council of ceduna notice is hereby given that a meeting of council is to be held at council chamber,...

DISTRICT COUNCIL OF CEDUNA NOTICE is hereby given that a Meeting of Council is to be held at Council Chamber, 44 O’Loughlin Terrace, Ceduna on Wednesday 18 April 2018, commencing at 3:00pm.

______________________ GEOFFREY MOFFATT

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AGENDA

PRESENT1.APOLOGIES2.Councillor PC CodringtonMAYOR’S REPORT3.A verbal report will be presented by the Mayor at the meeting.Recommendation: That the report be received and noted.CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES4.Page 8 - 15

Council Meeting – 21/03/20184.1Recommendation: That the minutes be confirmed as a correct record.DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS5.6

SATIC5.1Shaun de Bruyn will present on the benefits of tourism.

PUBLIC QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE6.Meeting to adjourn for 15 minutes to receive questions without notice frommembers of the public (maximum time permissible per person is 5 minutes).REPORTS FROM COUNCIL COMMITTEES7.OFFICERS’ REPORTS8.

Chief Executive Officer’s Report8.1Page 17 - 25

Review of Confidentiality Orders 8.1.1 Street Beat Funding 8.1.2

1

Manager Governance Report 8.26 - 64

Ceduna Bowling Club Lease 8.2.1 Oyster Bar Permit 8.2.2 Policy Review 8.2.3

8.2.3.1 Policy 1.29 - Whistleblower Protection 8.2.3.2 Policy 1.55 - Council’s Role in Disaster & Emergency

Response 8.2.3.3 Policy 2.4 - Volunteers

General Manager Operations Report 8.3Page 65 - 100

Operations Project Update 8.3.1 Thevenard Marine Offloading Facility 8.3.2 Special Local Roads Program – Kalanbi Rd 8.3.3 Bitumen Sealing Tender 8.3.4 Smoky Bay Denton Street Playground Upgrade 8.3.5

8.4 Manager Administration & Finance ReportPage 101 - 143 8.4.1 Monthly Financial Reporting 8.4.2 2017-2018 Budget Review #3

Events & Tourism Officers Report 8.5Page 144 - 145

Ceduna Oysterfest – Event Plan 2018 8.5.1

CORRESPONDENCE9. Information Correspondence9.1

Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association 9.1.1File Reference: 57505 (10.85.1.3) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 146 - 151 EPLGA Meeting Minutes 27/02/2018.

2

The Hon Dr John McVeigh MP 9.1.2File Reference: 57642 (7.41.7.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 152 - 153 Regional Growth Fund is now open for Initial Applications.

Primary Industries and Regions SA 9.1.3File Reference: 57686 (11.3.2.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 154 - 155 PIRSA’s response to the Pacific Oyster Mortality (POMS) virus detection in the Port River in Adelaide.

Australia Local Government Association 9.1.4File Reference: 57687 (10.85.1.2) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 156 - 157 Invitation to attend the National General Assembly of Local Government in Canberra from 17-20 June 2018.

Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure 9.1.5File Reference: 57705 (9.3.2.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 158 - 159 On 22/08/2017, the Local Government (Boundary Adjustment) Amendment Act 2017 was assented to by the Governor.

Regional Development Association Whyalla & Eyre Peninsula 9.1.6File Reference: 57726 (14.85.1.8) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 160 - 167 Test results from the voltage testing that SA Power Networks have been conducting across Eyre Peninsula as part of ESCOSA’s review into the reliability and quality of electricity supply across Eyre Peninsula.

South Australian Tourism Association 9.1.7File Reference: 57746 (4.85.1.3) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 168 International visitors continue to flock to South Australia.

3

Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association 9.1.8File Reference: 57751 (10.85.1.3) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 169 - 178 Coastal Management report to be considered at the next SAROC meeting.

Local Government Association of South Australia 9.1.9File Reference: 57777 (10.85.1.11) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 179 Circular 11.8 - The agenda for the LGA Ordinary General Meeting to be held on Friday 13 April 2018 at the Adelaide Town Hall, Agenda is provided under separate cover.

Australia Day Council of South Australia 9.1.10File Reference: 57790 (2.38.1.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 180 - 183 Notice of AGM and Nomination Form for election of Board Members.

Local Government Association of South Australia 9.1.11File Reference: 57810 (9.34.4.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 184 - 185 Promotion of the Local Government Elections and Council’s budget considerations for the expenses.

Local Government Association of South Australia 9.1.12File Reference: 57812 (10.85.1.11) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 186 - 187 Minister Fifield - Media Release : New Regulatory Powers and Lower NBN Prices.

Minister for Regional Development 9.1.13File Reference: 57858 (4.65.1.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 188 Correspondence in relation to the TMOF will be forwarded to PIRSA for consideration and a response, due to the Government of SA observing caretaker conventions.

4

SAPOL 9.1.14File Reference: 57893 (5.85.1.6) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 189 Advise that correspondence in relation to agency response to an incident at Yellabinna Regional Reserve has been received and forwarded to the appropriate area for consideration.

Local Government Association of South Australia 9.1.15File Reference: 57943 (5.3.2.2) Officer: Manager Governance Page 190 Circular 12.3 – The LGA would like to advocate that the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) provide financial support to assist councils with the liability associated with illegally dumped waste. The circular provides further details as to how the LGA is seeking Council’s assistance to develop a business case.

National Native Title Tribunal 9.1.16File Reference: 57981 (4.65.1.2) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 191 Removal of SI2005/007 Ceduna Keys Development ILUA from the ILUA Register.

Primary Industries and Regions South Australia 9.1.17File Reference: 57988 (11.3.2.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 192 - 195 Information in relation to the Pacific Oysters Mortality Syndrome

Regional Development Australia Whyalla & Eyre Peninsula 9.1.18File Reference: 58005 (4.85.1.4) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Separate Cover RDAWEP Performance and Progress Report. Provided under separate cover.

Department of Planning Transport and Infrastructure 9.1.19File Reference: 58033 (9.14.1.4) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 196 Department will consider request to supply and install marine speed limit signage at Davenport Creek.

5

Whyalla City Council 9.1.20File Reference: 58035 (10.85.1.3) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 197 - 198 Copy of letter sent to EPLGA in relation to a motion supporting a deep sea port at Cape Hardy.

Investment Attraction South Australia 9.1.21File Reference: 58037 (4.3.2.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 199 - 201 Action List from Qantas Regional Flight Training Workshop.

Local Government Association of South Australia 9.1.22File Reference: 58080 (9.3.2.2) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 202 - 224 Circular 13.7 - The Department of the Environment and Energy has developed two documents concerning product stewardship for consultation. This circular provides further information and submission details.

Local Government Association of South Australia 9.1.23File Reference: 58084 (9.3.2.2) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 225 - 248 Circular 13.3 – The LGA has prepared the Local Government Industry Participation Policy Framework to translate the South Australian Industry Participation Policy (SAIPP) of the State Government into principles applicable to local Government.

Regional Development Australia Whyalla & Eyre Peninsula 9.1.24File Reference: 58109 (4.85.1.4) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 249 - 274 Eyes on Eyre interim report.

Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association 9.1.25File Reference: 58149 (10.85.1.3) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 275 - 276 LGA budget allocations for Regional Organisations.

6

Eyre Peninsula Community Foundation 9.1.26File Reference: 58157 (7.31.3.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 277 - 279 Eyre Peninsula Community Foundation Education Fund Guidelines.

South Australian Country Fire Service 9.1.27File Reference: 58182 (5.85.1.6) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 280 - 282 CFS response letter in relation to agency response tasking.

Peter Codrington 9.1.28File Reference: 58209 (9.33.3.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 283 Apology for April Council Meeting.

Local Government Association of South Australia 9.1.29File Reference: 58239 (4.3.2.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Page 284 - 291 Detailed monthly trade data – February 2018 from Department of Trade, Tourism and Investment. Recommendation: That Council receive and note all correspondence.

QUESTION ON NOTICE 10. MOTION ON NOTICE 11. QUESTION WITHOUT NOTICE 12. MOTION WITHOUT NOTICE 13. MEETING CLOSED 14.

7

District Council of Ceduna – Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 21/03/2018

DISTRICT COUNCIL OF CEDUNA

MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL held at the Council Chamber, 44 O’Loughlin Terrace, Ceduna, on Wednesday 21 March 2018 at 3:00pm.

PRESENT 1.

His Worship the Mayor AJ Suter, Councillors LA Brown, IP Bergmann, PG Brown, PC Codrington ESM, KR Maynard, GA Ryan and PA Will. GM Moffatt (Chief Executive Officer), MS Hewitson (Manager Governance), GK Drummond (General Manager Operations), Marni Trowbridge (Administration Officer) and KE Blums (Executive Assistant).

APOLOGIES 2.

MAYOR’S REPORT 3.

Mayors Verbal Report 3.127/02/2018 Breakfast meeting with Roger Lang EPLGA Meeting in Port Lincoln 02/03/2018 Ceduna Leaders Group Meeting Community Panel Meeting 08/03/2018 Informal Gathering of Council 21/03/2018 Strategic Planning Meeting

1c/32018 Moved – PC Codrington Seconded – PG Brown

That the report be received and noted. CARRIED

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 4.

Council Meeting – 21/02/2018 4.12c/32018 Moved – PG Brown Seconded – PC Codrington

That the minutes be confirmed as a correct record. CARRIED

DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS 5.

Department for Communities & Social Inclusion 5.1Deputation in relation to the Ceduna Service reform and in particular the Street Beat program funding.

3:18pm Councillor LA Brown left the meeting 3:19pm Councillor LA Brown entered the meeting 3:51pm Councillor PC Codrington left the meeting 3:52pm Councillor PC Codrington entered the meeting

8

District Council of Ceduna – Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 21/03/2018 2

PUBLIC QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 6. REPORTS FROM COUNCIL COMMITTEES 7.

OFFICERS REPORTS 8.

Chief Executive Officer’s Report 8.1 Request for Discretionary Rebate of Council Rates 8.1.1

3c/32018 Moved – KR Maynard Seconded – LA Brown That Council pursuant to Section 166 (1)(j) of the Local Government Act, provide a 75% discretionary rebate of rates only on the premises utilised by the Uniting Church Op Shop located at 6/52 Poynton Street Ceduna. CARRIED

Manager Governance Report 8.2

Delegations 8.2.14c/32018 Moved – PC Codrington Seconded – GA Ryan

1. The Council hereby revokes its previous delegations to its Chief Executive Officer of those powers and functions under the Expiation of Offences Act 1996 to take effect from 30 April 2018.

2. In exercise of the power contained in Section 44 of the Local Government Act 1999 the powers and functions under the following Acts and specified in the proposed Instruments of Delegation contained in Appendices 4 and 34 (annexed to this report and titled Annexure A & B respectively) identified as indicated below are hereby delegated this 21st day of March 2018 to the person occupying the office of Chief Executive Officer of the Council to take effect from 30 April 2018 subject to the conditions or limitations indicated herein or in the Schedule of Conditions contained in the proposed Instruments of Delegation: 1 Expiation of Offences Act 1996 (Appendix 4) 2 Fines Enforcement and Debt Recovery Act 2017 (Appendix 34)

3. The powers and functions may be further delegated by Chief Executive Officer in accordance with Sections 44 and 101 of the Local Government Act 1999 as the Chief Executive Officer sees fit, unless otherwise indicated herein or in the Schedule of Conditions contained in each such proposed Instrument of Delegation.

CARRIED Policy Review 8.2.2

8.2.2.1 Policy 1.49 - Complaints Handling 5c/32018 Moved – PC Codrington Seconded – PA Will

That Council adopt Policy 1.49 Complaints Handling as presented and amended.

CARRIED

9


8.2.2.2 Policy 1.62 - Workplace Surveillance 6c/32018 Moved – PC Codrington Seconded – GA Ryan

That Manager Governance Report 8.2.2.2 : Policy 1.62 – Workplace Surveillance Lay on the Table.

CARRIED Policy Review Schedule 8.2.3

7c/32018 Moved – IP Bergmann Seconded – PA Will That this Report be received and noted.

CARRIED

General Manager Operations Report 8.3 Operations Project Update 8.3.1

8c/32018 Moved – GA Ryan Seconded – PC Codrington That this Report be received and noted.

CARRIED Thevenard Marine Offloading Facility 8.3.2

9c/32018 Moved – PG Brown Seconded – LA Brown That this Report be received and noted.

CARRIED Bunker Site RAV Access – Decres Bay Rd 8.3.3

4:42pm Councillor LA Brown declared an actual interest in the matter as he is a Business and Land Owner on Decres Bay Rd, and left the meeting. His Worship the Mayor suspended the operation of Division 2 of Part 2 of the Local Government (Procedures at Meetings) Regulations 2000, with the approval of the members present, commencing at 4:58pm, to enable discussions in relation to Bunker Site RAV Access along Decres Bay Rd. His Worship the Mayor determined to resume the operation of Division 2 of Part 2 of the Local Government (Procedures at Meetings) Regulations 2000 at 5:14pm.

5:15pm Councillor LA Brown entered the meeting

Bitumen Sealing Tender 8.3.410c/32018 Moved – PC Codrington Seconded – IP Bergmann

That Council delegates authority to the Chief Executive Officer to execute a contract for Bitumen Sealing services to a maximum value of $422,725.

CARRIED Skate Park Project Update 8.3.5

11c/32018 Moved – KR Maynard Seconded – PA Will That this Report be received and noted.

CARRIED

10


5:17pm Councillor KR Maynard left the meeting 5:18pm Councillor KR Maynard entered the meeting

Manager Administration and Finance Report 8.4 Monthly Financial Reporting 8.4.1

12c/32018 Moved – IP Bergmann Seconded – GA Ryan That this Report be received and noted.

CARRIED

CORRESPONDENCE 9. Information Correspondence 9.1

Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet 9.1.1File Reference: 57207 (17.65.1.2) Officer: Chief Executive Officer New Transitional Accommodation Centre arrangements.

Department for Communities and Social Inclusion 9.1.2File Reference: 57208 (17.65.1.7) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Street Beat Report for January 2018.

Hon Zoe Bettison MP 9.1.3File Reference: 57215 (10.3.2.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer The 2018 Premier’s Certificate of Recognition for outstanding volunteer service program with open for nominations on Friday 16 February and close 5pm, Monday 19 March 2018.

Hon Zoe Bettison MP 9.1.4File Reference: 57216 (10.3.2.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer The 2018 South Australian Volunteers Awards program will open for applications on Friday 16 February 2018.

Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association 9.1.5File Reference: 57251 (3.85.1.7) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Notes from Joint Planning Board Workshop from Monday 12 February 2018.

Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure 9.1.6File Reference: 57258 (13.85.1.8) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Accredited Professionals Scheme Discussion Paper.

11


Hon Geoff Brock MP 9.1.7File Reference: 57271 (10.3.2.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer The regulations for a new Code of Conduct for Council Employees (Employees Code) under the Local Government Act 1999 (the Act) have been made and gazetted on 13 February 2018, to come into operation on 2 April 2018.

Department of State Development 9.1.8File Reference: 57303 (10.3.2.1) Officer: Manager Governance Jobs and Skills for Regional SA – Eyre and Western Workshop Report.

The Hon John Rau MP 9.1.9File Reference: 57321 (7.41.7.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer 2017-18 Planning and Development Fund Grant Application. Approved funding of $139,950 for the Triangle Reserve Redevelopment Project.

Sam Johnson, SA-Best Upper House Candidate 9.1.10File Reference: 57421 (9.3.2.1) Officer: Manager Governance SA-BEST Local Government Reform policy.

Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association 9.1.11File Reference: 57509 (10.85.1.3) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Joint Planning Board Pilot staff group and business case development.

Department for Communities Social Inclusion 9.1.12File Reference: 57511 (17.65.1.7) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Street Beat Coordinator update.

Local Government Association of South Australia 9.1.13File Reference: 57523 (10.85.1.13) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Circular 10.1 - Following extensive consultation with the local government sector, the new LGA Constitution will be presented for endorsement to the LGA Ordinary General Meeting in April. There are a number of Ancillary Documents to the new Constitution on which the LGA is seeking feedback.

12


Local Government Association of South Australia 9.1.14File Reference: 57527 (10.85.1.13) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Circular 9.9 - Working with the state government to deliver a local government reform program is identified as a priority in the LGA's 2018 State Election Agenda - South Australia Uncapped Potential. The LGA has now released a plan for sensible change that state and local government can work together to start delivering in the first 100 days of government and beyond.

Office of the Gene Technology Regulator 9.1.15File Reference: 57617 (11.3.2.1) Officer: Manager Governance The Regulator has now issued a licence authorising the limited and controlled release (field trial) of perennial ryegrass genetically modified for fructan biosynthesis.

Department for Communities and Social Inclusion 9.1.16File Reference: 57661 (17.65.1.7) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Street Beat Report for February 2018.

Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association 9.1.17File Reference: 57715 (10.85.1.13) Officer: Chief Executive Officer EPLGA Charter review.

13c/32018 Moved – GA Ryan Seconded – PC Codrington

That Council receive and note all Correspondence. CARRIED 5:27pm Councillor IP Bergmann left the meeting 5:31pm Councillor IP Bergmann entered the meeting

Action Correspondence 9.2 Ceduna Foreshore Hotel Motel 9.2.1

File Reference: 57213 (2.3.2.1) Officer: Chief Executive Officer Request for informal meetings between Council and the Hotel.

14c/32018 Moved – PC Codrington Seconded – LA Brown That Council commence informal meetings with the Ceduna Foreshore Hotel board.

CARRIED

13


Ceduna Presenters Group 9.2.2File Reference: 57294 (7.31.3.1) Budget 2017/18 $10,000 Actual to Date $0 Officer: Chief Executive Officer Correspondence has been received from the Ceduna Presenters Group seeking financial assistance of $2,600.00 by way of sponsorship towards the presentation of ‘The Barber of Seville’ by CoOpera in Ceduna Council established budgeting provisions of $10,000.00 for the purpose of Community Arts Projects in 2017/2018, against which there has been no expenditure to date.

5:44pm Councillor KR Maynard declared a perceived interest in the matter as he is a member of the Ceduna Presenters Group, and left the meeting

15c/32018 Moved – PC Codrington Seconded – LA Brown

That Council provide financial assistance of $2,600.00 to the Ceduna Presenters Group by way of sponsorship for a performance of ‘The Barber of Seville’ by CoOpera, in Ceduna.

CARRIED 5:44pm Councillor KR Maynard entered the meeting

OFFICERS REPORTS 8. General Manager Operations Report 8.3

Bunker Site RAV Access – Decres Bay Rd 8.3.3 5:45pm Councillor LA Brown declared an actual interest in the matter as he is a Business and Land Owner on Decres Bay Rd, and left the meeting. His Worship the Mayor suspended the operation of Division 2 of Part 2 of the Local Government (Procedures at Meetings) Regulations 2000, with the approval of the members present, commencing at 5:52pm, to enable discussions in relation to Bunker Site RAV Access along Decres Bay Rd. His Worship the Mayor determined to resume the operation of Division 2 of Part 2 of the Local Government (Procedures at Meetings) Regulations 2000 at 6:00pm.

14


16c/32018 Moved – KR Maynard Seconded – GA Ryan That Council: 1. Includes in its 2018/19 budget estimates a Capital Works project to

upgrade the RAV access from the Viterra Decres Bay Road Bunker site to Hastings Road

2. Approach Viterra for a 25% contribution to the project. 3. Submits an application to the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity

Program for the project. 4. Impose a 40km speed limit to RAV’s on Decres Bay Rd between the

Viterra bunker site and Hasting Rd. 5. Impose a condition on all RAV access on Decres Bay Rd between the

Viterra bunker site up to and including Hasting Rd, that access is only allowed for unladen vehicles unless a permit issued by Council provides otherwise.

CARRIED 6:01pm Councillor LA Brown entered the meeting

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE 10.

QUESTION WITHOUT NOTICE 11.

MOTION ON NOTICE 12.

MOTION WITHOUT NOTICE 13.17c/32018 Moved – KR Maynard Seconded – IP Bergmann

That the District Council of Ceduna write to Peter Treloar MP and congratulate him on being re-elected and we look forward in working in collaboration with him for the advancement of the western end of Eyre Peninsula.

CARRIED

MEETING CLOSED – 6:16PM 14.

DATE: __________________ CONFIRMED: ___________________ Mayor

15

3

To: Geoffrey Moffatt

Subject: Request for deputation

Hi Geoff

Trust you are well.

I’m sending this email to request an opportunity to speak to your elected members. Over recent months I have

been endeavouring to present at local government council meetings in SA, to make elected members aware of the

benefits of tourism. Can you please let me know one or two dates that I might be able to present to your council.

Kind regards

Shaun

Shaun de Bruyn

Chief Executive Officer

SA Tourism Industry Council Level 3, 185 Victoria Square, Adelaide, South Australia 5000 GPO Box 2071, Adelaide, South Australia 5001Ph: (08) 8110 0128 M: 0419 841190 E: [email protected] www.satic.com.au www.qualitytourismsouthaustralia.com.au

Our Mission: To engage, represent, strengthen and empower the South Australian Tourism Industry. The information contained in this e-mail, and any attachments to it, is intended for the use of the addressee and is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, read, forward, copy or retain any of the information. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify the sender by return e-mail or telephone. The South Australian Tourism Industry Council does not warrant that any attachments are free from viruses or any other defects. You assume all liability for any loss, damage or other consequences which may arise from opening or using the attachments.

______________________________________________________________________

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.

For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________



______________________________________________________________________

9.24.1.4

07/03/2018

A57633CEO

16

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

District Council of Ceduna Officer Report

REPORT TO: Mayor and Councillors FROM: Chief Executive Officer DATE: 16 April 2018

1.0 REVIEW OF CONFIDENTIALITY ORDERS File Reference: Various Budget 2017/2018: N/A Actual to Date: N/A Strategic Plan Reference: Goal: Open and Transparent Relationships,

Improved and Sustainable Council Services.

Outcome: Effective Management Systems. Section 90 of the Local Government Act 1999 (the Act) requires Council to conduct meetings of Council (and Council Committees) in public, except in specified and prescribed circumstances, and Section 91 of the Act requires the minutes and documents considered at meetings of Council (and Council committees), to be released and available to the public, except in specified and prescribed circumstances. Section 90 (2) of the Act enables Council, by resolution, to make an order to exclude the public from a Council meeting “in order to receive, discuss or consider in confidence any information or matter listed in Section 90 (3), after taking into account any relevant consideration under Section 90 (3)”. Section 90 (3) prescribes 19 specific circumstances which may be used (and specified) by Council in making an order under the provisions of Section 90 (2). Following Council’s consideration and discussion of the matter subject of the order, Council may then make an order, by resolution under the provisions of Section 91 (7) of the Act, that either the documents or minutes, or both, pertaining to the matter remain confidential and not available to the public (as would ordinarily be required under Sections 91 (4), (5) & (6) of the Act). In this circumstance, Section 91 (9)(a) of the Act requires Council to specify either the duration that the order will have effect (until a specific date or for a specific period of time) or the circumstances under which the order will cease to apply. Council may also delegate the power to revoke the order made under Section 91 (7) to an employee, usually the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), with or without conditions for revocation. All resolutions made under section 90 and 91 must be recorded in the minutes of the Council meeting available to the public. With reference to the provisions of Section 91 (9) of the Act, it is not uncommon for orders under Section 91 to prevail for extended periods of time, because the conditions under which the order will cease to apply have not been met.

17


For this reason, Section 91 (9)(a) of the Act requires Council to review any order made under the provisions of Section 91 (7) of the Act that has been in effect for more than 12 months (by virtue of the resolved duration or the specified cessation circumstances), to be reviewed by Council at least once in every year. Council must then make a determination, by resolution, of whether the previous order made under Section 91 (7) should remain in effect or be revoked. In considering the yearly review of current orders as outlined above, Council must give due consideration to the currency and relevance of the original grounds on which the order was made under Section 90 (2) of the Act, whilst also being mindful of the overarching intent of Chapter 6 of the Act, that the conduct and recording of Council meetings be as open and transparent as possible. Companies, organisations and persons seeking Council’s consideration to matters in confidence must be aware of Council’s obligations under Chapter 6 of the Act, and Council must be mindful of not fettering its obligations and powers under Section 91 of the Act particularly, when making orders to keep those matters confidential. It is certainly not the intent of Sections 90 (2) and 91 (7) of the Act that matters considered by Council remain confidential indefinitely. Council currently has six (6) orders made under Section 91 (7) of the Act which should be reviewed at this time. Orders made under Section 91 (7) of the Act were previously reviewed by Council on 15 February 2017.

1.1 Native Title & ILUA Negotiations Directions This matter was considered in confidence at a special meeting of Council held on Tuesday 4 December 2007, pursuant to an order made under Sections 90(2), 90(3)(g) and 90(3)(h) of the Local Government Act 1999, to receive, discuss and consider Native Title and Indigenous Land Use Agreement matters including CEO report 2s/122007, Far West Coast Native Title Claimant proposal and correspondence from State Government Native Title Claim Resolution Team. The following order was made following Council’s consideration of the matter, under the provisions of Section 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999.

4s/122007 Moved – Ronan Seconded - Brown That as per Section 91(9)(a) of the Local Government Act 1999, any documents or discussions including the minutes of Council relating to discussion on this matter having been dealt with on a confidential basis under Section 90 of the Act will remain confidential until any confidential orders are lifted by the Native Title Holders in relation to the matters and/or by written agreement between the parties involved in the Native Title Negotiations or as directed by any other means. CARRIED

18


Matters pertaining to Native Title and Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUA) have been considered in confidence to date under direction from the State Government Native Title Claim Resolution Team. The CEO has received advice from Council’s Solicitors regarding the circumstances and timing for revocation of the order made under Council resolution 4s/122007. Further investigation and research of records held by Council’s previous (retired) Native Title Solicitor is required to confirm of discount any remaining restrictions on revocation of the previous Council orders in relation to this matter. Until such time as the circumstances for revocation of the order made under Council resolution 4s/122007 have been met, the order should remain in effect. Recommendation: That having reviewed the order made pursuant to the provisions of Section 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999 on 4 December 2007 and recorded as resolution 4s/122007, Council confirms that any documents or discussions including the minutes of Council relating to discussion on this matter having been dealt with on a confidential basis under Section 90 of the Act will remain confidential until any confidential orders are lifted by the Native Title Holders in relation to the matters and/or by written agreement between the parties involved in the Native Title Negotiations or as directed by any other means.

1.2 Local Government Indigenous Land Use Agreement This matter was considered in confidence at a general meeting of Council held on Wednesday 18 November 2009, pursuant to an order made under Sections 90(2), 90(3)(h) and 90(3)(j) of the Local Government Act 1999, to receive, discuss and consider Local Government Indigenous Land Use Agreement and CEO report 3/112009. The following order was made following Council’s consideration of the matter, under the provisions of Section 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999.

17c/112009 Moved - Codrington Seconded – Gregory That as per Section 91(9)(a) of the Local Government Act 1999, any documents or discussions including the minutes of council relating to discussion on this matter having been dealt with on a confidential basis under Section 90 of the Act will remain confidential until any confidential orders are lifted by the Native Title Holders in relation to the matters and/or by written agreement between the parties involved in the Native Title Negotiations, or as directed by any other means. CARRIED

Matters pertaining to Native Title and Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUA) have been considered in confidence to date under direction from the State Government Native Title Claim Resolution Team.

19


The CEO has received advice from Council’s Solicitors regarding the circumstances and timing for revocation of the order made under Council resolution 17c/112009. Further investigation and research of records held by Council’s previous (retired) Native Title Solicitor is required to confirm of discount any remaining restrictions on revocation of the previous Council orders in relation to this matter. Until such time as the circumstances for revocation of the order made under Council resolution 17c/112009 have been met, the order should remain in effect. Recommendation: That having reviewed the order made pursuant to the provisions of Section 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999 on 18 November 2009 and recorded as resolution 17c/112009, Council confirms that any documents or discussions including the minutes of Council relating to discussion on this matter having been dealt with on a confidential basis under Section 90 of the Act will remain confidential until any confidential orders are lifted by the Native Title Holders in relation to the matters and/or by written agreement between the parties involved in the Native Title Negotiations or as directed by any other means.

1.3 Far West Coast Native Title Claim SAD 6008/98 This matter was considered in confidence at a general meeting of Council held on Wednesday 17 October 2012, pursuant to an order made under Sections 90(2), 90(3)(h) and 90(3)(j) of the Local Government Act 1999, to receive, discuss and consider Position Paper by the Crown Solicitor’s Office and A/CEO report 6/102012. The following order was made following Council’s consideration of the matter, under the provisions of Section 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999.

31c/102012 Moved - Codrington Seconded – Gregory That as per Section 91(9)(a) of the Local Government Act 1999, any documents or discussions including the minutes of council relating to discussion on this matter having been dealt with on a confidential basis under Section 90 of the Act will remain confidential until any confidential orders are lifted by the Native Title Holders in relation to the matters and/or by written agreement between the parties involved in the Native Title Negotiations, or as directed by any other means. CARRIED

Matters pertaining to Native Title and Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUA) have been considered in confidence to date under direction from the State Government Native Title Claim Resolution Team. The CEO has received advice from Council’s Solicitors regarding the circumstances and timing for revocation of the order made under Council resolution 31c/102012. Further investigation and research of records held by Council’s previous (retired) Native Title Solicitor is required to confirm of discount any remaining restrictions on revocation of the previous Council orders in relation to this matter.

20


Until such time as the circumstances for revocation of the order made under Council resolution 31c/102012 have been met, the order should remain in effect. Recommendation: That having reviewed the order made pursuant to the provisions of Section 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999 on 17 October 2012 and recorded as resolution 31c/102012, Council confirms that any documents or discussions including the minutes of Council relating to discussion on this matter having been dealt with on a confidential basis under Section 90 of the Act will remain confidential until any confidential orders are lifted by the Native Title Holders in relation to the matters and/or by written agreement between the parties involved in the Native Title Negotiations or as directed by any other means.

1.4 CEO Annual Performance Review (2015) This matter was considered in confidence at a ordinary meeting of Council held on Wednesday 18th November 2015, pursuant to an order made under Sections 90(2) and 90(3)(a) of the Local Government Act 1999, to receive, discuss and consider CEO Annual Performance Review. The following order was made following Council’s consideration of the matter, under the provisions of Section 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999.

26c/112015 Moved – GA Ryan Seconded – PC Codrington Pursuant to Sections 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999, Council orders that all reports and associated documents received, considered and discussed by Council relating to Item 3.2 – Chief Executive Officer Annual Performance Review, having been dealt with on a confidential basis under Sections 90(2) and 90(3)(a) of the Local Government Act 1999, be kept confidential and not available for public inspection until such time as the Chief Executive Officer is no longer employed by Council, with the exception of any minutes relating to any amendment of the Employment Contract Package which shall be a public document. CARRIED

Recommendation: That having reviewed the order made pursuant to the provisions of Section 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999 on 18 November 2015 and recorded as resolution 26c/112015, Council confirms that any documents or discussions of Council relating to discussion on this matter having been dealt with on a confidential basis under Section 90 of the Act will remain confidential until such time as the Chief Executive Officer is no longer employed by Council.

1.5 CEO Annual Performance Review (2017) This matter was considered in confidence at a ordinary meeting of Council held on Wednesday 17th May 2017, pursuant to an order made under Sections 90(2) and 90(3)(a) of the Local Government Act 1999, to receive, discuss and consider CEO Annual Performance Review.

21


The following order was made following Council’s consideration of the matter, under the provisions of Section 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999.

24c/52017 Moved – IP Bergmann Seconded – LA Brown Pursuant to Sections 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999, Council orders that all reports and associated documents received, considered and discussed by Council relating to Item 3.2 – Chief Executive Officer Annual Performance Review, having been dealt with on a confidential basis under Sections 90(2) and 90(3)(a) of the Local Government Act 1999, be kept confidential and not available for public inspection until such time as the Chief Executive Officer is no longer employed by Council, with the exception of any minutes relating to any amendment of the Employment Contract Package which shall be a public document. CARRIED

Recommendation: That having reviewed the order made pursuant to the provisions of Section 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999 on 18 November 2015 and recorded as resolution 24c/52017, Council confirms that any documents or discussions of Council relating to discussion on this matter having been dealt with on a confidential basis under Section 90 of the Act will remain confidential until such time as the Chief Executive Officer is no longer employed by Council.

1.6 Thevenard Marine Offloading Facility – Supply of Rock & Fill Material Tender This matter was considered in confidence at a ordinary meeting of Council held on Wednesday 11th August 2017, pursuant to an order made under Sections 90(2) and 90(3)(k) of the Local Government Act 1999, to receive, discuss and consider tender offers for the supply of rock and fill material for the Thevenard Marine Offloading Facility Breakwater. The following order was made following Council’s consideration of the matter, under the provisions of Section 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999.

3sc/1182017 Moved –IP Bergmann Seconded – PA Will Pursuant to Sections 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999 Council orders that all reports and associated documents received, considered and discussed by Council relating to Item 1 – Thevenard Marine Offloading Facility – Supply of Rock & Fill Material Tender having been dealt with on a confidential basis under Sections 90(2) and 90(3)(k) of the Local Government Act 1999, be kept confidential and not available for public inspection on the grounds that they relate to tenders for the supply of goods, the provision of services or the carrying out of works, until practical completion of the project is received. CARRIED

22


Recommendation: That having reviewed the order made pursuant to the provisions of Section 91(7) and 91(9) of the Local Government Act 1999 on 11 August 2017 and recorded as resolution 3sc/1182017, Council confirms that all reports and associated documents received, considered and discussed by Council on this matter having been dealt with on a confidential basis under Section 90 of the Act will remain confidential until practical completion of the project is received.

2.0 STREET BEAT FUNDING File Reference: 17.65.01.07 (A58140) Budget 2017/2018: $NA Actual to Date: $NA Strategic Plan Reference: Goal: Improved Community Development

Services that Support Health and Wellbeing.

Outcome: A Safe Community.

Refer to Pages 24 - 25

Correspondence has been received from Sue Wallace, Executive Director Community Services Division, Department of Human Services (SA), requesting Council commitment to continued funding of $150,000 per year for the next 3 (three) financial years, toward the operation of the Ceduna Street Beat Service. The correspondence follows a deputation by Jacky Costanzo (Ceduna Service Reform Manager) to Council at the Ordinary meeting of Council held on Wednesday 21 March 2018 in relation to the Ceduna Service Reform Project and ongoing funding requirements for the Ceduna Street Beat Service. A copy of the correspondence is attached at Annexure A for Council’s information and reference. Council contributed $150,000 in 2016/2017 and is contributing $150,000 in 2017/2018 toward the operation of the Ceduna Street Beat Service. SA Health (Drug & Alcohol Services SA) has confirmed continued funding for the next 3 (three) financial years toward the operation of the Ceduna Street Beat Service, and confirmation of funding from the Commonwealth is for this purpose is anticipated in the near future. The Ceduna Street eat Service will not continue post 30 June 2018 without a commitment of funding of $150,000 per year from Council. Recommendation: that Council confirm a financial contribution of $150,000 per year to the Community Services Division, South Australian Department for Human Services, for the neat 3 (three) financial years, commencing in 2018/2019, toward the operation of the Ceduna Street Beat Service.

G.M. (Geoff) Moffatt CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

23

17.65.1.7

05/04/2018

A58140CEO

Annexure A24

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp


REPORT TO: Mayor and Councillors FROM: Manager Governance DATE: 18 April 2018

1.0 CEDUNA BOWLING CLUB LEASE File Reference: 44.4.33.0 Budget 2017/2018: Actual to Date: Strategic Plan Reference: Goal: 5. Improved Community Development

Services that support health and wellbeing

Outcome: 5.2.3 Provide sustainable sport and recreational facilities

Risk Rating: High Legislative process

The current 5 year lease agreement with the Ceduna Bowling Club for the Crown Land in CR 5950/911, executed in 2008, expired in 2013. At the time of executing the 2008 agreement, the lease term was 5 years, with an exercisable extension for a further period of 5 years, which was never exercised by the Ceduna Bowling Club. It is not clear why this lease, and many other land and facility leases executed by Council in previous years, were limited to 5 year terms. Section 202 of the Local Government Act 1999 provides that Council may grant a lease or licence over Community Land for a period of up to 42 years, inclusive of an initial lease term and any period or periods of extension. It would be entirely appropriate for Council, in the absence of any reason to the contrary, to grant new leases over Community Land to Community Groups for the maximum available statutory term to provide greater surety of tenure. Section 202 of the Local Government Act 1999 prescribes that a Council must follow the relevant steps set out in its Public Consultation Policy prior to granting a Lease or Licence over Community Land.

Recommendation: that Council undertake Public Consultation in accordance with Policy 1.13 Community Consultation in relation to a proposal to grant a lease over the Community Land in CR 5950/911 to the Ceduna Bowling Club, for a term of 42 years.

26


2.0 OYSTER BAR PERMIT File Reference: 44.4.24.0 Budget 2017/2018: Actual to Date: Strategic Plan Reference: Goal: 3. Sustainable economic development

opportunities identified, vigorously pursued and promoted

Outcome: 3.1 Growth of new and existing industries and businesses

Risk Rating: Medium Legislative Process

Ceduna Oyster Bar, operated by Denial Bay Aquaculture P/L (Mr & Mrs David Hoffrichter), commenced operation in 2000 and has been an advocate for the supply and sale of local oysters to tourists and locals alike. This has now grown to include showcasing other local seafood as well. The Ceduna Oyster Bar facility is located on a road reserve pursuant to an Authorisation and Permit issued by Council pursuant to the provisions of Section 221 (Alteration of a Road) and Section 222 (Permits for Business Purposes) of the Local Government Act 1999. The term of the permit is limited to a maximum of 5 years by Section 222(4) of the Local Government Act 1999. The current Authorisation and Permit has expired and Mr & Mrs Hoffrichter are seeking an Authorisation and Permit for a further 5 years. To date there have been no complaints raised by any person or authority in relation to the location or operation of the Ceduna Oyster Bar.

Recommendation: that Council execute an Authorisation and Permit for the Ceduna Oyster Bar for a term of 5 years pursuant to the provisions of Sections 221 and 222 of the Local Government Act 1999.

27


3.0 POLICY REVIEW File Reference: 9.63.2.1 Budget 2017/2018: Actual to Date: Strategic Plan Reference: Goal: 4. Open & transparent

relationships, improved & sustainable Council Services

Outcome: 4.6 Effective regulatory services

Risk Rating: Moderate Legislative compliance

3.1 Policy 1.29 Whistleblower Protection

A periodic review of this policy has identified that it is consistent with the current model policy provided by the Local Government Association. Council Officers have recommended one minor amendment to the current policy, altering the review period of the policy to align with Council’s policy review period of 4 years, unless amendments to legislation or other circumstances occur.

Annexure A to this report provides a copy of current Policy 1.29 Whistleblower Protection for reference.

Annexure B to this report provides a draft revised Policy 1.29 Whistleblower Protection for Council’s consideration.

Recommendation: that Council adopt revised Policy 1.29 Whistleblower Protection as presented.

3.2 Policy 1.55 Council’s Role in Disaster & Emergency Response

A periodic review of this policy has identified that it is outdated.

Although Policy 1.55 Council’s Role in Disaster & Emergency Response provided guidance and direction for the CEO to authorise use of Council’s plant, equipment and or personnel to assist a combatant authority in an emergency situation, the requirement for a combatant authority to provide the CEO with adequate information and safeguards was not defined.

Council Officers have reviewed and rewritten the policy in its entirety, to provide clear direction and expectations for all parties, and changing the title more accurately reflects the content and intent of the policy.

Refer to Pages 30 - 64

28


Annexure C to this report provides a copy of current Policy 1.55 Council Role in Disaster & Emergency Response, for reference.

Annexure D to this report provides the revised Policy 1.63 Provision of Council Resources to Support Emergency Services in Emergencies, for Council’s consideration.

Recommendation: that Council rescinds Policy 1.55 Council’s Role in Disaster & Emergency Response. Recommendation: that Council adopts Policy 1.63 Provision of Council Resources to Support Emergency Services in Emergencies as presented.

3.3 Policy 2.4 Volunteers

The use of volunteers by Council is minimal. The Oysterfest is the only situation where assistance from volunteers is sought by Council. A periodic review of this policy has identified that it is outdated and unnecessary. The current policy content, Council’s responsibilities, Volunteers Rights, Volunteers responsibilities and WH&S requirements are all Human Resources matters that would be better suited in a manual or guide specifically for volunteers. Annexure E to this report provides a copy of current Policy 2.4 Volunteers for reference.

Recommendation: that Council rescind Policy 2.4 Volunteers

M.S.(Mark) Hewitson MANAGER GOVERNANCE

29

WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 4

Issued: 19th Aug 2015

POLICY Next review 2018

1

Category: Governance Classification: Public First Issued: 24/1/06 Review Frequency: 4 years – Term of Council Legislation: Whistleblower Protection Act 1993 Relevant Policies: Related Procedures: Signed: Responsible Officer: Manager Governance Adopted on : 19/8/2015

1. Introduction1.1. The District Council of Ceduna is committed to upholding the principles of

transparency and accountability in its administrative and management practices and, therefore, encourages the making of disclosures that reveal public interest information.

1.2. The purpose of this Policy is to ensure that Council:

properly fulfils its responsibilities under the Whistleblowers Protection Act1993;

encourages and facilitates Disclosures of Public Interest Information whichmay include occurrences of Maladministration and Waste within the Council,and corrupt or illegal conduct in general, so that internal controls may bestrengthened;

provides a process by which Disclosures may be made so that they areproperly investigated;

provides appropriate protection for those who make Disclosures in accordancewith the Act; and

recognises the need to appropriately support the Whistleblower, theResponsible Officer and, as appropriate, those Public Officers affected by anyallegation that affects them.

1.3. The Council will review and update this Policy within the first 12 months in the term of a new Council.

2. Scope2.1. This Policy applies to appropriate Disclosures of Public Interest Information that

are made in accordance with the Act by Council Members, Employees of the Council, and members of the public. This Policy is also intended to complement the reporting framework under the ICAC Act.

2.2. This Policy is designed to complement the existing communication channels within Council, and operate in conjunction with existing policies, including:

Fraud & Corruption Prevention Policy; Code of Conduct for Council Employees; Code of Conduct for Council Members; and Internal Review of Council Decisions Policy under section 270 of the Local

Government Act 1999.

Annexure A30

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 4



2

2.3. The Council is committed to:

referring, as necessary, appropriate Disclosures to the Appropriate Authority, which, depending on the nature of the Disclosure include a Minister of the Crown, the SA Police, the Anti-Corruption Branch of the SA Police, the Auditor-General or the Ombudsman. Further, where the Disclosure relates to Corruption it must be reported directly to the OPI in accordance with the Directions and Guidelines. A report of Misconduct or Maladministration may be made to the OPI, but it must be reported to the OPI if the Disclosure gives rise to a reasonable suspicion of serious or systemic Misconduct and/or Maladministration unless there is knowledge that the Disclosure has already been reported to the State Ombudsman..

otherwise facilitating the investigation of all appropriate Disclosures of Public Interest Information in a manner which promotes fair and objective treatment of those involved; and

rectifying any substantiated wrongdoing to the extent practicable in all the circumstances.

3. Definitions

For the purposes of this Policy the following definitions apply. 3.1. Act means the Whistleblowers Protection Act 1993. 3.2. An Appropriate Authority that receives disclosure of public interest information

includes:

a Minister of the Crown; a member of the police force - where the information relates to an illegal

activity; the Auditor-General – where the information relates to the irregular or

unauthorised use of public money; the Ombudsman – where the information relates to a public officer; a Responsible Officer - where the information relates to a matter falling within

the sphere of responsibility of a Local Government body; or any other person1 to whom, in the circumstances of the case, it is reasonable

and appropriate to make the disclosure. 3.3. Corruption in public administration means:

3.3.1. an offence against Part 7 Division 4 (Offences relating to public officers) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935, which includes the following offences:

1 Such a person may include:

a Council employee (such as the Chief Executive Officer) to whom the whistleblower feels comfortable making the disclosure; and/or

The OPI where the disclosure relates to corruption, maladministration or misconduct in public administration.

31

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 4



3

(i) bribery or corruption of public officers; (ii) threats or reprisals against public officers; (iii) abuse of public office; (iv) demanding or requiring benefit on basis of public office; (v) offences relating to appointment to public office.

3.3.2 any other offence (including an offence against Part 5 (Offences of dishonesty) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935) committed by a public officer while acting in his or her capacity as a public officer or by a former public officer and related to his or her former capacity as a public officer, or by a person before becoming a public officer and related to his or her capacity as a public officer, or an attempt to commit such an offence; or

3.3.3 any of the following in relation to an offence referred to in a preceding paragraph: (i) aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the commission of the

offence; (ii) inducing, whether by threats or promises or otherwise, the

commission of the offence; (iii) being in any way, directly or indirectly, knowingly concerned in, or

party to, the commission of the offence; (iv) conspiring with others to effect the commission of the offence

3.4. Detriment includes:

injury, damage or loss; or intimidation or harassment; or discrimination, disadvantage or adverse treatment in relation to a person's

employment; or threats of reprisal.

3.5. Directions and Guidelines is a reference to the Directions and Guidelines issued pursuant to section 20 of the ICAC Act, which are available on the Commissioner’s website (www.icac.sa.gov.au).

3.6. Disclosure means an appropriate disclosure of public interest information made by the Whistleblower to an Appropriate Authority, including to a Responsible Officer. A person makes an appropriate disclosure of public interest information if: a) the person:

i believes on reasonable grounds that the information is true; or ii is not in a position to form a belief on reasonable grounds about the truth of

the information but believes on reasonable grounds that the information may be true and is of sufficient significance to justify its disclosure so that its truth may be investigated; and

32

http://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/index.aspx?action=legref&type=act&legtitle=Criminal%20Law%20Consolidation%20Act%201935

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 4



4

b) the disclosure is made to an Appropriate Authority. 3.7. Employee refers to all the Council's employees and includes trainees, work

experience students, volunteers, and contractors whether they are working in a full-time, part-time or casual capacity.

3.8. Fraud is an intentional dishonest act or omission done with the purpose of deceiving.

3.9. ICAC Act is the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption Act 2012. 3.10. Immunity is an undertaking given by the Council (in accordance with the Act) to

a Whistleblower in relation to action it does not intend to take against a Whistleblower as a result of receiving an appropriate disclosure of public interest information from the Whistleblower.

3.11. Independent Assessor is the person responsible for investigating, a disclosure made to a Responsible Officer. The Independent Assessor will be appointed by the Responsible Officer on a case-by-case basis (depending upon the nature of the disclosure) in accordance with clause 7.3 of this Policy. The Council may prepare a list of pre-approved persons who may be appointed as an Independent Assessor in any given circumstances, in which case, the Responsible Officer must have regard to this list in appointing the Independent Assessor.

3.12. Maladministration is defined in the Whistleblowers Protection Act 1993 to include impropriety or negligence. Section 4 of the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption Act 2012 defines Maladministration in public administration to mean: (i) conduct of a public officer, or a practice, policy or procedure of a public

authority, that results in an irregular and unauthorised use of public money or substantial mismanagement of public resources; or

(ii) conduct of a public officer involving substantial mismanagement in or in relation to the performance of official functions; and

3.12.1. includes conduct resulting from impropriety, incompetence or negligence; and

3.12.2. is to be assessed having regard to relevant statutory provisions and administrative instructions and directions.

3.13. Misconduct in public administration defined at Section 4 of the ICAC Act

means: 3.13.1. contravention of a code of conduct by a public officer while acting in his

or her capacity as a public officer that constitutes a ground for disciplinary action against the officer; or

3.13.2. other misconduct of a public officer while acting in his or her capacity as a public officer.

33

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 4



5

3.14. Office for Public Integrity (OPI) is the office established under the ICAC Act

that has the function to: 3.14.1. receive and assess complaints about public administration from

members of the public; 3.14.2. receive and assess reports about corruption, misconduct and

maladministration in public administration from the Ombudsman, the Council and public officers;

3.14.3. make recommendations as to whether and by whom complaints and reports should be investigated;

3.14.4. perform other functions assigned to the Office by the Commissioner. 3.15. Public administration defined at section 4 of the ICAC Act means without

limiting the acts that may comprise public administration, an administrative act within the meaning of the Ombudsman Act 1972 will be taken to be carried out in the course of public administration.

3.16. Public interest information2 means information that tends to show: a) that an adult person, a Council or other Government Agency, is or has been

involved in: i an illegal activity; or ii an irregular and unauthorised use of public money; or iii substantial mismanagement of public resources; or iv conduct that causes a substantial risk to public health or safety, or to the

environment; or b) that a public officer is guilty of maladministration in or in relation to the

performance of official functions. 3.17. Public Officer includes:

a Council Member; and an Employee or Officer of the Council;

3.18. Responsible Officer is a person appointed pursuant to Section 302B of the Local Government Act 1999 who is authorised to receive and act upon public interest information received from a Whistleblower3. Each Council must ensure that a member of the staff of the Council (with qualifications prescribed by the

2 This definition captures conduct that constitutes corruption, misconduct and maladministration in public administration. 3 It is recommended that the Responsible Officer is one or two Council Officers and is not the Chief Executive Officer, the Mayor, Council Member or a Council Committee. A Council Member should not be appointed as a Responsible Officer as Council Members are not equipped to properly deal with an appropriate disclosure in terms of the roles and responsibilities of their office. Furthermore the Responsible Officer is an administrative role and the principles of good governance require division between the administrative and governing bodies of a Council.

34

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 4



6

Regulations4) is designated as a Responsible Officer for the Council for the purposes of the Act.

3.19. Victimisation occurs when a person causes detriment to another on the ground, or substantially on the ground, that the other person (or a third person) has made or intends to make an appropriate disclosure of public interest information.

3.20. Waste refers to the waste of public resources (including public money), which occurs as a result of the substantial mismanagement, irregular or unauthorised use of public resources.

3.21. Whistleblower is any person who makes an appropriate disclosure of public interest information.

4. Confidentiality 4.1. The identity of a Whistleblower will be maintained as confidential in accordance

with the Act. Confidentiality will remain in all circumstances, unless the Whistleblower consents to his/her identity being disclosed or, disclosure is otherwise required so that the matter may be properly investigated. The Act does not expressly require any other information relating to a Disclosure (i.e. the nature of the allegations) to be maintained as confidential.

4.2. A Whistleblower may wish to remain anonymous. In the event that an anonymous Disclosure is made, the Whistleblower must ensure that the allegation is sufficiently supported by the provision of necessary details and evidence to enable the matter to be properly investigated. Accordingly, if an allegation is not supported by sufficient evidence it will not be investigated under the provisions of the Act.

5. Disclosure Process 5.1. A Disclosure is to be made to the Responsible Officer. A Whistleblower may

alternatively choose to disclose Public Interest Information directly to an Appropriate Authority.

5.2. The following are relevant considerations for the Whistleblower in determining where to direct a Disclosure: 5.2.1. subject to this clause, when choosing to make a Disclosure internally,

Disclosures relating to an elected member or a member of council staff, other than the Chief Executive Officer (or person acting in that position), should be made to a Responsible Officer;

4 Regulation 21B of the Local Government (General) Regulations 1999, states that the prescribed qualifications are the qualifications determined by the Minister. The Minister has not yet made any determination.

35

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 4



7

5.2.2. any Disclosure relating to a person appointed as a Responsible Officer should be made to the other person appointed as a Responsible Officer or failing this, to an Appropriate Authority external to the Council;

5.2.3. any Disclosure relating to the Chief Executive Officer should be made external to the Council to the Ombudsman or, where it relates to Corruption in public administration to the OPI;

5.2.4. any Disclosure relating to Maladministration or Misconduct in public administration may be reported in accordance with the ICAC Act or, if there is a reasonable suspicion that the Maladministration or Misconduct is serious or systemic, it must be reported to the OPI in accordance with the Directions and Guidelines;

5.2.5. if a Disclosure contains allegations of Fraud or Corruption, the Whistleblower should report the matter in accordance with the Council’s Fraud and Corruption Policy. That is, if the Disclosure relates to Corruption in public administration it should be reported to the OPI in the first instance5. If the Disclosure relates to Fraud, it may be reported to the Responsible Officer or direct to SAPOL.

5.2.6. Any allegations of Fraud or Corruption and/or criminal conduct will not be investigated by an Independent Assessor under this Policy.

5.3. Nothing in this Policy prevents a person from making a Disclosure to an Appropriate Authority external to the Council (i.e. the Ombudsman or the OPI). This is a choice to be made by the Whistleblower at his/her discretion.

5.4. A Disclosure made to the Responsible Officer may be made in person, by telephone or in writing. The relevant contact details are:

Telephone: (08) 8625 3407 Email: [email protected] Address: Confidential - Whistleblowers PO Box 175 Ceduna SA 5690

5.5. Where a Disclosure is made by telephone, the Responsible Officer must take notes of the conversation and, where possible ask the Whistleblower to verify and sign the notes.

6. The Role of the Responsible Officer 6.1. Upon the receipt of a Disclosure, the Responsible Officer will:

6.1.1. undertake a preliminary assessment in accordance with Part 7 of this Policy below to determine the nature of the Public Interest Information contained within the Disclosure; and

5 The OPI is the authority charged with receiving complaints and reports relating to such information. However, it remains open to the Whistleblower to make a disclosure relating to corruption in public administration to the Responsible Officer if he/she feels more comfortable doing so.

36

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 4



8

6.1.2. either refer the Disclosure to the Appropriate Authority (where it is appropriate to do so), or proceed with the an investigation process outlined in Part 8 of this Policy.

6.2. If the Disclosure relates to the Chief Executive Officer (or a person acting in that position), the Responsible Officer will immediately refer it to the Ombudsman for investigation as the Ombudsman deems appropriate. Alternatively, if the Disclosure relates to Corruption in public administration, the Responsible Officer must immediately report the matter to the OPI in accordance with the Directions and Guidelines.

6.3. In making any determination under this Policy (i.e. such as to refer a disclosure to the Appropriate Authority or proceed with an assessment or otherwise determining whether to pursue an investigation) : 6.3.1. the Responsible Officer may seek legal advice from Council’s Lawyers

and/or seek guidance from SAPOL or the Ombudsman in relation to the best course of action to pursue; and

6.3.2. is authorised to incur costs in accordance with the Council’s Budget for this purpose.

6.4. In the event that the Responsible Officer determines that the Disclosure warrants further investigation by the Council, the Responsible Officer will appoint an Independent Assessor for these purposes under paragraph 7.3 of this Policy.

6.5. The Responsible Officer will liaise with the Independent Assessor and the Whistleblower in relation to any ensuing investigation process and will ensure that the Whistleblower is provided with adequate support and protection as necessary.

6.6. The Whistleblower will be notified of the progress of any investigation by the Responsible Officer and, wherever practicable and in accordance with the law, of the final outcome.

7. Preliminary Assessment of Complaint 7.1. Where the identity of the Whistleblower is known to the Responsible Officer or

is reasonably ascertainable, the Responsible Officer will acknowledge receipt of the Disclosure within 2 days and in doing so, will provide a copy of this Policy to the Whistleblower.

7.2. Upon receipt of a disclosure, the Responsible Officer will undertake a preliminary assessment to determine whether it: 7.2.1. is frivolous, vexatious or trivial, in which case, no further action will be

taken in relation to the complaint; or 7.2.2. warrants referral to an Independent Assessor for a formal investigation

and report to Council; or

37

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 4



9

7.2.3. requires referral to an Appropriate Authority external to the Council; 7.3. The Responsible Officer must report the outcome of his/her determination under

paragraph 7.2 above to the Chief Executive Officer (unless the disclosure relates to the Chief Executive Officer in which case it is to be dealt with pursuant to clause 6.2 above and must not be investigated by an Independent Assessor). Where the Responsible Officer determines the disclosure warrants investigation, the Responsible Officer will, having regard to available resources, appoint the Independent Assessor and refer the Disclosure to the Independent Assessor for investigation.

7.4. Where the Responsible Officer determines the Disclosure warrants referral to an external body, the Responsible Officer will undertake the referral.

7.5. The Responsible Officer will inform the Whistleblower of the outcome of his/her determination under paragraph 7.2 above in writing as soon as is reasonably practicable after the determination has been made.

7.6. If the Whistleblower is dissatisfied with the Responsible Officer’s determination it is open to him/her to report the Disclosure to an Appropriate Authority external to the Council.

8. Investigation Procedure 8.1. The objectives of the investigation process are:

to investigate the substance of the disclosure and to determine whether there is evidence in support of the matters raised or, alternatively, to refute the report made;

to collate information relating to the allegation as quickly as possible. This may involve taking steps to protect or preserve documents, materials and equipment;

to consider the information collected and to draw conclusions objectively and impartially;

to observe procedural fairness in the treatment of any person who is subject of the disclosure;

to make recommendations arising from the conclusions drawn concerning remedial or other appropriate action; and

8.2. The Independent Assessor will observe the principles of natural justice throughout the investigation process. The investigation will be conducted in an efficient manner and will involve a thorough and balanced assessment of the available evidence and any other factors deemed relevant to making a fair and reasonable judgement about the matter.

38

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 4



10

8.3. The Act requires that the Whistleblower assist with certain investigations that may result from his/her Disclosure. In the event that the Whistleblower fails, without reasonable excuse, to assist with an investigation process the protection afforded to him/her under the Act may be forfeited6.

8.4. Upon receipt of a Disclosure, the Independent Assessor will bring the fact of the Disclosure to the attention of the person who is the subject of it in writing within 5 days, and provide them with an opportunity to respond to the disclosure within a reasonable timeframe (either in writing or in person). The full details of any allegations contained in the Disclosure need not be brought to the person’s attention if the Independent Assessor considers that doing so will compromise the success of the investigation.

8.5. At any time the Independent Assessor is required to communicate with the person subject of the Disclosure, the Whistleblower and/or other witnesses for the purposes of the investigation, the Independent Assessor will ensure the relevant person is aware of the reason for and purpose of the communication. Such notification will be provided to the relevant person at least 48 hours before such communication is to take place.

8.6. During any interview with the Independent Assessor, the person who is the subject of a Disclosure may be accompanied by any person providing support to him/her (including a lawyer) as he/she considers fit. Any costs incurred in relation to obtaining the assistance of a support person are the personal expenses of the person subject of the Disclosure. The support person is bound by a duty of confidentiality in relation to any matter discussed during such interview.

8.7. The investigation will be undertaken in confidence. The Independent Assessor will keep the identity of the Whistleblower confidential unless Disclosure of his/her identity is necessary to ensure that the proper investigation of the Disclosure.

8.8. The Independent Assessor will keep the Responsible Officer informed of the expected timeframes for completion of the investigation and the provision of a report to the Council.

9. Final Report and Recommendation 9.1. Upon finalising a detailed investigation the Independent Assessor must prepare

a report that will contain the following:

the allegation(s); an account of all relevant information received including any rejected evidence,

and the reasons why the rejection occurred; the conclusions reached and the basis for them; any recommendations arising from the conclusions; and

6 Refer section 6(3) of the Act.

39

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 4



11

any remedial action which should be taken by the Council. The report will be accompanied by:

the transcript or other record of any verbal evidence taken, including tape recordings; and

all documents, statements or other exhibits received by the officer and accepted as evidence during the course of the investigation.

9.2. The report will not disclose particulars that will or are likely to lead to the identification of the Whistleblower.

9.3. The report must be provided to the Chief Executive Officer to action as he/she considers appropriate.

10. Handling of Information 10.1. The Independent Assessor must ensure accurate records of the investigation

process are maintained including notes of all discussions, phone calls, and interviews. It is recommended that the interviewee sign written records of interviews and interviews be taped, but only where the interviewee has consented to this. Witness statements should also be signed.

10.2. In performing his/her duties, the Independent Assessor will maintain a confidential file of information (including written documents, disks, tapes, film or other objects that contain information) that relates to a disclosure and/or is a product of the associated investigation/reporting process. All such information will be recorded in a register which is to remain confidential and be securely stored7.

11. Information to Elected Body 11.1. As a matter of discretion, the Chief Executive Officer may inform the elected

body, on a confidential basis, of the fact an investigation of a Disclosure took place and the outcome of the investigation.

11.2. Factors the Chief Executive Officer will take into account in determining whether to inform the elected body under paragraph 11.1 above and the level of detail provided in doing so are as follows: 11.2.1. the identity of the person subject of the Disclosure; 11.2.2. the impact (if any) of the investigation upon the Council’s achievement

of its objectives under its Strategic Plan and/or policies; and

7 The Responsible Officer, in conjunction with the independent assessor will ensure all information relating to an appropriate disclosure is maintained as confidential and as such, will be solely responsible for the secure storage of this information. It is recommended that the information be stored separately from the Council’s records. In the event that a person’s appointment as a Responsible Officer is terminated, the person must provide this information to the newly-appointed Responsible Officer and having done so will continue to be bound by a duty of confidentiality in respect of the Whistleblower’s identity and the information received.

40

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 4



12

11.2.3. the nature of the impact of any action taken to finalise the matter upon the Council’s operations and/or budget.

11.3. In the event the Disclosure and investigation process is confined only to issues impacting upon Council staff and human resource processes, the Chief Executive Officer will not inform the elected body of the fact of the Disclosure and/or investigation since these matters fall outside the roles and responsibilities of elected members under the Local Government Act 1999.

12. Protection for the Whistleblower 12.1. The Act provides immunity from criminal or civil liability for Whistleblowers, and

protection for Whistleblowers against victimisation. Accordingly the Council will take action as appropriate to protect Whistleblowers from victimisation. Furthermore, in the event that a Whistleblower is victimised, the Council will, immediately refer the matter to the SA Police.

12.2. The Act does not provide any protection to people who knowingly make false disclosures or are reckless as to whether their disclosures are true.

12.3. A person who knowingly makes a false Disclosure or is reckless as to whether the disclosure is true is guilty of an offence and may be prosecuted.

12.4. A Public Officer who knowingly makes a false disclosure, or is reckless as to whether the Disclosure is true, in addition to being guilty of an offence under the Act, may face disciplinary action taken by the Council.

13. Availability of the Policy 13.1. This Policy will be available for inspection at the Council's Offices during

ordinary business hours and via the Council's website www.ceduna.sa.gov.au . Copies will also be provided to the public upon request, and upon payment of a fee in accordance with the Council's Schedule of Fees and Charges.

41

http://www.ceduna.sa.gov.au/

WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 45

Issued: 19th Aug

201518th April2018


1

Category: Governance Classification: Public First Issued: 24/1/06 Review Frequency: 4 years – Term of Council Legislation: Whistleblower Protection Act 1993 Relevant Policies: Related Procedures: Signed: Responsible Officer: Manager Governance Adopted on : 19/8/2015

1. Introduction1.1. The District Council of Ceduna is committed to upholding the principles of

transparency and accountability in its administrative and management practices and, therefore, encourages the making of disclosures that reveal public interest information.

1.2. The purpose of this Policy is to ensure that Council:

properly fulfils its responsibilities under the Whistleblowers Protection Act1993;

encourages and facilitates Disclosures of Public Interest Information whichmay include occurrences of Maladministration and Waste within the Council,and corrupt or illegal conduct in general, so that internal controls may bestrengthened;

provides a process by which Disclosures may be made so that they areproperly investigated;

provides appropriate protection for those who make Disclosures in accordancewith the Act; and

recognises the need to appropriately support the Whistleblower, theResponsible Officer and, as appropriate, those Public Officers affected by anyallegation that affects them.

1.3. The Council will review and update this Policy as part of its policy review process. within the first 12 months in the term of a new Council.

2. Scope2.1. This Policy applies to appropriate Disclosures of Public Interest Information that

are made in accordance with the Act by Council Members, Employees of the Council, and members of the public. This Policy is also intended to complement the reporting framework under the ICAC Act.

2.2. This Policy is designed to complement the existing communication channels within Council, and operate in conjunction with existing policies, including:

Fraud & Corruption Prevention Policy; Code of Conduct for Council Employees; Code of Conduct for Council Members; and Internal Review of Council Decisions Policy under section 270 of the Local

Government Act 1999.

Annexure B42

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 45

Issued: 19th Aug

201518th April 2018


2

2.3. The Council is committed to:

referring, as necessary, appropriate Disclosures to the Appropriate Authority, which, depending on the nature of the Disclosure include a Minister of the Crown, the SA Police, the Anti-Corruption Branch of the SA Police, the Auditor-General or the Ombudsman. Further, where the Disclosure relates to Corruption it must be reported directly to the OPI in accordance with the Directions and Guidelines. A report of Misconduct or Maladministration may be made to the OPI, but it must be reported to the OPI if the Disclosure gives rise to a reasonable suspicion of serious or systemic Misconduct and/or Maladministration unless there is knowledge that the Disclosure has already been reported to the State Ombudsman..

otherwise facilitating the investigation of all appropriate Disclosures of Public Interest Information in a manner which promotes fair and objective treatment of those involved; and

rectifying any substantiated wrongdoing to the extent practicable in all the circumstances.

3. Definitions

For the purposes of this Policy the following definitions apply. 3.1. Act means the Whistleblowers Protection Act 1993. 3.2. An Appropriate Authority that receives disclosure of public interest information

includes:

a Minister of the Crown; a member of the police force - where the information relates to an illegal

activity; the Auditor-General – where the information relates to the irregular or

unauthorised use of public money; the Ombudsman – where the information relates to a public officer; a Responsible Officer - where the information relates to a matter falling within

the sphere of responsibility of a Local Government body; or any other person1 to whom, in the circumstances of the case, it is reasonable

and appropriate to make the disclosure. 3.3. Corruption in public administration means:

3.3.1. an offence against Part 7 Division 4 (Offences relating to public officers) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935, which includes the following offences:

1 Such a person may include:

a Council employee (such as the Chief Executive Officer) to whom the whistleblower feels comfortable making the disclosure; and/or

The OPI where the disclosure relates to corruption, maladministration or misconduct in public administration.

43

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 45

Issued: 19th Aug

201518th April 2018


3

(i) bribery or corruption of public officers; (ii) threats or reprisals against public officers; (iii) abuse of public office; (iv) demanding or requiring benefit on basis of public office; (v) offences relating to appointment to public office.

3.3.2 any other offence (including an offence against Part 5 (Offences of dishonesty) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935) committed by a public officer while acting in his or her capacity as a public officer or by a former public officer and related to his or her former capacity as a public officer, or by a person before becoming a public officer and related to his or her capacity as a public officer, or an attempt to commit such an offence; or

3.3.3 any of the following in relation to an offence referred to in a preceding paragraph: (i) aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the commission of the

offence; (ii) inducing, whether by threats or promises or otherwise, the

commission of the offence; (iii) being in any way, directly or indirectly, knowingly concerned in, or

party to, the commission of the offence; (iv) conspiring with others to effect the commission of the offence

3.4. Detriment includes:

injury, damage or loss; or intimidation or harassment; or discrimination, disadvantage or adverse treatment in relation to a person's

employment; or threats of reprisal.

3.5. Directions and Guidelines is a reference to the Directions and Guidelines issued pursuant to section 20 of the ICAC Act, which are available on the Commissioner’s website (www.icac.sa.gov.au).

3.6. Disclosure means an appropriate disclosure of public interest information made by the Whistleblower to an Appropriate Authority, including to a Responsible Officer. A person makes an appropriate disclosure of public interest information if: a) the person:

i believes on reasonable grounds that the information is true; or ii is not in a position to form a belief on reasonable grounds about the truth of

the information but believes on reasonable grounds that the information may be true and is of sufficient significance to justify its disclosure so that its truth may be investigated; and

44

http://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/index.aspx?action=legref&type=act&legtitle=Criminal%20Law%20Consolidation%20Act%201935

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 45

Issued: 19th Aug

201518th April 2018


4

b) the disclosure is made to an Appropriate Authority. 3.7. Employee refers to all the Council's employees and includes trainees, work

experience students, volunteers, and contractors whether they are working in a full-time, part-time or casual capacity.

3.8. Fraud is an intentional dishonest act or omission done with the purpose of deceiving.

3.9. ICAC Act is the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption Act 2012. 3.10. Immunity is an undertaking given by the Council (in accordance with the Act) to

a Whistleblower in relation to action it does not intend to take against a Whistleblower as a result of receiving an appropriate disclosure of public interest information from the Whistleblower.

3.11. Independent Assessor is the person responsible for investigating, a disclosure made to a Responsible Officer. The Independent Assessor will be appointed by the Responsible Officer on a case-by-case basis (depending upon the nature of the disclosure) in accordance with clause 7.3 of this Policy. The Council may prepare a list of pre-approved persons who may be appointed as an Independent Assessor in any given circumstances, in which case, the Responsible Officer must have regard to this list in appointing the Independent Assessor.

3.12. Maladministration is defined in the Whistleblowers Protection Act 1993 to include impropriety or negligence. Section 4 of the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption Act 2012 defines Maladministration in public administration to mean:

(i) conduct of a public officer, or a practice, policy or procedure of a public authority, that results in an irregular and unauthorised use of public money or substantial mismanagement of public resources; or

(ii) conduct of a public officer involving substantial mismanagement in or in relation to the performance of official functions; and

3.12.1. includes conduct resulting from impropriety, incompetence or negligence; and

3.12.2. is to be assessed having regard to relevant statutory provisions and administrative instructions and directions.

3.13. Misconduct in public administration defined at Section 4 of the ICAC Act

means: 3.13.1. contravention of a code of conduct by a public officer while acting in his

or her capacity as a public officer that constitutes a ground for disciplinary action against the officer; or

3.13.2. other misconduct of a public officer while acting in his or her capacity as a public officer.

45

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 45

Issued: 19th Aug

201518th April 2018


5

3.14. Office for Public Integrity (OPI) is the office established under the ICAC Act

that has the function to: 3.14.1. receive and assess complaints about public administration from

members of the public; 3.14.2. receive and assess reports about corruption, misconduct and

maladministration in public administration from the Ombudsman, the Council and public officers;

3.14.3. make recommendations as to whether and by whom complaints and reports should be investigated;

3.14.4. perform other functions assigned to the Office by the Commissioner. 3.15. Public administration defined at section 4 of the ICAC Act means without

limiting the acts that may comprise public administration, an administrative act within the meaning of the Ombudsman Act 1972 will be taken to be carried out in the course of public administration.

3.16. Public interest information2 means information that tends to show: a) that an adult person, a Council or other Government Agency, is or has been

involved in: i an illegal activity; or ii an irregular and unauthorised use of public money; or iii substantial mismanagement of public resources; or iv conduct that causes a substantial risk to public health or safety, or to the

environment; or b) that a public officer is guilty of maladministration in or in relation to the

performance of official functions. 3.17. Public Officer includes:

a Council Member; and an Employee or Officer of the Council;

3.18. Responsible Officer is a person appointed pursuant to Section 302B of the Local Government Act 1999 who is authorised to receive and act upon public interest information received from a Whistleblower3. Each Council must ensure that a member of the staff of the Council (with qualifications prescribed by the

2 This definition captures conduct that constitutes corruption, misconduct and maladministration in public administration. 3 It is recommended that the Responsible Officer is one or two Council Officers and is not the Chief Executive Officer, the Mayor, Council Member or a Council Committee. A Council Member should not be appointed as a Responsible Officer as Council Members are not equipped to properly deal with an appropriate disclosure in terms of the roles and responsibilities of their office. Furthermore the Responsible Officer is an administrative role and the principles of good governance require division between the administrative and governing bodies of a Council.

46

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 45

Issued: 19th Aug

201518th April 2018


6

Regulations4) is designated as a Responsible Officer for the Council for the purposes of the Act.

3.19. Victimisation occurs when a person causes detriment to another on the ground, or substantially on the ground, that the other person (or a third person) has made or intends to make an appropriate disclosure of public interest information.

3.20. Waste refers to the waste of public resources (including public money), which occurs as a result of the substantial mismanagement, irregular or unauthorised use of public resources.

3.21. Whistleblower is any person who makes an appropriate disclosure of public interest information.

4. Confidentiality 4.1. The identity of a Whistleblower will be maintained as confidential in accordance

with the Act. Confidentiality will remain in all circumstances, unless the Whistleblower consents to his/her identity being disclosed or, disclosure is otherwise required so that the matter may be properly investigated. The Act does not expressly require any other information relating to a Disclosure (i.e. the nature of the allegations) to be maintained as confidential.

4.2. A Whistleblower may wish to remain anonymous. In the event that an anonymous Disclosure is made, the Whistleblower must ensure that the allegation is sufficiently supported by the provision of necessary details and evidence to enable the matter to be properly investigated. Accordingly, if an allegation is not supported by sufficient evidence it will not be investigated under the provisions of the Act.

5. Disclosure Process 5.1. A Disclosure is to be made to the Responsible Officer. A Whistleblower may

alternatively choose to disclose Public Interest Information directly to an Appropriate Authority.

5.2. The following are relevant considerations for the Whistleblower in determining where to direct a Disclosure: 5.2.1. subject to this clause, when choosing to make a Disclosure internally,

Disclosures relating to an elected member or a member of council staff, other than the Chief Executive Officer (or person acting in that position), should be made to a Responsible Officer;

4 Regulation 21B of the Local Government (General) Regulations 1999, states that the prescribed qualifications are the qualifications determined by the Minister. The Minister has not yet made any determination.

47

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 45

Issued: 19th Aug

201518th April 2018


7

5.2.2. any Disclosure relating to a person appointed as a Responsible Officer should be made to the other person appointed as a Responsible Officer or failing this, to an Appropriate Authority external to the Council;

5.2.3. any Disclosure relating to the Chief Executive Officer should be made external to the Council to the Ombudsman or, where it relates to Corruption in public administration to the OPI;

5.2.4. any Disclosure relating to Maladministration or Misconduct in public administration may be reported in accordance with the ICAC Act or, if there is a reasonable suspicion that the Maladministration or Misconduct is serious or systemic, it must be reported to the OPI in accordance with the Directions and Guidelines;

5.2.5. if a Disclosure contains allegations of Fraud or Corruption, the Whistleblower should report the matter in accordance with the Council’s Fraud and Corruption Policy. That is, if the Disclosure relates to Corruption in public administration it should be reported to the OPI in the first instance5. If the Disclosure relates to Fraud, it may be reported to the Responsible Officer or direct to SAPOL.

5.2.6. Any allegations of Fraud or Corruption and/or criminal conduct will not be investigated by an Independent Assessor under this Policy.

5.3. Nothing in this Policy prevents a person from making a Disclosure to an Appropriate Authority external to the Council (i.e. the Ombudsman or the OPI). This is a choice to be made by the Whistleblower at his/her discretion.

5.4. A Disclosure made to the Responsible Officer may be made in person, by telephone or in writing. The relevant contact details are:

Telephone: (08) 8625 3407 Email: [email protected] Address: Confidential - Whistleblowers PO Box 175 Ceduna SA 5690

5.5. Where a Disclosure is made by telephone, the Responsible Officer must take notes of the conversation and, where possible ask the Whistleblower to verify and sign the notes.

6. The Role of the Responsible Officer 6.1. Upon the receipt of a Disclosure, the Responsible Officer will:

6.1.1. undertake a preliminary assessment in accordance with Part 7 of this Policy below to determine the nature of the Public Interest Information contained within the Disclosure; and

5 The OPI is the authority charged with receiving complaints and reports relating to such information. However, it remains open to the Whistleblower to make a disclosure relating to corruption in public administration to the Responsible Officer if he/she feels more comfortable doing so.

48

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 45

Issued: 19th Aug

201518th April 2018


8

6.1.2. either refer the Disclosure to the Appropriate Authority (where it is appropriate to do so), or proceed with the an investigation process outlined in Part 8 of this Policy.

6.2. If the Disclosure relates to the Chief Executive Officer (or a person acting in that position), the Responsible Officer will immediately refer it to the Ombudsman for investigation as the Ombudsman deems appropriate. Alternatively, if the Disclosure relates to Corruption in public administration, the Responsible Officer must immediately report the matter to the OPI in accordance with the Directions and Guidelines.

6.3. In making any determination under this Policy (i.e. such as to refer a disclosure to the Appropriate Authority or proceed with an assessment or otherwise determining whether to pursue an investigation) : 6.3.1. the Responsible Officer may seek legal advice from Council’s Lawyers

and/or seek guidance from SAPOL or the Ombudsman in relation to the best course of action to pursue; and

6.3.2. is authorised to incur costs in accordance with the Council’s Budget for this purpose.

6.4. In the event that the Responsible Officer determines that the Disclosure warrants further investigation by the Council, the Responsible Officer will appoint an Independent Assessor for these purposes under paragraph 7.3 of this Policy.

6.5. The Responsible Officer will liaise with the Independent Assessor and the Whistleblower in relation to any ensuing investigation process and will ensure that the Whistleblower is provided with adequate support and protection as necessary.

6.6. The Whistleblower will be notified of the progress of any investigation by the Responsible Officer and, wherever practicable and in accordance with the law, of the final outcome.

7. Preliminary Assessment of Complaint 7.1. Where the identity of the Whistleblower is known to the Responsible Officer or

is reasonably ascertainable, the Responsible Officer will acknowledge receipt of the Disclosure within 2 days and in doing so, will provide a copy of this Policy to the Whistleblower.

7.2. Upon receipt of a disclosure, the Responsible Officer will undertake a preliminary assessment to determine whether it: 7.2.1. is frivolous, vexatious or trivial, in which case, no further action will be

taken in relation to the complaint; or 7.2.2. warrants referral to an Independent Assessor for a formal investigation

and report to Council; or

49

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 45

Issued: 19th Aug

201518th April 2018


9

7.2.3. requires referral to an Appropriate Authority external to the Council; 7.3. The Responsible Officer must report the outcome of his/her determination under

paragraph 7.2 above to the Chief Executive Officer (unless the disclosure relates to the Chief Executive Officer in which case it is to be dealt with pursuant to clause 6.2 above and must not be investigated by an Independent Assessor). Where the Responsible Officer determines the disclosure warrants investigation, the Responsible Officer will, having regard to available resources, appoint the Independent Assessor and refer the Disclosure to the Independent Assessor for investigation.

7.4. Where the Responsible Officer determines the Disclosure warrants referral to an external body, the Responsible Officer will undertake the referral.

7.5. The Responsible Officer will inform the Whistleblower of the outcome of his/her determination under paragraph 7.2 above in writing as soon as is reasonably practicable after the determination has been made.

7.6. If the Whistleblower is dissatisfied with the Responsible Officer’s determination it is open to him/her to report the Disclosure to an Appropriate Authority external to the Council.

8. Investigation Procedure 8.1. The objectives of the investigation process are:

to investigate the substance of the disclosure and to determine whether there is evidence in support of the matters raised or, alternatively, to refute the report made;

to collate information relating to the allegation as quickly as possible. This may involve taking steps to protect or preserve documents, materials and equipment;

to consider the information collected and to draw conclusions objectively and impartially;

to observe procedural fairness in the treatment of any person who is subject of the disclosure;

to make recommendations arising from the conclusions drawn concerning remedial or other appropriate action; and

8.2. The Independent Assessor will observe the principles of natural justice throughout the investigation process. The investigation will be conducted in an efficient manner and will involve a thorough and balanced assessment of the available evidence and any other factors deemed relevant to making a fair and reasonable judgement about the matter.

50

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 45

Issued: 19th Aug

201518th April 2018


10

8.3. The Act requires that the Whistleblower assist with certain investigations that may result from his/her Disclosure. In the event that the Whistleblower fails, without reasonable excuse, to assist with an investigation process the protection afforded to him/her under the Act may be forfeited6.

8.4. Upon receipt of a Disclosure, the Independent Assessor will bring the fact of the Disclosure to the attention of the person who is the subject of it in writing within 5 days, and provide them with an opportunity to respond to the disclosure within a reasonable timeframe (either in writing or in person). The full details of any allegations contained in the Disclosure need not be brought to the person’s attention if the Independent Assessor considers that doing so will compromise the success of the investigation.

8.5. At any time the Independent Assessor is required to communicate with the person subject of the Disclosure, the Whistleblower and/or other witnesses for the purposes of the investigation, the Independent Assessor will ensure the relevant person is aware of the reason for and purpose of the communication. Such notification will be provided to the relevant person at least 48 hours before such communication is to take place.

8.6. During any interview with the Independent Assessor, the person who is the subject of a Disclosure may be accompanied by any person providing support to him/her (including a lawyer) as he/she considers fit. Any costs incurred in relation to obtaining the assistance of a support person are the personal expenses of the person subject of the Disclosure. The support person is bound by a duty of confidentiality in relation to any matter discussed during such interview.

8.7. The investigation will be undertaken in confidence. The Independent Assessor will keep the identity of the Whistleblower confidential unless Disclosure of his/her identity is necessary to ensure that the proper investigation of the Disclosure.

8.8. The Independent Assessor will keep the Responsible Officer informed of the expected timeframes for completion of the investigation and the provision of a report to the Council.

9. Final Report and Recommendation 9.1. Upon finalising a detailed investigation the Independent Assessor must prepare

a report that will contain the following:

the allegation(s); an account of all relevant information received including any rejected evidence,

and the reasons why the rejection occurred; the conclusions reached and the basis for them; any recommendations arising from the conclusions; and

6 Refer section 6(3) of the Act.

51

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 45

Issued: 19th Aug

201518th April 2018


11

any remedial action which should be taken by the Council. The report will be accompanied by:

the transcript or other record of any verbal evidence taken, including tape recordings; and

all documents, statements or other exhibits received by the officer and accepted as evidence during the course of the investigation.

9.2. The report will not disclose particulars that will or are likely to lead to the identification of the Whistleblower.

9.3. The report must be provided to the Chief Executive Officer to action as he/she considers appropriate.

10. Handling of Information 10.1. The Independent Assessor must ensure accurate records of the investigation

process are maintained including notes of all discussions, phone calls, and interviews. It is recommended that the interviewee sign written records of interviews and interviews be taped, but only where the interviewee has consented to this. Witness statements should also be signed.

10.2. In performing his/her duties, the Independent Assessor will maintain a confidential file of information (including written documents, disks, tapes, film or other objects that contain information) that relates to a disclosure and/or is a product of the associated investigation/reporting process. All such information will be recorded in a register which is to remain confidential and be securely stored7.

11. Information to Elected Body 11.1. As a matter of discretion, the Chief Executive Officer may inform the elected

body, on a confidential basis, of the fact an investigation of a Disclosure took place and the outcome of the investigation.

11.2. Factors the Chief Executive Officer will take into account in determining whether to inform the elected body under paragraph 11.1 above and the level of detail provided in doing so are as follows: 11.2.1. the identity of the person subject of the Disclosure; 11.2.2. the impact (if any) of the investigation upon the Council’s achievement

of its objectives under its Strategic Plan and/or policies; and

7 The Responsible Officer, in conjunction with the independent assessor will ensure all information relating to an appropriate disclosure is maintained as confidential and as such, will be solely responsible for the secure storage of this information. It is recommended that the information be stored separately from the Council’s records. In the event that a person’s appointment as a Responsible Officer is terminated, the person must provide this information to the newly-appointed Responsible Officer and having done so will continue to be bound by a duty of confidentiality in respect of the Whistleblower’s identity and the information received.

52

WHISTLEBLOWER

PROTECTION

Policy # 1.29 / 45

Issued: 19th Aug

201518th April 2018


12

11.2.3. the nature of the impact of any action taken to finalise the matter upon the Council’s operations and/or budget.

11.3. In the event the Disclosure and investigation process is confined only to issues impacting upon Council staff and human resource processes, the Chief Executive Officer will not inform the elected body of the fact of the Disclosure and/or investigation since these matters fall outside the roles and responsibilities of elected members under the Local Government Act 1999.

12. Protection for the Whistleblower 12.1. The Act provides immunity from criminal or civil liability for Whistleblowers, and

protection for Whistleblowers against victimisation. Accordingly the Council will take action as appropriate to protect Whistleblowers from victimisation. Furthermore, in the event that a Whistleblower is victimised, the Council will, immediately refer the matter to the SA Police.

12.2. The Act does not provide any protection to people who knowingly make false disclosures or are reckless as to whether their disclosures are true.

12.3. A person who knowingly makes a false Disclosure or is reckless as to whether the disclosure is true is guilty of an offence and may be prosecuted.

12.4. A Public Officer who knowingly makes a false disclosure, or is reckless as to whether the Disclosure is true, in addition to being guilty of an offence under the Act, may face disciplinary action taken by the Council.

13. Availability of the Policy 13.1. This Policy will be available for inspection at the Council's Offices during

ordinary business hours and via the Council's website www.ceduna.sa.gov.au . Copies will also be provided to the public upon request, and upon payment of a fee in accordance with the Council's Schedule of Fees and Charges.

53

http://www.ceduna.sa.gov.au/

COUNCIL ROLE IN DISASTER & EMERGENCY

RESPONSE

Policy # 1.55 / 1

Issued: 26 Nov 2014

POLICY Next review Nov 2018

1

Category: Risk & Safety Classification: Public First Issued: 26/11/14 Review Frequency: Each Election Term (4yrs) Legislation: Local Government Act 1999, Emergency Management Act 2001 Relevant Policies: Related Procedures: Signed: Responsible Officer: Chief Executive Officer Adopted by Council: 26/11/14

BACKGROUND Given the increasing regularity and severity of natural disasters, the District Council of Ceduna recognises the shared responsibility that it has to help protect and assist its community to respond to and recover from disasters. This policy has been prepared within the context of supporting the emergency services in emergencies, as part of the State Emergency Management Plan arrangements to support response and recovery operations in an emergency.

POLICY The LGA of South Australia has worked in collaboration with the State Government (SAFECOM) to combine all the essential elements that support strategies to ensure that responding to emergency situations is undertaken safely in the best interests of the community. Council anticipates that it may be requested to provide resources to assist a control agency to respond to disaster or emergency situations. It is recognised that this will involve the activation of ordinary operations and use of resources in extraordinary circumstances. In relation to Council’s role in disaster and emergency response activities, Council has: Carefully considered risk management issues; and Had regard to the arrangements of the LGA Asset Mutual Fund, the LGA Workers

Compensation Scheme and LGS Mutual Liability Scheme

1. I-RESPONDA FRAMEWORKReflecting the partnership role played by Local Government in emergency situationsthe Council will: As a Member of Local Government Risk Services comply with statutory

requirements and appropriate risk management guidelines/protocols. Specificallyfor this situation this will include implementing the i-responda framework, toensure that all disaster and emergency response activities are undertaken withina consistent and robust risk assessed framework guiding practical decisions andactions pursuant to the Schemes’ Rules;

Establish, implement, monitor and review WHS Policy/s and Procedure/sconsistent with the i-responda framework;

Establish, maintain and manage an “Emergency Response Support Register”.The Register will ensure the preparedness and the availability of the i-

Annexure C54


RESPONSE

Policy # 1.55 / 1

Issued: 26 Nov 2014


2

responda framework employee resource pool within the Council area in the event of a disaster or emergency situation; and

Establish, maintain and manage an “Emergency Services Vehicles, Plant and Equipment Register” which will identify Council owned vehicles, plant and equipment that is suitable and available for the purpose of being used in an Emergency/Disaster situation. Attaching to the Register will be the terms and conditions of availability and use of the plant and equipment.

2. USE OF ORDINARY COUNCIL RESOURCES IN AN EXTRA-ORDINARY EVENT Council will consider a request from an incident Control Agency for the provision of equipment and other resources in a timely and effective manner, reflecting an assessment of the emergency situation. Only the Council’s CEO (or their delegate) has the authority to approve the use of Council’s plant, equipment and or personnel to assist a Control Agency in an emergency situation. The supply of such Council resources is made on a cost recovery basis for the supply of plant and equipment or employee wages and salaries where Council has responded to a request from a relevant control agency for the provision of Council resources. 2.1. Council Employees

Council will: Support any Council Employee who is listed on the Emergency Response

Support Register in accord with the i-responda framework; Not obligate any Council Employee to be listed on the Emergency

Response Support Register, nor obligate any Council employee listed on the register to respond to any particular incident;

Ensure all Council Employees who will be required to operate Council vehicles, plant, equipment and/or machinery undertake annually the i-responda Awareness programme;

Maintain the integrity of the Emergency Response Support Register/s; Not prejudice any employment conditions of an employee acting as a

recognised Control Agent Volunteer within and relating to the emergency circumstances; and

Reserve the right, in accord with the i-responda framework, not to release Council Employees and/or vehicles, equipment, plant, machinery during an emergency/disaster response operation should extenuating circumstances, as determined by the CEO, apply or exist.

2.2. Council Plant and Equipment Council will: Provide a list of vehicles, plant and equipment, maintained in operational

condition, to be available for the purpose of utilisation in an emergency/disaster situation;

Liaise with the Control Agent where necessary how the delivery of, or

55


RESPONSE

Policy # 1.55 / 1

Issued: 26 Nov 2014


3

access to, any vehicles, plant and equipment will be undertaken; Have available at all times a comprehensive list of persons on the

Emergency Response Support Register that are identified to operate the various items of equipment;

Reserve the right not to release Council owned plant and equipment for Emergency response operations should extenuating circumstances, as deemed by the CEO, apply or exist.

3. RISK MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORTING COVER 3.1. Local Government Association Asset Mutual Fund

The LGAAMF will continue to provide coverage to Council owned property, plant and machinery (mobile or otherwise) whilst it is being used in preventing, preparing, or responding to an emergency/disaster on the following basis: 1. The plant, vehicle, or machinery will be operated by Council staff in

accord with the i- responda framework. 2. Council is responsible to ensure all property, vehicles, plant and machinery

(mobile or otherwise) provided in an emergency/disaster situation is fit for purpose, consistent with the declared emergency/disaster.

3.2. Local Government Association Workers Compensation Scheme Via Council’s membership of the LGAWCS, all staff are covered for workers compensation (as governed by the WR&C Act) where the activity being carried out on/with Council plant and equipment is ordinary Council business, so the activity forms part of the employee’s ordinary employment. Pursuant to workers compensation legislation, the compensability arises from injury sustained ‘in the course of employment’. The i-responda framework establishes that at all times in responding to an emergency incident or disaster, the Council, the CEO and the relevant employee/s will be undertaking ordinary activity “in the course of employment” controlled and directed by Council, including in an extraordinary event. Council employees will retain workers compensation cover when engaged in emergency incidents by way of operating Council plant and equipment in the conduct of Council business.

3.3. Local Government Association Mutual Liablity Scheme For the purpose of the i-responda framework, the Council as a Member of the Local Government Association Mutual Liability Scheme is entitled to civil liability cover including proactive risk management support, pursuant to the LGAMLS Rules. The i-responda framework establishes that at all times, the Council, the CEO and the relevant employee/s while undertaking ordinary activity pursuant to a Council’s role, functions, duties (as set out Section 7 of the Local Government Act 1999) during an extraordinary (disaster or emergency) event will be covered by the LGAMLS.

56

PROVISION OF COUNCIL RESOURCES TO SUPPORT EMERGENCY SERVICES IN

EMERGENCIES

Policy # 1.63 / 1

Issued: 18 April 2018

POLICY Next review April 2022

Classification: 1. Governance Classification: Council

First Issued: 26 November 2014 Review Frequency: 4 years

Legislation: Local Government Act 1999, State Emergency Management Act 2004, State Emergency Management Plan

Relevant Policies:

Related Procedures: Signed:

Responsible Officer: Chief Executive Officer

Adopted: 18/4/2018

PURPOSE

The purpose of this policy is to define how The District Council of Ceduna will support the emergency services in responding to an emergency. In particular:

arrangements that will allow the participation of Councils employees andassociated use of Council equipment;

the availability of Council employees who agree to participate; the availability of Council owned plant and equipment; and the scope of works that might be undertaken.

A Council employee within this policy does not include any person who separately undertakes duties (for the same emergency) as a registered emergency service volunteer e.g. CFS firefighter or SES volunteer.

AUTHORITY TO ACCESS COUNCIL’S PLANT, EQUIPMENT OR PERSONNEL

Any request by a combatant authority to access and use Council’s plant, equipment and or personnel in an emergency situation or for recovery purposes must be directed to Council’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO) on all occasions.

The combatant authority must provide to the CEO’s satisfaction: a detailed situation report and forecast predictions of the emergency; details of the plant, equipment and personnel being requested, and the location

where they may be deployed; details defining expected time frames Council’s plant equipment and personnel

will be required; details of the strategies the combatant authority will implement to safe guard

Councils plant equipment and personnel; details of timings for future updates of the emergency situation.

Only the CEO at his/her absolute discretion has the authority to approve the use of Council’s plant, equipment and personnel in an emergency or recovery situation when a request is received from a combatant authority.

Council will not provide plant, equipment or personnel to an emergency situation on the request from a non combatant authority (ie. a member of the public).

Annexure D57


EMERGENCIES

Policy # 1.63 / 1



PREPAREDNESS Availability of Council employees To support this policy the Council will establish and maintain an 'Employee Emergency Response Support Register'. The Council will ensure that the employees that are listed on the Register are adequately trained:

to operate the plant and equipment that might be required to support an emergency response;

in work health and safety procedures that are pertinent to staying safe in an emergency;

in i-Responda. Council will:

identify relevant employees who are interested in participating in Council response(s) to emergency support requests under this policy and list such employees on the Employee Emergency Response Support Register;

not obligate any Council Employee to be listed on the Employee Emergency Response Support Register, nor obligate any Council employee listed on the register to respond to a particular incident;

ensure all Council Employees who will be required to operate Council vehicles, plant and equipment undertake annually the i-Responda program;

maintain the integrity of the Employee Emergency Response Support Register; and

reserve the right, in accordance with the i-Responda framework, not to release Council employees to support an emergency (as deemed by the CEO).

Availability of Council Plant and Equipment Council will establish and maintain an 'Emergency Services Plant and Equipment Register' which will identify Council owned plant and equipment that may be made available to the emergency services for the purpose of being used in an emergency response operation. Attaching to the Register will be the terms and conditions of availability and use of the plant and equipment. Council will:

provide a list of vehicles, plant and equipment, maintained in operational condition, that may be available for the purpose of utilisation in an emergency;

liaise with the Control Agency about how the delivery of, or access to, any vehicles, plant and equipment will be achieved;

have available at all times a list of persons on the Employee Emergency Response Support Register that are competent to operate the various items of plant and equipment; and

58


EMERGENCIES

Policy # 1.63 / 1



reserve the right not to release Council plant and equipment for emergency response operations (as deemed by the CEO).

Emergency Services Council welcomes relevant emergency services to meet periodically (at least annually) to confirm critical coordination arrangements. These may include:

contact protocols; details of Council resources that could be made available; the arrangements for accessing such resources; and the scope of work that could be performed.

RISK MANAGEMENT Application of risk management The Council when supporting the emergency services in responses operations will:

apply appropriate risk management principles; and have regard to the arrangements of the LGA Asset Mutual Fund, the LGA

Workers Compensation Scheme and LGS Mutual Liability Scheme.

The Council will act in a manner that ensures the various activities that might be undertaken in an emergency response situation are managed in such a way that the safety and health of its workers and community are paramount. i-Responda Framework The i-Responda framework has been developed in consultation with the LGA and Local Government Risk Services. It addresses issues such as incident management protocols, operational arrangements in emergency response situations and fulfils the legislative requirement of the Work, Health and Safety Act to ensure as far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety of the Council worker. Implementation of the framework will equip Council Chief Executives, managers and employees with information and tools that will enable a confident response to requests for Councils to provide support to emergencies. Council will:

implement the i-Responda framework, to ensure that all emergency response activities are undertaken within a consistent and robust risk assessment framework guiding practical decisions and actions pursuant to the Schemes Rules; and

59


EMERGENCIES

Policy # 1.63 / 1



establish, implement, monitor and review work health and safety policy and procedures consistent with the i-Responda framework.

INSURANCE Local Government Association Asset Mutual Fund (LGAAMF) The LGAAMF will continue to provide coverage to Council owned property, plant and machinery (mobile or otherwise) while it is being used in preventing, preparing, or responding to an emergency on the following basis:

the plant, vehicle, or machinery must be operated by Council employees and in accordance with the i-Responda framework; and

Council is responsible to ensure all property, vehicles, plant and machinery (mobile or otherwise) provided to support an emergency is fit for purpose and consistent with the emergency response.

Local Government Association Workers Compensation Scheme Council’s membership of the LGAWCS ensures that all employees are covered for workers compensation (as required by the Return to Work Act 2014) where the activity being carried out with Council plant and equipment is ordinary Council business, so the activity forms part of the employee’s ordinary employment. Pursuant to the Return to Work legislation, the compensability arises from injury sustained “in the course of employment”. The i-Responda framework establishes that at all times in responding to an emergency incident or disaster, the Council, the CEO and the relevant employee/s will be undertaking ordinary activity 'in the course of employment' controlled and directed by Council, including in an extraordinary event. Council employees will retain workers compensation cover when supporting the emergency services by operating Council plant and equipment in the conduct of Council business. Local Government Association Mutual Liability Scheme For the purpose of the i-Responda framework, the Council as a member of the Local Government Association Mutual Liability Scheme is entitled to civil liability cover including proactive risk management support, pursuant to the LGAMLS Rules. The i-Responda framework establishes that all existing LGA LGRS insurance arrangements will continue (workers compensation, public liability and asset insurance) subject to the normal terms and conditions.

60

VOLUNTEERSPolicy # 2.4 / 1

Issued: 28 March 2013

POLICY Next review December 2016

1

Classification: Human Resources Classification: First Issued: Review Frequency:

Legislation: Relevant Legislation, Children’s Protection Act 1993, Work Health and Safety Act 2012, SA Equal Opportunity Act 1992, Volunteer Protection Act (SA) 2001, Volunteer Protection Regulation (SA) 2004, Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992

Relevant Policies: Related Procedures: 2.4.1 Volunteer Management Signed: Responsible Officer: Manager Governance Adopted: 28/03/2013

GGEENNEERRAALL SSTTAATTEEMMEENNTT The District Council of Ceduna recognises the importance of volunteers within its community. Volunteers are valued for enhancing the core activities, services and programs delivered by Council.

1 Purpose This policy will provide a framework for the involvement of volunteers in Council activities, and to ensure the safety and protection of volunteers in the workplace. It will ensure through procedures that the rights and responsibilities of volunteers, Council and the voluntary organisations working with Council to achieve its vision, mission and objectives, are clearly understood and accepted.

2 Definitions 2.1 Volunteer means a person undertaking or performing duties for Council for no direct

payment or disbursement. 2.2 Employee means a person employed by Council under a formal employment contract 2.3 Volunteers working for Council are persons who:

Undertake activities without monetary reward Undertake activities on their own free will Undertake activities of benefit to Council and their local community and support

Council’s vision, mission and policy objectives Undertake activities that compliment but do not replace services provided by paid

staff2.4 The following persons, for the purpose of this policy, are not considered volunteers:

Elected members People on work placement and work experience programs Students undertaking volunteering as part of the education curriculum Persons receiving payment for activities/ programs delivered on behalf of Council.

Annexure E61

VOLUNTEERS

Policy # 2.4 / 1



2

3 Policy Statement 3.1 Council will adhere to the following responsibilities;

3.1.1 Recognise the different roles, rights and responsibilities of volunteers 3.1.2 Create a climate of mutual respect 3.1.3 Provide a safe work environment, free from discrimination 3.1.4 Ensure the volunteers are appropriately registered. 3.1.5 Provide appropriate induction, training and support 3.1.6 Assess volunteer skills to match tasks with expectations, interests, time

commitment and skills 3.1.7 Ensure volunteers are not used to replace paid staff 3.1.8 Require volunteers to work under supervision of paid staff 3.1.9 Council, as a member of the Local Government Association Mutual Liability

Scheme (LGAMLS), provides Personal Accident Insurance for its volunteers up to and including 89 years of age (as prescribed by the LGAMLS). Benefits are available for death, permanent total disablement and some non-medical related expenses. Cover will only extend to volunteers of Council identified by Council as members of a specified group or individuals assisting Council in clearly defined activities that are approved and controlled by Council.

3.1.10 Have the right not to register a volunteer if there is a perceived health risk to the volunteer or to the effective management of the organisation

3.2 Volunteers Rights 3.2.1 Unlike paid staff, volunteers are not covered by awards or workplace

agreements. Volunteers however have rights and responsibilities which are in part defined by legislation and in recognition of the significant value that volunteers bring to Council and the community. In addition to the legislative requirements and provisions outlined in Section 6 of this policy, Councils policies, procedures and Code of Conduct also apply to volunteers.

3.2.2 The management of volunteers will be carried out in accordance with the Local Government Association Mutual Liability Scheme’s – A Guide to Best Management of Volunteers in Local Government.

62

VOLUNTEERS

Policy # 2.4 / 1



3

3.3 Volunteer Responsibilities 3.3.1 Acquaint themselves with the objectives and functions of Council and the

services Council provides 3.3.2 Fulfil the duties as specified in their position description in accordance with

relevant legislation 3.3.3 Complete a Volunteer registration form 3.3.4 Understand and acknowledge the requirements of Councils Employee Code of

Conduct and relevant policies, procedures and guidelines presented in the induction and training

3.3.5 Operate under the direction and supervision of Council staff and / or a suitably trained and appointed volunteer coordinator to carry out approved volunteer activities and not undertake any unapproved or prohibited activities.

3.3.6 Maintain confidentiality regarding Council business, program information or any other sensitive, private information they come across during their volunteer duties

3.3.7 Notify Council of any potential or actual hazard, injury, damage or near miss to themselves or a third party.

4 Incorporated Volunteer Groups Council may enter into an agreement with an incorporated volunteer group to;

Enhance the level of service Or facilities provided on land either owned or under the care and control of Council.

5 National Criminal History records check and screening assessment Volunteers must undertake a satisfactory National Criminal History records check and screening assessment prior to the commencement of volunteer activities (and may require ongoing checks) where their duties are likely to involve: 5.1 working with or near vulnerable people or children 5.2 working in or visiting a resident’s home or being on their property in an unsupervised

capacity 5.3 where it is a requirement of a funding agreement or other legislation The administration of the screening assessment inclusive of payment will be undertaken by Council.

63

VOLUNTEERS

Policy # 2.4 / 1



4

6 Occupational Health Safety and Welfare Pursuant to the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 and the Equal Employment Opportunity Act 1992, volunteers are deemed to be employees of Council and have the same rights and responsibilities in relation to the provision of a safe working environment including the provision of safe work practices. Therefore volunteers must adhere to Council’s OHS&W requirements. Volunteers are not however, entitled to benefits pursuant to the Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1986. Council will conform to the requirements of the Children’s Protection Act 1993.

7 Responsibility The Chief Executive Officer is responsible for compliance with this policy.

64


REPORT TO: Mayor and Councillors FROM: General Manager Operations DATE: 18th April 2018

1.0 OPERATIONS PROJECT UPDATE

Roads Construction gang has completed widening a section of Decres Bay Road prior to sealing and kerbing. Construction of Ten Chain Road has commenced Crushing Rock & Crete Crushing Services have completed crushing in Laura Bay Rd Pit. This is the last works for the crushing contract. Airport The upgrade of the access control system has been slightly held up due to a shortage of available components, this is now scheduled for mid April. An independent external audit of the Transport Security Program was undertaken on 6th April. This audit was recommended as best practice by the Office of Transport Security following their audit last August. The report is expect by the end of the month and any recommendations will be considered for an update to the Transport Security Program, along with the inclusion of changes to the access control once that project has been completed. The annual Airport Emergency Services Desktop exercise and Committee meeting were held on 11th April. Staff have commenced updates to the Emergency Plan following recommendations from the meeting. Slats to replace the lattice work around the baggage collection area have been ordered and are expect to arrive and be installed towards the end of April. Ongoing routine maintenance inside the terminal and the surrounds continues. Swimming Enclosure The metalwork fabrication required for the swimming enclosure project is now overdue and fabricators are on notice for end of month delivery. Council has provided a contract for signing for the delivery and installation of the net. Water West Whilst frequency of pipeline leaks has reduced we are still detecting and repairing pipeline leaks along a 1500m section of the Water West pipeline.

65


Tender Update

Swimming Enclosure Net – contract being finalised Piling and installation of steelwork select tender being called.

Marine Offloading Facility Package 1, stage 2 Package 2 & 3, Breakwater & Dredging Contract documentation being finalised prior to signing.

Foreshore Toilet Block Tender has been awarded to Terrain Group, expect project works on-site in May & June 2018.

Access Control – Ceduna Airport Awarded expect works to be completed April 2018

Sealed Road Resealing Tender run by DPTI, in contract signed. See separate Council report

Recommendation: That the report be received and noted.

2. THEVENARD MARINE OFFLOADING FACILITYFile Reference: 22.02.243.00 Budget 2017/2018: $10,819,736.00 Actual to Date: $ 650,945.30 Strategic Plan Reference: Goal: Physical infrastructure is improved

and developed Outcome: Infrastructure that Supports Marine

Activities.

WGA Activity report has been provided under separate cover.

Contracts for Package 2 – Breakwater and Package 3- Dredging are being prepared for execution.

Recommendation: That this report be received and noted.

66


3. SPECIAL LOCAL ROADS PROGRAM - KALANBI RDFile Reference: 10.85.1.3 Budget 2017/2018: $0 Actual to Date: $0 Strategic Plan Reference: Goal 1: Physical infrastructure is improved

and developed Outcome 1.2:

Improved roads and infrastructure, transport links, footpath and walking trails

Refer to Pages 71 - 97.

The South Australian Special Local Roads Program (SLRP) provides funding for road construction projects across the state on the basis of regional priorities. These priorities are developed in the Eyre Peninsula region by consultants and member Councils who have developed, and continue to update the Eyre Peninsula Roads & Transport Strategy (EPR&TS). This strategy development is supported by the Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association (EPLGA) and is presented to, and adopted by the EPLGA each time it is reviewed.

The Councils that have EPR&TS roads that are listed in the Action Plan as 1 or top priority for funding, appear not to be submitting projects for the 2018/19 round of Special Local Roads Program funding. This provides the District Council of Ceduna with an opportunity to submit an Action Plan 2 priority road for funding with a reasonable chance of success.

Annexure A, B & C provide additional information regarding SLRP

The 1st 2.5 kilometre section of Kalanbi Road is identified in the EPR&TS Action Plan, with the highest score for a District Council of Ceduna road due to its functions which include community access, freight and tourist links. A copy of the EPR&TS Action Plan is attached at Annexure D

A costing has been prepared to sheet this section of road to 12 meters wide and seal the central 8 meters, complete with line marking and signage, this GST exclusive cost is $444,776.00, this will provide a road suitable for the present and future transport mix and allow for a 1.2m formed road shoulder which is a requirement for this class of road. The Special Local Roads Program will fund up to 67% of the total project cost and therefore the split would be $298,000 from SLRP and $146,776 from District Council of Ceduna.

Applications need to be submitted to the Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association by 20th April 2018 and therefore this matter needs to be determined at the April 2018 meeting of Council.

67


Recommendation: That Council: 1. Includes in its 2018/19 budget estimates a Capital Works project to upgrade

and seal a 2.5 kilometre section of Kalanbi Road with a total constructioncost of $444,776.

2. Submits a funding application for funding of $298,000, to the 2018 round ofthe Special Local Roads Program for the sealing of 2.5 kilometres of KalanbiRoad, commencing at the Eyre Highway.

4.0 BITUMEN SEALING TENDER File Reference: 22.2.231.0 Budget 2017/2018: 11000 $492,500.00

Actual to Date: $ 18,999.52

At an ordinary meeting of Council held on 21 March 2018, Council considered a report from the General Manager Operations regarding the awarding of bitumen sealing works and resolved as follows.

10c/32018 Moved – PC Codrington Seconded – IP Bergmann That Council delegates authority to the Chief Executive Officer to execute a contract for Bitumen Sealing services to a maximum value of $422,725.

CARRIED.

Due to the lateness of this contract award, the quantity of work contained in the combined DPTI – Council contract, the resources of the contractor, the selected bitumen treatment (hot spray seal) and the DPTI requirement to have their work completed by 30th June 2018, works for the District Council of Ceduna would not be able to be performed until after 30th June 2018. Hot bitumen spray seal relies on sufficient pavement temperature to allow the bitumen binder to sink into the pavement for good adhesion and also to stay viscous long enough for application and adhesion of the aggregate. Whilst we are experiencing a warm autumn there is no chance that pavement temperatures will be high enough over winter to achieve satisfactory results for hot spray sealing. Discussions with DPTI and Downer have identified the following:

The DPTI contract end date is October 2018 and this date could be extended, therefore District Council of Ceduna works could be performed under the DPTI contract in October 2018 (or later), tendered pricing would be held with the only variable being the normal rise & fall provisions for bitumen pricing.

68


Downer have indicated that they are willing to perform the works at a more suitable time outside the DPTI contract, later in 2018. The pricing that they provided for District Council of Ceduna works would be held with the only variable being the normal rise & fall provisions for bitumen pricing. A separate contract would need to be developed to proceed with this option.

Recommendation: That Council: 1. advises DPTI that Bitumen Sealing Works under Contract No 2 – 2017/18 –

Contract No. 17C357 are not to be performed before mid September 2018 atthe earliest.

2. makes provision for CAPITAL – Resealing – Ceduna/Thevenard & SmokyBay with a Contractors Value of $422,725 in the 2018/19 Budget.

5.0 SMOKY BAY DENTON STREET PLAYGROUND UPGRADE File Reference: 9.85.01.02 Budget 2017/2018 $ 0 Actual to Date: $ 0 Strategic Plan Reference: Goal: 1. Physical infrastructure is improved

and developed.Outcome: 1.5 Improved public spaces.

Refer to Pages 99 - 100.

For the last 15 years the Smoky Bay Community through the Progress Association has been hosting the Variety Bash of Australia. As part of the gratitude for this Variety provide grants for infrastructure within the community. This year as a token of their appreciation they have funded the supply and installation of a jumping pillow for the Denton Street play ground. Included in this project for future funding is an additional shade structure to cover and protect the jumping pillow. This application covers the details for both the pillow and future shade. The Smoky Bay Progress Association (SBPA) are seeking

approval for the Council to endorse the installation of the jumping pillow andthe future installation of a rigid shade structure covering the pillow and;

for Council to accept care and control of the pillow and shade once erected.A plan and photos of the proposal is attached for Council’s information and reference at Annexure E.

69


Details: Pillow The pillow made of PVC fabric, is 7.9m x 9m in size with a 1.5m sand border supplied and installed by Jumping Pillows Pty Ltd. The pillow is certified to Australian Standards, has a 3 year wear and tear warranty and a 12 month installation warranty. Repair of the pillow if it is damaged is relatively easy and completed by patching. The pillow is inflated with an electric blower which uses minimal power and the blower can be set to operate at certain times to suit community expectations. Safety signage would be installed in relation to the use of the pillow. The construction involves digging an 800mm deep trench and inserting anchoring points for a large PVC tarp, sand is then backfilled around the trench and the blower is attached to inflate the pillow. This is on a timer and would be inflated daily and monitored by the SBPA. Building approval has been sought as it exceeds the 30m2 minimum. SBPA will undertake all additional works such as trenching, installation of power, extension of the soft fall area and clean up of site. Ongoing costs

Power is estimated to cost $22 per month , Cleaning is minimal and just requires soapy water when dirty, Sand edges will need topping up yearly similar to all soft fall, Repairs can be undertaken similar to punctures in a blow up mattress when

identified early, The life expectancy of a unit is dependant on use and sun damage and can

be around 10 years, this is extended with shade covering, Current market value for replacement is $8,000 (earthworks are existing). Shade Shelter The SBPA has investigated shades similar to the one above. These are certified to withstand coastal wind conditions and are constructed from RHS All galv frame, colourbond roofing and flashing, foot plates or footings. At the time of funding being available an application for building approval will be submitted with the appropriate plans. The Manager of Technical Services and Works has met with the SBPA and discussed the logistics of the site and the ongoing maintenance issues which will need to be considered and will be available during installation of both to ensure Council standards are met.

70


Recommendation: That Council

endorse the installation of a jumping pillow and the future installation of arigid shade structure covering the pillow, at Denton Street Park, Smoky Bayand;

accept care and control of the pillow and shade once erected.

G.K. (Grant) Drummond GENERAL MANAGER OPERATIONS

71

1

Katrina Blums

From: Tony Irvine <[email protected]>

Sent: Tuesday, 13 March 2018 11:26 AM

To: Alex Douglas; Arthur Johnstone; 'Craig Matena'; Damian Windsor; Darren Zechner;

Gary Jutzen; Grant Drummond; 'Ivan Noble'; 'Michael Inglis'; Michelle Tucker; 'Neil

Haines'; Penny Williams; Robyn Nottle

Cc: Gibbons, Belinda ([email protected]); Alan McGuire; Chris Cowley

([email protected]); Chris Smith ([email protected]);

'Deb Larwood' ([email protected]); Geoffrey Moffatt; Joy Hentschke; Peter

Arnold; Phil Cameron; Rodney Pearson; Stephen Rufus

([email protected]); Trevor Smith

Subject: SLRP Funding Applications 2018/19

Attachments: Circular SLRP Funding.pdf; SLRP 2018-19 Application.docx; LGTAP - Terms of

Reference Guidelines Policy & Processes.pdf; Copy of Action Plans DRAFT 2018.xlsx

HI , Please take note of the LGA’s – 2018/19 Special Local Roads Program (SLRP) Funding Circular

7.13 attached

Obviously our Transport Plan is a guide only to regional road priorities. SMEC will be engaged to prioritize & write the regional summary for submitting with the individual Council applications to the LGTAP. This makes sense considering they have a great background on our roads through their work on the Transport

The Circular attached highlights the important documents that needed to submit an application.

I would like all applications to be with me by COB Friday 20 April 2018 so we have plenty of time for SMEC to run the applications through the prioritization process and prepare the LGTAP Regional App

I have given an indication of the funding scenario possibilities for the region below.

Probable Funding

Received

18/19 $ 2,133,000

2018/ 19

Total

Application

Amount

SLRP Funding

Sought (67%)

Council

Contribution

(33%)

Length

of Road

DC Elliston $ 687,830 $ 458,554 $ 229,277 5.2kms Project Completed

after this year

DC Wudinna $ 840,000 $ 560,000 $ 280,000 7kms Project Completed

after this year

$ 1,018,554

New Strategy Priorities

as per plan

$ 1,671,669 $ 1,114,446 $ 557,223

What this means is the revised Regional Transport Strategy Draft Action Plans (as attached) possibly have works up to $1.67m to apply for. See a revised copy of the Road Action Plans from the Transport Strategy – this has not been out to the EPLGA Board due to time constraints but was discussed at the Engineering& Works Committee meeting in Feb 2018. This was prepared by SMEC based on information supplied to Belinda from Councils.

Annexure A 72

mailto:[email protected]





2

I also believe the last Engineering & Works Committee spoke on the priorities to be submitted for the SLRP funding. I look forward to this process running smoothly as it has in the last couple of years and receiving the applications in line with our regional planning priorities.

Cheers

TonyTonyTonyTony

Tony Irvine

Executive Officer, Eyre Peninsula Local Government Assoc,

89 Liverpool St., Port Lincoln SA 5606

Ph 8682 6588 Fax 8682 5081

Mob 0428 826 587

Email [email protected]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCLAIMER : The information contained in this correspondence, including any attachment, is for the use of the addressee only and is confidential and may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, re-transmission, distribution, unauthorised use, disclosure or copying of the contents of the correspondence, or other use of any information contained in the correspondence, by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.

______________________________________________________________________



______________________________________________________________________

73


3/13/2018 Circulars

http://www.lga.sa.gov.au/page.aspx?c=79417 1/1

Circulars

Call for Applications - Special Local Roads Program 2018-19 - Circular 7.13

ToChief Executive Officer Information - Engineering Staff Planning - Building Staff Policy and Strategic Planning Staff

Date15 February 2018

ContactLea Bacon Email: [email protected]

Response RequiredNo

SummaryThe Local Government T ransport Advisory Panel is now calling for applications for the 2018/19 Special Local Roads Program. This circular providesdeadlines for applications and further information.

In 2004 the Local Government Association (LGA) State Executive Committee (now LGA Board) resolved to establish a Local Government Transport AdvisoryPanel (LGTAP) to consider strategic road funding applications under the Special Local Roads Program (SLRP) and make recommendations to the LGA Board onthe allocation of funds.

Each year the LGTAP calls for applications for SLRP funding from the Regional LGA's (Eyre Peninsula, Legatus, Limestone Coast, Murraylands and Riverland,Southern and Hills and Spencer Gulf) and the Metropolitan Local Government Group.

Applications received from The MLGG and Regional LGAs are then considered by the LGTAP and the LGTAP proposes an annual program (recommendations) ofworks across SA for the allocation of funding from the SLRP. LGTAP analyses applications in accordance with the adopted LGTAP policy which assurestransparency and accountability in its decisions. LGTAP gives preference to those projects that have been developed through Local Government RegionalTransport Plans and transparent planning processes.

Following assessment, LGTAP provides recommendations for projects to the LGA Board, which in turn, makes recommendations to the South Australian LocalGovernment Grants Commission for proposals under the Identified Local Roads Grants and the Federal Minister for Transport in the case of the Roads toRecovery component.

New Application Form and Application Deadlines

To ensure that proposed projects are strategic and regional in nature, Regional LGA's and the Metropolitan Local Government Group are asked each funding yearto submit a prioritised list of projects proposed by their members.

Using the updated application form attached, the following deadlines for applications apply:

Metropolitan Councils: email applications to Patricia Coonan via [email protected] by 6 April 2018 (to then be considered by the MetropolitanStrategic Roads Committee prior to the May MLGG meeting)

Regional Councils: contact your respective Regional LGA to find out when they require your application

MLGG: recommendations for funding to be provided to Patricia Coonan by 11 May 2018

Regional LGAs: recommendations AND applications to be provided to Patricia Coonan by 11 May 2018

The LGTAP does not provide general public notification of its recommendations as it is the prerogative of the respective State and Federal Ministers to make thepublic announcements.

Application Form - SLRP 2018-19 (223 kb)

Support Documents

On the LGTAP web page (click here), please refer to the ‘Terms of Reference, Guidelines, Policy and Processes for the Special Local Roads Program’ document.

For further information on the SLRP Funding, contact Lea Bacon, Director Policy on [email protected] or 8224 2025.

For further information on the submission of applications, contact Patricia Coonan on 0408 801 026 or [email protected].

Annexure B74

http://www.lga.sa.gov.au/



http://www.lga.sa.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/SLRP%202018-19%20Application.docx

http://www.lga.sa.gov.au/page.aspx?u=6728



Local Government Transport Advisory Panel

Terms of Reference, Guidelines, Policy and Processes for the Special Local Roads Program

Adopted by the LGA Board on 25 January 2017

Next review due November 2019

Annexure C 75

LGA of SA ECM 646745 LGTAP Terms of Reference, Guidelines, Policy & Processes Page 1 of 23

Table of Contents 1. Terms of Reference ........................................................................................................ 2

2. Guidelines ...................................................................................................................... 4

3. General Policy .............................................................................................................. 17

4. Communications Policy ................................................................................................ 19

5. Application Process ...................................................................................................... 21

6. Consideration and Approval Process ........................................................................... 21

76


1. Terms of Reference Introduction

Funding for strategic local roads in South Australia is made available under the South Australian Special Local Roads Program (SLRP).

Funding for the Special Local Roads Program is provided from:

15% of Identified Local Road Grants; and

15% of funding from the SA allocation of Roads to Recovery.

Functions

The Local Government Transport Advisory Group (LGTAP) is established to provide advice to the Local Government Association Board for the recommendation of projects under the 15% of Identified Local Road Grants and 15% of funding from the SA allocation of Roads to Recovery to the Federal Minister for Local Government and Territories.

Process

The LGTAP will make one call for applications for funding each year for:



Identified Local Road Grants

The LGTAP will consider applications from Regional Local Government Associations, the Metropolitan Strategic Roads Committee, and groups of Councils. In performing this function the LGTAP will give preference to those projects that have been developed through Local Government Regional Transport Plans and transparent planning processes as will projects that have been previously funded by the LGTAP and remain a priority for the region.

The LGTAP in prioritising roads for funding for consideration by the South Australian Local Government Grants Commission (the Grants Commission) give due weight to State Government Plans such as the State Strategic Plan, State Infrastructure Plan and the State Land Use and Transport Plan. The Grants Commission in turn will make recommendations to the State Minister for Local Government who in turn will forward these to the Federal Minister for Local Government and Territories for approval.

Roads to Recovery

The LGTAP will consider applications from Regional Local Government Associations, the Metropolitan Strategic Roads Committee, and groups of Councils or consortiums where projects are driven by Local Government with substantial financial contributions and support from partner organisations.

The LGTAP will propose a program of works across South Australia for allocation of funding. In performing this function the LGTAP will give preference to those projects that have been developed through Local Government Regional Transport Plans and transparent planning processes.

77


The LGTAP will in making its recommendations to the Local Government Association Board for recommendation to the Federal Minister for Local Government and Territories, give due weight to State Government Plans such as the State Strategic Plan, the Planning Strategies and the State Transport Plan.

Membership

The LGTAP will have the following membership:

Three Members from Local Government:

o At least one Member will be a member of the LGA Board;

o At least one Member will be from a metropolitan Council with the required skills and experience;

o At least one Member will be from a country Council with the required skills and experience;

A nominee of the Minister for Local Government;

A nominee of the Minister for Transport;

A representative from the Commonwealth Department of Transport and Regional Services who will have an advisory role (AusLink requirement); and

A Senior Officer of the Local Government Association.

The LGA Board will nominate the Chairperson for the LGTAP which shall be a person from the group of three Local Government Members.

Executive Support

Executive support for the Committee will be provided by the Local Government Association.

Reporting

Agendas and Minutes of the LGTAP will be published on the Local Government Association website. The LGTAP will provide an annual report on its operations and provide details of approved submissions on the LGA website by 30 September each year.

Review

The membership and Terms of Reference of the LGTAP will be reviewed every 2 years and a report provided to the LGA Board.

78


2. Guidelines The Local Government Transport Advisory Panel (LGTAP) uses a specialist database developed by the Grants Commission as a consistent framework to assist planning and prioritising road proposals. The Roads Infrastructure Database assists the LGTAP in assessing candidate road proposals on an equitable basis, accounting for State and regional strategic planning processes and technical issues. A project to review the database was undertaken in early 2013 with an additional review undertaken in August 2013 The additional review involved an update to the “fit for purpose” standards spreadsheet, including associated references, developed as part of the original methodology. It is consistent with Recommendation 3 from the Final Report of the initial review. Both review projects were undertaken by HDS Australia. The following process describes the framework of this database as used by the LGTAP for the assessment and prioritising of particular road proposals. The flow chart shows the key steps taken to assess an individual road proposal, ranging from determination of the primary purpose of the road through to establishment of its priority against other road proposals.

Prior to the commencement of this process in any application year, the LGTAP will ensure that applications have met the basic requirements of legislation, AusLink and Special Local Roads Program (SLRP) criteria where applicable. Generally, applications must include:

Justification and objectives of the project, including a description of the functions of the road and any existing problems;

A map showing the location of the project in the road network;

Description of the nature and extent of the project, highlighting the principal aspects and aligning these with each of the “fit for purpose” categories, that is, freight, tourism, social; and

Points at which the proposal interlinks with other regional, State or Federal plans or policies. The LGTAP will in making its recommendations give due weight to available State Government plans such as South Australia’s Strategic Plan, State Planning Strategies, the State Infrastructure Plan and the State Transport Plan.

Further to these requirements, LGTAP will seek assurances that applications have been formed and submitted with the support of other Councils, Regional LGA’s/Metropolitan Local Government Group or other partnering organisations, and that Councils and/or regions will contribute funding to the project.

Analysis Process

Step 1: Define Purpose – Primary, Secondary, Second Level within Purpose. Primary purposes provide mutually exclusive priority lists.

Step 2: Determine Standards – construction and maintenance consideration; the “ideal” situation. Determine standards by primary purpose, modified by Secondary purpose modified by Second Level of purpose.

Step 3: Establish the Gap – existing state of the road.

79


Step 4: Determine the Cost – technical issues; degree of gap closure achieved by proposal vs cost.

Step 5: Determine the Benefit – list of benefits; economic, social and safety issues.

Step 6: Prioritise within Primary Purpose – three priority lists by Primary Purpose. Weighted influencing factors eg roadside use; social need.

Step 7: Prioritise across Primary Purposes – single priority list. Policy considerations and project urgency issues.

A brief description of each step in the analysis process follows. Subsequent sections expand the description of each step and discuss underlying requirements that will assist in the completion of the “Funding Application”:

Step 1 - Define Purpose

The term "primary purpose" is used in order to incorporate the breadth of strategic activities and to address the range of varying design standards that will apply to different road proposals.

For each of the primary purpose areas, a mutually exclusive priority list will be established.

In addition to the primary purpose, each road may have one or two secondary purposes that add weight to the importance of the road.

Moreover, there may be one or more secondary levels of purpose, which will further affect "fit for purpose" standards.

Step 2 - Determine Standards

For each primary purpose, and as further modified by the secondary level of purpose, a particular "fit for purpose" standard can be established. "Fit for purpose" can be defined as providing minimum acceptable design/construction standards for the situation (ie a road has a specific purpose and is then built/maintained to a standard to enable it to be fit for purpose).

Step 3 - Establish the Gap

By comparing the existing road standard against the defined "fit for purpose" standard, it is possible to determine the “gap”. The "gap" is therefore defined as the improvement in standard required to upgrade a particular road from its current standard to a standard that is fit for purpose.

Step 4 - Determine the Cost

Once the gap is determined, it is possible to estimate the cost of improvements required to bring the particular road up to a standard which is fit for purpose. This "Cost to Close the Gap" is best equated to the cost of the proposed upgrade (as supplied in grants applications), as it is not practical to arbitrarily apply automated cost estimation techniques to estimate the cost to close the gap. However, using "Cost of Upgrade" as an approximation for "Cost to Close the Gap" assumes that the upgrade proposal brings the road to a fit for purpose standard. This may not always be the case.

80


Step 4A Determine the Extent to which the Gap is Closed

An assessment needs to be made of the extent to which any gap (between the current standard and the fit for purpose standard of a road) is closed by an upgrade proposal.

Step 5 Determine the Benefit

To assess the benefit of a particular proposal, consideration needs to be given to a range of influencing factors that define what benefits can be achieved by the proposal. The most important of these factors is the road's "significance", as defined within relevant Council, regional and state transport strategies.

Step 6 Prioritise within Primary Purpose

By weighting the various influencing factors identified in Step 5, an initial prioritised list of proposals is obtained for each of the three primary purpose categories. This initial ranking by "weighted benefit" provides a general overview of the relative benefit of various proposals, but does not take into account the number of road users and other industry or community groups which benefit from the proposal, nor the individual cost of the proposal.

By combining the weighted benefit with a measure of the road use (namely traffic volume), divided by road length and proposed cost, it is possible to come up with a second prioritised list. This list of "weighted benefit cost scores" will then indicate which proposals provide greatest "value for money" in terms of maximising benefits to the greatest number of users per km of road upgraded per dollar of cost.

Note that whilst it is technically possible for the "weighted benefit cost score" list to be used to compare road upgrade proposals across the state, it is not considered advisable to do so. The influence of "traffic volume" and "cost per km" factors vary considerably across LGA Regions, and even across Councils within regions. The weighted benefit cost score will therefore be used as a tool for differentiating road upgrade proposals that otherwise show similar "weighted benefits". This can be applied within individual LGA Regions and/or across (or even within) individual Councils

Step 7 Prioritise Across Primary Purposes

To determine priorities between each of the primary purpose areas, policy and project urgency considerations will need to be applied. The LGTAP will undertake this step manually, using the three "priority within purpose" lists based on weighted benefits, as generated in Step 6.

81


1. Development of Purpose

a) Primary Purpose

Three primary purpose categories have been developed as a basis for this approach, namely:

Freight

Facilitates industry development by linking key industries to major transport routes and contributes to efficient movement of large volumes of heavy freight vehicles.

Tourism

Provides access to tourism sites and locations, and enables people to view scenic attractions in a safe and enjoyable manner.

Community Access

Provides for community development and equitable access to community facilities, whilst minimising the impact of heavy vehicles on the community.

While a particular road proposal may have one primary purpose, say freight it may well have a secondary purpose, such as providing for a community access purpose by linking communities within the regional area. This factor will assist the LGTAP in determining an appropriate "fit for purpose" standard for the road and to enable roads with multiple purposes to be weighted accordingly when determining benefits.

b) Second Level within Purpose

Following the determination of key primary purpose categories, there is often a second level within each purpose that will impact on design standards. For example, the use of B-Doubles will require a higher standard with respect to road geometry than normal commercial vehicles.

A set of second levels within each purpose category has been developed which involve a number of specific design standards. It is important to note that there is some overlap between these second levels of purpose and their associated primary purpose categories (eg "Commercial" appears in the "Freight" category of primary purpose, while "Commercial / Bus" appears in both the "Tourism" and "Community Access" categories).

The second levels for each of the primary purpose categories are as follows:

Freight

PBS Classification L1 – Up to Single Articulated

PBS Classification L2 – B-Double

PBS Classification L3 – Double Road Train

82


Tourism

General Passenger

Commercial / Bus

Bicycle Route

Community Access

General Passenger

Commercial / Bus

Bicycle Route

2. Determination of "Fit for Purpose" Standards

This step employs a planning tool to look at a broad range of minimum performance standards. These collectively create a basis for quantitatively assessing whether a particular road is "fit for purpose". It is not an engineering tool for use in designing new or upgraded roads, because it cannot reasonably address the many qualitative considerations and detailed site investigations necessary to fully define all requirements for safe and efficient operation of a particular road.

The proposed set of standards listed in this section have been settled on after an extensive, though not necessarily exhaustive, literature search of available state, federal and some overseas road/traffic design standards.

Before considering which standards to apply, it is necessary to recognise that road/traffic design standards vary considerably between "metropolitan" and "rural" situations. However, the term "metropolitan" can often mean just the Adelaide region, whereas many regional cities and towns in South Australia also contain roads for which a metropolitan standard of road/traffic design should apply. Thus, the terms "built up area" and "non-built up area" are used, rather than metropolitan and rural. These terms are then consistent with the extensive work already carried out by the Grants Commission in defining all Local Government administered roads within South Australia as being in "built up" or "non-built up" areas.

In addition to knowledge of any particular road's primary purpose, second level within purpose, and whether or not the road is in a built up area, details of various traffic parameters are required before appropriate standards can be determined.

The critical parameters are:

Traffic volume (in AADT - Annual Average Daily Traffic per Austroads Definition);

Heavy vehicle loading (expressed in "Equivalent Standard Axles" ie ESA's, for the design life of the pavement);

Presence of parking/cyclists (built up areas only), and

Speed environment.

83


Applications must also include surface type (ie simply "surfaced" vs "unsurfaced") as a further initial parameter before standards can be applied.

The choice of "surfaced" vs "unsurfaced" is not, however, completely unrestricted. Common sense and engineering judgement, has been used to apply some restrictions, such as:

only "Category A - Formed and Sheeted" unsurfaced roads (as defined in the LGA's Unsurfaced Roads Manual) should be permitted as an option in built up areas;

only "Category A - Formed and Sheeted" unsurfaced roads should be permitted as an option for roads in non-built up areas with "freight" as the primary purpose; and

only "Category D - Tracks" unsurfaced roads should be permitted as an option for roads with "tourism" as the primary purpose and "4WD" as the second level within that purpose.

Considering the above factors, it is possible to select appropriate standards for defining whether a road is fit for its purpose. These standards have been grouped under four fundamental headings, namely:

a) Speed Environment

Design speed is a key standard which applies in both "built up" and "non-built up" areas, collectively reflecting such fundamental parameters as vertical profile, horizontal geometry and site distance, all leading to a particular safe travel speed.

In built up areas, the average flow speed (both in off-peak conditions and in peak hour) reflects the degree of congestion in the road segment, collectively reflecting the capacity of the cross-section layout (through lanes vs mixed through/turning lanes), capacity of intersections and number of access points onto the road.

b) Dimensions

Overall carriageway width is a measure of the overall width of the road surface required to safely handle the type and volume of traffic. Carriageway width (bridges) provides an added measure of the minimum clearance requirement for points of restricted access (and high construction cost) where shoulders may not be cost effective to provide.

Lane width is a measure of "through lane" requirements, particularly as they apply to multi-laned roads. Lane width is highly dependent on traffic volumes, and the presence of a high percentage of heavy vehicles, such as on freight routes. In built up areas, allowing room for on-street parking and/or cyclists can add up to 2.1 metres to the recommended width of the kerbside lane on a freight route, where at least one through lane is required (bicycle and freight movements are incompatible.

Consideration should be given to providing for cycling movements on the adjacent road network or with off-road facilities, where this is not possible, the width above applies).

84


In non-built up areas, shoulder width is also a key dimension, reflecting the need to allow vehicles room for pulling off of the main carriageway (such as due to a breakdown), or to recover in the event of accidentally running off the main carriageway. The standard for shoulder width increases significantly with increase in traffic volume. Whilst for normal circumstances shoulders do not need to be sealed, designated cycle routes require between one and three metres of sealed shoulder (depending on the speed environment) in addition to normal sealed carriageway requirements. Sealed shoulders can also be worthwhile on some sections of road to reduce the risk of run-off road crashes.

Height clearance is a major consideration for freight routes, and also where buses (commuter or tourist) use the route.

c) Geometry

Whilst basic geometric considerations are covered by "design speed" under the speed environment heading, special consideration needs to be given to horizontal curve radius (particularly in hilly areas where isolated curves can be very tight) due to the problems of heavy vehicle tracking (corner cutting) creating a significant safety risk for on-coming vehicles.

Vertical grade is also a key consideration, particularly for freight routes, because of the high safety risks associated with the large uphill speed differential between commercial vehicles and cars, and the potential for loss of control (including break failure) on steep downhill grades (similarly for routes used by vehicles towing caravans).

In built up areas, critical to the movement of large vehicles (freight and, occasionally, buses) is intersection turning radius, while roundabout lane width and roundabout radius are also two major considerations for safe movement of commercial vehicles and buses.

d) Strength/Durability

Traditionally, pavement strength has not been directly specified, but has been reflected in design pavement depths chosen after site investigation of sub-soil conditions, knowledge about the available sub-base and/or base course material strengths and traffic loading predictions have been taken into account. Such a methodology is very site specific. As a more practical alternative, this report specifies pavement thickness as an indicator of overall pavement strength.

Whilst suitable for surfaced roads, pavement thickness is not a suitable indicator of pavement strength for unsurfaced roads. As an alternative, road quality categories (defined in the Local Government Association of SA's "Managing Unsealed Roads in South Australia" publication) are proposed. These categories range from a graded track (Category D) through to a fully formed and engineered road (Category A).

Individual bridge/culvert mass limits are a second important strength related design consideration. Often, the overall route classification may be down-graded due to

85


one or two isolated bridges having a lower capacity and being unable to be bypassed.

Surface roughness has been included as a measure of strength related performance of a road pavement as it ages. Although some examples of high roughness counts reflect initial poor construction standards, it is generally more likely that high roughness is a sign of a deteriorating pavement which manifests itself in general deformation, rutting and high levels of pavement defects. High roughness of a road surface also has a potential economic cost to vehicles using the road, particularly heavy vehicles, in terms of extra wear and tear on the vehicle and possible damage to the load.

Section 4: Standards of the application form lists, as columns, the above 17 standards and then establishes individual "fit for purpose" levels for each relevant standard against each combination of primary purpose, second level within purpose, built environment and surface type. Not all standards apply to each purpose/category combination. In addition to the actual standards, the spreadsheet identifies where traffic parameters influence the standard. The spreadsheet also lists relevant references, highlighting the source of information upon which the selected standard has been based.

3. Establishment of the Gap

The 17 individual standards discussed in the previous section collectively define the "fit for purpose" standard of a particular road. These same parameters, from a planning viewpoint, provide the basis for defining the current state of a road. Note that, apart from measuring pavement deflection and surface roughness, no other pavement condition or seal condition measurements, or maintenance standards, are suggested. This is because the methodology in this report is focussed upon the ability of a road to safely and efficiently meet its purpose, not what physical condition the road is in, unless that physical condition has reached such a state of disrepair that it directly impacts upon the road's ability to meet its purpose.

In order to establish the gap between current condition of the road and its "fit for purpose" standard, Councils will need to supply data on relevant traffic parameters and on the current standard of the road. Traffic parameters required are the traffic volume and heavy vehicle loading, along with (for built up areas only) the presence of parking/cyclists and (for unsurfaced roads) the general speed environment. Note that traffic parameters should be supplied for the conditions expected within a two to five year timeframe, not current conditions, since the reason for many roads requiring an upgrade is the expected increase in traffic loading resulting from planned developments, not just current traffic loads.

By comparing "fit for purpose" standards with current standards, the gap in the ability of the road to meet its purpose is established.

86


4. Determination of the Cost to Close the Gap

The gap between current and fit for purpose standards represents an economic cost in terms of the inability of individual roads within the road network to meet suitable standards for safe and efficient operation in line with their defined purpose. However, quantifying that cost requires an understanding of the individual situation for each road, since the gap in standard may be caused by many varying factors. Therefore the cost to close the gap should be derived from individual Council estimates of the road upgrade proposals as contained in grant applications, rather than some holistic formula which attempts to put a broad dollar value on the gap using arbitrary (non-site specific) parameters.

Before a cost to close the gap can be adequately defined using this method, any proposed upgrading of the road (and its associated cost) must be tested against the fit for purpose standards. This is because it cannot automatically be assumed that a particular proposal will close all aspects of the gap in standards. Councils will therefore be required to define the standards achieved by the proposed upgrade, using the same (up to) 17 standards defined earlier, and also provide their estimate of the percentage of the gap which is closed by the upgrade proposal.

Once the above information is supplied, a modifying factor can be applied to the upgrade's proposed cost, to obtain a closer approximation of the total cost to close the gap. The proposed modifying factor is:

Cost to Close Gap = Upgrade Cost / % of Gap Closed

As an example, a proposed upgrade which only closes 80% of the identified gap in standard would result in the "cost to close gap" being 25% greater than the upgrade cost.

This method for determining the cost to close any gap in standards is clearly an approximation, which cannot ultimately replace a detailed assessment of costs on a site specific basis. However, it will be a valuable planning tool for the purpose of assessing and prioritising road grant applications, where it is clearly impractical to perform a detailed independent analysis of the cost to close the gap in standards for every proposal submitted.

87


5. Determination of Factors Influencing Benefits

The relative potential benefits of any proposed road upgrade are derived from a series of "benefit influencing factors". These influencing factors, in turn, impact on the priority of each proposal.

Influencing factors have been categorised into six key areas. Each key area has been weighted according to its relative importance in determining the overall benefit of road upgrade proposals. In the case of the "Economic" area, further individual weightings have been applied to the three sub-areas of road user benefits, community benefits and road owner benefits. Within each area (or sub-area in the case of the "Economic" area), influencing factors have been given equal importance in determining the percentage of that area (or sub-area) weighting which should be applied for any given road upgrade proposal.

The key areas, sub-areas and specific influencing factors are as follows:

a) Secondary Purpose (10%)

Does the road offer?

One secondary purpose (eg freight, tourism or social) in addition to the primary purpose.

Two secondary purposes (eg freight, tourism or social) in addition to the primary purpose.

b) Regional Significance (25%)

Does the road have?

Community significance (ie part of a formal Council transport strategy).

Regional significance (ie part of a regional transport strategy).

State significance (ie links in with a state freight or tourism strategy).

c) Economic (20%)

Does the road proposal provide a?

Road user benefit (10%), such as:

Reduce delays and operating costs for heavy vehicles.

Provide direct access to major industrial developments, freight generators and specific facilities such as grain silos, wineries, processing plants, etc.

Facilitate a higher classification of freight movements (eg commercial to B-double).

Facilitate direct access for intermodal transport operations:

Rail

Sea

Air

88


Assist export of products by improving quality (market condition) and reducing impacts of dust, etc.

Provide direct access to new industrial precincts.

Community benefit (5%), such as:

Benefit regional employment and sustain communities

Assist attraction of economic investment to region

Road owner benefit (5%), such as:

Reduce the road maintenance effort

d) Access (15%)

Does the road proposal?

Reduce traffic congestion.

Link areas of particular land uses to strategic routes.

Provide a higher standard alternative route.

Complement the existing arterial road network.

Provide improved access to key population centres.

Ensure communities are not isolated by flooding.

Act as a collector road for local traffic and for heavy traffic.

Provide all weather access.

Provide access to other types of transport as a passenger intermodal connector:

Bus

Rail

Air

e) Safety (20%)


Reduce conflicts between tourist, freight and commuter traffic.

Contribute to safer travel and reduced accidents.

Provide safe overtaking opportunities and reduce frustration and fatigue.

Reduce exposure to travel risk.

Provide access for school buses.

Provide access for emergency services.

Remove traffic from city/town areas.

89


Reduce road roughness and potential dust hazards.

Reduce the impact of roadside hazards such as culverts and overhanging trees.

f) Environmental (10%)


Reduce environmental pollution:

Air

Noise

Water

Minimise impact of heavy vehicles on local community.

Reduce reliance on road transport and encourage other forms of transport.

6. Prioritisation within Primary Purpose

As previously stated, this initial ranking by "weighted benefit" provides a general overview of the relative merits of various proposals, with maximum priority given to those proposals with regional and/or state significance that have the most individual benefits. The ranking does not take into account the number of road users and other industry or community groups which benefit from the proposal, nor the individual cost of the proposal. However, the results reasonably accurately reflect the current evaluation process applied by the LGTAP. It is therefore recommended that the "weighted benefit within primary purpose" priority lists be used as the main criteria for ranking of road upgrade proposals.

In order to differentiate proposals that show much the same weighted benefit score, it is proposed that the above weighted benefit score also be expanded as follows:

a) Multiply the weighted benefit score (wb) by the traffic volume (tv) using the route (in AADT). This applies the individual benefits of the proposal to each user of the route, to provide a "total road user benefit" score. At this point, the formula will clearly be biased towards more highly trafficked roads, which is not unreasonable. Note that broader benefits to the economy and/or community are not specifically included, having already been covered in the original weighted benefit score.

b) Divide the total road user benefit score by the "cost to close gap / road length (rl) to be upgraded (in km)". This will effectively "normalise" the total road user benefit score on a "per $ per km" basis, so that lower cost proposals, or those where a relatively long length of road is being upgraded, will have their benefit score elevated.

Noting that the "cost to close gap" has previously been defined as being equal to "upgrade cost (uc) / % of gap closed (gc)", then the components of the formula described above can be brought together as follows:

Weighted benefit/cost score = wb x tv x rl x gc / uc

90


Using the above "weighted benefit/cost score", new priority lists within primary purpose can be generated. These will indicate which proposals offer the greatest "value for money" on a "road user benefit per $ per km" basis. However, as previously stated, it is important at this stage to only apply the weighted benefit/cost score as a means of differentiating proposals within individual LGA Regions, or across (or within) individual Councils. Other factors still need to be considered for inclusion before such a score could be unilaterally applied in establishing state-wide priority lists.

91


3. General Policy Introduction

The Special Local Roads Program (SLRP) was established under the joint approvals of the South Australian, Commonwealth and Local Governments. The Program commenced in 1985-86 and facilitates funding of significant and strategic works throughout the State.

Funding for the SLRP is provided from:



As a result of the Commonwealth’s AusLink White Paper the LGA State Executive has established the LGTAP to propose and monitor a continuing program of projects for the prioritisation of funding under the SLRP.

Each year the Panel will call for submissions from Regional LGA’s and the Metropolitan Local Government Group and groups of Councils or consortiums where projects are driven by Local Government with substantial financial contributions and support from partner organisations. The LGTAP will propose a program of works across SA for allocation of funding from the SLRP. In performing this function the LGTAP will give preference to those projects that have been developed through Local Government Regional Transport Plans and transparent planning processes.

Priorities can be established by assessment of submissions from member Councils or by the Regional LGA/Metropolitan Local Government Group itself. There will be a call for submissions each year for the Special Local Roads Program. The LGTAP will make recommendations for projects to the LGA Board which will, in turn, make recommendations to the Grants Commission for review. The Grants Commission will then forward its recommendations to the State Minister for Local Government for his endorsement and the State Minister will forward the recommendations on to the Federal Minister for Local Government and Territories for approval.

Candidate Projects

All submissions for projects to be funded under the Special Local Roads Program are to be made on a “Standard Funding Application”. These applications must be forwarded to the LGTAP through the appropriate Regional LGA/Metropolitan Local Government Group or agreed body by the published closing date. It must be noted that all projects submitted for funding must be prioritised by Regional LGA’s/Metropolitan Local Government Group or, where appropriate, Councils.

The application to the LGTAP also provides for a written financial commitment from the Council/Councils to the project.

In addition, a project submission should provide the justification, cost, scope, nature and design features of the project and its timeframe. Sufficient detail is required for the Committee to assess the appropriateness of the proposal in terms of its purpose and also its technical aspects.

92


Any requests for changes to submitted funding applications must be made in writing to the LGTAP.

The LGTAP encourages substantial projects, but will not endorse funding in any particular region of the State that commits too great a proportion of the available funds such that other regions of the State cannot be funded for a considerable period of time.

Councils are required to certify that the projects submitted are financially sustainable. The LGTAP will not provide funding to projects that have not completed the relevant financial sustainability documents.

Councils need to agree to contribute to the cost of the project. Additionally, continuing projects funded in one particular year under the Special Local Roads Program, or the special projects component of the Roads to Recovery Program, will need to be re-submitted for funding consideration in subsequent years. An update on the progress of these projects is to be provided to the Panel annually.

93


4. Communications Policy Principles

The LGTAP is committed to the principles of open governance. It will undertake its activities according to principles of transparency and accountability to ensure that each sphere of government and all applicants for funding are satisfied that decisions are made on equitable and common guidelines.

Decision Making

The minutes of the LGTAP will be published on the LGA website.

Information explaining the purpose and function of a database used for the assessment of road funding proposals will also be available at the LGA website, along with the guidelines used by the LGTAP to guide its decisions.

To ensure that the LGTAP decisions are made with the authority delegated to it, decisions will only be made when a quorum of members is present.

Record Keeping and Availability of Information

Copies of all correspondence relating to the decisions and operation of the LGTAP will be retained by the Senior Officer at the LGA offices, 148 Frome Street, Adelaide. All correspondence relating to funding submissions will be provided to each Panel member.

Proceedings for LGTAP meetings will be noted in minutes to be drafted by the Project Coordinator. Hard copies of minutes approved by the subsequent meeting of LGTAP will be stored at the LGA and placed on the LGA website by the Project Coordinator.

Records of LGTAP meetings will be publicly accessible except when commercial in confidence issues are discussed, during which the LGTAP will function in camera.

LGTAP may elect to discuss or consider in confidence any information or matter of a confidential nature, the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to prejudice the person who supplied the information, or to confer a commercial advantage on a third party.

When in camera discussion occurs, the LGTAP will note in minutes the reasons for discussions being so held. At the end of a meeting the LGTAP may decide that the discussion as recorded may be returned to the public record, or if it shall remain confidential.

The LGTAP in its annual report will note the occasions and reasons discussions took place in confidence.

The records of the LGTAP (including minutes, reports, recommendations and financial statements) will be presented to the LGA Board along with its recommendations for project funding. The LGA Board will note these records and deliberate upon the recommendations of the LGTAP.

The same information will be available in the annual report of the LGTAP, with the exception of exclusions noted elsewhere in this policy.

94


Accountability

Calls for funding will be made in January each year for the following financial year.

The Project Coordinator will provide the call for funding LGA Circular to Regional LGA’s and the Metropolitan Local Government Group inviting application.

The LGTAP will be required to report to the membership of the LGA by way of update reports to:

LGA Board;

Annual General Meeting of the LGA; and

An annual report.

Once approved by the respective Federal Ministers and successful applicants have been notified the LGA will include the approved projects via the LGA website and through LGA Circulars.

Publicity

The LGTAP will continue to promote its role throughout Local Government in SA to ensure that all parties with an actual or potential interest in its processes are aware of the opportunities available to them. The Chair of the LGTAP will be its spokesperson.

Information about the Panel and its functions, where deemed appropriate and necessary by LGTAP, will be announced in LGA News, via Circular, information sessions at meetings including Regional LGA’s/Metropolitan Local Government Group and on the LGA website.

The Grants Commission will also continue to provide information about the SLRP and the LGTAP to Council Members and Council Staff as part of its visiting program.

95


5. Application Process Step 1: Council to complete road designs (note this cost is NOT funded by LGTAP)

Step 2: Council to consider Relevant Cost

Step 3: Complete Whole of Life Cost

Step 4: Complete Application Form

Step 5: Submit application to Regional LGA or MSRC**

If successful, Councils will be required to complete a Progress Report annually.

**Regional LGA’s – Central Local Government Region, Eyre Peninsula LGA, Murray & Mallee LGA, South East LGA and Southern & Hills LGA

MSRC – Metropolitan Strategic Roads Committee

6. Consideration and Approval Process Step 1: The LGA will call for submissions

Step 2: Regional LGA’s and the Metropolitan Strategic Roads Committee will provide deadlines to Councils

Step 3: Councils will complete applications (following LGTAP guidelines) which will be forwarded to their Regional LGA or MSRC

Step 4: The Regional LGA or MSRC will then assess and forward prioritised funding applications to LGTAP in April

Step 5: LGTAP will make its recommendations to the LGA Board in June

Step 6: LGA Board recommendations will be provided to the Grants Commission for its consideration in June/July

Step 7: The Grants Commission will forward its recommendations to the State Minister for Local Government for his endorsement and the State Minister will forward the recommendations on to the Federal Minister for approval in July/August.

Step 8: The Minister will make announcement of projects via letter to Councils (August/September)

**Regional LGA’s – Central Local Government Region, Eyre Peninsula LGA, Murray & Mallee LGA, South East LGA and Southern & Hills LGA

MSRC – Metropolitan Strategic Roads Committee

96


148 Frome St Adelaide SA 5000

GPO Box 2693 Adelaide SA 5001

T (08) 8224 2000

F (08) 8232 6336

E [email protected]

www.lga.sa.gov.au

97

Council RoadAction Plan

(1,2,3)

L1 of L2 Road

(as defined in table

6-2)

Freight

Community

Tourism

CompliantMinor

Deficiency

Major

Deficiency

Traffic Volumes

(AADT)

ESA's (Freight

Routes)

Construction Cost

EstimateLength of Section

Planned Stages

(years)Comments

DC Franklin Harbour Cowell-Kimba Road 1 1 F 3 - 1 136 53$170,000 per year

approx16.6 5+

DC Franklin Harbour Lucky Bay Road 1 1 F 3 - 1 202 -$170,000 per year

approx5.3 5

DC Franklin HarbourBeach Road (South end) Oyster

loop to Pt Gibbon1 1 C - 1 3 44avg 119peak - $3,053,504 14.5

DC Franklin HarbourBeach Road to (South end)

Oyster loop1 1 C - 1 3 44avg 119peak - $3,796,704 4.1

DC Franklin Harbour Igloo Road 1 2 C 1 3 - 115 40 - 4.9 3

CC Whyalla Jenkins Avenue* 1 1 C - - 4 2000 $886,678 0.545 4

Applied for 2015/16 SLRP funding. Funding was not approved. Surface in poor

condition. Widening, protected right turns, lighting and drainage upgrades

recommended.

DC Elliston Kyancutta-Mt Wedge Road*** 1 1 T 2 2 - 50

This road was granted funding over 4 years of construction via EPLGA

Resolution (4-12-15) and completion of is due at the end of the 2018/19

financial year. 5.2kms remaining (minor deficiencies in the remaining 5.2kms)

Wudinna DC Elliston-Mt Wedge Road*** 1 2 C 3 1 - 40

This road was granted funding over 4 years of construction via EPLGA

Resolution (4-12-15) and completion of is due at the end of the 2018/19

financial year. 9.5kms remaining

DC KimbaBuckleboo Road (total Unsealed

21 Kms)2 1 F - 4 - 100 Construct and seal to the community club (4.5kms)

DC KimbaBuckleboo Road (total sealed 28

Kms)2 1 F - 4 - 100

Pavement widening required (currently 6.7m width) for 14kms north side of

Tola Road

DC Kimba Old Eyre Highway 2 2 F - 3 1 Resheet 20kms

DC Kimba Old Eyre Highway 3 2 F - 3 1

DC Kimba Siding Road 2 2 F - 3 1 Resheet 3kms

DC Kimba Siding Road 3 2 F - 3 1

DC Kimba Balumbah-Kinnaird Road 3 1 F 3 1 -

DC Kimba Cowell-Kimba Road 3 1 F 2 2 - 136

DC Streaky Bay Gawler Ranges Road 2 2 T - 2 2 25 Poor geometry, poor pavement thickness.

DC Streaky Bay Point Labatt Road 2 1 T - 1 3 175 Poor Geometry and pavement surface

DC Streaky Bay Calca Road 2 1 T - 2 2 200 Poor Surface

DC Streaky Bay Finlayson Road 3 2 F 1 3 -

DC Streaky Bay Westall Way Loop Road 3 2 T 1 3 -

DC Lower Eyre PeninsulaFlinders Highway (Cockatoo

Drive to Western Approach)2 1 C - 1 2 400

Previous section (Winter Hill Drive to Cockatoo Drive) was reconstructed in

2016. Section is sub standard for FFP. Pavement is badly deteriorated leading to

poor ride quality at the posted speed.

DC Lower Eyre Peninsula Bratten Way** 1 1 F 2 1 1 319

This has become top priority for Council as has multiple sections of pavement

failure due to increased Heavy Vehicles. Independent analysis recommends the

need for overlay 150-190mm basecourse for full length. Council has

commenced a cource of cement stabilising for deteriorated sections which will

occur over 4 years. Council are currently developing a business case for

government funding assistance (approx $18M for overlay and $1.2M cement

stab)

DC Lower Eyre Peninsula White-Flat Road 3 1 C - 4 - 239 Becomes Tod River Road in DC Lower Eyre Peninsula

DC Lower Eyre Peninsula Proper Bay Road 2 1 C 2 1 1 434

DC Lower Eyre Peninsula Fishery Road 2 1 C - - 4 220

DC Lower Eyre Peninsula Sleaford Bay Road 2 1 C - 2 2 131

DC Lower Eyre Peninsula Pound Lane 2 1 F - 1 3 250

DC Lower Eyre Peninsula Farm Beach Road 2 1 T - 1 3 450

DC Lower Eyre Peninsula Airport Lane 2 1 C - - 4 233

DC CleveCleve / Mangalo Road

3 2 F - 3 1Existing sealed road of 21 kms in need of reconstruction and reseals. Currently work

being undertaken by Council as part of maintenance program.

DC Cleve Balumbah-Kinnard Road 2 1 F 1 3 - Shoulder widening to upgrade for new fit for purpose

DC Ceduna Kalanbi Road 2 1 C 2 1 1 130 12

DC Ceduna Goode Road 2 1 F 1 2 1 641 329

DC Ceduna Miltaburra Road 2 2 C 1 2 1 62 5

DC Ceduna Nunyah Road 3 - F 3 - 1 19 20

Applied for 2015/16 SLRP funding. Funding was not approved. Council have listed this

road as top priority. This road has recorded traffic volumes of 19 vpd and does not

classify as a level 1 or 2 road.

DC Ceduna Denial Bay Road 3 1 F 3 1 - 419 22

DC Ceduna OTC Road 3 2 F 3 - 1 61 12

DC Ceduna Pt Brown Road 3 2 T 3 - 1 26 3

DC Ceduna Schwartz Road 3 2 T 1 2 1 35 4

DC Ceduna Thistleton Way 3 1 C 3 1 - 280 25

DC Ceduna Decres Bay Road 3 1 F 2 2 - 1687 42

CC Port Lincoln London Street 3 1 F 3 1 - 5950

CC Port Lincoln Stevenson Street 3 2 F 3* 1 - 1200

CC Port Lincoln Luke Street 3 2 F 4* - - 700

CC Port Lincoln Dublin Street 3 2 F 3* 1 - 800

CC Port Lincoln Brougham Plan 3 2 F 3* 1 - 200

CC Port Lincoln Mark Street 3 2 F 4* - - 250

CC Port Lincoln Gawler Terrace 3 2 F 1 3 - 50

CC Port Lincoln Seaton Avenue 3 2 F 3 1 - 200

CC Port Lincoln Verran Terrace 3 2 F 4* - - 20

Notes;*No Feedback to date noting CC

Whyalla current strategic road

plan

**DCLEP yet to decide on

whether SLRP will be applied for

this year as this is part of a

longer business case

***Final year of funding

3

This is a programmed reseal of both roads. While the roads are performing to a

fit for purpose standard as present it is anticipated that the use of these roads

will change once Sea Transport SA's Harbour Export Facility is fully operating

and grain is being transported through Lucky Bay. Council will propose to hand

these roads back to State Govt.

Both these roads have become higher priority (and Re-categorised as L1 in last

Council meeting) for Council due to increasing developments and land sales in

and around Pt Gibbon. It is conceivable that the work will be completed over 3

years if SLRP funding application is accepted.

*These roads have been assessed as having either 1 or no minor deficiencies

only in their ‘whole road’ fit for purpose assessment, however, key intersections

have been identified as having 2 minor deficiencies with regards to heavy

vehicle movements on the RAV network at these locations. These intersections

are;

1. Stevenson Street and Matthew Place

2. Matthew Place and Luke Street

3. Luke Street and Dublin Street

4. Dublin Street and Brougham Place

5. Mark Street and St. Andrews Terrace

Annexure D 98

Location

Pillow

Annexure E 99

Proposed shade structure

100


REPORT TO: Mayor and Councillors FROM: Manager Administration & Finance DATE: 18 April 2018

1.0 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORTING File Reference: 7.8.1.1 Budget 2017/2018: N/A

Actual to Date: N/A

Strategic Plan Reference: Goal: Effective Management Systems

Outcome: Periodically review organisation structure, management systems, working environment and performance

Risk Rating: Medium Refer to Pages 103 - 123

Attached to this report are Council’s monthly financial reports, which contain Operating Report (Annexure B), Capital Expenditure Report (Annexure C) and explanation of significant variances to 31 March 2018 (Annexure A). Recommendation: That this report be received and noted

2.0 2017-2018 BUDGET REVIEW #3 File Reference: N/A Budget 2017/2018: N/A

Actual to Date:

Strategic Plan Reference: Goal: Effective Management Systems Outcome: Periodically review organisation

structure, management systems, working environment and performance

Risk Rating: Medium Refer to Pages 124 - 143

In accordance with Section 9(1)(a) of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 2011, Council is required to review its Operating and Capital activities at least three times per year. Provided with this report is a copy of Model Financial Statements (Annexure G) containing 2016-17 Actual Data, Original 2017-18 Budget Data, Current 2017-18 Budget Data and proposed 2017-18 Revised Estimates. In addition, provided with this report are Operating Statement (Annexure E) & Capital Expenditure Report (Annexure F) in the format of Council’s monthly financial reports, with

101


commentary on budget amendments listed within these reports (Annexure D).In summary, the overall proposed changes to Council’s budgeted financial outcomes for 2017-18 are as follows:

Original 2017/18 Budget

Current 2017/18 Budget

Revised 2017/18 Budget

Operating Revenue $ 8,314,783 $ 8,734,022 $ 8,824,890 Operating Expenditure $ 9,658,530 $ 9,797,132 $ 9,788,728 Operating Surplus/(Deficit) ($1,343,747) ($ 1,063,110) ($ 963,838)

Capital Revenue $ 7,211,995 $ 7,612,791 $ 1,396,127 Capital Expenditure $ 11,891,316 $ 14,702,872 $ 7,335,474

Borrowings $ 2,728,042 $ 4,750,989 $ 750,989

Recommendation: That Council, having reconsidered the adopted 2017/2018 budget pursuant to and in accordance with Section 123 (13) of the Local Government Act 1999 and Section 9 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 2011, adopt revised 2017/2018 Budgeted Financial Statements as presented

Ben Taylor MANAGER ADMINISTRATION & FINANCE

102

Monthly Council Financial Report

For the Period 1 July 2017 – 31st March 2018

1

This report illustrates reasons for variances between actual financial data for financial year compared to adopted budget figures. Any functions where net variances is not within 10% of set

variance marker (75.0% for March) and $10,000 must be reported,

Operating Position

1.0.10 – Property Portfolio Variance occurs due to advanced payments from both Smoky Bay Aquaculture Park tenants and finalising of BP Aerodrome Lease. Additional expenditure on the newly owned BP Hangar has increased expenditure- however Smoky Bay Aquaculture Park and the Visitor Information Centre are lower than expected to reporting date.

1.0.11 – Sewerage/STEDS Variance occurs due to accrual accounting when all CWMS Service Charges levied are treated as revenue when Council Rates are raised.

1.0.12 – Water Supply Variance occurs due to higher reported depreciation than budgeted due to revaluation adjustments not yet formalised. Upon acceptance by valuer the depreciation figure can be readjusted.

1.0.15 – Marine Offloading Facility Variance occurs as budgeted interest expense on loans not yet required.

2.1.16 – Crime Prevention Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date.

2.1.18 – Other Fire Protection Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date.

2.4.35 – Cemetery/Crematoria Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date as well as higher revenue then estimated.

2.4.36 – Public Convenience Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date due to less maintenance requirements for the year.

4.0.48 – Regional Development Variance occurs due to full contribution to RDAWEP being made for the year.

4.0.49 – Support to Local Businesses Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date.

4.0.51 – Other Economic Development Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date.

5.8.60 – Waste Disposal Facility Variance occurs due to capping and revegetation provision movements not to be realised until end of year.

5.8.61 – Other Waste Management Variance occurs due to accrual accounting when all Annual Waste Collection Service Charges levied are treated as revenue when Council Rates are raised. Expenditure for this function is in line with estimates.

Annexure A103



2

5.8.62 – Coastal Protection

Variance occurs due to $10K contribution from Coastal Protection board being received.

5.9.63 – Stormwater and Drainage Variance occurs due to accrual accounting when all EPNRM Levy levied are treated as revenue when Council Rates are raised. Expenses are lower then estimated as stormwater works historically performed later in the year.

5.9.64 – Street Cleaning Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date.

5.9.65 – Street Lighting Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date.

6.0.69 – Jetties Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date.

6.0.70 – Other Marine Facilities Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date.

7.0.77 – Dog & Cat Control

Variance occurs due to higher then estimated revenue for the year. 7.0.78 – Building Control

Variance occurs due to higher then estimated revenue for the year, along with expenditure lower then estimated.

7.0.79 – Town Planning

Variance occurs due to larger portion of than estimated planning fees being received to the reporting date.

7.0.80 – Health Inspections Variance occurs due to low expenditure to end of reporting period.

7.0.82 – Litter Control Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date.

8.0.85 – Aerodrome Variance occurs due to slightly lower then estimated expenditure to date.

8.0.88 – Footpaths and Kerbing Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date.

8.0.91 – Roads Natural Formed Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date.

8.0.93 – Traffic Management Variance occurs due to lower than expected expenditure to reporting date.

8.0.95 – Other Transport

Variance occurs due to initial higher portion of boat ramp fees to the reporting date due to annual boat ramp permit renewals.

104



3

9.0.96 – Plant & Depot Costs Variance occurs due to lower then estimated internal plant hire income being recognised for the year to date.

11.10.98 – Administration – Other Variance occurs due higher portion of revenue being received to date.

11.10.99 – Elected Members

Variance occurs due to low expenditure to end of reporting period.

11.10.100 – Organisational Variance occurs due to low expenditure to end of reporting period

11.10.104 – Human Resources

Variance occurs due higher then estimated revenue to end of reporting period.

11.10.107 – Rates Administration Variance occurs due to accrual accounting when all General Rates levied are treated as revenue when Council Rates are raised.

105

Operating Budget

Comparison Report by Function

for the Period July 2017 to March 2018

Budget ($)

Paid

Variance ($) Var. (%)

Committed Total

Actuals ($)

1 - BUSINESS UNDERTAKINGS

1.0.9 - Private Works

-10,972 -14,756 3,784 74.4%Revenue - -10,972

3,056 11,695 -8,639 26.1%Expenses - 3,056

-3,061-7,916 -4,855 258.6% - -7,916

1.0.10 - Property Portfolio

-251,738 -287,049 35,311 87.7%Revenue - -251,738

34,164 41,526 -1,393 96.6%Expenses 5,969 40,133

-245,523-217,574 33,918 86.2% 5,969 -211,605

1.0.11 - Sewerage/ Steds

-817,405 -816,399 -1,006 100.1%Revenue - -817,405

482,108 818,572 -271,789 66.8%Expenses 64,675 546,783

2,173-335,298 -272,796 -12,453.9% 64,675 -270,623

1.0.12 - Water Supply - Domestic

-423,323 -477,190 53,867 88.7%Revenue - -423,323

466,811 561,416 28,072 105.0%Expenses 122,677 589,488

84,226 43,488 81,939 197.3% 122,677 166,165

1.0.15 - Marine Offloading Facility

- 20,000 -20,000 0.0%Expenses - -

20,000 - -20,000 0.0% - -

-142,185-517,299 -181,793 227.9%TOTAL: BUSINESS UNDERTAKINGS 193,321 -323,978

2 - COMMUNITY SERVICES

2.1.16 - Crime Prevention

7,841 23,573 -13,459 42.9%Expenses 2,273 10,114

23,573 7,841 -13,459 42.9% 2,273 10,114

Page 1 of 10Operating Budget Comparison by Function, exc FCA

Annexure B106

Operating Budget




2.1.18 - Other Fire Protection

10,206 18,789 -8,583 54.3%Expenses - 10,206

18,789 10,206 -8,583 54.3% - 10,206

2.1.19 - Other Public Order And Safety

112,177 150,000 -37,823 74.8%Expenses - 112,177

150,000 112,177 -37,823 74.8% - 112,177

2.2.24 - Other Health Services

-43,500 -58,000 14,500 75.0%Revenue - -43,500

22,105 30,366 -8,261 72.8%Expenses - 22,105

-27,634-21,395 6,239 77.4% - -21,395

2.3.25 - Senior Citizens Facilities

28,807 38,622 -9,815 74.6%Expenses - 28,807

38,622 28,807 -9,815 74.6% - 28,807

2.3.29 - Children And Youth Services

1,851 5,697 -3,846 32.5%Expenses - 1,851

5,697 1,851 -3,846 32.5% - 1,851

2.3.33 - Other Community Support

58,555 83,730 -24,930 70.2%Expenses 245 58,800

83,730 58,555 -24,930 70.2% 245 58,800

2.4.35 - Cemeteries/Crematoria

-15,068 -15,000 -68 100.5%Revenue - -15,068

32,067 61,759 -29,259 52.6%Expenses 434 32,500

46,759 16,999 -29,327 37.3% 434 17,432


Budget ($) Variance ($) Var. (%)Actuals ($)

Paid Committed Total

107

Operating Budget




2.4.36 - Public Conveniences

-55,864 -55,864 - 100.0%Revenue - -55,864

52,772 92,069 -38,675 58.0%Expenses 622 53,394

36,205-3,092 -38,675 -6.8% 622 -2,470

2.4.37 - Car Parking - Non-Fee-Paying

3,559 4,745 -1,186 75.0%Expenses - 3,559

4,745 3,559 -1,186 75.0% - 3,559

380,486 215,509 -161,404 57.6%TOTAL: COMMUNITY SERVICES 3,573 219,082

3 - CULTURE

3.5.41 - Static Libraries

-6,449 -6,449 - 100.0%Revenue - -6,449

32,704 46,308 -13,604 70.6%Expenses - 32,704

39,859 26,255 -13,604 65.9% - 26,255

3.6.43 - Cultural Venues

-2,309 -2,500 191 92.4%Revenue - -2,309

86,600 116,076 -27,265 76.5%Expenses 2,211 88,811

113,576 84,291 -27,074 76.2% 2,211 86,502

3.6.44 - Heritage

2,258 3,010 -752 75.0%Expenses - 2,258

3,010 2,258 -752 75.0% - 2,258

3.6.46 - Other Cultural Services

- 10,000 -7,400 26.0%Expenses 2,600 2,600

10,000 - -7,400 26.0% 2,600 2,600

166,445 112,804 -48,831 70.7%TOTAL: CULTURE 4,811 117,614




108

Operating Budget



4 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

4.0.48 - Regional Development

32,051 32,051 - 100.0%Expenses - 32,051

32,051 32,051 - 100.0% - 32,051

4.0.49 - Support To Local Businesses

5,709 21,080 -15,371 27.1%Expenses - 5,709

21,080 5,709 -15,371 27.1% - 5,709

4.0.50 - Tourism

-120,327 -117,328 -2,999 102.6%Revenue - -120,327

433,526 512,949 -78,833 84.6%Expenses 590 434,116

395,621 313,199 -81,832 79.3% 590 313,789

4.0.51 - Other Economic Development

7,464 14,381 -6,917 51.9%Expenses - 7,464

14,381 7,464 -6,917 51.9% - 7,464

463,133 358,423 -104,120 77.5%TOTAL: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 590 359,013

5 - ENVIRONMENT

5.8.56 - Domestic Waste

55,405 80,894 -25,489 68.5%Expenses - 55,405

80,894 55,405 -25,489 68.5% - 55,405

5.8.58 - Recycling

14,861 19,581 -3,402 82.6%Expenses 1,318 16,179

19,581 14,861 -3,402 82.6% 1,318 16,179

5.8.60 - Waste Disposal Facility

152,937 274,143 -121,206 55.8%Expenses - 152,937

274,143 152,937 -121,206 55.8% - 152,937




109

Operating Budget



5 - ENVIRONMENT

5.8.61 - Other Waste Management

-298,138 -298,811 673 99.8%Revenue - -298,138

30,454 37,442 -6,988 81.3%Expenses - 30,454

-261,369-267,684 -6,315 102.4% - -267,684

5.9.62 - Coastal Protection

-10,000 -10,000 - 100.0%Revenue - -10,000

11,125 26,485 -15,360 42.0%Expenses - 11,125

16,485 1,125 -15,360 6.8% - 1,125

5.9.63 - Stormwater And Drainage

-164,750 -179,750 15,000 91.7%Revenue - -164,750

141,212 254,380 -113,168 55.5%Expenses - 141,212

74,630-23,539 -98,169 -31.5% - -23,539

5.9.64 - Street Cleaning

64,320 106,638 -42,318 60.3%Expenses - 64,320

106,638 64,320 -42,318 60.3% - 64,320

5.9.65 - Street Lighting

66,847 125,538 -57,600 54.1%Expenses 1,091 67,938

125,538 66,847 -57,600 54.1% 1,091 67,938

5.9.68 - Other Environment

134 1,248 -1,114 10.7%Expenses - 134

1,248 134 -1,114 10.7% - 134

437,788 64,409 -370,970 15.3%TOTAL: ENVIRONMENT 2,409 66,818

6 - RECREATION




110

Operating Budget



6 - RECREATION

6.0.69 - Jetties

21,857 42,224 -20,062 52.5%Expenses 305 22,162

42,224 21,857 -20,062 52.5% 305 22,162

6.0.70 - Other Marine Facilities

5,820 15,112 -9,292 38.5%Expenses - 5,820

15,112 5,820 -9,292 38.5% - 5,820

6.0.71 - Parks And Gardens

-10,813 -12,879 2,066 84.0%Revenue - -10,813

346,749 520,474 -167,124 67.9%Expenses 6,601 353,350

507,595 335,936 -165,058 67.5% 6,601 342,537

6.0.75 - Swimming Centres - Outdoor

990 1,320 -330 75.0%Expenses - 990

1,320 990 -330 75.0% - 990

566,251 364,603 -194,742 65.6%TOTAL: RECREATION 6,906 371,509

7 - REGULATORY SERVICES

7.0.77 - Dog And Cat Control

-39,896 -26,250 -13,646 152.0%Revenue - -39,896

58,637 81,254 -22,238 72.6%Expenses 379 59,016

55,004 18,741 -35,884 34.8% 379 19,120

7.0.78 - Building Control

-9,403 -10,000 597 94.0%Revenue - -9,403

46,132 72,325 -22,475 68.9%Expenses 3,718 49,850

62,325 36,729 -21,878 64.9% 3,718 40,447




111

Operating Budget




7.0.79 - Town Planning

-17,235 -18,458 1,223 93.4%Revenue - -17,235

15,719 39,863 -24,144 39.4%Expenses - 15,719

21,405-1,515 -22,920 -7.1% - -1,515

7.0.80 - Health Inspections

-2,154 -2,535 381 85.0%Revenue - -2,154

3,239 15,000 -11,761 21.6%Expenses - 3,239

12,465 1,085 -11,380 8.7% - 1,085

7.0.82 - Litter Control

-500 - -500 0.0%Revenue - -500

2,802 3,981 -1,179 70.4%Expenses - 2,802

3,981 2,302 -1,679 57.8% - 2,302

7.0.83 - Parking Control

6,166 7,960 -1,567 80.3%Expenses 227 6,393

7,960 6,166 -1,567 80.3% 227 6,393

7.0.84 - Other Regulatory Services

2,484 - 2,484 0.0%Revenue - 2,484

549 - 549 0.0%Expenses - 549

- 3,033 3,033 0.0% - 3,033

163,140 66,540 -92,276 43.4%TOTAL: REGULATORY SERVICES 4,324 70,864

8 - TRANSPORT

8.0.85 - Aerodrome

-368,778 -487,676 118,898 75.6%Revenue - -368,778

362,054 550,297 -187,006 66.0%Expenses 1,236 363,291

62,621-6,724 -68,108 -8.8% 1,236 -5,487




112

Operating Budget



8 - TRANSPORT

8.0.88 - Footpaths And Kerbing

99,230 204,381 -102,314 49.9%Expenses 2,836 102,067

204,381 99,230 -102,314 49.9% 2,836 102,067

8.0.89 - Roads - Sealed

345,348 488,819 -139,348 71.5%Expenses 4,124 349,471

488,819 345,348 -139,348 71.5% 4,124 349,471

8.0.90 - Roads - Formed

852,469 1,187,694 -335,225 71.8%Expenses - 852,469

1,187,694 852,469 -335,225 71.8% - 852,469

8.0.91 - Roads - Natural Formed

- -4,740 4,740 0.0%Revenue - -

1,885 4,441 -2,556 42.4%Expenses - 1,885

-299 1,885 2,184 -630.3% - 1,885

8.0.93 - Traffic Management

25,353 39,721 -14,368 63.8%Expenses - 25,353

39,721 25,353 -14,368 63.8% - 25,353

8.0.94 - Lggc - Roads (Formula Funded)

-333,113 -442,092 108,979 75.3%Revenue - -333,113

-442,092-333,113 108,979 75.3% - -333,113

8.0.95 - Other Transport

-31,902 -32,000 98 99.7%Revenue - -31,902

31,661 48,662 -17,001 65.1%Expenses - 31,661

16,662-241 -16,903 -1.4% - -241

1,557,507 984,207 -565,104 63.7%TOTAL: TRANSPORT 8,196 992,403




113

Operating Budget



9 - PLANT HIRE & DEPOT COSTS

9.0.96 - Plant Hire & Depot Costs

-366,653 -847,775 481,122 43.2%Revenue - -366,653

1,173,106 1,705,383 -521,220 69.4%Expenses 11,056 1,184,163

857,608 806,453 -40,098 95.3% 11,056 817,510

857,608 806,453 -40,098 95.3%TOTAL: PLANT HIRE & DEPOT COSTS 11,056 817,510

11 - COUNCIL ADMINISTRATION

11.10.98 - Administration - Other

-85,254 -95,000 9,746 89.7%Revenue - -85,254

84,196 150,189 -64,902 56.8%Expenses 1,091 85,287

55,189-1,057 -55,155 0.1% 1,091 34

11.10.99 - Elected Members

65,322 103,373 -36,660 64.5%Expenses 1,391 66,713

103,373 65,322 -36,660 64.5% 1,391 66,713

11.10.100 - Organisational

158,442 245,646 -87,204 64.5%Expenses - 158,442

245,646 158,442 -87,204 64.5% - 158,442

11.11.104 - Human Resources

-93,577 -80,000 -13,577 117.0%Revenue - -93,577

128,953 162,600 -27,209 83.3%Expenses 6,437 135,391

82,600 35,376 -40,786 50.6% 6,437 41,814

11.11.105 - Information Technology

197,547 262,673 -64,108 75.6%Expenses 1,018 198,565

262,673 197,547 -64,108 75.6% 1,018 198,565




114

Operating Budget






11.11.107 - Rates Administration

-4,299,707 -4,298,027 -1,680 100.0%Revenue - -4,299,707

201,805 219,520 -15,876 92.8%Expenses 1,839 203,644

-4,078,507-4,097,902 -17,556 100.4% 1,839 -4,096,063

11.11.109 - Occupancy

79,406 117,910 -35,639 69.8%Expenses 2,865 82,271

117,910 79,406 -35,639 69.8% 2,865 82,271

11.11.112 - Other Support Services

-12,510 -12,510 - 100.0%Revenue - -12,510

630,864 928,840 -297,976 67.9%Expenses - 630,864

916,330 618,354 -297,976 67.5% - 618,354

11.12.113 - Lggc - General Purpose

-774,821 -959,064 184,243 80.8%Revenue - -774,821

-959,064-774,821 184,243 80.8% - -774,821

-3,253,850-3,719,333 -450,842 113.9%TOTAL: COUNCIL ADMINISTRATION 14,641 -3,704,692

1,196,323-1,263,684 -2,210,179NETT Council Surplus/(Deficit) -84.7% 249,827 -1,013,856


115

Capital Budget



Budget ($)

Paid


Committed Total

Actuals ($)



Revenue

-3,678,522 - 3,678,522 0.0%3412 - ABNORMAL ITEMS ( APPROPRIATIONS) - -

-3,678,522 - 3,678,522 0.0%TOTAL: Property Portfolio - -

1.0.11 - Sewerage/ Steds

Expenses - Capital

- 182 182 0.0% - 182

1,967 2,092 125 106.4% - 2,092

6,869 6,870 1 100.0% - 6,870

31,932 31,932 - 100.0% - 31,932

2,500 2,044 -456 81.8% - 2,044

19,160 18,243 -917 95.2% - 18,243

7,620 - -7,620 0.0% - -

11,500 4,426 -7,074 38.5% - 4,426

34,658 - -25,567 26.2%

3804 - CAPITAL - Reuse to Lutheran School

3805 - CAPITAL - Reuse to Race Course

3809 - CAPITAL - Lutheran School Reuse Connection

3810 - CAPITAL - Ceduna WWTP Decant System

Reconfiguratio 3812 - CAPITAL - Supernatant Pit Upgrade

3813 - CAPITAL - Sludge Disposal System

3814 - CAPITAL - Smoky Bay Filtration System

3815 - CAPITAL - FWASCI Reuse Connection

3819 - CAPITAL - Reuse to Hambridge St 9,091 9,091

65,789 116,206 -41,326 64.4% 9,091 74,880

116,206 65,789 -41,326 64.4%TOTAL: Sewerage/ Steds 9,091 74,880


Expenses - Capital

47,883 5,452 -42,431 11.4% - 5,452

95,624 26,518 -69,106 27.7% - 26,518

11,258 7,015 -4,243 62.3%

3340 - CAPITAL - Water West Telecommunication

Upgrade 3438 - CAPITAL - Water West Replacements

3616 - CAPITAL - Eyre Hwy Standpipe - 7,015

38,985 154,765 -115,780 25.2% - 38,985

154,765 38,985 -115,780 25.2%TOTAL: Water Supply - Domestic - 38,985

Page 1 of 8Capital Budget Comparison by Function, exc FCA

Annexure C116

Capital Budget



Budget ($)

Paid


Committed Total

Actuals ($)



Revenue

-6,328,042-607,804 5,720,238 9.6% - -607,8045440 - Grant - Thevenard Slipway Unloading

Facility Expenses - Capital

10,819,736 650,945 -10,168,255 6.0%5459 - CAPITAL - Thevenard Unloading Facility 535 651,481

4,491,694 43,141 -4,448,017 1.0% 535 43,677

1,084,143 147,915 -926,602 14.5%

TOTAL: Marine Offloading

Facility TOTAL: BUSINESS

UNDERTAKINGS

9,626 157,541


2.3.29 - Children And Youth Services

Expenses - Capital

14,929 24 -14,905 0.2%2666 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Skateboard Park - 24

14,929 24 -14,905 0.2%TOTAL: Children And Youth Services - 24


Expenses - Capital

5,335 5,334 -1 100.0% - 5,334

26,660 9,292 -14,905 44.1%

3330 - CAPITAL - Cemeteries

3332 - CAPITAL- Ceduna Cemetery

Landscaping

2,464 11,755

14,626 31,995 -14,906 53.4% 2,464 17,089

31,995 14,626 -14,906 53.4%TOTAL: Cemeteries/Crematoria 2,464 17,089


Expenses - Capital

140,000 27,147 -4,120 97.1%3361 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Foreshore Toilet Block 108,733 135,880

140,000 27,147 -4,120 97.1% 108,733 135,880

186,924 41,797 -33,931 81.8%

TOTAL: Public Conveniences

TOTAL: COMMUNITY SERVICES 111,196 152,993


117

Capital Budget



Budget ($)

Paid


Committed Total

Actuals ($)

3 - CULTURE


Expenses - Capital

8,000 1,675 -6,325 20.9%5481 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Hall - Plant & Furniture - 1,675

8,000 1,675 -6,325 20.9% - 1,675

8,000 1,675 -6,325 20.9%

TOTAL: Cultural Venues

TOTAL: CULTURE - 1,675

5 - ENVIRONMENT

5.8.58 - Recycling

Revenue

-8,000-7,000 1,000 87.5% - -7,0003327 - Grant - Zero Waste SA

Expenses - Capital

42,000 26,830 -15,170 63.9%3313 - CAPITAL - Recycling Skips - 26,830

34,000 19,830 -14,170 58.3%TOTAL: Recycling - 19,830


Expenses - Capital

111,132 120,784 11,471 110.3%3379 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Landfill Cells 5 & 6 1,818 122,603

120,784 111,132 11,471 110.3% 1,818 122,603

111,132 120,784 11,471 110.3%TOTAL: Waste Disposal Facility 1,818 122,603


Revenue

-45,000 - 45,000 0.0% - -14006 - Grant - Rec Fishing Fund Expenses - Capital

50,676 - -50,676 0.0% - -

122,040 97 -121,943 0.1% - 97

229,460 1,795 -227,665 0.8%

4062 - CAPITAL - Oyster Artifical Reef

4063 - CAPITAL - Smoky Bay Foreshore Revetment

4064 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Foreshore Revetment - 1,795

1,892 402,176 -400,284 0.5% - 1,892

357,176 1,892 -355,284 0.5%TOTAL: Coastal Protection - 1,892


118

Capital Budget



Budget ($)

Paid


Committed Total

Actuals ($)

5 - ENVIRONMENT


Revenue

-14,130-14,360 -230 101.6% - -14,3603344 - CAPITAL - Council Carpark Lights

Expenses - Capital

14,360 - -14,360 0.0%3344 - CAPITAL - Council Carpark Lights - -

230-14,360 -14,590 -6,243.5% - -14,360

502,538 128,147 -372,573 25.9%

TOTAL: Street Lighting

TOTAL: ENVIRONMENT 1,818 129,965

6 - RECREATION

6.0.69 - Jetties

Revenue

-6,000-6,000 - 100.0% - -6,0005755 - Grant - Rec Fishing Fund

Expenses - Capital

20,000 - 2,345 111.7%5478 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Jetty Shelters 22,345 22,345

14,000-6,000 2,345 116.8%TOTAL: Jetties 22,345 16,345

6.0.71 - Parks And Gardens

Revenue

-139,950-139,950 - 100.0% - -139,9505351 - CAPITAL - Thevenard Masterplan Project Expenses - Capital

46,170 39,406 -6,764 85.3% - 39,406

15,000 7,662 -7,338 51.1% - 7,662

269,395 - -269,395 0.0% - -

22,265 19,832 -2,433 89.1% - 19,832

7,882 7 -7,875 0.1% - 7

12,202 6,839 -5,363 56.0% - 6,839

- 1,142 1,142 0.0%

5254 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Foreshore Tree Removal

5276 - CAPITAL - Playground

5351 - CAPITAL - Thevenard Masterplan Project

5386 - CAPITAL - McKenzie Street Upgrade

5394 - CAPITAL - Frayne Tce Median

5398 - CAPITAL - Poynton St Grates

5399 - CAPITAL - Ceduna CBD Flagpoles - 1,142

74,888 372,914 -298,026 20.1% - 74,888

232,964-65,062 -298,026 -27.9%TOTAL: Parks And Gardens - -65,062


119

Capital Budget



Budget ($)

Paid


Committed Total

Actuals ($)

6 - RECREATION


Revenue

-260,000 - 260,000 0.0% - -5621 - Swimming Enclosure Funding

Expenses - Capital

306,527 3,255 -218,365 28.8%5490 - CAPITAL - Swimming Pool Enclosure 84,907 88,162

46,527 3,255 41,635 189.5% 84,907 88,162

293,491-67,807 -254,046 13.4%

TOTAL: Swimming Centres -

Outdoor TOTAL: RECREATION 107,252 39,445

8 - TRANSPORT

8.0.85 - Aerodrome

Expenses - Capital

34,800 - -1,835 94.7% 32,965 32,965

16,623 - -16,623 0.0% - -

12,000 10,600 599 105.0%

16062 - CAPITAL - Security

16080 - CAPITAL - Airport Spetic Tank

16081 - CAPITAL - Terminal Painting 1,999 12,599

10,600 63,423 -17,859 71.8% 34,964 45,564

63,423 10,600 -17,859 71.8%TOTAL: Aerodrome 34,964 45,564

8.0.88 - Footpaths And Kerbing

Expenses - Capital

53,423 6,414 -47,009 12.0% - 6,414

10,000 - -10,000 0.0% - -

21,711 36 -21,675 0.2%

15067 - CAPITAL - Kerbing - Decres Bay Rd

15070 - CAPITAL - Footpath - South Tce, Smoky Bay

16265 - CAPITAL - Denton St, Smoky Bay Footpath - 36

6,451 85,134 -78,683 7.6% - 6,451

85,134 6,451 -78,683 7.6%TOTAL: Footpaths And Kerbing - 6,451


120

Capital Budget



Budget ($)

Paid


Committed Total

Actuals ($)

8 - TRANSPORT

8.0.89 - Roads - Sealed

Revenue

-633,675-519,418 114,257 82.0%19001 - R2R & Special R2R Program Funding - -519,418

Expenses - Capital

492,441 46,694 5,388 101.1%11000 - CAPITAL - Resealing - Ceduna/Thevenard Streets 451,134 497,829

-141,234-472,724 119,645 15.3%TOTAL: Roads - Sealed 451,134 -21,589

8.0.90 - Roads - Formed

Expenses - Capital

202,721 1,856 -168,138 17.1% 32,727 34,583

2,711 - -2,711 0.0% - -

26,512 - -26,512 0.0% - -

11,804 - -11,804 0.0% - -

8,048 - -8,048 0.0% - -

23,582 - -23,582 0.0% - -

15,199 - -15,199 0.0% - -

148,743 149,912 1,169 100.8% - 149,912

112,567 4,740 -107,827 4.2% - 4,740

137,561 133,593 -3,968 97.1% - 133,593

17,625 17,625 - 100.0% - 17,625

109,391 110,140 749 100.7% - 110,140

139,994 194,922 54,928 139.2%

30003 - CAPITAL - Rd #3 - Ten Chain Rd

30005 - CAPITAL - Rd #5 - Watraba Rd

30017 - CAPITAL - Rd#17 - Trowbridge Rd

30019 - CAPITAL - Rd#19 - Browns Rd

30049 - CAPITAL - Rd#49 - Foggos Rd

30061 - CAPITAL - Rd#61 - Trewartha Rd

30099 - CAPITAL - Rd #99 - Goode Hall Rd

30107 - CAPITAL - Rd #107 (N)Marchant Rd, (S)Pt Brown Rd

30135 - CAPITAL - Rd #135 - Decres Bay Rd

30161 - CAPITAL - Rd #161 - Nunyah Rd

30175 - CAPITAL - Rd #175 - Nunji Rd

30179 - CAPITAL - Rd #179 - Miltaburra Rd

39107 - CAPITAL - Rd#107 - Point Brown Rd (West)

- 194,922

612,787 956,458 -310,943 67.5% 32,727 645,515

956,458 612,787 -310,943 67.5%TOTAL: Roads - Formed 32,727 645,515


121

Capital Budget



Budget ($)

Paid


Committed Total

Actuals ($)

8 - TRANSPORT


Expenses - Capital

23,411 27,258 3,847 116.4% - 27,258

15,000 9,575 -925 93.8% 4,500 14,075

10,655 10,655 - 100.0%

17000 - CAPITAL - Signs

17001 - CAPITAL - Town Entrance Signs

17004 - CAPITAL - Barrow Stop Light - 10,655

47,488 49,066 2,922 106.0% 4,500 51,988

49,066 47,488 2,922 106.0%TOTAL: Traffic Management 4,500 51,988


Revenue

-8,500 - 8,500 0.0% - -

-76,166 - 76,166 0.0%

5762 - ABNORMAL ITEMS - Boat Ramps

5766 - Grant - Smoky Bay Boat Ramp Uprgade - -

- -84,666 84,666 0.0% - -

Expenses - Capital

152,332 1,150 -151,182 0.8% - 1,150

17,000 - -17,000 0.0%

5465 - CAPITAL - Boat Ramp - Smoky Bay

16152 - CAPITAL - Fosters Boat Ramp Upgrade - -

1,150 169,332 -168,182 0.7% - 1,150

84,666 1,150 -83,516 1.4% - 1,150

1,097,513 205,753 -368,435 66.4%

TOTAL: Other Transport

TOTAL: TRANSPORT 523,325 729,078



122

Capital Budget



Budget ($)

Paid


Committed Total

Actuals ($)


9.0.96 - Plant Hire & Depot Costs

Revenue

-44,913-44,913 - 100.0% - -44,913

-62,545-56,682 5,863 90.6%

90060 - Proceeds on Sale of Plant & Equipment

90063 - Proceeds on Sale of vehicles - -56,682

-101,595 -107,458 5,863 94.5% - -101,595

Expenses - Capital

157,100 113,694 -43,406 72.4% - 113,694

103,500 102,874 -627 99.4% - 102,874

33,100 20,326 -2,887 91.3%

89149 - CAPITAL - Purchase of Plant & Equipment

89150 - CAPITAL - Vehicle Purchases

89440 - CAPITAL - Depot 9,887 30,213

236,893 293,700 -46,920 84.0% 9,887 246,780

186,242 135,298 -41,057 78.0% 9,887 145,185

186,242 135,298 -41,057 78.0%

TOTAL: Plant Hire & Depot Costs

TOTAL: PLANT HIRE & DEPOT COSTS 9,887 145,185



Expenses - Capital

28,000 27,099 -851 97.0%1186 - CAPITAL - Administration Building Improvements 50 27,149

28,000 27,099 -851 97.0%TOTAL: Occupancy 50 27,149


Expenses - Capital

12,000 2,360 -5,641 53.0%1208 - CAPITAL - Records Storage Facility 3,999 6,359

12,000 2,360 -5,641 53.0% 3,999 6,359

40,000 29,459 -6,492 83.8%

TOTAL: Other Support Services

TOTAL: COUNCIL ADMINISTRATION 4,049 33,508

3,398,851 622,237 -2,009,460NETT Council Surplus/(Deficit) 40.9% 767,154 1,389,391


123

Council Budget Review #3

For the Period 1 July 2017 – 30 June 2018

The following is a list of budget items requiring revision in Council Operating & Capital Reports. Operating Position

Function Account Type Account Budget Amendment Reason

1.0.9 Expenses Private Works - 4970 Reduce allocated labour & internal plant out of Private Works as reduction in levels of works performed

1.0.10 Revenue BP Lease - 18000 Amend to reflect over estimation of revenue to be received..

Expenses BP Hangar Maintenance + 11300 Amend to reflect works required to maintain buildings in our care

1.0.11 Revenue Sale of Waste Water + 8000 Amend to reflect estimated higher waste water sales for the year

Expenses Various - 4000 Amend to reflect reallocation of labour to other Council projects

1.0.12 Revenue Water West Sales + 71000 Amend to reflect additional water sales due to prolonged dry period.

Expenses Water West Operating Expenses + 52000 Amend to reflect additional water purchases due to prolonged dry period.

1.0.15 Expenses Finance Charges - 10000 Reduce estimated interest expense due to delay in capital works

2.3.33 Expenses Various - 2000 Amend to reflect reallocation of labour to other Council projects

2.4.35 Revenue Cemetery Fees + 1500 Amend to reflect estimated revenue for the year

2.4.36 Revenue Public Conveniences Income - 4136 Amend to reflect actual insurance settlement of O’Loughlin Terrace toilet block received

Expenses Public Conveniences + 1400 Amend to reflect reallocation of labour to other Council projects

3.6.43 Expenses Memorial Hall Maintenance + 2500 Amend to reflect additional maintenance required.

4.0.50 Expenses Oysterfest Maintenance - 5130 Amend to bring account to correct balance

5.8.58 Expenses Recycling Skips - 8166 Amend to reflect outsourcing of skip bins collections for the year

5.9.63 Revenue Stormwater Study - 15000 Remove from budget as no allocation made to Council.

Expenses Stormwater Study - 31000 Remove corresponding expense to stormwater study revenue.

Annexure D 124




5.9.64 Expenses Street Sweeping - 17500 Reduce labour and internal plant due to reduced works performed for the year.

6.0.69 Expenses Jetties Maintenance - 3450 Amend to reflect reallocation of labour to other Council projects

6.0.71 Expenses Various - 4000 Amendment of labour allocations only 7.0.77 Revenue Impounding Fees + 3000 Increase impounding fees estimates for the due

7.0.78 Revenue Development Fees + 2500 Amend to reflect higher estimated revenue for the year

Expenses Building Control Salaries - 7500 Amend to reflect lower expenditure through use of contractor to end of the year.

7.0.79 Revenue Development Plan Fees + 3000 Amend to reflect higher estimated revenue for the year

Expenses Town Planning Officer - 7500 Amend to reflect expenditure through use of contractor to end of the year.

7.0.80 Expenses Health Inspector - 2000 Amend to reflect lower estimated expenditure to end of the year

7.0.84 Expenses Collection Fees + 3500 Amend to account for costs of forwarding fines to Fine Enforcement Officer

8.0.85 Revenue RPT Income + 2500 Amend to reflect higher estimated revenue for the year

8.0.95 Revenue Boat Ramp User Charges + 2500 Amend to reflect additional boat ramp fees for the year.

Various - 1450 Amend to reflect reallocation of labour to other Council projects

125




9.0.96 Revenue Plant Hire Income - 30580 Amend to reflect internal plant hire adjustments in budget review

Expenses Plant Operations - 47201 Amend plant operating costs to reflect lower usage of specific plant for the year.

Depot Office & Maintenance + 19860

Amend to reflect contractor payments not included in initial budget (who were under contract prior to 1/7/17), plus additional contracts for necessary depot maintenance

Salaries + 5000 Amend to reflect reallocation of labour to other Council projects

Small Tools + 2500 Amend to reflect additional replacements during the year.

11.10.98 Revenue Sundry Income + 2000 Amend to reflect insurance reimbursements

11.11.104 Revenue W/Cover & Inc Protection Claims + 30000 Amend to reflect additional payments received for the year

Expenses W/Cover & Inc Protection Claims + 30000 Amend to reflect additional payments received for the year

126


For the Period 1 July 2017 – 30 June 2018 Capital Expenditure Report


1.0.12 Expenses Eyre Hwy Standpipe - 4100 Bring account to correct balance

1.0.15 Revenue Grants – Unloading Facility - 3500000 Reduce Grant revenue due to delay in capital works

Expenses Thevenard Marine Unloading Facility - 7500000 Reduce actual expenditure this financial year due to delays in contract execution.

5.9.62 Revenue Rec Fishing Fund - 45000 Remove funding as project to be removed Expenses Oyster Artificial Reef - 55100 Amend as project not to progress this year

6.0.71 Expenses Thevenard Masterplan Project - 20000 Amend to reflect project to be completed under contract (Subject to receival of funding)

8.0.88 Expenses Smoky Bay Footpath – South Rd - 10000 Amend to reflect works performed as maintenance under existing budget

8.0.90 Expenses Marchant Road + 59300 Amend to reflect actual costs incurred on the roads.

8.0.93 Expenses Signs + 7500 Amend to reflect additional expenditure

9.0.96 Revenue Proceeds on Sale of Vehicle - 4000 Amend to reflect lower then estimated trade in values on vehicles

Expenses Purchase of Plant + 4000 Amend for additional costs in acquiring trailer mounted generator

Purchase of Vehicles - 59250 Amend to reflect savings in not changing over one vehicle and lower then estimated purchase price of another

127

Current

Budget ($)

Revised

Estimates ($)

Estimated

Revisions ($)

Estimated Operating Statement

As at 30 March 2018

Actuals To

Date ($)


1.0.9 - Private Works

-14,756-14,756 --10,972Revenues

7,411 12,396 -4,985 4,074Expenses

TOTAL: Private Works -7,345-2,360 -4,985-6,898


-269,041-287,049 18,008-251,738Revenues

53,061 41,756 11,305 40,157Expenses

TOTAL: Property Portfolio -215,980-245,293 29,313-211,581

1.0.11 - Sewerage/ STEDS

-824,399-816,399 -8,000-817,405Revenues

847,314 851,766 -4,452 566,950Expenses

TOTAL: Sewerage/ STEDS 22,915 35,367 -12,452-250,455


-548,426-477,190 -71,236-423,323Revenues

629,177 576,846 52,331 604,249Expenses

TOTAL: Water Supply - Domestic 80,751 99,656 -18,905 180,926


10,000 20,000 -10,000 -Expenses

TOTAL: Marine Offloading Facility 10,000 20,000 -10,000 -

TOTAL: BUSINESS UNDERTAKINGS -109,659-92,630 -17,029-288,008


2.1.16 - Crime Prevention

25,882 25,833 48 10,848Expenses

TOTAL: Crime Prevention 25,882 25,833 48 10,848

2.1.18 - Other Fire Protection

18,789 18,789 - 10,206Expenses

TOTAL: Other Fire Protection 18,789 18,789 - 10,206

2.1.19 - Other Public Order and Safety

150,000 150,000 - 112,177Expenses

TOTAL: Other Public Order and Safety 150,000 150,000 - 112,177

2.2.24 - Other Health Services

-58,000-58,000 --43,500Revenues

30,366 30,366 - 22,105Expenses

TOTAL: Other Health Services -27,634-27,634 --21,395

2.3.25 - Senior Citizens Facilities

38,622 38,622 - 28,807Expenses

TOTAL: Senior Citizens Facilities 38,622 38,622 - 28,807

2.3.29 - Children and Youth Services

6,900 6,875 25 2,138Expenses

TOTAL: Children and Youth Services 6,900 6,875 25 2,138

2.3.33 - Other Community Support

84,170 86,119 -1,949 59,678Expenses

TOTAL: Other Community Support 84,170 86,119 -1,949 59,678


-16,500-15,000 -1,500-15,068Revenues

72,747 72,516 231 40,449Expenses

TOTAL: Cemeteries/Crematoria 56,247 57,516 -1,269 25,381

1Estimated Operating Surplus as at 30 March 2018

Annexure E128

Current

Budget ($)

Revised

Estimates ($)

Estimated

Revisions ($)


As at 30 March 2018

Actuals To

Date ($)



-55,864-55,864 --55,864Revenues

98,077 97,951 126 58,739Expenses

TOTAL: Public Conveniences 42,213 42,087 126 2,875

2.4.37 - Car Parking - Non-fee-paying

4,745 4,745 - 3,559Expenses

TOTAL: Car Parking - Non-fee-paying 4,745 4,745 - 3,559

TOTAL: COMMUNITY SERVICES 399,935 402,953 -3,018 234,274

3 - CULTURE

3.5.41 - Static Libraries

-6,449-6,449 --6,449Revenues

46,308 46,308 - 32,704Expenses

TOTAL: Static Libraries 39,859 39,859 - 26,255


-2,500-2,500 --2,173Revenues

118,576 116,076 2,500 88,811Expenses

TOTAL: Cultural Venues 116,076 113,576 2,500 86,638

3.6.44 - Heritage

3,010 3,010 - 2,258Expenses

TOTAL: Heritage 3,010 3,010 - 2,258

3.6.46 - Other Cultural Services

10,000 10,000 - 2,600Expenses

TOTAL: Other Cultural Services 10,000 10,000 - 2,600

TOTAL: CULTURE 168,945 166,445 2,500 117,751

4 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

4.0.48 - Regional Development

32,051 32,051 - 32,051Expenses

TOTAL: Regional Development 32,051 32,051 - 32,051

4.0.49 - Support to Local Businesses

21,080 21,080 - 5,709Expenses

TOTAL: Support to Local Businesses 21,080 21,080 - 5,709

4.0.50 - Tourism

-117,328-117,328 --120,327Revenues

524,435 529,824 -5,389 452,849Expenses

TOTAL: Tourism 407,107 412,496 -5,389 332,521

4.0.51 - Other Economic Development

15,276 15,258 19 8,173Expenses

TOTAL: Other Economic Development 15,276 15,258 19 8,173

TOTAL: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 475,514 480,884 -5,370 378,454

5 - ENVIRONMENT

5.8.56 - Domestic Waste

96,304 95,981 324 67,654Expenses

TOTAL: Domestic Waste 96,304 95,981 324 67,654

5.8.58 - Recycling

30,931 22,824 8,107 17,772Expenses

TOTAL: Recycling 30,931 22,824 8,107 17,772


129

Current

Budget ($)

Revised

Estimates ($)

Estimated

Revisions ($)


As at 30 March 2018

Actuals To

Date ($)

5 - ENVIRONMENT


281,624 281,467 157 165,430Expenses

TOTAL: Waste Disposal Facility 281,624 281,467 157 165,430

5.8.61 - Other Waste Management

-298,811-298,811 --298,138Revenues

45,997 45,817 180 38,268Expenses

TOTAL: Other Waste Management -252,814-252,994 180-259,870


-10,000-10,000 --10,000Revenues

30,159 30,082 77 14,317Expenses

TOTAL: Coastal Protection 20,159 20,082 77 4,317

5.9.63 - Stormwater and Drainage

-164,750-179,750 15,000-164,750Revenues

229,857 261,439 -31,581 143,425Expenses

TOTAL: Stormwater and Drainage 65,107 81,689 -16,581-21,325

5.9.64 - Street Cleaning

115,851 133,353 -17,502 86,571Expenses

TOTAL: Street Cleaning 115,851 133,353 -17,502 86,571


126,017 126,007 10 67,988Expenses

TOTAL: Street Lighting 126,017 126,007 10 67,988

5.9.68 - Other Environment

134 1,351 -1,217 134Expenses

TOTAL: Other Environment 134 1,351 -1,217 134

TOTAL: ENVIRONMENT 483,313 509,759 -26,446 128,672

6 - RECREATION

6.0.69 - Jetties

42,801 46,327 -3,527 23,920Expenses

TOTAL: Jetties 42,801 46,327 -3,527 23,920

6.0.70 - Other Marine Facilities

16,349 18,554 -2,204 8,052Expenses

TOTAL: Other Marine Facilities 16,349 18,554 -2,204 8,052

6.0.71 - Parks and Gardens

-12,879-12,879 --10,813Revenues

593,493 598,650 -5,157 411,565Expenses

TOTAL: Parks and Gardens 580,614 585,771 -5,157 400,752


1,320 1,320 - 990Expenses

TOTAL: Swimming Centres - Outdoor 1,320 1,320 - 990

TOTAL: RECREATION 641,084 651,972 -10,888 433,714


7.0.77 - Dog and Cat Control

-29,640-26,250 -3,390-39,896Revenues

81,254 81,254 - 59,137Expenses

TOTAL: Dog and Cat Control 51,614 55,004 -3,390 19,241

7.0.78 - Building Control

-12,500-10,000 -2,500-9,403Revenues

64,825 72,325 -7,500 49,850Expenses

TOTAL: Building Control 52,325 62,325 -10,000 40,447


130

Current

Budget ($)

Revised

Estimates ($)

Estimated

Revisions ($)


As at 30 March 2018

Actuals To

Date ($)


7.0.79 - Town Planning

-21,458-18,458 -3,000-17,235Revenues

32,363 39,863 -7,500 15,719Expenses

TOTAL: Town Planning 10,905 21,405 -10,500-1,515

7.0.80 - Health Inspections

-2,535-2,535 --2,154Revenues

13,000 15,000 -2,000 3,239Expenses

TOTAL: Health Inspections 10,465 12,465 -2,000 1,085

7.0.82 - Litter Control

3,981 3,981 - 2,802Expenses

TOTAL: Litter Control 3,981 3,981 - 2,302

7.0.83 - Parking Control

7,960 7,960 - 6,393Expenses

TOTAL: Parking Control 7,960 7,960 - 6,393

7.0.84 - Other Regulatory Services

2,750 - 2,750 2,484Revenues

750 - 750 549Expenses

TOTAL: Other Regulatory Services 3,500 - 3,500 3,033

TOTAL: REGULATORY SERVICES 140,750 163,140 -22,390 70,985

8 - TRANSPORT

8.0.85 - Aerodrome

-490,176-487,676 -2,500-368,778Revenues

588,275 587,478 798 404,367Expenses

TOTAL: Aerodrome 98,099 99,802 -1,702 35,589

8.0.88 - Footpaths and kerbing

219,729 219,407 322 109,836Expenses

TOTAL: Footpaths and kerbing 219,729 219,407 322 109,836

8.0.89 - Roads - sealed

497,073 496,899 173 355,932Expenses

TOTAL: Roads - sealed 497,073 496,899 173 355,932

8.0.90 - Roads - formed

1,210,694 1,210,211 483 861,843Expenses

TOTAL: Roads - formed 1,210,694 1,210,211 483 861,843

8.0.91 - Roads - natural formed

-4,740-4,740 - -Revenues

4,839 4,831 8 1,885Expenses

TOTAL: Roads - natural formed 99 91 8 1,885


40,249 40,238 11 25,508Expenses

TOTAL: Traffic Management 40,249 40,238 11 25,508

8.0.94 - LGGC - roads (formula funded)

-442,092-442,092 --333,113Revenues

TOTAL: LGGC - roads (formula funded) -442,092-442,092 --333,113


-34,500-32,000 -2,500-31,902Revenues

55,898 54,538 1,360 34,389Expenses

TOTAL: Other Transport 21,398 22,538 -1,140 2,487

TOTAL: TRANSPORT 1,645,249 1,647,093 -1,844 1,059,966



131

Current

Budget ($)

Revised

Estimates ($)

Estimated

Revisions ($)


As at 30 March 2018

Actuals To

Date ($)


9.0.96 - Plant hire & depot costs

-820,516-847,775 27,259-371,948Revenues

1,209,203 1,249,248 -40,045 868,312Expenses

TOTAL: Plant hire & depot costs 388,687 401,473 -12,786 496,365

TOTAL: PLANT HIRE & DEPOT COSTS 388,687 401,473 -12,786 496,365


11.10.98 - Administration - other

-97,000-95,000 -2,000-79,343Revenues

150,189 150,189 - 85,364Expenses

TOTAL: Administration - other 53,189 55,189 -2,000 6,021

11.10.99 - Elected Members

103,373 103,373 - 66,713Expenses

TOTAL: Elected Members 103,373 103,373 - 66,713

11.10.100 - Organisational

245,646 245,646 - 158,442Expenses

TOTAL: Organisational 245,646 245,646 - 158,442

11.11.104 - Human Resources

-110,000-80,000 -30,000-93,577Revenues

192,600 162,600 30,000 135,745Expenses

TOTAL: Human Resources 82,600 82,600 - 42,168

11.11.105 - Information Technology

262,673 262,673 - 198,565Expenses

TOTAL: Information Technology 262,673 262,673 - 198,565

11.11.107 - Rates Administration

-4,298,027-4,298,027 --4,299,707Revenues

219,520 219,520 - 203,644Expenses

TOTAL: Rates Administration -4,078,507-4,078,507 --4,096,063


117,910 117,910 - 82,597Expenses

TOTAL: Occupancy 117,910 117,910 - 82,597


-12,510-12,510 --12,510Revenues

928,840 928,840 - 630,864Expenses

TOTAL: Other Support Services 916,330 916,330 - 618,354

11.12.113 - LGGC - general purpose

-959,064-959,064 --774,821Revenues

TOTAL: LGGC - general purpose -959,064-959,064 --774,821

TOTAL: COUNCIL ADMINISTRATION -3,255,850-3,253,850 -2,000-3,698,023

NET COUNCIL SURPLUS / (DEFICIT) 977,968 1,077,240 -99,272-1,065,851


132

Estimated Net Capital Expenditure

As at 30 March 2018

Revised

Estimates ($)

Estimated

Revisions ($)

Current

Budget ($)

Actuals To

Date ($)



Revenues

-3,678,522-3,678,522 -3412 - ABNORMAL ITEMS ( APPROPRIATIONS) -

TOTAL: Property Portfolio -3,678,522-3,678,522 - -

1.0.11 - Sewerage/ STEDS

Expenses - Capital

2,657 2,463 1943805 - CAPITAL - Reuse to Race Course 2,705

7,691 7,409 2813809 - CAPITAL - Lutheran School Reuse Connection 7,746

31,932 31,932 -3810 - CAPITAL - Ceduna WWTP Decant System

Reconfiguratio

31,932

2,579 2,500 793812 - CAPITAL - Supernatant Pit Upgrade 2,722

19,679 19,668 113813 - CAPITAL - Sludge Disposal System 18,290

8,242 8,229 133814 - CAPITAL - Smoky Bay Filtration System -

12,019 12,008 113815 - CAPITAL - FWASCI Reuse Connection 4,426

34,658 34,658 -3819 - CAPITAL - Reuse to Hambridge St 9,091

TOTAL: Sewerage/ STEDS 119,456 118,867 589 76,912


Expenses - Capital

48,781 48,762 193340 - CAPITAL - Water West Telecommunication

Upgrade

5,764

99,602 99,518 843438 - CAPITAL - Water West Replacements 29,711

9,903 14,054 -4,1513616 - CAPITAL - Eyre Hwy Standpipe 10,193

TOTAL: Water Supply - Domestic 158,285 162,334 -4,049 45,668


Revenues

-2,828,042-6,328,042 3,500,0005440 - Grant - Thevenard Slipway Unloading Facility -607,804

-2,828,042-6,328,042 3,500,000-607,804

Expenses - Capital

3,323,663 10,823,580 -7,499,9185459 - CAPITAL - Thevenard Unloading Facility 655,164

3,323,663 10,823,580 -7,499,918 655,164

TOTAL: Marine Offloading Facility 495,621 4,495,538 -3,999,918 47,360

TOTAL: BUSINESS UNDERTAKINGS -2,905,160 1,098,218 -4,003,378 169,941


2.3.29 - Children and Youth Services

Expenses - Capital

14,929 14,929 -2666 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Skateboard Park 24

TOTAL: Children and Youth Services 14,929 14,929 - 24


Expenses - Capital

7,753 7,703 513330 - CAPITAL - Cemeteries 7,959

29,586 29,524 613332 - CAPITAL- Ceduna Cemetery Landscaping 12,348

TOTAL: Cemeteries/Crematoria 37,339 37,227 112 20,308

1Estimated Net Capital Expenditure as at 30 March 2018

Annexure F133


As at 30 March 2018

Revised

Estimates ($)

Estimated

Revisions ($)

Current

Budget ($)

Actuals To

Date ($)



Expenses - Capital

140,000 140,000 -3361 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Foreshore Toilet Block 135,880

TOTAL: Public Conveniences 140,000 140,000 - 135,880

TOTAL: COMMUNITY SERVICES 192,268 192,156 112 156,212

3 - CULTURE


Expenses - Capital

8,000 8,000 -5481 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Hall - Plant & Furniture 1,675

TOTAL: Cultural Venues 8,000 8,000 - 1,675

TOTAL: CULTURE 8,000 8,000 - 1,675

5 - ENVIRONMENT

5.8.58 - Recycling

Revenues

-8,000-8,000 -3327 - Grant - Zero Waste SA -7,000

-8,000-8,000 --7,000

Expenses - Capital

42,207 42,203 43313 - CAPITAL - Recycling Skips 27,144

42,207 42,203 4 27,144

TOTAL: Recycling 34,207 34,203 4 20,144


Expenses - Capital

131,080 119,518 11,5623379 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Landfill Cells 5 & 6 132,470

TOTAL: Waste Disposal Facility 131,080 119,518 11,562 132,470


Revenues

--45,000 45,00014006 - Grant - Rec Fishing Fund -

--45,000 45,000 -

Expenses - Capital

- 55,100 -55,1004062 - CAPITAL - Oyster Artifical Reef -

123,247 123,222 254063 - CAPITAL - Smoky Bay Foreshore Revetment 152

231,713 231,666 474064 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Foreshore Revetment 2,447

354,960 409,988 -55,028 2,599

TOTAL: Coastal Protection 354,960 364,988 -10,028 2,599


Revenues

-14,130-14,130 -3344 - CAPITAL - Council Carpark Lights -14,360

Expenses - Capital

14,360 14,360 -3344 - CAPITAL - Council Carpark Lights -

14,360 14,360 - -

TOTAL: Street Lighting 230 230 --14,360


134


As at 30 March 2018

Revised

Estimates ($)

Estimated

Revisions ($)

Current

Budget ($)

Actuals To

Date ($)

TOTAL: ENVIRONMENT 520,478 518,939 1,539 140,853

6 - RECREATION

6.0.69 - Jetties

Revenues

-6,000-6,000 -5755 - Grant - Rec Fishing Fund -6,000

-6,000-6,000 --6,000

Expenses - Capital

20,519 20,508 115478 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Jetty Shelters 22,345

20,519 20,508 11 22,345

TOTAL: Jetties 14,519 14,508 11 16,345

6.0.71 - Parks and Gardens

Revenues

-139,950-139,950 -5351 - CAPITAL - Thevenard Masterplan Project -139,950

-139,950-139,950 --139,950

Expenses - Capital

46,993 46,976 175254 - CAPITAL - Ceduna Foreshore Tree Removal 42,717

15,000 15,000 -5276 - CAPITAL - Playground 7,710

269,395 269,395 -5351 - CAPITAL - Thevenard Masterplan Project -

25,391 25,326 665386 - CAPITAL - McKenzie Street Upgrade 24,035

9,356 9,325 315394 - CAPITAL - Frayne Tce Median 11

13,781 13,747 335398 - CAPITAL - Poynton St Grates 6,839

1,229 - 1,2295399 - CAPITAL - Ceduna CBD Flagpoles 1,236

381,145 379,769 1,376 82,548

TOTAL: Parks and Gardens 241,195 239,819 1,376-57,402


Revenues

-260,000-260,000 -5621 - Swimming Enclosure Funding -

-260,000-260,000 - -

Expenses - Capital

315,000 314,822 1785490 - CAPITAL - Swimming Pool Enclosure 88,162

TOTAL: Swimming Centres - Outdoor 55,000 54,822 178 88,162

TOTAL: RECREATION 310,713 309,149 1,564 47,105

8 - TRANSPORT

8.0.85 - Aerodrome

Expenses - Capital

34,800 34,800 -16062 - CAPITAL - Security 32,965

18,082 18,051 3116080 - CAPITAL - Airport Spetic Tank -

12,599 12,000 59916081 - CAPITAL - Terminal Painting 12,599

TOTAL: Aerodrome 65,481 64,851 630 45,564


135


As at 30 March 2018

Revised

Estimates ($)

Estimated

Revisions ($)

Current

Budget ($)

Actuals To

Date ($)

8 - TRANSPORT

8.0.88 - Footpaths and kerbing

Expenses - Capital

53,423 53,423 -15067 - CAPITAL - Kerbing - Decres Bay Rd 25,829

- 10,000 -10,00015070 - CAPITAL - Footpath - South Tce, Smoky Bay -

23,885 23,839 4616265 - CAPITAL - Denton St, Smoky Bay Footpath 6,421

TOTAL: Footpaths and kerbing 77,308 87,262 -9,954 32,249

8.0.89 - Roads - sealed

Revenues

-633,675-633,675 -19001 - R2R & Special R2R Program Funding -519,418

-633,675-633,675 --519,418

Expenses - Capital

494,542 494,498 4411000 - CAPITAL - Resealing - Ceduna/Thevenard Streets 505,123

494,542 494,498 44 505,123

TOTAL: Roads - sealed -139,133-139,177 44-14,295

8.0.90 - Roads - formed

Expenses - Capital

212,731 214,806 -2,07530003 - CAPITAL - Rd #3 - Ten Chain Rd 34,668

2,898 2,894 430005 - CAPITAL - Rd #5 - Watraba Rd -

27,797 27,770 2730017 - CAPITAL - Rd#17 - Trowbridge Rd -

12,926 12,902 2430019 - CAPITAL - Rd#19 - Browns Rd -

8,521 8,511 1030049 - CAPITAL - Rd#49 - Foggos Rd -

25,950 25,900 5030061 - CAPITAL - Rd#61 - Trewartha Rd -

16,757 16,725 3330099 - CAPITAL - Rd #99 - Goode Hall Rd -

156,336 154,854 1,48230107 - CAPITAL - Rd #107 (N)Marchant Rd, (S)Pt Brown

Rd

156,689

117,408 118,703 -1,29530135 - CAPITAL - Rd #135 - Decres Bay Rd 4,740

140,498 140,436 6230161 - CAPITAL - Rd #161 - Nunyah Rd 136,781

18,265 18,252 1330175 - CAPITAL - Rd #175 - Nunji Rd 18,320

116,384 114,524 1,86030179 - CAPITAL - Rd #179 - Miltaburra Rd 115,832

207,128 147,964 59,16439107 - CAPITAL - Rd#107 - Point Brown Rd (West) 207,806

TOTAL: Roads - formed 1,063,599 1,004,241 59,358 674,835


Expenses - Capital

39,839 32,152 7,68717000 - CAPITAL - Signs 35,622

15,000 15,000 -17001 - CAPITAL - Town Entrance Signs 14,075

10,655 10,655 -17004 - CAPITAL - Barrow Stop Light 10,655

TOTAL: Traffic Management 65,494 57,807 7,687 60,352


136


As at 30 March 2018

Revised

Estimates ($)

Estimated

Revisions ($)

Current

Budget ($)

Actuals To

Date ($)

8 - TRANSPORT


Revenues

-8,500-8,500 -5762 - ABNORMAL ITEMS - Boat Ramps -

-76,166-76,166 -5766 - Grant - Smoky Bay Boat Ramp Uprgade -

-84,666-84,666 - -

Expenses - Capital

157,462 157,354 1085465 - CAPITAL - Boat Ramp - Smoky Bay 1,150

17,000 17,000 -16152 - CAPITAL - Fosters Boat Ramp Upgrade -

174,462 174,354 108 1,150

TOTAL: Other Transport 89,796 89,688 108 1,150

TOTAL: TRANSPORT 1,222,545 1,164,672 57,873 799,855


9.0.96 - Plant hire & depot costs

Revenues

-44,913-44,913 -90060 - Proceeds on Sale of Plant & Equipment -44,913

-63,045-62,545 -50090063 - Proceeds on Sale of vehicles -56,682

-107,958-107,458 -500-101,595

Expenses - Capital

157,100 157,100 -89149 - CAPITAL - Purchase of Plant & Equipment 113,694

102,874 103,500 -62689150 - CAPITAL - Vehicle Purchases 102,874

33,671 33,659 1289440 - CAPITAL - Depot 30,485

293,645 294,259 -614 247,052

TOTAL: Plant hire & depot costs 185,687 186,801 -1,114 145,456

TOTAL: PLANT HIRE & DEPOT COSTS 185,687 186,801 -1,114 145,456



Expenses - Capital

28,000 28,000 -1186 - CAPITAL - Administration Building Improvements 27,149

TOTAL: Occupancy 28,000 28,000 - 27,149


Expenses - Capital

12,000 12,000 -1208 - CAPITAL - Records Storage Facility 6,359

TOTAL: Other Support Services 12,000 12,000 - 6,359

TOTAL: COUNCIL ADMINISTRATION 40,000 40,000 - 33,508

NET COUNCIL CAPITAL EXPENDITURE -425,469 3,517,934 -3,943,403 1,494,605


137

2016-17

Actual

2017-18

Original

Budget

2017-18

Current

Budget

2017-18

Revised

Budget

$'000 INCOME $'000 $'000 $'000

4,080 General Rates 4,150 4,168 4,168

1,250 Other Rates 1,278 1,265 1,265

54 Statutory Charges 43 53 57

1,332 User Charges 1,260 1,353 1,420

3,756 Grants & Contributions 1,287 1,455 1,440

28 Investment Income 10 35 35

56 Reimbursements 54 202 234

304 Other Income 233 203 206

10,860 TOTAL INCOME 8,315 8,734 8,825

EXPENSES

2,797 Employee Costs 2,979 2,876 2,885

3,755 Materials, Contracts & Other Expenses 3,922 4,130 4,123

182 Finance Costs 174 194 184

2,610 Depreciation 2,584 2,597 2,597

9,344 TOTAL EXPENSES 9,659 9,797 9,789

1,516 OPERATING SURPLUS / (DEFICIT) ( 1,344) ( 1,063) ( 964)

( 1) Net Gain on Disposal - ( 49) ( 49)

1,076 7,166 7,506 3,961

22 Physical Resources received free of charge - 3,679 3,679

2,613 NET SURPLUS / (DEFICIT) 5,822 10,073 6,627

OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

2,536 - ( 9,315) ( 9,315)

( 632) - - -

4,517 TOTAL COMPREHENSIVE INCOME 5,822 758 ( 2,688)

Statement of Comprehensive Income

District Council of Ceduna

Impairment (expense) / recoupments offset to asset revaluation

reserve

Amounts specifically for new or upgraded assets

Change in revaluation surplus

2017-18 Budget Review Financials (Mid Yr Review)

Annexure G138


2016-17

Actual

2017-18

Original

Budget

2017-18

Current

Budget

2017-18

Revised

Budget

$'000 ASSETS $'000 $'000 $'000

CURRENT ASSETS

3,391 Cash & Cash Equivalents 1,725 2,082 1,977

804 Receivables 942 700 700

729 Inventories 346 729 749

4,924 TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 3,013 3,511 3,426

NON-CURRENT ASSETS

- Financial Assets - - -

99,650 Infrastructure, Property, Plant & Equipment 107,835 106,221 95,536

257 Other Non-Current Assets - - 3,324

99,907 TOTAL NON-CURRENT ASSETS 107,835 106,221 98,860

104,831 TOTAL ASSETS 110,848 109,732 102,286

LIABILITIES

CURRENT LIABILITIES

1,091 Payables 664 720 720

297 Borrowings 352 352 352

598 Provisions 687 631 631

1,986 TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES 1,703 1,703 1,703

NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES

2,180 Borrowings 5,156 6,579 2,579

295 Provisions 88 322 322

2,475 TOTAL NON-CURRENT LIABILITIES 5,244 6,901 2,901

4,461 TOTAL LIABILITIES 6,947 8,604 4,604

100,370 NET ASSETS 103,901 101,128 97,682

EQUITY

23,775 Accumulated Surplus 29,900 33,720 30,274

76,595 Reserves 74,001 67,408 67,408

100,370 TOTAL EQUITY 103,901 101,128 97,682

Balance Sheet


139


2016-17

Actual

2017-18

Original

Budget

2017-18

Current

Budget

2017-18

Revised

Budget

$'000 ACCUMULATED SURPLUS $'000 $'000 $'000

21,202 Balance at beginning of period 23,887 23,775 23,775

2,613 Net Surplus for Year 5,822 10,073 6,627

( 40) Transfer to Reserves 191 ( 128) ( 128)

23,775 BALANCE AT END OF PERIOD 29,900 33,720 30,274

RESERVES

74,651 Balance at beginning of period 74,192 76,595 76,595

1,944 Movement in Reserve for Year ( 191) ( 9,187) ( 9,187)

76,595 BALANCE AT END OF PERIOD 74,001 67,408 67,408

100,370 TOTAL EQUITY AT END OF PERIOD 103,901 101,128 97,682

Statement in Changes of Equity


140


2016-17

Actual

2017-18

Original

Budget

2017-18

Current

Budget

2017-18

Revised

Budget

$'000 CASHFLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES $'000 $'000 $'000

RECEIPTS

5,334 Rates - general & other 5,428 5,537 5,537

56 Fees & other charges 43 53 57

1,540 User charges 1,260 1,353 1,420

27 Investment receipts 10 35 35

3,797 Grants utilised for operating purposes 1,287 1,455 1,440

62 Reimbursements 54 202 234

789 Other revenues 233 203 206

PAYMENTS

( 2,900) Employee costs ( 2,878) ( 2,816) ( 2,825)

( 4,353) Materials, contracts & other expenses ( 3,922) ( 4,521) ( 4,514)

( 168) Finance payments ( 174) ( 174) ( 184)

4,184 NET CASH PROVIDED BY (OR USED IN) OPERATING ACTVITIES 1,341 1,327 1,406

CASHFLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

RECEIPTS

1,076 Specifically for new or upgraded assets 7,166 7,506 3,961

43 Sale of Replaced Assets 46 46 46

- Sale of Surplus Assets - 61 56

PAYMENTS

( 1,977) Expenditure on renewal/replacement of assets ( 1,778) ( 2,800) ( 2,973)

( 1,028) Expenditure on new/upgraded assets ( 10,113) ( 11,903) ( 4,364)

( 1,886) NET CASH PROVIDED BY (OR USED IN) INVESTING ACTVITIES ( 4,679) ( 7,090) ( 3,274)

CASHFLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

RECEIPTS

- Proceeds from Borrowings 2,728 4,751 751

PAYMENTS

( 349) Repayment of Borrowings ( 297) ( 297) ( 297)

( 349) NET CASH PROVIDED BY (OR USED IN) FINANCING ACTVITIES 2,431 4,454 454

1,949 NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH HELD ( 907) ( 1,309) ( 1,414)

1,442 CASH AT BEGINNING OF YEAR 2,632 3,391 3,391

3,391 CASH AT END OF YEAR 1,725 2,082 1,977

Cash Flow Statement


141


2016-17

Actual

2017-18

Original

Budget

2017-18

Current

Budget

2017-18

Revised

Budget

1,516 Operating Surplus/(Deficit) ( 1,344) ( 1,063) ( 964)

279 Adjusted Operating Surplus/(Deficit) ( 107) 174 273

266 Nett Financial Liabilities 4,280 5,822 1,927

14.0% Operating Surplus Rato -16.2% -12.2% -10.9%

2.6% Adjusted Operating Surplus Rato -1.3% 2.0% 3.1%

2.4% Nett Financial Liabilities Ratio 51.5% 66.7% 21.8%

1.4% Interest Cover Ratio 2.0% 1.8% 1.7%

74.1% Asset Sustainability Ratio 67.0% 106.0% 112.7%

Being Nett Expenditure on Replacement/Renewal of Council's

Assets as a percentage of depreciation expense

Being the operating surplus (deficit) before capital amounts

Being the operating surplus as a percentage of Total Revenue

Net Financial Liabilities are defined as total liabilities less financial

assets (excluding equity accounted investments in Council

businesses.

Being the Nett Financial Liabilities as a percentage of total

operating revenue less NRM Levy

Being Council's Nett Interest Expense as a percentage of operating

revenue less NRM Levy

Being the operating surplus (deficit) before capital amounts after

accounting for Advanced payments of Finanical Assistances

Grants

Being the adjusted operating surplus as a percentage of total

income

Financial Indicators


142


2016-17

Actual

2017-18

Original

Budget

2017-18

Current

Budget

2017-18

Revised

Budget

$'000 $'000 $'000 $'000

10,860 Income 8,315 8,734 8,825

9,344 less Expenses 9,659 9,797 9,789

1,516 Operating Surplus / (Deficit) ( 1,344) ( 1,063) ( 964)

LESS NET OUTLAYS ON EXISTING ASSETS

1,977 1,778 2,800 2,973

( 2,610) Depreciation, Amortisation and Impairment ( 2,584) ( 2,597) ( 2,597)

( 86) Proceeds from Sale of Replaced Assets ( 46) ( 46) ( 46)

( 719) NET OUTLAYS ON EXISTING ASSETS ( 852) 157 330

LESS NET OUTLAYS ON NEW AND UPGRADED ASSETS

1,028 Capital Expenditure on New and Upgraded Assets 10,113 11,903 4,364

( 1,076) Amounts received Specifically for New and Upgraded Assets ( 7,166) ( 7,506) ( 3,961)

43 Proceeds from Sale of Surplus Assets - ( 61) ( 56)

( 5) NET OUTLAYS ON NEW AND UPGRADED ASSETS 2,947 4,336 347

2,240 NET LENDING/(BORROWING) FOR FINANCIAL YEAR ( 3,439) ( 5,556) ( 1,641)

Capital Expenditure on renewal and replacement of Existing

Assets

Uniform Presentation of Finances


143


REPORT TO: Mayor and Councillors FROM: Events & Tourism Officer DATE: 18 April 2018

1.0 CEDUNA OYSTERFEST – EVENT PLAN 2018 File Reference: 2.38.1.3 Budget 2018/2019: $76,000 Actual to Date: $0 Strategic Plan Reference: Goal: Sustainable economic opportunities

identified, vigorously pursued and promoted

Outcome: Existing events supported and new events developed

As part of the planning process for Oysterfest 2018, an Event Plan has been drafted. This plan is the starting point for grant applications, sponsorship, logistics and promotion and gives an overview of the event. Major elements of the 2018 Plan are;

Sponsorship program with an entry-level of $100, having more benefitsto sponsors at minimal expense to the event

Increased EP Produce and Seafood to build on 2017 West Coast Eatsconcept in consultation with existing suppliers

Marketing Plan that includes a professional event photographer andassistance from a digital marketing agency to produce a social mediaand online campaign for promotion as part of requested grant fromEvents South Australia Festivals & Events Marketing Fund

Alignment to Regional and State Tourism plans

A range of high-profile, quality entertainers, performers and arts projectsthat also includes local talent

Opportunities for local business, not-for-profit organisations and tourismoperators to benefit from providing services to or at the event

Planning that allows for flexibility with Council Works staff and a reducedreliance on their availability for construction and pull-down functions

At this stage most major quotes have been received and several supplier contracts have been confirmed. Sponsorship requests are being finalised with a view to being sent out before the middle of April and finalised by June 30. Quotes from Entertainers are being considered with final confirmations to be made by the end of April. Premium suppliers for the Food & Wine precinct are being contacted and details to be confirmed by the end of May.

144


A copy of the 2018 Event Plan is provided under separate cover.

Recommendation: that the report be received and noted.

Annette Plane TOURISM & EVENTS OFFICER

145

E:\EPLGA\EPLGA Minutes\2018\EPLGA Draft Minutes 27 Feb.docx 1

Minutes of the Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association Board Meeting held at Port Lincoln on

Tuesday 27 February 2018 commencing at 11.09am.

Delegates Present: Sam Telfer [Chair] President, EPLGA

Allan Suter Mayor, District Council of Ceduna

Bryan Trigg Deputy Mayor, District Council of Cleve [Proxy]

Kym Callaghan Chairperson, District Council of Elliston

Robert Starr Mayor, District Council of Franklin Harbour

Dean Johnson Mayor, District Council of Kimba

Julie Low Mayor, District Council of Lower Eyre Peninsula

Bruce Green Mayor, City of Port Lincoln

Travis Barber Mayor, District Council of Streaky Bay

Lyn Breuer Mayor, City of Whyalla

Eleanor Scholz Mayor, Wudinna District Council

Guests/Observers: Tony Irvine EO, EPLGA

Geoffrey Moffatt CEO, District Council of Ceduna

Peter Arnold CEO, District Council of Cleve

Phil Cameron CEO, District Council Elliston

Darren Zechner Works Manager, District Council of Franklin Harbour

Graeme Baldock Councillor, District Council of Kimba

Deb Larwood CEO, District Council of Kimba

Rod Pearson CEO, District Council of Lower Eyre Peninsula

Neville Starke Deputy Mayor, City of Port Lincoln

Stephen Rufus CEO, City of Port Lincoln

Faye Davis Councillor, City of Port Lincoln

Joy Hentschke CEO, District Council of Streaky Bay

Damian Windsor Works Manager, District Council of Tumby Bay

Clare McLaughlin Councillor, City of Whyalla

Chris Cowley CEO, City of Whyalla

Ned Luscombe Deputy Mayor, Wudinna District Council

Alan McGuire CEO, Wudinna District Council

Aina Danis Executive Assistant, RDAWEP/EPLGA

Dion Dorward CEO/Director of Regional Development, RDAWEP

Brad Riddle Tourism and Economic Development Manager, RDAWEP

Jade Ballantine Special Projects Officer, RDAWEP

Diana Laube Presiding Member, EPNRM Board

Jonathan Clark Regional Director, EPNRM Board

Karen Hollamby Regional Coordinator, PIRSA, Regions SA

Leith Blacker Manager Development and Environmental Services,

District Council of Lower Eyre Peninsula

Stephen Smith Director Policy, LGA of SA

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Welcome/Apologies

Welcome by President Mayor Telfer. CONGRATS to Port Lincoln on EPLGA conference.

Apologies received from:

Chris Smith CEO, District Council of Franklin Harbour

Dave Allchurch Deputy Chair, District Council of Elliston

Roger Nield Mayor, District Council of Cleve

Trevor Smith CEO, District Council of Tumby Bay

1.2 Minutes of Previous Meeting

Confirmation of Minutes

Amendment to the resolution on page 6 to include the word retention, ie “That the EPLGA Board form a

working party to develop strategies for recruitment and retention, etc”.

“Proxy” to be deleted alongside Mayor Scholz’s name.

146


001/18: Confirmation of Minutes

Moved: Mayor Johnson Seconded: Mayor Low

That the amended minutes of the Board meeting of the Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association

held on Friday 1 December 2017, be adopted as a true and correct record of proceedings.

CARRIED

2. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES

Nil.

3. GENERAL REPORTS

3.1 President’s Report – Mayor Telfer

002/18: President’s Report

Moved: Mayor Suter Seconded: Mayor Breuer

That the EPLGA Board accepts the President’s Report.

CARRIED

As presented.

3.2 Individual Council Activity Reports [2 minute summary]

As presented.

3.3 Executive Officer’s Reports

3.3.1 Report No 1-0218: General Report

003/18: Executive Officer’s Report No. 01-0218

Moved: Mayor Scholz Seconded: Mayor Low

That the EPLGA Board accepts General Report No. 01-0218 from the Executive Officer.

CARRIED

Stephen Rufus’ background in the area of health can be beneficial as a member of the Health Working Party.

Written notification to the Executive Officer is required from Stephen.

Health Working Party TOR page 20 – delete bracketed words “Elected Members”.

004/18: Health Working Party Terms of Reference

Moved: Mayor Suter Seconded: Mayor Barber

That the EPLGA Health Working Party Terms of Reference are adopted by the EPLGA Board.

CARRIED

005/18: Regional Review of Decisions Panel - Appointments

Moved: Mayor Green Seconded: Mayor Scholz

That the EPLGA Board appoints the following to the Regional Review of Decisions Panel as per the

conditions set out in the Panel’s Terms of Reference:-

Peter Arnold, CEO, DC Cleve; and

Chris Tarran, Councillor, DC Cleve.

CARRIED

3.3.2 Report No. 02-0218: Charter Review

006/18: Report # 02-0218/Charter Review

Moved: Mayor Johnson Seconded: Mayor Barber

1. That the EPLGA Board accepts Report # 02-0218 from the Executive Officer.

2. That the EPLGA Board adopts the amendments to its Charter and takes the following legislative

action pursuant to Schedule 2 of the Local Government Act 1999 after adoption:-

1) Furnish a copy of the Charter, as amended, to the Minister.

2) Ensure that a copy of the Charter, as amended, is published on a website (or websites)

determined by the Chief Executive Officers of the Constituent Councils (suggest the EPLGA

website is suffice).

3) Ensure that a notice of the fact of the amendment and a website address at which the Charter

is available for inspection is published in the Gazette.

CARRIED

147


3.3.3 Report No. 03-0218: Meeting Actions Report

007/18: General Report # 03-0218

Moved: Mayor Low Seconded: Mayor Suter

1. That the EPLGA Board accepts General Report # 03-0218 from the Executive Officer.

2. That the EPLGA Board notes the Meeting Actions Report.

CARRIED

3.3.4 Report No 04-0218: Joint Planning Board (JPB) Pilot

008/18: General Report # 04-0218/Amend JPB TOR

Moved: Mayor Scholz Seconded: Deputy Mayor Trigg

1. That the EPLGA Board accepts report # 04-0218 from the Executive Officer.

2. That the EPLGA Board amends the JPB Pilot Steering Committee Terms of Reference in reference to

discussion at the workshop held at Wudinna on 12 February 2018.

CARRIED

009/18: DPTI Joint Planning Board Pilot – Addendum

Moved: Mayor Low Seconded: Mayor Johnson

That the EPLGA Board nominates the following persons to the JPB Staff Group:

Chief Executive Officers (1 to Chair):

1. Geoffrey Moffatt

2. Deb Larwood (Chair)

3. Trevor Smith

Plus current participating Council planning staff and or local contractors working with them in this

function (subject to their approval to participate):

1. Jen Brewis

2. Laurie Collins

3. Leith Blacker

CARRIED

3.3.5 Zone Emergency Management Committee (ZEMC)

010/18: General Report # 05-0218

Moved: Mayor Johnson Seconded: Mayor Green

That the EPLGA Board accepts report # 05-0218 from the Executive Officer.

011/18: Zone Emergency Management Committee – Presiding Member and Proxy

Moved: Mayor Green Seconded: Mayor Low

That the EPLGA Board nominates a Presiding Member and proxy for the Zone Emergency Management

Committee, being Deputy Mayor Trigg with the position of proxy to remain open in the immediate

future.

CARRIED

012/18: Zone Emergency Management Committee – Members and Proxies

Moved: Mayor Low Seconded: Mayor Scholz

That the EPLGA Board seeks nominations for members and proxies for the Zone Emergency

Management Committee from the following member Councils:

District Council of Elliston

City of Port Lincoln

City of Whyalla

Wudinna District Council

CARRIED

013/18: Zone Emergency Management Committee – Tenure for Members

Moved: Mayor Low Seconded: Mayor Suter

That the EPLGA Board determines the tenure for its members on the Zone Emergency Management

Committee, which will be four (4) years.

CARRIED

014/18: Emrap Software and Status of Councils’ Emergency Management Plan

Moved: Mayor Scholz Seconded: Mayor Low

That the EPLGA Board instructs the Executive Officer to seek from member Councils which ones are

using the Emrap software and if not, why not.

CARRIED

148


3.4 Local Government Association of SA (Stephen Smith, LGASA)

As presented.

Meeting adjourned for lunch at 12.34pm and reconvened at 1.01pm.

Neville Starke and Damian Windsor did not return to the meeting.

Phil Cameron and Chairperson Kym Callaghan left the meeting at 1.27pm.

3.5 Regional Development Australia Whyalla & Eyre Peninsula (Dion Dorward/Jade Ballantine)

As presented.

3.7 Eyre Peninsula Natural Resources Management Board (Jonathan Clark)

As presented.

3.8 Other Reports/Minutes

3.8.1 South Australian Regional Organisation of Councils

Minutes of the January meeting to be circulated.

4 COMMITTEES

4.1 CEO’s Committee

015/18: CEOs’ Committee – Actions/Notes

Moved: Mayor Suter Seconded: Mayor Green

That the Actions/Notes from the Chief Executive Officers’ Committee meeting dated 30 November 2017

be noted.

CARRIED

Update on today’s meeting from Deb Larwood.

4.2 Engineering & Works Committee

016/18: Engineering & Works Committee – Actions/Notes

Moved: Mayor Johnson Seconded: Mayor Low

That the Actions/Notes from the Engineering & Works Committee dated 30 November 2017 be noted.

CARRIED

4.3 Eyre Peninsula Mineral and Energy Resources Community Development Taskforce

No report tabled.

Update from EO Tony Irvine – the next meeting of the taskforce is scheduled for Tuesday 27 March 2018 at

Port Lincoln.

4.4 Executive Committee

017/18: Executive Committee Minutes

Moved: Mayor Scholz Seconded: Deputy Mayor Trigg

That the minutes of the Executive Committee dated 19 January 2018 be noted.

CARRIED

5. FINANCE REPORTS

5.1 Balance Sheet as at 11 February 2018

5.2 Budget Comparison Report as at 11 February 2018

5.3 Budget Comparison Summary Report 2017-2018

Receipt of Finance Reports

149


018/18: EPLGA Balance Sheet/Budget Comparison Report/Budget Comparison Summary Report

Moved: Mayor Suter Seconded: Mayor Green

That the EPLGA Board receives the Balance Sheet as at 11 February 2018, Budget Comparison Report

as at 11 February 2018 and the Budget Comparison Summary Report 2017-2018.

CARRIED

6. DEPUTATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

6.1 Deputations/Presentations

Nil.

6.2 Petitions

Nil.

7. GENERAL BUSINESS – Motions on Notice & Without and Questions

7.1 From the floor – Motions on Notice and Without and Questions

019/18: Establishment of a Deep Sea Port at Cape Hardy

Moved: Mayor Johnson Seconded: Mayor Barber

That the EPLGA strongly supports the establishment a deep sea port at Cape Hardy.

CARRIED

Mayor Breuer called for a division.

President Mayor Telfer declared the vote put aside.

Board Members voting in the affirmative:

Mayor Suter

Mayor Johnson

Mayor Green

Deputy Mayor Trigg

Mayor Starr

Mayor Scholz

Mayor Barber

Mayor Telfer

DC Elliston absent from the meeting.

Board Member voting in the negative:

Mayor Breuer

Mayor Low

020/18: Removal of Native Vegetation Regulations – Township Areas

Moved: Mayor Telfer Seconded: Mayor Suter

That the EPLGA lobbies to remove Native Vegetation regulations in designated township areas.

CARRIED

EP Cooperative Bulk Handling representative to present at the June meeting of the EPLGA Board at Wudinna.

8. CORRESPONDENCE

8.1 Correspondence for Decision

None tabled.

8.2 Correspondence for Noting

1-0218: Anna Gordon, Campaign Officer, SA-BEST: Response via email from the office of Nick

Xenophon, to the EPLGA’s letter of concern regarding the need to address the issue of

recruitment and retention of medical professionals in our regional communities.

150


2-0218: Anita Allen, Manager, Planning Reform, Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure:

Information regarding the next steps for groups who decide to continue into the business

case development phase of the Joint Planning Arrangements Pilot project along with details

pertaining to funding for the initiative. A request was made for receipt of advice on EPLGA’s

decision regarding continuation.

8.3 Incoming & Outgoing Correspondence

As listed within the agenda.

021/18: Incoming/Outgoing Correspondence

Moved: Mayor Green Seconded: Mayor Breuer

That all incoming and outgoing correspondence listed in the agenda be noted.

CARRIED

9 FUTURE MEETINGS

022/18: Next Meeting

Moved: Deputy Mayor Trigg Seconded: Mayor Barber

That the next meeting of the Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association Board will be held on Friday

29 June 2018 at Wudinna, commencing at 10.00am.

CARRIED

Conference Location Rotation

2019 Kimba 2020 Wudinna 2021 Cowell

2022 Cleve 2023 Streaky Bay 2024 Elliston

Meeting closed at 2.15pm.

__________________________________ ___________________

Vice President Date

151

11.3.2.1

13/03/2018

A57686CEO

154

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

1

In reply please quote A3482082 Enquiries to Ms Alex Hart Telephone 7109 7145

Dear Lord Mayor / Mayor / Chair

On 22 August 2017, the Local Government (Boundary Adjustment) Amendment Act 2017 (the Amendment Act) was assented to by the Governor.

The Amendment Act will commence on 1 January 2019, and will significantly reform the processes within the Local Government Act 1999 that govern changes to council boundaries. The reformed process will centre on an independent statutory body that will receive and consider all proposals for boundary changes, prior to making recommendations to the Minister for Local Government through published reports.

You may also be aware that the Amendment Act appointed the South Australian Local Government Grants Commission (LGGC) as the statutory body responsible for this work. Additionally, the Minister for Local Government has requested the LGGC to undertake the preparatory work that will be necessary to ensure the smooth operation of the new system for council boundary changes that will be operating on 1 January 2019.

The chief work that the LGGC will be undertaking during this period is the development of guidelines that will detail the processes by which proposals for boundary change will be received, assessed and progressed.

As these guidelines will be critical to a robust and effective boundary change system, the LGGC intends to work closely with the local government sector on their development. Accordingly, the LGA will assist the LGGC as the guidelines are drafted, and all councils will be provided with an opportunity to consider them before they are finalised.

It is expected that draft guidelines will be released for public consultation by May 2018. In the meantime, information on the Amendment Act is available on the Office of Local Government website; https://dpti.sa.gov.au/local_govt

9.3.2.1

13/03/2018

A57705CEO

158

https://dpti.sa.gov.au/local_govt

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

2

The LGGC looks forward to working constructively with the local government sector as we prepare for and implement a more flexible, independent and effective council boundary change system in South Australia. If you or your council have any further questions, I encourage you to contact the Manager, Office of Local Government, Ms Alex Hart, [email protected], telephone 7109 7145. Yours sincerely

Mary Patetsos Chair Local Government Grants Commission 13 March 2018

159


1

Katrina Blums

From: Peter Scott <[email protected]>

Sent: Wednesday, 14 March 2018 1:50 PM

To: Steve Sawyer; Kimba IGA; 'Geoff Dodd'; Tony Irvine; Sue Henriksen;

[email protected]; 'Chris Smith'; Sam Telfer; Trevor Smith;

Rodney Pearson; [email protected]; Geoffrey Moffatt; [email protected];

[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];

[email protected]; [email protected]; brooksea32

@gmail.com; [email protected]; [email protected];

[email protected]; [email protected]; Brian Foster EPICA; Andrea

Broadfoot; Jack Ritchie; [email protected]

Cc: Dion Dorward

Subject: Voltage testing across Eyre Peninsula

Attachments: Test Results Summary Eyre Peninsula December 2017.docx; Test Results Summary

Eyre Peninsula January 2018.docx; Test Results Summary Eyre Peninsula November

2017.docx

Hello all,

please find attached the test results from the voltage testing that SAPN have been conducting across Eyre Peninsula

as part of ESCOSA's review into the Reliability and Quality of Electricity Supply across Eyre Peninsula.

Regards

Peter Scott, BE Civil

Economic Development Manager

89 Liverpool Street PORT LINCOLN SA 5606 (08) 8623 0508 0455 026 000 [email protected] www.rdawep.org.au

From: Grant Cox [[email protected]]

Subject: Voltage testing

Please find attached Nov, Dec and Jan18 monthly reports on the QoS monitoring. A summary and actions to be

taken are detailed below.

After five months (August-December 2017) of continuous QS monitoring at these six sites on the Eyre Peninsula

we’ve found moderate issues at the Kimba site and minor issues at Ceduna, Wudinna and Streaky Bay sites. We’ll

update the progress of remediation actions in the January report next week, but in brief;

Kimba: Moderate issues, partly caused by the customer (IGA). New infill transformer planned; scope underway.

Expect completion by December 2018.

Streaky Bay: Minor issues. Load balance issued in November 2017. Should be completed by now. Will update in

January report.

Ceduna: Minor issues. Load balance issued in November 2017. Should be completed by now. Will update in January

report.

Wudinna: Minor issues. Voltage at the 11kV bus is being monitored.

14.85.1.8

14/03/2018

A57726CEO

160

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

2

Any queries please contact me

Kind regards,

Grant Cox

Manager Regulatory Affairs

-----------------------------------------------------

Mobile: 0403 582 024

[email protected]

-----------------------------------------------------

1 Anzac Hwy, Keswick SA 5035

www.sapowernetworks.com.au

-----------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------

***********************************************************

This email and any file attachments are highly confidential. If you have received this email in error please

notify the sender and delete the email. You should note the contents of the email do not necessarily

represent the views of SA Power Networks, nor can we guarantee that the email is free of any malicious

code. If you have any doubts about the source or authenticity of the email, please contact us on 13 12 61.

***********************************************************

______________________________________________________________________



______________________________________________________________________

161

Test Results Summary Eyre Peninsula November 2017

Summary

Test results from November 2017 indicate Voltage was within standard at all sites except Wudinna. Subsload data indicates Wudinna 11kV volts has been sitting lower than the March to August period (previously maximum 11.4kV) with the voltage now reaching maximum 11.2kV. Wudinna TF, W01 TF3 voltage is now generally below 253V with occasional excursions to 256V. Voltage rise does not correspond with PV load. TF is not fitted with a tap changer.

Since high voltage issue fixed at Kimba, IGA voltage is now borderline within standard. IGA internal load balance poor.

Kimba and Elliston are suffering excessive flicker. Flicker at Kimba is suspected to be localised to this transformer and may be caused by the customer’s own load. Flicker at Elliston mainly caused by customer loads at the service point with most transformer flicker caused by storm activity.

In all cases, Total Harmonic Distortion is within acceptable limits and the transformers are loaded within capacity.

Town Location Device ID Feeder TF Voltage

max/min THDV% Flicker (pst)

Peak load

TF capacity

Wudinna TF test EUPM0034 W01 3 256V/242V 2.0 1.1 23kVA 200kVA Elliston TF test EUPM0022 W04 51 250V/237V 1.8 1.0 78kVA 200kVA

Elliston IGA

Service EUPM0008 250V/235V 1.8 1.1 74A Kimba TF test EUPM0007 CV08 38 252V/230V 2.3 1.0 207kVA 315kVA

Kimba IGA

meter EUPM0025 251V/217V 3 1.5 80A Ceduna TF test EUPM0027 CD02 TC39695 251V/230V 1.9 1.0 97kVA 300kVA

Cummins TF test EUPM0014 CM02 51 250V/238V 1.6 0.8 66kVA 200kVA Streaky

Bay TF test EUPM0035 SB01 TC54726 248V/236V 2.5 1.0 170kVA 300kVA

Follow-up Actions (in progress)

Wudinna

162

• Further investigation underway. Possible 66kV issue and the 11kV is running out of taps.

Ceduna

• Transformer Load out of balance on the Red phase only during the weekdays. Transformer will be load balanced. Balance issued to FS.

Streaky Bay

• Transformer Load out of balance on the Red phase all the time. Transformer will be load balanced. Balance issued to FS.

Kimba

• IGA supermarket balance poor. White phase load consistently 25 amps lower than red and blue phases. As load has increased during warmer weather it is becoming apparent the transformer balance is also poor. Recommend advising Kimba IGA to balance their internal loads. This will assist the overall transformer balance. Although TF38 is not overloaded, the customer service point is 200 metres 7/3.75AAC conductor from the transformer and the customer would benefit from an infill transformer to improve overall voltage levels and reduce flicker.

163

Test Results Summary Eyre Peninsula December 2017

Summary

Test results from December 2017 indicate Voltage was within standard at all sites except Kimba. As connectivity is unavailable to the remote logger in Wudinna, we were unable to determine if there were any QS issues for December 2017. However, substation data indicates Wudinna 11kV Voltage has been sitting lower than the March to August period (previous maximum of 11.4kV) with the voltage now reaching a maximum of 11.2kV.

The Kimba distribution transformer is approaching overload and is also out of balance. Furthermore, the Kimba IGA suffers excessive Flicker and low Voltage. To address these issues, an infill transformer is planned to be installed closer to the Kimba IGA. Note that the Kimba IGA also has unbalanced loads internally and creates significant internal flicker.




Peak load

TF capacity

Wudinna TF test EUPM0034 W01 3 256V/242V# 2.0 1.1 23kVA 200kVA Elliston TF test EUPM0022 W04 51 251V/237V 1.8 1.0 107kVA 200kVA

Elliston IGA


Kimba IGA

meter EUPM0025 251V/215V* 3 1.5 78A Ceduna TF test EUPM0027 CD02 TC39695 250V/231V 1.9 1.0 150kVA 300kVA



# Connectivity to the Remote Logger located in Wudinna has been lost. The results above are from November 2017.

*Kimba IGA suffers from Low Volts and we noticed a large voltage difference between the highest and lowest voltage.

164


Wudinna

• Further investigation is underway with December results unavailable.

Ceduna

• Transformer Load out of balance on the Red phase only during the weekdays. Transformer will be load balanced. Balance issued in November 2017.

Streaky Bay

• Transformer Load out of balance on the Red phase all the time. Transformer will be load balanced. Balance issued in November 2017.

Kimba

• IGA supermarket balance is poor. White phase load is consistently 25 amps lower than red and blue phases. Recommend advising Kimba IGA to balance their internal loads. Kimba distribution transformer’s (TF38) load is out of balance on different days between the hours of 6am - 8pm. The Red Phase can be as high as 150A; higher than the Blue and White phases. The transformer is close to being overloaded, the IGA is experiencing flicker above the standard limit and at times suffers from low voltage. This customer’s service point is 200 metres away from their distribution transformer. By installing an infill transformer closer to the IGA, overall quality of supply can be improved to the area. Balancing will then be rechecked. This work is planned for completion by December 2018.

165

Test Results Summary Eyre Peninsula January 2018

Summary

Test results from January 2018 indicate power quality levels similar to December 2017 results. Voltage levels were generally slightly lower, although still within standard, except at the Kimba IGA meter position. Transformer loading at most sites is slightly lower than December 2017. Connectivity is still unavailable to the remote logger in Wudinna (under investigation). Wudinna 11kV substation data indicates voltage generally within the 10.8kV to 11.2kV range with occasional excursions outside of this range.

The Kimba distribution transformer is approaching overload and is also out of balance. Furthermore, the Kimba IGA suffers excessive Flicker and low Voltage. A design specification has issued for an infill transformer one pole north of the Kimba IGA service point. Note that the Kimba IGA also has unbalanced loads internally and creates significant internal flicker.




Peak load

TF capacity

Wudinna TF test EUPM0034 W01 3 256V/242V# 2.0 1.1 23kVA 200kVA Elliston TF test EUPM0022 W04 51 251V/236V 1.6 1.0 78kVA 200kVA

Elliston IGA


Kimba IGA

meter EUPM0025 250V/214V 3.3 2.0 84A Ceduna TF test EUPM0027 CD02 TC39695 251V/232V 1.2 0.8 110kVA 300kVA



# Connectivity to the Remote Logger located in Wudinna has been lost. The results above are from November 2017.

.

166


Wudinna

• Investigation underway with the malfunctioning logger.

Ceduna

• A load balance was attempted however it was found the primary cause is due to 3 phase commercial customer load having poor balance. As this is beyond the meter, no further action is recommended. The transformer is well within capacity.

Streaky Bay

• Load balance was issued in November 2017.

Kimba

• A design specification has been issued for an infill transformer to improve poor voltage levels at Kimba IGA. Recommend rechecking the load balance at Kimba IGA after the infill transformer has been completed and possibly recommending an internal load balance to the customer if necessary.

167

1

Katrina Blums

From: Harrex, Rodney (SATC) <[email protected]>

Sent: Wednesday, 14 March 2018 4:09 PM

Subject: International Visitors continue to flock to South Australia

Hi all,

International visitation to South Australia has reached an all-time high as visitors spend a huge $1.15 billion in our

state – up 18 per cent, compared to the national average of 8 per cent.

The latest International Visitor Survey (IVS) results show that the Chinese market has once again led the way in

growth with expenditure up 55 per cent to a record high of $389 million. China has maintained its spot as our

second largest international visitor market behind the United Kingdom and ahead of the United States of America.

During this period, we had amazing events like the Ashes and Pacific School Games that provided a significant boost

to the State’s economy.

Comparing December 2017 to December 2016, other IVS results show:

• Visits to South Australia have grown to a record 462,000, up 7 per cent.

• Nights in South Australia have reached 10.8 million, up 9 per cent for the year and above the national

growth rate of 5 per cent.

• Adelaide recorded 391,000 visits from the international market, followed by the Limestone Coast with

45,000 visits, then Kangaroo Island (43,000 visits).

For further information, check out our latest infographic or download the summary report.

Thank you for your efforts and commitment to growing the visitor economy and please feel free to share this

information with your networks.

Regards

Rod

Rodney Harrex

Chief Executive

South Australian Tourism Commission

Level 3 121-125 King William Street

Adelaide South Australia 5000

GPO Box 1972 Adelaide SA 5001

T 08 8463 4501 M 0427 518 373

E [email protected]

W southaustralia.com

W tourism.sa.gov.au

4.85.1.3

14/03/2018

A57746CEO

168

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

1

Katrina Blums


Sent: Thursday, 15 March 2018 10:36 AM

To: Alan McGuire; Chris Cowley ([email protected]); Chris Smith

([email protected]); 'Deb Larwood' ([email protected]); Geoffrey

Moffatt; Joy Hentschke; Peter Arnold; Phil Cameron; Rodney Pearson; Stephen Rufus

([email protected]); Trevor Smith; '[email protected]'; Bryan Trigg;

Dean Johnson; Eleanor Scholz; Julie Low ([email protected]); Kym Callaghan

([email protected]); Lyn Breuer ([email protected]); mayor; R.

E. & M. G. Nield; Robert Starr; Sam Telfer; Travis Barber

Subject: FW: Coastal Report

Attachments: ECM_659784_v5_Coastal Management report to SAROC March 2018 docx.pdf;

ECM_659785_v2_Attachment to ECM 659784 EOI Coastal Management Pl.pdf

Hi,

This report or very similar will be going to the SAROC meeting on 21 March 2018. Mayor Telfer and myself

will be present at the SAROC meeting. I am keen to get feedback on the 2 recommendations. My “gut feeling” from

the last EPLGA Board meeting is that we would have a majority leaning towards the alternative motion which is as

such:

Alternative Recommendation That the SAROC Committee recommends to the Board that a forum of coastal councils (Mayors and CEOs) be held with the purpose being: 1. identify whether there is interest from councils in establishing a state based coastal alliance, or othergovernment mechanism to enable coastal councils to collaborate and advocate on coastal issues; and 2. develop a common understanding of issues impacting on coastal councils and identify areas of interest wherecouncils may seek to work together.

The other recommendation in the report is as such:

That the SAROC Committee: 1. notes progress towards establishing an SA Coastal Councils Alliance; and2. endorses submitting an EOI to the LGA for reallocation of $30,000 supporting development of a state-widecoastal management and protection strategy, in collaboration with the Metropolitan Seaside Councils

I believe a forum, inviting all coastal councils needs to be held to actually establish :

1. Do the Councils want to form an alliance to tackle the coastal issues

2. If an Alliance is established then establish a governance model for it.

3. After this determine what all the issues are; including the prioritization of the issues

4. These all then form an action plan that is costed for implementation – obviously there will need to be other

funding gained through advocacy etc.

It is a big task ahead with the determination of all the prioritized issues if the Alliance is formed.

Can I have feedback on whether my ”gut feeling” is right or not?

Cheers

TonyTonyTonyTony

Tony Irvine

10.85.1.3

15/03/2018

A57751CEO

169

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

2



Ph 8682 6588 Fax 8682 5081

Mob 0428 826 587



From: Lea Bacon [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, 15 March 2018 9:32 AM To: Graeme Martin; Anita Crisp

Cc: Dominic Testoni ([email protected]); Graeme Martin ([email protected]); Peter Bond ([email protected]); Simon Millcock; Tony Irvine; Stephen Smith

Subject: RE: Coastal Report

Hi all

Please find attached a copy of the report that will be included in the agenda papers for next week’s SAROC meeting.

You’ll note that we’d already suggested an alternative recommendation that a forum be held as per earlier

discussions – this picks up Graeme’s points below. However, it will be difficult to have a forum at the same time as

the OGM given the full agenda, and also the Lord Mayor is inviting Mayors to a smart cities forum on the

Wednesday afternoon.

The LGA comments in the report note our concerns with the proposal to reallocate the $30,000 from an existing

R&D project.

See you all next week.

Kind regards

Lea

Lea Bacon • Director Policy • Local Government Association

[email protected] • www.lga.sa.gov.au • @LGAofSA

T: 08 8224 2025 M:0487302299 • 148 Frome St Adelaide • GPO Box 2693 Adelaide SA 5001

170

3

From: Graeme Martin [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 8:01 AM

To: Anita Crisp; Lea Bacon Cc: Dominic Testoni ([email protected]); Graeme Martin ([email protected]); Peter Bond

([email protected]); Simon Millcock; Tony Irvine ([email protected]); Stephen Smith Subject: RE: Coastal Report

Hi Anita and others

A very comprehensive report on the proposed coastal alliance, apologies as I will not be able to attend the next

SAROC meeting and I believe we have indicated to workshop this a bit just prior to the meeting.

My suggestions:

1. Add the proposed Governance structure to the report

2. Amend the recommendation to “propose as a start point the matters raised in the report be subject to a

preliminary workshop discussion with identified stakeholders at the next LGA OGM April 12&13”

Kind regards

Graeme Martin Executive Officer

13 Ringmer Dr

Burnside SA 5066

M +61 418 502 311

E [email protected]

www.shlga.sa.gov.au

**** CONFIDENTIAL **** The information in this message and in any attachments may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must not read, forward, print, copy, disclose or use the information or any attachments in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message and any attachments. S&HLGA does not warrant this email or attachment is free from computer viruses or defects. Any person or entity who makes use of this email or attachment accepts all responsibility for any loss,damage or consequence from such use.

From: Anita Crisp [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Saturday, 10 March 2018 4:29 PM

To: Lea Bacon <[email protected]>

Cc: Dominic Testoni ([email protected]) <[email protected]>; Graeme Martin ([email protected])

<[email protected]>; Peter Bond ([email protected]) <[email protected]>; Simon Millcock

<[email protected]>; Tony Irvine ([email protected]) <[email protected]>

Subject: Coastal Report

Hi Lea and co,

Coastal management report for SAROC attached.

Regards

Anita

171

4

Anita Crisp

Executive Officer

Upper Spencer Gulf Common Purpose Group Inc.

(T/A Spencer Gulf Cities)

PO Box 677, Port Pirie SA 5540

Mob: 0427609404

Em: [email protected]

______________________________________________________________________



______________________________________________________________________

172

Local Government Association of South Australia

6.X Coastal Management

Reports for DiscussionFrom: Anita Crisp, Executive Officer, Spencer Gulf Cities

Key Initiative: K.I 1 Leadership and advocacy

Strategy: 1B Contribute to state-wide and local policy

Meeting SAROC Committee 21 March 2018

ECM: 659784 Attachment/s: #659785

RecommendationThat the SAROC Committee:

1. notes progress towards establishing an SA Coastal Councils Alliance; and

2. endorses submitting an EOI to the LGA for reallocation of $30,000 supporting development of a state-wide coastal management and protection strategy, in collaboration with the Metropolitan Seaside Councils

Alternative RecommendationThat the SAROC Committee recommends to the Board that a forum of coastal councils (Mayors and CEOs) be held with the purpose being:

1. identify whether there is interest from councils in establishing a state based coastal alliance, or other government mechanism to enable coastal councils to collaborate and advocate on coastal issues; and

2. develop a common understanding of issues impacting on coastal councils and identify areas of interest where councils may seek to work together.

BackgroundThe January 2018 SAROC meeting resolved to support the SAROC Executive Officers working with the Coastal Protection Board to form a SA Coastal Councils Alliance.

The initial impetus for the Alliance came from a workshop session with local Councils at the recent SA Coastal Conference, which confirmed a strong level of interest in forming a state-wide ‘Coastal Councils Alliance’.

DiscussionProgress – Coastal Councils Alliance

Following the January SAROC meeting, the regional executive officers met with representatives of DEWNR’s Coastal Management Branch and the Metropolitan Seaside Councils to give some initial thought as to how a state-wide alliance may work.

Version: 5, Version Date: 14/03/2018

Document Set ID: 659784

173


This initial discussion was then further considered at the most recent meeting of the Metropolitan Seaside Councils, which was attended by a representative from the SAROC Executive Officers, DEWNR’s Coast Management Branch and the LG Mutual Liability Scheme.

The Metropolitan Seaside Councils meeting fully supported the proposal for a state-wide alliance and endorsed a working group of metropolitan Council officers to support the SAROC executive officers and Coastal Management Branch to develop the governance and operational model further.

Broadly, the objectives of the SA Coastal Councils Alliance would be to provide an informed, coordinated advocacy voice for SA coastal issues, with a focus on:

1. Information sharing and networking on coastal management issues.2. Collaboration and efficiency gains through shared resources and initiatives3. Coordinating a list of current and emerging coast protection works and costings.4. Preparing SA Coast Protection Strategy and prioritised, risk-based actions.5. Developing options for new, sustainable funding model and cost-sharing

arrangements.

Membership of the Alliance would comprise one elected member (and proxy) nominated from each Coastal Council in SA. It is envisaged the Alliance would meet formally twice per year and incorporate workshops, guest speakers, strategic planning, showcasing best practice and Council updates as appropriate. To avoid extra travel and cost for regional members, this would ideally be held as a standing concurrent session as part of the LGA ordinary/annual general meetings.

Supporting the political advocacy of the Coastal Alliance would be a ‘Technical Working Group comprising:

Coastal Council officer with relevant expertise/involvement in coastal management. DEWNR Coast Protection Branch staff. LG Mutual Liability Scheme. LGA staff officer with relevant expertise/involvement in coastal management. Regional Executive Officers (metro, regional), as relevant.

The Technical Working Group would be responsible for bringing together the relevant agencies and technical expertise to bring together a costed list of current and emerging coast protection works and preparing these into a state-wide strategy with prioritised, risk-based actions; along with developing options for new, sustainable funding model and cost-sharing arrangements.

It is envisaged that, in the first instance, executive support to the Alliance will be provided by Councils/regions in-kind on a rotational basis, or as nominated for a fixed period by the group.

A draft discussion paper identifying governance options for the Coastal Councils Alliance has been prepared and will be distributed for consideration by regional and metro coastal groups.

The LGA has previously advised it does not have the resources available to support establishment of the Alliance.



174


Coastal Strategy – Request to Reallocate Funding

In addition to the establishment of the Alliance itself, the Regional EO’s/Metro Seaside Council working group have submitted a request to the LGA seeking consideration for the $30,000 R&D funding allocated by the LGA to review the Coastal Adaptation Decision Support Pathway Tool to be instead re-scoped to supporting the following key steps:

1. Identifying costed coastal protection/management priorities across all districts 2. Developing a state-wide coastal protection/management strategy3. Developing realistic and sustainable funding and cost-sharing options

This request acknowledges that, whilst the notion of updating the decision support pathways has merit, for many Coastal Councils, reality has now overtaken the theoretical application of such an approach.

Instead, Councils have indicated they now need to urgently focus on how to prioritise and fund the increasing backlog of coastal protection and adaptation works. A copy of the draft EOI is attached to this report.

This work is complimentary to the state-wide initiatives aiming to deliver a consistent data set and identifies the gaps and priorities associated with adaptation and inundation for coastal decision makers.

Officer’s Comments(Officer: Stephen Smith, Director Policy)

Observations from attendance at recent regional LGA meetings (Southern and Hills LGA and Eyre Peninsula CEOs meeting) indicates that there is not currently an agreed approach across councils to progressing coastal management matters.

This issue was discussed at length at the Regional Executive Officers meeting on 8 March, and it is considered that the proposed recommendation diverges from the discussion at the meeting, which was also attended by Mayor Parkes.

There was an acknowledgement that before a governance model such as a Coastal Alliance could be adopted, there is a strong need to fully understand the concerns councils have with coastal management and possibly the different mechanisms to be developed to address these concerns.

As a result it was suggested that prior to moving forward with the Coastal Alliance or developing a state wide coastal management strategy a forum of coastal councils (Mayors and CEOs) be held with the purpose being:

1. to identify whether there is interest from councils in establishing a state based coastal alliance, or other government mechanism to enable coastal councils to collaborate and advocate on coastal issues; and

2. develop a common understanding of issues impacting on coastal councils and identify areas of interest where councils may seek to work together.

Research and Development Scheme Coastal Management Project

In the LGA Election Platform Document, the LGA calls for an increase in Coast Protection Board (CPB) funding for coastal management to $40 million over 4 years taking into account that the CPB has identified a preliminary list of priority coastal protection works.

The LGA has also called for an allocation of $5 million in 2018/19 for a coast-wide strategic assessment and planning process.



175


On 30 January 2018, the LGA sent out an expression of interest seeking assistance for the project management of a project titled ‘LGA Coastal Adaptation Decision Pathways Guidance’. The project represents an update of existing guidance with funds ($30,000) allocated from the Local Government Research and Development Fund (LGR&D Fund).

The LGA was unaware of the proposal for reallocating the $30,000 dedicated for the update of the guidelines until a presentation was given to Eyre Peninsula CEOs by a representative of the Coast protection Branch on 27 February 2018.

Details outlining the proposed reallocation were only sent to the LGA in the days following this meeting and it was disappointing to have not been engaged on this proposal prior to it being presented to councils.

The LGA has concerns with the proposed reallocation for the following reasons:

the operational guidelines are needed by councils and will be utilised; it is not possible to reallocate LGR&D funding without going through the proper

approval processes in accordance with the Scheme rules; and funding of $30,000 is not adequate to achieve proposed steps 1-3 in any meaningful

way, hence the call for a greater amount of funding in the LGA State Election Agenda.

Financial and Resource Implications

The LGA can assist the Regional Executive Officers in arranging a forum of coastal councils. Support could also be sought from a metropolitan coastal council or regional council to host the forum.

As outlined above, the reallocation of the $30,000 LGR&DS grant is not permitted without going through the necessary approval processes under the Scheme rules.



176

Attachment to ECM 659784SOUTH AUSTRALIAN COASTAL COUNCILS ALLIANCE

DRAFT EXPRESSION OF INTEREST FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A STATEWIDE COASTAL MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION STRATEGY

The 2012 Local Government Association Coastal Adaptation Decision Support Pathways project aimed to assess and quantify the likely impacts on assets to Councils from coastal inundation and erosion as a result of climate change and identify decision pathways for a range of adaptation options.

The project reviewed the likely climate change impacts for the Australian coastal zone; reviewed the identified policy options for addressing coastal climate change impacts both in Australia and overseas; and provided a flowchart to guide decision makers through the steps associated with determining the likely costs and liabilities associated with climate change impacts on existing coastal assets.

The LGA are now seeking expressions of interest from the local government sector to update the guidelines, with $30,000 allocated from the Local Government Research and Development fund.

Whilst the notion of updating the decision support pathways has merit, for many Coastal Councils, reality has now overtaken the theoretical application of such an approach.

We now need to urgently focus on how to prioritise and fund the increasing backlog of coastal protection and adaptation works.

The 2014 release of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) provides further data and certainty in relation to observed changes and their causes; future climate change, risks and impacts; future pathways for adaptation, mitigation and sustainable development; and adaptation and mitigation.

At a more localised scale, the completion of Climate Change Adaptation Strategies for all regions in the state and initiatives such as the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility’s “CoastAdapt”, Geoscience Australia’s “OzCoasts”, The South Australian Government’s “Enviro Data”, The Goyder Institute’s Regional Climate Projections and work by the LGA in ‘Defining the Sea Level Rise Problem in South Australia’ provide no shortage of information, tools, guidelines and advice.

Councils are now struggling with the practicalities of prioritising, resourcing and sustaining the coastal adaptation task ahead, particularly in relation to protection of built assets.

The Metropolitan Seaside Councils Committee (MSCC) is a long-standing body of Local Government representatives spanning the twelve Coastal Councils extending from Playford, Salisbury, Port Adelaide Enfield, Charles Sturt, West Torrens, Holdfast Bay, Marion and Onkaparinga.

Current priorities across the metropolitan coast include implementing regional adaptation plans, managing escalating coastal erosion, flooding, sand and seagrass loss and cliff stabilisation, whilst also managing public infrastructure renewals and infrastructure damage. Mapping of the coast line and sea floor associated with base line data and prediction modelling is also being undertaken to determine the long-term impacts associated with increasing encroachment associated with commercial and residential land uses.



177

The Eyre Peninsula, Limestone Coast, Southern & Hills, Riverland and Murraylands Local Government Associations, Spencer Gulf Cities and Legatus Group of Councils represent the 26 regional Coastal Councils – extending from the West Coast, Spencer Gulf and Yorke Peninsula, the Fleurieu Peninsula and Kangaroo Island through the Coorong to Robe and Southend.

Regional Councils are currently working towards updating availability and accuracy of coastal elevation mapping and developing a series of maps that highlight potential ‘hot spots’ and maps coastal assets. This initiative will provide a consistent set of maps at a scale and resolution that allows planning authorities and communities to make more informed decisions around coastal management and protection.

In 2016, the Coast Protection Board, in conjunction with all Coastal Councils is South Australia, identified a preliminary list of identified coastal protection works that will need to be actioned over the coming years.

In addition to the recent and current work being undertaken by individual Councils and regions, the Coast Protection Board initiative provides a solid starting point for developing a clear understanding of a fully costed and prioritised action plan for coast protection work across the state.

The Local Government Mutual Liability Scheme also has a key role in supporting Councils to identify opportunities to minimise risk, including protection of public assets and issues arising from development and financial exposure associated with coastal management and protection.

Following preliminary discussion with all proposed project partners, the Metropolitan Seaside Councils, in conjunction with the combined Regional Coastal Councils are proposing that the $30,000 allocated by the LGA to review the Coastal Adaptation Decision Support Pathways Project be instead re-scoped to supporting the following next steps:

1. Identifying costed coastal protection/management priorities across all districts 2. Developing a statewide coastal protection/management strategy3. Developing realistic and sustainable funding and cost-sharing options

Preliminary discussions with potential project partners indicates that support from the LGA may then leverage additional funding and support, including from Regional Coastal Councils, Metropolitan Seaside Councils, the Coast Protection Board with support from the Local Government Mutual Liability Scheme.

The project would be managed by a steering committee comprising: the South Australian Coast Protection Board (DEWNR Coastal Management Branch) representatives from Metropolitan Seaside Councils representatives from regional Coastal Councils the Local Government Association Local Government Mutual Liability Scheme



178

Circulars

2018 LGA Ordinary General Meeting - Agenda available - Circular 11.8

ToChief Executive Officer Elected MembersGovernance Officers

Date14 March 2018

ContactAstrid CragoEmail: [email protected]

Response RequiredNo

SummaryThe agenda for the LGA Ordinary General Meeting to be held on Friday 13 April 2018 at the Adelaide Town Hall is now available to download from the LGA website.

The 2018 LGA Ordinary General Meeting will be held at 11am on Friday 13 April at the Adelaide Town Hall, 128 King William Street, Adelaide (refer to LGA Circular 2.3).

The agenda is now available to download via LGA AGM and OGM Agenda and Minutes Documents and includes information reports from the LGA Board and Council Notices of Motion (listed below). Please note pages 105-153 were updated at 10am on 15/3/2018. Councils are reminded to provide copies of the agenda and papers to their nominated voting delegates, and any other council members and officers attending the meeting.

Councils can contact Astrid Crago on 8224 2031 or [email protected] to confirm their voting delegate if this has not already been checked.

Discussion Reports

• LGA Governance Review / New Constitution

Information Reports

• Update of the LGA Policy Manual

• Advocacy Update

• LGA Schemes Review Update

Council Notices of Motion

• Little Corella Management (Alexandrina)

• Potential Overseas Recycling Import Restrictions (Marion)

• New Properties Application for Reticulation (AFR) (Marion)

• South Australian Government’s Industry Participation Policy and Guidelines (Adelaide)

• Local Heritage Listing Policy and Procedure (Adelaide)

• Car Share Schemes Policy and Procedure (Adelaide)

• Bike Share Scheme Policy and Procedure (Adelaide)

• Developer Contributed Assets (Charles Sturt)

• Building Code Standards for Accessible Car Parking (Prospect)

• Potential Conflict of Interest (Salisbury)

All General Meetings are conducted as per the Code of Practice for Meeting Procedures at General Meetings of the Local Government Association adopted by the LGA Board at its July 2014 meeting.

For more information and to register for the event please click 2018 Council Next Practice Showcase and LGA Ordinary General Meeting.

Page 1 of 2Circulars

23/03/2018http://www.lga.sa.gov.au/page.aspx?c=79735

10.85.1.11

16/03/2018

A57777CEO

179

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

1

Katrina Blums

From: Bell, Bill (DPC) <[email protected]>

Sent: Thursday, 15 March 2018 2:10 PM

To: Bell, Bill (DPC)

Subject: Notification of Annual General Meeting - Australia Day Council of SA

Attachments: Notice of AGM 2018.pdf; Nomination Form and Election Notice 2018A.pdf

Dear Australia Day Council Member

Please find attached official notification of the forthcoming Annual General Meeting for the Australia Day Council of

South Australia (ADCSA).

Also attached is information pertaining to the election of your representatives on the Board of Management of the

ADCSA.

If you have any questions regarding the AGM or election you are most welcome to contact me on telephone 8463

5436 or email, [email protected].

Please put the 3rd

May, 2018 in your calendar as you are most welcome to attend the AGM.

Regards

Bill Bell

Australia Day Council of South Australia

30 Wakefield St, Adelaide SA 5000

GPO Box 2343, Adelaide SA 5001

tel: 08 8463 5436

fax: 08 8463 5449

email: [email protected]

web: http://www.australiadaysa.com.au

______________________________________________________________________



______________________________________________________________________

2.38.1.1

15/03/2018

A57790CEO

180

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

Australia Day Council of South Australia Inc

NOTICE OF ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Annual General Meeting of the Australia Day Council of South Australia Inc. (ABN 95 945 352 311) will be held at

Level 14, 30 Wakefield Street Adelaide SA 5000

On Thursday, 3 May, 2018 at 5:00pm

For the purpose of the following business.

BUSINESS

1. Annual Report for the year ended 28 February, 2018

To receive the Annual Report of the Australia Day Council of South Australia Inc. for the period ended 28 February, 2018 which includes the Financial Report and the Auditors Report.

2. Election to Board of Management (3 current positions PLUS 1 new position)

The following Members of the Board of Management, in accordance with Clause 19.7 of the Constitution, will ‘Retire’ from their terms and are eligible for re-election, if they wish, at the Annual General Meeting of the Australia Day Council of South Australia Incorporated.

Elected Members

Dr Michael Henningsen # Mr Steve Maras Mayor John Trainer

# These Board Members have indicated that they will not be re-standing.

Nomination is open to all financial members and should be made by completing the attached form and returning it to the Returning Officer by 5 April, 2018.

3. Appointment of Auditor

The current auditors, Dean Newberry & Partners, are eligible for re-appointment and have indicated their willingness to be re-appointed.

4. Other Business

Members may raise any business pertaining to the Australia Day Council of South Australia Inc. Items for the agenda must reach the office of the Australia Day Council of South Australia by 5:00pm, 5 April, 2018.

BY ORDER OF THE BOARD Emma Chidlow Public Officer 15 March, 2018

Note: A final Agenda will be forwarded prior to the AGM

181

NOMINATION FORM

Australia Day Council of South Australia ELECTION OF BOARD MEMBERS

NOTE: Nominations open on 15 March, 2018 and must reach the Returning Officer at the address shown below, not later than at 5:00pm on Thursday, 5 April, 2018. Nominations cannot be withdrawn after this time.

I, the undersigned member of the Australia Day Council of SA and eligible to vote in this election, nominate:

CANDIDATE: Full name (block letters):

For the office of: BOARD MEMBER

NOMINATOR: Full Name (block letters) Signature Date

/ /

NOTE: OUR CONSTITUTION REQUIRES THAT A CANDIDATE BE NOMINATED BY AT LEAST ONE MEMBER OF THE

AUSTRALIA DAY COUNCIL OF SA UNLESS A “RETIRING” MEMBER WISHES TO SEEK RE-ELECTION; IN WHICH CASE A NOMINATOR IS NOT REQUIRED.

CANDIDATE’S CONSENT: (Print your name as you wish it to appear on the ballot paper)

I,

consent to nomination for the above office and declare I am a member of the Australia Day Council of SA and am eligible to be elected under the Constitution\Election Rules of the organisation.

Salutation Please indicate preferred salutation, eg Mr, Mrs, Miss, Ms ________ POSTAL ADDRESS:

Postcode:

TELEPHONE: Email : Work No. : Mobile : Fax : SIGNATURE and DATE: Signed : / / NOTE: * As a candidate you will be sent an acknowledgment by return email.

OFFICE ADDRESS : POSTAL ADDRESS : Returning Officer PO Box 153

GREENWITH SA 5125 Email: [email protected]

Returning Officer PO Box 153 GREENWITH SA 5125

ACKD: ACC.N /B:

ACC.B:

See reverse for Election Notice

182

Board Member (4) Elections 2018

ELECTION NOTICE Arrangements have been made for me to conduct the election of 4 Board Members (3 existing and one new position) for appointment to the Board of Management of the Australia Day Council of South Australia. The term of office for the successful candidates will expire at the Annual General Meeting in 2020. Financial members of the Council are eligible to nominate and vote in the election as at the date of roll closure at 5:00pm on Wednesday, 14 March 2018. Nominations are hereby invited and may be made at any time from Thursday, 15 March 2018, to reach me (at PO Box 153, Greenwith SA 5125,) no later than 5pm (ACDT) on Thursday, 5 April 2018. Nominations must be made on the prescribed form, signed by the candidate and one nominator eligible to vote in the election, in accordance with Clause 19 of the Constitution. The Constitution is available from the Australia Day Council of SA, and to request a copy please either email [email protected] for an electronic copy, or telephone (08) 8463 5436 for a printed version, to be posted to your address. Retiring Members who wish to stand for re-election should also complete a Nomination Form as above, with the only difference being that there is no requirement to obtain a Nominator’s signature. Please indicate on the Form that you are a Retiring Member. A candidate may submit a statement not exceeding 300 words, for distribution with ballot material. The statement must reach me not later than 5pm (ACDT) on Thursday, 5 April 2018. Should more than 4 members nominate for the Board positions and an election is necessary, election material will be forwarded to all eligible voters by post. The ballot will open on Thursday 12 April 2018 and will close at 1:00 pm on Thursday, 3 May 2018. All Board Member positions are Voluntary in nature. Board meetings are currently held on a Thursday evening, approximately 10 times per annum. All nominations will be kept confidential prior to the commencement of the election. A nomination form has been forwarded to each Member. Further nomination forms are available from the office of the Australia Day Council of South Australia (Tel: 8463 5436). Returning Officer 15 March 2018

Returning Officer

PO Box 153 GREENWITH SA 5125

Email: [email protected]

183


148 Frome Street Adelaide SA 5000 | GPO Box 2693 Adelaide SA 5001 | T 08 8224 2000 | F 08 8232 6336 | W lga.sa.gov.au

In reply please quote our reference: ECM 659889 LT/AL

15 March 2018

Mr Geoffrey Moffatt Chief Exectuve Officer District Council of Ceduna PO Box 175 CEDUNA SA 5690 Emailed: [email protected]

Dear Mr Moffatt

Promoting the council elections - draft budget

With budget preparations for 2018-19 now well underway, I am writing to advise you of recent discussions I have had with the South Australian Electoral Commissioner regarding the arrangements for state-wide advertising the 2018 council elections.

As you may be aware, the Commissioner has responsibility for arranging the promotion of council elections. The cost of this promotion is recovered from councils along with the other costs associated with conducting the elections.

In previous election years, the LGA has also run parallel promotional activities during the ‘nominate’ and ‘vote’ phase to increase the number and diversity of candidates. The LGA’s activity has been funded through the Local Government Research and Development Scheme.

In 2018, the Commissioner has agreed that it would be a better approach for the LGA to manage the promotion of all phases of the election on his behalf. This approach responds to feedback from local government that future council election campaigns should be better integrated and more comprehensive. This approach has been endorsed by the LGA Board.

This proposal relates to the promotional activities only. All other aspects of the elections will be managed by ECSA, and all cost recovery, including the costs of the promotional activities managed by the LGA, will still be undertaken by ECSA.

The Commissioner has advised the LGA that his expectation is for a more comprehensive campaign in 2018 compared to previous elections in which promotional activities were limited. The LGA’s objective is to develop a campaign that will significantly increase the number of times that eligible voters will hear or see a promotional message, while keeping the costs to councils as low as possible.

Based on third party advice on the costs of producing and implementing a state-wide campaign with wide reach, the LGA is proposing a total campaign budget of approximately $847,000.

This total budget figure includes an allocation of $150,000 from the Local Government Research and Development Scheme, which will not be recovered from councils.

The final campaign budget will be subject to confirmation of final costs for production and placement, LGA Board approval of R&D funding and also the agreement of the Electoral Commissioner.

9.34.4.1

16/03/2018

A57810CEO & MAF

184

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

As in previous years, costs will be recovered on a per elector basis by ECSA. The cost per elector for a limited campaign in 2014 was $0.50c. The proposed cost per elector for a high quality and more comprehensive campaign in 2018 will be approximately $0.65c. On this basis the estimated cost to your council will be approximately $1,183.

Can you please review your draft budget allocations and let me know if you have any concerns.

As we need to finalise the budget and start preparations for the campaign, I am seeking your urgent feedback by no later than Tuesday 20 March 2018. Yours sincerely

Matt Pinnegar Chief Executive Officer Telephone: (08) 8224 2022 Email: [email protected]

185


2

Good afternoon All,

Re: FYI Minister Fifield - Media Release New Regulatory Powers and Lower NBN Prices

Whilst this announcement stops well short of declaring the NBN an “Essential Service” it appears there is now more

rigour around the relationship between the NBN.Co and telcos and an umpire between the two promoting the

interests of the consumer which of course includes business.

Please find attached a Media Release from Senator the Hon Mitch Fifield Minister for Communications received

today.

"New consumer protections, greater transparency and lower wholesale prices are delivering an improved experience

for users on the National Broadband Network (NBN)..."

“The NBN is being rolled out at such a rapid pace that around 30,000 homes and businesses are making the switch

every week, and 3.6 million are already connected” Minister Fifield said.

"The first report showed 89 percent of NBN installs are done ‘right first time’, 92 percent of installations are

completed on time, and 85 percent of faults are repaired on time."

"The progress report reveals NBN’s new pricing has led to a jump in users enjoying speeds of 50 Mbps and faster; and

a dramatic reduction in network congestion – meaning more reliable high-speed broadband, even at peak times."

Kind Regards,

Sean G Holden • Senior Policy Adviser • Local Government Association

[email protected] • www.lga.sa.gov.au • @LGAofSA

T: 08 8224 2027 M: 0459 896 715 • 148 Frome St Adelaide • GPO Box 2693 Adelaide SA 5001

WARNING AND DISCLAIMER: The information provided by the LGA in this email does not constitute legal advice. If

legal advice is required, we suggest that you seek out the services of a qualified legal provider. The contents of this

email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may be subject to legal professional privilege and

copyright. You must not copy or distribute this message or any part of it or otherwise disclose its contents to anyone

without written authorisation from the LGA. No representation is made that this email is free of viruses or other

defects. Virus scanning is recommended and is the responsibility of the recipient. We take no responsibility for

misdirection, corruption or unauthorised use of email communications, nor for any damage that may be caused as a

result of transmitting or receiving an email communication. If you have received this communication in error, please

delete the email and advise us immediately.

10.85.1.11

16/03/2018

A 57812CEO

186

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

MEDIA RELEASE

Media contact: Geraldine Mitchell | 0407 280 476 | [email protected]

New regulatory powers and lower NBN prices delivering better broadband for consumers

15 March 2018 New consumer protections, greater transparency and lower wholesale prices are delivering an improved experience for users on the National Broadband Network (NBN), Minister for Communications Mitch Fifield announced today. The ACMA today released new rules to stop the handballing of complaints between telcos and nbn, giving the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman better tools to help resolve complaints. The ACMA will also issue new requirements for retailers to publicly release complaints statistics to help consumers differentiate between retailers based on the quality of their customer service. “The NBN is being rolled out at such a rapid pace that around 30,000 homes and businesses are making the switch every week, and 3.6 million are already connected” Minister Fifield said. “While the overwhelming majority of users have a smooth migration onto the NBN, we want to ensure the ACMA is a strong cop-on-the-beat, armed to protect consumers from the handballing of complaints.” The new ACMA rules follow the announcement of a new NBN monthly customer experience progress report. The first report showed 89 percent of NBN installs are done ‘right first time’, 92 percent of installations are completed on time, and 85 percent of faults are repaired on time. The progress report reveals NBN’s new pricing has led to a jump in users enjoying speeds of 50 Mbps and faster; and a dramatic reduction in network congestion – meaning more reliable high-speed broadband, even at peak times. The ACMA’s new complaints-handling rules are the first of a range of consumer protections announced by the Government in December last year. The ACMA will release additional consumer protection in coming months, requiring retailers to:

perform a line test to confirm a working connection at installation, and undertake a line speed test at any time if requested by a customer;

re-activate a service on a legacy network within a certain timeframe if an erroneous disconnection has occurred and the NBN cannot be connected;

explain to consumers how different speed tiers can be applied in their home or business, as well as a ‘critical information summary’ for NBN services when signing consumers to a new contract.

“The rules are designed to ensure broadband customers get the service they expect from their retail service provider as they transition to the NBN” said Minister Fifield. The ACMA will also undertake further research into modem quality, potentially leading to the introduction of technical standards, or a modem performance rating scheme.

187


https://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-information/media-centre/media-statements/customer-experience-progress-report.html

https://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-information/media-centre/media-statements/customer-experience-progress-report.html

Circulars

Illegal dumping - Circular 12.3

ToChief Executive Officer Community Services StaffElected MembersRecycling - Waste Management

Date19 March 2018

ContactFrances BeerEmail: [email protected]

Response RequiredYes

Respond By16 April 2018

SummaryThe LGA would like to advocate that the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) provide financial support to assist councils with the liability associated with illegally dumped waste. This Circular provides further details as to how the LGA is seeking councils’ assistance to develop a business case.

The LGA is aware of the burden that illegal dumping places on councils. To help address this issue, the LGA would like to develop a business case proposing that the EPA provides financial and other support to assist councils in managing the illegal dumping of waste.

The LGA is particularly interested in any information/feedback councils have in relation to the following:

1. Records showing the number of instances of illegal dumping that have occurred since 2015;

2. Councils’ cost of removing illegally dumped materials and the cost of legally dumping the materials;

3. Whether councils feel the increase in instances of illegal dumping is a result of the increased fees and charges deriving from the increase in the solidwaste levy? If so, is there data to substantiate this?; and

4. What assistance councils believe is required to help alleviate the problem of illegal dumping (e.g. providing reimbursement for clearing up, refund of thesolid waste levy, support to purchase cameras etc.).

Please send responses to Frances Beer at [email protected] by Monday 16 April 2018.



5.3.2.2

A57943CEO

23/03/2018

190

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

Level 5, Commonwealth Law Courts, 1 Victoria Avenue Perth WA 6000 l GPO Box 9973, Perth WA 6848 l www.nntt.gov.au Email [email protected] l Telephone +61 8 9425 1000 l Freecall 1800 640 501 l Facsimile +61 8 9425 1193

Ref: SI2005/007

22 March 2018

Mr Geoffrey Moffat Chief Executive Officer District Council of Ceduna 44 O’Loughlin Terrace Ceduna SA 5690

Via email: [email protected]

Dear Mr Moffat

Re: Removal of SI2005/007 Ceduna Keys Development ILUA from ILUA Register

Further to my letter of 28 February 2018, the Native Title Registrar has removed the above ILUA from the ILUA Register.

Feel free to call me on 08 9425 1104 or on the Tribunal’s free call number 1800 640 501 if you have any queries in relation to this letter.

Regards

Claire Smith Practice Leader Telephone (08) 9425 1104 Facsimile (08) 9425 1193 Email [email protected]

4.65.1.2

23/03/2018

A57981CEO

191




kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

1

Katrina Blums

From: Holyoak, Emily (PIRSA) <[email protected]>

Sent: Thursday, 22 March 2018 1:53 PM

Subject: POMS - Pacific Oyster Mortality Syndrome

Attachments: PIRSA18 A5 Flyer Help Oyster Industry-Web.pdf; Oysters are safe and delicious

DL100x210-WEB.pdf

Good afternoon,

As you are aware, PIRSA recently detected Pacific Oyster Mortality Syndrome (POMS) in the Port River, Adelaide.

To limit the spread of aquatic diseases such as POMS, we’d appreciate if you could take the time to distribute the

attached information to members, the community and visitors.

What you can do to help:

If travelling through South Australia, you can help protect our oyster farming areas to remain disease free by

following these steps:

• Regardless of the point of purchase, check the origin of any oysters you are carrying. Dispose of any

Tasmanian-sourced live oysters into landfill or at quarantine stations across SA.

• Never discard or store live oysters in any SA waters. It is an offence under the Fisheries Management Act

2007 to release or deposit exotic and/or aquaculture farmed species (such as Pacific Oysters) into the

waters of South Australia and fines may apply.

• Do not use Pacific Oysters, even when dead, as bait or berley.

• Never use seafood sold for human consumption as bait or berley.

• Boat owners should refer to the guidelines for good vessel cleaning practices.

Hope this helps, let me know if you need any more information of clarification on anything.

Kind regards,

Emily

Emily Holyoak | Senior Communications Adviser Agriculture, Food and Wine | Primary Industries and Regions SA - PIRSA Government of South Australia | Level 15, 25 Grenfell Street, Adelaide GPO Box 1671 Adelaide SA 5001 P: +61 8 8429 0790 | M: + 61 417 290 418 | W: www.pir.sa.gov.au

I work Monday - Thursday. For urgent enquiries outside of these hours, please contact Celia Brissenden on 0477 259 248.

Service l Professionalism l Trust l Respect l Collaboration & Engagement l Honesty & Integrity l Courage & Tenacity l Sustainability Disclaimer: The information in this e-mail may be confidential and/or legally privileged. Use or disclosure of the information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may be unlawful.

11.3.2.1

22/03/2018

A57988CEO

192

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

You can help protect South Australia’s valuable oyster industry ‑ turn over to find out how

194

POMS IN SOUTH AUSTRALIAQUICK FACTS

Pacific Oyster Mortality Syndrome

On 28 February 2018, the presence of the Pacific Oyster Mortality Syndrome (POMS) virus in feral Pacific Oysters in Adelaide’s Port River was confirmed.

South Australian oysters are still safe and delicious to eat.

They continue to be processed for human consumption, with no disruptions to their availability or quality.

Help protect South Australia’s oyster industry > Buy and enjoy our locally-grown oysters.> Don’t discard into the ocean any oysters or other seafood purchased for human consumption (this includes oyster shells).> Don’t store oysters in the ocean (e.g. in a bag placed in the water).

Thank you!

These simple steps will support our growers, and help protect our industry from aquatic pests and diseases.

For more information, visit www.pir.sa.gov.au/poms

© Primary Industries and Regions SA | March 2018Image © SATC

195

1

Katrina Blums

From: Swigart, Kimberley (DSD) <[email protected]>

Sent: Tuesday, 27 March 2018 5:11 PM

To: [email protected]; Geoffrey Moffatt; [email protected];

[email protected]; Andrew Boardman; Sutton, Mark (DPTI); Trevor Smart;

Barrie Rogers; [email protected]; [email protected]; Mark Bell;

Chris Cowley; [email protected]; David Blake; Doug Drury; URAF; Campana, Wendy

(DPTI); [email protected]; Albanese, Robert (IASA); Primer, David (IASA); Adlaf,

Sophie (IASA); Chief Executive Officer; Wadewitz, Mark (IASA); [email protected];

[email protected]; Molly Ellis Hennekam; Ramesh Raja Segaran; Marthenis, Sha

(IASA); Constantin, Natasha (IASA); D'Argenio, Leah (IASA); Clarke, Leah (SATC);

Ruppert, Juergen (DPTI); Horan, Ilona (Defence SA); Williams, Brett (DPC); Jones,

Nick (SATC); [email protected]; Kate Quigley; Peter Ackland

Cc: Antcliff, Megan (DSD)

Subject: Action List | Qantas Workshop 21 March 2018

Attachments: Action Items Qantas Workshop_20180321.docx; 20180327 - Competition to IASAs

bid for Qantas pilot training centre.pdf; Qantas Workshop attendance list 21 March

2018.xlsx

Dear all

Please find attached the Action List from last week’s Qantas flight training academy workshop held on 21 March

2018.

As per Action 2, I have attached the contact details of all workshop participants. Please let me know if any of your

contact details are out of date.

Also attached is a document detailing the competition to SA’s bid which has links to all related media articles.

Please don’t hesitate to contact me if you have any queries.

Kind regards, Kimberley

Kimberley Swigart Project Officer

Investment Attraction South Australia Office of the Chief Executive

T: 8226 3002 E [email protected] Hours: Tues-Thurs

GPO Box 320 Adelaide, South Australia 5001

Level 9, 131-139 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, 5000

4.3.2.1

27/03/2018

A58037CEO

199

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

Action Items

Qantas Regional Flight Training Academy Workshop

1.00-3.00pm, Wednesday, 21 March 2018, IASA, 131-139 Grenfell St

Attendees:

Name Organisation

Fiona Hogan District Council of Coober Pedy

Andrew Boardman Kangaroo Island Council

Wendy Campana DPTI

Trevor Smart District Council of Grant

Mike Ryan District Council of Grant

Barrie Rogers Adelaide Airport Limited

Stephanie Norrie Adelaide Airport Limited

Rod Pearson The District Council of Lower Eyre Peninsula

Tony Siviour Renmark Paringa Council

Chris Cowley Whyalla City Council

Pine Pienaar Flight Training Adelaide

Mark Sutton Outback Communities Authority

Kate Quigley UniSA Aviation Academy

Ramesh Raja Segaran University of Adelaide

Molly Ellis Hennekam University of Adelaide

Juergen Ruppert DPTI

Ilona Horan Defense SA

Brett Williams DPC

Megan Antcliff IASA

Sophie Adlaf IASA

Robert Albernese IASA

David Primer IASA

Mark Wadewitz IASA

Kimberley Swigart IASA

Leah D’Argenio IASA

Natasha Constantin IASA

Apologies:

Geoffrey Moffatt District Council of Ceduna

John Banks Port Augusta City Council

David Blake Bruce Hartwig Flying School

Matt Pinnegar Local Government Association of SA

James Holyman Port Pirie Regional Council

200

Action Items

Action List

Item Action Officer

1 Schedule a secondary workshop once the Request for Proposal has been received by State Government

Kimberley Swigart

2 Email the workshop participant contact list and Qantas media releases to the group

Kimberley Swigart

Meeting Notes

Key Issues Raised:

Need technical information contained in the Request for Proposal to further proceed. Including:

o Accessibility

o Proximity of regional airports to city center

o Operational model

o Workforce

o Aircraft maintenance and facilities

Questions for Qantas:

Who is the end user? Qantas or a training provider?

What is Qantas looking for at a State level?

What is the nature of the training program? Including:

o class size

o curriculum

o single or double engine aircraft

o essential infrastructure

o proximity/connectivity to a major city

o is a distributed model across multiple airports an option

o funding incentives

o due to 2019 build will airports with development approval be accepted

o migration status for students and state level student training contribution

Next Steps:

Await the formal Request for Proposal from Qantas and schedule next group workshop in the days

following.

201

Circulars

Documents regarding national approach to product stewardship released for consultation - Circular 13.7

ToChief Executive Officer Elected MembersGovernance OfficersPlanning - Building StaffSustainability Officers

Date29 March 2018

ContactFrances BeerEmail: [email protected]

Response RequiredYes

Respond By20 April 2018

SummaryThe Department of the Environment and Energy has developed two documents concerning product stewardship for consultation. This Circular provides further information and submission details.

Product stewardship is an approach to managing the impacts of products and materials and links to the concept of a Circular Economy. Product stewardship acknowledges that those involved in producing, selling, using and disposing of products have a shared responsibility to ensure that those products or materials are managed in a way that reduces their impact on the environment, human health and safety.

The two documents released by the Department of the Environment and Energy are the draft Assessment Action Escalation (AAE) Process and the 2018-19 Product Impact Management (PIM) Work-plan. The first document outlines the step-by-step process for assessing, actioning and escalating national priority issues not identified by the Minister under the Act, while the second document categorises national priorities identified in the AAE Process and by the Minister under the Act.

The Department is seeking comment by 5pm 4 May 2018. To view the documents and to make a submission, please see http://www.environment.gov.au/protection/national-waste-policy/product-stewardship/consultation-2018.

The LGA will also be providing comment on the documents and would appreciate councils sending their submissions to Stephen Smith at [email protected] by 20 April 2018.

In particular, the LGA is seeking councils’ opinions on the following:

• AAE Process◦ Are any stages missing from the AAE process and should any steps/requirements be added or removed?

◦ Is the distinction between the priorities identified under the AAE Process and the priorities determined by the Minister for the Environment andEnergy under the Product Stewardship Act 2011 clear?

◦ Is it clear how local government can interact with the AAE Process?

• 2018-19 PIM Work-plan◦ Do you agree with the 2018-19 priorities? Are there any priorities your council believes are missing?

◦ Are any SA councils in a position to work with a lead jurisdiction on any of the identified priorities?

◦ Does the Work-plan contain sufficient information, and is the information presented clearly?



9.3.2.2

03/04/2018

58080CEO

202

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

ENV

240.

0218

February 2018

Assessment | Action | Escalation ProcessSupporting a national strategy to manage environmental impacts from products

Draft for consultation

203

2 / Assessment | Action | Escalation Process

© Commonwealth of Australia, 2018.

Assessment | Action | Escalation Process Draft for consultation Supporting a national strategy to manage environmental impacts from products is licensed by the Commonwealth of Australia for use under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence with the exception of the Coat of Arms of the Commonwealth of Australia, the logo of the agency responsible for publishing the report, content supplied by third parties, and any images depicting people. For licence conditions see: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/au/

This report should be attributed as ‘Assessment | Action | Escalation Process Draft for consultation Supporting a national strategy to manage environmental impacts from products, Commonwealth of Australia 2018’.

The Commonwealth of Australia has made all reasonable efforts to identify content supplied by third parties using the following format ‘© Copyright, [name of third party] ’.

Disclaimer The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Australian Government or the Minister for the Environment and Energy.

204

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/au/

3

ContentsIntroduction 4

Assessment 6

Step 1 – Is there a product impact issue? 7

Step 2 – Characterise the issue & assess feasibility of action 9

Steps 3–4 – Prioritisation and agreement of the Work Plan 11

Action 12

Step 5 – Design the Approach 12

Steps 6 and 7 – Implement and Operate the chosen approach 14

Step 8 – Monitor and Review 14

Step 9a – Continue with chosen approach 14

Step 9b – Continue with modifications 14

Escalation 15

Priorities set under the Product Stewardship Act 2011 15

205


IntroductionThe Department of the Environment and Energy, in consultation with a working group representing the states, territories and local government is developing a set of principles and processes to guide strategic national prioritisation of action on product impact issues. The working principles are that Australian governments will:

• promote and support industry led action to minimise the negative impacts from products throughout their life cycle,

• work cooperatively and collaboratively with industry to ensure timely and consistent assessment of, and action on national product impact issues,

• support escalation of product stewardship action once in train.

The draft Assessment | Action | Escalation Process (the Process) outlines the step-by-step processes for assessing, managing and escalating national priority issues in line with these principles.

An overview of the Process is at Figure 1.

The structure of this document reflects the steps outlined in Figure 1, with further information provided for each step.

Steps 1 to Step 4 outline the Assessment Stage where initial analysis of product impact issues to determine the extent and severity of the issue, a recommendation is made, and Environment Ministers decide to include an issue as a priority, or not. These steps can be undertaken by any level of government, in cooperation across government, or in collaboration with industry, academia, and the public.

Recommendations for product impact issues to be addressed under the Work Plan will be put to Environment Ministers through the Senior Officials Group, subject to majority agreement from all jurisdictions.

The remaining steps cover the Action Stage where in-depth analysis is undertaken and the action to be implemented is designed. This could be voluntary, co-regulatory or regulatory action. The Action Stage also includes the development of timeframes

for delivering outcomes, key measures of success, the review process as well as the likely escalation process (should it be required following review). The Escalation Stage is then outlined for actions that are seen to not be delivering the intended outcomes, noting that escalation is not assumed for all priorities.

The roles of Environment Ministers and any party analysing a product impact issue for prioritisation are outlined throughout these guidelines.

Note – the Minister for the Environment and Energy has the authority to publish a yearly list of Commonwealth product waste issues for action under Section 108A of the Product Stewardship Act 2011. This process is separate to the prioritisation process outlined here. The priorities set by the Minister for the Environment and Energy will however also sit on the work plan. See page 16 for more information on the Minister’s list

The steps undertaken to define these priorities has therefore also been outlined, and the processes outlined in this document are also intended to guide that prioritisation process to ensure consistency.

206

5

for delivering outcomes, key measures of success, the review process as well as the likely escalation process (should it be required following review). The Escalation Stage is then outlined for actions that are seen to not be delivering the intended outcomes, noting that escalation is not assumed for all priorities.

The roles of Environment Ministers and any party analysing a product impact issue for prioritisation are outlined throughout these guidelines.

Note – the Minister for the Environment and Energy has the authority to publish a yearly list of Commonwealth product waste issues for action under Section 108A of the Product Stewardship Act 2011. This process is separate to the prioritisation process outlined here. The priorities set by the Minister for the Environment and Energy will however also sit on the work plan. See page 16 for more information on the Minister’s list

The steps undertaken to define these priorities has therefore also been outlined, and the processes outlined in this document are also intended to guide that prioritisation process to ensure consistency.

207


AssessmentThe Assessment Stage of the Process is where a product impact issue is identified, characterised, considered by Environment Ministers for inclusion as a priority for management through the Work Plan. It also covers the assignment of roles and responsibilities if it is deemed a priority. This stage is broken up into four steps.

There are five core requirements that underpin Steps 1–4 of the Assessment stage and must be satisfied before an issue can be recommended to Environment Ministers for consideration. These steps and core requirements ensure the extent of the issue and the risks of not taking prioritised action under the PIMS Work Plan are identified and consistently assessed.

The core requirements are that:

1. The issue must be confirmed as a product impact issue.

a. The term ‘product’ covers all manufactured things used in households, commercial and industrial sectors. This includes the things used to build those households and commercial and industrial premises. Waste is any material, substance, or by-product that is discarded as no longer required and has negative social, economic and environmental outcomes.

b. It must be demonstrated that there is an issue with the impacts of the product, there is measurable failure to minimise the product impacts through industry action and there are significant risks to not taking action.

2. A jurisdiction must be willing to sponsor and lead the initial analysis of the suspected product impact issue. Jurisdictions may co-sponsor or lead.

a. Note – it is assumed that the sponsoring jurisdiction during the Assessment Stage will undertake the Action Stage, unless otherwise agreed.

3. The product impact issue or the action required to minimise it must be cross-jurisdictional.

a. That is, not just where the effects of the product impact are seen should be considered, but where they originate. Whether taking action on the issue will require cross-jurisdictional action or not taking action could have cross-jurisdictional or national consequences should also be considered.

4. The lead jurisdiction must prepare advice to Environment Ministers outlining the analysis and rationale for prioritising a product impact issue on the Work Plan. This must demonstrate a quantifiable benefit to taking action.

a. The initial analysis undertaken during this stage is not envisaged as a full costs and benefits analysis and will likely depend on existing information, given decisions will need to be made by Environment Ministers allocating resources for further in-depth analysis (e.g. full cost-benefit analysis).

b. The paper must outline potential options for action based on this initial analysis to inform allocation of resources (if prioritised).

5. The majority of jurisdictions must agree that the nature of the issue is of a high enough priority for recommendation to Environment Ministers for management through the Work plan.

a. Environment Ministers will consider inclusion of new priorities once a year.

b. Jurisdictions must agree to a maximum of 4–5 priorities to put to Environment Ministers on a yearly basis. This will ensure the PIMS Work Plan focuses only on the highest priority national issues. Priorities will be limited to 3–4 in a rolling two-year timeframe.

208

7

Steps 1–2: Identification and characterisation of a product impact issue

Step 1 – Is there a product impact issue?

The first step in the Assessment Stage is that a product impact issue needs to be identified, brought to the attention of government (local, state/territory and/or Commonwealth) and confirmed as an issue that needs further characterisation. This means that the issue needs to be confirmed as one that can be minimised through product stewardship.

Issues caused by products can include environmental impacts and impacts on the health and safety of people. They may also include broader issues such as a lack of information about the product, or general awareness of the product and its impacts.

Identifying a product impact issue

Each jurisdiction will monitor product impact issues. These may be identified in several ways, including, but not limited to:

• Community concern raised through ministerial and other forms of correspondence, including campaigns, at local, state/territory and Commonwealth government levels

• Media reports

• Adverse events

• Government reporting such as State of the Environment and National Waste reports, and legislative and scheme reviews.

• Regular monitoring by Environment Protection Authorities or similar.

• Other forms of reporting, including inquiries, resulting from targeted monitoring. This can be done by local, state, territory governments, non-government organisations and/or industry.

The credibility of any data being used to justify an issue being recommended as a priority will need to be noted. This will need to be considered and factored in to ensure resources are appropriately assigned to further characterise the problem and progress it through the priority setting process. Credibility criteria may include:

– Published, peer-reviewed scientific/measured data from reputable organisation/s

– Information that can be otherwise reasonably verified. Examples may include a clear description of the issue; recorded images, known events; correlation with monitoring data and/or health reports; and consistency (over scale and time) in concerns raised.

Check point – If following this initial assessment one or more jurisdictions (state, territory and/or Commonwealth) considers that there is a product impact issue, this meets Core requirement 1. Further characterisation is to be undertaken at Step 2.

A sponsoring jurisdiction must be identified at this point. Jurisdictions may co-sponsor. This meets Core requirement 2.

209


Step 2 – Characterise the issue & assess feasibility of action

The second step in the Assessment Stage is to characterise the product impact issue and do an initial analysis of the feasibility of action by considering the costs and benefits. This step identifies if there is measurable failure to minimise the product impacts through industry action either early in the product life cycle, by building in mechanisms throughout the lifecycle, or at end-of-life.

The lead jurisdiction undertakes Step 2 collaboratively or in consultation with other jurisdictions and industry as appropriate.

2a Characterise the problem

Several aspects need to be taken into account when characterising a problem in order to satisfy Environment Ministers that due consideration has been given to the issue and recommend it as a priority issue under the Work Plan.

Note that:

• the categories below should be used as guidance for characterising the product impact issue.

• objective, rather than anecdotal evidence is to be provided wherever possible.

• that this may determine that action (or further action) is not (yet) required.

These aspects include:

Scale

• Local

• Regional

• In single state/territory

• Cross-jurisdictional

• National

Check point – If the issue is not at least cross-jurisdictional then it will generally not meet the core criteria for management under the Work Plan and should not be submitted to Environment Ministers for consideration. However as noted, where the product originates, or the action(s) required to minimise its impact may be cross-jurisdictional.

Further analysis (through assessing the following aspects) may help determine this.

Occurrence

• Already existing or emerging

• Transient

• Seasonal

• Ongoing

• High risk of continuing (short to long-term progression) or re-occurrence

Source

What is the root-cause of the negative social, economic and environmental impacts? Consider whether the product is:

• Designed and manufactured in single jurisdiction

• Designed and manufactured in/across multiple jurisdictions

• Imported. Where does import occur? How?

Complexity of supply chain

• Characteristics and complexity of the product (considering its different components)

• Characteristics and complexity of the supply chain

• What is the market stability of the product (for example, early in development and production a product may have low stability because of an unproven market, while a more mature product would likely have a more stable market).

• What is the rate of recovery of waste from the product?

• What is the free-rider percentage?

210

9

Impact

• Is it hazardous? If so, how?

• General environmental (visibility, greenhouse gas, pollution, odour, dust, etc.)

• Resource impacts (water, sewage, etc.)

• Health – how many people does/could it affect in what way/s? (acute/chronic, minor/major)

• Impacts sensitive populations (e.g. elderly, children, those with pre-existing conditions etc.)

• Adverse lifestyle effects (e.g. impedes outdoor activities)

Severity and trajectory

• Concentration in directly impacted populations

• Steady

• Worsening (how quickly?)

Stakeholders

• Outline of the key affected stakeholders/stakeholder groups

Current management

Is there a currently known method for effective minimisation?

• If not, why?

• If so:

– What is the method?

– Is it currently implemented?

• If not, why?

– Effective or ineffective for current and expected future situation?

– If ineffective, why?

Risk of no action

• What are the likely impacts if no action (or no further action) is taken?

Other risks

• Political/reputational considerations

• Economic impacts

• Social/stakeholder concerns

• Technical limitations

• Legal considerations

Check point – If the issue is cross-jurisdictional in the way previously described, or national, this meets core requirement 3 and assessment can proceed.

2b Assess feasibility of action

To assess the feasibility of taking product stewardship action on a potential priority product impact issue, an initial costs and benefits analysis needs to be undertaken. As stated previously, this is not expected to be in-depth, but must provide enough analysis to aid in the Environment Minister’s consideration.

The following are elements of the issue that need to be assessed to confirm that the impact the product has can be reduced through product stewardship because:

• There is the potential to reduce or change the materials used in the products.

• The way the product is used can be changed to minimise its impacts.

• The recovery of resources (including materials and energy) from waste from the product can be improved.

Determine potential options to manage the issue

Once a waste stream from a product issue has been characterised, an appropriate Action to address the issue needs to be considered, taking into account the characteristics identified.

This can be in the form of voluntary, co-regulated or regulated product stewardship Action.

Considerations that may help inform potential options to manage the issue include:

• Is there already action underway on this issue?

– If so, is there a clear regulatory gap or failure?

• Who is most appropriate to sponsor and lead on the Action

211


– Note that it is assumed that the sponsoring jurisdiction during the Assessment Stage will undertake the action, unless otherwise agreed. A priority cannot be recommended to Environment Ministers without a sponsoring jurisdiction.

• Is a single environmental standard or other cross-jurisdictional measure required, for example, to achieve a consistent outcome or approach? Why?

• If cross-jurisdictional, will it impose unnecessary costs or obligations on jurisdictions where the issue is not currently a problem?

• Would there be more collective benefit in addressing one or more other product impact issues and would this be at a lower overall cost to implement?

• What is the level of preparedness of industry to act?

• What is the level of preparedness of government to act?

• What will be the cost to industry and governments to take action?

– What are the resourcing and other requirements to take action?

• What is the likely consumer willingness to pay for the action undertaken by industry and/or government?

– Are consumers asking for action or will they need to be convinced?

• Is there a market for the recovered resource?

• How will it facilitate knowledge/information/technical transfer requirements? If so, how?

• Are there international examples of action on a similar issue that can be drawn on?

• Are the products identified as being a risk internationally, for example under: the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, the Minamata Convention on Mercury, the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous

Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants.

Determine indicative timeframes for Action

Any potential Action options should also include the expected timeframes to:

Assess further

• This initial analysis stage may expose knowledge gaps that require more time and/or resources to investigate further.

Design final approach for Action

• This is where the in-depth analysis of relative costs and benefits of different types of action (voluntary, co-regulatory or regulatory) are considered, and then an approach is chosen and designed.

Implement

• This should consider the processes that need to be developed and put in place before Action can commence.

• This will be dependent on the type of approach chosen – voluntary, co-regulatory or regulatory.

• For voluntary schemes this may include the likely time needed to develop and implement specific guidelines for undertaking the action.

• For co-regulatory and regulatory schemes this should also consider likely timeframes to develop and make legislation.

212

11

Steps 3–4 – Prioritisation and agreement of the Work Plan Steps 3–4 cover the decision on whether an issue is considered a priority, the assignment of roles and responsibilities to undertake Action, and final agreement of the Work Plan.

Step 3 – Determining priorities and assigning roles and responsibilities

Step 3 covers the processes that need to be completed to seek a decision from Environment Ministers on issues to be prioritised for management on the Work Plan.

Determining priorities

The process to seek a decision by Environment Ministers whether to prioritise an issue on the Work plan is:

1. Jurisdiction(s) prepare(s) a paper outlining the analysis undertaken in Steps 1–2

This meets core requirement 4.

2. Jurisdictions consult with other jurisdictions to seek support for prioritising the issue and recommending it as such to Environment Ministers. Comments from jurisdictions should be included with the paper.

3. Jurisdictions coordinate to ensure that no more than 4-5 issues are recommended to Environment Ministers on a yearly basis. Priorities will be limited to 3-4 in a rolling two-year timeframe.

This meets core requirement 5.

4. The Senior Officials Group endorses the paper and recommends it to Environment Ministers for consideration.

5. Environment Ministers make a decision on whether the issue is deemed a priority or not.

Assigning roles and responsibilities

Once a product impact issue has been deemed a priority, a sponsoring jurisdiction must be confirmed to undertake the Action Stage.

As stated previously, it is assumed that the sponsoring jurisdiction during the Assessment Stage will also undertake the Action Stage. This may not however always be the case, and/or undertaking the Action Stage may require more jurisdictions to participate.

Identifying who will undertake the investigative work to design an appropriate approach includes consideration of existing powers and responsibilities, as well as available resources that can be contributed to the issue.

Any jurisdiction/s can self-nominate to sponsor or co-sponsor an issue.

Step 4 – Agreement on the Work Plan

Following a decision by Environment Ministers on priorities and agreement on roles and responsibilities for every priority, agreement will be reached on the Work Plan.

This will include when the first report on each priority (outlining action undertaken under Step 5) is due to Environment Ministers.

A high level explanation of the decision on considered issues is to be conveyed through the Meeting of Environment Ministers agreed statement.

Check point – These three steps must be completed before proceeding to the next step.

This meets core requirements 4 and 5 of the Assessment Stage.

213


ActionThe Action stage encompasses the design of the product stewardship approach, the implementation and operation of the chosen approach, and the review of that approach at pre-determined intervals.

Taking Action on a priority product impact issue will be the responsibility of the sponsoring jurisdiction that is agreed during Step 4 of the Assessment Stage. This section provides guidance on the Action Stage.

There are 6 core requirements of the Action Stage that ensure there is timely, measurable progress on minimising the product impact issue. These are that:

1. The sponsoring jurisdiction will manage the Action Stage and ensure all requirements are met.

2. The responsible party will establish a working group for the management of the issue and report on progress.

a. The working group should be well-represented from various parts of the supply chain relevant to the priority issue.

3. The action design is fit-for-purpose and cost-effective.

4. Timeframes and clear measures of success are established.

a. Note - a two-year work plan will be assumed for each priority issue unless otherwise agreed.

5. Where appropriate (for example where a product impact issue is particularly complex) Environment Ministers must agree to the final Action design before implementation commences.

6. There is regular review and reporting to Environment Ministers on progress.

a. Note – this can happen throughout the timeframe for delivery and must happen after two years.

Step 5 – Design the Approach

The design of the approach to be implemented will be undertaken by the sponsoring jurisdiction and the working group established for each priority product impact issue.

The design should encompass the analysis undertaken during the Assessment Stage and build on it.

The sponsoring jurisdiction will report back to Environment Ministers and seek agreement to the Action designed during Step 5 at a pre-determined time agreed to in Step 4 of the Assessment Stage.

Which product stewardship approach?

This is the type of product stewardship action that will be implemented. It can range from voluntary through to mandatory through co-regulatory or regulatory schemes.

The approach should be chosen based on an in depth analysis of the costs and benefits of action and be fit-for-purpose for managing that product impact issue.

The analysis undertaken during the Assessment Stage should be used here and built on or changed as appropriate.

Establish timeframe for delivery

As a baseline, a two-year work plan will be assumed for each priority issue. The work may be escalated at each meeting within this two-year work plan, and must be formally reviewed after two years. A shorter or longer time-frame can be agreed to for a priority issue on a case-by-case basis.

214

13

Establish the evaluation criteria

The sponsoring jurisdiction and working group must establish evaluation criteria. The evaluation criteria will be used to review and evaluate the success of the Action. These should answer the following questions:

• What are the objectives of the scheme?

– These should be clear and concise and easily answer the questions ‘so what?’, ‘by when?’ and ‘how?’

• What is the baseline?

– This should be detailed information on the product impacts before Action is implemented. This can include qualitative and quantitative data.

• What are the measures of success?

– These should be established in relation to the baseline and agreed timeframes for reporting. Separate measures of success can be established for Stage 6 Implement and Stage 7 Operate.

Seeking agreement from Environment Ministers on

Action design

The sponsoring jurisdiction will report back to Environment Ministers and seek agreement to the Action design at a pre-determined time agreed to in Step 4 of the Assessment Stage.

Note that the analysis undertaken during the Action design stage may result in the decision to not proceed with action. This may happen for several reasons, including:

• The issue has been resolved in the meantime or is expected to be resolved through market forces (or other) without further action

• Further analysis shows there is too high a cost to take action

• There is not enough resourcing

Check point – These three steps must be completed before proceeding to Step 6 – Implement.

This meets core requirements 1–4 of the Action Stage.

215


Steps 6 and 7 – Implement and Operate the chosen approach

The sponsoring jurisdiction and working group will implement and operate the chosen approach as agreed during the Approach Design stage.

Step 8 – Monitor and Review

The sponsoring jurisdiction and working group will undertake review and evaluation of the Action at regular intervals pre-determined during the Approach design stage.

The review will be undertaken against the measures of success developed during the Approach Design stage.

The working group will report to Environment Ministers on the findings of these reviews at regular, pre-determined intervals agreed during the Approach Design stage.

Step 9a – Continue with chosen approach

If the review of the implemented action shows that it is delivering in line with the intended outcomes, then the sponsoring jurisdiction(s) should continue with the action.

Step 9b – Continue with modifications

If the review of the implemented action shows that it is largely delivering in line with the intended outcomes but some modifications would be beneficial, then the sponsoring jurisdiction(s) must undertake design work on the modifications.

This is unlikely to require further review by Environment Ministers but may be put to the next meeting if deemed necessary.

216

15

Escalation10 – Escalation

Escalation is not an assumed step for every action. Escalation means that the action has not been completed, has not been effective in minimising the impact of the product in line with the measures of success, or has resulted in perverse outcomes. This will be determined following a formal review of the Action stage at pre-determined times.

As noted previously, the specific process to determine this will be developed by the working group as part of the design process. They will also develop information on the feasibility and benefits of escalation for consideration by Environment Ministers.

This should include the environmental and socio-economic impacts, complexity of the waste product’s life cycle, the level of preparedness of industry to act and the cost of either modifying the approach or increasing regulation.

The form that escalation takes will be dependent on the design of the Action. That is, whether it is voluntary, co-regulatory or regulatory. The assumption in escalation is that the requirements on those covered by the Action will increase.

If it is agreed that escalation is needed and appropriate, the process will begin back at Design within the Action Stage.

Priorities set under the product stewardship act 2011

The Minister for the Environment and Energy has the authority to set yearly product impact issues for priority action in accordance with Section 108A of the Product Stewardship Act 2011. These will include only issues that the Commonwealth reasonably expects will need some form of regulatory intervention under the Product Stewardship Act 2011.

They will be separate to those determined through the Assessment | Action | Escalation Process, however the same principles as those outlined in this Process will guide their prioritisation.

These priorities will also be listed on the Work Plan.

The general administrative process for determining these priorities is outlined here for transparency and clarity around how it will feed into the Work Plan.

217


Process for the minister for the environment and energy yearly priority setting process under the Product Stewardship Act 2011

1. By the end of September each year the Department of the Environment and Energy will publish a draft priority list for the following year for consultation to State & Territory governments, local government, industry organisations and the general public. Submissions will be due by the end of December each year.

1.1. The Department will provide guidance on how submissions should be made.

2. The Department of Environment and Energy will consult on the submissions and draft priorities as appropriate.

3. By the end of each financial year, the Minister for the Environment and Energy will publish the priority products for the next financial year.

218

environment.gov.au

ENV

240.

0218

219

Draft 2018-2019 Product Impact Management (PIM) Work-plan

PRODUCT IMPACT MANAGEMENT PRIORITIES

ASSESSMENT

ISSUE OBJECTIVE OF ACTION SPONSORING JURISDICTION

ACTION DEADLINE FOR IMPLEMENTING ACTION

REPORTING DUE AT NEXT MEM

JURISDICTION RESPONSIBLE FOR ACTION

1 Photovoltaic systems

1. National Product Stewardship scheme for Photovoltaic Systems (PV)

Victoria Establish jurisdictional Working Group to work with the PV industry to develop national PV Product Stewardship scheme.

2. [By 2019] [Plan for implementation by 2019]

Victoria

2 Electrical and electronic products

3. Consider inclusion of other products under National Television and Computer Recycling Scheme

Commonwealth TBC 4. [Dependent on defining Action.

5. Within 2 years from agreement of action]

[Progress update.

Plan for implementation by XXXX]

3 Large energy storage batteries

6. Establish a product stewardship scheme for large energy storage batteries

7. [Dependent on establishing sponsoring jurisdiction and defining Action.


[Sponsoring jurisdiction established]

4 Plastic oil containers

9. Consider need for options to replace program

Commonwealth TBC 10. [Dependent on defining Action.


[Progress update.

Plan for implementation by XXXX]

220


2

ACTION: PHASES: DESIGN – IMPLEMENT – OPERATE – MONITOR - REVIEW ISSUE OBJECTIVE OF ACTION SPONSORING

JURISDICTION ACTION ACTION

PHASE KEY DELIVERY TIMEFRAME



1 Plastic bags 12. Voluntary, national action by retailers to phase-out the use of heavier plastic department store or ‘boutique’ bags.

Queensland Establish a cross-jurisdictional working group to work with retailers on voluntary measures to phase-out the use of heavier plastic department store or ‘boutique’ bags.

13. [DESIGN] [Implement within 2 years]

Nil. Report to first Environment Ministers meeting in 2018.

Queensland

14. Nationally consistent approach to phase-out the use of single-use plastic bags.

Ministers are supporting actions by individual jurisdictions to phase out the use of single-use plastic bags, but no actions have been specified.


All State/Territory Governments

2 Microbeads 16. National phase-out of plastic microbeads.

New South Wales and Commonwealth

17.

Assess effectiveness of voluntary approach to phase out microbeads.

[MONITOR] All jurisdictions.

[Work with Accord Australasia to develop a compliance protocol.]


New South Wales and Commonwealth

[Commission an independent assessment of the sale of microbeads in the retail sector.]

19. [OPERATE] Commonwealth

3 Tyres Implement the National Market Development Strategy for Used Tyres 2017-22

20.

Queensland and Victoria

21.

Transition the cross-jurisdictional Working Group to a National Oversight Group (NOG) to develop the details of the implementation of the National Market Development Strategy for Used Tyres 2017-22 and oversee this implementation.

[IMPLEMENT] [Transition to NOG by end of October 2017 and regularly report to Environment Minsters on Strategy.]

Queensland and Victoria

[Commonwealth to liaise with the Commonwealth Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, on updating relevant engineering, safety and biofuel standards to enable greater uptake of tyre derived


Commonwealth

221


3

products in engineering and fuel applications.]

23. ACCC authorisation of Tyre Stewardship Australia’s (TSA) scheme.

Report back on the progress of the Australian CCC’s review into TSA’s scheme.

24. [IMPLEMENT/ 25. OPERATE/RE

VIEW]

Provide report

26. 4 27. Packaging Administration of the Australian Packaging Covenant.

28. Implement the Australian Packaging Covenant

[IMPLEMENT]

Review of the Covenant’s Strategic Plan. [REVIEW] [Establish working group]

[Commonwealth]

Review the Covenant’s annual Statement of Intent.

[REVIEW]

5 Container Deposit Scheme

Successful implementation of State and Territory Governments’ container deposit schemes.

All State/Territory Governments

Cooperate and share information to assist in the successful implementation of container deposit schemes.

[OPERATE] All State/Territory Governments

6

29.

Handheld batteries

30. National Product Stewardship scheme for handheld batteries

Queensland Continue to work with battery industry to develop voluntary Product Stewardship scheme for power tools and other hand-held rechargeable batteries.


All

Commission work to evaluate the feasibility of potential regulatory options to underpin voluntary scheme.


Senior Officials Group

Jurisdictions to participate and make financial and in-kind contributions to support industry engagement to develop and implement scheme.


All

Working Group to prepare project plan and detailed budget for Senior Officials Group out-of-session.

[DESIGN] [Implement within 2 years]

[Qld out of session]

222


4

ESCALATION ISSUE OBJECTIVE OF ACTION SPONSORING

JURISDICTION ACTION DEADLINE FOR

DELIVERING OBJECTIVES



223


5

WORK SUPPORTING THE PRODUCT IMPACT MANAGEMENT STRATEGY - ADMINISTRATION

ISSUE OBJECTIVE OF ACTION SPONSORING JURISDICTION ACTION TIMEFRAMES REPORTING DUE

AT NEXT MEM


1 Voluntary accreditation of product stewardship schemes

34. Encourage voluntary product stewardship arrangements to be of a high standard or (at least) best practice.

Commonwealth Run regular applications rounds for the accreditation of voluntary product stewardship arrangements.

35. [Run an application round every one to two years]

Commonwealth

36. [Run the next application round by early-mid 2018]

[Progress report] Commonwealth

2 Guidance for establishing and managing product stewardship

37. Promote consistent, fit-for-purpose design of product stewardship action.

Commonwealth Develop guidance on details of establishing and managing product stewardship action.

38. [By first Environment Ministers meeting 2018]

[Provide draft for comment]

Commonwealth

224

Circulars

Local Government Industry Participation Policy Framework – a procurement tool for councils - Circular 13.3

ToChief Executive Officer Corporate Services StaffEconomic Development and Tourism StaffElected MembersFinance and Accounting StaffGovernance OfficersPolicy and Strategic Planning StaffProcurement Staff

Date26 March 2018

ContactLea BaconEmail: [email protected]

Response RequiredNo

SummaryThe LGA has prepared the Local Government Industry Participation Policy Framework to translate the South Australian Industry Participation Policy (SAIPP) of the State Government into principles applicable to local government. This Circular provides further details.

The Local Government Industry Participation Policy Framework is available here Industry Participation Policy Framework (977 kb)

Context

The State Government’s South Australian Industry Participation Policy (SAIPP) has assisted government departments and agencies to make an assessment of the economic contribution between rival tenders within a broader value-for-money context.

With support from the Local Government Research and Development Scheme, the LGA has worked with the Industry Advocate and the Department for State Development to translate the SAIPP into principles applicable to local government. The attached Local Government Industry Participation Policy Framework – A procurement tool for local councils (the Framework) is modelled on the SAIPP, yet allows for flexibility within the parameters of council policies, practices and procedures.

The Framework has the benefit of feedback and input from member councils, the Metropolitan Local Government Group, the Network of Procurement Professionals and LGA Procurement. The Framework provides the direction and tools to assist councils in recognising the important contribution businesses make to their local economy through labour, investment and the whole supply chain.

Benefits to councils

While councils need to get value-for-money from every dollar that is spent, this does not always mean using the cheapest option. In this context, there is an opportunity for councils to gain maximum value from procurement through the inclusion of economic assessment criteria in contracts for goods, services and works.

In addition to maximising value for money, councils that embrace the Local Government Industry Participation Policy Framework, will be able to demonstrate a modern, flexible and adaptable approach to procurement, that:

• balances the ability to exploit competition in category supply markets with the economic benefits of local procurement;

• nurtures a mix of local, national and international suppliers to achieve the most influence from councils strong purchasing power; and

• uses procurement to achieve broader council objectives.

The Framework is aligned with the current work the LGA and member councils have been undertaking with the Office for the Small Business Commissioner and the Small Business Friendly Council Charter Program. That program seeks to formalise a framework which allows greater recognition of small business and the activities undertaken by various councils. The benefits of being small business friendly include the generation and maintenance of local jobs, embracing a “buy local” philosophy particularly in local procurement, and the embedded philosophy and practice in creating the right environment for business to grow.

Next steps

The Local Government Industry Participation Policy Framework was endorsed by the LGA Board at its meeting on 22 March 2018. The LGA Board has asked LGA Procurement to update model templates to reflect this policy.



9.3.2.2

03/04/2018

A58084CEO

225

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

The Framework is now recommended to all SA councils to inform their procurement policies and practices. Consideration of the Framework will assist councils to develop an understanding of how procurement can consider and incorporate an assessment of economic benefit within the tendering processes if the overall need is demonstrated.

To support further consideration and implementation of the Framework consistently across like-minded councils, the LGA will facilitate a workshop with member councils, the Industry Advocate and the Small Business Commissioner (details to follow).

Please contact Lea Bacon, Director Policy LGA on [email protected] to express an interest in a future workshop.



226

LGA of SA ECM 649481 Industry Participation Policy Guide: Procurement tools for SA councils Page 1 of 22

Local Government Industry Participation Policy Framework: A procurement tool for SA

councils

March 2018

227


Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 3

2. South Australian Industry Participation Policy ............................................................................ 4

3. Objectives for Local Government ................................................................................................. 4

4. Policy Framework for Councils ..................................................................................................... 5

5. Approach for SA Councils ............................................................................................................. 5

Step 1: Consider the principles ............................................................................................................ 5

Step 2: Define the thresholds ............................................................................................................... 5

Step 3: Define the region ..................................................................................................................... 5

6. Implementation and Templates ..................................................................................................... 9

Appendix 1 –Employment Contribution Test .....................................................................................10

Appendix 2 – Industry Participation Plan ...........................................................................................14

228


1. Introduction

The Industry Participation Policy Framework: A procurement tool for SA councils translates the South Australian Industry Participation Policy (SAIPP) of the State Government into principles applicable to local government.

The Local Government Industry Participation Policy Framework is modelled on the SAIPP, which has proved to be very successful in using the assessment of the economic contribution between rival tenders within a broader value-for-money context. For example, when certain economic outcomes are maximised this provides the Council with evidence that one tender has more economic contribution than another.

It is important to note the emphasis of the State’s Industry Participation Policy it is not about special treatment or price preferencing but rather about recognising the important contribution businesses make to the South Australian economy through labour and other supply input and this can equally be applied at a regional scale as well as the whole of State.

South Australia’s Local Government Act 1999 and its regulations -in particular, Sections 48 and 49 of the Act seem to provide a perfect opportunity to carry the government’s Industry Participation Policy through into standard policies/ practice in local government.

Modern procurement principles and practices will drive councils’ response to the ongoing pressure to provide more and better services with less money. Competitiveness in the supply market is an important feature of achieving value for money. However, councils also have a role to play in providing opportunity where possible for local suppliers, which can lead to broader economic and social benefits.

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 49 of the Local Government Act 1999, councils have procurement policies that provide direction towards obtaining value in the expenditure of public money, providing fair and ethical treatment of suppliers, and ensuring probity, accountability and transparency in procurement operations. These policies are legally required to include detail on contracting out of services, competitive tendering, and the use of local goods and services.

Councils are encouraged to use the Local Government Industry Participation Policy Framework to inform their procurement policies. Doing so will help to develop an understanding of how procurement can consider and incorporate an assessment of economic benefit within the tendering processes if the overall need is demonstrated.

By embracing a modern, flexible and adaptable approach to procurement, there is an opportunity for South Australian councils to demonstrate best practice, to become customers of choice and establish confidence in the market by investing in their relationships with local suppliers.

229


2. South Australian Industry Participation Policy The Industry Advocate Act 2017 sets out the objectives of the South Australian Industry Participation Policy (SAIPP). The SAIPP provides a single, comprehensive framework for strategic procurement policies that focus on the economic benefit of the State. The policy measures economic benefit through jobs, investment and supply chain opportunities.

The South Australian Government is responsible for developing and implementing the Industry Participation Policy Framework. The Industry Advocate is, among other things, responsible for ensuring that commitments made under Industry Participation Plans are delivered, including opportunities for smaller businesses and suppliers in the supply-chain. Further information on the SAIPP is available on the Department of State Development’s website1.

3. Objectives for Local Government While some South Australian councils may already have procurement policies that define an approach for contracting with local suppliers, the adoption of an Industry Participation Policy Framework as applicable to local government provides the greatest opportunity for assessing economic contribution through jobs, investment and the supply chain. Consideration of this policy guide and the attached templates will allow for flexibility within the parameters of transparent policies, practices and procedures. Implementation of procurement frameworks requires expertise, resourcing and a culture of compliance. Provided staff are appropriately skilled in respect of procurement, these tools will assist procurement processes, provide appropriate documentation for procurement activities and foster strategies and environments to enable councils to undertake collective acquisition. These are all factors that councils could focus on to enhance value for money and reduce procurement risk. The benefits of SA councils considering the application of the principles of the SAIPP to their own policies and processes include:

ensuring that council procurement processes include an assessment of the impact of council expenditure on local employment and economy;

ensuring that the councils achieve value for money for public expenditure; and

promoting collaboration across councils’ procurement spending to achieve more value for money and increased economic development together.

Assessment of economic contribution through an Industry Participation Policy Framework is designed to apply to the any following expenditure:

procurement of goods and services including infrastructure and construction;

Federally-funded or State-funded infrastructure and procurement projects managed by the Council; and

Federally-funded or State-funded grants received by the Council and then spent on projects or procurement.

1 https://statedevelopment.sa.gov.au/industry/south-australian-industry-participation-policy

230

https://statedevelopment.sa.gov.au/industry/south-australian-industry-participation-policy


4. A Policy Framework for SA Councils The Office of the Industry Advocate (OIA) received economic modelling from Deloitte Access Economics to advise South Australian Government on how economic contribution could be measured in South Australian Government procurement. This framework is directly applicable to Council expenditure as well.

Deloitte found in most cases that economic contribution in procurement should be measured by focusing on:

i. labour;

ii. investment; and

iii. supply-chain inputs in performance of the contracts.

The Employment Contribution Test (ECT) uses weighting and scoring assessment that measure ‘labour’ only.

The Industry Participation Plan (IPP) uses weighting and scoring assessment to measure outcomes that provide for all three areas.

Templates for the ECT and IPP are as applicable for councils are provided in Appendix 1 and 2. These are provided as a reference guide and can be changed to meet the requirements of Council policy.

While it is noted that the South Australian Government templates were amended to an online format in August 2017 and changed in design and operation, the LGA Industry Participation Policy Framework deems the templates in this guide as the more appropriate to local councils, due to their paper based format and ease of application in existing council tender systems. The online format is not recommended for councils.

5. Approach for SA Councils The following methodology will assist SA councils. It provides the flexibility for councils to apply the tools in a manner that meets their own needs when setting procurement policies.

Step 1: Consider the principles underpinning an Industry Participation Policy

Step 2: Define the thresholds

Step 3: Define the region

Step 1: Consider the principles underpinning an Industry Participation Policy

First principle: Look local for suppliers when undertaking direct engagement / non-

competitive purchases

The first principle of a council supporting their local economy through procurement is to seek out businesses that employ and invest in the local economy. This is critical to promoting economic benefit in the council area, the region or the State.

231


The most obvious impediment to economic contribution is when there are no local businesses involved in the procurement. Councils are encouraged to actively identify and develop relationships with local suppliers and to seek quotes and tenders from them when appropriate.

This approach is sufficient to cover all low-value purchases as may be defined in a Council’s procurement policy. For example, if a policy allows for the direct engagement of a supplier up to a specified value of spend, without the need to obtain competitive quotes or invite tenders, then the act of seeking to invite a quote from or engage with a business within the council area or broader region will contribute to the intent of supporting the local economy.

For such low-value contracts, an Employment Contribution Test or Industry Participation Plan is not required.

Second principle: Apply the Employment Contribution Test to measure labour

contribution

When undertaking a lower-value competitive procurement, especially in services, employment is the most important measure of economic contribution.

If there is employment for the council area or the region, then this is likely to generate income for the area. This will not only support people living nearby but this income is also spent in the local economy. Businesses located in the council area pay council rates and as such contribute to the provision of council services that support the local community.

The Employment Contribution Test (Appendix 1) is used by South Australian Government in regions on procurement between $33,000 and $1 million. This can be used as a guide for when councils could apply an Employment Contribution Test.

Third Principle: Apply the Industry Participation Plan to measure labour, investment and

supply chain inputs

For larger value procurements, especially those in civil construction, an Industry Participation Plan (Appendix 2) measuring employment but also the level of investment and use of sub-contracting from the region is the best way of assessing economic contribution.

An Industry Participation Plan is used by South Australian Government in Regions on procurements from $1 million. This can be used as a guide for when Councils could apply an Industry Participation Plan.

Step 2: Define the thresholds The October 2016 version of the South Australian Industry Participation Policy has the following instruments:

Employment Contribution Test is used for procurements between $33,000 and $1 million. Industry Participation Plan is used for procurements from $1 million.

For both measures, weighting in a tender assessment criteria is set to at least 15 percent. This figure was informed by Deloitte’s economic modelling.

232


This can be used as a guide to inform councils when setting their own procurement policies. However, the methodology allows for flexibility and variation when councils set their own policies.

For example, a Council may decide to apply an Employment Contribution Test for procurements between $50,000 and $4 million, and an Industry Participation Plan is used for procurements from $4 million. A policy could be flexible to stipulate that an Industry Participation Plan is also used under $4M where local supplier is known – as this uses knowledge of local market without complicating the policy.

The size of the industry participation weighting will determine how important economic assessment is to the evaluation of a tender winner. The remaining evaluation criteria provides for a rounded assessment of value for money. While 15 percent may seem high, the weighting needs to be high enough to be worthwhile in the evaluation of tenders. It should be noted that the actual spend on a contract does not increase by the percentage weighting given to economic assessment. Value for money is achieved by balancing the benefits of economic development on the one hand with criteria such as price, quality, experience and delivery on the other.

Step 3: Define the region It is recommended that councils apply the ECT and IPP at a ‘regional’ level and not at the ‘Council area’ level. This is because a Council area may be too small in size and there are not enough capable businesses in most cases. This approach also supports those cases where councils across a region purchase similar goods and services in a joined up collaborative manner. For example, establishing and using a panel of suppliers across a broader group of purchasing councils. It is also the case that collaborative purchasing can build business capability and promotes better suppliers winning. To encourage reciprocal arrangements among neighbouring, or nearby councils, economic assessment should ideally be evaluated at the region level. Smaller councils (either in population or geographic size) can gain particular benefit from this approach as they gain access to broader opportunities from regional economic development and they can leverage their business capability on those projects in neighbouring councils. The region can be defined by participating councils by the following criteria:

1. Councils should look for a neighbouring community to be a region; 2. The region should be meaningful to the local community and this is a common sense test; but 3. The region should also be big enough for most procurement to have at least one capable

business from the region involved. In most cases, this is larger than an individual council area.

Councils have flexibility to implement a policy that suits their needs. While a region can be set on a case-by-case basis for each individual procurement activity, the reality is that this would add complication and as such a defined ‘region’ would apply in most cases.

Some councils have used the entire State as the region. This approach may be useful when councils want to measure broad economic contribution across South Australia and have a broader assessment of the neighbourhood.

Other councils may choose a more defined area, for example councils in northern Adelaide have agreed this approach in alignment with the Northern Economic Plan region. Some regional areas in South Australia already have an identity beyond the council area, for example through their Regional LGAs.

233


Assessment of economic contribution under the proposed approach is primarily at the regional level as councils can be geographically small or limited in population. What this means is that business in a nearby council area has the same chance of winning as a business in the council itself under this approach. But when councils act together to apply this model across all members, it will benefit them overall even more.

Economic assessment on sector-wide contracts

Sector-wide panel contracts allow timely access to contracts at better commercial rates than available at the individual Council or even at the regional level. LGA Procurement has a wide range of sector wide contracts available for councils to use. There may be cases where the benefits of collaboration at the sector-wide level are very large. These include commodity purchases (bulk items of a similar nature). Collaboration can promote value for money in terms of better commercial rates as well as potential for more economic development outcomes for the region or the State. Examples of when these goals reinforce each other include when the size of a contract can promote new participants to locate to a region or the State to establish a new office or when an existing business can build up and develop the next level of capability as a result of a larger contract.

234


6. Templates Table 1: Suggested use of Templates

Category Tender Requirement

Note that the IPP Requirements below are to include sub-contracting arrangements where they are proposed/exist

All procurements Look to include suppliers from within the Council or Region when selecting businesses to quote or tender

Competitive procurement between $33,000 and $1 million (or ECT threshold as determined by council)

The Region is the default area for the primary measure of economic contribution. One quote or tender must be from a local business where possible. Employment Contribution Test (ECT) to be completed and forms a minimum 15% of overall evaluation.

Competitive procurement over $1 million (or IPP threshold as determined by council)

The Region is the default area for the primary measure of economic contribution. Submission of an Industry Participation Plan (IPP) is required for the tender to be considered compliant. IPP Plan has a minimum 15% weighting

Collaboration – Regional procurement subject to ECT or IPP Plan

The Region is the default area for the primary measure of economic contribution. Councils collaborate to aggregate purchasing and contracting. Look for Regional suppliers. Minimum 15% weighting.

Collaboration – sector-wide procurement subject to ECT or IPP Plan

LGA or other body to put in place State-wide contracts where there is an overwhelming benefit from this. Look for South Australian suppliers. Minimum 15% weighting.

235


Appendix 1 –Employment Contribution Test

This Employment Contribution Test is designed for procurement activity of up to $1 million. (All prices are GST inclusive)

Employment is the key driver of economic contribution from procurement that is being assessed through the use of this template:

Part A: Employment

A minimum 15% weighting will apply to contract evaluations that use a weighted award criteria.

GENERAL ADMINISTRATION

Business Name

Project Manager

Telephone Email

What is your physical presence in South Australia? (you can tick more than one)

Head Office ☐

Branch Office ☐

Warehouse ☐

Other (please specify)

☐

Location of physical presence

Tender Title

Tender Reference Number

Council

Tender value ($AUD) This is the total value of your tender, including GST, including all options and for the life of the contract including all possible extensions

236


PART A: LABOUR

The purpose of this section is to measure the potential economic benefit through the use of local labour.

i ii iii IV V

Total How much in the Region Note: do not include Fly-in/Fly-out

labour from outside the

Region See Guidance

Note 4

Percentage of hours in the

Region See Guidance

Note 3

How much outside the

Region but in South

Australia Note: do not include Fly-in/Fly-out

labour from outside SA

See Guidance Note 4

Percentage of hours outside

the Region but in South

Australia See Guidance

Note 3

Head Contract

A1: How many hours of labour will be used to perform the contract from within your business?

See Guidance Note 1

……….hrs ……….hrs ………….% ……….hrs ………….%

Sub-contract/s or supply arrangements

A2: Will you need to engage one or more subcontractors to deliver this contract?

☐YES Complete A3

☐ NO No further action required

A3: How many hours of sub-contracted labour will be used to perform the contract?

See Guidance Note 2

……….hrs ……….hrs ………….% ……….hrs ………….%

A4: Total Add A1 & A3

……….hrs ……….hrs ………….% ……….hrs ………….%

Guidance Notes:

1. We are seeking the number of labour hours your business will employ directly to deliver the contract should you be successful. Do not include the labour hours related to outsourced or subcontracted work in this question. Outsourced and subcontracted work should be included in A3.

2. We are seeking an estimation of the number of labour hours from any outsourced and subcontracted work to deliver the contract.

237


3. If you are quoting/tendering for an hourly rate rather than total number of hours, please complete column (iii & v) only

4. Please use principal place of residence to determine South Australian labour (do not include fly in/fly out labour

For the purpose of the Employment Contribution Test - the Region is defined as follows:

[Council to insert map or definition based on considerations in Step 3: Define the region]

238

Scoring system

Assessment Guideline Score Total

% of labour hours performed in the Region

>90% >80% but ≤ 90% >70% but ≤ 80% >60% but ≤ 70% >50% but ≤ 60% >40% but ≤ 50% >30% but ≤ 40% ≤ 30%

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

/7

% of labour hours performed in South Australia (including the Region)

>80% >60% but ≤ 80% >40% but ≤ 60% ≤ 40%

3 2 1 0

/3

/10

239

Appendix 2 – Industry Participation Plan

This Industry Participation Plan (IPP) is designed for procurement activity over $1 million delivered in the Region. (All prices are GST inclusive) There are three key drivers of economic contribution from procurement that are being assessed through the use of this template:

Part A: Employment

Part B: Investment

Part C: Supply Inputs

The IPP Plan will contribute a minimum of 15% of the overall Tender Assessment.

GENERAL ADMINISTRATION

Business Name

Project Manager

Telephone Email

What is your physical presence in South Australia? (you can tick more than one)

Head Office ☐

Branch Office ☐

Warehouse ☐

Other (please specify)

☐

Location of physical presence

Tender Title

Tender Reference Number

Council

Tender value ($AUD) This is the total value of your tender, including GST, including all options and for the life of the contract including all possible extensions

Please note: Your Business is expected to monitor and report against the commitments outlined in the following plan.

Guidance Note:

It is important that you complete all sections in this template, even if you believe you are repeating information contained in the rest of your tender response. The officers evaluating your Industry Participation Plan do not have access to your full tender response and can only award you marks for the information you provide in this template.

When completing this template please ensure that all the money you, as the Tenderer, will expend to deliver this contract (within the value thresholds for each section) appears somewhere – you will either;

Directly employ someone, existing or new staff, to do the work/make the product or deliver the service (include in ‘Part A: Jobs’)

Engage a subcontractor to perform some of the work/make the product or deliver the service (include in ‘Part C: Supply Inputs)

240

Significant investments your business has made or will make to deliver the contract that your accountant can depreciate or is already depreciating, (put in ‘Part B: Investment), or

Purchase products that are needed to fulfil the contract (put in ‘Part C: Supply Inputs’).

PART A: LABOUR

The purpose of this section is to measure the potential economic benefit to the Region and South Australia through the use of local labour.

i ii iii iv v

Total How much in

South

Australia

Note: do not

include Fly-

in/Fly-out labour

from outside the

SA

See Guidance

Note 3

Percentage of

hours in South

Australia

See Guidance

Note 2

How much

within the

Region

Note: do not

include Fly-

in/Fly-out labour

from outside

Region

See Guidance

Note 3

Percentage of

hours within

the Region

See Guidance

Note 2

Head Contract

A1: How many hours of labour will be used to perform the contract from within your business?

See Guidance Note 1

……….hrs ……….hrs ………….% ……….hrs ………….%

Guidance Notes:

1. We are seeking the number of labour hours your business will employ directly to deliver the contract should you be successful. Do not include the labour hours related to outsourced or subcontracted work in this question. Outsourced and subcontracted work should be included in Part C: Supply Inputs.

2. If you are quoting/tendering for an hourly rate rather than total number of hours, please complete column (iii) and (iv)only

3. Please use principal place of residence to determine Region / South Australian labour (do not include fly in/fly out labour). Refer to map at end of document to determine Regional boundaries.

241

PART B: INVESTMENT

The purpose of this section is to measure the potential economic benefit to the Region and South Australia through your investment expenditure.

B1: What investment of $33,000 or more have you or will you make to deliver the contract? Please note any investment that is within the Region.

Guidance Note:

4. Here we are looking for information on significant investments your business will make or has made to deliver this contract. If you are unsure whether a purchase belongs in Part B – Investment or Part C – Supply Inputs, do not record the item in both sections. A good test is to consider if a purchase is a routine consumable good, in which case it should be recorded in Part C – Supply Inputs. If an item has immediate use for this contract and also has a longer tem use and benefit to your business, such as land, a building or a piece of machinery, this could be considered investment and recorded in this section.

5. You may consider here any investment into R&D, Traineeships, or other skill development that your business makes that provides economic benefit to South Australia.

6. If you have no investment above $110,000 to include you do not need to complete this item. Please proceed to Part C: Supply Inputs.

What is the total value of investment to be sourced from within the Region?

$

What is the total value of investment to be permanently located in the Region?

$

242

SA INDUSTRY PARTICIPATION POLICY (TAILORED) PLAN TEMPLATE – USG

PART C: SUPPLY INPUTS

The purpose of this section is to measure the potential economic benefit to the Region and South Australia through the use of supply inputs. (e.g. merchandise, finished products, food and beverages, supplies and raw materials)

C1: What supply inputs valued at over $33,000, will you purchase to deliver this contract? Supply inputs include, but are not limited to lease/hire of major equipment, heavy machinery or heavy vehicles, purchase of items of merchandise, finished products, food and beverages, supplies and raw materials. Please complete the table below.

i ii iii iv v vi vii viii

List the subcontractor / supply inputs over $22,000

(including bundled work

packages) to be purchased in the

course of delivering this

contract. Please add more rows as required or attach

additional pages.

Estimated Value of item

($AUD)

Name & location of subcontractor

/ supplier

(if known)

What is the estimated value

that will be sourced from within South

Australia ($AUD)?

What is the estimated value

that will be sourced within the

Region ($AUD)?

What are the labour hours

directly linked to the delivery of this

supply input? See Guidance Note 8

What percentage of these labour hours will be in

South Australia? Note: do not include Fly-

in/Fly-out labour

See Guidance Note 9

What percentage of these labour hours will be

within the Region?

Note: do not include Fly-in/Fly-out labour

See Guidance Note 9

Guidance Notes:

7. We are looking for a complete list of all purchases of goods that directly relate to this contract. If a purchase is a routine consumable item, it should be recorded in this section. Please include ALL purchases over $110,000, do not just include those purchases sourced from the Region or South Australia. Please do not include any items under the value of $110,000, these will not be considered. An estimated value of the item is important for our scoring methodology, if no value is provided we are unable to allocate a full score.

8. Please include here the labour hours your supplier or subcontractor will use to deliver the supply input.

9. Please use principal place of residence to determine Regional / South Australian labour (do not include fly in/fly out labour).

243

SA INDUSTRY PARTICIPATION POLICY (TAILORED) PLAN TEMPLATE – USG

i ii iii iv v vi vii viii

……….hrs ………….% ………….%

……….hrs ………….% ………….%

……….hrs ………….% ………….%

……….hrs ………….% ………….%

……….hrs ………….% ………….%

……….hrs ………….% ………….%

……….hrs ………….% ………….%

……….hrs ………….% ………….%

244

PART D: DECLARATION

Declaration

As a duly authorised officer of the Business, I agree that if awarded the contract for which this Industry Participation Plan has been prepared, the Business will:

Meet the commitments given in this or an amended Industry Participation Plan Note that the Council reserves the right to negotiate and/or clarify commitments in this plan

prior to finalisation of the contract Note that the information provided in Parts A, B, C is used to score the Plan. This

information will also be incorporated into the contract conditions and you will be required to report against these commitments.

Report to the Council during the project yearly on the anniversary of the contract award and at completion of the contract using the IPP Report template.

Signature: Date:

Name (print): Position:

245

LGA of SA ECM XXXXX < File Name > Page 1 of 22

For the purpose of the Industry Participation Plan - the Region is defined as follows:

[Council to insert map or definition based on considerations in Step 3: Define the

region]

246


Assessment Criteria:

Plan Section

Section Title Assessment Guideline Score

Part A Employment

% of labour hours in South Australia* (include figures from Head Contractor and Supply Chain) *include Regional labour hours

>90% >80% but ≤ 90% >70% but ≤ 80% >60% but ≤ 70% >50% but ≤ 60% >30% but ≤ 50% >10% but ≤ 30% >0% but ≤ 10% 0%

15 13 11 9 7 5 3 1 0

% of labour hours within the Region (include figures from Head Contractor and Supply Chain)

>95% >90% but ≤ 95% >85% but ≤ 90% >80% but ≤ 85% >75% but ≤ 80% >70% but ≤ 75% >65% but ≤ 70% >60% but ≤ 65% >55% but ≤ 60% >50% but ≤ 55% >40% but ≤ 50% >30% but ≤ 40% >20% but ≤ 30% >10% but ≤ 20% >0% but ≤ 10% 0%

35 33 31 29 27 25 23 21 19 17 13 10 7 4 1 0

Part B Capital Expenditure:

Demonstrates significant investment in the State that has the potential to provide temporary or ongoing economic benefit to the Region or the State

Excellent Acceptable/good Marginal Unacceptable

5 3 1 0

Part C Supply Inputs

Percentage of supply inputs (based on value) that are sourced from (or have the potential to be sourced from) within South Australia*. *include supply inputs from Region

>90% >70% but ≤90% >50% but ≤70% >30% but ≤50% >0% but ≤30% 0%

5 4 3 2 1 0

Percentage of supply inputs (based on value) that are sourced from (or have the potential to be sourced from) within the Region.

>90% >80% but ≤ 90% >70% but ≤ 80% >60% but ≤ 70% >50% but ≤ 60% >30% but ≤ 50%

15 13 11 9 7 5

247


Plan Section

Section Title Assessment Guideline Score

>10% but ≤ 30% >0% but ≤ 10% 0%

3 1 0

Score Scoring guidance

Excellent Response demonstrates that all requirements have been met in full and at least some of the requirements will be exceeded.

Acceptable/Good Response demonstrates that most major and minor requirements have been met.

Marginal Response demonstrates that only minor requirements have been met.

Unacceptable Response fails to demonstrate that any requirements have been met.

Plan Section Section Title Range Score Part A Jobs 0-50 Part B Capital Items 0-5 Part C Supply Inputs 0-20 Total Score: /75

248

A WAYFINDING, COASTAL ACCESS AND

CAMPING OPTIONS PROJECT

# E Y R E P E NI NS UL A

EYES ON EYRE

INTERIM REGIONAL FINDINGS MARCH 2018

249

The Barngarla, Nauo, Wirangu,

Kokatha, Mirning, Pitjantjatjara,

Yankunytjatjara and Ngaanyatjarra

people are the traditional custodians of

Eyre Peninsula and the Far West and have

been for thousands of years.

Regional Development Australia Whyalla and

Eyre Peninsula acknowledges and respects

the traditional owners of Eyre Peninsula.

We acknowledge elders past and present, and

we respect the relationship Aboriginal

peoples have to country.

250

# E Y R E P E NS I NS UL A

251

EYES ON EYREW A Y F I N D I N G > C O A S T A L A C C E S S > C A M P I N G

INTERIM FINDINGS OF EYES ON EYRE

BY REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUSTRAL IA WHYALLA AND EYRE PENINSULA

It is critical for Eyre Peninsula to generate

adequate and ongoing revenue to reinvest into

the protection, maintenance and improvement of

our natural and built assets and the renewal of

our foreshore, reserves and camping facilities.

While there is high seasonal demand for our

accommodation, there is currently inadequate

revenue to manage and improve the coastal and

inland reserves and assets to expected

community standards.

The region has not invested on the scale in which

significant economic and environmental

dividends can be returned since the late eighties

and early nineties with the roll out of the “A

Breath of Fresh Eyre” initiative.

“The vast, straw-coloured triangle of

Eyre Peninsula is Australia's big-sky

country, and is the promised land

for seafood fans. Meals out here

rarely transpire without the option

of trying the local oysters, tuna or

whiting. Sublime national parks

punctuate the coast along with

world-class surf breaks and low-key

holiday towns, thinning out as you

head west towards the Great

Australian Bight, the Nullarbor

Plain and Western Australia.”

- Lonely Planet.

WHY DO WE NEED A WAYF INDING ,

COASTAL ACCESS AND CAMPING MASTER

PLAN ?

252

The Eyre Peninsula has the gamut of attractions

that visitors would ordinarily need to travel

numerous regions and States in Australia for. This

we undersell.

Our unbroken connection and cultural heritage of

traditional owners is virtually untapped and

unexpressed outside of culture and should the

Traditional Owners want to express their

connection to Country, and the significance and

meaning of particular sites, their language, places

and events then this will ensure a richer and

deeper experience for locals and visitors alike.

Similarly, our geological formations (some

occurring in only one or two places on earth) have

yet to be comprehensively mapped to form a

touring route of their own.

Our ornithological vibrancy and history is another

drawcard yet to be solidified through protective

infrastructure and marketing.

Our artistic abilities and endeavours are also

world class and burgeoning and could benefit

from cohesive packaging.

As a region we will be required to work together

to demonstrate to the State and Australian

Government how serious our collective local

investment intends to be if we are to attract

funding support and wrestle our way to the front

of an ever increasing and competitive line of

regional areas vying for economic

recognition. Bemoaning Kangaroo Island's

selection within Australia's top ten iconic

destinations (and reflective subsequent

government investment) will not move us

forward.

Eyes on Eyre was the first step towards the

development of a master plan to achieve long-

term economic and environmental sustainability

in the visitor economy.

The Eyre Peninsula tourism economy is currently

valued at $278 million with a potential growth

(second only to Fleurieu Peninsula) of $511 million

by 2020. There are currently 1,500 direct jobs in

the Eyre Peninsula visitor economy and a further

1,500 indirect jobs. Expenditure has decreased

among the dominant intrastate market and also

across all markets. Visitor numbers through the

visitor information centres are:

Ceduna 46,137

Streaky Bay 6,424

Wudinna X

Elliston 14,677

Port Lincoln 6,424

Whyalla X

253

Our seafood resources and marine adventure

experiences whilst receiving the majority of our

marketing attention need repolishing and

reinvigoration with greater land-based connections

through interactive museums, markets and a

greater spread of quality dining and service

experiences.

In this vein we also have a farming, mining, fishing,

and manufacturing culture that we should work

towards expanding and developing authentic,

observational and hands-on interactions with.

The future of this unique region for tourism, local

communities and the environment is at a point of

reinvention and necessary change. To do nothing is

not an option. Increased visitor pressure, evolving

tourism trends and aging visitor infrastructure are

issues requiring a new approach. In response, a

master plan has to look to our coast, our hinterland

and arid interior and seek to transform the region in

a bold but clear strategic move.

From a visitor’s perspective, the Eyre Peninsula

whilst clearly containing world-class attractions,

currently over promises and under-delivers. There is

a stark and widening gap between what people are

looking for as a world-class experience and what is

currently being offered by way of open space

infrastructure, accommodation, access to local

produce, the logistics of getting to the coast,

navigating and interpreting it.

This leads to a low return for the local and

regional economy and little benefit for the local

communities. In the short-term, there is an

immediate need to fund priority foundation

visitor pod installations and install coastal access

and campground infrastructure at priority

locations for safety, environment and visitor

economy sustainability.

Eyes on Eyre is the first step in devising a master

plan for discussion that will present a bold,

innovative and visionary plan for the future of this

world-class landscape.

A strong link between conservation objectives,

the towns and tourism is required to:

• Begin to repair and protect the natural

landscape;

• Strengthen the character of the local townships

and their relationship to open space and parks;

and

• Increase the economic return and associated

benefits to the region and the State of South

Australia.

254

VISION“ENHANCE THE EYRE PENINSULA AS A

DIST INCT IVE , CULTURAL AND

REMARKABLE WORLD -CLASS

DEST INAT ION , UNDERP INNED BY THE

CHARACTER OF I TS BIG SKY INLAND

COUNTRY , LOCAL TOWNS COUPLED WITH

THE CONSERVAT ION AND PROTECT ION

OF I TS NAT IONAL , COASTAL AND MARINE

PARKS . "

OBJECTIVESACCESS AND C IRCULAT ION

A new approach to access and circulation is

proposed to diversify choice and routes into and

through the region. This includes inland Big Sky

Touring Routes and the opportunity to capitalise

on the Seafood Frontier Touring Route and

introduce a Great Australian Bight Journey from

Whaler's Way to the Nullarbor. Each of these will

connect to minor touring routes related to art,

culture, wildlife and geology in towns and key

visitor precincts.

NAT IONAL PARK TOWNS AS V IS I TOR HUBS New structures for how visitors experience the

area are proposed. Supporting each townships’

role as a visitor hub in a decentralised and

dispersed approach to information and

interpretation services that provide choice and

draw people along the touring routes rather than

concentrating all visitors into one area. The plan

recommends that development of the highest

quality visitor facilities of a world-class standard

are essential.

A suite of design initiatives could be developed to

improve the interface of each town with adjacent

parks. This seeks to reinforce each town’s

distinctive characteristics and enhance their role

as hubs for visitors to experience the parks, coast

and inland region.

NEW STRUCTURES FOR V IS I TOR

EXPER IENCES

When combined, the concepts regarding access

and circulation, town and visitor hubs and a

decentralised approach to experience establish a

framework of different loops, trails and journeys

that are linked together. This provides locals and

visitors with a variety of ways to experience the

area by mixing and matching options .

L INKS , LOOPS , HORSESHOES AND JOURNEYS

By rethinking the way people access and move

through the region and introducing a new

environmental and landscape management

framework spanning both public and private

land. The plan proposes net biodiversity gains

through the removal of redundant infrastructure

and a regional-scale approach to revegetation to

strengthen habitat and augment the national

parks.

ENV IRONMENTAL FRAMEWORK

255

KEY INITIATIVESV IS I TOR PODS AND EXPER IENCE

CENTRES

Visitor pods and visitor experience centres are

critically missing from the destination offerings

on the Eyre Peninsula to clinch decision to travel,

draw visitors along, provide shelter, refreshment,

toilet amenities, interpretative information and

public WiFi.

The Far West, Whyalla and Port Lincoln are the

likely best locations and an Aboriginal Arts and

Culture Centre, Marine Interpretative Centre and

Maritime Interpretative Centre are the most

stand-out themes for each regional centre

respectively. The standards must be high and

equal to centres like those found in Exmouth WA,

Grampians VIC and Winton QLD.

ESTIMATED BUDGET $90 million

Eyes on Eyre recommends a possible 22 rest

visitor pods spread throughout the region that

ideally are WiFi activated and where practicable

include shade, table seating, bins (solar activated

compaction recommended), toilets, fresh water,

rv dump point, tyre inflation/deflation (where

suited). Proposed locales:

Whyalla Northern Coastline

Whyalla Wetlands

Eastern start of Birdseye Highway

Kimba Silos/Recreation Reserve

Darke Peak

Koongawa

Wirulla

Lock

Cleve turnoff at Arno

Tumby Bay Silos

Port Lincoln North

Port Lincoln South

Sleaford

Coffin Bay

Cummins

Cummings Monument

Colton

Port Kenny

Streaky Bay Eyre's Waterhole

Streaky Bay Perlubie

Ceduna 'Big Oyster'

Yalata

Head of Bight

ESTIMATED BUDGET $1.5 million.

Eyes on Eyre recommends two new gateway

visitor pods are installed around the 'Tanks' prior

to Whyalla and at Border Village. These should

welcome visitors to the Eyre Peninsula (our best

and most inclusive brand) and be WiFi activated,

designed to activate bookings for attractions,

campgrounds, national park passes and

Aboriginal land entry permits. The promotion at

these gateways is for product not local

government areas or singular towns. Our goal

should be the opposite of the dilapidated sign

that is just after the 'Tanks' at present.

ESTIMATED BUDGET $60,000

256

KEY INITIATIVES CONT.PREC INCTS AND TOURING ROUTES

Eyes on Eyre does not recommend a new brand

be developed for the Eyre Peninsula, rather

we could simply use our region name 'Eyre

Peninsula' and develop precincts and touring

routes to give our defining character. We have

developed suggestions to inspire and generate

discussion. These are not the only possibilities

and in fact may not be viable but let's start the

conversation. Five precincts are put forward:

Shingle Coast

Big Sky Eyre

Seafood Frontier

Great Australian Bight Journey

Nullarbor

Our inland towns and assets are under sold and

under developed and have been in the shadow of

the Seafood Frontier marketing focus. We could

consider wrapping these assets under the

umbrella of Big Sky Eyre. Outback branding is

already over utilised in our assessment.

Touring routes can be developed interconnecting

or remaining within the precincts. As a starting

point, we considered that Big Sky Eyre could

encompass one loop, one link and two (almost)

horseshoe routes.

Gawler Ranges Loop: Whyalla, Iron Knob, Mt Ive,

Wirulla, Wudinna, Kimba, Whyalla. Focus: Gawler

Ranges Granite Geology

Eyre Link: Whyalla, Iron Knob, Kimba, Wudinna,

Ceduna, Nullarbor to WA. Focus: Two night

layovers.

BirdsEYE horseshoe: Cowell, Kimba, Darke Peak,

Cleve, Arno Bay. Focus: Gemstones, Explorers,

4WDriving, Mountain Biking, Hiking, Mangroves.

EyreHEART horseshoe: Tumby Bay, Lipson,

Ungarra, Yallunda Flat, Cummins, Edilillie, Koppio,

Poonindie. Focus: Art, Agriculture, Pioneers,

Aboriginal Culture.

SH INGLE COAST

Whyalla's northern coastline encompassing Point

Lowly, Fitzgerald Bay through to Douglas Point

and ideally Cultana Defence land is worthy of

precinct definition on its own and ideally should

be home to a coastal drive, five star caravan

park/resort, a redeveloped campground at

Fitzgerald Bay to the highest standard, boutique

accomodation at lighthouse cottages and a

destination interpretative and cultural centre

starring Cuttlefish and Shingle Geology.

BIG SKY EYRE

257

KEY INITIATIVES CONT.SEAFOOD FRONT IER

The Seafood Frontier Touring Route has been

declared and marked by route markers by the

South Australian Tourism Commission to begin at

Whyalla, conclude at Border Village and cover the

entire coastal reaches of the Eyre Peninsula.

Arguably, the commercial and retail reflection of

this touring route begins at Cowell and is

rounded off at Ceduna. Nonetheless, the

infrastructure and branding juggernaut are in

place and it is recommended that coastal towns

and centres embrace the route branding and

seek to capitalise on it with dedicated

destinations and activities linked to brand.

There is significant potential for seafood

producers to diversify into tourism interactive

product (e.g mussel, oyster, abalone processing

viewing, oyster hatchery tours, vongole raking,

wharf loading/unloading) and for cafes and

restaurants to harness ocean to plate menus.

Fishing charters, jetties and beach fishing

hotspots could also connect to the route

branding.

As a starting point let's consider ordering more

purple lollipops (or perhaps borrow a few from

roadside!) and use them to direct to destination

product. Let's share graphic logo and let tourism

providers brand themselves (e.g business

frontage, emails, social media, websites, vehicle

decals to saturate and make connections for

visitors).

The Great Australian Bight journey commences

on its eastern reaches at Whalers Way/Cape Giles

and continues over to Western Australia.

This plan proposes to harness its geologic

foundations and to formalise the start of the

journey at its southern most point, encouraging

visitors to interact with the full length of the

Bight in South Australia and extend identification

of its geology beyond Bunda Cliffs

Formalising this journey will depend upon a

significant investment in coastal access

infrastructure, including viewing platforms

(cantilevered would be outstanding), ramps,

stairs, fencing, bird hides, camping nodes and

trail development.

There are critical coastal access, camping, trail

development, visitor safety and environment

protection issues surrounding this journey and

these are discussed in more detail in the sections

for the relevant council districts encompassing

this western stretch of the Eyre Peninsula.

GREAT AUSTRAL IAN BIGHT JOURNEY

258

KEY INITIATIVES CONT.NULLARBOR

The Nullarbor Touring Route is where our volume

visitors lie, it is believed 400,000 visitors travel the

plain per year. Many come into SA from WA to go

out again. Many come in to sniff around, some are

suitably impressed and stay, others have informed

us we are a shock (not in a good way) to the system

from the offerings of Western Australia.

Accommodation provision is top priority and is well

below three stars. Border Village and Nullarbor

Roadhouse are doing a tremendous job in terms of

service standards (they were quite simply a cut

above most) but their facilities were tired and worn.

It was a disappointing juxtaposition.

Fowlers Bay and Penong should strongly consider

caravan parks to an accredited family orientated

standard - more unit accommodation and

glamping options would make a significant

difference.

Head of the Bight, Yalata, Maralinga, Scotdesco

have the potential to play a critical role in

harnessing visitors and underpinning the Far West

Aboriginal Tourism Strategy implementation. Head

of the Bight is half way there already but it needs a

revamp. Night tours to hear whales moaning,

merchandise to value add to the experience and

higher standard of interpretation and interaction

using digital technology would be worth

considering.

Blow holes, bombs, caves, dinosaur footprints,

fossils, trans Australian railway, Daisy Bates and

the incredible Aboriginal landscape are bucket

list wonders yet to be primed for visitor

connections.

The Nullarbor has the brand and pulling power

locked away, it is our most visited and

downloaded visitor information guide. it now

needs to slow the throughput and truly reveal its

soul to the traveller.

259

A REMINDER OF WHO

AND WHERE WE AREREGIONAL CONTEXT

Our region is located 380 km or 4 hours’ drive by

inland routes from Adelaide and 1440 km or 15

hours’ drive from Perth. Most enticingly it is a 40

minute flight from Adelaide to Port Lincoln, 50

minute flight from Adelaide to Whyalla and a one

and a half hour flight from Adelaide to Ceduna.

To address the fundamentals of the project brief,

the strategic positioning of the study area and its

relationship to intrastate, interstate and

international markets must be questioned and

explored for new opportunities. These relationships

are considered to influence the region in several

ways:

- It affects the type, timing and routes of visitation,

especially with peak periods during summer;

- 96% of Eyre Peninsula visitors are domestic and

4% are international. Domestically, 70% are from

within the state compared to 30% from interstate.

40% of visitors are here for a holiday, 24% are

visiting friends and relatives and 25% are visiting for

business purposes.

- The Eyre Peninsula is recognised as having the

highest growth potential of any South Australian

region for the visitor economy but without the

basics in foundation infrastructure to access

natural assets sustainably and be supported with

quality accommodation and services this growth

will not be realised.

- The Eyre Peninsula has not invested region wide

in catalyst visitor economy infrastructure since

the late eighties and early nineties.

- The divide between visitor expectations and

realities in supporting foundation infrastructure is

growing and expenditure is downward trending

on the Eyre Peninsula.

- Australia, along with Canada, has three cities in

the top ten world’s most liveable cities index –

Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth. The rankings are

a result of performance in the following areas:

o Stability

o Healthcare

o Culture & Environment

o Education and

o Infrastructure

The region therefore needs to work extra hard to

be attractive to its closest city centres when they

themselves have such high levels of world ranked

liveability and natural attractions.

260

A REMINDER OF WHO

AND WHERE WE ARECONT .

- There is growing demand for Australia’s

distinctive and authentic experiences, many of

which are located in regional and remote areas.

In the year ending June 2017, Australia has seen

increased international visitation to Aboriginal

sites and communities (up 16 per cent), heritage

buildings and sites (up 10 per cent), guided tours

(up 12 per cent), national parks (up 11 per cent),

the beach (up 8 per cent) and botanical gardens

(up 10 per cent). Regional Australia is benefiting

from this demand, with 63 per cent of domestic

overnight visitors and 36 per cent of international

visitors dispersing beyond capital cities in the

year ending June 2017.

- State Governments around Australia have

initially selected ten iconic tourism regions where

the visitor economy is showing signs of growth,

but has witnessed lower levels of investment (i.e.

evidence of market failure) and in collaboration

with the Australian Government Austrade and

Tourism Australia have developed a strategy for

investment into these regions. In South Australia,

Kangaroo Island is the target.

- The Eyre Peninsula region must prove itself

worthy of being next in line for equal levels of

investment in South Australia. To do this we need

to demonstrably reveal our own commitment to

investment in visitability, that is: a sense of

welcome, inclusivity, communication, technology

and transport.

Currently in the Eyre Peninsula, there is a lack of

‘man made’ attractions and products. Activities

such as agritourism, cultural interpretation and

interaction are key opportunities to retain visitors

in the region and improve expenditure yield.

Products that make use of local produce, such as

food (bush food included), wine, brewing,

roasting and seafood could complement the

natural attractions of the region, which will

continue to act as the main drawcard for tourists.

Cummins, Wudinna, Kimba, Cleve and the

hinterland of Port Lincoln would make perfect

locations for this kind of positioning.

The short length of visitor stays in the region can

be attributed to a lack of activities or tourism

product within the area that would invite people

to stay longer and spend more. Development of

products relating to artisan produce could

supplement the current drawcard of coastal

scenery and the natural environment, and entice

visitors into staying within the region longer.

Some excellent interstate examples of this

include Beechworth, Margaret River, King Island,

Daylesford and the Yarra Valley, among others.

261

WAYFINDINGS IGNAGE I S OUR S I LENT BRAND

The Eyes on Eyre stocktake revealed we are 3/10 when

it comes to wayfinding and signage. Our last

investment of significance was seemingly in the

nineties. Wayfinding is primarily a shared

responsibility between Local Government, the

Department of Planning Transport and Infrastructure

and the Department for Environment and Water.

RDAWEP will work in conjunction with the EPLGA

Works Committee to define priorities and guide the

resourcing of improvements over the coming three to

five years.

We could also innovate using QR coding and other

digital technologies to reduce signage numbers and

avoid ongoing maintenance.

Wayfound Consultants Audit Report should be read in

conjunction with the interim Eyres on Eyre findings

report and individual local government statements.

REGIONAL PRIORITIES

Remove or repair dilapidated signage.

400m advanced warning notifications prior to

attraction turnoffs require installation almost across

the region.

Re-skinning of tourism commission signage installed

in nineties (Whyalla, Wudinna, Baird Bay and Coffin

Bay x4)

Consider regional digital strategies to supplement

hard infrastructure (e.g QR Codes, Apps) to reduce

amount of signage, limit vandalism.

Re-skinning of A Breath of Fresh Eyre signs (or

replacement where condition warrants) or better yet

see above dotpoint.

Regional gateway visitor information bays (x2)

Visitor pods rest stop information bays (x22)

Welcome to Town Entry Signage (potential for

joint procurement of a regionally applied

structure design or Council's can source

individually.

Standard coastal access designs (1xCliff,

1xBeach/Drive, 1xBeach/Walk, 1xBoat

Ramp,1xCampground) with advisory

notifications and expected user behaviour

outline.

Standard campground use design with

advisory notifications and expected user

behaviour.

ESTIMATED BUDGET: TBA

262

COASTAL ACCESS &

CAMPINGCOASTAL ACCESS

The Eyre Peninsula has a vast amount (2,500km)

of coastline that provides iconic landscapes, a

diverse range of natural and cultural values, and

substantial economic and recreational

opportunities for the local community. The Eyre

Peninsula community uses beaches and bays for

recreation and enjoyment, the coast also supports

a large number of our local industries including

tourism, mining, aquaculture, and agriculture.

Although many of our towns are situated on the

coast, we are fortunate to have large tracts of

coast that are minimally developed or protected

as reserves.

Damage to the natural resources used by

recreationalists and the tourism industry has

been recognised as an increasing management

problem on the Eyre Peninsula. Unmanaged

outdoor recreation and/or tourism is recognised

as being a pervasive and cumulative contributor

that puts at risk the environment and Aboriginal

culture as well as impacts on the social and

economic fabric of a region and its people. As a

result there have been examples of private lease

or landholders restricting public access through

properties due to environmental damage, and

littering in particular. Traditional Owners have

also raised concerns about access through sacred

or important heritage sites.

There is a high level of community expectations

regarding the use of the coast, particularly in

regards to open public access for recreational

purposes. The coast is shaped by dynamic coastal

processes and pressures, and in particular, from

climate change effects, including sea level rise

and increasing storm intensity and frequency

which will cause permanent and temporary

inundation and erosion. As a result, coastal

processes and coastal forces will have major

implications on how we access and use these

areas. It is beneficial to current and future

generations to to ensure that this sustainable

coastal access is maintained.

Coastal access is valued for a variety of reasons by

different people, including government, councils,

communities, developers, individuals and special

interest groups. The planning and management

of the coast must therefore balance environment,

economic and social outcomes,

and take into consideration the range of issues or

values that stakeholders consider important.

The current LiDAR Climate Change Modelling

project will be critical for the completion of an

Eyre Peninsula Coastal Access Strategy and its

subsequent integration into articulating a

regional vision for coastal access, supporting the

assessment of development and other proposals

with a non-urban focus. It will also provide local

government authorities with strategic direction

for the protection, planning and management of

the Eyre Peninsula's coastal public access routes.

The Eyes on Eyre project saw evidence of

common coastal management problems all

around the region, however coastal visitor safety

around coastal cliff landscapes, uncontrolled

camping and uncontrolled pedestrian and

vehicle use were the perceived priorities (in

specific locations) after finishing the coastal

assessments.

The Eyre Peninsula is yet to develop one regional

centre with a population of 50,000 or more or

receive the number of visitors that have proven in

Western Australia and Queensland to warrant

significant large scale investment in coastal

access infrastructure and management controls.

That is not to say there isn't evidence of particular

sites under obvious stress and trends of

population/visitation growth that should not be

ignored.

263

COASTAL ACCESS &

CAMPINGCOASTAL ACCESS

The Eyes on Eyre coastal access and camping

stocktake demonstrated that vehicular access is

available at almost every beach on our vast

coastline - including within Conservation Parks

and National Parks. There are very few restrictions

and there are a number of sites with a maze of

track options leading to the beach - particularly

in the upper west and far west of the Eyre

Peninsula.

Vehicular access must be viewed as a privilege

not a right. The Natural Resources Management

Boards have done a very thorough job of installing

signage at almost every point to alert users to

vulnerable wildlife such as threatened bird

species and advise of responsible user behaviour

when accessing the nearshore environment. The

signs were one of the most consistently applied

forms of signage in the Eyre Peninsula. Eyes on

Eyre survey/interview respondents were able to

recall and nominate the signage advisory

information more often than not when asked to

do so. Visitors to the region were especially aware.

Driving or riding on beaches is thrilling and adds

to a level of convenience (when lugging

equipment) for accessing fishing, surfing and

picnic locations that most all humans sincerely

appreciate and desire. It is a much valued

experience for locals and tourists alike. The

privilege however comes with direct and indirect

environmental impacts.

The Coastal Access and Camping component of

Eyes on Eyre has arguably generated the most

suspicion, hesitation and vigorous interest of the

project. Some stakeholders expressed strong

concern regarding the delivery of this component

of Eyes on Eyre.

There was fear that the stocktake would lead to a

list of coastal access points or campgrounds

that would be recommended for 'çlosure' or that

unrealistic demands for immediate expenditure

on all sites would eventuate. It is important that

these concerns and fears are addressed in the

coming stages of Eyes on Eyre and that the

primary goal of securing a regional vision for

sustainable development opportunities that will

attract and secure external and internal

investment is clearly articulated.

Local Government staff were wary of their

involvement and undoubtedly the breadth of

coastline requiring asset (including risk)

management is daunting and intimidating when

under review.

Coastal access decision making has polarised Eyre

Peninsula communities, government and

regulatory bodies and is fundamental to the

visitor economy. As stakeholders we can bury our

heads in the sand (pardon the pun) or lift our

heads up to the horizon and look for the

opportunities, not the challenges in the first

instance.

By focusing on opportunities in the first instance,

we can build the much needed (and currently

missing) trust between Eyre Peninsula

communities and between government

agencies. Trust creates safe spaces for competing

view points and a willingness among members to

be open to new – sometimes difficult – ideas.

Coastal Access, Climate Change Adaptation along

with Emergency Management Planning are

arguably critical aspects for Eyre Peninsula's

survival as a place to live, work and play. The

notion of joint planning has never been more

necessary than for these aspects.

264

COASTAL ACCESS &

CAMPINGCOASTAL ACCESS CONT .

Eyes on Eyre did reveal a region wide build it,

release it and forget it undercurrent. This is not

through apathy however but rather as a

consequence of scale versus available resource

(both human and financial). For comparison, the

44 km hinterland and coast road along Victoria's

Shipwreck Coast (Great Ocean Road) has an

almost identical visitor economy potential as Eyre

Peninsula's 2,500 km coast at just over $500

million. Those 44 km are recommended to have

an investment of $178 million to stimulate and

achieve economic potential and environment

protection. How would the Eyre Peninsula spend

the same amount?

The masterplan that results from the stocktake, if

nothing else, will lay out our goals and desires

cohesively, something the Australian and State

Governments openly advise us we are poor at. We

won't get everything we want but perhaps we will

have at least set ourselves up with clear

destination goals.

The coast is a complex socio-ecological system,

the management community must expand

current monitoring efforts. Tracking ecological

data only tells half the story; collecting social data

sheds light on how people engage coastal

ecosystems and highlights values crucial for

affecting behavior change.

RECOMMENDED PRINCIPLES FOR

ACCESS LOCATIONS

Consider recreational attributes that attract

people to the coast such as safe swimming

beaches, surfing spots and interesting

landscape or seascape features.

Provide a level of public access and facilities

consistent with the function of the coastal

location and level of demand.

Minimise public access over eroding or steep

dunes, rocky areas or other difficult terrain.

Control access to protect significant

conservation or heritage areas.

Manage access to the coast to

promote safety for coastal users.

Provide obvious and logical public access to

the coast.

Ensure connectivity with adjacent uses such as

public open space, public transport access, and

urban areas and amenities.

RECOMMENDED PRINCIPLES FOR

ACCESS PATHS AND ROUTES

Incorporate natural topography and vegetation,

access to sheltered or popular locations into

design and location of paths and routes.

Design paths and routes to minimise erosion,

wind tunnelling and maintenance.

Locate paths and access routes to encourage

regeneration and/ or rehabilitation of degraded

areas.

Provide a range of universal, access options to

the coast.

Respect historical patterns of access such as

existing tracks (if sustainable).

Provide access routes to encourage visitors

taking in areas of cultural, indigenous

and natural attractions.

Access paths and routes should be justified in

terms of a coastal public access purpose

(usually through a foreshore management

plan).

Provide access routes and paths to direct

people away from sensitive or unsafe areas and

toward recreational opportunities such as safe

swimming beaches.

265

COASTAL ACCESS &


EYRE PENINSULA COASTAL LANDSCAPES OVERVIEW

Opportunities for progress in master planning

include:

Point Douglas to Backy Point (implement

existing northern coastline masterplan)

Redbanks

Parnkalla or Barngala Extension Trail (Fig trees

to Axel Stenross)

Sleaford

Whalers Way

Frenchman's to Greenly Beach

Cummings Monument

Head of Bight

Bunda Cliffs

Coastal cliff access points should be prioritised

over the next ten years for definition of access

and infrastructure controls primarily due to

human safety risks. This includes, signage,

access delineation, lookouts and steps/ramps.

Eyre Peninsula coastal landforms include cliffs,

rocky outcrops and shore platforms, mangrove

woodlands, mudflats, estuaries, extensive sandy

beaches, coastal dunes and coastal barrier

systems, as well as numerous near shore reefs and

islands. These coastal landforms have developed

under the influence of a range of tidal conditions

and wave regimes, varying from high energy on

exposed open ocean coasts (for example, the

west coast of Eyre Peninsula) to low energy in

protected shorelines with high tidal ranges (such

as Whyalla and Franklin Harbour). The oldest

known rocks in South Australia are at Cape

Carnot, Whaler's Way, Port Lincoln.

The east coast of Eyre Peninsula is subdued in

character in comparison with the rugged west

coast, mainly because of the absence of

aeolianite (former sand dunes turned into rock),

which have been eroded into spectacular high

cliffs on the west coast, and the much quieter

wave climate in the sheltered Spencer Gulf. The

modern coastline was broadly established some

7,000 years ago after a relatively geologically

rapid rise in sea level, thus many coastal sectors

are still establishing a new equilibrium (for

example, North Shields). Some parts of the Eyre

Peninsula coastal areas are relatively stable where

the shoreline intersects resistant rocks, which

form cliffs. Other cliff lines may be eroding rapidly,

such as those of the Nullarbor, where cliff falls are

frequent.

Ongoing global sea level rise will influence the

future behaviour of the Eyre Peninsula coastline.

We will see enhanced coastal erosion and

landward migration of the shoreline along some

more vulnerable sectors. The mangrove

woodlands of the upper Spencer Gulf (Whyalla to

Arno Bay), for example, will migrate landward;

cliffs in unconsolidated alluvium and dune

limestone will experience new phases of erosion,

but many of the resistant, bedrock-cliffed

coastlines should experience less dramatic

change. Thus the east coast of Eyre Peninsula will

be particularly vulnerable to change and coastal

access management will need to consider these

factors.

RECOMMENDED REGIONAL PRIORITIES

The localities list below was generated from an

assessment of current accessibility, movement

and volume of (current and projected) visitation,

position adjacent to campgrounds, physical

opportunities and constraints and connectivity to

high visitation nodes or proposed precincts. They

are well-used areas that need links established

and are adjacent to significant population centres

and/or receive high visitation or could maximise

benefits by capitalising on other Council projects.

Opportunities for progress in master planning

include:

Point Douglas to Backy Point (implement

existing northern coastline masterplan)

Point Gibbon to Point Price

Redbanks

Parnkalla or Barngala Extension Trail (Fig trees

to Axel Stenross)

Sleaford

Whalers Way

Frenchman's to Greenly Beach

Cummings Monument

Head of Bight

Bunda Cliffs

266

COASTAL ACCESS &



Every major coastal town should strive for

disability access to coast (permanent or

seasonal). Acknowledgement to Whyalla and

Tumby Bay for their existing efforts in this

regard.

Standard coastal access designs for signage

with advisory notifications (Location reference,

safety, risk and environment protection,

reporting and emergency contact) deployed

across the region. Language choice and tone is

critical. Identify shorebird breeding vulnerable

locations and add extra definition to

expectation of user behaviour where

appropriate.

Introduction of new coastal access

infrastructure or refinement of existing

infrastructure should be prioritised around

designated camping node precincts to

facilitate a revegetation target of 30% to 40%

from pre-development condition..

The east coast of Eyre Peninsula contains large

sections of significant and vulnerable saltmarsh

and mangrove habitat as well as coastal

landscapes that are degraded through

vegetation clearance, weed infestations and

dune instability.

The east coast (and parts of the west coast) are

particularly vulnerable to coastal erosion and

storm surge impacts. Further direction and risk

assessment will come from the LIDAR survey. This

section of Eyre Peninsula will likely feel the

greatest pressure for inland retreat and

potentially the greatest conflict between public

and private coastal accessibility.

This section of the region revealed hotspots of

undefined pedestrian access through dunes

(often attached to informal camping locations),

unrestricted beach and sometimes dune vehicle

access. This is not to say, there weren't also

pockets of excellence (Port Neill, Pioneer Road

Walking Track and Arno Bay Mangrove walk for

example.)

Fitzgerald Bay to Point Lowly

Flat Rock to Point Gibbon

Redbanks to Moonlight Bay

Sleaford to Whaler's Way

Frenchman's to Greenly

Sheringa and Walker's Rock to Lake Newland

Gibson Peninsula to Cape Bauer

Point Brown and Davenport Creek

Far West TBA

Opportunities for progress in camping node,

coastal access and trail master planning include:

The lower Eyre Peninsula's informal campgrounds

and coastal access interface also requires

definition and consolidation.

An increasingly popular stretch of coast for

caravanners and campers which varies in coastal

access definition and infrastructure to delineate

and control access through dunes and proximity

to cliff edges.

In a world where ecological habitats are

disappearing, the unique natural assets of Eyre

Peninsula will become a stronger drawcard.

Campertrailers were the fastest growing

recreational vehicle purchase in 2016,

Helping families to go camping and connect with

nature in an affordable and environmentally

sustainable way should be a key economic goal

for the region.

267

COASTAL ACCESS &



Consider the development of ornithological

visitor hubs e.g Yanerbie, Baird Bay, Kellidie Bay,

and Little Swamp. Hub meaning: ecotourism

accommodation, interpretative information, bird

hides and other bird observation supporting

infrastructure.

Define the locations for acceptable horse

training, 4WD experiences and/or small

bikes/orv's, improve infrastructure supporting

their sustainable use.

A comprehensive social media based awareness

campaign with a carefully selected ambassador

conducted across region for responsible vehicle

use on coasts, along with a reporting mechanism

for anti-social human behaviour and site

determined actions for protecting shorebird

nesting.

Continue the oustanding use of public art to

engage coastal users and residents in the story of

the Eyre Peninsula's biodversity and consider a

defined tourism trail based on it.

Franklin Harbour

Sleaford Bay

Coffin Bay (Point Longnose and Gunyah Beach)

Lake Newland Conservation Park (including the

ocean beach)

Venus Bay (including the islands within the bay)

Baird Bay

Sceale Bay (including Seagull Lake)

Streaky Bay (including Acraman Creek)

Tourville Bay

Murat Bay

Eyre Island

St Peter Island

As outlined, there are important opportunities to

explore before focusing on restrictions. The first

Eyre Peninsula district for example to invest in

limiting vehicle access to a beach, enabling eco-

tourism accommodation and embracing and

facilitating shorebird tourism will have a very

powerful product to take to market.

The very successful Camel Beach House

experience on the west coast is a case in point.

There is a substantial market of visitor (and local)

who wants to experience highly controlled

exposure to relatively intact, pristine

environments. The Eyre Peninsula is behind in

developing product for this market, yet

undoubtedly has one of, if not the most

significant potential to be the leader in South

Australia (alongside Kangaroo Island).

There is evidence of this potential from the

earliest European settlements and exploration of

Eyre Peninsula. Dignitaries from around the world

travelled to Eyre Peninsula for its ornithological

uniqueness and vibrancy. The story is waiting to

be told and a market tapped.

Local Government planning can be the most

critical catalyst for creating both protection and

development for eco-tourism using specific

zoning and appropriate conditions.

The following are nationally and internationally

significant shorebird areas on Eyre Peninsula

(Caton et al., 2011a):

268

Images: Shipwreck Coast Master Plan & WA Camping Node Master Plan Sandy Cape.

269

COASTAL ACCESS &

CAMPINGCAMPING

Camping visitors in Eyre Peninsula use a wide

range of accomodation facilities at either

commercial sites (caravan parks, camping

grounds or cabins) or non-commercial sites (by

the side of the road, on private property, on

crown land or in a national park, often in a self-

drive avn, motorhome or campervan).

In recent years, there has been a noticeable

increase in the number of people using camping

accomodation yet a decline in the number of

commercial sites available. This has been offset

by the increased patronage on non-commercial

sites, a trend expected to continue.

Around 12% of all visitor nights in Australia are

spent camping. There is no one typical non-

commercial camper. They:

are not just those travelling long-haul and

touring (a percentage of the point-to-point

market also stays in non-commercial sites).

are not all retirees (in fact, the largest segment

is those still working and aged between 30-54).

are not the same market as those that prefer to

stay in commercial sites.

it is clear from most available research that many

travellers mix and match their accomodation

choices. Five years ago BDO Australia researched

the difference between commercial and non-

commercial campers.

Those surveyed in commercial camping sites tend

to:

spend the majority (85% of their nights in

commercial accomodation or camping

grounds.

stay 4 nights or longer (49% of campers), with

34% staying 2-3 nights and only 17% staying 1

night.

spend approximately $576 at each location

(excluding accomodation) or $73 per day.

still be in full time employment (33%).

Those in non-commercial camping sites tend to:

spend most of their nights (71%) in non-

commercial accomodation or camping

gropunds.

also stay at commercial sites (30%) of the time,

but an equal number (30%) try to avoid staying

at commercial sites.

stay 3 nights or less (74%) in each location, of

which 34% are for 1 night.

spend approximately $213 at each location

(excluding accomodation) or $53 per day.

be retired (only 12% still employed full-time).

(Source: BDO 2013)

Therefore to be competitive nationally, Eyre

Peninsula needs to meet the needs of both

commercial and non-commercial campers.

However, there are sub-regional profiles and

trends they may see a swing more towards the

provision of non-commercial campers.

The future of camping appears to have two main

directions:

a market looking for greater comfort and

facilities that provide for their needs, including

a growing family market

a market looking to keep it simple and keep

the cost down.

270

COASTAL ACCESS &

CAMPINGCAMPING CONT .

The majority of consumers of the camping lifestyle

are generally demanding better facilities and a

higher standard of accommodation, whether in

park cabins or in their own caravan or motor home.

They also wish to be able to experience non-

degraded natural and constructed landscapes, and

are more environmentally conscious.

Eyes on Eyre found our commercial and non-

commercial camping offerings to be below par -

with some excellent exceptions dotted throughout

the region. There is a growing divide between Eyre

Peninsula's offerings however and that of

neighbouring Western Australia and other SA

regions that will leave our visitor economy flagging.

We need resort standard commercial caravan parks

and our informal campgrounds are a little too rustic

in most cases.

Eyes on Eyre considered there to be an adequate

supply of informal camping locations but in general

these were undersized, haphazard, lacking in

planned fit-for-purpose design and standards of

amenities/service provision were highly variable and

mostly below three stars. The application of by-laws

was also variable in terms of length of stay, cost or

no cost, obtaining of permit or supply of honesty

box.

The Eyes on Eyre survey/interviews with campers

generally revealed an overwhelming desire to have

campgrounds that facilitated a reduced

environmental impact, permitted a sense of

escapism but were backed up with amenities of a

basic but quality standard. Anecdotally, around 40%

of campers used the supplied honesty box system

with visitors from outside the region, the most likely

to abide.

It was also evident that campers will flock in greater

numbers to campgrounds with amenities and are

not at all put off by nominal fees.

Wikicamps/Tripadvisor and other online

apps analysis across the Eyre Peninsula provides a

terrific insight for any government or management

agency interested in better understanding their

target market.

Western Australia is home to camping node

developments that have delivered dual visitor

economy and environment protection outcomes.

WA's camp host model is also highly transferable

and adaptable to the Eyre Peninsula.

RDAWEP strongly advocates for camping node

developments within the region and we offer a list

of nominated localities based on our Eyes on Eyre

assessment and analysis - again this is a starting

point for discussion and is not intended to limit or

exclude other locations (Tod River Reservoir for

example or Koppio Hills have excellent potential).

Camping node developments involve landscape

architecture, amenity infrastructure (toilets,

showers, shelter, bbq, tables/seating, fire pits, WiFi)

and planned fit-for-purpose designs (all weather

access, vehicle turnarounds, large RV's through to

tent sites) with a strong revegetation component

that not only enhances biodiversity but delivers

that highly sought after sense of privacy. The nodes

are best placed to launch or connect trail

developments. Camping node developments could

be used to trial a region wide camping permit

system using smart technology.

REGIONAL CAMPING NODE POSSIBILITIES

Fitzgerald Bay to Point Lowly

Lake Gilles

Flat Rock to Point Gibbon

Darke Peak/Carapee Hill

Pildappa Rock

Redbanks to Moonlight Bay

Sleaford to Whaler's Way

Frenchman's to Greenly

Sheringa and Walker's Rock to Lake Newland

Streaky Bay Loops (TBA)

Point Brown and Davenport Creek

Head of Bight

*list is not exhaustive and land ownership is not considered purposefully to drive

opportunity not challenge mentality.

271

Images: Western Australian Camping Node Developments.

272

UNITED WE STAND,

DIVIDED WE FALLOUR BOUNDARIES ARE ART IF IC IAL

To perform the Eyes on Eyre stocktake, the region

was viewed through visitor eyes and those eyes

take in natural assets, attractions and navigation

aids and not Council or Natural Resource

Management boundaries.

It is hoped that before each stakeholder reaches

for their individual report card for Eyes on Eyre

(and tries to determine how they compare or

whether they have received the same attention)

that the wider perspective is acknowledged and

we collectively spend a proportion of time

mapping opportunities without burrowing in to

the all too common themes of 'we can't afford it'',

'we've already tried it', 'who owns what', 'why that

can't be done' and 'its not my responsibility'.

These are circular discussions and why we are

trapped in a rut. We need to move forward, even

if it is just one project at a time.

The visitor economy hinges on high quality

sustainable environmental conditions. Our

natural resources require considered human

stewardship. Modern infrastructure and

technology makes our region a contender in the

livability stakes and therefore visitation stakes.

Livability means Doctors, Nurses, Teachers,

Scientists, Engineers and Podiatrists might return

home or leave the leafy eastern suburbs of the

City with their families to feel a sense of

community and interact with the bounty of

natural riches that only a regional lifestyle can

deliver.

There is a big task ahead of us but plenty of

precedence and guidance to refer to and adapt

to our own needs. It is not about rushing in

or going big to catch up, but it is about forward

collective movement.

Just one experience centre or camping node

development would potentially benefit the entire

region by bringing those extra few thousand

visitors and making their stay longer.

If those projects are years off then let's start with

a foreshore redevelopment, a consolidated

coastal access path or one mountain biking trail

and let's lift the standard of outcome to world-

class.

273

PROJECT APPROACH NEXT STEPS : F IVE STAGES

The Eyes on Eyre Wayfinding, Coastal Access and

Camping Options stocktake should be considered

Stage 1 for developing an Eyre Peninsula Visitor

Economy Master Plan.

Stage 1 - Issues and Opportunities Analysis

DECEMBER 2017 - MARCH 2018

The purpose of Stage 1 was to identify and

analyse issues and opportunities in conjunction

with stakeholders and the community.

Stage 2 - Project Vision and Place Principles

APRIL 2018 - JUNE 2018

The project vision, place principles and key

directions will be developed in Stage 2. Stage 1

and 2 will provide the foundation for the Master

Plan moving forward.

Stage 3 - Draft Concepts

JULY 2018 - SEPTEMBER 2018

Draft concepts will be prepared to capture all the

key moves proposed for the Eyre Peninsula. The

concepts will reposition the coast and inland

areas and develop precincts in a high-level

illustrative plan with specific and tangible

outcomes.

Stage 4 - Preliminary Master Plan

OCT 2018 - DECEMBER 2018

The conclusions from Stage 3 are refined and

developed into a preliminary master plan.

Recommendations for how each township can be

better connected and interfaced with the

informal campgrounds, conservation and national

parks and the draft site plans for the priority

visitor sites are prepared.

Stage 5 - DRAFT Master Plan

JAN 2019 - MARCH 2019

Recommendations tested in Stage 04 were

further refined ahead of master plan exhibition

and consultation through Local Government

corporate planning and community engagement

methods. A cost plan and implementation

strategies are devised, with a view to submitting a

Building Better Regions Fund application.

The project will require a Project Control Group

and a Project Working Group comprising senior

and executive officers from Local Government,

Regional Development Australia Whyalla and Eyre

Peninsula, Department for Environment and

Water, Regions SA and the South Australian

Tourism Commission.

274

1

Katrina Blums


Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2018 10:55 AM

To: '[email protected]'; Bryan Trigg; Dean Johnson; Eleanor Scholz; Julie Low

([email protected]); Kym Callaghan ([email protected]); Lyn Breuer

([email protected]); mayor; R. E. & M. G. Nield; Robert Starr; Sam Telfer;

Travis Barber; Alan McGuire; Chris Cowley ([email protected]); Chris

Smith ([email protected]); 'Deb Larwood' ([email protected]);

Geoffrey Moffatt; Joy Hentschke; Peter Arnold; Phil Cameron; Rodney Pearson;

Stephen Rufus ([email protected]); Trevor Smith

Subject: FW: Meeting with Matt Pinnegar / Regional Organisations

Hi,

There has been some negotiations going on behind the scenes in regards to Regional LGA funding from the

LGA.

I will now be able to prepare a draft budget & revise the LTFP with this information.

I hope to have a draft 2018/19 Budget and the proposed EPLGA subscriptions out to all Councils very shortly for

comment. Then I will include the draft budget & LTFP in the Agenda for the June EPLGA Board meeting

deliberations.

Cheers

TonyTonyTonyTony

Tony Irvine



Ph 8682 6588 Fax 8682 5081

Mob 0428 826 587



From: Graeme Martin [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2018 10:26 AM

To: Keith Parkes ([email protected]); Glen Rowlands ([email protected])

Cc: Peter Clements - KI ([email protected]); Jan - Claire Wisdom ([email protected]); Graham Philp ([email protected]); Bill Spragg ([email protected]); Ann Ferguson - Mt Barker Council

([email protected]); Anita Crisp; Dominic Testoni; Peter Bond; Simon Millcock; Tony Irvine Subject: Meeting with Matt Pinnegar / Regional Organisations

Hi Keith and Glen

Further to our recent conversation and the subsequent meeting with LGA CEO Matt Pinnegar yesterday I can

confirm some agreed outcomes.

1. MP will recommend to the LGA Board that the existing Regional Capacity grant the Regional Organisations

receive ( approx. $40,000 ) be retained for the 2018-2019 Financial year. This will give some financial clarity

10.85.1.3

04/04/2018

A58149CEO

275

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

2

and certainty for these organisations as they present their respective budgets. This grant is derived from the

LGA R&D fund and the additional rubble royalty payments are attached to this as well.

2. The current LGA Outreach payment of $50,000 each region receives is less certain. I have requested it be

halved for the next financial year as a transitional arrangement. Unfortunately this payment comes directly

from the LGA operational budget which is under stress so depending on how the LGA Budget falls will

determine any future Outreach grants funding.

3. MP reiterated that there is no planned formal role for Regional Organisation EO’s in the new LGA

Constitution. His view is Regional Organisation EO’s have a duty and responsibility to their respective

Regional Organisations but no formal role in the governance of the LGA. This is not to say they will not be

able to be part of a SAROC/GAROC future operations as non - voting observers. We emphasised the existing

strong bonds between SAROC/LGA in both relationship and operations. MP is committed to retaining the

best elements of this. The role of EO’s has been somewhat clouded with the “sudden” inclusion of Council

CEO’s as voting members of SAROC/GAROC. This issue is being addressed separately with an amendment

proposed at the OGM.

4. MP stressed that all the ancillary documents relating to SAROC/GAROC/LGA membership are still to be

consulted on and widely discussed and that all that is being requested at present is support for the new LGA

Constitution. This new constitution will essentially allow for an efficient and streamlined LGA Board with

equitable representation. I fully endorse this position and would urge all S&HLGA Councils to support the

adoption of the new LGA constitution at the OGM.

Kind regards

Graeme Martin Executive Officer

13 Ringmer Dr

Burnside SA 5066

M +61 418 502 311

E [email protected]

www.shlga.sa.gov.au

**** CONFIDENTIAL **** The information in this message and in any attachments may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must not read, forward, print, copy, disclose or use the information or any attachments in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message and any attachments. S&HLGA does not warrant this email or attachment is free from computer viruses or defects. Any person or entity who makes use of this email or attachment accepts all responsibility for any loss,damage or consequence from such use.

______________________________________________________________________



______________________________________________________________________

276

Guidelines December 2017

Eyre Peninsula Community Foundation Education Fund Scholarships

Purpose of the scholarship

To provide funding for Eyre Peninsula students wishing to study at a university in Adelaide after they complete 12

To help with the costs of books and other resources need to establish self in Adelaide

Application round Applications will be called for in the second half of the first semester on each year How will scholarship round be advertised?

All Eyre Peninsula schools will be advised of the scholarship round An email sent to the RDAWEP database Local media Local councils

How many scholarships will be provided? Dependent on the amount of funding available Amount of funding that can be requested Up to $2,000 Selection criteria

1. Students are a current resident of Eyre Peninsula 2. Have completed their schooling to Year 12 in a school on Eyre Peninsula 3. Have completed Year 12 in the year prior to applying for a scholarship i.e.

they did not have a gap year or taken time off to work after leaving school 4. Students are not in receipt of a scholarship or funding from another source to

assist with studies.

For further information www.epcf.com.au [email protected]

277

http://www.epcf.com.au/



MOTION WITHOUT NOTICE 13. Eyre Peninsula Community Foundation – Education Fund 13.1

5:44pm Cr Maynard declared an Actual Interest in this matter, as he is a director of the Eyre Peninsula Community Foundation, and left the meeting. 38c/62017 Moved – LA Brown Seconded – PG Brown

That Council contribute $2000 to the Eyre Peninsula Community Foundation Education Fund in 2017/2018 and request a copy of the selection criteria for the awarding of scholarships from the fund.

CARRIED 5:48pm Cr Maynard entered the meeting.

OFFICERS REPORTS 8. Chief Executive Officer’s Report 13.2

Memorandum of Lease – BP Development Australia 8.1.239c/62017 Moved – PA Will Seconded – LA Brown

That Council : 1. Pursuant to Sections 90(2), 90(3)(b) of the Local Government Act 1999,

Council orders that the public be excluded from attendance at the meeting, with the exception of Mr GM Moffatt (Chief Executive Officer), Mr MS Hewitson (Manager Governance), Mr GK Drummond (General Manager Operations), Mr BW Taylor (Manager Administration and Finance), Mr S Redden (Manager Planning & Building) and Mrs KE Blums (Executive Assistant), in order to consider in confidence Item 8.1.2 – Memorandum of Lease – BP Developments Australia.

2. Council is satisfied that the principle that meetings of Council should be conducted in a place open to the public is outweighed in relation to this matter because it involves the consideration and discussion of information, the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council id conducting, or proposing to conduct business, or to prejudice the commercial position of the council and would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest.

CARRIED 5:50pm Mayor Suter vacated the chair and left the meeting 5:50pm Deputy Mayor LA Brown assumed the chair 5:51pm Mayor Suter entered the Council meeting. 5:51pm Deputy Mayor LA Brown vacated the chair.

279

5.85.1.6

06/04/2018

A58182CEO

280

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

1

Katrina Blums

From: Peter Codrington <[email protected]>

Sent: Friday, 6 April 2018 3:37 PM

To: Katrina Blums

Subject: Apology for Council Meetings 18th April 2018

G/day Katrina,

I will be an apology for Council Meetings on 18th April 2018.

I would still appreciate a copy of the agenda.

Kind Regards

Peter C.

______________________________________________________________________



______________________________________________________________________

9.33.3.1

06/04/2018

A58209CEO

283

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

2

Good morning All,

Re: Detailed monthly trade data - February 2018

Please find below a copy of an email from TODD MILLER General Manager International Trade with DSD.

Sean

From: Miller, Todd (DSD) [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, 5 April 2018 6:13 PM

To: Miller, Todd (DSD) Subject: FW: Detailed monthly trade data - February 2018

Good afternoon Everyone,

Please see attached a detailed overview of today’s release of trade data for the year to February 2018 – Source:

International Trade in Goods and Services (ABS 5368.0).

Key points include:

• South Australia’s merchandise exports in the year to February 2018 totalled $11.83 billion, an increase of

9.8% compared with the year to February 2017.

• On a rolling 12 month basis, exports for the 12 months to February 2018 increased by $21 million compared

to the 12 months to January 2018. However, lowered production forecasts in some key agricultural

commodities, combined with lower prices for some items are likely to see overall export value declines in

coming months.

• Increased exports (in current price terms) over the previous year were achieved in key areas such as

o Wheat – 24.8%

o Meat – 7.2%

o Fruit and vegetables – 14.7%

o Wine – 19.2% - and is the State’s biggest export

o Copper – 16.7%

• In terms of markets increases were seen in:

o China – 11.9%

o Japan – 30.8%

o Middle East – 33.7%

o ASEAN – 33.4%

Let me or any of the TradeStart Team know if you have any questions.

Regards,

Todd

Todd Miller | General Manager, International Trade

International Engagement Division Department for Trade, Tourism and Investment

T +61 (8) 8303 2461 F +61 (8) 8303 2040 M +61 (0) 455 091 200 E [email protected]

www.austrade.gov.au | www.statedevelopment.sa.gov.au

Twitter.com/StateDevSA

4.3.2.1

10/04/2018

A58239CEO

284

kblums.ceduna

Corro Stamp

Wednesday, 11 April 2018

SOUTH AUSTRALIAN EXPORTS – KEY FACTS

NOTE: Unless explicitly indicated otherwise, all figures are in current prices.

HEADLINE FIGURES

Value in Current Prices

In the 12 months to February 2018, the value of merchandise exports fromSouth Australia increased by 9.8% over the previous 12-month period to$11.83 billion.

On a rolling 12 month basis, the 12 months to February 2018 saw an increasein exports of $21 million over the 12 months to January 2018 ($11.81 billion).However, lowered production forecasts in some key agricultural commodities,combined with lower prices for some items are likely to see overall exportvalue declines in coming months.

The value of Australian merchandise exports rose 12.0% to $302.99 billionover the same period.

South Australia’s share of Australian exports in the 12 months to February2018 was 3.9%, with WA, Queensland, NSW and Victoria accounting for41.2%, 23.1%, 15.3% and 8.7% respectively.

Services Exports

It is important to note that these figures only refer to merchandise exports.Figures for services exports at the state level are only reported at six monthlyintervals. The latest services exports figures for South Australia (2016-17)show a 9.1% increase to a value of $3.24 billion in current prices.

Strong increases in the main sectors were recorded - education, up 12.8% toover $1.47 billion, and tourism, up 1.9% to $802 million - but also includedencouraging progress in some smaller sectors such as transport services (up15% to $252 million) and other business services (up 75% to $145 million).The other two smaller sectors which had been growing fastest recently fellslightly in 2016/17. These are R&D totalling $114 million in 2016/17 andtelecommunications/IT at $97 million. Even with small decreases in the year,both these sectors are well up on two years’ ago (46% and 33% respectively).

285


Chain Volume

It is our recommendation that export data is always reported by the Government in current price terms as this effectively represents the true value of our exports. For most consumers of trade data, this is generally of more interest than volume based measures.

Reporting on chain volume terms can offer the potential of a higher overall export figure compared to current price measures at certain times, but can also result in a lower figure when the base period is updated. Furthermore, chain volume data is not available at a market or commodity level, so its use is limited. If required, the latest chain volume export data is below.

South Australia’s trend for total exports (goods and services) in chain volume

terms was recorded at $15.372 billion in the 12 months to December 2017. This comprised merchandise exports of $12.061 billion and services exports of $3.306 billion (both in chain volume terms).

GENERAL COMMENT

The increase in exports reflected in the February result are concentrated in commodity and resources areas in which South Australia is a price-taker on global markets and vulnerable to sudden price swings of notoriously cyclical sectors; or in other sectors (e.g. road vehicles) affected by changes in external circumstance over which the Government has no control.

Government export programs concentrate on higher-value added sectors which

create more jobs, and on new, small exporters. These are the companies which find internationalisation hardest, and benefit most from the sort of assistance Governments can provide. However, it takes a long time for these companies to grow to the stage where they make significant impacts on broad metrics like total export value. One percent of Australian exporters produce 89% of exports by value, and the smallest 79% produce less than 1%.

The success in introducing more first-time exporters into international markets

is evidenced by ABS reports that South Australia had 202 more exporting companies in 2015-16 than 12 months earlier.1 This will feed through to an increased level of total exports as these small companies grow.

1 ABS, Characteristics of Australian Exporters 2015-16. Next release with 2016-17 data expected in June 2018.

286


COMMODITIES – CHANGES IN EXPORT VALUE

Declines

Declines in export values in the 12 months to February 2018 included:

o Road vehicle exports fell $69 million (or 27.6% to $180 million), reflecting Holden production winding down. Given the rolling 12 month data, vehicle exports still feature in our key exports, but will peter out to a very small value of custom exports (i.e. non Holden).

o Lead exports decreased by 9.9% (or $54 million to $491 million). o Seafood exports decreased by 3.7% (or $9 million to $244 million).

Increases

Increases in export values recorded in the 12 months to February 2018 included: o Refined copper exports increased by 16.7% (or $165 million to $1.155

billion). In late December 2017, copper prices reached a four-year high (above US$3.25/lb) and have generally stayed above US$3.00/lb since. If current price levels are retained, this offers strong prospects for continued gains in export value in 2017-18, despite a 10% forecast drop in 2017-18 copper production at Olympic Dam.

o Meat exports increased by 7.2% (or $81 million to $1.210 billion). The Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics Sciences (ABARES) projects that meat exports will continue to grow through 2017-18, but with a reduction in prices due to increased global supplies. The full impact on South Australian exports resulting from the significant fire on 3 January 2018 at the Thomas Foods International (TFI) abattoir near Murray Bridge is not yet clear, but will likely be significant, albeit temporary. January and February export values for meat are the lowest recorded in any month since September 2016. The company has indicated that it is not yet clear how long the disruption will be, and that it will process meat at other sites, including at its abattoirs in Lobethal in SA and at a much larger facility in Tamworth, NSW. Where processed interstate, the export orders will still earn money for TFI but will be recorded as a NSW export.

o Vegetable and fruit exports were up 14.7% (or $100 million to $776 million). Lentils account for much of this increase, with broad beans and peas also having strong increases. However, lentil prices have reduced by

287


40% since this time last year due to a better season for Indian producers and fallout from recent Indian Government announcements to impose a 50% import duty on dry peas (November 2017), a 30% duty on lentils and chickpeas (December 2017) and an increase to 40% on chickpeas (February 2017). Further still, ABARES has forecast a massive drop (nearly 50%) in lentil production for South Australia in 2017-18. In coming months these factors are likely to greatly reduce the booming growth in our overall vegetable and fruit export figure, which includes legumes (it has already reduced from its peak of $877 million in the 12 months to November 2017).

o Wheat exports increased by $261 million (or 24.8% to $1.315 billion) on the back of a record 2016-17 winter crop. In its March 2018 report, ABARES has forecast substantial reductions in South Australian winter wheat crop production for 2017-18 (down by 38%), with a similar reduction forecast for barley production (barley exports are not reported separately, but as part of the confidential item). This is expected to impact significantly on export volumes and earnings in 2017-18, which will become more apparent as 2018 progresses. Recent production forecast growth from Russia has also seen a fall in global prices this financial year (near the decade low), which if sustained, could greatly impact export revenue.

o Metal ore exports increased by 7.3% (or $93 million to $1.365 billion). This grouping mainly comprises copper ores and concentrate, and iron ore. The rise is primarily due to price rises for iron ore, which began rising from around US$40/tonne in September 2016, peaking at around US$90/tonne in March 2017. However, prices have since fallen to around US$65/tonne. The average price received in 2017 for SA’s iron ore per unit volume remains less than half that achieved from 2010 to 2013. Price reductions since 2013-14 saw some unprofitable South Australian production withdrawn from the market. However, some minor production is currently being developed (CU River’s Cairn Hill expansion and SIMEC Mining’s Iron Warrior deposit), which have the potential to increase the importance of iron ore to the State’s export revenue.

o Wool and sheepskin exports were up 3.6% (or $7 million) to $203 million. o Wine exports increased by $279 million (or 19.2% to $1.732 billion) and

remains the State’s largest export. This growth has been supported by increases in premium quality wine exports to the key China market (which has accounted for much of the growth in our wine exports over recent years).

288


o Machinery exports were up 11.2% (or $37 million to $365 million). o Metal manufactures were up 20.6% (or $9 million to $51 million). o Petroleum product exports increased by 78.4% (or $134 million to $304

million). o Coal and gas exports (essentially only gas) were up 54.8% (or $20 million

to $56 million).

DEPARTMENT FOR TRADE, TOURISM AND INVESTMENT EXPORT PROGRAMS

The Government is continually monitoring emerging and growth markets and implementing appropriate international strategies to assist South Australian companies to grow their export business and attract investment.

The State’s international engagement strategies provide the frameworks to

assist companies and drive trade outcomes.

The Department for Trade, Tourism and Investment works closely with the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in formulating appropriate high-level trade and investment policies that will deliver benefits to the State, particularly in terms of enhanced access for goods and services in international markets.

The Department for Trade, Tourism and Investment also facilitates trade

opportunities with other international markets via support for exporters provided through the TradeStart Network and the Export Partnership Program.

TradeStart Advisers assist companies from all sectors to access and scope trade

opportunities in all international markets, whilst the Export Partnership Program provides greater funding and opportunities for SMEs to explore and pursue international markets.

The Department for Trade, Tourism and Investment has also established an

International Education Office to implement the International Education Action Plan and consolidate efforts to increase the number of international students studying in South Australia.

289


SOUTH AUSTRALIAN EXPORTS –COMMODITIES

South Australia’s major exports by commodity by value in the 12 months to February 2018 were:

Commodity Value (million) Year on Year Growth Wine $1,732 +19.2% Metalliferous ores and metal scrap

$1,365 +42.3%

Wheat $1,315 +24.8% Meat $1,210 +7.2% Copper $1,155 +16.7% Vegetables and fruit $776 +14.7% Lead $491 -9.9% Machinery $365 +11.2% Petroleum products $304 +78.4% Seafood $244 -3.7% Wool and sheepskins $207 +3.6% Road vehicles $180 -27.6% Coal and gas $56 +54.8% Manufactures of metals $51 +20.6% Iron and steel $48 +45.8% Other / confidential (incl. uranium and barley)

$2,316 -0.9%

Total $11,827 +9.8%

290


SOUTH AUSTRALIAN EXPORTS – KEY MARKETS

Major export markets by value in the 12 months to February 2018 were:

Market Value (million)

1 year growth

5 year average growth (pa)

10 year average growth (pa)

ASEAN $2,506 +33.4% +6.8% +5.9% China $2,417 +11.9% +2.3% +12.6% United States $1,176 -10.0% +4.0% -2.9% European Union (15) *

$1,078 -2.6% +0.8% -4.1%

India $821 +1.1% +2.7% +15.5% Japan $781 +30.8% +6.8% -0.1% Middle East $688 +33.7% -7.1% -2.1% New Zealand $421 +3.7% +0.3% -3.3% United Kingdom

$371 +0.7% -2.1% -8.6%

Canada $304 +8.1% -5.0% -3.6% Taiwan $251 -2.7% +12.1% +0.5% South Korea $244 -3.7% +3.9% -0.6% * Member countries in the European Union (EU) prior to the accession of further countries to the EU in 2004. The EU15 includes: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.

291