opinion, the road is not being used by the public.

(2) However, a lease may not be granted under this Division with respect to land that has been acquired by RMS under Division 3 of Part 12 (being land that forms part of a classified road) except by RMS.

(3) A lease granted under this Division may be terminated by the roads authority at any time and for any reason.

154 Public notice to be given of proposed lease

(1) Before granting a lease under this Division, the roads authority must cause notice of the proposed lease:

(a) to be published in a local newspaper, and

(b) to be served on the owner of each parcel of land adjoining the length of public road concerned.

(2) The notice:

(a) must identify the public road concerned, and

(b) must state that any person is entitled to make submissions to the roads authority with respect to the proposed lease, and

(c) must indicate the manner in which, and the period (being at least 28 days) within which, any such submission should be made.

156 Decision on proposed lease

(1) After considering any submissions that have been duly made with respect to the proposed lease, the roads authority may grant the lease, either with or without alteration, or may refuse to grant the lease.

(2) If the roads authority grants a lease, the roads authority must cause notice of that fact to be published in a local newspaper.

157 Special provisions with respect to short-term leases

(1) The term of a lease, together with any option to renew, must not exceed:

(a) except as provided by paragraph (b), 5 years, or

(b) in the case of a lease of land that has been acquired by the roads authority under Division 3 of Part 12, 10 years.

(2) A person must not erect any structure on land the subject of a lease under this Division otherwise than in accordance with the consent of the roads authority.

Maximum penalty: 10 penalty units.

(3) Such a consent may not be given unless the roads authority is satisfied that the proposed structure comprises a fence or a temporary structure of a kind that can easily be demolished or removed.

Financial Considerations

Nil.

Consultation and Engagement

Nil.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - General Manager 13.6

Report No. 13.6 Ardill Payne & Partners v Byron Shire Council [2019] NSWLEC 1297 4 Marvell Street Byron Bay

Directorate: General Manager

Report Author: Ralph James, Legal Counsel

File No: I2019/1081

Summary:

The Land and Environment Court proceedings were an appeal under s 8.7 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 against the deemed refusal by Council of development application 10.2017.588.1 for a mixed use development (primarily a tourist hotel) at 4 Marvell Street, Byron Bay.

Judgement was delivered in the appeal on 27 June 2019.

The court ordered that:

1. The cl 4.6 requests to vary the height and FSR standards are upheld.

2. The appeal is upheld.

3. Development Application No. 10.2017.588.1 for a mixed use development (primarily a tourist hotel) at 4 Marvell Street, Byron Bay is approved subject to conditions.

Council has 60 days from the date of judgement to lodge an appeal.

Staff have considered the judgement and initially sought advice from the solicitor who had carriage of the matter in the Land and Environment Court.

In order to have an objective view staff briefed HWL Ebsworth (long-standing members of Council’s legal services panel) to consider the judgement and advise as to the prospects of an appeal.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council note the report and the legal advice contained in Confidential attachment (E2019/52563)

2. That Council direct the General Manager not to commence a section 56A appeal against the decision.

Attachments:

1 Confidential - Legal advice on grounds of appeal and prospects of success, E2019/52563

REPORT

The appeal against the Council’s deemed refusal.

Judgement was delivered in the appeal on 27 June 2019. A copy of the judgement is available via the following link:

https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/nsw/NSWLEC/2019/1297.html

Council participated in the appeal pursuant to an authority signed by the General Manager on 23 March 2018.

The progress of the appeal was updated to Councillors monthly between April 2018 and July 2019.

The site

The site is located on the southern side of Marvell Street. Marvell Lane adjoins to the rear (south).

The site is adjoined to the east at 6 Marvell Street by a medical centre of 3 storeys with a built form element above the third storey. The medical centre has a rear car parking area accessed off Marvell Lane.

The site comprises a single rectangular lot of 1012m² currently containing an older style cottage used for commercial purposes. The site falls by some 400mm from the rear to the Marvell Street frontage.

To the west of the site is an existing single storey building operating as a Vinnie’s shop. Surrounding properties comprise a range of commercial buildings up to 3 storeys, including shop top housing and a relatively new mixed use tourist/residential/commercial development on the opposite side of Marvell Street comprising 3 levels above 2 levels of parking. In relatively close proximity, accessed off Marvell Lane, is a language school and a youth hostel.

Generally to the west of the site is the Byron town centre whilst the area to the east of Middleton Street, on either side of Marvell Street, is zoned Residential R2 and contains predominantly 1-2 storey dwellings interspersed with low scale tourist accommodation.

Notification

The application was notified but no submissions of objection were lodged.

Amended plans

In response to conciliation between the parties, amendments to the application were made with the leave of the Court. The amended application sought consent for a 4 storey mixed use building above a basement car park containing 18 cars. The uses proposed comprise a 24 room hotel with associated services and facilities (including a ground floor restaurant and rooftop pool, bar and amenities block) above 2 ground floor retail tenancies. The building is also designed to minimise impact on trees on, and adjoining, the site perimeter.

Contentions

Contentions were resolved in terms of acoustic impacts, social impact, and the adequacy of the Plan of Management. The remaining contentions in the proceedings were:

1. Whether the proposed breaches of height and FSR were justified, and whether approval to the breaches would create an undesirable precedent, particularly given they relate to a proposed fourth storey;

2. Whether the proposed development would be compatible with, or have an adverse impact on, the character of the street and area; and

3. The adequacy of the parking provided.

Height

The proposed development exceeded the maximum height in order to accommodate the lift overrun and the rooftop facilities comprising the bar, pool and amenities.

The maximum permissible height under the LEP is 11.5m. The amended application proposed to exceed this height for:

· the lift overrun to 13.87m (a 20.61% exceedance);

· to the top of the roof over the rooftop deck to 12.67m (a 10.17% exceedance); and

· up to 12.09m to the top of the pool deck (a 5.13% exceedance).

The main roof over the building was agreed to be height compliant and much of the building was below the height limit and only 3 storeys. It was the rooftop elements and lift overrun which breached the limit and constituted a partial fourth storey.

Council contended this excess height had adverse impacts on the area. The applicant disputed this.

In Council’s view, the cl 4.6 request had not demonstrated that height compliance would be unreasonable or unnecessary when a compliant building could comply with all of the relevant controls. Council did not accept that it would result in a more appropriate relationship with Marvell Street and considered 6 Marvell Street to be an anomaly in the street.

Council argued that the examples of other height breaches cited by the applicant were associated with site topography or architectural roof elements as defined in cl 5.6 of the LEP and did not constitute a fourth storey.

Council generally accepted that the development met the objectives of the zone but contended that the proposed height was not compatible with adjoining development contrary to the objectives of the height standard at cl 4.3 resulting in a bulk and scale not in harmony with such development.

Council contended that the non-compliant height added to the building’s bulk when viewed from a number of vantage points including from the nearby R2 low density residential area and questioned how any building with a 4 storey element and an activated top storey accommodating a significant number of people could be complimentary to the streetscape and character of the area where that character is development to a maximum of 3 storeys, as supported by the Master Plan for the Town Centre. The Master Plan was prepared with considerable community consultation and input.

Council’s case was that the elements which breached the maximum height could have been accommodated at a lower level rather than on the roof breaching the height. In Council’s view, there should be less tolerance from any impacts associated with the use of the rooftop area when these uses resulted in a breach of the height standard.

Further, if the uses above the maximum permitted height were approved, it would undermine the suitability of other permissible uses in the same zone being located near the rooftop bar, specifically residential accommodation in shop top housing, given the uncertainty of noise and other amenity impacts.

Council argued that there were no site constraints which cause the height breaches. What is proposed is a new building on a flat site. Rather, the height exceedances are driven by the applicant’s desire to provide 24 hotel rooms and rooftop bar and pool elements. It is the design of the ground floor which causes the height breach and there are other design options available which would allow compliance with the height standard.

In summary, Council argued that the proposal did not achieve the objectives of the height standard because:

1. a 4 storey building detracts from an area characterised by 1 to 3 storey buildings;

2. the roof form and building scale did not respond to the character of built form in the locality;

3. the Town Centre is not a major commercial area and not characterised by large multi-storey development;

4. the existing cottage on the site more closely represents the existing character of Byron Bay on the Town Centre edge;

5. the site is in a locality close to a low density residential area dominated by 1-2 storey buildings;

6. the development with a full fourth storey would have a pronounced impact in this location;

7. the proposal did not minimise the visual impact of the building in particular from distant views at ground level including from the state heritage listed Byron Bay railway yard to the west; and

8. the visual impact assessment, undertaken by the applicant, skews the perception of the fourth storey.

Floor space ratio

In Council’s view, the cl 4.6 request did not demonstrate that FSR compliance would be unreasonable or unnecessary when a compliant building with reduced floor area could comply with all of the relevant controls.

Council, while accepting that the development generally met the objectives of the zone, contended that the proposed FSR was not compatible with adjoining development contrary to the objectives of the standard at cl 4.4 resulting in a bulk and scale not in harmony with such development.

Council considered that the non-compliant FSR added to the building’s bulk when viewed from a number of vantage points including the nearby low density residential area.

Council argued that there was a shortfall in parking provision for the site which would have a traffic impact on the locality thus not meeting the FSR objective of regulating density and traffic generation.

Parking

To arrive at a required 15 car spaces to support the accommodation component of the development, Council used the DCP as a starting point. Council considered that the DCP was a more appropriate guide for parking provision than the RMS Guide as the RMS Guide was based on 1988 surveys of Sydney CBD hotels. The DCP rates were based on local knowledge and conditions and had been adopted after consultation based on submissions from the public. The RMS Guide was not a product of local information.

Precedent

Council was concerned that the approval of the development would encourage further height breaches in the area. Further, the community expected Council to impose applicable development standards and ensure that development did not generate negative impacts on the surrounding area.

If approved, this development would set a precedent that undermines the development standards that the community expects to be upheld.

In this regard, Council maintained that the development should not vary from Council standards and controls without sufficient justification as approval would set a precedent for similarly inappropriate development within the B2 zone and in the Town Centre.

Public Interest

Council did not accept that the proposal demonstrated that there would not be a negative impact on the amenity or environment of the locality. Therefore, the applicant had not demonstrated that the proposal is in the public interest.

Council argued that the proposal should be considered contrary to the public interest. It has combined non-compliances of height and FSR representing over development of the site with resultant impacts, and traffic and parking demands that have not been satisfactorily addressed.

The applicant noted that, in a community as vocal as Byron, there had been no objections to the development including from residents in the nearby R2 Low Density Residential zone. This was despite notification over an extensive area.

The applicant also argued it would allow for quality, regulated and much needed ‘legal’ tourist accommodation in an area in demand for tourist accommodation.

Decision

The Commissioner was satisfied that the requests meet the requirements of cl 4.6 and justify the variations to the standards sought and the degree of flexibility to vary the standards provided by cl 4.6(1)(a) is appropriate to apply in the circumstances, providing a better outcome for and from the development.

She found that compliance with the height and FSR standards is unnecessary in this instance as there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to warrant the breaches sought.

She found that there can be little argument that the development will meet the objectives of the B2 zone. She found that it proposes a range of uses of the kind supported in the zone and will service residents, workers and visitors (tourists). It will provide employment opportunities in a location reasonably accessible including by walkers and cyclists and, to the extent the Byron Bay Town Centre has public transport, will be accessible to that transport. Finally, it will encourage vibrancy, given the uses proposed and with the design at the ground level in particular, and it specifically proposes tourist accommodation above commercial premises, as the objectives seek.

She agreed with the statements in the cl 4.6 request that the proposed building will be of a height appropriate in the location having regard to both the existing and the future surrounding development and will, in design and use, complement the Marvell Street streetscape and character of the area being part, albeit on the edge of, a desired vibrant tourist Town Centre.

Having regard to this context, and in particular noting adjoining development is reflective of an area in transition from older single storey ‘beach’ cottages to new mixed use Town Centre development in the order of 11.5m in height, the court considered the development’s design, including its height, to be a reasonable and appropriate response.

The court found that the height breaches are associated with rooftop uses which are amenity features of a proposed tourist hotel, described as a ‘boutique’ hotel of only 24 rooms. These uses are to be accessed by a lift and served by amenities. The rooftop uses include a bar. However, the bar can only be patronised by hotel guests and diners of the ground floor restaurant, and the use of which will be managed and monitored in a 3 year trial, by conditions of consent, and by a Plan of Management.

The court did not accept that the visual impact or disruption of views as a consequence of the proposed building have not been minimised or would be unacceptable in a Town Centre location.

This is particularly given the existing adjoining development at 6 Marvell Street was agreed to negatively contribute to the streetscape and character of the area but nevertheless exists. It is highly prominent in the absence of redevelopment in the immediate vicinity to a similar height, as is proposed in this application which is on the same side of Marvell Street. Given the Town Centre location, redevelopment to the maximum height supportable by the LEP is likely in the future in this section of Marvell Street which is an area in transition.

Part of the justification provided in the cl 4.6 request, and in court’s view one of the strongest environmental planning ground stated for the height breaches (other than the height of the adjoining building at 6 Marvell Street), was that facilities that would reasonably be expected in a boutique hotel (such as a pool and bar) would generally be provided at ground floor level but have been relocated to the roof in order to provide public amenity at the ground level. This comprises a tree-lined through site link for pedestrians and cyclists activated by the adjoining ground floor restaurant and hotel foyer and containing cycle racks. The court reasoned that the through site link will not only provide public amenity but is a feature encouraged by the Town Centre Master Plan and will offer a substantially improved pedestrian and cycle link than the current use of the existing adjoining laneways, particularly associated with the youth hostel and language school in Marvell Lane.

The court did not accept that the design of the development or use of the rooftop area in the manner proposed will add anything but positive elements in the streetscape and locality.

The court found that the development was appropriate given the character of the locality in which it is situated. It is part of Byron Bay’s Town Centre which has a mix of uses, vibrant character and eclectic environment, including as a result of development in the lane at the rear, opposite and adjoining. What is proposed will only add to the character of the area in that context.

The court found that the proposed tourist hotel, with its design, range of uses and through site link, will provide an improved outcome for the area and enhance the urban environment and that rather than having an adverse impact on the street and area, the activation of the rooftop and at ground level with the restaurant and hotel lobby fronting a public thoroughfare, will make a positive contribution to the adjoining streets and lanes, and reflect the intended character sought for the Town Centre.

The court said that the development would not be a precedent which could be relied upon by other applicants for a fourth storey unless that storey comprised similar non-habitable rooftop facilities associated with tourist accommodation.

The court also said that its decision in supporting the height breach should therefore not be construed as supporting 4 storey development in the Town Centre, per se. Such an outcome would not accord with the Master Plan vision or expectations of the Byron Bay community as outlined in the Master Plan.

The court ordered that:

1. The cl 4.6 requests to vary the height and FSR standards are upheld.

2. The appeal is upheld.

3. Development Application No. 10.2017.588.1 for a mixed use development (primarily a tourist hotel) at 4 Marvell Street, Byron Bay is approved subject to conditions.

The approved conditions of consent are included in the judgement.

The question of a Council appeal

Council, being a party to proceedings in Class 1 of the Court’s jurisdiction may appeal to the Court against an order or a decision of the Court on a question of law, being an order or a decision made by a Commissioner.

Council has 60 days from the date of judgement to lodge an appeal.

Staff have considered the judgement and initially sought advice from the solicitor who had carriage of the matter in the Land and Environment Court.

In order to have an objective view staff briefed HWL Ebsworth (long-standing members of Council’s legal services panel) to consider the judgement and advise as to the prospects of an appeal.

HWL Ebsworth’s advice is Confidential attachment 1.

The two pieces of advice are consistent.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

	CSP Objective		L2		CSP Strategy	L3	DP Action	L4	OP Activity
Community Objective 5: We have community led decision making which is open and inclusive		5.6		Manage Council’s resources sustainably		5.6.13	Manage the delivery of high quality cost effective legal services	5.6.13.2	Represent Council’s legal interests

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Land and Environment Court Act

56A Class 1, 2, 3 and 8 proceedings—appeals to the Court against decisions of Commissioners

(1) A party to proceedings in Class 1, 2, 3 or 8 of the Court’s jurisdiction may appeal to the Court against an order or a decision of the Court on a question of law, being an order or a decision made by a Commissioner or Commissioners.

(2) On the hearing of an appeal under subsection (1), the Court shall:

(a) remit the matter to the Commissioner or Commissioners for determination by the Commissioner or Commissioners in accordance with the decision of the Court, or

(b) make such other order in relation to the appeal as seems fit.

(3) Notwithstanding subsection (1), an appeal shall not lie to the Court under that subsection in respect of a question of law that has been referred to, and determined by, a Judge pursuant to section 36.

Financial Considerations

In the event of a section 56A appeal costs follow the event. This means that in the event that Council is unsuccessful in any such appeal Council would be liable to pay the Respondent’s (applicant for development) costs of the Appeal (as well its own).

Consultation and Engagement

Executive Team and Councillors provided with monthly updates between April 2018 and July 2019.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - General Manager 13.7

Report No. 13.7 Railway Park Public Art

Directorate: General Manager

Report Author: Claire McGarry, Place Manager - Byron Bay

File No: I2019/1154

Summary:

In April 2019, Council began an upgrade of Railway Park in Byron Bay, which is due for completion in October 2019. The adopted detailed design for the upgrade includes a piece of public art commissioned by Council in March 2019.

This report provides Councillors with an update on the construction of the park, the design and manufacture of the sculpture that has been commissioned (Memento Aestates), and recommends reconsideration of the location of the sculpture based on changes to its form, materials and timeframes for completion.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council removes Memento Aestates from the scope of works for the upgrade of Railway Park.

2. That Council enters into further negotiations with Urban Art Projects (UAP) regarding the artwork’s final form and location.

3. That an alternative location within the Byron Bay town centre be found for Memento Aestates by including it for consideration in concept designs for:

a) Rail corridor project

b) Sandhills Estate skate park and recreation hub

c) Broader rail precinct projects

4. That the unspent project budget ($40,000) be retained in the Section 94A Public Art fund for completion of the artwork once final form and location are agreed upon.

REPORT

Background - Process

In February 2019, Council awarded the tender for the upgrade of Railway Park, which included two public art features.

The park upgrade was designed by consultant Landscape Architect Dan Plummer (Plummer and Smith) in consultation with Councillors, staff, the Byron Masterplan Guidance Group and key users of the park.

Subsequently, Council went through the process of commissioning artwork for Railway Park. The process included:

- Development of commissioning brief

- Public Expression of Interest process

- Shortlisting of Expressions of Interest

- Selection of two shortlisted artists for further concept development

- Commissioning artwork

At its 22 November 2018 meeting, Council resolved (part 18-769):

That with respect to the Public Art Panel meeting held on 11 October 2018, Council grant the preferred artist, as per attachment 1, the commission for the Railway Square Public Art project.

The commissioned artwork, Memento Aestates, is by Giovanni Veronesi working under Urban Art Projects (UAP) Brisbane.

Council staff entered into negotiations with UAP and exchanged contracts on 1 March 2019. A $40,000 deposit (50%) has been paid to UAP as per the fee structure agreed upon in the contract.

At the time of contract exchange, the delivery programs for the park upgrade and manufacture of the artwork aligned, so the piece could be installed as part of the park construction works.

Since then, further discussions with the Public Art Panel regarding material and form of the artwork have meant that the Railway Park upgrade will be completed and the park re-opened at least three months prior to the artwork being ready for installation.

Railway Park

Construction to upgrade Railway Park began in May 2019. It is a $2.1 million project designed to revitalise the park and surrounding precinct as a community gathering and public recreation space. Construction is on track to be completed by October 2019.

The upgrade of the park features a number of key components, including:

· Bespoke nature-based playground

· Central cottonwood feature including site-specific bespoke wooden seating and complementary brickwork

· Arakwal artwork sandblasted into pavers through and around the park

· Native title statement plaque at key entry point to the park

As construction of the park has progressed and these feature elements have begun to fall into place, advice from Dan Plummer, landscape architect for the project, is that an additional sculpture in the park is not a good design outcome – both aesthetically (in terms of overcrowding the space), but also in terms of sight lines and allowing the Arakwal artwork to be the key artistic and cultural feature within the space.

Based on this advice and changes to the timeframe for the artwork’s design and manufacture, it is recommended that Memento Aestates be removed from the scope of works for Railway Park.

It is important to note that the other public art element – the Arakwal artwork – remains in the scope of works for the park and will be delivered within the construction timeframe.

Next Steps

A status update from UAP at the end of July 2019 indicated that they are 75% through phase one of a nine-phase design and manufacture process. That is to say, while a 50% deposit has been paid, the overall project delivery is approximately 10% completed.

There are a significant number of major projects happening within the Byron town centre over the coming two years, including a number specifically within the ‘rail precinct’. These include:

- Railway Park upgrade

- Rail corridor revitalisation and opening

- Byron Bay bus interchange

- Sandhills Estate skate park and recreation hub

- Landscaping and upgrade works throughout the town centre

Based on the changes in the scope of works and the number of other projects being constructed in the town centre over the next 2 years, it is recommended that:

1. Council enters into further negotiations with UAP regarding the artwork’s final form and location; and

2. An alternative location within the Byron Bay town centre be found for the artwork by including it for consideration in concept designs in future town centre projects; and

3. That the unspent project budget ($40,000) be retained in the Section 94A Public Art fund for completion of the artwork once final form and location are agreed upon.

This recommendation was discussed at most recent meetings of the Byron Masterplan Guidance Group and the Public Art Panel, and attendees of both meetings supported the recommendation.

It is important to note that the recommendation is not to decommission the artwork, but to set a hold point in design and manufacture until materials, form and location are determined.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 1: We have infrastructure, transport and services which meet our expectations

1.2

Provide essential services and reliable infrastructure which meet an acceptable community standard

1.2.7

Implement identified projects of the Byron Bay Town Centre Master Plan

1.2.7.5

Railway Park Precinct development

Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community

2.1

Support and encourage our vibrant culture and creativity

2.1.3

Enhance opportunities for interaction with art in public spaces

2.1.3.1

Implement Public Art Strategy

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Contract clauses 6, 11.2 and 17 provide the legal basis for the report recommendation that the artwork will make its best contribution to the public good in a location other than Railway Park.

Public Art Policy

Public Art Strategy

Public Art Guidelines and Criteria

Financial Considerations

A budget of $80,000 has been allocated for public art in Railway Park as part of the park upgrade.

A non-refundable $40,000 deposit has been paid to UAP.

The remaining $40,000 will be removed from the Railway Park budget and retained for completion of the artwork once final form and location are agreed upon.

Consultation and Engagement

Byron Masterplan Guidance Group
Public Art Panel

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.8

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services

Report No. 13.8 Conduct of the 2020 Local Government Election

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Heather Sills, Corporate Governance Officer

File No: I2019/18

Theme: Corporate Management

Corporate Services

Summary:

This report has been prepared to allow Council to consider the arrangements for the conduct of the 2020 Local Government Election.

The Local Government Amendment Act 2019 provided for the extension of the ‘cut-off’ date for council to make a decision on the administration of elections in 2020, and requires councils that do not enter into an arrangement with the Electoral Commissioner to engage an electoral services provider to administer elections.

Council has until 1 October 2019 to resolve to enter into arrangements with the Electoral Commissions, or an electoral services provider, to administer the 2020 ordinary council elections, and has until 1 January 2020 to enter into these arrangements.

This report recommends that Council enters into an arrangement with the NSW Electoral Commissioner to administer the 2020 Local Government Election, and any associated council polls and constitutional referenda.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council:

1. Resolves pursuant to s. 296(2) and (3) of the Local Government Action 1993 (NSW) (Act) that an election arrangement be entered into by contract for the Electoral Commissioner to administer all elections of the Council.

2. Resolves pursuant to s. 296(2) and (3) of the Act, as applied and modified by s. 18, that a council poll arrangement be entered into by contract for the Electoral Commissioner to administer all council polls of the Council.

3. Resolves pursuant to s. 296(2) and (3) of the Act, as applied and modified by s. 18, that a referendum arrangement be entered into by contract for the Electoral Commissioner to administer all constitutional referenda of the Council.

Report

The next ordinary election of Councillors is to be held on 12 September 2020. In accordance with the Local Government Amendment Act 2019, councils must determine how their elections will be administered, no later than 1 October 2019.

A council that fails to make a decision on the administration of its elections by 1 October 2019 will be required to publish a notice of that failure on its website.

Councils, in making a determination on the conduct of the election, must do so by resolution and that resolution should include the arrangement that is to be entered into. Council has until 1 January 2020 to enter into an arrangement for the administration of the election.

This report recommends that Council enters into an arrangement with the Electoral Commissioner to conduct the 2020 Council Election and any associated council polls and constitutional referenda.

The recommended resolution uses text provided by the Office of Local Government in its model resolution for councils wishing to arrange for the Electoral Commissioner to administer their elections and associated polls/referenda.

IPART Review

By way of background, the NSW Government asked IPART to recommend a costing methodology to be applied in determining the amount the NSW Electoral Commission (NSWEC) charges councils for local government election services in 2020. This is the first time IPART has reviewed these costs.

Following initial consultation, IPART has released a Draft Report which officers have responded to. In summary IPART recommends that councils pay a higher amount for NSWEC to conduct elections. Its recommended methodology for allocating the costs incurred by the NSWEC requires that:

· Councils pay for the efficient costs of contestable election services.

o The direct costs of contestable services are allocated to individual client-councils.

o Indirect costs of contestable services are allocated to all client-councils, mostly on a per-elector basis.

· The NSW Government pays for non-contestable election services as no mechanism exists to charge for these services, with the exception of ‘enrolment’ activities (i.e., the provision of a paper or electronic copy of the residential roll to the General Manager of each local government area), which should continue to be paid for by both client and non-client councils.

IPART has sought to allocate costs in a way that means NSWEC will compete on a level playing field with private providers post 2020. However this means councils would pay for 97% of the NSWEC’s costs of administering local government elections. The NSW Government (or NSW taxpayers) would cover the remaining 3%.

In contrast:

· under the NSWEC’s existing formula, councils would pay for 89% of the cost of local government elections.

· Under the NSWEC’s proposed allocation of costs, councils would pay for 62% of the cost of local government elections.

Financial considerations are noted below.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective		L2	CSP Strategy		L3	DP Action	L4	OP Activity
Community Objective 5: We have community led decision making which is open and inclusive	5.1			Engage and involve community in decision making

There are no required activities in the 2019/2020 Operational Plan, however the resolution will generate future activities in the 2020/2021 Operational Plan.

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

The Local Government Amendment Act 2019 was assented to on 24 June 2019, which provided for the extension of the ‘cut-off’ date for council to make a decision on the administration of elections in 2020, and to require councils that do not enter into an arrangement with the Electoral Commissioner to engage an electoral services provider to administer elections. Further details regarding the recent amendments to the Local Government Act 1993 are outlined in the Office of Local Government Circular 19-14.

Section 55(3) of the Act provides that a council need not invite tenders before entering into a contract with the Electoral Commissioner for the administration of the council’s elections, constitutional referendums and polls.

Where a council decides to engage an electoral services provider to conduct its elections, constitutional referendums and polls, section 296A of the Act outlines that the provider is to appoint a returning officer and a substitute returning officer, and that neither of these positions can be employees of the council. The returning officer is to appoint one or more electoral officials, who may or may not be employees of the council.

Section 296A also provides that the General Manager cannot be appointed as a returning officer, substitute returning officer or electoral official for any area.

Financial Considerations

Council will require a budget allocation in its 2019/20 budget for administration expenses and 2020/21 budget for payment for administering the election. By way of comparison, the following election expenses were incurred in the 2008, 2012 and 2016 Local Government Elections.

Election Year	Electoral Commission Costs	Other Costs	Total Election Costs
2008	$122,900	$4,290	$127,190
2012	$140,854	$2,979	$143,833
2016	$177,621	$9,575	$187,196

There is an indicative budget allocation (2020/21) for the 2020 election of $225,000. By the 2020/21 financial year, it is estimated that Council will have a reserve of $200,000 available.

If Council assumes that the percentage figures nominated by IPART were to come to fruition, the following would apply:

The cost of the 2016 election was $187,196. If that equalled 89% of the total cost, this would mean the real full cost was $187,196/89*100 = $210,300.

As a ball park to project forward, assuming inflation of 2% per year from 2016 in theory would bring the cost to the following:

2017 - $210,300*1.02 = $214,500 (rounded)

2018 - $214,500*1.02 = $218,800 (rounded)

2019 - $218,800*1.02 = $223,200 (rounded)

2020 - $223,200*1.02 = $227,700 (rounded)

Assuming then the cost of the real cost in 2020 is $227,700 and Council is responsible for 97% of the cost, this will result in an indicative election cost of $220,800 (rounded) or an additional $33,600 more than the 2016 election.

A quote from the Electoral Commission is pending and will be circulated to Councillors should this be provided prior to the Ordinary Meeting.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.9

Report No. 13.9 Investments - 1 June 2019 to 30 June 2019

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: James Brickley, Manager Finance

File No: I2019/934

Summary:

This report includes a list of investments and identifies Council’s overall cash position for the period 1 June 2019 to 30 June 2019 for information.

This report is prepared to comply with Regulation 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report listing Council’s investments and overall cash position as at 30 June 2019 be noted.

REPORT

Council has continued to maintain a diversified portfolio of investments. At 30 June 2019, the average 90 day bank bill rate (BBSW) for the month of June 2019 was 1.54%. Council’s performance to 30 June 2019 is 2.49%. This is largely due to the active ongoing management of the investment portfolio, maximising investment returns through secure term deposits, bonds and purchasing floating rate notes with attractive interest rates.

The table below identifies the investments held by Council as at 30 June 2019.

Schedule of Investments held as at 30 June 2019

Purch Date	Principal ($)	Description	CP*	Rating	Maturity Date	No Fossil Fuel	Type	Interest Rate Per Annum	Current Value
24/03/17	1,000,000	NAB Social Bond (Gender Equality)	Y	AA-	24/03/22	Y	B	3.25%	1,044,263.16
15/11/18	980,060	NSW Treasury Corp (Green Bond)	N	AAA	15/11/28	Y	B	3.00%	1,108,880.00
20/11/18	1,018,290	QLD Treasury Corp (Green Bond)	N	AA+	22/11/24	Y	B	3.00%	1,077,720.00
28/10/16	650,000	Teachers Mutual Bank	Y	BBB+	28/10/19	Y	FRN	3.51%	651,521.00
31/03/17	1,000,000	CBA Climate Bond	Y	AA-	31/03/22	Y	FRN	3.01%	1,008,850.00
16/11/17	750,000	Bank of Queensland	Y	BBB+	16/11/21	N	FRN	2.97%	753,667.50
30/08/18	500,000	Bank Australia Ltd (Sustainability Bond)	Y	BBB+	30/08/21	Y	FRN	3.17%	502,795.00
28/03/19	1,000,000	National Housing Finance & Investment Corporation	Y	AAA	28/03/29	Y	B	2.38%	1,062,980.00
07/12/18	2,000,000	Credit Union Australia	Y	BBB	07/12/20	Y	TD	3.02%	2,000,000.00
13/12/18	1,000,000	Summerland Credit Union	Y	NR	13/12/19	Y	TD	3.01%	1,000,000.00
02/01/19	1,000,000	Police Credit Union Limited (SA)	Y	NR	01/07/19	Y	TD	3.05%	1,000,000.00
05/01/19	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	06/01/20	N	TD	2.75%	2,000,000.00
18/01/19	1,000,000	Westpac	Y	AA-	16/01/20	N	TD	2.73%	1,000,000.00
21/01/19	1,000,000	Police Credit Union Limited (SA)	N	NR	22/07/19	Y	TD	2.95%	1,000,000.00
23/01/19	1,000,000	Bank Vic	Y	NR	24/07/19	Y	TD	2.76%	1,000,000.00
30/01/19	1,000,000	Defence Bank	Y	BBB	30/01/20	Y	TD	2.85%	1,000,000.00
30/01/19	2,000,000	AMP Bank	Y	A-	30/07/19	N	TD	2.85%	2,000,000.00
04/02/19	1,000,000	Summerland Credit Union	N	NR	04/02/20	Y	TD	2.95%	1,000,000.00
05/02/19	2,000,000	MyState Bank	Y	NR	06/08/19	Y	TD	2.85%	2,000,000.00
08/02/19	2,000,000	Suncorp	Y	A	08/11/19	Y	TD	2.75%	2,000,000.00
08/02/19	1,000,001	AMP Bank	N	A-	07/08/19	N	TD	2.80%	1,000,001.00
11/02/19	1,000,000	B & E Ltd (Bank of Us)	Y	NR	12/08/19	Y	TD	2.88%	1,000,000.00
25/02/19	1,000,000	AMP Bank	N	A	26/08/19	N	TD	2.80%	1,000,000.00
28/02/19	1,000,000	AMP Bank	N	A-	29/08/19	N	TD	2.80%	1,000,000.00
01/03/19	1,000,000	Suncorp	N	A+	29/07/19	Y	TD	2.60%	1,000,000.00
05/03/19	1,000,000	Australian Military Bank	Y	NR	04/09/19	Y	TD	2.77%	1,000,000.00
06/03/19	1,000,000	Bananacoast Credit Union	Y	NR	04/03/20	Y	TD	2.90%	1,000,000.00
01/04/19	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	01/07/19	N	TD	2.46%	1,000,000.00
03/04/19	1,000,000	Australian Military Bank	N	NR	03/07/19	Y	TD	2.77%	1,000,000.00
04/04/19	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	04/07/19	N	TD	2.46%	1,000,000.00
09/04/19	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	09/07/19	N	TD	2.44%	1,000,000.00
10/04/19	1,000,000	Bankwest	Y	AA-	09/07/19	N	TD	2.30%	1,000,000.00
23/04/19	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	22/07/19	N	TD	2.75%	2,000,000.00
29/04/19	1,000,000	ME Bank	Y	BBB	16/08/19	Y	TD	2.43%	1,000,000.00
29/04/19	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	27/07/19	N	TD	2.40%	2,000,000.00
30/04/19	1,000,000	Australian Military Bank	N	NR	12/07/19	Y	TD	2.40%	1,000,000.00
30/04/19	1,000,000	ME Bank	N	BBB	29/10/19	Y	TD	2.43%	1,000,000.00
01/05/19	1,000,000	Maitland Mutual Building Society	Y	NR	20/08/19	Y	YD	2.45%	1,000,000.00
07/05/19	1,000,000	Credit Union SA	Y	NR	06/08/19	Y	TD	2.35%	1,000,000.00
08/05/19	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	06/08/19	N	TD	2.35%	1,000,000.00
14/05/19	1,000,000	B & E Ltd (Bank of Us)	N	NR	14/08/19	Y	TD	2.40%	1,000,000.00
15/05/19	1,000,000	Maitland Mutual Building Society	N	NR	15/08/19	Y	TD	2.40%	1,000,000.00
21/05/19	1,000,000	Maitland Mutual Building Society	N	NR	20/08/19	Y	TD	2.38%	1,000,000.00
27/05/19	1,000,000	AMP Bank	N	A-	25/11/19	N	TD	2.45%	1,000,000.00
28/05/19	1,000,000	Suncorp	N	A+	26/08/19	Y	TD	2.27%	1,000,000.00
28/05/19	1,000,000	Suncorp	N	A+	28/08/19	Y	TD	2.27%	1,000,000.00
12/06/19	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	10/09/19	N	TD	2.10%	2,000,000.00
03/06/19	1,000,000	Maitland Mutual Building Society	N	NR	02/09/19	Y	TD	2.30%	1,000,000.00
04/06/19	2,000,000	Illawarra Credit Union	Y	NR	20/09/19	Y	TD	2.30%	2,000,000.00
04/06/19	2,000,000	Beyond Bank Australia	Y	NR	06/12/19	Y	TD	2.40%	2,000,000.00
04/06/19	1,000,000	AMP Bank	N	A-	03/12/19	N	TD	2.45%	1,000,000.00
11/06/19	1,000,000	Summerland Credit Union	N	NR	09/09/19	Y	TD	2.35%	1,000,000.00
24/06/19	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	20/01/20	N	TD	1.90%	2,000,000.00
27/06/19	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	25/09/19	N	TD	1.97%	2,000,000.00
28/06/19	2,000,000	Bankwest	N	AA-	27/12/19	N	TD	1.90%	2,000,000.00
28/06/19	2,000,000	Bank of Queensland	N	BBB+	27/08/19	N	TD	2.00%	2,000,000.00
28/06/19	2,000,000	Bank of Queensland	N	BBB+	24/01/20	N	TD	2.10%	2,000,000.00
28/06/19	2,000,000	Bankwest	N	AA-	02/10/19	N	TD	1.85%	2,000,000.00
N/A	1,500,327.98	CBA Business Online Saver	N	AA-	N/A	N	CALL	1.40%	1,500,327.98
12/01/18	3,550,320.16	NSW Treasury Corp	N	AAA	N/A	Y	CALL	2.04%	3,550,320.16
Total	77,948,999.14						AVG	2.49%	78,261,325.80

Note 1.	CP = Capital protection on maturity
	N = No Capital Protection
	Y = Fully covered by Government Guarantee
	P = Partial Government Guarantee of $250,000 (Financial Claims Scheme)

Note 2.	No Fossil Fuel ADI
	Y = No investment in Fossil Fuels
	N = Investment in Fossil Fuels
	U = Unknown Status

Note 3.	Type	Description
	B	Bonds	Principal can vary based on valuation, interest payable via a fixed interest, payable usually each quarter.
	FRN	Floating Rate Note	Principal can vary based on valuation, interest payable via a floating interest rate that varies each quarter.
	TD	Term Deposit	Principal does not vary during investment term. Interest payable is fixed at the rate invested for the investment term.
	CALL	Call Account	Principal varies due to cash flow demands from deposits/withdrawals, interest is payable on the daily balance.

Environmental and Socially Responsible Investing (ESRI)

An additional column has been added to the schedule of Investments to identify if the financial institution holding the Council investment has been assessed as a ‘No Fossil Fuel’ investing institution. This information has been sourced through www.marketforces.org.au and identifies financial institutions that either invest in fossil fuel related industries or do not. The graph below highlights the percentage of each classification across Council’s total investment portfolio in respect of fossil fuels only.

The notion of Environmental and Socially Responsible Investing is much broader than whether a financial institution as rated by ‘marketforces.org.au’ invests in fossil fuels or not. Council’s current Investment Policy defines Environmental and Socially Responsible Investing at Section 4.1 of the Policy which can be found on Council’s website

Council has two investments with financial institutions that invest in fossil fuels but are nevertheless aligned with the broader definition of Environmental and Socially Responsible investments i.e.:

1. $1,000,000 investment with the National Australia Bank maturing on 24 March 2022 known as a Social Bond that promotes Gender Equity.

2. $1,000,000 investment with Commonwealth Bank maturing on 31 March 2022 known as a Climate Bond.

Investment Policy Compliance

The above table identifies compliance with Council’s Investment Policy by the proportion of the investment portfolio invested with financial institutions, along with their associated credit ratings compared to parameters in the Investment Policy. The parameters are designed to support prudent short and long-term management of credit risk and ensure diversification of the investment portfolio. Unfortunately the financial institutions currently offering investments in the ‘ethical’ area are mainly those with lower credit ratings (being either BBB or not rated at all i.e. credit unions).

Associated Risk

Progressively moving more of the investment portfolio into the ‘ethical’ space will lower the credit quality of the investment portfolio overall and continue to increase the organisation’s credit risk (i.e. exposure to potential default). To monitor this issue the ‘Investment Policy Compliance’ table is now produced for each monthly Investment Report to Council.

Currently Council is exceeding its policy benchmark for the proportion of the investment portfolio invested in financial institutions with low credit ratings or no credit rating. Although this has reduced, it is still 3% above tolerance. This means a greater proportion of Council’s investments have a higher level of exposure to credit risk than Council has determined via policy. To redress this risk, Council would need to invest more of the portfolio with institutions with higher credit ratings but this will reduce the percentage of the investment portfolio invested ethically. Over time it is likely that institutions with higher credit ratings will move more into the ethical investment space and this will continue to be monitored closely for suitable investment opportunities.

The investment portfolio is outlined in the table below by investment type for the period 1 June 2019 to 30 June 2019:

Dissection of Council Investment Portfolio as at 30 June 2019

Principal Value ($)	Investment Linked to:	Current Market Value ($)	Cumulative Unrealised Gain/(Loss) ($)
66,000,001.00	Term Deposits	66,000,001.00	0.00
2,900,000.00	Floating Rate Note	2,916,833.50	16,833.50
1,500,327.98	Business On-Line Saver (At Call)	1,500,327.98	0.00
3,550,320.16	NSW Treasury Corp (T Corp)	3,550,320.16	0.00
3,998,350.00	Bonds	4,293,843.16	295,493.16
77,948,999.14		78,261,325.80	312,326.66

The current value of an investment compared to the principal value (face value or original purchase price) provides an indication of the performance of the investment without reference to the coupon (interest) rate. The current value represents the value received if an investment was sold or traded in the current market, in addition to the interest received.

The table below provides a reconciliation of investment purchases and maturities for the period of 1 June 2019 to 30 June 2019 on a current market value basis.

Movement in Investment Portfolio – 30 June 2019

Item	Current Market Value (at end of month) $
Opening Balance at 1 June 2019	70,718,831.62
Add: New Investments Purchased	21,000,000.00
Add: Call Account Additions	1,000,000.00
Add: Interest from Call Account	975.75
Less: Investments Matured	14,000,000.00
Add: T Corp Additions	0.00
Add: Interest from T Corp	6,099.42
Less: Call Account Redemption	700,000.00
Less: T Corp Redemption	0.00
Add: Fair Value Movement for period	235,419.01
Closing Balance at 30 June 2019	78,261,325.80

Investments Maturities and Returns – 1 June 2019 to 30 June 2019

Principal Value ($)	Description	Type	Maturity Date	Number of Days Invested	Interest Rate Per Annum	Interest Paid on Maturity $
2,000,000.00	Australian Military Bank	TD	01/06/19	93	2.84%	14,471.24
1,000,000.00	Maitland Mutual Building Society	TD	03/06/19	91	2.77%	6,906.03
1,000,000.00	AMP Bank	TD	04/06/19	90	2.65%	6,534.25
1,000,000.00	Suncorp	TD	05/06/19	92	2.55%	6,427.40
1,000,000.00	Summerland Credit Union	TD	11/06/19	91	2.75%	6,856.16
2,000,000.00	NAB	TD	12/06/19	75	2.43%	9,986.30
2,000,000.00	Beyond Bank Australia	TD	18/06/19	182	2.80%	27,923.29
1,000,000.00	Maitland Mutual Building Society	TD	21/06/19	86	2.70%	6,361.64
2,000,000.00	NAB	TD	27/06/19	90	2.45%	12,082.19
1,000,000.00	ME Bank	TD	27/06/19	119	2.68%	8,737.53
14,000,000.00						106,286.03

Council’s overall ‘cash position’ is not only measured by what funds Council has invested but also by what funds Council has retained in its consolidated fund or bank account for operational purposes. In this regard, for the month of June 2019 the table below identifies the overall cash position of Council as follows:

Dissection of Council Cash Position as at 30 June 2019

Item	Principal Value ($)	Current Market Value ($)	Cumulative Unrealised Gain/(Loss) ($)
Investments Portfolio
Term Deposits	66,000,001.00	66,000,001.00	0.00
Floating Rate Note	2,900,000.00	2,916,833.50	16,833.50
Business On-Line Saver (At Call)	1,500,327.98	1,500,327.98	0.00
NSW Treasury Corp (T Corp)	3,550,320.16	3,550,320.16	0.00
Bonds	3,998,350.00	4,293,843.16	295,493.16
Total Investment Portfolio	77,948,999.14	78,261,325.80	312,326.66

Cash at Bank
Consolidated Fund	,230,079.22	1,230,079.22	0.00
Total Cash at Bank	230,079.22	1,230,079.22	0.00

Total Cash Position	79,179,078.36	79,491,405.02	312,326.66

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.10

Report No. 13.10 Section 355 Management Committees - resignations, appointments

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Joanne McMurtry, Community Project Officer

File No: I2019/1052

Theme: Society and Culture

Community Development

Summary:

This report updates Council on recent resignations and proposed appointments to Section 355 committees.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That the resignation of Stephen Bond from the Brunswick Heads Memorial Hall Management Committee be accepted and a letter of thanks provided.

2. That the nominee in Confidential Attachment 1 be appointed to the Marvell Hall Management Committee.

3. That the nominee in the Confidential Attachment 1 be appointed to Suffolk Park Community Hall Management Committee.

4. That the resignation of Colleen Barton from Suffolk Park Community Hall Management Committee, effective early September, be accepted and a letter of thanks be provided.

Attachments:

1 Confidential - Additional community members for Section 355 committees, E2019/50728

Report

This report details resignations and proposed new appointments for Section 355 committees where nominations have been received. Advertising for new members was conducted recently for a month, closing on 12 July 2019. Staff utilised the new Love Byron Halls marketing materials via social media to augment the standard Council Notices advertising to encourage fresh membership.

Brunswick Heads Memorial Hall

A resignation has been received from Stephen Bond. Stephen has been on extended leave of absence for approximately 12 months.

Current members on this Management Committee are:

Councillors

· Cr Simon Richardson

Community Representatives

· Marj Trimble (Secretary)

· Beverley Rahill

· Ann Burnett

· Leah Schinagl

· Melinda Bennett

· Dianne Burke

· Trudy Ashworth (Chair)

· Paul Brennan (Treasurer)

· Tracey Woods

Management Recommendation

That the resignation received from Stephen Bond from the Brunswick Heads Memorial Hall Management Committee be accepted and a letter of thanks provided.

Marvell Hall Byron Bay

A nomination has been received for the Committee. Details of the nominee can be found in Confidential Attachment 1.

Current members on this Management Committee are:

Councillors

· Cr Cate Coorey

· Cr Jan Hackett (alternate)

Community Representatives

· Margaret Robertson (Bookings)

· Jim Beatson (Chair)

· Nancy English (Secretary)

· Maureen Lightfoot (Treasurer)

· Caroline Lloyd

· Christine Willmot

Management Recommendation

That the nominee in Confidential Attachment 1 be appointed to the Marvell Hall Management Committee.

Suffolk Park Community Hall

A nomination has been received for the Committee. Details of the nominee can be found in Confidential Attachment 1. A resignation has been received from Colleen Barton, effective early September when the August accounts are all completed.

Current members on this Management Committee are:

Councillors

· Cr Cate Coorey

· Cr Simon Richardson (alternate)

Community Representatives

· Margaret Beazley

· Sergio Scudery

· Linda Holland

· Annabelle Sinclair

· Joy Taylor

· Margaret Wiles

· Colleen Barton

· Linda Lacopetta

Management Recommendation

That the nominee in Confidential Attachment 1 be appointed to the Suffolk Park Community Hall Management Committee. That the resignation from Colleen Barton be accepted and a letter of thanks provided.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 1: We have infrastructure, transport and services which meet our expectations

1.2

Provide essential services and reliable infrastructure which meet an acceptable community standard

1.2.9

Develop capital upgrades, renewal and enhancements works program for buildings- including community buildings, public toilets, emergency services, sports club facilities and Council operations buildings (SP)

1.2.9.1

Deliver program in consultation with community groups, s355 committees, Council asset managers and Plans of Management

Legal / Statutory / Policy Considerations

Management Committees and Boards of Management operate under Guidelines which state:

3.2 Committee Membership

Committee membership will number not less than four and not more than nine and each committee will state the actual number in their Terms of Reference unless otherwise decided by Council. The exception will be the Bangalow Parks (Showground) committee which numbers twelve. Council reserves the right to appoint up to two Councillors to each Committee. The total number of members includes office bearer committee members and Councillor members which are appointed by Council.

Whilst no particular qualifications are necessary (not withstanding 3.1.a), a commitment to the activities of the Committee and a willingness to be actively involved in Committee issues is essential. Committees work best when the workload is shared amongst committee members and there is evident goodwill and cooperation amongst members.

Further information on the operations and meeting minutes for these Committees and Boards can be found on Council’s web site at https://www.byron.nsw.gov.au/Council/Committees-and-groups/Section-355-Committees-and-Boards-of-Management.

Financial Considerations

Community Members of Section 355 Management Committees are volunteer positions unless otherwise resolved by Council.

Consultation and Engagement

Section 355 Committee members are nominated in response to an open period of advertising calling for interest in filling a vacancy. To hold office and be responsible for the management of a Council facility, all community committee members are assessed against a set of criteria. Nominations are formally submitted in writing to Council for appointment.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.12

Report No. 13.12 The Lighthouse Sculpture - next steps

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Vanessa Adams, Director Corporate and Community Services

File No: I2019/1153

Summary:

At the Public Art Panel meeting on 24 June, the Panel recommended that proposed further work by the artist on The Lighthouse sculpture be completed.

Subsequent to the Public Art Panel recommendation, a structural engineering inspection of The Lighthouse was undertaken as a result of community members having climbed the sculpture.

Continued instances of climbing by members of the public since the inspection indicate that misuse of the sculpture is highly likely to continue, raising a risk to public safety and necessitating regular maintenance and inspection activity at ongoing cost.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council considers the safety concerns outlined in this report, alongside the Public Art Panel recommendation from the Extraordinary meeting held on 24 June and resolves:

a) To decommission The Lighthouse sculpture.

b) To commission further work on The Lighthouse sculpture.

Attachments:

1 Confidential - The Lighthouse Sculpture artist notes, E2019/53025

2 Confidential - Proposed further work on the sculpture, E2019/56421

3 Confidential - Structural Inspection Bayshore Drive Artwork final, E2019/57721

REPORT

Councillors are requested to consider the information provided below and in the attachments in order to make a decision regarding The Lighthouse.

Public Safety

Since the Public Art Panel meeting on 24 June, several incidents have occurred at the sculpture site including:

· people using the roundabout site inappropriately (e.g. photo shoots, protestors)

· people climbing the structure at least twice (photos on social media, which have since been removed), and hanging banners and other items from the sculpture

Further, comments on social media of plans to “bring down” the sculpture have been noted, albeit since removed.

Detached fragments of the sculpture (birds) have also been found at the site. It cannot be determined whether this was an act of vandalism or the result of climbing.

As a result of these incidents, Council commissioned a structural engineering inspection as a matter of due diligence, as the sculpture was not designed to be climbed.

The inspection was conducted on 16 July 2019 and the findings are provided in Attachment 1. The estimated cost of the inspection was $8,000 including traffic management.

The report raises structural and non-structural safety issues for consideration (e.g. the ongoing risk of people continuing to climb the sculpture) indicating that regular inspection and maintenance are likely to be required at ongoing cost.

The certifying Structural Engineer provided an As-Built response to Council which addresses the structural queries. Although the structural issues are able to be remediated and are such that the artist could address them in the course of any further work, non-structural safety issues are expressly noted as the primary concern.

There is a risk of serious personal injury being sustained by a member of the public due to climbing and falling from the sculpture; and potentially due to crossing a busy road; and allied to this, the eventual risk of the sculpture’s structural integrity being compromised. The engineer’s report indicates that birds have already been substantially damaged by climbing activity.

While Council recognises people’s right to protest, the sculpture was not designed to be climbed and in light of the likelihood that this behaviour will continue, with the attendant risks outlined above and in the engineer’s report, the sensible course is to elect to de-commission The Lighthouse.

Public Art Panel

A separate report is provided in this Ordinary Meeting agenda regarding the outcome of the Public Art Panel Extraordinary meeting on 24 June.

However the Public Art Panel recommendations from the 24 June meeting specific to The Lighthouse were:

1. That the proposed works on The Lighthouse provided by the artist be completed, given that:

a) The Public Art Panel considered that the artist should have the opportunity to complete his work.

b) The artist provided robust responses to the Panel’s requests for information, including attending a meeting in person and providing detailed images and video of proposed modifications.

The Public Art Panel asked Council to note that it undertook serious deliberation in relation to the recommendation. Full Public Art Panel minutes can be found in the separate report to this meeting of Council, however a brief summary of the deliberations includes:

· The Panel found the artist’s responses to questions by the Panel convincing

· Issues around completion of the sculpture were addressed

· The original acquisition was lean in comparison with similar projects

· Learning and improvements arising from the management of the project by Council

Next steps

Should Council resolve to decommission the sculpture, a timeframe will be drawn up, although it is likely that decommissioning could be carried out relatively quickly. The sculpture would be stored at the depot pending final disposal or, should another individual or entity wish to acquire the sculpture, pending agreement on that option.

Should Council approve further work on the sculpture, a Community Engagement Plan will need to be developed.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	L2	CSP Strategy	L3	DP Action	L4	OP Activity
Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community	2.1	Support and encourage our vibrant culture and creativity	2.1.3	Enhance opportunities for interaction with art in public spaces	2.1.3.1	Implement Public Art Strategy

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Public Art Policy

Public Art Strategy

Public Art Guidelines and Criteria

Work Health and Safety legislation

Financial Considerations

The cost of decommissioning (including required traffic management and transport to the depot) has now been calculated at between $11,000 and $13,000 (with the higher sum including an element for contingencies).

The base estimates provided in February to Council included an element for reconstruction at an alternative site and are provided below for comparison:

$16,000-$20,000 Removal to storage (depot)

$20,000-$25,000 Reinstatement of roundabout (still required but could be addressed as part of routine maintenance)

$60,000-$70,000 Reconstruction at alternative site

The table below details costs for traffic management and safety to complete additional works on The Lighthouse sculpture. The ‘suggested allowance’ column is provided in case the particular supplier/resource specified in the quote is not available, costs increase in the interim or works take longer than anticipated.

The Lighthouse Public Art Itemised Traffic and Safety Management
Item	Rate	Hours	Per Shift	Suggested Allowance
Artist	$0	10	$0	$0
Traffic Control	$2,063	11.5	$2,063	$2,500
EWP	$165	SHIFT	$165	$250
EWP Operator	$66	10	$660	$800
Supervisor	$51	10	$510	$650
Supervisor Ute	$15	10	$150	$200
Lights x 2	$153	SHIFT	$153	$200
			$3,701	$4,600
EWP Delivery	$500	EACH	$500	$500
TOTAL			$4,201	$5,100
			Actual Quotes	Incl. contingency
Please note the 'EWP Delivery' is once-off, not per shift. All other costs are per shift.

If a project management consultant with specific public art experience is appointed to oversee further work as recommended, this is estimated to cost an additional $2,000 - $4,000.

The safety report recommends a further inspection by a qualified welding inspector. If Council were to proceed with further work by the artist, this inspection should be undertaken in advance. Costs are estimated to be in the vicinity of $8,000 including safety management. Please note there is potential for the required remediation, covering both engineering reviews, to be addressed by the artist should Council decide to proceed with further work, which may reduce these costs.

Note too that the artist would donate time, travel and accommodation to finish the sculpture. An estimate of the travel and accommodation component is approximately $1,600. An estimate of the artist’s labour costs is $55.31 per hour based on the NAVA Code of Practice for a mid-career public artist and estimated upwards of 100 hours. The total estimated in-kind value contributed by the artist is therefore approximately $7,131. The artist has received offers of philanthropic donation to assist with costs attributed to the completion of the work.

Note also that at the time of estimating costs for further work the structural issues had not been identified. Although these may have been able to be addressed by the artist, any extra associated costs (e.g. extra time required) have not yet been quantified.

The Lighthouse Public Art Total Completion Cost
	Actual	Contingency
5 x nights traffic and safety management	$18,505	$23,000
EWP Delivery	$500	$500
Public Art consultant	(est.) $2,000	$4,000
Welding and structural inspection	(est.) $8,000	$10,000
TOTAL	$29,005	$35,500

The Public Art budget has $51,700 available (made up of a carry forward amount from 18/19 and the 19/20 allocation).

Consultation and Engagement

Public Art Panel

Consulting Engineers

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.13

Report No. 13.13 Investments - 1 July 2019 to 31 July 2019

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: James Brickley, Manager Finance

File No: I2019/1103

Summary:

This report includes a list of investments and identifies Council’s overall cash position for the period 1 July 2019 to 31 July 2019 for Council’s information.

This report is prepared to comply with Regulation 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the report listing Council’s investments and overall cash position as at 31 July 2019 be noted.

REPORT

Council has continued to maintain a diversified portfolio of investments. At 31 July 2019, the average 90 day bank bill rate (BBSW) for the month of July 2019 was 1.11%. Council’s performance to 31 July 2019 is 2.41%. This is largely due to the active ongoing management of the investment portfolio, maximising investment returns through secure term deposits, bonds and purchasing floating rate notes with attractive interest rates. It should be noted that as investments mature, Council’s % return will start to decrease due to the lower rates available in the current market.

The table below identifies the investments held by Council as at 31 July 2019.

Schedule of Investments held as at 31 July 2019

Purch Date	Principal ($)	Description	CP*	Rating	Maturity Date	No Fossil Fuel	Type	Interest Rate Per Annum	Current Value
24/03/17	1,000,000	NAB Social Bond (Gender Equality)	Y	AA-	24/03/22	Y	B	3.25%	1,044,263.16
15/11/18	980,060	NSW Treasury Corp (Green Bond)	N	AAA	15/11/28	Y	B	3.00%	1,108,880.00
20/11/18	1,018,290	QLD Treasury Corp (Green Bond)	N	AA+	22/11/24	Y	B	3.00%	1,077,720.00
28/10/16	650,000	Teachers Mutual Bank	Y	BBB+	28/10/19	Y	FRN	3.51%	651,521.00
31/03/17	1,000,000	CBA Climate Bond	Y	AA-	31/03/22	Y	FRN	3.01%	1,008,850.00
16/11/17	750,000	Bank of Queensland	Y	BBB+	16/11/21	N	FRN	2.97%	753,667.50
30/08/18	500,000	Bank Australia Ltd (Sustainability Bond)	Y	BBB+	30/08/21	Y	FRN	3.17%	502,795.00
28/03/19	1,000,000	National Housing Finance & Investment Corporation	Y	AAA	28/03/29	Y	B	2.38%	1,062,980.00
07/12/18	2,000,000	Credit Union Australia	Y	BBB	07/12/20	Y	TD	3.02%	2,000,000.00
13/12/18	1,000,000	Summerland Credit Union	Y	NR	13/12/19	Y	TD	3.01%	1,000,000.00
05/01/19	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	06/01/20	N	TD	2.75%	2,000,000.00
18/01/19	1,000,000	Westpac	Y	AA-	16/01/20	N	TD	2.73%	1,000,000.00
30/01/19	1,000,000	Defence Bank	Y	BBB	30/01/20	Y	TD	2.85%	1,000,000.00
04/02/19	1,000,000	Summerland Credit Union	N	NR	04/02/20	Y	TD	2.95%	1,000,000.00
05/02/19	2,000,000	MyState Bank	Y	NR	06/08/19	Y	TD	2.85%	2,000,000.00
08/02/19	2,000,000	Suncorp	Y	A	08/11/19	Y	TD	2.75%	2,000,000.00
08/02/19	1,000,001	AMP Bank	Y	A-	07/08/19	N	TD	2.80%	1,000,001.00
11/02/19	1,000,000	B & E Ltd (Bank of Us)	Y	NR	12/08/19	Y	TD	2.88%	1,000,000.00
25/02/19	1,000,000	AMP Bank	N	A	26/08/19	N	TD	2.80%	1,000,000.00
28/02/19	1,000,000	AMP Bank	N	A-	29/08/19	N	TD	2.80%	1,000,000.00
05/03/19	1,000,000	Australian Military Bank	Y	NR	04/09/19	Y	TD	2.77%	1,000,000.00
06/03/19	1,000,000	Bananacoast Credit Union	Y	NR	04/03/20	Y	TD	2.90%	1,000,000.00
29/04/19	1,000,000	ME Bank	Y	BBB	16/08/19	Y	TD	2.43%	1,000,000.00
30/04/19	1,000,000	ME Bank	N	BBB	29/10/19	Y	TD	2.43%	1,000,000.00
01/05/19	1,000,000	Maitland Mutual Building Society	Y	NR	20/08/19	Y	YD	2.45%	1,000,000.00
07/05/19	1,000,000	Credit Union SA	Y	NR	06/08/19	Y	TD	2.35%	1,000,000.00
08/05/19	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	06/08/19	N	TD	2.35%	1,000,000.00
14/05/19	1,000,000	B & E Ltd (Bank of Us)	N	NR	14/08/19	Y	TD	2.40%	1,000,000.00
15/05/19	1,000,000	Maitland Mutual Building Society	N	NR	15/08/19	Y	TD	2.40%	1,000,000.00
21/05/19	1,000,000	Maitland Mutual Building Society	N	NR	20/08/19	Y	TD	2.38%	1,000,000.00
27/05/19	1,000,000	AMP Bank	N	A-	25/11/19	N	TD	2.45%	1,000,000.00
28/05/19	1,000,000	Suncorp	N	A+	26/08/19	Y	TD	2.27%	1,000,000.00
28/05/19	1,000,000	Suncorp	N	A+	28/08/19	Y	TD	2.27%	1,000,000.00
12/06/19	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	10/09/19	N	TD	2.10%	2,000,000.00
03/06/19	1,000,000	Maitland Mutual Building Society	N	NR	02/09/19	Y	TD	2.30%	1,000,000.00
04/06/19	2,000,000	Illawarra Credit Union	Y	NR	20/09/19	Y	TD	2.30%	2,000,000.00
04/06/19	2,000,000	Beyond Bank Australia	Y	NR	06/12/19	Y	TD	2.40%	2,000,000.00
04/06/19	1,000,000	AMP Bank	N	A-	03/12/19	N	TD	2.45%	1,000,000.00
11/06/19	1,000,000	Summerland Credit Union	N	NR	09/09/19	Y	TD	2.35%	1,000,000.00
24/06/19	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	20/01/20	N	TD	1.90%	2,000,000.00
27/06/19	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	25/09/19	N	TD	1.97%	2,000,000.00
28/06/19	2,000,000	Bankwest	N	AA-	27/12/19	N	TD	1.90%	2,000,000.00
28/06/19	2,000,000	Bank of Queensland	N	BBB+	27/08/19	N	TD	2.00%	2,000,000.00
28/06/19	2,000,000	Bank of Queensland	N	BBB+	24/01/20	N	TD	2.10%	2,000,000.00
28/06/19	2,000,000	Bankwest	N	AA-	02/10/19	N	TD	1.85%	2,000,000.00
01/07/19	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	30/09/19	N	TD	2.00%	1,000,000.00
01/07/19	1,000,000	Police Credit Union Limited (SA)	Y	NR	03/01/20	Y	TD	2.23%	1,000,000.00
03/07/19	1,000,000	Australian Military Bank	N	NR	02/07/20	Y	TD	2.12%	1,000,000.00
04/07/19	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	30/03/20	N	TD	1.95%	1,000,000.00
09/07/19	1,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	08/10/19	N	TD	1.93%	1,000,000.00
09/07/19	1,000,000	Bankwest	Y	AA-	09/10/19	N	TD	1.80%	1,000,000.00
22/07/19	2,000,000	NAB	N	AA-	22/10/19	N	TD	1.90%	2,000,000.00
24/07/19	1,000,000	Bankwest	Y	AA-	24/01/20	N	TD	1.85%	1,000,000.00
30/07/19	2,000,000	AMP Bank	Y	A-	28/01/20	N	TD	2.20%	2,000,000.00
N/A	2,001,952.95	CBA Business Online Saver	N	AA-	N/A	N	CALL	1.40%	2,001,952.95
12/01/18	2,054,315.43	NSW Treasury Corp	N	AAA	N/A	Y	CALL	2.04%	2,054,315.43
Total	71,954,619.38						AVG	2.41%	72,266,946.04

Note 1.	CP = Capital protection on maturity
	N = No Capital Protection
	Y = Fully covered by Government Guarantee
	P = Partial Government Guarantee of $250,000 (Financial Claims Scheme)

Note 2.	No Fossil Fuel ADI
	Y = No investment in Fossil Fuels
	N = Investment in Fossil Fuels
	U = Unknown Status

Note 3.	Type	Description
	B	Bonds	Principal can vary based on valuation, interest payable via a fixed interest, payable usually each quarter.
	FRN	Floating Rate Note	Principal can vary based on valuation, interest payable via a floating interest rate that varies each quarter.
	TD	Term Deposit	Principal does not vary during investment term. Interest payable is fixed at the rate invested for the investment term.
	CALL	Call Account	Principal varies due to cash flow demands from deposits/withdrawals, interest is payable on the daily balance.

Environmental and Socially Responsible Investing (ESRI)

1. $1,000,000 investment with the National Australia Bank maturing on 24 March 2022 known as a Social Bond that promotes Gender Equity.

2. $1,000,000 investment with Commonwealth Bank maturing on 31 March 2022 known as a Climate Bond.

Investment Policy Compliance

Associated Risk

Currently Council is exceeding its policy benchmark for the proportion of the investment portfolio invested in financial institutions with low credit ratings or no credit rating. Although this has reduced, it is still 4% above tolerance. This means a greater proportion of Council’s investments have a higher level of exposure to credit risk than Council has determined via policy. To redress this risk, Council would need to invest more of the portfolio with institutions with higher credit ratings but this will reduce the percentage of the investment portfolio invested ethically. Over time it is likely that institutions with higher credit ratings will move more into the ethical investment space and this will continue to be monitored closely for suitable investment opportunities.

The investment portfolio is outlined in the table below by investment type for the period 1

July 2019 to 31 July 2019:

Dissection of Council Investment Portfolio as at 31 July 2019

Principal Value ($)	Investment Linked to:	Current Market Value ($)	Cumulative Unrealised Gain/(Loss) ($)
61,000,001.00	Term Deposits	61,000,001.00	0.00
2,900,000.00	Floating Rate Note	2,916,833.50	16,833.50
2,001,952.95	Business On-Line Saver (At Call)	2,001,952.95	0.00
2,054,315.43	NSW Treasury Corp (T Corp)	2,054,315.43	0.00
3,998,350.00	Bonds	4,293,843.16	295,493.16
71,954,619.38		72,266,946.04	312,326.66

The table below provides a reconciliation of investment purchases and maturities for the period of 1 July 2019 to 31 July 2019 on a current market value basis.

Movement in Investment Portfolio – 31 July 2019

Item	Current Market Value (at end of month) $
Opening Balance at 1 July 2019	78,261,325.80
Add: New Investments Purchased	11,000,000.00
Add: Call Account Additions	3,000,000.00
Add: Interest from Call Account	1,624.97
Less: Investments Matured	16,000,000.00
Add: T Corp Additions	1,500,000.00
Add: Interest from T Corp	3,995.27
Less: Call Account Redemption	2,500,000.00
Less: T Corp Redemption	3,000,000.00
Add: Fair Value Movement for period	0.00
Closing Balance at 31 July 2019	72,266,946.04

Investments Maturities and Returns – 1 July 2019 to 31 July 2019

Principal Value ($)	Description	Type	Maturity Date	Number of Days Invested	Interest Rate Per Annum	Interest Paid on Maturity $
1,000,000.00	NAB	TD	01/07/19	91	2.46%	6,133.15
1,000,000.00	Police Credit Union Limited (SA)	TD	01/07/19	180	3.05%	15,041.10
1,000,000.00	Australian Military Bank	TD	03/07/19	91	2.77%	6,906.03
1,000,000.00	NAB	TD	04/07/19	91	2.46%	6,133.15
1,000,000.00	Bankwest	TD	09/07/19	90	2.30%	5,671.23
1,000,000.00	NAB	TD	09/07/19	91	2.44%	6,083.29
1,000,000.00	Australian Military Bank	TD	12/07/19	73	2.40%	4,800.00
1,000,000.00	Police Credit Union Limited (SA)	TD	22/07/19	182	2.95%	14,709.59
2,000,000.00	NAB	TD	22/07/19	90	2.40%	11,835.62
1,000,000.00	Bank Vic	TD	24/07/19	182	2.83%	14,111.23
2,000,000.00	NAB	TD	27/07/19	89	2.40%	11,704.11
1,000,000.00	Suncorp	TD	29/07/19	150	2.60%	10,684.93
2,000,000.00	AMP Bank	TD	30/07/19	181	2.75%	27,273.97
16,000,000.00						141,087.40

Council’s overall ‘cash position’ is not only measured by what funds Council has invested but also by what funds Council has retained in its consolidated fund or bank account for operational purposes. In this regard, for the month of July 2019 the table below identifies the overall cash position of Council as follows:

Dissection of Council Cash Position as at 31 July 2019

Item	Principal Value ($)	Current Market Value ($)	Cumulative Unrealised Gain/(Loss) ($)
Investments Portfolio
Term Deposits	61,000,001.00	61,000,001.00	0.00
Floating Rate Note	2,900,000.00	2,916,833.50	16,833.50
Business On-Line Saver (At Call)	2,001,952.95	2,001,952.95	0.00
NSW Treasury Corp (T Corp)	2,054,315.43	2,054,315.43	0.00
Bonds	3,998,350.00	4,293,843.16	295,493.16
Total Investment Portfolio	71,954,619.38	72,266,946.04	312,326.66

Cash at Bank
Consolidated Fund	5,746,581.92	5,746,581.92	0.00
Total Cash at Bank	5,746,581.92	5,746,581.92	0.00

Total Cash Position	77,701,201.30	78,013,527.96	312,326.66

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 5: We have community led decision making which is open and inclusive

5.5

Manage Council’s finances sustainably

5.5.2

Ensure the financial integrity and sustainability of Council through effective planning and reporting systems (SP)

5.5.2.5

Identification of ethical investment opportunities with environmental and social inclusion outcomes

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

In accordance with Regulation 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, the Responsible Accounting Officer of Council must provide Council with a monthly report detailing all monies Council has invested under section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993.

The Report must be presented at the next Ordinary Meeting of Council after the end of the month being reported. The current Council Meeting cycle does not always allow this to occur, especially as investment valuations required for the preparation of the report are often received after the deadline for the submission of reports. Endeavours are being made to achieve a better alignment and for some months this will require reporting for one or more months.

Council’s investments are made in accordance with section 625(2) of the Local Government Act 1993 and Council’s Investment Policy. The Local Government Act 1993 allows Council to invest money as per the Minister’s Order – Forms of Investment, last published in the Government Gazette on 11 February 2011.

Council’s Investment Policy includes the objective of maximising earnings from authorised investments and ensuring the security of Council Funds.

Financial Considerations

Council uses a diversified mix of investments to achieve short, medium and long-term results.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.14

Report No. 13.14 Policy Review 2019 - Policies for Repeal

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Mila Jones, Corporate Governance Coordinator

File No: I2019/1112

Summary:

At the Ordinary Meeting on 18 April 2019 a report was presented to Council advising of a policy review that is being undertaken this year. This report covers phase 2 of the review in which 21 policies have been identified by management as redundant and therefore recommend the policies be repealed.

The final phase of the policy review will be covered by a separate report to Council in December this year, providing any further policies that require major updates.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the following redundant policies be removed from Council’s Policy Register:

a) Affordable Housing on Council Owned Land 2009

b) Camphor Laurel Management in Byron Shire 2011

c) Commercial and Other Activities on Public Land and Roads 1994

d) Community Halls and Sporting Facilities - Management by Community Groups 1994

e) Excess of Power and Procedural Fairness 1996

f) Footpath Dining 2001

g) Freedom of Information 1996

h) Inspection, Evaluation and Maintenance of Public Infrastructure 2003

i) Interactions between Councillors and Council Staff 2002

j) Interactive Management and Supervisory Training 1994

k) Interim Policy on Genetically Modified Agriculture in Byron Shire 2001

l) Maintenance and Improvement of Council Owned Community Buildings 1994

m) Positive Ageing Policy 2010

n) Procedures for Cases of Financial Hardship to undertake repair works to prevent adverse Environmental or Public Health Impacts 2002

o) Review of the Stormwater Management Service Charge 2007

p) Sewerage Charges - Charitable Nursing/Aged Care Homes 1994

q) Smoke Free Environment 1994

r) Water and Sewer Charges – Religious Properties 1994

s) Water Meters and Charges on Strata Units 1994

t) Work Health Safety 2015

u) Youth Policy 2010

REPORT

As previously discussed in a report to Council on 18 April 2019 titled “Policy Review 2019”, staff have been undertaking a review of all Council’s policies based on an internal audit recommendation made by OCM in November 2017 that Council review its 139 policies to identify which policies may be redundant, updated, aggregated or moved to a procedure or guideline.

This report covers phase 2 of the review in which 21 policies have been identified by management as redundant and are therefore recommended for repeal by Council.

Management comments on each policy are provided in Table 1 below.

Note due to the number of policies being recommended for repeal, and in order to reduce the file size of this business paper, separate links have been provided to each Policy on Council’s website, rather than producing attachments to this report (these can be opened by clicking on the policy title to open the document).

TABLE 1

Policy	Reviewed	Responsibility	Reason for repeal
Affordable Housing on Council Owned Land 2009 (E2013/12293)	DM906158	Manager Environment and Economical Planning	· This Policy has been replaced by the development of the Residential Strategy.
Camphor Laurel Management in Byron Shire 2011 (DM1131653)	11-Aug-11	Manager Environment and Economical Planning	· This policy is now outdated and based on old/repealed legislation. · The Noxious Weeds Act has been replaced by the Biosecurity Act 2015 and applicable policies/plans including Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan (North Coast). · Camphor is no longer listed as a noxious weed and is now only a species of concern in the North Coast LLS region. Work on this species occurs as part of existing weed programs. · Policy not required and should be repealed.
Commercial and Other Activities on Public Land and Roads 1994 (DM657502)	29-Mar-94	Manager Works	· There is significant crossover with Commercial Use of Road Reserves Policy. · This Policy addresses only establishment and operation of roadside stalls, this detail could reasonably be included within Commercial Use of Road Reserves.
Community Halls and Sporting Facilities - Management by Community Groups 1994 (DM630111)	29-Mar-94	Manager Social and Cultural Planning and Manager Open Space and Resource Recovery	· Change in legislative framework requiring plans of management replaces need for overarching policy.
Excess of Power and Procedural Fairness 1996	12-Dec-96	Legal Counsel	· Covered by the adoption of the provisions of the Code of Conduct
Footpath Dining 2001 (DM293182)	09-Oct-01	Manager Sustainable Development	· Replaced by Commercial Use of Road Reserves 2018 (E2018/28846) and all provisions included
Freedom of Information 1996 (DM630096)	25-Jun-96	Manager Business Systems and Technology	· Replaced by GIPA Act requirements
Human Resources Policy Manual 2001 (Internal Policy) (DM254796)	01-Jan-01	Manager People and Culture	· Any relevant parts have been pulled apart and are now standalone policies or procedures
Human Resources Staff Reward and Recognition Scheme 2015 (Internal Policy) (E2015/66482)	13-Oct-15	Manager People and Culture	· We will modify to a guideline or procedure
Human Resources Staff Suggestion Scheme 2015 (Internal Policy) (E2015/66451)	01-Oct-15	Manager People and Culture	· We will modify to a guideline or procedure
Human Resources Temporary and Fixed Term Employment 2013 (Internal Policy) (E2013/32988)	03-Jul-13	Manager People and Culture	· We will modify to a guideline or procedure
Inspection, Evaluation and Maintenance of Public Infrastructure 2003 (DM446920)	26-Aug-03	Manager Assets and Major Projects	· The content is covered by the Asset Management Policy
Interactions between Councillors and Council Staff 2002 (DM355493)	22-Oct-02	Manager Corporate Services	· Principles are covered in the code of conduct and councillors’ expenses and facilities policy. · New councillor service level agreement developed which includes interactions
Interactive Management and Supervisory Training 1994 (DM658662)	29-Mar-94	Manager People and Culture	· Outdated
Interim Policy on Genetically Modified Agriculture in Byron Shire 2001 (DM658627)	09-Oct-01	Manager Environmental and Economic Planning	· Superseded by development of the Sustainable Agriculture Strategy
Maintenance and Improvement of Council Owned Community Buildings 1994 (DM658755)	29-Mar-94	Manager Social and Cultural Planning	· Strategic Asset Management Plan captures the long term asset maintenance as part of a broad organisational approach
Positive Ageing Policy 2010 (DM976723)	10-Jun-10	Manager Social and Cultural Planning	· CSP details aspirations of community, move away from targeted interventions to whole of community aspirations
Procedures for Cases of Financial Hardship to undertake repair works to prevent adverse Environmental or Public Health Impacts 2002 (DM658637)	04-Apr-02	Manager Finance	· Policy is prior to introduction of Best Practice Water and Sewerage Pricing Guidelines that Council must comply with. Policy is inconsistent with these guidelines and should be repealed.
Review of the Stormwater Management Service Charge 2007 (E2018/16962)	30-Aug-07	Manager Finance	· Policy is out of date. Stormwater Management Service Charges are a regulated charge and are governed by the guidelines issued by the Office of Local Government in 2006 referred to in the policy. Council also details these charges annually in its Statement of Revenue Policy.
Sewerage Charges - Charitable Nursing/Aged Care Homes 1994 (DM624654)	27-Feb-96	Manager Finance	· Policy is prior to introduction of Best Practice Water and Sewerage Pricing Guidelines that Council must comply with. Policy is inconsistent with these guidelines.
Smoke Free Environment 1994 (DM630051)	29-Mar-94	Manager People and Culture	· The information in the Policy is outdated and covered by legislation and a council resolution: · The NSW Smoke-free Environment Act 2000 and the Smoke-free Environment Regulation 2016 are the legislative documents governing smoking in public places. · Resolution 11-801 is the Council resolution governing smoking in Council workplaces.
Water and Sewer Charges – Religious Properties 1994 (DM629048)	29-Mar-94	Manager Finance	· Policy is prior to introduction of Best Practice Water and Sewerage Pricing Guidelines that Council must comply with. Policy is inconsistent with these guidelines.
Water Meters and Charges on Strata Units 1994 (DM629020)	29-Mar-94	Manager Finance	· Policy is prior to introduction of Best Practice Water and Sewerage Pricing Guidelines that Council must comply with. Policy is inconsistent with these guidelines
Work Health Safety 2015 (E2015/32312)	11-Jun-15	Manager People and Culture	· Covered by other WHS Policies and Statement
Youth Policy 2010 (DM1020284)	07-Oct-10	Manager Social and Cultural Planning	· CSP details aspirations of community to move away from targeted interventions towards a whole of community approach

Next steps

The final phase of the policy review for 2019 will be covered by a separate report to Council in December this year, providing any policies that require major updates.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

	CSP Objective		L2		CSP Strategy	L3	DP Action	L4	OP Activity
Community Objective 5: We have community led decision making which is open and inclusive		5.2		Create a culture of trust with the community by being open, genuine and transparent		5.2.3	Provide access to publicly available corporate registers	5.2.3.4	Update and publish Council's policies online

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Council is required to comply with a varying suite of corporate compliance obligations originating from sources such as:

· Federal and State Based legislation, such as the Local Government Act 1993;

· Council’s own internal policies and procedures; and

· Obligations which Council has elected to comply with (eg. contracts).

Financial Considerations

There are no financial implications with this project.

Consultation and Engagement

Consultation has been held with the Executive Team, Managers and relevant Document Development Officers and Councillors.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.15

Report No. 13.15 Carryovers for Inclusion in the 2019-2020 Budget

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: James Brickley, Manager Finance

File No: I2019/1146

Summary:

This report is prepared for Council to consider and to adopt the carryover Budget allocations for works and services, either commenced and not completed, or not commenced in the 2018/2019 financial year for inclusion in the 2019/2020 Budget Estimates.

Each year Council allocates funding for works and services across all programs. For various reasons, some of these works and services are incomplete at the end of the financial year. The funding for these works is restricted at the end of the financial year, and is carried over as a budget allocation revote to the following year, to fund the completion of the work or service.

This report identifies all the works and services recommended to be carried over from the 2018/2019 financial year to the 2019/2020 Budget Estimates. The report also identifies the funding for each recommended budget allocation carryover.

This report was considered by the Finance Advisory Committee at its Meeting held on 8 August 2019.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the works and services, and the respective funding shown in Attachment 1 (#E2019/55476), be carried over from the 2018/2019 financial year and that the carryover budget allocations be adopted as budget allocation revotes for inclusion in the 2019/2020 Budget Estimates.

Attachments:

1 Carryovers for Inclusion in 2019-2020 Budget General, Water and Sewerage Funds, E2019/55476

REPORT

Each year Council allocates funding for works and services across all programs. For various reasons, some of these works and services are incomplete at the end of the financial year. The funding for these works and services is restricted at the end of the financial year to be carried over to the following year for completion.

This report identifies all the works and services to be carried over to the 2019/2020 Budget Estimates and the respective funding of each, relating to works and services not completed during the course of the 2018/2019 financial year. The specific details of all carryover works and services that are the subject of this report are outlined in Attachment 1.

The works and services are fully funded and have no impact on Council’s Unrestricted Cash Result or the 2019/2020 Budget Estimates result.

As in previous years there is a significant amount of carryovers, although it is significantly less than in recent years.

Table 1 below outlines carryovers in recent years.

Table 1 - Value of budget carryovers 2015/16 – 2019/20

Fund	2015/16 ($)	2016/17 ($)	2017/18 ($)	2018/19 ($)	2019/20 ($)
General	10,550,300	5,022,100	7,102,100	9,004,500	6,024,800
Water	1,671,900	729,900	2,770,100	879,500	301,900
Sewer	1,929,000	600,100	2,051,800	2,473,500	625,400
Total	14,151,200	6,352,100	11,924,000	12,357,500	6,952,100

General Fund

The value of works carried over to 2019/2020 for the General Fund is significantly less ($2,979,700) than that carried over for the 2018/2019 year. Of the $6,024,800 of General Fund carryovers, approximately 25% ($1,530,600) is attributable to Local Roads and Drainage projects not completed in 2018/2019 to be carried forward to 2019/2020.

Major carryover items in this fund are as follows:

· Eureka Bridge	$131,300
· Johnston Lane Causeway	$168,900
· Waterlily Park	$202,900
· Former Mullumbimby Hospital Site	$1,309,400
· Solar Panel Installation in Admin Car Park	$341,600
· CPTIGS - Bus Shelters	$250,100
· Bin Maintenance and Cleaning Vehicle	$102,300
· Community Buildings Maintenance (2008/2009 SRV)	$727,400

Water and Sewer Funds

Carryovers for the Water Fund have decreased by $577,600 and for the Sewer Fund by $1,848,100 compared to the carryover for the 2018/2019 financial year.

The following table outlines the project status of Local Roads & Drainage capital works carryovers for Councillors’ information, where works are in progress or contracts have been awarded at the time of writing this report.

Table 2 – Schedule of Carryover works current status

Project	Carryover $	Project Status
Blackspot and Safer Roads Grant Applications	10,500	Application preparation to be finalised and lodged 31 July 2019
Rural Co-Op Society Drought Relief	5,500	To be completed 2019/20
Broken Head Road - Bus Shelter	24,800	Works in progress to be completed by December 2019
Shire Wide - PAMP (Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan)	15,100	Works in progress to be completed by December 2019
Survey, design and consultation Bay Lane	12,200	Works in progress to be completed by December 2019
Bridge at Eureka	131,300	Works under contract to be completed by December 2019
Project Investigation & Planning	36,900	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Shire Wide Bike Plan	12,900	Works in progress to be completed by December 2019
Cycleway - Bangalow Rd/Broken Head Rd	34,200	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Johnston Lane Causeway - Private Works	168,900	Works to be undertaken 2019/20
Safer Roads Program - Jonson Street	3,500	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Bangalow Rd at Tinderbox Rd Talofa	10,900	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
CPTIGS - Bus Shelters	250,100	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
2017-19 CPTIGS Bus Shelters	20,000	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Bayshore/Ewingsdale Roundabout – Land	166,800	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Orana Rd - Renew Stormwater Line (No. 87)	35,000	Works to be undertaken 2019/20
Lawson Street, Byron (Middleton to Tennyson	9,200	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
The Pocket Road Segment 568.10	13,700	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Main Arm Rd Causeway #7 Replacement	4,800	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Main Arm Rd Causeway #12 Replacement	9,500	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Main Arm Rd Causeway #14 Replacement	11,700	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Causeways, Culvert and Bridge Renewal Investigation	82,700	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Bangalow Sportsfield Access Road	58,300	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Upper Wilsons Creek #10 Causeway Replacement	36,300	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Gittoes Lane Causeway Replacement	36,000	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Blackbean Road Causeway Replacement	39,400	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Tweed Valley Way Rural Major Culvert Repair	6,800	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Gravel Resheeting	11,500	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
McPhail’s Rd Cattle Grid Works	41,900	Works to be undertaken 2019/20
Seven Mile Beach Rd Investigations	20,000	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Integrated Shire-wide Transport Strategy	2,100	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Tweed Street Projects	94,700	Works to be undertaken 2019/20
Mullumbimby Cycle Racks	11,800	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Rifle Range Road Intersection Upgrade	10,300	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Traffic Study Strategic Network Analysis	19,700	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Ironbark Avenue - Drainage Works	2,300	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Street Lighting	36,000	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Heavy Patching (Balance of SRV Funds)	33,300	Works in progress to be completed 2019/20
Total	1,530,600

In accordance with Clause 211 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, Council conducted its annual meeting to approve expenditure and voting of money on 27 June 2019 via Resolution 19-325. The expenditure items that are the subject of this report were not included in the 2019/2020 Budget Estimates but now need to be. The intent of this report is to seek Council approval to revote the carryovers from the 2018/2019 financial year and to adopt the budget allocation carryovers for inclusion in the 2019/2020 adopted Budget Estimates.

At its meeting held on 28 March 2013 the Strategic Planning Committee considered Report 4.3 on Council’s financial position for the 2012/2013 financial year. The recommendations from this meeting were adopted by Council at its Ordinary Meeting held on 18 April 2013 through resolution 13-164. Committee recommendation SPC 4.3 in part 5 included the following process to be applied to the consideration of any amount identified as a carryover to the 2013/14 and future Budgets and funded from general revenues:

That Council determines that any general revenue funded allocated expenditure, not

expended in a current financial year NOT be automatically carried over to the next

financial year before it is reviewed and priorities established.

This report was also considered by the Finance Advisory Committee at its Meeting held on 8 August 2019.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.18

Report No. 13.18 Budget Review 1 April 2019 to 30 June 2019

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: James Brickley, Manager Finance

File No: I2019/1168

Summary:

This report is prepared in accordance with the format required by Clause 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 to inform Council and the Community of Council’s estimated financial position for the 2018/2019 financial year, reviewed as at 30 June 2019.

The Quarterly Budget Review for the June 2019 Quarter has been prepared to assist Council with its policy and decision making on matters that could have short, medium and long term implications on financial sustainability.

This report contains an overview of the proposed budget variations for the General Fund, Water Fund and Sewerage Fund. The specific details of these proposed variations are included in Attachments 1 and 2 for Council’s consideration and authorisation.

The report also provides an indication of the financial position of the Council at 30 June 2018. It should be noted that the figures provided are subject to completion and audit of the Council’s Financial Statements for 2018/2019. Any major variances will be included as part of the report adopting the financial statements in October 2019.

This report was considered by the Finance Advisory Committee at its meeting held on 8 August 2019.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council authorises the itemised budget variations as shown in Attachment 2 (#E2019/56200) which includes the following results in the 30 June 2019 Quarterly Review of the 2018/2019 Budget:

a) General Fund - $0 change in Unrestricted Cash Result

b) General Fund - $11,930,300 increase in reserves

c) Water Fund - $1,664,200 increase in reserves

d) Sewerage Fund - $2,015,700 increase in reserves.

2. That Council adopts the revised General Fund Estimated Unrestricted Cash Result of $1,145,200 for the 2018/2019 financial year.

Attachments:

1 Budget Variations for General, Water and Sewerage Funds, E2019/56197

2 Itemised Listing of Budget Variations for General, Water and Sewerage Funds, E2019/56200

REPORT

Council adopted the 2018/2019 budget on 28 June 2018 via Resolution 18-429. It also considered and adopted the budget carryovers from the 2017/2018 financial year, to be incorporated into the 2018/2019 budget at its Ordinary Meeting held on 23 August 2018 via Resolution 18-522. Since that date Council has reviewed the budget, taking into consideration the 2017/2018 Financial Statement results and progress through the 2018/2019 financial year. This report considers the June 2019 Quarter Budget Review.

The details of the budget review for the Consolidated, General, Water and Sewer Funds are included in Attachment 1, with an itemised listing in Attachment 2. This aims to show the consolidated budget position of Council, as well as a breakdown by Fund and Principal Activity. The document in Attachment 1 is intended to provide Councillors with more detailed information to assist with decision making regarding Council’s finances.

Contained in the document at Attachment 1 is the following reporting hierarchy.

Consolidated Budget Cash Result

General Fund Cash Result Water Fund Cash Result Sewer Cash Result

Principal Activity Principal Activity Principal Activity

Operating Income Operating Expenditure Capital income Capital Expenditure

Attachment 1 shows (from left to right) the original budget as adopted by Council on 28 June 2018 plus the adopted carryover budgets from 2017/2018, followed by resolutions that had budget impact for each Quarter, followed by the relevant quarterly review and the revote (or adjustment) and then the revised position projected for 30 June 2019.

On the far right of the Principal Activity, there is a column titled “Note”. If this is populated by a number, it means that there has been an adjustment in the quarterly review. This number corresponds to the notes at the end of the Attachment 1 which explain the variation.

There is also information detailing restricted assets (reserves) to show estimated balances as at 30 June 2019 for all reserves.

A summary of Capital Works is also included by Fund and Principal Activity.

Office of Local Government Budget Review Guidelines:

On 10 December 2010, the Office of Local Government issued Quarterly Budget Review Guidelines via Circular 10-32. Reports to Council concerning Quarterly Budget Reviews normally provide statements in accordance with these guidelines as a separate attachment. Given that there is no statutory obligation for Council to produce a Quarterly Budget Review as at 30 June each financial year, the statements required by the guidelines have not been produced for this specific report.

CONSOLIDATED RESULT

The following table provides a summary of the overall Council budget on a consolidated basis inclusive of all Funds’ budget movements for the 2018/2019 financial year projected to 30 June 2019.

2018/2019 Budget Review Statement as at 30 June 2019	Original Estimate (Including Carryovers) 1/7/2018	Adjustments to 30 June 2019 including Resolutions*	Proposed 30 June 2019 Review Revotes	Revised Estimate 30/6/2019
Operating Revenue	81,580,000	1,681,500	5,933,400	89,194,900
Operating Expenditure	86,541,800	5,742,900	(2,423,700)	89,861,000
Operating Result – Surplus/Deficit	(4,961,800)	(4,061,400)	8,357,100	(666,100)
Add: Capital Revenue	25,070,200	(11,135,500)	1,118,100	15,052,800
Change in Net Assets	20,108,400	(15,196,900)	9,475,200	14,386,700
Add: Non Cash Expenses	13,678,900	925,700	0	14,604,600
Add: Non-Operating Funds Employed	3,899,000	5,070,000	132,500	9,101,500
Subtract: Funds Deployed for Non-Operating Purposes	(63,028,000)	21,343,000	6,002,500	(35,682,500)
Cash Surplus/(Deficit)	(25,341,700)	12,141,800	15,610,200	2,410,300
Restricted Funds – Increase / (Decrease)	(25,357,500)	12,157,600	15,610,200	2,410,300
Forecast Result for the Year – Surplus/(Deficit) – Unrestricted Cash Result	15,800	(15,800)	0	0

GENERAL FUND

In terms of the General Fund projected Unrestricted Cash Result the following table provides a reconciliation of the estimated position as at 30 June 2019:

Opening Balance – 1 July 2018	$1,145,200
Plus original budget movement and carryovers	15,800
Council Resolutions July – September Quarter	(53,000)
Recommendations September Budget Review – increase/(decrease)	37,200
Council Resolutions October – December Quarter	($20,000)
Recommendations December Budget Review – increase/(decrease)	20,000
Council Resolutions January – March Quarter	0
Recommendations within this Review – increase/(decrease)	0
Council Resolutions April – June Quarter	0
Recommendations within this Review – increase/(decrease)	0
Forecast Unrestricted Cash Result – Surplus/(Deficit) – 30 June 2019	0
Estimated Unrestricted Cash Result Closing Balance – 30 June 2019	$1,145,200

The General Fund financial position overall has remained at a balanced result as a result of this budget review. The proposed budget changes are detailed in Attachment 1.

Council Resolutions impacting the Budget Result

There were no resolutions of Council during the April to June quarter that affected the budget result.

Budget Adjustments

The budget adjustments identified in Attachments 1 and 2 for the General Fund have been summarised by Directorate in the following table:

Budget Directorate	Revenue Increase/ (Decrease) $	Expenditure Increase/ (Decrease) $	Budget Result Increase/ (Decrease) $
General Manager	3,100	3,100	0
Corporate & Community Services	1,951,800	1,889,600	62,200
Infrastructure Services	(1,097,200)	(1,094,600)	(2,600)
Sustainable Environment & Economy	413,100	472,700	(59,600)
Total Budget Movements	1,270,800	1,270,800	0

Budget Adjustment Comments

General Fund budget adjustments are identified in detail at Attachment 1 and 2. More detailed notes on these are provided in Attachment 1 with the majority of budget revotes proposed to reflect actual results achieved.

The major consideration with this budget review is the reduction in expenditure associated with projects not completed and under-expenditure. Council will also be considering a report to this Ordinary Council Meeting regarding carryover items from the 2018/2019 financial year for work not completed to be added to the 2019/2020 Budget Estimates. This report also considers the implications of that report.

Specific Cash Position

On reconciling Council’s total cash and investment position at 30 June 2019 compared to the reserve movements outlined in this Budget Review, there is an indication that Council may have total unrestricted cash and investments of $1,145,200 – the same level as 2018. Council commenced the 2018/2019 financial year with unrestricted cash of $1,145,200 which was an attainment of one of Council’s short term financial goals. The actual amounts eventually allocated are contingent upon finalisation of the 2018/2019 financial statements. These are subject to external audit and further reporting to Council.

WATER FUND

After completion of the 2017/2018 Financial Statements the Water Fund as at 30 June 2018 had a capital works reserve of $6,923,500 and held $3,857,800 in section 64 developer contributions.

The estimated Water Fund reserve balances as at 30 June 2019, and forecast in this Quarter Budget Review, are derived as follows:

Capital Works Reserve

Opening Reserve Balance at 1 July 2018	$6,923,500
Plus original budget reserve movement	(2,627,400)
Less reserve funded carryovers from 2017/2018	(375,700)
Resolutions July - September Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	89,900
Resolutions October - December Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
December Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	515,600
Resolutions January - March Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
March Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	2,561,000
Resolutions April - June Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
June Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	1,240,800
Forecast Reserve Movement for 2018/2019 – Increase / (Decrease)	1,404,200
Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2019	$8,327,700

Section 64 Developer Contributions

Opening Reserve Balance at 1 July 2018	$3,857,800
Plus original budget reserve movement	(746,400)
Less reserve funded carryovers from 2017/2018	(503,800)
Resolutions July - September Quarter – increase / (decrease)	(430,000)
September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	74,000
Resolutions October - December Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
December Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	0
Resolutions January - March Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
March Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	442,000
Resolutions April - June Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
June Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	423,400
Forecast Reserve Movement for 2018/2019 – Increase / (Decrease)	(740,800)
Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2019	$3,117,000

Movements for Water Fund can be seen in Attachment 1 with a proposed estimated increase to reserves (including S64 Contributions) overall of $1,664,200 from this review.

SEWERAGE FUND

After completion of the 2017/2018 Financial Statements the Sewer Fund as at 30 June 2018 had a capital works reserve of $8,706,800 and plant reserve of $704,400. It also held $9,051,600 in section 64 developer contributions.

Capital Works Reserve

Opening Reserve Balance at 1 July 2018	$8,706,800
Plus original budget reserve movement	(3,480,800)
Less reserve funded carryovers from 2017/2018	(1,454,800)
Resolutions July - September Quarter – increase / (decrease)	(1,330,000)
September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	258,600
Resolutions October - December Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
December Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	2,099,000
Resolutions January - March Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
March Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	2,177,800
Resolutions April - June Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
June Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	274,600
Forecast Reserve Movement for 2018/2019 – Increase / (Decrease)	(1,455,600)
Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2019	$7,251,200

Plant Reserve

Opening Reserve Balance at 1 July 2018	$704,400
Plus original budget reserve movement	0
Less reserve funded carryovers from 2017/2018	0
Resolutions July - September Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	0
Resolutions October - December Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
December Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	0
Resolutions January - March Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
March Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	0
Resolutions April - June Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
June Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	69,000
Forecast Reserve Movement for 2018/2019 – Increase / (Decrease)	69,000
Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2019	$773,400

Section 64 Developer Contributions

Opening Reserve Balance at 1 July 2018	$9,051,600
Plus original budget reserve movement	(27,900)
Less reserve funded carryovers from 2017/2018	(1,018,700)
Resolutions July - September Quarter – increase / (decrease)	(1,020,000)
September Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	(50,400)
Resolutions October - December Quarter – increase / (decrease)	(856,000)
December Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	50,000
Resolutions January - March Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
March Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	884,400
Resolutions April - June Quarter – increase / (decrease)	0
June Quarterly Review Adjustments – increase / (decrease)	1,672,100
Forecast Reserve Movement for 2018/2019 – Increase / (Decrease)	(366,500)
Estimated Reserve Balance at 30 June 2019	$8,685,100

Movements for the Sewerage Fund can be seen in Attachment 1 with a proposed estimated overall increase to reserves (including S64 Contributions) of $2,015,700 from this Budget Review.

Legal Expenses

Legal expenses are funded by general revenue and can potentially be a significant cost and also one which is subject to fluctuation.

The table that follows indicates the allocated budget and actual legal expenditure within Council on

a fund basis as at 30 June 2019.

Total Legal Income and Expenditure as at 30 June 2019

Program	2018/2019 Budget ($)	Actual ($)	Percentage To Revised Budget
Income
Legal Expenses Recovered	4,000	4,000	100%
Total Income	4,000	4,000	100%

Expenditure
General Legal Expenses	433,200	409,964	94.64%
Total Expenditure General Fund	429,200	405,964	94.59%

Note: The above table does not include costs incurred by Council in proceedings after 30 June 2019 or billed after this date. During the financial year, an additional $230,600 was added to the original budget of $202,600. This was allocated at the 31 December 2019 and March 2019 Quarterly Budget Reviews with funding from the legal services reserve.

The current status of the Legal Services Reserve is shown below:

Legal Reserve

Opening Reserve Balance at 1 July 2018	$318,100
Less:-
Legal Services Officer	(70,300)
General Legal Expenses (December 2018 QBR)	(104,000)
General Legal Expenses (March 2019 QBR)	(99,400)
Proposed 30 June 2019 Quarter Budget Review Adjustment	76,400
Estimated Reserve Balance at as at 30 June 2019	$120,800

Financial Implications

The 30 June 2019 Quarter Budget Review of the 2018/2019 Budget Estimates forecasts no change to the estimated budget attributable to the General Fund assuming all revotes of income and expenditure reported for Council’s consideration are approved. Overall, the short term financial position still needs to be carefully monitored on an ongoing basis but maintaining this result through the financial year is a good outcome.

It is expected, given the level of reserve funds compared to total cash and investments at 30 June 2019, that Council may have succeeded in maintaining an unrestricted cash balance, currently estimated as at least $1,145,200. This is another positive achievement.

Notwithstanding that Council has maintained its short term funding liquidity goal, longer term financial sustainability requirements, such as the provision of adequate funding for the maintenance and renewal of infrastructure assets, still need careful monitoring and management.

Note that the financial outcomes outlined in this Budget Review should be considered in the context that they are indicative. Council is yet to finalise its financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2019 which will also be subject to external independent audit.

It is expected that Council will receive a report regarding the formal adoption of its financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2019 at its Ordinary Meeting on 24 October 2019.

This report was also considered by the Finance Advisory Committee at its meeting held on 8 August 2019.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	L2	CSP Strategy	L3	DP Action	L4	OP Activity
Community Objective 5: We have community led decision making which is open and inclusive	5.5	Manage Council’s finances sustainably	5.5.1	Enhance the financial capability and acumen of Council	5.5.1.1		Financial reporting as required provided to Council and Management

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

In accordance with Regulation 203 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 the Responsible Accounting Officer of a Council must:-

(1) Not later than 2 months after the end of each quarter (except the June quarter), the responsible accounting officer of a council must prepare and submit to the council a budget review statement that shows, by reference to the estimate of income and expenditure set out in the statement of the council’s revenue policy included in the operational plan for the relevant year, a revised estimate of the income and expenditure for that year.

(2) A budget review statement must include or be accompanied by:

(a) a report as to whether or not the responsible accounting officer believes that the statement indicates that the financial position of the council is satisfactory, having regard to the original estimate of income and expenditure, and

(b) if that position is unsatisfactory, recommendations for remedial action.

(1) A budget review statement must also include any information required by the Code to be included in such a statement

Statement by Responsible Accounting Officer

This report indicates that the short term financial position of the Council is still satisfactory for the 2018/2019 financial year, having consideration of the original estimate of income and expenditure at the 30 June 2019 Quarter Budget Review.

This opinion is based on the estimated Unrestricted Cash Result position and the maintenance overall of a balanced budget result for the 2018/2019 financial year.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Corporate and Community Services 13.19

Report No. 13.19 Delivery Program 6-monthly Report and 2018/19 Operational Plan Fourth Report - Q4 - to 30 June 2019

Directorate: Corporate and Community Services

Report Author: Heather Sills, Corporate Governance Officer

File No: I2019/1177

Summary:

Council’s Operational Plan outlines its projects and activities to achieve the commitments in its four-year Delivery Program. In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 progress reports must be provided at least every six months.

This report represents the second ‘6-monthly edition’ of the Quarterly Report, providing an additional reporting layer regarding the Council’s progress toward the higher level actions of the Delivery Program.

Notably 81% of Council’s operational plan activities were achieved in 2018/19, compared to 52% during 2017/18. The total number of activities also increased from 238 to 301.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council notes the Delivery Program 6-monthly Report and 2018/19 Operational Plan Fourth Quarter Report for the period ending 30 June 2019 (Attachment 1 #E2019/55728).

Attachments:

1 Delivery Program 6-monthly Report and Operational Plan Quarter Report - Q4 - to 30 June 2019, E2019/55728

REPORT

Background

The Delivery Program and Operational Plan are two key corporate documents that establish Council’s goals and priorities for the term of the Council and the current financial year.

The Delivery Program (4-year) outlines the principal activities to be undertaken to implement the strategies established by the Community Strategic Plan (10-year), within the resources available under the Resourcing Strategy. All plans, projects, activities, and funding allocations must be directly linked to this program.

The Delivery Program is supported by the annual Operational Plan, which spells out the individual projects and activities that will be undertaken for the year to achieve the commitments made in the Delivery Program.

The General Manager is required to provide six monthly progress reports to the Council on the progress toward the delivery program, in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 s404 which states:

“The general manager must ensure that regular progress reports are provided to the council reporting as to its progress with respect to the principal activities detailed in its delivery program. Progress reports must be provided at least every 6 months”

While the requirement is six monthly reporting, the Council is provided with a Quarterly Report on the activities in the Operational Plan, to promote effective and efficient reporting and decision making.

As this is the last quarter report for the 2018/19 financial year, this report details Council’s achievement for the activities in the 2018/19 Operational Plan. Overall, Council achieved 81% of planned activities against the measures in the plan. This compares to 52% during 2017/18. The total number of activities also increased from 238 to 301.

The report (Attachment 1 #E2019/55728) is structured by the five ‘Our Byron, Our Future’ Community Strategic Plan 2028 objectives and the below graph illustrates the achievements against each of these objectives:

· Community Objective 1: We have infrastructure, transport and services which meet our expectations

· Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community

· Community Objective 3: We protect and enhance our natural environment

· Community Objective 4: We manage growth and change responsibly

· Community Objective 5: We have community led decision making which is open and inclusive

Each section in the report notes the progress against the activities including:

· Activity

· Responsible directorate

· Measure

· Timeframe

· Comments

· Status

o Achieved – Indicates that the planned activity was achieved in accordance with the timeframe, measures, and budget

o Substantially Achieved – greater than 50% achievement for the planned activity

o Partly Achieved – less than 50% achievement for the planned activity

o Deferred / Delayed – activity has been deferred or delayed. These activities will be considered in the first quarterly review of the 2019/20 Operational Plan.

Achievements

Council achieved 81% of its actions during this period, compared to 52% the prior year. This is attributed to a number of factors including:

· Improved monitoring and measurement of activities

· More regular reporting on activities provided to Executive Team, Councillors and community

· More realistic planning and scheduling of activities

· Working better together

· Broader and improved community input

Key achievements include:

· Construction of Bayshore Drive/Ewingsdale Road roundabout completed

· Approved funding for the Byron Bay Bypass announced in December 2019 and tender awarded by May 2019

· Conducted laser assessment of condition of entire sealed road network to provide data on additional key parameters

· Delivered detailed asset inspection program of Council and Community Buildings through an innovative approach working with Southern Cross University and achieved high quality outcome and cost significantly less than using consultants

· Engaged community on Bike Plan and Pedestrian and Access Mobility Plan (PAMP)

· Awarded tender for the supply and installation of solar the Sewerage Treatment Plans in Bangalow, Byron, and Brunswick Valley

· Commenced car share trial in Byron Bay and Mullumbimby

· Supported more than 280 events across the Shire and held three event workshops

· Completed the Mullumbimby Hospital project reference group (PRG) in November 2018

· Completed Rough Sleepers street count in August 2018

· Submitted proposal outlining Responses to 'Rough Sleeping' to Department of Premier and Cabinet

· Held successful Safe Summer in the Bay event

· Secured Crime Prevention grant funding and project commenced to complete lighting upgrade in Byron Bay

· Developed draft Community Resilience Plan

· Held Heritage Forum August 2018

· Undertook robust engagement to prepare Draft Integrated Pest Management Strategy including professional peer review and a quality document that uses diagrams and pictures and layered information to tell the story

· Awarded two grants to assist in implementing the Flying Fox Camp Management Plan

· Adopted Zero Emissions Strategy

· Adopted Recycled Water Strategy

· Received Gateway Determination public exhibition for EZone Planning Proposal (PP) #1

· Adopted Bangalow Village Plan

· Held Byron Housing Roundtable Forum in July 2018

· Identified various land parcels by landowners for the Accessible Housing Project through an EOI process

· Launched Byron Unfolded map in August 2018

· Held AusIndustry - Incubators Workshop in August 2018

· Conducted extensive community engagement to inform Sustainable Visitation Strategy – including Kitchen Table Book sessions, 1200 survey responses, and 30 participant Panel

· Developed draft Rural Function Centre planning controls and put on public exhibition

· Adopted Community Engagement Policy which incorporates community-led governance principles

· Developed "Byron Model" for democracy with panel of randomly selected citizens and stakeholders

· Improved quarterly reporting on Council’s Delivery Program and Operational Plan

· Developed ‘Customer Services Promises’

· Delivered staff training initiatives

· Implemented new online induction Learning Management System

· Installed new server hardware and configured improving computing capability

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective		L2	CSP Strategy		L3	DP Action		L4		OP Activity
Community Objective 5: We have community led decision making which is open and inclusive	5.2			Create a culture of trust with the community by being open, genuine and transparent	5.2.1		Provide timely, accessible and accurate information to the community		5.2.1.3		Report on progress of Delivery Program actions

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

The General Manager is required under Section 404 (5) of the Local Government Act 1993 to provide regular progress reports as to the Council’s progress with respect to the principal activities detailed in the Delivery Program/Operational Plan. Progress reports must be provided at least every six months.

Financial issues

Council’s financial performance for the reporting period is addressed in the Quarterly Budget Review, which is subject to a separate report included in this business paper.

Consultation and Engagement

The development of the Delivery Program was informed by extensive engagement around the Community Strategic Plan and specifically a Community Solutions Panel on infrastructure priorities.

The progress reports on the Delivery Plan will be published on Council’s website as a way of ensuring transparency around how Council is progressing activities and actions.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.20

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report No. 13.20 Update on the Sustainable Visitation Strategy

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Sarah Workman, Tourism Officer

Lisa Richards, Tourism Officer

File No: I2019/978

Summary:

This report provides Council with an update on the outcomes from the Sustainable Visitation Strategy community engagement program, in particular the Community Solutions Panel. Details on the project’s next steps are also outlined.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council note update on the Sustainable Visitation Strategy.

REPORT

Over the last five months the following community engagement has been undertaken to inform the development of the Sustainable Visitation Strategy (SVS):

1. Over twenty interviews with Council staff - these were conducted to understand the impacts of tourism on their roles/departments and what strategies / policies / procedures are recommended to assist their areas in the sustainable management of tourism.

2. Three focus group sessions with visitors - these included; visitors that had been to Byron Shire for the first time; repeat visitors and those considering visiting Byron Shire to gain their perspective.

3. Eleven community and industry workshops which facilitated a kitchen table discussion (60 attendees).

4. Kitchen Table Handbook driven communications campaign was created to encourage the community to engage in the kitchen table discussions and respond to the survey. Council received over 1,200 responses from the local community.

5. Byron Shire Tourism product audit of accommodation, attractions, restaurants, wellness centres and activities to compare growth over the last ten years.

6. Convened a Community Solutions Panel (CSP) of 26 Byron Shire residents and/or ratepayers. An 80 page briefing book which contained the results of all the engagement was developed by staff and used by the CSP to answer the following question – What actions can Council take to align community values with visitor behaviour?

The Sustainable Visitation Strategy Community Solutions Panel (CSP)

Three workshops were held in May and June, with the final CSP held on Saturday 22 June 2019 and the outcomes/recommendations from the Panel were reported to Councillors at the Strategic Planning Workshop (SPW) on 1 August 2019. The image below shows two members of the CSP presenting to Councillors at the SPW.

The Community Solutions Panel looked at strategies and actions that will be categorised under the following four criteria developed by the Global Sustainable Tourism Council, which forms part of the Sustainable Visitation Strategy (SVS):

1. Maximise economic benefits to the host community and minimise negative impacts,

2. Maximise benefits to the environment and minimise negative impacts,

3. Demonstrate sustainable destination management, and

4. Maximise benefits to communities, visitors and culture and minimise negative impacts.

The CSP received a summary of the community’s feedback from the kitchen table discussions and built on this through their own deliberations, workshopping and ideas. Some of the Panel’s recommendations are as follows:

· Educate the local community and visitors regarding initiatives that support sustainable tourism values in the Shire

· Maintain and provide additional infrastructure in high-use visitor areas – improve standards to encourage respect by visitors

· Develop a marketing campaign to attract visitors with shared community values. By not actively marketing Council is not attracting visitors with shared community values

· Develop more tourism product geared towards the family market

· Develop a short-term holiday letting policy and educate visitors and property owners on the expectations and consequences for poor behaviour

· Encourage indigenous culture awareness and tourism

· Investigate ways of ensuring long-term viability of visitor centres in the Shire

· Disperse visitors to all towns and villages within Byron Shire to keep all townships thriving

· Develop a sustainable shire-wide tourism transport strategy that links with public transport infrastructure

· Improve accessibility to tourist areas

· Develop a comprehensive research program to monitor visitation and community and visitor attitudes

· Provide and encourage tourism businesses the opportunity to become and maximise sustainability and show environment respect to support the Byron culture and community’s values

· Develop initiatives to discourage anti-social behaviour and improve safety

· Continue to encourage sustainable waste free events that highlight the environment

· Look at ways to increase funding for tourism

Council would like to take the opportunity to thank the members of the Community Solutions Panel for their commitment, critical thinking and dedication at each meeting. This feedback has been invaluable to the development of the SVS.

Members of the Sustainable Visitation Strategy Community Solutions Panel.

In addition to the CSP’s feedback, some of the areas of sustainable tourism criteria that will be developed further while writing the SVS will be as follows:

· Monitoring visitors

· Tourism seasonality management

· Climate change adaption

· Planning regulations

· Access for all

· Visitor satisfaction

· Sustainability standards

· Safety and security

· Crisis and emergency management

· Economic monitoring

· Local career opportunities

· Attraction protection

· Cultural heritage protection

· Site interpretation

· Environmental risks

· Protection of sensitive environments

· Wildlife protection

· Greenhouse gas emissions

· Energy conservation

· Water management

· Water security

· Water quality

· Wastewater

· Solid waste reduction

· Light and noise pollution

· Low-impact transportation

Next steps

August to October 2019 Draft SVS

December 2019 Draft SVS to Council for consideration

February 2020 Public Exhibition for 6 weeks

June 2020 SVS to Council for adoption.

Staff are preparing an award submission to the IAP2 awards for community engagement in 2020 on the SVS engagement process. Submissions open in February 2020.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 4: We manage growth and change responsibly

4.4

Support tourism and events that reflect our culture and lifestyle

4.4.1

Build a tourism industry that delivers local and regional benefits in line with the community’s values

4.4.1.1

Develop a new Byron Shire Sustainable Visitation Plan

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Local Government Act 1993.

Financial Considerations

Project resourced through existing budget allocation.

Consultation and Engagement

Community engagement is outlined above. The Sustainable Visitation Strategy will be placed on public exhibition in February 2020.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Sustainable Environment and Economy 13.22

Report No. 13.22 PLANNING -10.2018.486.1 Redevelopment of Brunswick Heads Surf Life Saving Club - Deferred

Directorate: Sustainable Environment and Economy

Report Author: Patricia Docherty, Planner

File No: I2019/1169

DA No:	10.2018.486.1
Proposal description:	Redevelopment of Brunswick Heads Surf Life Saving Club.
Property description:	LOT: 427 DP: 729272
	South Beach Road BRUNSWICK HEADS
Parcel No/s:	181600
Applicant:	Joe Davidson Town Planning
Owner:	Byron Shire Council
Zoning:	7 f1 Coastal Land Zone
Date received:	24 September 2018
Integrated / Designated Development:	☐ Integrated	☐ Designated	☒ Not applicable
Concurrence required	No
Public notification or exhibition:	- Level 2 advertising under DCP 2014 Part A14 – Public Notification and Exhibition of Development Applications - Exhibition period: 18/10/18 to 31/10/18 - Submissions received: one (1) Support
Variation request	☐ Clause 4.6	☐ SEPP 1	☒ Not applicable
Delegation to determine	Council
Issues:	Flood Liable Land – along western boundary. Acid Sulfate Soils Class 3 and 5 Coastal Erosion Precinct 1 Deferred by Council - 20 June 2019, Resolution Number 19-282

Summary:

Further to a Planning Meeting of Council on 20 June 2019, this report responds to Council Resolution Number 19-282 outlined below.

Resolved that determination of Development Application 10.2018.486.1 be deferred to the Planning Meeting in August subject to further information being provided in relation to the dog access track, development contributions, parking arrangements, the footprint and ensured preservation of the coastal dune.

The applicant has revised the Development Application (DA) plans and further assessment has been undertaken to address the matters raised.

The proposed development includes the demolition of the old surf club and replacement with a new and larger facility on the site. The new surf club building contains training rooms, storage areas, canteen, amenities and foyer at ground level and an additional training room, bar areas, kitchen, amenities, storage areas, cool rooms, function area and deck areas within the upper floor.

The old building was erected in the late 1960’s with the most recent additions completed in 1973. The existing building is no longer fit for purpose due to the overall degradation of building quality and is too small to accommodate essential surf life saving equipment and facilities.

The subject site is located South Beach Road and is zoned 7(f1) Coastal Lands Zone. Although the building is not relocatable, it is considered that it is sited sufficient distance from the Erosion escarpment some 70 metres to the east. In the event that the building was at risk of being damaged by Coastal Erosion Processes, it can be demolished.

The proposed surf club is consistent with the relevant environmental planning instruments and planning controls applicable to the site. The proposal raises no significant issues in terms of environmental impacts which cannot be managed and the site is considered suitable for the development. The application is recommended for approval subject to conditions of consent.

NOTE TO COUNCILLORS:

In accordance with the provisions of S375A of the Local Government Act 1993, a Division is to be called whenever a motion for a planning decision is put to the meeting, for the purpose of recording voting on planning matters. Pursuant to clause 2(a) under the heading Matters to be Included in Minutes of Council Meetings of Council's adopted Code of Meeting Practice (as amended) a Division will be deemed to have been called by the mover and seconder of all motions relating to this report.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That pursuant to Section 4.16 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, Development Application 10.2018.486.1 for redevelopment of Brunswick Heads Surf Life Saving Club, be granted consent subject to conditions in Attachment 2 (E2019/56291).

2. That under the Byron Shire Council Development Servicing Plans for Water Supply and Sewerage Adopted Plan (E2016/82468) 07 September 2016, a waiver to developer contributions is granted for the Brunswick Heads Surf Life Saving Club being a non-profit and charitable organisation that makes a significant and positive contribution to the community.

Attachments:

1 Amended DA Plans 1-10 plus colour schedule Brunswick Heads Surf Life Saving Club(3), E2019/56485

2 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF CONSENT 10.2018.486.1 22AUG 2019, E2019/56291

3 Tree Report Brunswick SLSC.pdf, E2019/56051

4 Design Statement 23-07-19.pdf, E2019/56050

5 Brunswick Surf Life Saving Club - Charity Confirmation.pdf, E2019/56199

6 Brunswick Heads SLSC Noise Impact Assessment prepared by Craig Hill Acoustics Dated July 24 2018.pdf.PDF, E2019/56045

Additional information:

https://www.byron.nsw.gov.au/Council/Council-meetings/Additional-Supporting-Information

REPORT

Assessment:

Further to a Planning Meeting of Council on 20 June 2019, this report responds to Council Resolution Number 19-282 outlined below.

The applicant has revised the Development Application (DA) plans and further assessment has been undertaken to address the matters raised. The original DA report is available at

https://byron.infocouncil.biz/Open/2019/06/PLA_20062019_AGN_1054.PDF. Amended DA plans are at Attachment 1.

Dog access track and preservation of vegetation

The existing access to the dog beach has been retained via the south side of the of the proposed surf club building. Pedestrian Access will be available on both sides of the building. The amended layout also ensures preservation of the vegetation mapped Coastal Dune Dry Sclerophyll Forest. A small retaining wall with a seating area has also been proposed.

The repositioned building requires removal of one non-native Cook Island Pine. Tree removal is supported by an arborist report at Attachment 3. Conditions of consent are recommended to require replacement planting with 15 native endemic plants is to be undertaken in a suitable location adjoining the public reserve to be determined in consultation with Council and the local Landcare team.

The relocation of vehicle access to the beach ramp via the foreshore reserve has been considered. Conditions of consent are recommended to require detailed construction plans to allow for a minimum 4 metre wide clearance on the southern side of the building to achieve suitable shared access, particularly for emergency vehicles, council maintenance trucks and all wheel drive (AWD) beach permit – disability access. Council planners and engineers consider that there is sufficient space for a shared pedestrian and vehicle zone with bollard control and operational management measures to be implemented, illustrated below.

Shared access zone - Dog track access and nominated path of travel for AWD beach permit holders

Vehicular access to the reserve is intermittent and includes disabled access for beach vehicle permit holders. For reference, in 2018 Council issued nine permits only. All beach vehicle permits expire as at 30 June each year. Conditions require permit holders to respect the operations of the surf club at all times. Permit conditions can also be reviewed and permit holders notified, to further accommodate the relocated access arrangements.

It is noted that representatives of the Brunswick Head Surf Life Saving Club have been in discussions with Council and Landcare to look at alternative vehicle access tracks to the beach for vehicle permit holders. Options include access via existing cleared areas of vegetation north and south of the club building for the purpose of minimising conflicts with beach permit vehicles and the patrolled part of the beach. The submitted plans for consideration with this DA do not preclude separate additional and alternative vehicle access options being explored.

Car parking

Car parking is to be constructed as recommended by Council’s engineers for 25 spaces including 2 of which will be disabled accessible. The applicant prepared a concept plan to demonstrate there is space within the road reserve in front of the proposed building to accommodate car parking including disabled accessible parking spaces (Refer to Sheet 2 of 10 in Attachment 1). Detailed construction plans will be prepared prior to issue of a construction certificate to accommodate the shared access space to the south of the building and car spaces that will facilitate access for all users.

Building footprint

Ground floor plan

The old building was erected in the late 1960’s with the most recent additions completed in 1973. The existing building is no longer fit for purpose due to the overall degradation of the building. It is too small to accommodate essential surf life saving equipment and facilities.

The applicant has prepared a detailed design statement (see Attachment 4). This explains the need for the size and layout of the modernised surf club and clearly describes the required configuration, particularly the ground floor footprint to accommodate essential surf life saving equipment including vehicles, patrol boats and training areas for both nippers and seniors. The size of the building footprint at ground floor level is determined by these needs.

This layout and configuration allows nippers and seniors training to happen concurrently, which is not possible at present.

The areas on the first floor will be available for bookings to the wider public.

Developer contributions

Brunswick Heads Surf Life Saving Club seeks a waiver to developer contributions under Section 2.7 of the Byron Shire Council Development Servicing Plans for Water Supply and Sewerage Adopted Plan (E2016/82468) 07 September 2016.

The Waiver provisions in the adopted Development Servicing Plan (DSP) are as follows:

Correspondence is attached (Attachment 5) demonstrating that Brunswick Heads Surf Life Saving Club is a non-profit and charitable organisation, which by virtue of carrying out such development, is considered to be making a significant and positive contribution to the community and is unable to recover the charge from the end user.

In this regard, the applicant has stated that all money currently and proposed to be generated is used to run the building and that as part of the club’s licence with the Crown, they are required to reinvest all monies back into the club, including running/maintenance costs. The surf club provide essential surf life saving rescue services to all beach users.

It is recommended that Council consider a waiver to the developer contributions on this basis. This has been further considered by Council’s ET Engineer in discussions with Rous Water as they have the same waiver provisions in their DSP.

The draft recommended conditions of consent still include reference to payment of developer charges for water and sewer (condition No. 10), which will be applicable unless Council resolves to waiver charges under the DSP.

Other matters

The amended plans make provision for roof-top solar panels and underground rain water tanks.

The original report to Council in June 2019 approved an acoustic report in recommended conditions of consent (No.1). The acoustic report lodged with the application in September 2018 was considered by Council’s Environmental Health Officer. For reference, a copy of the acoustic report is at Attachment 6.

The adjoining vegetation is not an Endangered Ecological Community (EEC). It is mapped Coastal Dune Dry Sclerophyll Forest and mapping attributes identify the plant community as Coast Banksia.

The subject site is zoned 7(f1) Coastal Lands Zone. Although the building is not relocatable, it is considered that it is sited sufficient distance from the erosion escarpment some 70 metres to the east. In the event that the building was at risk of being damaged by coastal erosion processes, it can be demolished.

The application is recommended for approval subject to conditions of consent and a waiver of charges under the Development Servicing Plan being supported by Council.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 13.23

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services

Report No. 13.23 Council Road Reserve Closure and Transfer - Arakwal & Morgan - Bangalow Road, Byron Bay

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Deanna Savage, Roads and Property Officer

File No: I2019/590

Summary:

This report addresses the request to close a portion of Council road reserve adjacent to Broken Head Road, Byron Bay. It is noted that the applicant for the road closure and its subsequent acquisition and main beneficiary is the Arakwal Aboriginal Corporation. The reason for closure is to achieve a consolidated allotment and gain a building entitlement. The owner of Lot 320 DP 755695 will also benefit from the closure and will be offered a section of road reserve that fronts their property, subject to the closure being finalised. Their legal right of access is currently along the road reserve.

In 2012 Council resolved to go ahead with the closure, however due to process changes with the Crown the proposal had to go through a submission process and any objections needed to be addressed and an updated Council resolution passed. A submission from Department of Primary Industries Land objecting to the closure has been addressed and a compromise has been found between all parties.

Due to new legislative changes to the Roads Act 1993 the application for road closure was unable to be processed through the old legislation and a new road closure process was commenced.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council endorse the finalisation of the closure of the road reserve between Lot 320 DP 755695 and Lot 438 DP 729107 as per Resolution 12-820 and Resolution 17-006 and move forward with registration of plans with Land Registry Services and all documentation to facilitate the closure of the road.

2. That Council authorise the execution of all documents necessary to affect the road closure and consolidation.

Attachments:

1 PDF map of new proposal for Arakwal Lot 438 DP 729107 and Lot 320 DP 755695, E2016/105113

2 Emailed Signed Copy of approval on behalf of Byron Bay Aboriginal Corp - 24th September 2016 re: Council road reserve closure and transfer Lot 438 DP 729107 with new driveway going right through road reserve., E2016/102115

3 Signed Part Road Reserve Closure adjoining Lot 438 DP 729107, Lot 320 DP 755695 and Lot 443 DP 820680 - Refer E2016/80299, S2016/15446

4 Report 02/02/2017 Council Council Road Reserve Closure and Transfer - Bangalow Road, Byron Bay, I2016/263

5 Final Plan 250 Bangalow Rd Lot 320 DP 755695 , Crown Reserve 69040 Lot 443 DP 820680 and Crown Reserve 67201 Lot 438 DP 729107, E2019/29572

6 Signed admin and Section 88B between 250 Bangalow Rd Lot 320 DP 755695 , Crown Reserve 69040 Lot 443 DP 820680 and Crown Reserve 67201 Lot 438 DP 729107, E2019/29571

7 Submissions for road closure Part Road Closure adjoining Lot 320 DP 755695 Lot 438 DP 729107 and Lot 443 DP 820680, E2019/55317

8 Email trail Crown to NTS Corp regarding notification FW ~ Part Road Closure adjoining Lot 320 DP 755695 Lot 438 DP 729107 and Lot 443 DP 820680, E2019/55127

9 Email response Native Title Services Corporation RE - Road closure, E2019/55128

Report

Council Resolution History

The Biannual LEP Amendments report to Council on 24 June 2010 cited the fact that the:

“Arakwal Aboriginal Corporation is currently undergoing negotiations with Department of Lands to acquire Lot 438 DP729107 and through this process they are also likely to acquire the road reserve (marked in blue on Figure 3.1) or part thereof that adjoins the western boundary of Lot 438 DP729107.”

Council Resolved:

10-492 Resolved:

“That a Planning Proposal, funded by the applicant, be prepared to amend the Byron 1988 LEP to provide for a dwelling entitlement under Schedule 7 for Lot 438 DP 729107 including the road reserve to the west.”

In the acquisition of this land (Lot 438) and in consideration of the Arakwal Aboriginal Corporation also acquiring the road reserve along its western boundary, negotiations had to take place with the owner of the adjacent land (Lot 320) to ensure legal access remained in place.

Figure 1 above shows the general locality of the land in question.

Figure 2 below shows the detail of the land matters in question.

Council then considered a further report on 25 August 2011 where Council resolved:

11-699 Resolved:

1. That Council forward the planning proposal contained in Annexure 8 (#1076432) to the Department of Planning for drafting of the LEP amendment and finalisation.

2. That access to the adjoining Lot 320 and the issue of the road reserve be resolved as a matter of urgency prior to the lodgement of a development application for a dwelling on Lot 438, DP 729107, Bangalow Road, Byron Bay.

3. That the draft Shire-wide LEP mapping for this site be amended to suit the future location of a dwelling and to remove any zoning anomalies.

In order for the process to continue at this point, Council needed further direction and resolution of Council before the application for road closure could be lodged with Crown. This then led to the report on 25 October 2012, as per resolution 12-820 Council resolved:

1. That Council endorse the closure of the road reserve between Lot 320 DP755695 and Lot

438 DP729107 and its extension to the north adjoining the western alignment of Broken

Head Road.

2. That Council require the applicants of the road closure to pay the fee as published in Council’s Fees and Charges 2012- 2013 for a road closure, in the sum of $495.00.

3. That all costs, including but not necessarily limited to, legal services, fees for Crown

Lands, fees for plan registrations, survey, valuations etc be met by all three parties equally, being Council, Arakwal Corporation and Mr John Morgan, for the road closure and that Council’s costs come from the Roads Maintenance Budget.

4. That Council receive a peppercorn compensation of $1 upon sale of land for closure of road.

5. That any service relocations and works associated with affecting the access arrangements for Lot 320 not be at any cost to Council and be solely a matter between the owners of Lot 320 and Lot 438 and any relevant service authority.

6. That Council authorise the General Manager and the Mayor to sign and seal all relevant documents to affect the road closure and transfer of lands to the adjoining land holders.

(Wanchap/Ibrahim)

Canty’s Surveyors was retained to draw up the plans to accompany the application for road closure to Crown. The completion of this task took a considerable amount of time and was finalised in November 2015. Attachment 1 E2016/105113

The road closure was advertised in the Byron Shire News on the 5 November 2015 and all adjoining landholders and authorities were notified of the proposal. This allowed for a 28 day submission process. Both Rous Water and Telstra requested further easements to be put on the plan which will be altered before the application is lodged with Crown.

Council received a submission of objection from The Department of Primary Industries – Lands objecting on the grounds that practical access would be lost to Crown Land Lot 443 DP 820680 indicated by the arrow on image below, due to obstruction by drainage infrastructure at the location.

Further discussions were had with The Department of Primary Industries – Lands and an interim agreement was made, with an additional 10m frontage onto Bangalow Road, allowing for a total 21.465m frontage and access to Lot 443 DP 820680. (Attachment 2 E2016/105113)

A meeting was held on 30 August 2016 with Phillip Holloway – Director Infrastructure Services, Deanna Savage – Administration Officer Infrastructure Services, the owner of Lot 320 DP 755695 and a representative of the Bundjalung of Byron Bay Aboriginal Corp (Arakwal) to discuss the new proposal from The Department of Primary Industries – Lands.

As per Figure 3 below Council proposed the following:

Section 1 (shaded in blue Figure 3) to be allocated to the owner of Lot 320 DP 755695

Section 2 (shaded in red Figure 3) to be allocated to Bundjalung of Byron Bay Aboriginal Corp (Arakwal) Lot 438 DP 729107

Figure 3

An agreement was drawn up for both owners with the new proposal which has been signed (Attachments 2 E2016/102115 and 3 S2016/15446) by both parties.

A resolution of Council was needed to accompany the road closure application. A report was prepared (Attachment 4 I2016/263).

As per resolution 17-006 Council resolved:

1.That Council endorse the finalisation of the closure of the road reserve between Lot 320 DP 755695 and Lot 438 DP 729107 as per Resolution 12-820 and move forward by submitting the application with Crown.

2.That Council authorise the General Manager and the Mayor to sign and seal all relevant documents to affect the road closure and transfer of lands to the adjoining land holders.

Council was now able to move forward with the application to Crown for the road closure and subsequent transfer to the adjoining land properties.

The road closure process was nearly finalised and plans, administration sheets and section 88B were all sitting with Land Registry Services (LRS) to be registered (Attachments 5 E2019/29572 and 6 E2019/29571). Due to time constraints with new legislation and LRS requisitions this road closure was unable to be processed through the old legislation and a new road closure application was commenced under the new legislation.

This was advertised in the Byron Echo on 27 February 2019 and letters went out to adjoining land owners and authorities giving a 28 day submission period which closed on the 29 March 2019.

All submissions can be viewed at Attachment 7 E2019/55317.

As all the ground work had been completed in the prior application this application is just going through the motions under the new legislation.

With the new Native Title Bundjalung Determination, Crown contacted Native Title Services Corporation (NTS Corp) Attachment 8 E2019/55127 for comment on the road closure. The report was held over awaiting a response. The response can be viewed at Attachment 9 E2019/55128

A resolution of Council is now required to finalise the road closure process. The final plan, administration sheet and accompanying Section 88B will be registered with Land Registry Services. Once this is completed a plan of consolidation will also need to be drawn up and registered with LRS.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	L2	CSP Strategy	L3	DP Action	L4	OP Activity
Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community	2.1	Support and encourage our vibrant culture and creativity	2.1.6	Develop strong and productive relationships between the Aboriginal community and Council	2.1.6.1	Formalise relationships with identified stakeholder groups in the Shire and undertake appropriate, meaningful consultation
Community Objective 1: We have infrastructure, transport and services which meet our expectations	1.1	Provide a road network which is safe, accessible and maintained to an acceptable level of service	1.1.2	Develop maintenance levels for road network infrastructure in line with Community Solutions Panel values (SP)	1.1.2.7	Undertake detailed road condition assessment and revaluation

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Roads Act 1993

Part 4 Closing of public roads

Division 3 Closing of council public roads by councils

38A When council may close council public road

A council may propose the closure of a council public road for which it is the roads authority if:

(a) the road is not reasonably required as a road for public use (whether for present or future needs), and

(b) the road is not required to provide continuity for an existing road network, and

(c) if the road provides a means of vehicular access to particular land, another public road provide lawful and reasonably practicable vehicular access to that land.

38B Notification of proposal to close council public road

(1) A council that is proposing to close a council public road must cause notice of the proposal:

(a) to be published in a local newspaper, and

(b) to be given to:

(i) all owners of land adjoining the road, and

(ii) all notifiable authorities, and

(iii) any other person (or class of person) prescribed by the regulations.

(2) The notice:

(a) must identify the road that is proposed to be closed, and

(b) must state that any person is entitled to make submissions to the council with respect to the closing of the road, and

(c) must indicate the manner in which, and the period (being at least 28 days) within which, any such submission should be made.

38C Public submissions and formal objections

(1) Any person may make submissions to the council with respect to the closing of the road in the manner and within the period specified in the notice published under section 38B.

(2) Without limiting subsection (1), a notifiable authority in relation to the road may include a

statement in the authority’s submission to the effect that the authority formally objects to the

closing of the road. The authority may withdraw the objection any time by written notice given

to the council.

Note.

If a formal objection is made, section 38D (2) provides that the road may not be closed until the

objection is withdrawn by the authority or set aside by the Land and Environment Court under this section.

(3) The council may appeal to the Land and Environment Court against a formal objection made by a notifiable authority against the closing of the road.

(4) On any such appeal, the Land and Environment Court may:

(a) affirm the objection, or

(b) set aside the objection.

(5) In deciding whether to affirm or set aside the objection, the Land and Environment Court must have regard to the public interest.

38D Decision of proposal

(1) After considering any submissions that have been duly made with respect to the proposal, the

council may, by notice published in the Gazette, close the public road concerned.

(2) However, a council public road may not be closed:

(a) in the case of a classified road—unless RMS consents to the closure of the road, or

(b) in the case where a notifiable authority has formally objected under section 38C to the

closing of the road—until the objection is withdrawn by the authority or set aside by the

Land and Environment Court under that section.

38E Effect of notice of closure

(1) On publication of the notice closing the council public road concerned:

(a) the road ceases to be a public road, and

(b) the rights of passage and access that previously existed in relation to the road are

extinguished.

(2) The land comprising a former road:

(a) in the case of a public road that was previously vested in a council (other than a public road in respect of which no construction has ever taken place)—remains vested in the council, and

(b) in any other case—becomes (or, if previously vested in the Crown, remains) vested in the Crown as Crown land.

38F Appeals to Land and Environment Court against closure decision

(1) A person referred to in section 38B (1) (b) may appeal to the Land and Environment Court against the closure of a council public road by a council.

(2) On any such appeal, the Land and Environment Court may:

(a) affirm the closure, or

(b) set aside the closure.

(3) Section 38E is taken never to have applied to a closure that is set aside.

(4) To avoid doubt, an appeal under section 38C does not prevent an appeal under this section.

SECT 43 Disposal of land comprising former public road owned by council

(1) This section applies to land vested in a council and forming part of a former public road.

(2) Land to which this section applies is operational land for the purposes of the Local Government Act 1993 unless, before the land becomes vested in the council, the council resolves that it is to be community land, in which case the land is community land.

(3) If the land is disposed of by sale, the proceeds of sale (less the costs of the sale) are to be paid to the council.

(4) Money received by a council from the proceeds of sale of the land is not to be used by the council except for acquiring land for public roads or for carrying out road work on public roads.

Financial Implications

As per resolution 12-820 Council resolved:

1. That Council require the applicants of the road closure to pay the fee as published in Council’s Fees and Charges 2012- 2013 for a road closure, in the sum of $495.00.

2. That all costs, including but not necessarily limited to, legal services, fees for Crown

3. That Council receive a peppercorn compensation of $1 upon sale of land for closure of road.

4. That any service relocations and works associated with affecting the access arrangements for Lot 320 not be at any cost to Council and be solely a matter between the owners of Lot 320 and Lot 438 and any relevant service authority.

Consultation and Engagement

Arakwal Aboriginal Corporation

Owners of all adjoining land including Department of Industry

Council through various reports and resolutions

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 13.25

Report No. 13.25 Byron Bay Bypass - Environmental Compensation Options Over & Above Project Requirements

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Phil Warner, Manager Assets and Major Projects

File No: I2019/902

Summary:

At the 23 May 2019 meeting, Council resolved:

That Council receive a report on establishing a biodiversity enhancement program separate to, and above that which is required by the BioBanking component within the Byron Bay alternate route construction, and that this report contain:-

1. Sites within the Byron Bay Wetland SEPP area suitable for enhancement

2. Possible sites adjacent, or close to the area in 1.

3. Estimated costs of works

4. Potential funding sources

5. Potential partners and collaborative organisations

This report to Council addresses Res 19-253.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council complete bush regeneration works on the Butler Street Reserve Bushland and Midgen Swamp sites with a proposed budget of $62,000 being considered as part of the 30 September 2019 Quarterly Budget Review.

2. That Council consider as part of the 2020/2021 Budget Estimates the provision of $36,500 for bush regeneration works on the Sunrise site in addition to the Butler Street Reserve Bushland and Midgen Swamp sites.

3. That the cost of these environmental compensation works be factored into Council’s Long Term Financial Plan as indicated in the report over the next five financial years.

REPORT

At the 23 May 2019 meeting, Council resolved (19-253):

1. Sites within the Byron Bay Wetland SEPP area suitable for enhancement

2. Possible sites adjacent, or close to the area in 1.

3. Estimated costs of works

4. Potential funding sources

5. Potential partners and collaborative organisations

The first phase of the investigation has been completed with the focus on land owned or controlled by Council. The report presents details on three options.

In the second stage of the investigation, it is proposed that Council conduct a EOI process to identify landowners in the Byron Bay wetland area who would like to work with council to facilitate and secure long term revegetation and regeneration outcomes.

Stage 1 Options

1) Sunrise Boulevard Bushland

2) Butler Street Reserve Bushland

3) Midgen Park and Swamp Suffolk

Option 1: Sunrise Boulevard Bushland

Location of Work

Sunrise Boulevard Bushland Reserve, Byron Bay.

Vegetation - Coastal Swamp Forest

Parcel Number 220150

Site Size – 12.05 Hectares

Option 2: Butler Street Reserve Bushland

Location of Work
Butler Street, Byron Bay.
Vegetation - Coastal Swamp Forest & Subtropical Rainforest
Parcel Numbers 238704, 129710, 160280, 142250
Site Size – 2.1 hectares (750m Perimeter)

Option 3; Midgen Park and Swamp Suffolk

Location of Work

Alcorn Street, Suffolk Park.

Vegetation - Coastal Swamp Forest & Littoral Rainforest

Parcel Numbers 108190, 108180

Site Size – 3.7 hectares

Proposed work on the Option Sites

All three (3) options would involve specialized bush regeneration techniques until the sites reach a point of stability and requiring only maintenance.

It is proposed that the work be completed by Council’s Bush Regeneration Team and that the annual budget for the team be increased subject to identification of funding to undertake the works.

The sites are impacted to varying degrees by weeds. For example a preliminary list of weeds for the Butler Street Reserve bushland is as follows:

Scientific name	Common name
Ageratina adenophora	Crofton Weed
Ageratina riparia	Mistweed
Ageratum houstonianum	Blue Mistweed
Archontophoenix alexandrae	Alexander Palm
Asparagus aethiopicus	Asparagus Fern
Ipomoea cairica	Five-leaved or Coast Morning Glory
Ochna serrulata	Ochna
Lantana camara	Lantana
Paspalum wettsteinii	Broad-leaved Paspalum
Passiflora subpeltata	White Passionflower
Pennisetum purpureum	Bana Grass
Phoenix canariensis	Date Palm
Psidium cattleyanum	Cherry Guava
Schefflera actinophylla	Umbrella Tree
Schinus terebinthifolius	Broad-leaved Pepper Tree
Senna pendula var. glabrata	Winter Senna
Setaria sphacelata	Setaria
Solanum mauritianum	Wild Tobacco
Solanum seaforthianum	Brazilian or Climbing Nightshade
Sphagneticola trilobata	Singapore Daisy
Strelitzia nicolai	Giant Bird of Paradise
Syagrus romanzoffianum	Cocos Palm
Urochloa mutica	Para Grass

Cost of the proposed works

A cost schedule for the three options over a five year period is as follows:

Site	Year 1	Year 2	Year 3	Year 4	Year 5
Sunrise	20,500	8,800	7,200	7,200	7,200
Butler Street	45,600	10,400	7,200	7,200	7,200
Midgen Park	15,600	5,600	5,600	4,000	4,000
TOTAL	81,700	24,800	20,000	18,400	18,400

Effective regeneration requires committed funding over forward years. Each site requires a diminishing budget until a point of stability is achieved and then only ongoing maintenance is required. The highest cost of regeneration for a new site is in the first year. For this reason it is recommended that the Butler Street and Midgen sites be established in the first year and the Sunrise site be established in the second year. This will reduce the initial funding requirement and smooth the forward funding cash flow.

Stage 2 Options

Resolution 19-253 speaks about potential partners and collaborative organisations.

In this second stage of the investigation, it is proposed that Council conduct a EOI process to identify landowners in the Byron Bay wetland area who would like to work with council to facilitate and secure long term revegetation and regeneration outcomes.

It is envisaged that in addition to a open and publicised EOI process, contact will be made with land owners who have previously shown an interest in revegetation and regeneration.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective

CSP Strategy

DP Action

OP Activity

Community Objective 1: We have infrastructure, transport and services which meet our expectations

1.1

Provide a road network which is safe, accessible and maintained to an acceptable level of service

1.1.5

Deliver road network new works program

1.1.5.1

Continue construction of the Byron Bay Bypass

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

There are no legal or policy considerations

Financial Considerations

It is proposed funding will be via a budget adjustment at the 30 September 2019 Quarterly Budget Review increasing the annual budget for the bush regeneration team by $62,000 for the 2019/2020 financial year subject to the identification of funding. Council has commenced the 2019/2020 financial year with a budget deficit of $132,400 and without the identification of funding for the works subject of this report, that deficit will increase to $194,400.

Council does have an environmental levy within its overall general rate revenue that for 2019/2020 equates to $382,800. This would seem to be a logical source of funding for these works but Council has fully allocated the expenditure of this levy to other projects including $199,800 for other bush regeneration works for the 2019/2020 financial year.

Should Council adopt the recommendations to this report, it will need to consider the funding obligation of these environmental compensation works over the subsequent four financial years post the 2019/2020 financial year in addition to financing the works in 2019/2020 to be addressed as part of the 30 September 2019 Quarter Budget Review.

Consultation and Engagement

Internal consultation has occurred for Stage 1 of the investigation. The proposed Stage 2 investigation will involve external consultation and engagement.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 13.26

Report No. 13.26 1 Broken Head Road Project

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Phil Warner, Manager Assets and Major Projects

File No: I2019/907

Summary:

In March 2018, Council undertook an Expression of Interest (EOI) process inviting submissions from capable and experienced organisations regarding the future use of the former South Byron STP site (1 Broken Head Road). The EOI process allowed Council to gauge the level of preliminary interest in the development of the site and to develop a short-list of tenderers for a further selective procurement process. The following organisations were shortlisted:

• The Village Retirement Group

• Archiblox and Byron Bay Eco Lodges

• The Living School

• National Affordable Housing Consortium.

Byron Shire Council issued a Request for Tender (RFT) for the 1 Broken Head Road Redevelopment on 8 March 2019 and closing on 17 May 2019.

The RFT was issued to the above four (4) shortlisted organisations.

Tenders have been assessed in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government (General) Regulations 2005. This report summarises the background and assessment of the tenders and provides a recommendation.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council decline to accept any of the tenders submitted for RFT 2019-0015 – 1 Broken Head Road Redevelopment.

2. That Council, in accordance with s178 part 3(a) under Local Government Regulation 2005, cancel the proposal for the contract.

Attachments:

1 Confidential - CONFIDENTIAL Redevelopment Tender Evaluation Report CONFIDENTIAL FINAL DRAFT, E2019/57134

Report

• The Village Retirement Group

• Archiblox and Byron Bay Eco Lodges

• The Living School

• National Affordable Housing Consortium.

Byron Shire Council issued a Request for Tender (RFT) for the 1 Broken Head Road Redevelopment on 8 March 2019 and closing on 17 May 2019. The RFT was issued to the above four shortlisted organisations.

An Evaluation Panel comprising of five Council staff members was formed.

Tenders were received from the following proponents:

· Archiblox and Byron Bay Eco Lodges

· The Living School

· National Affordable Housing Consortium.

The Village Retirement Group officially withdrew from the procurement process on 15 May 2019.

An initial compliance check was conducted by the Evaluation Panel to identify submissions that did not comply with the requirements of the RFT.

The Compliance Criteria are:

• Tender lodged on time, in accordance with the Conditions of Tender

• Respondent has a valid Australian Business Number

• Respondent substantially complies with the stated requirements

• Respondent substantially complies with the draft lease

• Commitment to ethical business practice principles

• Tenderer confirms no ties to Adani.

During the initial compliance check, the evaluation panel identified that all respondents did not comply with the compliance criteria. This outcome was checked with the probity advisor O’Connor Marsden.

The Evaluation Panel chose to continue and the tenders were evaluated in accordance with the following evaluation criteria:

Criteria	Description	Weighting
Financial Return	Financial viability of the Tender and financial benefit to Council. Elements which will be considered include: · Financial return to Council; and · Structure of financial return.	30%
Vision, concept design, delivery approach and operation	Tender alignment with Council’s Community Strategic Plan and vision for the Site, including: · Concept design; · Delivery approach; · Development staging and program; and · Management and long term operation.	25%
Economic and social benefits	Tender performance in the delivery of economic and social benefits for the immediate and broader Byron Shire Community. Elements which will be considered include: · Social benefits · Environmental benefits · Economic benefits.	20%
Financial capacity	Demonstrated financial capacity (including financial resources) indicating clear ability to fund, to manage and deliver a development of the size, character and complexity of the Project. Elements which will be considered include: · Financial status of the Tenderer; and · Structure of financial arrangements including the source and adequacy of the Tenderer's funding.	10%
Experience and capability	Demonstrated capability to plan, deliver and operate a development of the size, character and complexity of the Project. Elements which will be considered include: · Demonstrated understanding of the applicable planning approval pathway; · Proposed community engagement through all phase of the Project: · Team composition; · Experience in successfully delivering and operating similar projects; and · Capability and resources.	10%
Risk Management	Degree of demonstration of the Tenderer’s understanding of the proposed risk allocation and the Tenderer’s approach to managing and mitigating the risks the Tenderer proposes to accept.	5%

Each of the criteria was scored out of ten according to the following rating scale:

Score	Rating
10	Outstanding - Requirements are exceeded in most key areas & addressed to a very high standard in others. All claims are fully substantiated. The solution is sound and represents very low risk.
8	Very Good - Requirements have been exceeded in some key areas. Most claims are fully substantiated. The solution is sound and represents low risk.
6	Acceptable - Requirements have been met to a satisfactory standard.
4	Passable - Requirements have been met but to a very low standard. The solution is passable but some major shortcomings or deficiencies could make the solution unworkable. The solution is of high to medium risk.
2	Marginal - Requirements have not been fully met or have been inadequately dealt with in most or all areas. The business solution is unclear. Clarification may rectify the understanding of the solution. The solution is of high risk.
0	Non-Compliant - The offer completely failed to respond to the criteria

The results of the evaluation are detailed in the attached confidential tender evaluation report.

In summary, all tenders resulted in comparatively low scores.

As reflected in the low scores, none of the responses significantly meet Council’s strategic objectives for the redevelopment of the site. Economic and social benefits are at most marginal and targeted at small segments of the broader Byron community. Financial return over 25 year could not be consistently assessed. This was an important criteria for Council as a financial return to the Sewer Fund could variously repay loans, lower service pricing or potentially support environmental outcomes aligned with sewer operations.

Key issues

Site Remediation

To date the former STP site has been subjected to extensive environmental investigations, demolition of the STP infrastructure and the recent remediation of the nightsoil area in early 2019.

The project team has been working with a Contaminated Site Auditor, the environmental consultant and Council staff and the preferred option for the final remediation the former South Byron STP site has been selected. This option includes relocating and capping the remaining contaminated material on site by creating an L–shaped berm along the western and southern edges of the property.

The current program for completing the remediation (subject to no unforeseen contamination) is:

- July 2019 – complete investigations to fill information gaps on the site, complete works design, prepare works tender documentation

- August-September 2019 – Works tender process

- October 2019 – Works tender report to Council

- November-December 2019 – remediation works and validation sampling

- January 2020 – landscaping, validation reporting, auditor review

- Mid 2020 – Site environmental management plan completion

The project team has consulted with key stakeholders extensively throughout the project history. Their feedback in conjunction with the results of contamination investigations has informed the outcome of the preferred remediation option. It should be noted that early in the project key stakeholders Arakwal Corporation, the NPWS and DPI had positive feedback to the remediation project. More recently, both the Arakwal and NPWS in particular expressed a desire to:

- Have the site complement or integrate with the adjacent Arakwal National Park;

- Have all contaminated material removed from site. They viewed the berm solution as an interim or incomplete solution. The Arakwal did concede that the berm solution would be acceptable to them only if Council committed to revisiting the removal of all contaminated material at the end of the proposed 25 year property lease; and

- Have more consultation with Council particularly with regards to the redevelopment of the site as stated in the MOU with Council.

Due to the procurement and probity requirements of the site redevelopment EOI/Tender process, no stakeholder was able to be consulted with in detail. However, if redevelopment proceeds it will be a requirement for Council and the proponent to consult thoroughly with key stakeholders particularly the Arakwal Corporation.

Existing sewage treatment ponds

The redevelopment tender proponents have all expressed the desire for Council to maintain control of the two sewage treatment ponds. At the conclusion of remediation works the ponds will remain in-situ and unmodified. As the ponds are currently used as, and are valued by the community as an environmental area with no human contact (primary or secondary), they are currently deemed suitable for that purpose provided they are not disturbed. The selected remediation option allows both sewage treatment ponds to remain ‘as is’ for environmental purposes however this comes with access and sediment contact risks:

- Access: The ponds are designed as sewage infrastructure and have steep embankments around the perimeter. Should a member of the public access or fall into the water exiting the ponds could prove difficult. To mitigate this risk, Council could fully fence the ponds which will come at a cost to amenity (e.g. proximity for bird watching), aesthetics and operational finances. Council could alternatively reshape the ponds which would require disturbance of sediments and possible remediation;

- Sediment Contact: Whilst the water contained within the ponds is not contaminated (it is effectively stormwater), heavy metals and other persistent contaminants associated with STP operations may be present in the sediments of the ponds. The sediments do not pose a hazard in their current undisturbed state within the ponds and the environmental consultant has confirmed that should sediments remain in-situ contaminants will not migrate. Contact with such sediments should be avoided by people for both human health and the need to avoid sediment disturbance. Council could choose to remediate the ponds and this would require contaminant investigations, a remediation action plan, validation activities and works on the ponds. Such works would likely require dewatering and possible removal of sediments (if reshaping the ponds) or, at minimum, capping of sediments. Secondary contact activities (kayaking etc) in the ponds in the current state is not advisable due to the need to monitor and police such activities to prevent primary contact and access to sediments.

In considering future use of the site, the accessibility and safety of the sewage ponds should be a factor in all deliberations.

Next steps

The recommendation of the Evaluation Panel is to decline to accept any of the tenders.

It is possible that the elected council, having rejected all tenders, may wish to continue to work with one of the tenders in developing their proposal for the site. In such circumstances the staff recommendation could be changed to specify a Tenderer to move forward with the next phase of community engagement to test support for the proposal. This process would shape the details of the proposal with a view to reaching an agreement with council.

It is possible that the elected council, having rejected all tenders, may wish to commence a new master planning process. In such circumstances the staff recommendation could be changed to direct a new planning process and specify key issues for consideration.

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	L2	CSP Strategy		L3		DP Action		L4		OP Activity
Community Objective 1: We have infrastructure, transport and services which meet our expectations	1.5		Provide continuous urban water and sewerage services within the Shire		1.5.2		Ensure Wastewater Treatment Plants are maintained in accordance with operating licences		1.5.2.7		South Byron Sewerage Treatment Plant future use options

Financial Implications

The 2019/20 Sewer Fund capital program includes funding to progress the future use of the remediated South Byron STP site.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

The tendering process has been undertaken in accordance with Council’s Purchasing and Procurement Policy, and the provisions of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

The Local Government (General) Regulations 2005 define the options available to Council. An extract is provided below.

Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 - Reg 178

Acceptance of tenders

178 Acceptance of tenders

(1) After considering the tenders submitted for a proposed contract, the council must either:

(a) accept the tender that, having regard to all the circumstances, appears to it to be the most advantageous, or

(b) decline to accept any of the tenders.

(2) A council must ensure that every contract it enters into as a result of a tender accepted by the council is with the successful tenderer and in accordance with the tender (modified by any variation under clause 176). However, if the successful tender was made by the council (as provided for in section 55 (2A) of the Act), the council is not required to enter into any contract in order to carry out the requirements of the proposed contract.

(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).

Council’s endorsement of the recommendation to decline to accept any of the tenders as recommended in the attached Evaluation Report is sought.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 13.28

Report No. 13.28 Draft Plan of Management Suffolk Park Recreation Grounds

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Darren McAllister, Acting Open Space and Facilities Coordinator

File No: I2019/1102

Summary:

A draft Plan of Management for the Suffolk Park Recreation Grounds (PoM) has been prepared in accordance with requirements of the Local Government Act 1993 and associated regulations.

Council resolved in March 2019 to publicly exhibit the draft Plan of Management (attachment 1), and arrange an independently chaired Public Hearing prior to reporting back to Council (19-110).

The Statutory process is complete, as the draft has been on public exhibition and a public hearing has been held.

This report provides the submissions received (Attachment 2) during the public exhibition and the report of the independent Chair of the public hearing; the “Suffolk Park Recreation Grounds Public Hearing Report” (Attachment 3).

The public hearing report provides a summary of the submissions made to the Public Hearing, a summary of the written submissions made during public exhibition process and provides a response to the issues raised in both the verbal and written submissions. The report also makes recommendations to Council.

There was 1 formal verbal submission made to the Public Hearing.

11 written submissions were received during the exhibition period.

Based on the assessment of submissions, and the conclusions and recommendations of the independent report into the Public Hearing, it is recommended that Council adopt the Plan of Management as exhibited.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Council adopt the Plan of Management for the Byron Bay Memorial Recreation Ground as exhibited.

Attachments:

1 Submissions Draft Plan of Management Suffolk Park Recreation Ground, E2019/52211

2 Suffolk Park Recreation Grounds Public Hearing Report - Planners North, E2019/52466

3 Draft Plan of Management Suffolk Park Recreation Grounds V1, E2019/56787

REPORT

There was 1 formal verbal submission made to the Public Hearing. However, it is noted that other attendees made comment throughout the hearing. A total of 7 people attended the hearing, all representing the Suffolk Park Community Garden.

11 written submissions were received during the exhibition period.

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS

Community Strategic Plan and Operational Plan

CSP Objective	L2		CSP Strategy		L3	DP Action		L4		OP Activity
Community Objective 2: We cultivate and celebrate our diverse cultures, lifestyle and sense of community		2.3		Provide accessible, local community spaces and facilities	2.3.5		Maintain Public Open space in a safe and efficient way that provides for both active and passive recreation (SP)		2.3.5.1	Plan and deliver Open Space works programs based on defined levels of service

Legal/Statutory/Policy Considerations

Local Government Act 1993

38 Public notice of draft plans of management

(1) A council must give public notice of a draft plan of management.

(2) The period of public exhibition of the draft plan must be not less than 28 days.

(3) The public notice must also specify a period of not less than 42 days after the date on which the draft plan is placed on public exhibition during which submissions may be made to the council.

(4) The council must, in accordance with its notice, publicly exhibit the draft plan together with any other matter which it considers appropriate or necessary to better enable the draft plan and its implications to be understood

40 Adoption of plans of management

(1) After considering all submissions received by it concerning the draft plan of management, the council may decide to amend the draft plan or to adopt it without amendment as the plan of management for the community land concerned.

(2) If the council decides to amend the draft plan it must either:

(a) publicly exhibit the amended draft plan in accordance with the provisions of this Division relating to the public exhibition of draft plans, or

(b) if it is of the opinion that the amendments are not substantial, adopt the amended draft plan without public exhibition as the plan of management for the community land concerned.

(2A) If a council adopts an amended plan without public exhibition of the amended draft plan, it must give public notice of that adoption, and of the terms of the amended plan of management, as soon as practicable after the adoption.

(3) The council may not, however, proceed to adopt the plan until any public hearing required under section 40A has been held in accordance with section 40A.

40A Public hearing in relation to proposed plans of management

(1) The council must hold a public hearing in respect of a proposed plan of management (including a plan of management that amends another plan of management) if the proposed plan would have the effect of categorising, or altering the categorisation of, community land under section 36 (4).

(2) However, a public hearing is not required if the proposed plan would merely have the effect of altering the categorisation of the land under section 36 (5).

(3) A council must hold a further public hearing in respect of the proposed plan of management if:

(a) the council decides to amend the proposed plan after a public hearing has been held in accordance with this section, and

(b) the amendment of the plan would have the effect of altering the categorisation of community land under section 36 (4) from the categorisation of that land in the proposed plan that was considered at the previous public hearing.

41 Amendment of plans of management

A council may amend a plan of management adopted under this Division by means only of a plan of management so adopted.

42 Revocation and cessation of plans of management

(1) A plan of management for community land may be revoked by a plan of management adopted under this Division by the council.

(2) A plan of management ceases to apply to land if:

(a) the land is reclassified as operational land, or

(b) in the case of land that is not owned by the council—the land ceases to be controlled by the council.

Financial Considerations

There are no financial implications from the development and adoption of the Plan of Management. Proposed actions consistent with an adopted plan of management may generate income and expenditure that Council will have to consider when they are presented.

Consultation and Engagement

Submissions closed 14 June 2019.

	Draft Plan of Management	Public Hearing
Byron Shire Echo	1/5/19 + 8/5/19	1/5/19 + 8/5/19
Byron Shire News	2/5/19 + 9/5/19	2/5/19 + 9/5/19
Byron Shire Council Website/Public Notices	23/4/19 to 23/6/19	30/4/19 to 30/6/19
Public Hearing		Held 19/6/19 at Cavanbah Centre

PoM on exhibition 61 days (minimum required 28), allowing 50 days (52 minimum required) for submissions.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 13.29

Report No. 13.29 Response to RFQ 2019-0033 - Integrated Transport Management Strategy

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Daniel Strzina, Project Engineer

File No: I2019/1191

Summary:

At its ordinary meeting on 27 June 2019, Council resolved (Res 19-313) that the Draft RFQ for the development of the Integrated Transport Management Strategy (previously known as the Shire-wide Transport Strategy) be modified as discussed including the consultation strategy and adopted for the engagement of a specialist consultant to undertake the work.

The Request for Quotation was revised and advertised from 28 June 2019 to 26 July 2019. Quotes were received from the following organisations:

· Arcadis Australia Pacific Pty Ltd

· Ason Pty Ltd

· Barker Ryan Stewart

· Bitzios Consulting

· Coote Burchills Engineering Pty Ltd

· GTA Consultants

· Ontoit Global Pty Ltd

· Point8 Pty Ltd

· PSA Consulting

· Urbis

· Veitch Lister Consulting Pty

Quotes have been assessed in accordance with Council’s procurement processes. This report summarises the background and assessment of the quotes and provides a recommendation to award Contract 2019-0033.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council award 2019-0033 Byron Shire Integrated Transport Management Strategy to GTA Consultants.

2. That $120,000 be allocated to this project in the 2019/2020 financial year funded from the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve but specifically as follows:

(a) Infrastructure Renewal Reserve Fund - Non-Byron Bay - $60,000

(b) Infrastructure Renewal Reserve Fund - Byron Bay - $60,000

Attachments:

1 Confidential - Confidential - 24.2018.46.1 - RFQ Evaluation Report - 2019-0033 Byron Shire Integrated Transport Management Strategy, E2019/55362

Report

At their Ordinary Meeting on 27 June 2019, Council resolved (Res 19-313) that the Draft RFQ for the development of the Integrated Transport Management Strategy (previously known as the Shire-wide Transport Strategy) be modified as discussed including the consultation strategy and adopted for the engagement of a specialist consultant to undertake the work.

The RFQ was revised and advertised from 28 June 2019 to 26 July 2019 to call for quotes for Contract 2019-0033 - Byron Shire Integrated Transport Management Strategy, which sought responses from suitably qualified and highly experienced consultants to prepare an Integrated Transport Management Strategy, using the outcomes of Transport and Infrastructure Advisory Committee (TIAC) workshops and meetings to date as a foundation for the development of the Strategy.

The Contract is expected to commence in August 2019 for a period of 12 months.

The Contract will be managed by the Project Manager.

The RFQ was advertised as follows:

Tenders Online: 28 June 2019 to 26 July 2019

An Evaluation Panel comprising of 3 Council staff members was formed.

The RFQ open period ended on 26 July 2019 and Quotes were received from the following proponents:

· Arcadis Australia Pacific Pty Ltd

· Ason Pty Ltd

· Barker Ryan Stewart

· Bitzios Consulting

· Coote Burchills Engineering Pty Ltd

· GTA Consultants

· Ontoit Global Pty Ltd

· Point8 Pty Ltd

· PSA Consulting

· Urbis

· Veitch Lister Consulting Pty

Quotes were evaluated by the Evaluation Panel in accordance with the following evaluation criteria:

Mandatory criteria:

a) Quotation lodged on time, in accordance with the Conditions of Quotation.

b) Respondent has a valid Australian Business Number.

c) Respondent substantially complies with the Statement of Requirements.

d) Respondent substantially complies with the Conditions of Contract.

e) Respondent holds the required insurances or has the ability to obtain the insurances.

Qualitative criteria:

Criteria	Elements	Weighting
Profile and Relevant Experience	Company Profile	30%
	Previous Relevant Experience
	Demonstrated experience providing innovative, creative solutions
Quality and Availability of Resources	Proposed Key Personnel	30%
	Clear management structure
	Minimal use or appropriate management of subcontractors
	Sound knowledge of internationally emerging trends and demonstrated experience providing innovative, creative solutions
Delivery Plan	Goods/services standards and methodology	40%
	Clear and realistic implementation plan that demonstrates understanding of Council's requirements.

Following the evaluation, the Evaluation Panel conducted referee and financial checks on the preferred respondent. The results of these checks were deemed by the Evaluation Panel to be satisfactory as detailed in the attached Evaluation Report.

Financial Implications

The price basis for the contract is a lump sum.

The current 2019/2020 budget provides a budget of $50,000 for this project. An additional $2,100 unexpended from the 2018/2019 financial year is also proposed to be added to this budget via the report to this Council Meeting concerning budget carryovers from the 2018/2019 financial year for inclusion in the 2019/2020 budget. Should Council adopt that report there then will be a total budget of $52,100, however there is insufficient funding for the proposed contract in the 2019/2020 budget.

An additional $120,000 is required to be allocated to this project in order to engage the preferred consultant. To provide this additional funding, it is recommended that $120,000 be allocated to this project from the Infrastructure Renewal Reserves specifically as follows:

(a) $60,000 from the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve Fund - Non-Byron Bay

(b) $60,000 from the Infrastructure Renewal Reserve Fund - Byron Bay

Based on the actual results for these two reserves related to the 2018/2019 financial year, commitments funded from these reserves forming part of the proposed budget carryover report to Council and projects already committed in the 2019/2020 financial year from these reserves, the funding proposal outlined above can be accommodated.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

The value of this contract does not trigger the mandatory tender provisions under the Local Government Act. However, given the public interest in ensuring an adequate Integrated Transport Management Strategy is delivered, Council staff have asked the elected Council to award the contract.

BYRON SHIRE COUNCIL

Staff Reports - Infrastructure Services 13.30

Report No. 13.30 Pay Parking Cash Collection Tender

Directorate: Infrastructure Services

Report Author: Andrew Pearce, Traffic Engineer

File No: I2019/1140

Summary:

On Monday, 4 March 2019, the General Manager, under delegated authority, approved the use of the open tender method to call for tenders for Contract 2019-0010, Parking Meter Cash Collection.

The Request for Tender was advertised from Tuesday 18 June 2019 to 2pm Tuesday 16 July 2019.

The online tender was viewed on 51 occasions with 17 tender document downloads.

Only one online tender submission was received from the following organisation:

· Prosek Security

Another tender was submitted directly to Council sttaff and is, therefore, invalid.

A third organisation contacted Council to say they intended to submit a tender but missed the dead line. This tender could not be submitted or accepted.

The Prosek tender has been assessed in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government (General) Regulations 2005. This report summarises the background and assessment of the tender and recommends not to award the tender at this time and to instead enter into negotiations with any person, with a view to entering into a contract to ensure Council receives the best possible value for money services.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council exercise its discretion under Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 (LGGR 2005) clause 178(1)(b) not to accept any of the tenders submitted in response to tender 2019-0010 Parking Meter Cash Collection.

2. That Council exercise its discretion under LGGR 2005 clause 178(3)(e) to 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.

3. That under LGGR 2005 clause 178(4)(a), the reason Council declines to invite fresh tenders or applications as referred to in clause 178(3)(b)–(d) is due to a clear failure in the tender process to provide a competitive market from which Council can select a suitable contractor.

4. That under LGGR 2005 clause 178(4)(b), the reason Council has determined to enter into negotiations with the person or persons referred to in clause 178(3)(e) is due to:-

a) a well-founded concern that a fresh tender process would result in the same market failure revealed by the first tender; and

b) that despite the market failure revealed by the tender process, Council has a well-developed understanding of the competitors within the pay parking cash collection market and is confident of selecting a suitable contractor in the public interest via direct negotiation.

5. That Council request the current cash collection contractor (ASAP) to continue undertaking cash collection beyond the current contract termination date and until a suitable contractor is selected via the process above.

4. That Council provides public notice of its decision not to award the tender, in accordance with LGGR 2005 clause 179.

Attachments:

1 Confidential - CONFIDENTIAL - Prosek Security Tender Assessment Report 2019-0010, E2019/57904

Report

On Monday, 4 March 2019, the General Manager, under delegated authority, approved the use of the open tendering method to call for tenders for Contract 2019-0010, Parking Meter Cash Collection. The current Cash Collection Contract expires on 31 August 2019 and a new contract needs to be established prior to this date.

The Request for Tender sought responses from proponents to provide services relating to the collection, counting and banking of cash from Council’s parking meters. The Contract term outlined in the tender was for 16 months subject to satisfactory performance by the successful Tenderer, which will be determined by Byron Shire Council. The tender permitted 2 contract extension options of 1 year each. The decision to offer a contract extension was to be at Council’s sole discretion.

To align with Council’s other contractual obligations for meter parking, the contract completion date was to be 4 January 2021, unless council determines to extend the contract term.

Tenders were advertised as follows:

Sydney Morning Herald: Tuesday 18 June 2019

Byron Echo: Wednesday 19June 2019

Tenders Online: Tuesday 18 June 2019 to Tuesday 16 July 2019

Council website: Not advertised on Council’s website

No site briefings were held.

The Contract will be managed by Andrew Pearce, Traffic Engineer

An Evaluation Panel comprising of 3 Council staff members was formed.

Tenders closed on Tuesday 16 July 2016 and tenders were received from the following proponents:

· Prosek Security

Evaluation Process

Tenders were to be evaluated by the Evaluation Panel in accordance with the following evaluation criteria:

Mandatory criteria:

a) Tenderer must have a valid Australian Business Number.

b) Substantial conformance to Conditions of Contract and Statement of Requirements.

c) Workers compensation insurance for all employees.

d) Holds, or is willing to obtain, the insurances as specified in the Statement of Requirements.

e) Satisfactory Work Health and Safety practices.

f) Commitment to ethical business practice principles.

Qualitative criteria:

Criteria	Elements
Profile and relevant experience	Tenderer profile
	Previous relevant experience
	Environmental practices
	Opportunities for disadvantaged people
Quality and availability of resources	Proposed key personnel
	Proposed staff
	Use of subcontractors
Delivery Plan	Goods/services standards and methodology
	Implementation plan
	Product sustainability
	Supporting local business, social enterprise and Indigenous business
Price	Total contract price

Due to there being only one tender, a full tender evaluation was not possible however the adequacy of the Prosek Security tender was analysed by the Evaluation Panel which considered the tender to be unsatisfactory. Refer to the document attached for a more detailed review of the Evaluation Panels analysis.

In summary, it is considered the tender submission did not satisfactorily meet the qualitative criteria requirements. In particular, Council staff is concerned the tender submission:

· Does not have sufficient relevant experience to undertake a contract of the value associated with the pay parking cash collection contract. It is considered this contract would be a significant step up in value (and therefore scale) for Prosek Security and no identified previous experience with Local Government or Pay Parking systems.

· Does not have sufficient “availability of resources” to ensure a consistent level of service within management and support staff to respond to issues as they arise. The number of proposed key personnel is considered limited for the level of service anticipated as required.

Based on these points above, Council staff recommend not awarding the tender and instead recommend Council exercise its discretion under LGGR 2005 clause 178(3)(e) to 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.

In addition, given the contract value is expected to be below $100,000 and that there was a clear failure in the tender process to provide a competitive market from which Council can select a suitable contractor via the tender process it is further recommended that Council does not re-tender.

Financial Implications

There is sufficient funding for the proposed contract in the current budget.

Statutory and Policy Compliance Implications

The tendering process has been undertaken in accordance with Council’s Purchasing and Procurement Policy, and the provisions of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005.

The Local Government (General) Regulations 2005 define the options available to Council. An extract is provided below.

Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 - Reg 178

Acceptance of tenders

178 Acceptance of tenders

(1) After considering the tenders submitted for a proposed contract, the council must either:

(a) accept the tender that, having regard to all the circumstances, appears to it to be the most advantageous, or

(b) decline to accept any of the tenders.