measuring performance council in · pdf file1 preface the key performance indicator (kpi)...

104
Measuring Council Performance in Tasmania 2006-2007 Local Government Division Department of Premier and Cabinet

Upload: dotram

Post on 25-Mar-2018

216 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

1

Measuring CouncilPerformance in Tasmania 2006-2007

Local Government Divis ionDepar tment of Premier and Cabinet

Page 2: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

Published September 2008 © State of Tasmania ISSN: 1833-7546

Page 3: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

PREFACE 1

1. INTRODUCTION 4

1.1 Background of the Key Performance Indicator Framework ............................................................. 4

1.2 Information and the Advancement of Local Government ............................................................... 4

1.3 Accountability and Leading Practice .............................................................................................................. 4

1.4 What is Performance Measurement? ........................................................................................................... 5

1.5 Identification of Key Result Areas ................................................................................................................... 5

2. PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM 6

2.1 The KPI Committee ............................................................................................................................................... 6

2.2 Defining Key Performance Indicators ........................................................................................................... 6

2.3 Performance Measurement for Tasmanian Councils ........................................................................... 7

2.4 Consolidated Data Collection .......................................................................................................................... 7

3. HOW TO USE THIS REPORT 9

3.1 Changes from Last Year’s Report................................................................................................................... 9

3.2 Presentation of the Data ..................................................................................................................................... 9

3.3 Analysis, Interpretation and Other Information ................................................................................... 13

KEY RESULT AREA

1 GOVERNANCE 15

1.1 GOVERNANCE ................................................................................................................................................... 15

1.1.1 VOTER TURNOUT ....................................................................................................................... 15

2 MANAGEMENT AND FINANCE 17

2. 1 FINANCE ................................................................................................................................................................. 17

2.1.1 BUDGET ACHIEVEMENT – REVENUE ............................................................................. 17

2.1.2 BUDGET ACHIEVEMENT – EXPENSES ........................................................................... 17

2.1.3 COST OF DEBT RATIO ............................................................................................................. 19

2.1.4 WORKING CAPITAL RATIO .................................................................................................. 19

2.1.5 REVENUE GROWTH ................................................................................................................... 22

2.1.6 EXPENDITURE GROWTH ....................................................................................................... 22

2.1.7 SOURCES OF REVENUE ............................................................................................................ 24

2.1.8 REVENUE PER CAPITA ............................................................................................................... 27

2.1.9 TOTAL RATES PER CAPITA .................................................................................................... 27

2.1.10 GENERAL RATE PER CAPITA ................................................................................................ 27

CONTENTS

Page 4: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

2.1.11 AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL RATE ............................................................................................. 30

2.1.12 RATES OUTSTANDING AT YEAR END......................................................................... 30

2.1.13 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE/DEPRECIATION RATIO ................................................... 33

2.1.14 OUTSOURCED CAPITAL EXPENDITURE ..................................................................... 33

2.2 CUSTOMER SERVICE – No measures available as yet .............................................................. 36

2.3 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................ 36

2.3.1 AVERAGE COST PER EMPLOYEE ....................................................................................... 36

2.3.2 AVERAGE COST OF TRAINING PER EMPLOYEE .................................................... 36

2.3.3 NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES PER 1000 POPULATION .............................................. 36

2.3.4 STAFF TURNOVER RATE ......................................................................................................... 39

2.3.5 AVERAGE SICK LEAVE PER EMPLOYEE .......................................................................... 39

2.3.6 LOST TIME DUE TO INJURY .................................................................................................. 39

2.4 INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT ..................................................................................... 42

2.4.1 ELECTRONIC SERVICE DELIVERY RECEIPTS ............................................................... 42

2.4.2 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY EXPENSES ............................................................... 42

2.4.3 IT EXPENSES PER TERMINAL OR PER PERSONAL COMPUTER ................... 42

3 REGULATORY 44

3.1 COMMUNITY HEALTH AND SAFETY ................................................................................................ 44

3.1.1 COMMUNITY HEALTH AND SAFETY EXPENDITURE ........................................ 44

3.1.2 NUMBER OF TIMES FOOD HANDLING PREMISES ARE INSPECTED ........ 47

3.2 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................................ 49

3.2.1 DAYS TO OBTAIN APPROVALS ......................................................................................... 49

3.2.2 NUMBER OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS LODGED ............................................ 52

3.2.3 NUMBER OF BUILDING APPLICATIONS LODGED ............................................... 52

4 INFRASTRUCTURE AND UTILITIES 54

4.1 ROADS, FOOTPATHS AND TRAFFIC ................................................................................................. 54

4.1.1 RATIO OF TOTAL EXPENDITURE ON ROADS AND FOOTPATHS TO DEPRECIATION ............................................................................................................................... 54

4.1.2 STATE OF THE ROADS AND FOOTPATHS ASSETS ............................................ 54

4.1.3 EXPENDITURE PER KILOMETRE OF SEALED ROAD ............................................ 57

4.1.4 EXPENDITURE PER KILOMETRE OF UNSEALED ROAD .................................... 57

4.2 WATER ..................................................................................................................................................................... 60

4.2.1 OUTCOME OF WATER QUALITY TESTS ..................................................................... 60

4.2.2 NUMBER OF BREAKS IN RETICULATION SYSTEMS per 100 kms ................. 60

Page 5: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

4.2.3 AVERAGE NUMBER OF DAYS OF WATER RESTRICTIONS ............................ 60

4.2.4 UNIT COST PER KILOLITRE .................................................................................................... 63

4.2.5 AVERAGE WATER CONSUMPTION PER CONNECTION ............................... 63

4.2.6 WATER SYSTEM LOSS ............................................................................................................... 63

4.3 SEWERAGE AND DRAINAGE .................................................................................................................. 66

4.3.1 NUMBER OF NOTIFIABLE INCIDENTS (SEWERAGE) .......................................... 66

4.3.2 AVERAGE COST PER SEWERAGE CONNECTION ................................................ 66

4.4 WASTE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................................... 70

4.4.1 AVERAGE COST OF WASTE MANAGEMENT PER PROPERTY .................... 70

4.4.2 AVERAGE COST OF WASTE MANAGEMENT PER CAPITA ............................ 70

5 COMMUNITY SERVICES AND DEVELOPMENT 72

5.1 SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES .............................................................................................. 72

5.1.1 SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES EXPENDITURE PER CAPITA 72

5.2 RECREATION AND CULTURE FACILITIES ....................................................................................... 72

5.2.1 RECREATIONAL AND CULTURAL FACILITIES EXPENDITURE PER CAPITA 72

APPENDIX 1 Data provided by local government financial year 2005-2006 75

APPENDIX 2 Council profile information 90

APPENDIX 3 Classification concordance 92

APPENDIX 4 Local Government Association of Tasmania Customer Satisfaction Survey 94

Page 6: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania
Page 7: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

1

PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania. This report presents data from the 2006-2007 financial year and provides five-year comparisons over the 2002-2003 to 2006-2007 financial years. The presentation of five years of data enables us to look at performance trends within Tasmanian councils. In addition, this report continues to provide opportunities to share knowledge about local government performance in Tasmania. It also represents the continued and unique collaborative effort across the three spheres of government in Tasmania.

Since the first report for the 1999-2000 financial year, data collection processes have been refined in an attempt to minimise the reporting burden on councils wherever possible. During the current year, some changes were made in the detail of the data being collected following a request from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). I thank councils for their positive approach to providing the requested data.

The KPI Committee has continued to minimise changes to the KPIs since they were first developed. Following the considerable number of changes to the KPIs in last year’s report, there are no changes this year. As was the case last year, councils were provided with their KPIs for validation and review and, as a result, some councils amended data supplied, including data provided in previous years. The amended KPIs are identified in the tables.

As in previous years, the report does not contain measures of customer satisfaction with services. It remains an objective of the KPI Committee to report on customer satisfaction in future years. The KPI Committee considers that, as recent amendments to the Local Government Act 1993 become effective, this may stimulate and encourage customer service reporting activities in the future.

The Local Government Association of Tasmania (LGAT) commissioned its third customer satisfaction survey in October 2006. As the most recent source of customer satisfaction data, a summary of the results of this survey is presented in Appendix 4.

This report includes some graphical representations of indicator trends for the period 2002-2003 to 2006-2007. A number of trends continue to be apparent:

In terms of the sources of total council revenue, the data continues to show that city councils are raising a greater proportion of their revenue from rates relative to smaller councils, and that smaller councils are more dependent on grants. The recent introduction of the new formula for the distribution of General Purpose Financial Assistance Grants means that this trend is likely to continue in future years as the formula is phased in.

There has been continued strong growth in the General Rate per Capita for the small council group with a 49% increase from 2002-2003 to 2006-2007. The same period saw an increase for the medium council group of 18% and 17% for the city councils.

There has been a slight decline in the Cost of Debt Ratio for the cities and small council groups, with the medium council group unchanged from last year.

Over the last eight years, there has been a consistent reduction in the level of rates outstanding at the end of the financial year indicating that councils are working hard to reduce the level of rates outstanding.

Page 8: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

2

• There continues to be a reduction in the number of hours lost through injury, for medium and small council groups. Most councils are providing significantly increased resources to meet occupational health and safety requirements, which may be the reason for this decline.

• There continues to be a steady increase in the level of electronic service delivery as councils promote, and communities adopt, the newer technologies.

• For the cities group, there continues to be a steady increase in the number of days required to obtain approvals for permitted use planning applications, but a continued reduction in the number of days taken to obtain building approvals.

As in recent reports, the KPI Committee includes appendices containing councils’ financial information and other statistics to provide contextual information on Tasmanian councils. It should be noted that the financial data from the Flinders Council was not validated with its audited accounts as they were unavailable in the time-frame for this report.

The KPI Committee continues to receive positive feedback from councils, researchers and State Government bodies. With the support of our partners in this project, the committee will continue to strive to improve the accuracy and integrity of the data set and to ensure that the KPIs are meaningful.

The KPI report is published and distributed by the Department of Premier and Cabinet’s Local Government Division on behalf of the KPI Committee. The Local Government Division provides executive and administrative support, and gives the KPI project an independence and objectivity that is vital in maintaining broad community acceptance and the support of all Tasmanian councils. The KPI Committee appreciates the ongoing financial support of the State Government.

David Sales Chair Key Performance Indicator Committee

Page 9: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

3

Page 10: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

4

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Key Performance Indicator Framework The KPI Project was developed through a partnership between the Local Government Division of the Department of Premier and Cabinet, the Local Government Association of Tasmania (LGAT) and Local Government Managers Australia (LGMA). This partnership built on performance indicator systems in use by other jurisdictions and developed the KPI framework.

Following the development of this framework, the KPI Committee was established to provide guidance to the Local Government Division which has the on-going management of the KPI framework. The project continues to attract strong support from local government in Tasmania. Although participation in the project has been on a voluntary basis, all 29 councils have participated over the eight financial years in which it has operated.

Over this eight year period, the KPI Project has provided councils with a range of indicators to measure their organisational performance. This enables councils to benchmark their operations and, through the time-series data, to monitor trends over time. Prior to this, there was no statewide framework for measuring and comparing council performance.

In summary, the information in the report:

enhances performance measurement by councils

enables benchmarking and identification of best practice

establishes performance trends over time

improves accountability to the community.

1.2 Information Sharing for the Advancement of Local Government Tasmania’s 29 councils vary in size, population and financial capacity. They all have, however, the same statutory powers and functions and similar objectives. Councils are working together in partnerships, and in regional and sub-regional arrangements. Physical resource sharing is growing, and information sharing and management are areas in which the local government sector has the opportunity to develop.

1.3 Accountability and Leading Practice In recent years, government accountability to the community has become increasingly important. Communities want to know more about, and have an increased involvement in, the operation of their council. This means that in recent years, councils have become increasingly open and transparent.

Value for money is high on the community agenda, as is the ability of councillors to assess priorities. The development of and reporting against performance indicators provides councils and councillors with a tool to discuss performance with the community. In addition, the cooperation underpinning this activity contributes towards Tasmania Together Goal 8: Open and accountable government that listens and plans for a shared future.

Page 11: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

5

1.4 What is Performance Measurement? Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are generic measures that focus on the achievement of outcomes most critical to the current and future success of organisations wishing to achieve continuous improvement, by monitoring the efficiency and effectiveness of their service delivery. KPIs can provide qualitative and/or quantitative information, which is used to assist in determining how successful a council is in achieving its objectives.

Performance measurement is not about ranking the performance of councils. Rather, it is about providing information to assist councils in improving their operations over time.

The following questions should be asked when analysing performance information:

What does this information tell us about what we are doing well?

What does this information tell us about where we need to improve?

Which councils appear to have “leading practices”?

How are these councils achieving success in these areas?

While the community may want to examine and analyse previous performances, the main value is to provide information to help councils plan for the future. This report gives a focus on where councils currently stand, some directions for the future and how these goals might be achieved.

1.5 Identification of Key Result Areas Councils are responsible for policy development and resource and service delivery in a range of areas. The following are the key result areas for measuring the performance of councils in Tasmania:

Governance

Management and Finance

Regulatory

Infrastructure and Utilities

Community Services and Development.

Councils report against a range of measures in these areas. The framework includes meeting various requirements under the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) and is consistent with the Review Guidelines of the Local Government Board1.

From the framework of measures, 49 council performance indicators have been selected for reporting purposes. These indicators are summarised in Section 3 – How to Use This Report. (See page 9)

The Local Government Board is an independent Board established under the Local Government Act 1993 to carry out reviews of Councils and to advise the Minister on any other matters the Minister may determine.

Page 12: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

6

2. PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM 2.1 The KPI Committee The KPI Committee was established in 2001 to oversee the introduction of the performance measurement system. Its role is to serve as the formal body reviewing the performance management system from year to year. This includes reviews of timeframes, expectations of councils, data and indicator definitional issues, and data management matters.

The current committee consists of:

David Sales Chief Executive Officer, Southern Waste Strategy Authority – Chair

Kim Wiggins Corporate Accountant, Glenorchy City Council

Paul West General Manager, Kingborough Council

Frank Barta Corporate Treasurer, Clarence City Council

Liz Gillam Senior Policy Officer, Local Government Association of Tasmania

Jeremy Threlfall Secretary to the State Grants Commission, Department of Treasury and Finance

Alistair Scott Deputy Director, Local Government Division, Department of Premier and Cabinet.

Executive support is provided by:

Pete Morrow Senior Policy Analyst, Local Government Division, Department of Premier and Cabinet

For the 2006-2007 report, data validation and technical support was provided by Mr John Gibson, and specialist statistical advice was provided by the ABS.

2.2 Defining Key Performance Indicators The KPIs are designed to assist councils identify better practices and to encourage them to look at the operation of other councils.

It is very difficult to precisely measure the performance of a council. The KPIs in this report are therefore only indicators designed to draw attention to performance, and highlight those councils who appear to be setting industry benchmarks. There may be special circumstances or unusual factors that influence the KPI outcomes for one or more councils. These influencing factors are included for each KPI.

The KPIs reported by the KPI Committee are:

directly related to performance outcomes

clearly defined in respect of purpose and use

understandable

cost effective to collect.

Page 13: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

7

2.3 Performance Measurement for Tasmanian Councils Since the reporting framework was developed in 1999, there have been two areas of performance measurement for Tasmanian councils:

1. Organisational measures that describe the performance of a council as an organisation. They address the outcomes of council services and management in areas such as human resources, finance and customer service.

2. Community measures that describe the state of a community in areas such as the economy, social well-being and environmental health. They will help answer the big questions like “How are things going in our community?”

While both categories of performance measurement are important, the KPI Committee continues to concentrate on organisational measurement, as this is the area in which councils have the greatest ability to influence outcomes, and data is readily available.

It is important to understand that councils are not able to fully influence community outcomes. For example, employment levels will influence community measures but are a product of Australian, State and local government policies, and industry decisions. A council can play a part in the achievement of community outcomes, but as one of many players, cannot be solely accountable for those outcomes. On the other hand, organisational measures are directly attributable to the performance of the council, and are readily accessible and more statistically robust.

The KPI Committee is of the view that customer satisfaction is a key indicator of the performance of a council. A detailed review of the Local Government Act 1993 undertaken during 2003-2004 resulted in amendments to the Act that required all councils to introduce a customer service charter. Some councils already operated effective customer service charters. The amendments require a council to seek and listen to the views and ideas of their local communities to determine how satisfied they are as consumers of council services. The KPI Committee will also continue to encourage councils to use a uniform customer satisfaction survey format for any customer satisfaction surveys undertaken. This will enable the publication of comparable community measures in future KPI reports.

In the absence of a KPI measuring customer satisfaction, the KPI Committee has again included in its report the summary of a customer satisfaction survey commissioned by the LGAT in October 2006 (see Appendix 4), as it is the most recent source of customer satisfaction data.

2.4 Consolidated Data Collection The KPI Committee collected data via an electronic form emailed to councils. This form collects data for the:

Tasmanian KPI Project

ABS for National Accounts reporting purposes

State Grants Commission for use in its grant allocation modelling.

This consolidated data collection process has reduced the reporting burden on councils. Rather than staff having to complete three separate questionnaires on an annual basis, one collection sheet satisfies the data needs of the three major users. Minor fine-tuning of requirements and definitions on the data collection sheets over a number of years has assisted councils to provide the required information.

The ABS sought additional data from councils in the 2006-2007 collection. Some councils found this to be challenging. However, cooperation between councils and the Data Validation Consultant enabled the required information to be collected.

Page 14: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

8

Feedback about the collection system continues to be positive. This demonstrates a unique collaboration in Tasmania between the three spheres of government. Ongoing consultation and cooperation will continue to improve the system further, minimising demands on councils, and improving consistency in data for the purpose of analysis.

This was the fourth time that the custom made database program assisted the committee to analyse the data in a timely manner to prepare the tables and graphs. The improvement in the program enabled the committee to send each council the background data (Appendix 1) and its own KPIs for validation and reasonableness testing. This provided the opportunity for councils to review the figures supplied to the committee. Councils have advised that they appreciated this opportunity and several councils asked for minor amendments to some of their figures. It is the intention of the committee to provide this data review opportunity to councils in the future.

Page 15: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

9

3. HOW TO USE THIS REPORT 3.1 Changes to some KPIs 2005-2006 onwards The KPIs for the five financial years 2002-2003 to 2006-2007 are presented in this report. As in recent years, the committee has included a number of graphs showing the movements in the KPIs over the five financial years. This allows trend analysis across various KPIs that are considered to be of most use and interest to the readers of this report.

In the 2005-2006 report, following a review of the KPIs carried out in consultation with all Tasmanian councils during 2005 and 2006, the KPI Committee made significant changes to the following KPIs:

2.1.3 Debt Service Ratio becomes Cost of Debt Ratio

3.1.2 Number of Infringement Notices Issued per 1000 Population becomes Number of Times Food Handling Premises are Inspected.

3.2.2 Number of Building and Planning Applications Lodged, is split to become:

3.2.2. Number of Planning Applications Lodged and

3.2.3. Number of Building Applications Lodged.

The changes were made so that the KPIs would be more meaningful and would provide more accurate measures of council services as originally intended.

These changed KPIs cannot be compared to the KPIs they replaced.

The KPI Committee made some fine-tuning adjustments to other KPIs, these KPIs are annotated in the tables. For these indicators, care should be taken when comparing this year’s figures to figures before 2005-2006.

3.2 Presentation of the Data The report is divided into the five key result areas:

1. Governance

2. Management and Finance

3. Regulatory

4. Infrastructure and Utilities

5. Community Services and Development.

Within these categories the relevant indicators are presented. Table 1A summarises how the indicators are arranged.

Page 16: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

10

Table 1A – Categories of Indicators

Report Ref Key Result Area Indicator

1 Governance

1.1 Governance 1.1.1 Voter Turnout

2 Management & Finance

2.1 Finance 2.1.1 Budget Achievement – Revenue 2.1.2 Budget Achievement – Expenses

2.1.3 Cost of Debt Ratio (Note: this measure has been substantially revised from 2005-2006 and so the figures cannot be compared to previous figures of the former Debt Service Ratio KPI.)

2.1.4 Working Capital Ratio 2.1.5 Revenue Growth 2.1.6 Expenditure Growth 2.1.7 Sources of Revenue 2.1.8 Revenue per Capita 2.1.9 Total Rates per Capita 2.1.10 General Rate per Capita 2.1.11 Average Residential Rate 2.1.12 Rates Outstanding at Year End

2.1.13 Capital Expenditure/Depreciation Ratio 2.1.14 Outsourced Capital Expenditure

2.2 Customer Service No measures available as yet

2.3 Human Resource Management

2.3.1 Average Cost per Employee 2.3.2 Average Cost of Training per Employee 2.3.3 Number of Employees per 1000 Population 2.3.4 Staff Turnover Rate 2.3.5 Average Sick Leave per Employee 2.3.6 Lost Time Due to Injury

2.4 Information Systems Management

2.4.1 Electronic Service Delivery Receipts 2.4.2 Information Technology (IT) Expenses 2.4.3 IT Expenses per Terminal or per Personal Computer

Page 17: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

11

Report Ref Key Result Area Indicator

3 Regulatory

3.1 Community Health and Safety

3.1.1 Community Health and Safety Expenses (Note: two measures)

3.1.2 Number of Times Food Handling Premises are Inspected (Note: this measure has been substantially revised. The KPIs under reference 3.1.2 before the 2005-2006 report cannot be compared to later figures.)

3.2 Planning and Development

3.2.1 Days to Obtain Approvals (Note: three measures)

3.2.2 Number of Planning Applications Lodged (Note: Figures before 2005-2006 cannot be compared with later figures.)

3.2.3 Number of Building Applications Lodged (Note: Figures before 2005-2006 cannot be compared with later figures)

4 Infrastructure and Utilities

4.1 Roads, Footpaths and Traffic

4.1.1 Ratio of Total Expenditure on Road and Footpaths to Depreciation

4.1.2 State of the Roads and Footpaths Assets

4.1.3 Expenditure per Kilometre of Sealed Road

4.1.4 Expenditure per Kilometre of Unsealed Road

4.2 Water

4.2.1 Outcome of Water Quality Tests

4.2.2 Number of Breaks in Reticulation Systems per 100kms

4.2.3 Average Number of Days of Water Restrictions

4.2.4 Unit Cost per Kilolitre

4.2.5 Average Water Consumption per Connection

4.2.6 Water System Loss

4.3 Sewerage and Drainage

4.3.1 Number of Notifiable Incidents (Sewerage)

4.3.2 Average Cost per Sewerage Connection

4.4 Waste Management

4.4.1 Average Cost of Waste Management per Property

4.4.2 Average Cost of Waste Management per Capita

Page 18: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

12

Report Ref Key Result Area Indicator

5 Community Services and Development

5.1 Social and Community Services

5.1.1 Social and Community Services Expenditure per Capita

5.2 Recreational & Cultural Facilities

5.2.1 Recreational and Cultural Facilities Expenditure per Capita

Accompanying each set of related indicators is a brief explanation of what the indicator is attempting to measure and a list of factors that may affect the outcome of that indicator.

The councils are arranged in the left hand column according to the Australian Local Government Classification (ALGC). Categories have been abridged, however, in order to make them more meaningful to Tasmania’s local government situation. Table 1B below illustrates how the councils have been classified for the purpose of this publication.

Table 1B – Tasmanian Local Governments

(Classified according to the abridged ALGC).

Major Cities (Cities) Other Urban and Large Rural (Medium)

Other (Smaller) Rural (Small)

Clarence City Brighton Break O’Day

Glenorchy City Burnie City Central Highlands

Hobart City Central Coast Circular Head

Launceston City Derwent Valley Dorset

Devonport City Flinders

Huon Valley George Town

Kingborough Glamorgan-Spring Bay

Meander Valley Kentish

Northern Midlands King Island

Sorell Latrobe

Waratah-Wynyard Southern Midlands

West Tamar Tasman

West Coast

Page 19: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

13

3.3 Analysis, Interpretation and Other Information Caution should be used when comparing one council with another, even within the abridged ALGC classifications. Differences in demography, geography and land use all influence cross-council comparisons.

The committee believes that the KPIs can best be used for monitoring changes in performance of a council over a statistically relevant period of time, and for identifying councils that may have improved practices in their operations.

The data from which the KPIs are calculated can be found in Appendix 1. This is the data that has been provided to the KPI Committee by councils, and has been independently validated against audited financial statements (where possible), and other information available to the public.

Two appendices containing statistical data based on ABS Government Finance Statistics (GFS) concepts were included in recent reports. These appendices are being reviewed and are not included in this report.

Appendix 2 contains council area demographics to create a contextual picture of each council for interpretation of the KPIs.

Appendix 3 provides a comparative link between ABS classifications and council functions.

Appendix 4 is the summary of the LGAT commissioned customer satisfaction survey conducted during October 2006.

Data interpretation

It needs to be understood that Total Operating Revenue includes funds received under the heading of Grants and Contributions for Capital Works when the expense associated with the development of the assets is not an operating expense, as well as assets acquired with the takeover of subdivisional works paid for by the developer. Other items that vary from year to year are profits from Joint or Single Authorities, and profit/loss on the disposal of assets. The latter item is inserted as a ’net figure‘ in the revenue stream and can produce a negative result due to the difference between the book value and the sale price. This treatment reduces the total revenue figure for KPI calculations. Appendix 1 – Other Revenue (page 77) shows that over all councils, there is a loss of $3.168 million in connection with the disposal of assets for the year ended June 2007. In the case of operating expense there is a downward adjustment to the value of goods sold. The KPIs concerned are budget achievement-revenue (Table 1A- 2.1.1), budget achievement-expenses (2.1.2), cost of debt ratio (2.1.3), revenue growth (2.1.5), expenditure growth (2.1.6), sources of revenue (2.1.7) and revenue per capita (2.1.8).

Under ’influencing factors‘ the abovementioned KPIs have a note indicating as a factor, “profit/loss on asset disposals can vary actual revenue and expenses totals” and “adjusted revenue/expenses for disposals”. While this notation issues a warning to the initiated local government employee, a reader of the respective schedule may find it difficult to understand for example where Break O’Day Council shows a negative overall revenue change of 17.1% for 2006-2007 (refer table 2.1.5), when rates and annual charges, total grants and contributions and user fees and charges show positive results calculating to 56.7%, 25.1% and 11.1% respectively. An inspection of input in this case shows a reduction of $2.2 million in ’government grants and contributions’ as the major variable factor for the reduction in the KPI for 2006-2007. A loss on disposal of assets for the latest year under review was $77,106 (a variation downward of $567,670) from the previous year. A second example at Tasman Council shows a positive revenue growth of 160.1% for 2006-2007 (refer table 2.1.5). Rates and annual charges, total grants and contributions and user fees and charges show positive results calculating to 58.7%, 22.5% and 15.0% respectively. The major variation in this case relates to the ’loss on sale of assets‘ in 2005-2006 of $3.8 million

Page 20: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

14

compared with $23,000 in 2006-2007. In 2005-2006 this table showed negative revenue growth of 50.1% when rates and annual charges, total grants and contributions and user fees and charges increased by 70.7%, 116.5% and 30.2% respectively.

A contributing factor to these calculations has been changes to Australian Accounting Standards since the KPI program commenced. The examples highlight the need for persons with any queries to contact the KPI Project Manager at the Local Government Division.

Note on comparisons between years

Data is presented for the 2006-2007 financial year as well as for the previous four financial years. It should be noted that some movements in figures between the years may potentially be the result of the change in the collection process. Such cases should be infrequent, as maintaining consistency has been a high priority for the KPI Committee in presenting this report. Nevertheless, in order to have meaningful performance measures, it has been necessary to have some KPIs better defined and the results clarified. Where this has been necessary, the KPI columns have been marked with an asterisk (*). As discussed in Section 3.1, it was necessary to make significant changes to three KPIs in 2005-06. These are annotated in the following KPI tables.

Averages

The averages of the council data presented in the report are not weighted averages. The committee determined to retain the present method of calculating averages for the 2006-2007 report. The importance of the timely production of this document resulted in the committee having insufficient time to address the calculation of averages.

Notes on unavailable, not applicable or zero data

In the KPI tables, UA is used where a council was not able to provide the data (unavailable) and NA is used where the council does not provide that particular service (not applicable). A zero (0) is included if the item is a nil amount.

For the 2004-2005 financial year, the figures relating to the number of kilolitres of water used by councils were not collected, and the committee had planned to use the data collected by the Government Prices Oversight Commission (GPOC). On reviewing the GPOC data, the committee decided not to report indicator 4.2.6 Water System Loss for 2004-2005. Because many properties in Tasmania do not have water meters, the data presented in some water related KPIs may not be robust.

Page 21: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

15

KPI

INFO

RM

AT

ION

K

EY R

ESU

LT A

REA

1 G

OV

ERN

AN

CE

1.1

GO

VER

NA

NC

E

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

over

s th

e ro

le o

f the

ele

cted

repr

esen

tativ

es, d

ealin

gs w

ith th

e co

mm

unity

and

the

lead

ersh

ip o

f loc

al g

over

nmen

t.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Ope

n, a

ccou

ntab

le g

over

nmen

t and

hig

h st

anda

rds

of b

ehav

iour

.

IND

ICA

TO

R

1.1.

1

VO

TER

TU

RN

OU

T

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Num

ber

of e

lect

ors

who

vot

ed in

ord

inar

y el

ectio

ns

Num

ber

of e

lect

ors

who

are

elig

ible

to v

ote

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

Vot

er T

urno

ut: A

mea

sure

of a

cou

ncil’s

eng

agem

ent w

ith it

s co

mm

unity

. It

shou

ld b

e no

ted

that

ele

ctio

ns fo

r M

ayor

and

Dep

uty

May

or

usua

lly o

ccur

in O

ctob

er in

eve

ry s

econ

d ye

ar.

Cou

ncillo

rs h

ave

a fo

ur-y

ear

term

, with

hal

f the

pos

ition

s be

ing

cont

este

d ev

ery

two

year

s, co

ncur

rent

ly w

ith th

e M

ayor

and

Dep

uty

May

or e

lect

ions

.

As

loca

l gov

ernm

ent e

lect

ions

are

hel

d ev

ery

seco

nd y

ear,

this

indi

cato

r w

ill be

quo

ted

ever

y se

cond

yea

r, or

as

the

elec

tions

are

hel

d.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

tim

ing

of e

lect

ions

nu

mbe

r an

d qu

ality

of e

lect

oral

can

dida

tes

nu

mbe

r of

vot

ers

with

lang

uage

and

oth

er d

iffic

ultie

s

na

ture

of c

urre

nt p

ublic

issu

es

pr

opor

tion

of d

wel

lings

bei

ng r

ente

d

%

Page 22: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

16

Cit

ies

No

te C

lare

nce

53

.95

3.2

52

.15

2.1

Gle

no

rch

y

53

.65

3.9

55

.85

2.7

Ho

bart

5

5.5

51

.65

0.4

54

.2

Lau

ncesto

n

52

.45

3.9

60

.35

6.0

Gro

up

ave

rag

e 5

3.9

53

.25

4.6

53

.8M

ed

ium

Co

un

cil

s

Bri

gh

ton

5

0.2

48

.44

8.3

46

.8

Bu

rnie

6

4.1

66

.46

4.5

60

.4

Cen

tral

Co

ast

57

.66

0.8

59

.25

8.1

Derw

en

t V

all

ey

55

.35

5.5

57

.05

7.4

Devo

np

ort

5

5.4

57

.75

7.9

55

.2

Hu

on

Vall

ey

67

.26

8.9

65

.96

5.9

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

54

.35

7.4

52

.25

4.3

Mean

der

Vall

ey

61

.75

9.9

59

.05

9.9

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

65

.46

5.2

68

.26

6.8

So

rell

5

9.5

58

.55

9.4

57

.4

Wara

tah

-W

yn

yard

6

2.3

64

.06

8.1

59

.5

West

Tam

ar

53

.05

5.7

59

.35

5.9

Gro

up

ave

rag

e5

8.8

59

.95

9.9

58

.1S

ma

ll C

ou

ncil

s

Bre

ak

O'D

ay

73

.07

0.8

73

.77

1.7

Cen

tral

Hig

hla

nd

s

66

.06

6.8

62

.06

3.3

Cir

cu

lar

Head

6

7.9

63

.96

6.9

70

.1

Do

rset

68

.26

8.9

70

.36

8.5

Fli

nd

ers

8

2.3

82

.38

1.7

76

.1

Geo

rge T

ow

n

66

.46

5.1

62

.76

5.9

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

70

.16

4.6

71

.36

8.9

Ken

tish

6

4.4

72

.96

2.0

65

.5

Kin

g I

sla

nd

7

4.7

77

.07

8.9

72

.0

Latr

ob

e

61

.36

2.9

57

.65

8.8

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

65

.86

2.8

64

.96

3.5

Tasm

an

7

1.6

72

.07

2.2

75

.2

West

Co

ast

71

.06

9.8

66

.86

6.3

Gro

up

ave

rag

e6

9.4

69

.26

8.5

68

.1

Sta

te A

vera

ge

62

.96

3.1

63

.06

2.0

Vo

ter T

urn

ou

t

Oct-

07

%

20

02

-0

3

%

20

04

-0

5*

Alth

ou

gh

th

e lo

ca

l g

ove

rnm

en

t e

lectio

ns in

O

cto

be

r 2

00

7 f

all

ou

tsid

e t

he

re

po

rtin

g

pe

rio

d,

the

re

su

lts h

ave

be

en

in

clu

de

d a

s t

he

m

ost

rece

nt

fig

ure

s a

va

ilab

le.

* E

lectio

n p

ostp

on

ed

un

til O

cto

be

r 2

00

5

%

20

00

-0

1

%

20

05

-0

6

%

Page 23: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

17

KEY

RES

ULT

AR

EA

2 M

AN

AG

EMEN

T A

ND

FIN

AN

CE

2.1

FIN

AN

CE

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

over

s co

rpor

ate

serv

ices

prov

ided

to th

e or

gani

satio

n by

cou

ncil

man

agem

ent.

Sou

nd m

anag

emen

t and

ade

quat

e fin

ancia

l cap

acity

ar

e es

sent

ial t

o de

liver

ser

vices

to m

eet c

urre

nt a

nd fu

ture

com

mun

ity n

eeds

.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Val

ue fo

r co

unci

l ser

vice

s, an

equ

itabl

e re

venu

e po

licy

(rat

es a

nd o

ther

cha

rges

), su

ffici

ent f

unds

for

asse

t rep

lace

men

t and

ref

urbi

shm

ent,

and

good

pro

ject

man

agem

ent.

IND

ICA

TO

R

2.1.

1

BU

DG

ET A

CH

IEV

EMEN

T –

REV

ENU

E 2.

1.2

B

UD

GET

AC

HIE

VEM

ENT

– E

XPE

NSE

S

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

A

ctua

l rev

enue

Budg

eted

rev

enue

A

ctua

l exp

ense

s

Budg

eted

exp

ense

s

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

Budg

et a

chie

vem

ent r

efle

cts

the

accu

racy

of t

he b

udge

t con

trol

as

com

pare

d to

the

oper

atin

g re

sults

. It

mea

sure

s a

coun

cil’s

ach

ieve

men

t in

mee

ting

annu

al b

udge

ted

reve

nue

targ

ets

and

a co

unci

l’s a

bilit

y to

con

tain

cos

ts w

ithin

bud

gete

d ex

pend

iture

par

amet

ers.

A c

ounc

il w

ith

cons

isten

t maj

or v

aria

tions

from

the

budg

eted

targ

ets

may

hav

e bu

dget

ary

issue

s th

at n

eed

to b

e ad

dres

sed.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

qu

ality

of f

orec

astin

g m

odel

qu

ality

of r

epor

ting

and

cont

rol s

yste

ms

un

fore

seen

(no

t bud

gete

d ite

ms)

m

ajor

rev

enue

/exp

endi

ture

var

iatio

ns

ch

ange

s in

acc

ount

ing

polic

ies

or s

tand

ards

pr

ofit/

loss

on

asse

t disp

osal

s ca

n va

ry a

ctua

l rev

enue

and

exp

ense

s to

tals

%

%

Page 24: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

18

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

13

9.0

10

7.4

11

2.7

11

2.7

11

3.3

99

.01

11

.21

03

.41

14

.21

12

.9

Gle

no

rch

y

10

1.4

10

3.2

10

3.9

11

6.0

10

8.7

10

8.1

10

4.1

11

0.2

11

1.8

10

3.2

Ho

bart

1

04

.81

04

.31

06

.11

11

.21

13

.41

05

.01

04

.41

02

.11

03

.51

03

.7

Lau

nce

sto

n

10

5.2

10

3.2

10

3.5

10

4.9

10

3.6

10

1.6

10

2.5

10

3.0

10

2.9

99

.9

G

roup

ave

rage

1

12

.61

04

.51

06

.51

11

.21

09

.81

03

.41

05

.51

04

.71

08

.11

04

.9M

ed

ium

Co

un

cil

s

Bri

gh

ton

1

04

.61

08

.91

04

.21

07

.11

03

.41

01

.61

05

.41

03

.49

9.0

10

1.3

Bu

rnie

9

7.1

10

0.4

10

8.0

10

2.5

10

2.7

99

.19

8.4

12

5.6

10

9.7

10

0.1

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

98

.91

02

.71

03

.11

01

.79

9.4

98

.29

7.9

10

2.5

10

2.3

10

2.0

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

10

6.4

11

1.5

14

3.4

11

4.6

10

3.4

10

8.0

11

0.4

13

8.8

13

5.5

12

3.4

De

vo

np

ort

9

8.6

10

4.4

10

9.1

11

7.3

11

7.9

10

8.0

10

2.9

10

4.3

10

7.3

10

3.7

Hu

on

Valle

y

10

7.0

10

2.5

97

.91

19

.31

16

.69

8.0

10

0.3

93

.81

15

.19

7.0

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

11

3.8

11

5.6

12

8.3

12

2.2

13

3.7

93

.41

02

.99

9.6

10

2.0

10

9.3

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

10

0.6

11

0.6

10

4.0

11

5.9

95

.91

05

.01

13

.81

05

.61

09

.71

11

.6

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

10

6.6

11

0.3

11

2.8

11

5.1

10

8.2

98

.81

00

.19

9.0

11

5.0

11

7.8

So

rell

10

5.0

10

9.5

10

3.5

10

6.1

11

4.8

12

3.3

10

8.1

10

2.4

98

.71

06

.7

Wara

tah

-Wyn

yard

1

05

.81

10

.81

05

.61

14

.21

06

.81

01

.31

00

.61

01

.91

02

.39

6.5

We

st

Tam

ar

10

7.5

11

0.5

11

7.8

12

1.5

12

4.4

99

.11

02

.41

20

.91

00

.29

8.4

G

roup

ave

rage

10

4.3

10

8.2

11

1.5

11

3.1

11

0.6

10

2.8

10

3.6

10

8.1

10

8.1

10

5.7

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak

O'D

ay

10

9.4

95

.78

3.7

10

5.4

98

.29

5.1

10

2.8

95

.69

6.8

94

.1

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

10

2.4

14

0.8

17

8.9

12

3.3

11

6.5

11

7.6

11

9.7

91

.57

2.8

10

4.9

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

1

26

.11

02

.79

8.9

99

.61

10

.51

09

.41

00

.09

5.6

99

.28

9.2

Do

rse

t 1

04

.31

02

.71

09

.01

03

.81

20

.31

07

.21

11

.21

10

.99

6.8

85

.6

Flin

de

rs

14

7.4

13

5.2

10

5.7

10

6.4

14

2.3

12

8.1

97

.59

4.2

79

.67

8.2

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

10

1.5

10

3.4

10

3.5

11

1.8

10

6.8

10

3.4

99

.01

09

.99

7.6

10

8.2

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

10

9.1

10

6.4

11

7.7

10

9.5

10

3.2

12

7.6

11

2.6

10

6.0

10

8.8

99

.9

Ke

nti

sh

1

16

.11

14

.71

29

.31

16

.89

9.8

10

2.9

10

4.8

11

1.5

11

3.8

10

4.6

Kin

g Isla

nd

1

04

.01

04

.41

06

.41

07

.31

06

.71

10

.19

6.0

98

.09

9.5

10

9.0

Latr

ob

e

10

9.0

10

6.9

11

2.7

12

1.8

12

5.3

94

.79

6.8

10

5.6

10

0.6

10

6.7

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

11

1.1

10

8.4

10

9.1

11

2.4

12

7.6

92

.08

9.0

95

.21

00

.41

05

.6

Tasm

an

1

02

.71

01

.91

00

.64

9.1

11

0.9

10

7.1

10

4.4

10

5.0

11

1.3

10

5.2

We

st

Co

ast

14

3.7

10

6.0

10

8.6

13

5.5

91

.61

07

.31

12

.41

13

.51

06

.68

4.1

Gro

up a

vera

ge1

14

.41

10

.01

12

.61

07

.91

12

.31

07

.91

03

.61

02

.59

8.7

98

.1

Sta

te A

vera

ge1

10

.01

08

.51

11

.31

10

.51

11

.21

05

.21

03

.91

05

.11

03

.91

02

.2

Bu

dg

et

Ach

iev

em

en

t –

Re

ve

nu

eB

ud

ge

t A

ch

iev

em

en

t -

Ex

pe

ns

es

20

02

-03

20

03

-04

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

20

06

-07

20

06

-07

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

20

02

-03

20

03

-04

%%

%%

%%

%%

%%

Page 25: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

19

2.1

FI

NA

NC

E co

ntin

ued

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

over

s co

rpor

ate

serv

ices

prov

ided

to th

e or

gani

satio

n by

cou

ncil

man

agem

ent.

Soun

d m

anag

emen

t and

ade

quat

e fin

ancia

l cap

acity

ar

e es

sent

ial t

o de

liver

ser

vices

to m

eet c

urre

nt a

nd fu

ture

com

mun

ity n

eeds

.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

V

alue

for

coun

cil s

ervi

ces,

an e

quita

ble

reve

nue

polic

y (r

ates

and

oth

er c

harg

es),

suffi

cien

t fun

ds fo

r as

set r

epla

cem

ent a

nd r

efur

bish

men

t, go

od p

roje

ct m

anag

emen

t.

IND

ICA

TO

R

2.1.

3

CO

ST O

F D

EBT

RA

TIO

N

ote:

Rev

ised

Indi

cato

r 20

05-2

006

2.1.

4

WO

RK

ING

CA

PIT

AL

RA

TIO

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Inte

rest

pay

men

ts

Ope

ratin

g re

venu

e

Cur

rent

ass

ets

Cur

rent

liab

ilitie

s

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

Cos

t of D

ebt R

atio

: A m

easu

re o

f the

cap

acity

of a

co

unci

l to

serv

ice

debt

– u

sual

ly in

curr

ed to

fund

in

frast

ruct

ure

and

othe

r m

ajor

cap

ital w

orks

. Th

is in

dica

tes

the

perc

enta

ge o

f cou

ncil

oper

atin

g re

venu

e re

quire

d to

ser

vice

deb

t.

Wor

king

Cap

ital R

atio

: A m

easu

re o

f the

liqu

idity

or

’cas

h‘ p

ositi

on o

f a

coun

cil.

It is

a m

easu

re o

f a c

ounc

il’s a

bilit

y to

mee

t its

fina

ncia

l obl

igat

ions

as

they

fall

due.

If c

urre

nt li

abilit

ies

exce

ed c

urre

nt a

sset

s (a

rat

io o

f <10

0%)

then

a c

ounc

il w

ould

nee

d to

impr

ove

its li

quid

ity p

ositi

on.

A fi

gure

wel

l in

exce

ss o

f 100

% m

ay m

ean

that

a c

ounc

il is

savi

ng fo

r a

spec

ific

purp

ose.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

ra

te o

f gro

wth

in a

rea

po

licy

on d

ebt f

inan

cing

le

vel o

f int

eres

t rat

es

lo

an te

rms

po

licy

on fu

ndin

g ca

pita

l inv

estm

ent

ad

just

ed r

even

ue fo

r di

spos

als

pl

anni

ng a

nd b

udge

tary

con

trol

tim

ing

of c

ash

flow

s

cr

edit

polic

ies

and

colle

ctio

n of

deb

ts

lo

cal e

cono

mic

clim

ate

de

bt r

educ

tion

polic

y

m

oney

s he

ld fo

r fu

ture

wor

ks

%

%

Page 26: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

20

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

† 1

2.0

5.6

5.2

2.8

2.4

41

4.5

31

6.9

34

1.7

46

4.6

50

9.9

Gle

no

rch

y

8.2

9.0

7.7

2.5

2.4

96

.89

4.0

89

.78

7.6

10

3.8

Ho

ba

rt

3.0

3.0

3.1

0.8

0.9

19

7.5

20

1.2

22

9.7

24

9.4

27

6.0

La

un

cesto

n

3.6

2.6

2.6

0.6

0.7

24

8.6

23

1.7

20

6.7

30

5.9

26

2.5

Gro

up a

vera

ge

6.7

5.0

4.6

1.7

1.6

23

9.4

21

1.0

21

7.0

27

6.9

28

8.1

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brig

hto

n

8.3

7.5

5.9

2.0

1.7

13

3.1

12

2.2

12

0.3

13

9.3

18

4.0

Bu

rn

ie

5.2

5.4

3.5

1.0

2.1

34

4.3

29

8.8

14

5.5

10

6.7

17

4.0

Cen

tra

l C

oa

st

6.5

3.7

3.0

0.3

0.1

29

8.0

37

7.1

29

9.5

25

5.3

24

9.2

Derw

en

t V

all

ey

7.0

6.3

4.8

1.4

1.4

69

.06

8.2

15

1.8

16

5.2

12

6.3

Devo

np

ort

8.4

12

.08

.21

.81

.67

7.4

11

3.2

16

0.8

15

1.5

16

3.8

Hu

on

Va

lley

5.1

4.1

4.0

0.3

0.2

42

5.8

37

7.7

37

2.7

41

2.9

56

3.4

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

1.5

0.9

0.4

0.2

0.1

31

5.7

31

3.2

27

6.9

29

9.8

30

5.4

Mea

nd

er V

all

ey

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

45

9.7

63

0.5

69

4.7

66

9.8

70

6.5

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

98

5.9

47

1.0

55

3.8

44

9.8

29

8.1

So

rell

6

.77

.84

.11

.41

.81

84

.22

21

.61

82

.01

85

.61

52

.3

Wa

ra

tah

-Wyn

ya

rd

6

.96

.16

.31

.41

.21

56

.42

41

.02

66

.32

37

.62

01

.0

West

Ta

ma

r

7.1

6.5

5.4

0.7

0.6

31

8.7

28

5.8

32

9.2

34

8.2

40

1.2

G

rou p

ave

rag

e5

.25

.03

.80

.90

.93

14

.02

93

.42

96

.12

85

.12

93

.8S

ma

ll C

ou

ncil

s

Brea

k O

'Da

y

4.4

3.7

2.9

1.1

1.3

42

9.5

40

6.4

46

3.8

66

3.3

30

0.5

Cen

tra

l H

igh

lan

ds

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.0

0.0

46

6.8

51

7.3

59

8.9

81

5.9

72

1.8

Cir

cu

lar H

ea

d

4.3

4.3

3.7

0.5

0.4

23

0.5

29

5.9

59

1.0

53

9.6

50

1.4

Do

rset

1.6

2.1

2.6

0.7

0.8

30

2.6

41

2.9

43

0.7

52

0.2

70

8.8

Fli

nd

ers

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

29

9.5

1,7

98

.32

,85

1.8

2,3

80

.32

,67

0.2

Geo

rg

e T

ow

n

19

.91

6.5

10

.51

.41

.28

4.6

90

.11

39

.92

22

.12

31

.3

Gla

mo

rg

an

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

6.4

6.5

15

.52

.01

.71

74

.74

4.2

80

.94

9.9

10

4.8

Ken

tish

2

.82

.62

.10

.20

.67

69

.64

16

.83

86

.13

34

.45

18

.4

Kin

g I

sla

nd

1

.02

.21

.70

.90

.83

12

.62

99

.82

95

.33

08

.43

32

.3

La

tro

be

4.0

4.6

4.7

1.1

0.9

19

0.6

15

7.9

13

6.5

12

7.4

89

.4

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

4.9

4.5

3.6

1.2

0.9

34

0.3

42

9.3

38

8.2

44

4.2

54

1.2

Ta

sm

an

2

.32

.94

.03

.31

.41

08

.66

6.2

63

.66

8.8

83

.6

West

Co

ast

6.3

7.5

4.8

1.3

1.3

11

6.2

82

.01

00

.31

25

.21

34

.7

Gro

u p a

vera

ge

4.5

4.4

4.3

1.1

0.9

29

4.3

38

5.9

50

2.1

50

7.7

53

3.7

Sta

te A

vera

ge

5.1

4.8

4.2

1.1

1.0

29

4.9

32

3.5

37

7.5

38

3.8

40

0.6

† I

ncl

udes

on

e-of

f sh

ort

term

fi

na

nci

ng

pa

ymen

t

Co

st

of

De

bt

Ra

tio

*W

ork

ing

Ca

pit

al

Ra

tio

20

02

-03

20

03

-04

20

04

-05

20

06

-07

%2

00

3-0

4

%2

00

2-0

3

%%

20

06

-07

20

05

-06

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

%%

* In

dic

ato

r ch

an

ged

20

05

-20

06

(Lo

an

rep

aym

ent

rem

oved

).

Fig

ures

for

20

01

-20

02

to

20

04

-20

05

are

not

com

pa

rab

le w

ith

20

05

-20

06

on

wa

rds.

%%

%%

Page 27: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

21

20

02

-03

20

03

-04

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

20

06

-07

Cit

ies

23

9.4

21

1.0

21

7.0

27

6.9

28

8.1

Med

ium

Co

un

cils

31

4.0

29

3.4

29

6.1

28

5.1

29

3.8

Sm

all C

ou

ncils

29

4.3

38

5.9

50

2.1

50

7.7

53

3.7

Sta

te A

vera

ge

29

4.9

32

3.5

37

7.5

38

3.8

40

0.6

10

0.0

15

0.0

20

0.0

25

0.0

30

0.0

35

0.0

40

0.0

45

0.0

50

0.0

55

0.0

60

0.0

Percentage

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ear

Wo

rkin

g C

ap

ita

l R

ati

o

Page 28: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

22

2.1

FI

NA

NC

E co

ntin

ued

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

over

s co

rpor

ate

serv

ices

prov

ided

to th

e or

gani

satio

n by

cou

ncil

man

agem

ent.

Sou

nd m

anag

emen

t and

ade

quat

e fin

ancia

l cap

acity

ar

e es

sent

ial t

o de

liver

ser

vices

to m

eet c

urre

nt a

nd fu

ture

com

mun

ity n

eeds

.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Val

ue fo

r co

unci

l ser

vice

s, an

equ

itabl

e re

venu

e po

licy

(rat

es a

nd o

ther

cha

rges

), su

ffici

ent f

unds

for

asse

t rep

lace

men

t and

ref

urbi

shm

ent,

and

good

pro

ject

man

agem

ent.

IND

ICA

TO

R

2.1.

5

REV

ENU

E G

RO

WT

H

2.1.

6

EXPE

ND

ITU

RE

GR

OW

TH

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

This

year

’s op

erat

ing

reve

nue

min

us la

st y

ear’s

ope

ratin

g re

venu

e

Last

yea

r’s o

pera

ting

reve

nue

This

year

’s op

erat

ing

expe

nditu

re m

inus

last

yea

r’s o

pera

ting

expe

nditu

re

Last

yea

r’s o

pera

ting

expe

nditu

re

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

Re

venu

e G

row

th: M

easu

res

the

chan

ge in

the

leve

l of

finan

cial

res

ourc

es a

vaila

ble

for

coun

cil a

ctiv

ities

. Ex

pend

iture

Gro

wth

: Mea

sure

s th

e ch

ange

in th

e le

vel o

f fin

anci

al

expe

nditu

re r

esul

ting

from

cou

ncil

activ

ities

.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

ra

te o

f gro

wth

or

decl

ine

in a

rea

tim

ing

of m

aint

enan

ce p

rogr

ams

ge

nera

l Sta

te/n

atio

nal/i

nter

natio

nal e

cono

mic

act

ivity

ab

norm

al it

ems

of r

even

ue

sp

ecia

l inc

reas

e in

rat

es o

r ot

her

oper

atin

g re

venu

e

av

aila

bilit

y of

gra

nts

fund

ing

ch

ange

s in

ser

vice

leve

ls

ad

just

ed r

even

ue fo

r di

spos

als

ra

te o

f gro

wth

or

decl

ine

in a

rea

tim

ing

of m

aint

enan

ce p

rogr

ams

ge

nera

l Sta

te/n

atio

nal/i

nter

natio

nal e

cono

mic

act

ivity

ab

norm

al it

ems

of e

xpen

ditu

re

sp

ecifi

c pr

ojec

ts

ch

ange

s in

ser

vice

leve

ls

ad

just

ed e

xpen

ditu

re fo

r di

spos

als

%

%

Page 29: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

23

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

25

.4-1

8.9

17

.23

.06

.6-1

.06

.22

.51

3.9

4.0

Gle

no

rch

y

1.4

6.6

6.9

13

.41

.44

.5-1

.11

0.9

5.2

6.2

Ho

bart

7

.23

.41

0.5

9.7

6.7

8.3

2.9

4.4

4.8

4.3

Lau

nce

sto

n

5.2

7.7

14

.88

.1-8

.45

.94

.96

.25

.83

.6

G

roup

ave

rage

9.8

-0.3

12

.38

.61

.64

.43

.26

.07

.44

.5M

ed

ium

Co

un

cil

s

Bri

gh

ton

4

.91

5.4

36

.7-1

5.3

6.6

3.5

5.5

1.4

1.0

3.2

Bu

rnie

1

.06

.71

8.1

4.5

0.7

10

.71

.13

7.5

-12

.52

.1

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

2.0

4.7

2.3

8.1

2.8

3.9

0.7

9.5

6.8

6.8

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

3.9

9.8

47

.4-1

6.2

-4.9

12

.66

.11

7.1

4.1

-4.1

De

vo

np

ort

1

.38

.01

0.6

13

.85

.45

.85

.43

.65

.64

.6

Hu

on

Valle

y

6.8

5.5

8.5

7.1

6.9

12

.35

.72

.71

0.8

0.5

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

11

.21

3.6

12

.92

.61

3.9

5.8

8.2

6.8

7.3

11

.8

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

6.3

7.8

-3.5

19

.1-5

.71

0.0

10

.8-6

.68

.51

1.4

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

12

.39

.8-2

.31

4.2

-7.9

1.3

-0.3

5.8

18

.96

.8

So

rell

7.5

5.9

-0.5

20

.79

.42

0.8

8.6

3.7

5.3

11

.4

Wara

tah

-Wyn

yard

1

9.4

9.3

0.4

10

.8-8

.21

.45

.4-1

.69

.31

.6

We

st

Tam

ar

3.2

9.3

14

.99

.91

5.5

3.5

7.9

23

.2-1

0.4

9.1

G

roup

ave

rage

6.7

8.8

12

.16

.62

.97

.65

.48

.64

.65

.4S

ma

ll C

ou

nc

ils

Bre

ak

O'D

ay

18

.0-8

.72

8.9

38

.3-1

7.1

2.1

11

.23

.01

1.3

8.7

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

19

.88

.73

6.7

-22

.7-0

.68

.91

6.1

-13

.61

3.9

-11

.8

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

-1

.2-4

.0-8

.01

4.5

7.7

4.9

-6.4

0.9

4.6

8.2

Do

rse

t 1

9.3

-4.1

3.3

18

.72

9.1

20

.04

.02

.8-2

.14

.9

Flin

de

rs

62

.2-2

1.5

-3.0

6.4

61

.25

2.9

-31

.61

3.6

0.7

2.7

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

4.1

7.9

0.8

22

.2-4

.71

.13

.31

2.4

2.2

12

.5

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

-8.3

-1.8

19

.41

1.1

9.2

-19

.49

.73

.02

1.9

2.7

Ke

nti

sh

5

.88

.52

1.0

13

.2-1

.8-1

.31

2.1

7.5

28

.8-3

.4

Kin

g Isla

nd

-1

.4-7

.17

.79

.12

.12

0.8

-25

.82

.21

1.2

6.9

Latr

ob

e

10

.64

.61

8.4

21

.58

.32

.71

0.1

11

.94

.21

2.3

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

-17

.02

7.7

-2.0

10

.22

6.8

-7.2

-5.6

3.8

6.1

9.2

Tasm

an

1

5.0

1.2

4.7

-50

.11

60

.14

.21

9.0

17

.31

2.0

5.0

We

st

Co

ast

32

.1-1

9.4

26

.91

3.3

-13

.18

.01

0.4

8.4

2.0

1.5

Gro

up a

vera

ge1

2.2

-0.6

11

.98

.12

0.6

7.5

2.0

5.6

9.0

4.6

Stat

e A

vera

ge9

.63

.31

2.1

7.6

10

.67

.13

.66

.96

.94

.9

Ex

pe

nd

itu

re G

row

th

%%

20

02

-03

%2

00

3-0

4

%2

00

4-0

5

Re

ve

nu

e G

row

th

20

02

-03

20

03

-04

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

20

06

-07

20

05

-06

%2

00

6-0

7

%%

%%

%

Page 30: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

24

2.1

FI

NA

NC

E co

ntin

ued

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

over

s co

rpor

ate

serv

ices

prov

ided

to th

e or

gani

satio

n by

cou

ncil

man

agem

ent.

Soun

d m

anag

emen

t and

ade

quat

e fin

ancia

l cap

acity

are

es

sent

ial t

o de

liver

ser

vices

to m

eet c

urre

nt a

nd fu

ture

com

mun

ity n

eeds

.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

V

alue

for

coun

cil s

ervi

ces,

an e

quita

ble

reve

nue

polic

y (r

ates

and

oth

er c

harg

es),

suffi

cien

t fun

ds fo

r as

set r

epla

cem

ent a

nd r

efur

bish

men

t, go

od

proj

ect m

anag

emen

t.

IND

ICA

TO

R

2.1.

7

SO

UR

CES

OF

REV

ENU

E

(Rat

es, g

rant

s co

ntrib

utio

ns/a

cqui

sitio

ns a

nd u

ser

char

ges)

Not

e: th

ree

sepa

rate

mea

sure

s (a

s ta

bula

ted

on n

ext p

age)

.

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

So

urce

of r

even

ue

Tota

l ope

ratin

g re

venu

e

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

So

urce

s of

Rev

enue

: Th

is is

a m

easu

re o

f a c

ounc

il’s d

epen

denc

e on

var

ious

rev

enue

sou

rces

: rat

es a

nd a

nnua

l cha

rges

, gra

nts

and

cont

ribut

ions

, use

r ch

arge

s, in

tere

st a

nd o

ther

sou

rces

. Fo

r th

is re

port

, int

eres

t and

oth

er in

com

e ha

ve n

ot b

een

tabu

late

d.

The

high

er th

e pe

rcen

tage

of r

even

ue r

ecei

ved

from

Gov

ernm

ent g

rant

s th

e m

ore

depe

nden

t is

the

coun

cil u

pon

othe

r le

vels

of g

over

nmen

t ra

ther

than

its

own

reso

urce

s.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

di

strib

utio

n an

d le

vel o

f Com

mon

wea

lth a

nd S

tate

Gov

ernm

ent g

rant

fu

ndin

g

so

cio-

econ

omic

pro

file

of a

rea,

i.e.

cap

acity

to p

ay

us

er-p

ay p

olic

ies

pr

ivat

e se

ctor

con

trib

utio

ns

as

sets

acq

uire

d w

ithou

t cos

t

pr

ofit/

loss

on

asse

ts d

ispos

als

Not

e: T

he in

dica

tors

are

inte

r-de

pend

ent;

an in

crea

se in

one

com

pone

nt w

ill ca

use

a re

lativ

e de

crea

se in

the

othe

r. T

he p

erce

ntag

es m

ay n

ot e

qual

100

bec

ause

of a

djus

ted

tota

l rev

enue

.

%

Page 31: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

25

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

57

.67

4.6

68

.36

9.9

70

.63

6.8

12

.21

6.0

15

.81

4.2

4.3

6.2

5.9

6.5

7.3

Gle

no

rch

y

67

.66

6.5

65

.65

9.6

62

.81

3.3

14

.01

5.7

20

.21

5.6

16

.81

7.6

16

.91

7.7

18

.6

Ho

bart

6

7.3

67

.06

5.5

62

.06

0.6

8.1

5.6

6.5

6.7

5.7

19

.72

1.2

21

.32

0.3

19

.9

Lau

nc

esto

n

65

.26

3.2

59

.55

7.8

64

.81

0.5

13

.91

9.4

19

.79

.61

6.3

16

.21

4.8

14

.01

7.0

Gro

up a

vera

ge

64.4

67.8

64.7

62.3

64.7

17.2

11.4

14.4

15.6

11.3

14.2

15.3

14.7

14.6

15.7

Me

diu

m C

ou

nc

ils

Bri

gh

ton

5

5.0

50

.23

9.5

50

.25

0.3

23

.02

7.8

39

.82

9.8

28

.51

9.4

19

.21

8.5

17

.31

7.8

Bu

rnie

6

5.0

63

.25

7.0

54

.65

7.8

12

.31

1.5

11

.72

0.3

12

.42

1.6

20

.92

2.8

23

.72

3.3

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

56

.85

6.4

57

.55

6.1

57

.32

4.0

23

.72

0.3

22

.72

1.8

16

.31

6.1

18

.51

7.3

16

.5

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

61

.05

6.5

45

.55

6.8

62

.52

7.9

30

.64

3.0

31

.12

3.8

9.1

10

.77

.98

.99

.4

De

vo

np

ort

6

9.4

67

.76

4.9

59

.05

8.4

10

.91

0.7

14

.32

1.3

23

.12

0.1

20

.52

0.9

16

.61

7.5

Hu

on

Valle

y

47

.34

6.7

48

.94

7.9

47

.12

9.6

30

.32

9.8

27

.52

9.0

7.3

9.4

8.9

9.7

10

.7

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

64

.55

9.4

55

.55

8.6

56

.52

3.2

27

.83

1.6

27

.12

9.6

10

.11

0.0

9.0

10

.19

.7

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

54

.75

3.8

59

.15

2.2

58

.53

0.3

30

.82

3.0

34

.32

3.9

11

.01

1.3

10

.69

.81

1.5

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

45

.24

3.9

47

.64

3.2

48

.93

6.8

41

.23

6.9

39

.83

1.3

12

.31

4.3

16

.51

8.1

18

.7

So

rell

58

.15

7.6

62

.25

5.9

55

.82

6.4

24

.92

0.8

27

.91

8.8

12

.51

3.9

13

.91

1.1

11

.9

Wara

tah

-Wy

ny

ard

5

5.1

52

.45

5.5

52

.25

8.6

29

.52

5.5

28

.12

9.8

23

.41

3.0

17

.71

6.9

15

.41

6.1

We

st

Tam

ar

65

.86

3.0

59

.25

6.5

53

.71

6.1

18

.32

3.6

26

.92

6.1

13

.51

4.1

13

.31

2.8

14

.5

Gro

up a

vera

ge

58.2

55.9

54.4

53.6

55.4

24.2

25.3

26.9

28.2

24.3

13.9

14.8

14.8

14.2

14.8

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

4

6.8

53

.95

2.5

43

.45

6.7

38

.03

4.6

25

.83

8.2

25

.11

1.3

14

.41

2.3

8.3

11

.1

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

28

.32

8.0

25

.13

3.6

40

.45

6.6

34

.12

2.9

39

.13

2.8

2.6

3.0

2.2

4.0

4.9

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

4

2.3

45

.55

4.4

49

.44

7.9

32

.72

3.2

23

.12

3.2

23

.51

9.0

21

.22

2.5

22

.82

2.9

Do

rse

t 3

9.5

43

.85

0.1

49

.14

0.4

42

.54

1.0

35

.24

0.9

46

.61

6.2

15

.01

2.1

10

.39

.5

Flin

de

rs

15

.61

9.8

23

.22

2.9

17

.76

6.4

53

.44

0.5

45

.26

3.2

3.5

7.1

9.2

24

.31

2.8

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

57

.55

5.9

59

.95

1.6

58

.01

9.0

25

.41

7.0

28

.02

4.2

20

.41

5.9

20

.11

4.8

16

.3

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

5

2.3

60

.96

2.2

59

.16

2.2

38

.71

7.5

27

.61

9.9

19

.35

.48

.36

.82

0.9

17

.8

Ke

nti

sh

5

0.2

51

.75

2.3

49

.85

4.3

40

.23

4.5

34

.33

7.6

31

.44

.85

.64

.47

.27

.8

Kin

g Isla

nd

3

3.9

38

.83

9.9

37

.53

7.3

35

.93

4.6

32

.43

6.1

34

.52

0.1

20

.11

8.8

20

.62

3.5

Latr

ob

e

66

.86

6.8

61

.35

3.1

52

.41

6.3

15

.32

1.2

29

.82

5.9

13

.01

3.8

11

.18

.91

1.4

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

46

.73

7.8

41

.83

9.9

33

.45

6.3

51

.44

5.4

48

.35

6.3

13

.18

.61

0.3

9.8

8.3

Tasm

an

2

4.3

27

.73

0.6

70

.73

7.0

62

.85

6.0

50

.31

16

.54

7.4

7.7

8.7

8.2

30

.21

1.0

We

st

Co

ast

48

.16

3.8

54

.34

9.7

58

.74

3.2

24

.71

9.5

19

.52

2.8

8.0

11

.11

5.7

11

.61

5.0

Gro

up a

vera

ge

42.5

45.7

46.7

46.9

45.9

42.2

34.3

30.4

40.2

34.9

11.2

11.8

11.8

14.9

13.2

Sta

te A

vera

ge

52.0

53.0

52.4

51.8

52.4

31.3

27.4

26.8

31.8

27.2

12.7

13.5

13.5

14.6

14.2

%

Us

er

Fe

es

an

d C

ha

rge

s

%

To

tal

Gra

nts

an

d C

on

trib

uti

on

s

20

02

-03

%2

00

3-0

4

%2

00

4-0

5

%2

00

5-0

62

00

4-0

5

%

SO

UR

CE

S O

F T

OT

AL

RE

VE

NU

E

Ra

tes

an

d A

nn

ua

l C

ha

rge

s

%%

20

06

-07

%2

00

5-0

6

%2

00

6-0

72

00

3-0

42

00

2-0

32

00

5-0

6

%2

00

6-0

7

%2

00

3-0

4

%2

00

4-0

5

%2

00

2-0

3

%

Page 32: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

26

Page 33: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

27

2.1

FIN

AN

CE

con

tinue

d

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

over

s co

rpor

ate

serv

ices

prov

ided

to th

e or

gani

satio

n by

cou

ncil

man

agem

ent.

Sou

nd m

anag

emen

t and

ade

quat

e fin

ancia

l cap

acity

ar

e es

sent

ial t

o de

liver

ser

vices

to m

eet c

urre

nt a

nd fu

ture

com

mun

ity n

eeds

.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

V

alue

for

coun

cil s

ervi

ces,

an e

quita

ble

reve

nue

polic

y (r

ates

and

oth

er c

harg

es),

suffi

cien

t fu

nds

for

asse

t rep

lace

men

t and

ref

urbi

shm

ent,

and

good

pro

ject

man

agem

ent.

IND

ICA

TO

R

2.1.

8

REV

ENU

E PE

R C

API

TA

2.

1.9

T

OT

AL

RA

TES

PER

CA

PIT

A

2.1.

10

GEN

ERA

L R

AT

E PE

R C

API

TA

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

To

tal o

pera

ting

reve

nue

Popu

latio

n of

cou

ncil

area

Tota

l rat

es

Popu

latio

n of

cou

ncil

area

Gen

eral

rat

e +

gar

bage

rat

e or

cha

rge

Popu

latio

n of

cou

ncil

area

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

Reve

nue

per

Cap

ita:

This

mea

sure

s re

venu

e ge

nera

ted

by c

ounc

ils p

er h

ead

of

popu

latio

n.

Tota

l Rat

es p

er C

apita

: Thi

s m

easu

res

the

rate

s ra

ised

by th

e co

unci

l per

hea

d of

po

pula

tion.

Gen

eral

Rat

e pe

r C

apita

: Thi

s m

easu

res

the

gene

ral r

ate

and

the

garb

age

rate

or

char

ge

per

head

of p

opul

atio

n. I

t sho

uld

prov

ide

a be

tter

bas

is fo

r co

mpa

rison

bet

wee

n co

unci

ls as

rat

es fo

r se

rvic

es s

uch

as w

ater

and

se

wer

age,

not

pro

vide

d by

som

e co

unci

ls, a

re

excl

uded

.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

di

strib

utio

n an

d le

vel o

f C

omm

onw

ealth

and

Sta

te

Gov

ernm

ent

fund

ing

so

cio-

econ

omic

pro

file

of a

rea,

i.e.

ca

paci

ty to

rep

ay

us

er-p

ays

polic

ies

nu

mbe

r of

‘non

-res

iden

tial’

rate

pa

ying

pro

pert

ies

le

vel a

nd r

ange

of s

ervi

ces

prov

ided

pr

ofit/

loss

on

asse

t disp

osal

s

di

strib

utio

n an

d le

vel o

f C

omm

onw

ealth

and

Sta

te

Gov

ernm

ent

fund

ing

so

cio-

econ

omic

pro

file

of a

rea,

i.e.

ca

paci

ty to

rep

ay

us

er-p

ays

polic

ies

nu

mbe

r of

‘non

-res

iden

tial’

rate

pa

ying

pro

pert

ies

le

vel a

nd r

ange

of s

ervi

ces

prov

ided

le

vel o

f reg

iona

l res

pons

ibilit

y

di

strib

utio

n an

d le

vel o

f C

omm

onw

ealth

and

Sta

te

Gov

ernm

ent

fund

ing

so

cio-

econ

omic

pro

file

of a

rea,

i.e.

ca

paci

ty to

rep

ay

us

er-p

ays

polic

ies

nu

mbe

r of

‘non

-res

iden

tial’

rate

pay

ing

prop

ertie

s

le

vel a

nd r

ange

of s

ervi

ces

prov

ided

Page 34: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

28

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

11

33

90

81

05

71

07

91

15

66

53

67

87

22

75

48

16

39

03

99

42

54

45

47

7

Gle

no

rch

y

10

52

10

98

11

82

13

31

13

72

71

27

30

77

57

93

86

22

85

28

83

12

31

23

42

Ho

bart

1

60

91

62

71

78

81

96

22

06

21

08

21

08

91

17

21

21

61

24

96

67

67

37

26

74

07

46

Lau

nc

esto

n

11

85

12

43

14

06

15

19

14

01

77

37

85

83

68

77

90

74

21

42

94

64

48

65

05

Gro

up a

vera

ge12

4512

1913

5814

7314

9880

582

187

691

095

944

144

748

249

651

7M

ed

ium

Co

un

cil

s

Bri

gh

ton

8

22

91

81

22

01

01

91

06

34

52

46

14

82

51

15

34

25

72

62

27

32

92

29

9

Bu

rnie

1

41

01

48

01

74

01

80

81

78

79

16

93

59

93

98

71

03

25

72

57

56

15

59

96

19

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

93

99

76

10

06

10

70

11

00

53

35

51

57

96

00

63

03

53

36

63

86

40

14

23

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

95

01

03

71

35

01

11

11

05

65

80

58

66

14

63

26

60

34

03

40

36

73

78

39

6

De

vo

np

ort

1

19

71

25

31

36

91

56

71

66

88

30

84

88

89

92

59

73

49

35

12

51

55

38

57

1

Hu

on

Valle

y

10

81

11

11

11

87

12

55

13

71

51

15

19

58

16

01

64

53

19

32

43

78

39

84

27

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

90

59

95

11

03

11

14

12

83

58

45

91

61

26

53

72

63

17

32

43

36

35

74

04

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

81

68

61

83

09

83

91

84

46

46

44

91

51

35

37

30

43

18

33

93

53

36

8

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

10

47

11

36

11

06

12

48

11

32

47

44

99

52

65

39

55

43

36

34

13

61

36

83

79

So

rell

95

89

94

97

71

14

81

21

85

57

57

36

07

64

26

80

43

84

60

47

94

97

52

1

Wara

tah

-Wy

ny

ard

1

03

41

13

81

15

61

26

61

13

45

70

59

66

42

66

16

64

35

43

72

41

14

05

40

8

We

st

Tam

ar

70

37

47

85

09

23

10

64

46

24

70

50

35

22

57

12

71

27

73

00

30

93

42

Gro

up a

vera

ge98

810

5411

5812

0912

3357

659

162

764

968

436

337

339

740

843

0S

ma

ll C

ou

nc

ils

Bre

ak O

'Day

1

34

41

18

71

49

12

01

71

70

46

29

64

07

83

87

59

66

37

54

13

52

75

83

63

8

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

24

04

26

27

35

27

27

75

27

36

68

17

37

88

59

32

11

07

50

95

60

70

07

31

88

5

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

1

72

31

63

31

50

41

73

31

83

57

28

74

38

19

85

68

79

51

65

26

59

16

22

64

3

Do

rse

t 1

30

41

28

51

33

01

59

52

00

05

15

56

26

66

78

38

08

36

33

94

48

25

79

59

5

Flin

de

rs

46

58

36

18

34

31

37

25

59

93

72

57

18

79

68

52

10

58

57

95

74

65

07

02

90

9

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

12

04

12

48

12

71

15

50

14

66

69

26

97

76

27

99

85

15

03

50

95

56

59

66

34

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

1

85

31

73

32

01

72

20

92

42

89

69

10

55

12

55

13

05

15

09

52

15

52

73

07

51

95

1

Ke

nti

sh

8

70

91

51

08

71

20

81

17

14

37

47

45

69

60

16

36

30

53

34

42

24

42

46

5

Kin

g Isla

nd

2

67

62

57

32

88

13

12

42

95

89

08

99

91

15

01

17

11

10

36

47

71

28

38

86

17

97

Latr

ob

e

93

99

42

11

07

12

98

14

37

62

76

28

67

96

90

75

23

44

34

93

78

38

64

21

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

96

21

22

31

20

31

33

11

65

04

49

46

35

02

53

25

51

30

53

13

34

53

68

38

1

Tasm

an

2

43

52

49

52

61

41

25

93

18

95

92

69

08

00

89

01

18

05

52

64

97

56

84

21

13

3

We

st

Co

ast

18

02

15

27

19

94

22

70

18

79

86

79

75

10

83

11

28

11

03

51

95

90

65

65

75

56

3

Gro

up a

vera

ge18

5917

7019

5820

0723

4267

872

282

787

896

246

549

858

761

869

4

$2

00

6-0

7

$$

$2

00

6-0

7

$2

00

5-0

6

$2

00

2-0

3

$2

00

3-0

4

$2

00

4-0

5

$$

$2

00

5-0

62

00

5-0

6

$2

00

3-0

4

$

Ge

ne

ral

Ra

te p

er

Ca

pit

a

20

04

-05

20

02

-03

$$

Re

ve

nu

e p

er

Ca

pit

aT

ota

l R

ate

s p

er

Ca

pit

a

20

02

-03

20

03

-04

20

04

-05

20

06

-07

Page 35: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

29

Page 36: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

30

2.1

FIN

AN

CE

cont

inue

d

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

over

s co

rpor

ate

serv

ices

prov

ided

to th

e or

gani

satio

n by

cou

ncil

man

agem

ent.

Sou

nd m

anag

emen

t and

ade

quat

e fin

ancia

l cap

acity

ar

e es

sent

ial t

o de

liver

ser

vices

to m

eet c

urre

nt a

nd fu

ture

com

mun

ity n

eeds

.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Val

ue fo

r co

unci

l ser

vice

s, an

equ

itabl

e re

venu

e po

licy

(rat

es a

nd o

ther

cha

rges

), su

ffici

ent f

unds

for

asse

t rep

lace

men

t an

d re

furb

ishm

ent,

and

good

pro

ject

man

agem

ent.

IND

ICA

TO

R

2.1.

11

AV

ERA

GE

RES

IDEN

TIA

L R

AT

E 2.

1.12

R

AT

ES O

UT

STA

ND

ING

AT

YEA

R E

ND

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Tota

l rat

es o

n re

siden

tial p

rope

rtie

s

Tota

l num

ber

of r

atea

ble

resid

entia

l pro

pert

ies

O

utst

andi

ng r

ates

(ex

clud

ing

rate

s po

stpo

ned)

and

ann

ual c

harg

es

at 3

0 Ju

ne

Tota

l rat

es a

nd a

nnua

l cha

rges

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

Ave

rage

Res

iden

tial R

ate:

Mea

sure

s th

e av

erag

e ra

tes

paid

on

res

iden

tial p

rope

rtie

s in

eac

h co

unci

l are

a.

Year

End

Rat

es O

utst

andi

ng: M

easu

res

how

cou

ncils

man

age

thei

r de

bt c

olle

ctio

n sy

stem

s (e

xclu

des

post

pone

d ra

tes)

.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

so

cio-

econ

omic

pro

file

of a

rea

po

licie

s on

use

rs p

ayin

g fo

r se

rvic

e

le

vel a

nd r

ange

of s

ervi

ces

prov

ided

ex

isten

ce o

f cro

ss s

ubsid

ies

betw

een

resid

entia

l and

ot

her

prop

erty

cla

sses

av

aila

bilit

y of

pay

men

t opt

ions

ef

ficie

ncy

of fo

llow

-up

proc

edur

es

so

cio-

econ

omic

pro

file

of th

e ar

ea

ge

nera

l eco

nom

ic c

ondi

tions

le

vel o

f rat

es p

ostp

oned

(un

der

sect

ion

125

of th

e Lo

cal

Gov

ernm

ent A

ct 1

993)

%

Page 37: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

31

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

1,3

03

1,3

68

1,4

09

1,4

51

1,5

39

6.7

5.4

5.2

4.6

4.6

Gle

no

rch

y

1,3

36

1,3

41

1,4

05

1,4

90

1,4

92

2.8

1.8

1.9

2.0

1.8

Ho

bart

1

,39

61

,40

61

,45

21

,47

61

,63

13

.12

.72

.42

.31

.4

Lau

nce

sto

n

1,2

18

1,2

58

1,2

91

1,4

64

1,4

92

7.2

4.7

4.4

4.0

2.8

Gro

up a

vera

ge1

,31

31

,34

31

,38

91

,47

01

,53

85

.03

.63

.53

.22

.6M

ed

ium

Co

un

cil

s

Bri

gh

ton

8

84

1,1

77

1,2

24

1,3

36

1,3

77

8.5

5.5

3.9

3.2

1.7

Bu

rnie

1

,31

31

,35

51

,38

61

,43

41

,46

74

.64

.03

.83

.94

.4

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

1,2

28

1,2

65

1,2

38

1,2

51

1,3

38

1.6

1.0

0.4

0.4

2.2

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

1,2

73

1,2

82

1,3

81

1,4

19

1,4

60

8.9

7.3

7.6

6.4

6.6

De

vo

np

ort

1

,37

41

,40

11

,38

11

,58

11

,58

83

.12

.42

.51

.71

.9

Hu

on

Valle

y

83

08

48

93

51

,02

71

,06

36

.14

.43

.83

.13

.4

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

1,2

42

1,2

93

1,3

62

1,3

88

1,4

52

3.0

2.9

2.8

2.5

2.5

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

88

39

16

95

89

90

96

14

.02

.82

.52

.82

.8

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

88

39

18

91

69

04

89

03

.12

.01

.42

.52

.0

So

rell

97

41

,01

19

54

1,1

33

1,1

49

9.1

6.9

6.8

6.2

2.8

Wara

tah

-Wyn

yard

9

99

94

41

,12

31

,15

21

,10

91

.40

.90

.70

.91

.0

We

st

Tam

ar

1,0

40

1,1

14

1,1

08

1,1

48

1,2

50

9.3

5.3

4.6

3.9

4.0

Gro

up a

vera

ge1

,07

71

,12

71

,16

41

,23

01

,25

95

.23

.83

.43

.12

.9S

ma

ll C

ou

nc

ils

Bre

ak

O'D

ay

71

97

09

77

99

12

99

14

.23

.42

.02

.82

.8

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

35

43

81

42

64

48

55

87

.86

.18

.37

.27

.0

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

1

,22

11

,07

31

,08

01

,05

51

,14

93

.72

.20

.90

.40

.1

Do

rse

t 8

12

84

09

03

1,0

30

1,0

81

6.6

3.8

2.7

2.4

2.3

Flin

de

rs

36

83

38

37

03

70

14

79

.66

.61

0.9

15

.51

2.8

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

61

96

49

63

56

58

1,1

23

4.5

2.8

1.9

1.8

1.6

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

95

81

,08

11

,22

81

,25

71

,16

71

.61

.89

.63

.42

.8

Ke

nti

sh

8

03

89

39

74

90

19

44

5.4

2.7

2.2

0.5

1.3

Kin

g Isla

nd

5

26

59

65

20

1,6

48

1,8

52

11

.35

.87

.35

.37

.2

Latr

ob

e

1,0

95

1,1

08

1,1

38

1,1

29

1,1

41

2.4

1.3

1.1

0.3

0.4

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

77

07

99

81

56

37

61

31

3.4

10

.78

.78

.28

.9

Tasm

an

4

09

53

05

75

59

18

96

10

.76

.36

.46

.86

.2

We

st

Co

ast

95

71

,02

91

,51

81

,14

11

,40

12

5.0

13

.91

1.4

9.3

5.2

G

roup

ave

rage

73

97

71

84

39

06

1,0

05

8.2

5.2

5.6

4.9

4.5

Stat

e A

vera

ge9

58

99

71

,05

11

,11

81

,18

46

.54

.24

.23

.73

.4

Ra

te

s O

uts

ta

nd

ing

at Y

ea

r E

nd

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

20

06

-07

20

02

- 0

32

00

3-0

4

%%

%

Av

era

ge

Re

sid

en

tia

l R

ate

20

02

- 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

4-0

52

00

5-0

62

00

6-0

7

$%

%$

$$

$

Page 38: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

32

Page 39: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

33

2.1

FIN

AN

CE

cont

inue

d

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

over

s co

rpor

ate

serv

ices

prov

ided

to th

e or

gani

satio

n by

cou

ncil

man

agem

ent.

Sou

nd m

anag

emen

t and

ade

quat

e fin

ancia

l cap

acity

ar

e es

sent

ial t

o de

liver

ser

vices

to m

eet c

urre

nt a

nd fu

ture

com

mun

ity n

eeds

.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

V

alue

for

coun

cil s

ervi

ces,

an e

quita

ble

reve

nue

polic

y (r

ates

and

oth

er c

harg

es),

suffi

cien

t fun

ds fo

r as

set r

epla

cem

ent a

nd r

efur

bish

men

t, an

d go

od p

roje

ct m

anag

emen

t.

IND

ICA

TO

R

2.1.

13

CA

PIT

AL

EXPE

ND

ITU

RE/

DEP

REC

IAT

ION

RA

TIO

2.

1.14

O

UT

SOU

RC

ED C

API

TA

L EX

PEN

DIT

UR

E

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Tota

l cap

ital e

xpen

ditu

re o

n ex

istin

g as

sets

To

tal d

epre

ciat

ion

expe

nse

Tota

l out

sour

ced

capi

tal e

xpen

ditu

re

Tota

l cap

ital e

xpen

ditu

re

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

Ra

tio o

f Cap

ital E

xpen

ditu

re o

n Ex

istin

g A

sset

s to

D

epre

ciat

ion:

Thi

s m

easu

re c

an a

ssist

in id

entif

ying

the

pote

ntia

l dec

line

or im

prov

emen

t in

asse

t con

ditio

n an

d st

anda

rds.

Cap

ital e

xpen

ditu

re c

an in

clud

e th

e re

new

al,

upgr

ade

or e

xpan

sion

of e

xist

ing

asse

ts.

A p

erce

ntag

e ab

ove

100

mea

ns th

at e

xpen

ditu

re o

n ex

istin

g as

sets

ex

ceed

ed d

epre

ciat

ion

of e

xist

ing

asse

ts.

Out

sour

ced

Cap

ital E

xpen

ditu

re: M

easu

res

the

exte

nt to

whi

ch a

co

unci

l use

s ex

tern

al p

rovi

ders

to d

eliv

er c

apita

l exp

endi

ture

pr

ogra

ms.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

st

age

in li

fe o

f ass

ets

gr

owth

or

decl

ine

of th

e ar

ea

de

prec

iatio

n po

licie

s/st

anda

rds

ca

pita

lisat

ion

polic

y

pr

esen

ce in

are

a of

alte

rnat

ive

serv

ice

supp

liers

av

aila

bilit

y of

join

t ven

ture

s

ex

tent

of c

ompe

titiv

e te

nder

pro

cess

es

ab

ility

to d

efin

e pr

ojec

ts a

nd m

anag

e ex

tern

al p

rovi

ders

co

st/b

enef

it of

out

sour

cing

par

ticul

ar p

roje

cts

or a

ctiv

ities

ex

tent

of g

rant

fund

ed p

roje

cts

po

licy

in r

espe

ct o

f out

sour

cing

%

%

Page 40: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

34

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

88

.91

42

.09

4.0

38

.34

8.5

47

.66

8.7

67

.06

7.8

34

.4

Gle

no

rch

y

74

.21

03

.56

8.9

58

.35

3.6

28

.11

7.4

20

.82

1.8

21

.7

Ho

ba

rt

68

.16

7.1

76

.34

9.7

50

.61

1.1

7.6

18

.01

2.3

6.9

La

un

cesto

n

11

0.5

13

5.4

13

3.9

3.6

5.8

50

.55

4.9

58

.13

5.6

39

.1

Gro

up

av

era

ge

85

.41

12

.09

3.3

37

.53

9.6

34

.33

7.1

41

.03

4.4

25

.5M

ed

ium

Co

un

cil

s

Brig

hto

n

81

.09

8.9

26

4.6

37

.10

.03

3.3

27

.22

1.7

22

.72

0.2

Bu

rn

ie

74

.18

5.8

12

9.2

79

.27

2.6

26

.82

5.8

61

.06

6.4

54

.1

Cen

tra

l C

oa

st

12

7.1

96

.11

27

.15

7.4

46

.25

9.5

58

.93

1.5

55

.54

2.5

Derw

en

t V

all

ey

11

2.2

10

7.2

13

7.9

78

.51

17

.36

.16

.04

.39

.14

4.9

Devo

np

ort

11

4.1

71

.77

7.6

57

.86

3.4

26

.84

9.6

47

.67

3.6

73

.9

Hu

on

Va

lley

11

0.5

18

1.3

17

2.0

10

1.7

86

.10

.00

.00

.00

.00

.0

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

74

.98

5.8

12

4.9

61

.46

2.3

64

.06

7.0

59

.35

0.8

66

.2

Mea

nd

er V

all

ey

15

2.6

99

.29

2.6

63

.28

8.9

73

.29

6.6

54

.54

4.2

36

.6

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

21

8.4

29

8.2

14

8.9

93

.89

0.7

66

.77

7.4

45

.44

3.8

62

.8

So

rell

6

8.1

50

.67

0.0

38

.09

0.1

93

.01

00

.08

5.7

45

.93

0.7

Wa

ra

ta

h-W

yn

ya

rd

1

80

.91

65

.22

13

.39

7.2

12

0.5

55

.25

0.9

35

.54

1.1

22

.1

West T

am

ar

11

6.0

15

1.8

11

2.8

71

.31

03

.18

9.7

89

.88

6.3

90

.38

3.0

Gro

up

av

era

ge

11

9.2

12

4.3

13

9.2

69

.77

8.4

49

.55

4.1

44

.44

5.3

44

.7S

ma

ll C

ou

ncil

s

Brea

k O

'Da

y

52

.66

7.3

11

1.0

24

.19

2.1

0.0

18

.83

2.9

39

.48

4.5

Cen

tra

l H

igh

lan

ds

54

.07

3.8

12

2.0

15

.01

4.6

76

.15

6.8

95

.28

7.0

68

.8

Cir

cu

lar H

ea

d

17

5.4

22

9.0

11

1.9

80

.18

7.5

N/A

35

.85

2.9

46

.83

7.4

Do

rset

11

1.0

80

.07

5.2

79

.99

6.9

17

.33

8.7

21

.23

3.8

34

.1

Fli

nd

ers

30

.53

3.6

33

.80

.40

.00

.05

4.1

6.1

24

.72

6.5

Geo

rg

e T

ow

n

10

2.5

12

0.5

61

.73

7.9

83

.58

0.7

7.0

4.6

18

.2U

A

Gla

mo

rg

an

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

18

2.8

25

4.3

15

9.0

72

.45

9.7

63

.61

0.1

3.0

17

.44

0.9

Ken

tis

h

44

.81

62

.31

35

.30

.07

.56

4.1

56

.07

8.2

60

.06

4.9

Kin

g I

sla

nd

1

01

.11

35

.81

13

.25

.43

7.8

0.0

15

.11

9.7

16

.31

6.9

La

tro

be

17

0.5

12

7.3

13

7.1

76

.76

4.8

11

.15

2.7

22

.42

8.4

12

.9

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

99

.98

9.7

11

4.5

92

.12

7.2

N/A

25

.52

8.6

36

.54

2.5

Ta

sm

an

3

46

.32

82

.51

38

.68

7.3

73

.07

0.9

57

.93

0.9

25

.14

3.9

West C

oa

st

33

5.5

11

0.7

13

5.3

17

.89

2.8

95

.29

4.5

82

.48

1.6

97

.4

G

rou

p a

ve

rag

e1

39

.01

35

.91

11

.44

5.3

56

.74

3.5

40

.23

6.8

39

.64

7.6

Sta

te A

ve

rag

e1

23

.41

27

.81

20

.45

4.3

63

.34

4.8

45

.54

0.5

41

.24

3.2

%2

00

6-0

7

%2

00

6-0

7

%2

00

4-0

5

%2

00

5-0

6

%

*

Fo

r t

he 2

00

5-0

6 F

Y t

he d

efin

itio

n o

f a

ssets w

as a

men

ded

fro

m a

ll a

ssets t

o e

xis

tin

g a

ssets.

T

his

ma

y m

ea

n t

he f

igu

res p

rio

r t

o 2

00

5-0

6 m

ay n

ot b

e d

irectly

co

mp

ara

ble

wit

h 2

00

5-0

6 o

nw

ard

s.

20

03

-04

%2

00

2 -

03

%2

00

3-0

4

%

Ou

tso

urce

d C

ap

ita

l E

xp

en

dit

ure

To

ta

l C

ap

ita

l E

xp

en

dit

ure

on

Ex

istin

g A

sse

ts

*

/ T

ota

l D

ep

re

cia

tio

n R

atio

20

02

- 0

3

%2

00

5-0

6

%2

00

4-0

5

Page 41: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

35

Page 42: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

36

2.2

CU

STO

MER

SER

VIC

E –

No

mea

sure

s av

aila

ble

as y

et

2.3

HU

MA

N R

ESO

UR

CE

MA

NA

GEM

ENT

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

over

s co

rpor

ate

serv

ices

prov

ided

to th

e or

gani

satio

n by

cou

ncil

man

agem

ent.

Sou

nd m

anag

emen

t and

ade

quat

e ph

ysica

l and

fin

ancia

l cap

acity

are

ess

entia

l to

deliv

er s

ervic

es to

mee

t cur

rent

and

futu

re c

omm

unity

nee

ds.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Fo

r ea

ch c

ounc

il to

hav

e w

ell-t

rain

ed, h

ighl

y m

otiv

ated

sta

ff, w

ho a

re m

ulti-

skille

d to

pro

vide

the

nece

ssar

y fle

xibi

lity

for

man

agem

ent i

n a

mod

ern

corp

orat

ion,

and

ope

rate

in a

saf

e an

d he

alth

y en

viro

nmen

t.

IND

ICA

TO

R

2.3.

1

AV

ERA

GE

CO

ST P

ER E

MPL

OY

EE

2.3.

2

AV

ERA

GE

CO

ST O

F T

RA

ININ

G

PER

EM

PLO

YEE

2.

3.3

N

UM

BER

OF

EMPL

OY

EES

PER

10

00 P

OPU

LAT

ION

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Tota

l em

ploy

ee c

osts

Num

ber

of y

ear-

end

full-

time

equi

vale

nts

(FTE

s)

Tota

l em

ploy

ee tr

aini

ng c

osts

Num

ber

of y

ear-

end

full-

time

equi

vale

nts

(FTE

s)

Num

ber

of y

ear

end

FTEs

(x

1000

)

Popu

latio

n of

cou

ncil

area

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

Ave

rage

Cos

t per

Em

ploy

ee:

Refle

cts

the

cost

to c

ounc

il of

em

ploy

ing

and

trai

ning

its

wor

kfor

ce.

Ave

rage

Cos

t of T

rain

ing

per

Empl

oyee

: Is

a m

easu

re o

f em

ploy

ee s

kill

deve

lopm

ent.

Num

ber

of E

mpl

oyee

s pe

r 10

00

popu

latio

n: A

mea

sure

to c

ompa

re

staf

fing

leve

ls of

sim

ilar

sized

cou

ncils

.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

po

licy

on u

se o

f out

sour

ced

labo

ur/c

onsu

ltant

s

di

fficu

lty in

att

ract

ing

staf

f

ra

nge

of s

ervi

ces

prov

ided

or

gani

satio

nal s

truc

ture

sk

ill m

ix o

f sta

ff

in

trod

uctio

n of

new

sys

tem

s an

d st

aff

us

e of

new

tech

nolo

gy o

r eq

uipm

ent

ac

cess

to tr

aini

ng fa

cilit

ator

s

le

vel o

f out

sour

cing

and

ran

ge o

f se

rvic

es p

rovi

ded

po

pula

tion

and

‘crit

ical

mas

s’ of

sta

ff re

quire

d to

run

cou

ncils

ge

ogra

phic

al r

emot

enes

s an

d la

ck o

f al

tern

ativ

e su

pplie

rs

† Pr

evio

usly

kno

wn

as R

elat

ive

Num

ber

of E

mpl

oyee

s. O

nly

a na

me

chan

ge.

Page 43: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

37

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

42

,06

64

7,9

96

45

,09

15

3,7

02

53

,96

45

95

86

71

,05

89

75

82

14

.34

.54

.54

.84

.7

Gle

no

rch

y

52

,41

95

6,3

62

59

,84

06

0,9

44

64

,78

88

33

86

61

,01

47

55

1,0

33

6.4

6.4

6.6

6.7

6.9

Ho

bart

5

2,6

03

54

,24

15

8,0

59

54

,57

95

9,9

42

48

36

34

97

21

,46

81

,47

51

2.0

11

.91

2.0

12

.01

1.7

Lau

nc

esto

n

49

,13

74

9,9

69

54

,47

15

8,6

38

64

,69

77

84

66

58

40

93

57

98

7.7

7.7

7.8

7.9

7.5

G

roup

ave

rag

e49

,056

52,1

4054

,365

56,9

6660

,848

67

47

58

97

11,

033

1,03

27.

67.

67.

77.

97.

7M

ed

ium

Co

un

cil

s

Bri

gh

ton

3

7,6

23

39

,49

74

1,3

73

47

,23

03

8,9

53

1,5

68

1,7

66

83

79

98

1,0

48

3.2

3.1

3.5

3.5

4.0

Bu

rnie

4

7,4

68

47

,05

64

7,1

28

57

,92

46

0,8

49

63

65

86

79

98

79

1,0

87

9.9

10

.41

1.3

11

.51

1.6

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

52

,49

04

9,9

76

53

,43

56

4,0

85

58

,07

38

23

85

61

,11

88

10

1,0

11

5.5

6.1

6.5

6.3

7.1

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

47

,04

94

6,4

58

47

,62

74

9,6

00

51

,38

25

54

45

65

01

63

27

05

7.3

7.0

7.5

6.4

5.6

De

vo

np

ort

5

1,9

71

48

,86

54

9,5

26

58

,53

26

1,5

08

63

69

11

91

28

86

66

67

.68

.08

.08

.28

.3

Hu

on

Valle

y

38

,28

63

3,6

83

38

,83

74

4,6

04

50

,54

84

62

35

13

35

44

43

86

8.7

10

.01

0.0

10

.51

0.2

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

44

,65

04

7,9

47

47

,68

25

1,2

98

54

,21

98

27

75

06

97

83

41

,04

35

.15

.15

.35

.35

.6

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

47

,74

04

4,9

41

51

,16

15

2,5

96

60

,08

11

,17

87

26

1,1

70

1,0

18

1,1

30

3.2

3.5

3.7

4.0

4.0

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

43

,81

54

3,6

28

48

,09

75

4,8

78

58

,93

81

,41

01

,65

11

,14

41

,12

41

,10

35

.35

.76

.25

.96

.0

So

rell

48

,55

35

3,9

47

55

,65

15

1,2

48

53

,20

46

04

43

46

09

50

15

67

6.1

6.3

6.1

7.3

7.0

Wara

tah

-Wy

ny

ard

4

3,9

73

37

,74

04

1,0

37

48

,47

65

0,2

17

84

28

23

89

81

,01

29

85

5.3

6.0

6.4

6.0

6.4

We

st

Tam

ar

45

,01

65

6,4

06

53

,76

95

5,9

49

58

,81

31

,14

81

,65

08

87

90

99

12

3.8

3.6

4.1

4.3

4.3

Gro

up a

vera

ge

45,7

1945

,845

47,9

4353

,035

54,7

328

91

91

38

26

83

78

87

5.9

6.2

6.5

6.6

6.7

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

4

4,5

88

48

,85

55

6,8

87

50

,60

75

2,6

38

33

58

14

2,2

61

1,7

33

2,0

15

7.9

8.0

7.6

9.2

10

.6

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

49

,81

34

9,6

25

51

,84

85

0,9

69

49

,56

36

49

56

46

13

60

13

02

13

.91

3.9

14

.11

3.9

13

.8

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

4

6,9

64

46

,72

04

8,3

65

49

,17

35

3,7

12

55

44

23

66

21

,13

01

,67

66

.16

.26

.36

.86

.8

Do

rse

t 4

9,5

53

50

,04

95

0,7

20

58

,85

65

5,4

15

87

01

,09

01

,51

41

,35

69

21

6.4

7.0

7.2

6.5

7.2

Flin

de

rs

44

,54

94

4,5

07

54

,70

95

7,9

53

68

,27

35

54

46

52

45

66

11

,50

51

9.6

19

.42

0.1

20

.51

8.2

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

41

,41

33

3,6

26

47

,68

55

2,2

95

55

,48

36

66

52

78

32

87

01

,19

66

.56

.46

.96

.97

.3

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

5

5,2

78

48

,10

34

6,6

60

68

,83

36

5,5

76

98

08

06

54

79

39

79

79

.09

.31

0.9

11

.01

1.3

Ke

nti

sh

4

0,6

45

48

,00

05

3,0

27

45

,63

04

9,4

20

60

15

98

70

41

,40

81

,59

33

.94

.14

.14

.95

.0

Kin

g Isla

nd

4

8,1

38

50

,73

64

6,1

86

48

,60

44

7,9

64

51

01

37

77

1,7

50

76

21

7.2

17

.21

6.6

16

.51

6.4

Latr

ob

e

48

,56

14

6,7

87

50

,32

05

1,1

56

49

,56

31

,26

11

,46

31

,26

21

,09

01

,29

65

.16

.06

.36

.26

.9

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

36

,36

33

8,3

20

39

,50

54

8,9

22

49

,77

72

62

37

63

75

52

16

00

7.8

7.8

7.7

7.7

7.9

Tasm

an

5

8,7

57

48

,35

85

2,7

50

61

,57

85

8,4

46

54

36

98

64

37

36

73

21

6.4

23

.92

5.7

24

.82

4.2

We

st

Co

ast

50

,04

84

8,4

38

53

,63

75

2,5

10

54

,24

06

67

69

68

86

39

14

75

9.8

11

.21

1.7

11

.81

1.0

Gro

up a

vera

ge

47,2

8246

,317

50,1

7753

,622

54,6

216

50

66

68

17

1,01

41,

067

10.0

10.8

11.2

11.3

11.3

Sta

te A

vera

ge

46,8

8046

,925

49,8

3053

,840

55,5

2675

378

184

294

498

88.

08.

58.

88.

98.

9

No

. o

f E

mp

loy

ee

s p

er

10

00

Po

pu

latio

n

20

06

-07

Av

era

ge

Co

st o

f T

rain

ing

pe

r E

mp

loy

ee

Av

era

ge

Co

st p

er

Em

plo

ye

e

20

02

- 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

5-0

62

00

4-0

52

00

3-0

42

00

2- 0

32

00

4-0

52

00

5-0

62

00

6-0

72

00

2- 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

4-0

52

00

5-0

62

00

6-0

7

$$

$$

$$

$$

$$

Page 44: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

38

Page 45: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

39

2.3

H

UM

AN

RES

OU

RC

E M

AN

AG

EMEN

T c

ontin

ued

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

over

s co

rpor

ate

serv

ices

prov

ided

to th

e or

gani

satio

n by

cou

ncil

man

agem

ent.

Sou

nd m

anag

emen

t and

ade

quat

e fin

ancia

l cap

acity

ar

e es

sent

ial t

o de

liver

ser

vices

to m

eet c

urre

nt a

nd fu

ture

com

mun

ity n

eeds

.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Fo

r ea

ch c

ounc

il to

hav

e w

ell-t

rain

ed, h

ighl

y m

otiv

ated

sta

ff, w

ho a

re m

ulti

skille

d to

pro

vide

the

nece

ssar

y fle

xibi

lity

for

man

agem

ent i

n a

mod

ern

corp

orat

ion,

and

ope

rate

in a

saf

e an

d he

alth

y en

viro

nmen

t.

IND

ICA

TO

R

2.3.

4

ST

AFF

TU

RN

OV

ER R

AT

E 2.

3.5

A

VER

AG

E SI

CK

LEA

VE

PER

EM

PLO

YEE

2.

3.6

L

OST

TIM

E D

UE

TO

INJU

RY

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Full-

time

equi

vale

nt te

rmin

atio

ns

Tota

l num

ber

of y

ear-

end

fu

ll-tim

e eq

uiva

lent

s (F

TEs)

Num

ber

of d

ays

of s

ick

leav

e

Num

ber

of y

ear-

end

full-

time

equi

vale

nts

(FTE

s)

Hou

rs lo

st to

inju

ry (

x100

0)

Tota

l hou

rs w

orke

d

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

St

aff T

urno

ver

Rate

: Mea

sure

s w

orkf

orce

st

abilit

y.

Ave

rage

Sic

k Le

ave

per

Empl

oyee

: M

easu

res

heal

th a

nd w

ellb

eing

in th

e w

orkp

lace

.

Lost

Tim

e D

ue t

o In

jury

: An

indi

cato

r of

a

coun

cil’s

occ

upat

iona

l hea

lth a

nd s

afet

y pe

rform

ance

.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

or

gani

satio

nal r

e-st

ruct

ure

em

ploy

er/e

mpl

oyee

rel

atio

ns a

nd

prac

tices

w

orkp

lace

cul

ture

qu

ality

of s

taff

and

staf

f mob

ility

re

mun

erat

ion

and

reco

gniti

on

lo

ng-t

erm

sic

knes

s of

one

or

mor

e st

aff

em

ploy

er/e

mpl

oyee

rel

atio

ns

in

flexi

ble

wor

king

pat

tern

s

w

orkp

lace

cul

ture

em

ploy

ee m

oral

e

in

adeq

uate

occ

upat

iona

l hea

lth a

nd

safe

ty p

ract

ices

lo

ng-t

erm

inju

ry o

f one

or

mor

e em

ploy

ees

w

orkp

lace

cul

ture

%

Page 46: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

40

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

8.9

9.3

12

.68

.27

.65

.27

.67

.56

.77

.31

.84

.81

.32

.30

.3

Gle

no

rch

y

19

.41

0.1

10

.87

.68

.85

.76

.85

.95

.96

.63

.53

.74

.08

.91

1.7

Ho

bart

6

.89

.49

.21

1.1

14

.66

.87

.36

.16

.46

.84

.33

.21

.52

.44

.0

Lau

nc

esto

n

13

.68

.19

.19

.71

3.3

6.3

5.7

6.2

6.3

7.5

6.4

8.1

4.4

4.0

2.6

G

roup

ave

rag

e12

.29.

210

.59.

211

.16.

06.

86.

56.

37.

04.

05.

02.

84.

44.

6M

ed

ium

Co

un

cil

s

Bri

gh

ton

1

4.3

16

.76

.10

.05

.34

.73

.93

.15

.77.

10

.51

.04

.43

.91

.8

Bu

rnie

1

0.8

10

.61

1.0

3.2

9.8

3.7

6.0

4.9

4.9

4.3

5.0

2.7

1.1

1.3

2.0

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

5.2

4.7

5.9

7.5

8.0

7.9

6.5

8.0

7.5

6.1

4.8

8.7

4.7

7.0

8.7

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

8.2

10

.61

1.3

25

.81

4.8

4.0

3.3

3.5

2.2

4.7

2.7

10

.22

.90

.90

.1

De

vo

np

ort

1

3.0

6.5

21

.81

7.6

12

.67

.06

.06

.26

.87

.81

0.6

6.9

4.3

3.4

5.4

Hu

on

Valle

y

5.8

10

.81

2.1

14

.22

1.8

3.0

3.6

2.1

4.1

3.8

12

.58

.53

.60

.30

.5

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

9.9

13

.41

3.8

13

.61

6.5

4.8

4.1

5.3

4.9

5.1

0.2

3.7

2.9

1.5

1.4

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

3.4

4.6

8.8

10

.69

.15

.35

.05

.15

.03

.44

.60

.41

.50

.00

.3

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

8.4

9.1

21

.31

3.0

14

.04

.56

.14

.44

.84

.71

.94

.21

0.8

0.9

2.0

So

rell

17

.67

.01

1.4

14

.01

2.9

6.0

5.5

5.3

2.7

5.6

0.5

1.1

0.8

1.5

2.5

Wara

tah

-Wy

ny

ard

1

3.9

13

.67

.89

.68

.65

.45

.36

.76

.26

.71

4.6

6.7

6.5

8.0

1.6

We

st

Tam

ar

14

.19

.21

7.2

13

.09

.73

.85

.05

.15

.45

.01

.90

.41

.02

.51

.4

G

roup

ave

rag

e10

.49.

712

.411

.811

.95.

05.

05.

05.

05.

45.

04.

53.

72.

62.

3S

ma

ll C

ou

nc

ils

Bre

ak O

'Day

1

3.0

14

.66

.42

1.6

7.6

3.3

5.1

4.9

5.2

4.0

0.0

1.6

2.3

14

.43

6.3

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

6.3

6.3

12

.19

.47

.83

.03

.55

.92

.83

.84

.54

.74

.44

.10

.6

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

1

0.2

14

.01

9.6

10

.91

2.5

4.4

9.3

6.2

5.0

5.3

UA

18

.32

4.2

18

.13

.2

Do

rse

t 8

.58

.05

.98

.75

.86

.95

.75

.55

.54

.20

.80

.80

.10

.00

.4

Flin

de

rs

11

.82

3.5

16

.72

7.8

25

.00

.05

.32

.67

.87

.70

.00

.00

.02

.00

.0

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

4.8

4.7

4.3

4.3

6.1

7.1

5.3

4.4

6.1

7.2

4.4

0.6

4.9

5.7

0.0

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

2

2.2

17

.91

4.9

10

.41

2.2

6.6

6.7

3.8

4.5

4.1

7.7

7.7

1.2

0.5

0.2

Ke

nti

sh

4

.68

.71

2.5

10

.36

.73

.22

.72

.82

.24

.00

.08

.62

.70

.00

.4

Kin

g Isla

nd

1

3.8

17

.97

.77

.71

4.3

4.6

3.8

7.1

6.1

9.5

3.1

11

.71

.10

.66

.0

Latr

ob

e

11

.75

.81

4.5

14

.38

.25

.84

.93

.97

.04

.91

.23

.00

.80

.00

.5

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

2.2

0.0

2.3

0.0

2.2

5.0

3.8

3.5

6.3

6.1

0.8

3.9

1.9

5.0

3.1

Tasm

an

8

.11

7.0

17

.91

9.6

14

.37

.77

.38

.67

.48

.32

3.3

11

.32

1.5

13

.15

.4

We

st

Co

ast

28

.61

7.5

51

.72

4.1

24

.66

.05

.76

.57

.27

.45

.31

.60

.60

.70

.8

Gro

up a

vera

ge

11.2

12.0

14.3

13.0

11.3

4.9

5.3

5.0

5.6

5.9

4.3

5.7

5.0

4.9

4.4

Sta

te A

vera

ge

11.0

10.7

13.0

12.0

11.5

5.1

5.4

5.2

5.5

5.8

4.5

5.1

4.2

3.9

3.6

%%

%%

%2

00

6-0

72

00

2 - 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

4-0

52

00

5-0

62

00

6-0

72

00

5-0

62

00

2 - 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

4-0

52

00

2 - 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

4-0

52

00

5-0

62

00

6-0

7

Sta

ff T

urn

ov

er R

ate

Lo

st T

ime

du

e t

o I

nju

ry

(h

ou

rs l

ost

pe

r 1

00

0 h

ou

rs w

ork

ed

) A

ve

ra

ge

Sic

k L

ea

ve

pe

r E

mp

loy

ee

(d

ay

s)

Page 47: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

41

Page 48: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

42

42

2.4

INFO

RM

AT

ION

SY

STEM

S M

AN

AG

EMEN

T

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

over

s co

rpor

ate

serv

ices

prov

ided

to th

e or

gani

satio

n by

cou

ncil

man

agem

ent.

Sou

nd m

anag

emen

t and

ade

quat

e ph

ysica

l and

fin

ancia

l cap

acity

are

ess

entia

l to

deliv

er s

ervic

es to

mee

t cur

rent

and

futu

re c

omm

unity

nee

ds.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Fo

r co

unci

ls to

hav

e ef

ficie

nt a

nd e

ffect

ive

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy (

IT)

syst

ems

to s

uppo

rt m

oder

n m

anag

emen

t pra

ctic

es a

nd to

sat

isfy

the

serv

ice

need

s of

thei

r co

mm

uniti

es.

IND

ICA

TO

R

2.4.

1

ELE

CT

RO

NIC

SER

VIC

E D

ELIV

ERY

R

ECEI

PTS

2.4.

2

INFO

RM

AT

ION

T

ECH

NO

LOG

Y E

XPE

NSE

S 2.

4.3

IT

EX

PEN

SES

PER

TER

MIN

AL

OR

PE

R P

ERSO

NA

L C

OM

PUT

ER

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Num

ber

of s

ervi

ce d

eliv

ery

rece

ipts

issu

ed

elec

tron

ical

ly

Tota

l num

ber

of s

ervi

ce d

eliv

ery

rece

ipts

issu

ed

IT o

pera

ting

expe

nses

Tota

l ope

ratin

g ex

pens

es

IT o

pera

ting

expe

nses

Num

ber

of te

rmin

als

or P

Cs

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

El

ectr

onic

Ser

vice

Del

iver

y Re

ceip

ts:

Mea

sure

s th

e de

gree

to w

hich

cou

ncil

busin

ess

is co

nduc

ted

elec

tron

ical

ly.

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy E

xpen

ses:

Mea

sure

s a

coun

cil’s

inve

stm

ent i

n in

form

atio

n te

chno

logy

.

IT E

xpen

ses

per

Term

inal

or

per

Pers

onal

C

ompu

ter:

Mea

sure

s th

e pr

opor

tiona

l co

st o

f sup

plyi

ng IT

ser

vice

s to

eac

h te

rmin

al.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

pr

ovisi

on o

f ele

ctro

nic

serv

ice

deliv

ery

syst

ems

co

mm

unic

atio

n of

ava

ilabi

lity

of

syst

ems

co

mm

unity

IT ta

ke-u

p

ap

prop

riate

infra

stru

ctur

e

ag

e an

d so

cio-

econ

omic

pro

file

of th

e co

mm

unity

co

mm

itmen

t to

the

use

of n

ew

tech

nolo

gy

tim

ing

of e

quip

men

t an

d so

ftwar

e up

grad

es

co

st a

lloca

tion

syst

ems

ec

onom

ies

of s

cale

co

mm

itmen

t to

the

use

of n

ew

tech

nolo

gy

tim

ing

of e

quip

men

t or

softw

are

upgr

ades

co

st a

lloca

tion

syst

ems

ec

onom

ies

of s

cale

%

%

Page 49: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

43

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

52

.75

2.8

56

.75

7.6

54

.92

.62

.82

.72

.22

.67

,44

38

,70

28

,78

67

,56

78

,51

6

Gle

no

rch

y

43

.45

7.4

68

.56

3.8

60

.72

.12

.12

.22

.62

.34

,86

84

,76

15

,08

75

,75

24

,95

6

Ho

bart

3

3.4

38

.14

0.7

56

.85

7.1

2.7

2.7

2.8

2.9

3.0

6,2

95

5,9

88

6,0

32

6,1

77

6,2

64

Lau

nc

esto

n

19

.82

2.1

24

.91

9.8

27

.82

.22

.21

.91

.61

.65

,79

95

,95

65

,19

33

,90

64

,10

9

G

roup

ave

rag

e37

.342

.647

.749

.550

.12.

42.

42.

42.

32.

46,

101

6,35

26,

274

5,85

15,

961

Me

diu

m C

ou

nc

ils

Bri

gh

ton

4

7.0

45

.35

8.5

41

.47

6.6

1.2

1.6

1.3

1.4

1.1

2,7

85

3,9

56

3,3

12

3,6

03

2,8

86

Bu

rnie

2

4.4

23

.32

7.8

29

.52

9.2

2.3

2.5

2.3

3.0

2.9

4,8

21

5,1

14

6,0

08

6,3

42

6,4

34

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

36

.13

7.9

41

.84

6.2

50

.62

.21

.91

.71

.81

.76

,46

25

,58

85

,51

55

,80

55

,47

0

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

46

.73

3.0

56

.26

1.5

71

.21

.21

.00

.70

.80

.64

,13

23

,66

02

,95

43

,70

12

,72

3

De

vo

np

ort

1

9.9

27

.74

0.1

40

.24

1.0

2.9

2.9

3.2

2.7

2.3

5,8

77

6,0

44

7,0

16

6,1

56

5,5

97

Hu

on

Valle

y

48

.34

7.0

45

.75

1.6

44

.91

.51

.21

.11

.31

.73

,37

12

,56

42

,36

12

,49

53

,26

8

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

64

.15

9.1

67

.56

9.8

70

.02

.42

.52

.72

.42

.15

,57

36

,04

36

,81

55

,22

64

,69

0

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

68

.46

8.9

72

.78

0.9

75

.42

.12

.22

.22

.11

.86

,59

86

,50

36

,15

36

,49

36

,05

2

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

36

.43

6.6

42

.84

3.5

42

.92

.12

.11

.41

.51

.55

,43

14

,83

33

,49

64

,53

84

,22

1

So

rell

34

.83

4.1

24

.81

1.4

11

.91

.00

.80

.62

.00

.82

,79

12

,35

11

,59

34

,41

31

,68

1

Wara

tah

-Wy

ny

ard

1

1.0

20

.81

2.3

30

.43

2.9

1.7

1.8

1.6

1.6

1.9

5,1

88

5,6

00

4,8

10

4,8

74

5,2

60

We

st

Tam

ar

25

.63

2.6

37

.33

8.4

45

.52

.63

.22

.62

.72

.84

,59

96

,52

46

,18

75

,39

26

,17

0

G

roup

ave

rag

e38

.538

.944

.045

.449

.31.

92.

01.

81.

91.

84,

802

4,89

84,

685

4,92

04,

538

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

U

A4

5.4

76

.15

8.5

62

.51

.41

.72

.01

.91

.44

,27

04

,74

45

,63

93

,86

92

,86

7

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

42

.64

1.0

54

.75

8.9

61

.61

.21

.41

.91

.81

.84

,30

75

,76

46

,60

27

,05

16

,39

2

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

0

.00

.00

.01

00

.01

00

.01

.21

.31

.21

.71

.74

,14

63

,94

73

,70

04

,98

36

,14

5

Do

rse

t 1

3.0

26

.23

2.0

35

.23

3.8

1.3

1.5

2.4

2.2

2.2

3,5

77

4,2

96

6,8

93

6,1

69

6,5

19

Flin

de

rs

0.0

0.0

0.0

10

.01

0.0

0.7

1.6

1.0

1.0

1.4

3,2

94

4,2

30

3,0

49

3,3

33

4,7

34

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

20

.02

3.7

25

.5U

AU

A3

.62

.62

.42

.11

.57

,44

17

,78

07

,37

16

,63

94

,99

4

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

3

6.5

23

.42

2.2

45

.14

6.0

1.6

2.6

2.4

2.1

1.7

4,7

50

4,4

83

3,5

40

5,5

82

5,4

77

Ke

nti

sh

6

2.5

65

.46

5.4

65

.86

7.1

1.5

1.5

1.6

2.1

2.9

4,2

61

4,0

51

4,0

49

6,3

48

8,3

90

Kin

g Isla

nd

6

.13

.79

.11

0.8

11

.01

.41

.81

.00

.90

.84

,38

04

,12

62

,73

12

,91

42

,56

4

Latr

ob

e

20

.21

6.3

16

.83

4.4

35

.22

.01

.81

.61

.81

.75

,76

94

,92

74

,63

95

,31

95

,02

1

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

60

.04

5.4

47

.18

2.6

82

.41

.51

.21

.31

.51

.74

,47

12

,97

13

,16

43

,36

64

,13

4

Tasm

an

2

7.1

31

.94

1.2

61

.87

7.8

2.2

1.7

1.4

1.4

1.1

4,6

73

3,1

91

3,0

93

3,2

85

2,5

71

We

st

Co

ast

29

.03

5.8

56

.05

7.6

70

.01

.11

.01

.71

.40

.93

,17

13

,26

64

,77

03

,96

02

,38

3

Gro

up a

vera

ge

26.4

27.5

34.3

51.7

54.8

1.6

1.7

1.7

1.7

1.6

4,50

14,

444

4,55

74,

832

4,78

4

Sta

te A

vera

ge

33.2

34.3

40.2

48.7

51.8

1.8

1.9

1.8

1.9

1.8

4,84

64,

895

4,84

75,

009

4,84

5

$$

$2

00

6-0

72

00

6-0

7

%%

20

02

- 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

2 - 0

3

$$

%%

%%

20

02

- 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

4-0

52

00

5-0

6

%%

%%

Ele

ctro

nic

Se

rvic

e D

eliv

ery

Re

ce

ipts

Info

rma

tio

n T

ec

hn

olo

gy

Ex

pe

ns

es

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

20

03

-04

20

05

-06

20

06

-07

20

04

-05

IT E

xp

en

se

s p

er

Te

rmin

al

/ P

C

Page 50: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

44

KEY

RES

ULT

AR

EA

3

REG

ULA

TO

RY

3.

1 C

OM

MU

NIT

Y H

EALT

H A

ND

SA

FET

Y

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry p

rovid

es in

form

atio

n re

gard

ing

thos

e ro

les

in w

hich

cou

ncils

mon

itor t

he m

aint

enan

ce o

f sta

ndar

ds in

cludi

ng h

ealth

insp

ectio

ns a

nd

build

ing

regu

latio

ns.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Free

dom

from

dise

ase,

cle

an a

nd s

afe

com

mun

ities

, effi

cien

t im

plem

enta

tion

of s

ound

and

con

siste

nt p

lann

ing

polic

ies,

and

the

mai

nten

ance

of

build

ing

stan

dard

s.

IND

ICA

TO

R

3.1.

1

CO

MM

UN

ITY

HEA

LTH

AN

D S

AFE

TY

EX

PEN

DIT

UR

E

Not

e tw

o se

para

te m

easu

res

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Expe

nditu

re o

n co

mm

unity

, hea

lth a

nd s

afet

y To

tal o

pera

ting

expe

nditu

re

Expe

nditu

re o

n co

mm

unity

, hea

lth a

nd s

afet

y Po

pula

tion

of c

ounc

il A

rea

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

C

omm

unity

Hea

lth a

nd S

afet

y Ex

pend

iture

as

a %

of T

otal

Ope

ratin

g Ex

pend

iture

is a

mea

sure

of t

he le

vel o

f exp

endi

ture

on

com

mun

ity

heal

th a

nd s

afet

y.

Com

mun

ity H

ealth

and

Saf

ety

Expe

nditu

re p

er C

apita

indi

cate

s th

e sc

ale

of c

ounc

il’s s

ervi

ce p

rovi

sion.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

bu

dget

ary

cons

trai

nts

ed

ucat

ion

polic

ies

nu

mbe

r of

pre

mise

s su

bjec

t to

insp

ectio

n

ru

ral h

ealth

issu

es

bu

dget

ary

cons

trai

nts

ed

ucat

ion

polic

ies

nu

mbe

r of

pre

mise

s su

bjec

t to

insp

ectio

n

ru

ral h

ealth

issu

es

%

Page 51: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

45

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

2.5

2.6

2.6

2.5

2.6

21

.02

2.4

23

.22

52

7

Gle

no

rch

y

1.8

1.8

1.7

2.0

2.0

20

.02

0.5

21

.42

72

8

Ho

bart

1

.21

.21

.21

.61

.42

0.0

20

.42

2.5

31

27

Lau

nce

sto

n

1.8

1.8

1.7

1.5

1.3

21

.02

1.3

20

.71

91

8

Gr

oup

aver

age

1.8

1.8

1.8

1.9

1.8

21.0

21.2

22.0

2525

Me

diu

m C

ou

nc

ils

Bri

gh

ton

2

.42

.93

.22

.11

.41

9.0

23

.62

5.9

16

11

Bu

rnie

1

.31

.21

.11

.21

.81

8.0

17

.22

0.8

21

31

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

21

.91

.81

.92

.11

8.0

16

.71

8.4

20

23

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

2.9

2.8

3.5

3.7

4.0

29

.02

8.4

37

.64

14

2

De

vo

np

ort

1

.81

.81

.91

.71

.92

3.0

22

.92

5.6

23

28

Hu

on

Valle

y

5.3

3.2

5.3

0.9

2.8

52

.03

1.7

53

.51

03

2

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

2.4

1.7

1.9

2.0

1.7

19

.01

4.5

16

.51

91

8

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

2.1

2.1

3.7

3.0

1.3

15

.01

6.8

27

.72

41

1

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

1.6

1.5

1.3

1.3

1.4

15

.01

3.2

12

.51

51

7

So

rell

44

.23

.84

.23

.04

2.0

46

.84

3.6

49

38

Wara

tah

-Wyn

yard

2

.41

.92

.21

.62

.12

1.0

18

.02

0.1

16

21

We

st

Tam

ar

22

.61

.81

.72

.11

3.0

18

.01

5.4

13

17

Gr

oup

aver

age

2.5

2.3

2.6

2.1

2.1

24.0

22.3

26.5

2224

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak

O'D

ay

1.7

1.9

1.6

1.7

1.5

21

.02

4.0

21

.12

32

2

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

10

.55

.35

.65

.35

.73

02

.01

77

.61

57

.81

75

16

3

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

1

.30

.71

.91

.60

.61

8.0

9.2

25

.02

39

Do

rse

t 5

.54

.92

.25

.78

.17

2.0

68

.13

1.2

81

11

6

Flin

de

rs

0.3

2.8

0.8

0.0

1.1

15

.01

07

.53

4.0

04

8

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

1.2

1.9

2.1

1.8

1.3

14

.02

1.6

26

.12

41

9

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

8.9

1.5

0.5

4.0

4.0

15

4.0

28

.18

.48

89

0

Ke

nti

sh

1

.75

.50

.20

.65

.51

4.0

49

.02

.17

63

Kin

g Isla

nd

1

.71

.60

.11

.12

.15

7.0

39

.53

.23

36

1

Latr

ob

e

1.9

2.1

1.8

1.9

1.6

16

.01

9.2

18

.21

91

9

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

1.6

1.3

1.4

1.6

1.9

20

.01

5.1

16

.72

02

6

Tasm

an

3

.78

.64

.85

.02

.37

1.0

19

8.9

12

6.6

14

46

7

We

st

Co

ast

4.1

3.7

2.4

2.5

1.8

56

.05

7.1

41

.94

53

1

Gro

up a

vera

ge3.

43.

21.

92.

52.

964

.062

.739

.452

56

Stat

e A

vera

ge2.

82.

62.

22.

32.

441

.040

.331

.636

39

Co

mm

un

ity

He

alt

h a

nd

Sa

fety

Ex

pe

nd

itu

re

as

a %

of

To

tal

Op

era

tin

g E

xp

en

dit

ure

Co

mm

un

ity

He

alt

h a

nd

Sa

fety

Ex

pe

nd

itu

re p

er

Ca

pit

a

20

02

- 0

32

00

6-0

7

%%

$$

$$

20

03

-04

20

02

- 0

32

00

3-0

4

$2

00

4-0

5

%2

00

5-0

6

%2

00

6-0

7

%2

00

4-0

52

00

5-0

6

Page 52: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

46

Page 53: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

47

3. 1

C

OM

MU

NIT

Y H

EALT

H A

ND

SA

FET

Y C

ontin

ued

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry p

rovid

es in

form

atio

n re

gard

ing

thos

e ro

les

in w

hich

cou

ncils

mon

itor t

he m

aint

enan

ce o

f sta

ndar

ds in

cludi

ng h

ealth

insp

ectio

ns a

nd

build

ing

regu

latio

ns.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Free

dom

from

dise

ase,

cle

an a

nd s

afe

com

mun

ities

, effi

cien

t im

plem

enta

tion

of s

ound

and

con

siste

nt p

lann

ing

polic

ies,

and

the

mai

nten

ance

of

bui

ldin

g st

anda

rds.

IND

ICA

TO

R

3.1.

2

NU

MBE

R O

F T

IMES

FO

OD

HA

ND

LIN

G P

REM

ISES

AR

E IN

SPEC

TED

Not

e: R

evise

d In

dica

tor

2005

-200

6

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Num

ber

of In

spec

tions

of F

ood

Han

dlin

g Pr

emise

s To

tal N

umbe

r of

Foo

d H

andl

ing

Prem

ises

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

This

will

indi

cate

the

perc

enta

ge o

f tim

es fo

od h

andl

ing

prem

ises

are

insp

ecte

d ea

ch y

ear.

For

exa

mpl

e, a

cou

ncil

with

a K

PI o

f 200

%

mea

ns o

n av

erag

e ea

ch p

rem

ises

has

been

insp

ecte

d tw

ice,

50%

mea

ns o

nly

half

the

food

han

dlin

g pr

emise

s ha

ve b

een

insp

ecte

d.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

nu

mbe

r of

insp

ectio

ns o

f pre

mise

s

co

unci

l pol

icy

ed

ucat

ion

of o

pera

tors

pa

rtic

ular

loca

l pro

blem

s (i.

e. d

iseas

e ou

tbre

aks)

%

Page 54: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

48

48

Citi

es C

lare

nce

0.0

0.0

0.0

47.5

55.4

Gle

norc

hy

0.4

0.4

0.4

28.7

82.3

Hob

art

0.3

0.5

0.3

145.

912

1.0

Lau

nces

ton

3.1

0.1

1.3

151.

716

9.5

Gro

up a

vera

ge0.

90.

30.

593

.510

7.0

Med

ium

Cou

ncils

B

right

on

0.1

0.3

0.2

221.

219

2.9

Bur

nie

1.6

0.0

0.0

135.

514

0.7

Cen

tral

Coa

st

0.0

0.0

0.0

204.

918

0.6

Der

wen

t Val

ley

0.0

0.0

0.0

100.

011

0.1

Dev

onpo

rt

0.0

0.0

0.0

227.

315

3.4

Huo

n V

alle

y 0.

00.

10.

176

.710

2.2

Kin

gbor

ough

0.

00.

00.

010

0.0

100.

0 M

eand

er V

alle

y 0.

00.

00.

055

.351

.4N

orth

ern

Mid

land

s0.

00.

00.

083

.944

.2 S

orel

l 0.

00.

10.

114

7.0

143.

3 W

arat

ah-W

ynya

rd

0.0

0.1

0.0

66.7

41.2

Wes

t Tam

ar

0.0

0.1

0.0

27.8

106.

5 G

roup

ave

rage

0.2

0.1

0.0

120.

511

3.9

Sm

all C

ounc

ils

Bre

ak O

'Day

0.

00.

00.

093

.892

.9 C

entra

l Hig

hlan

ds

0.0

0.0

0.0

100.

010

0.0

Circ

ular

Hea

d 0.

00.

00.

035

.632

.7 D

orse

t 0.

00.

10.

090

.212

5.9

Flin

ders

0.

00.

00.

025

0.0

250.

0 G

eorg

e T

own

1.4

0.0

0.0

100.

010

0.0

Gla

mor

gan-

Spr

ing

Bay

0.

01.

20.

099

.283

.9 K

entis

h

0.0

0.0

0.0

131.

615

2.6

Kin

g Is

land

0.

00.

00.

040

.511

4.3

Lat

robe

0.

00.

20.

038

.490

.8 S

outh

ern

Mid

land

s 0.

00.

00.

011

7.0

95.8

Tas

man

9.

80.

01.

421

9.0

147.

7 W

est C

oast

0.

00.

00.

010

0.0

100.

0 G

roup

ave

rage

0.9

0.1

0.1

108.

911

4.4

Sta

te A

vera

ge0.

60.

10.

111

1.6

113.

2

2006

-07

* In

dic

ato

r changed 2

005-2

006. F

igure

s f

or

2002-2

003 to 2

004-2

005 a

re n

ot com

para

ble

with 2

005-2

006

onw

ard

s.

%%

%%

%20

02 -

0320

03-0

4

Num

ber

of T

imes

Foo

d H

andl

ing

Pre

mis

es a

re

Insp

ecte

d *

2004

-05

2005

-06

Plea

se N

ote

– In

dica

tor

3.1.

2 ’N

otic

es Is

sued

‘ was

rem

oved

fro

m th

e 20

05-2

006

Repo

rt b

ecau

se o

f pro

blem

s w

ith

defin

ing

whi

ch c

omm

unity

hea

lth a

nd s

afet

y se

rvic

es s

houl

d be

incl

uded

. Th

is m

easu

re is

now

abo

ut th

e fre

quen

cy o

f in

spec

tion

of fo

od h

andl

ing

prem

ises.

Con

sequ

ently

pr

evio

us d

ata

conc

erni

ng ’N

otic

es Is

sued

‘ is

not c

ompa

rabl

e to

the

new

mea

sure

.

Page 55: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

49

3.2

PLA

NN

ING

AN

D D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

CA

TEG

OR

Y D

EFIN

ITIO

N

This

cate

gory

cov

ers

serv

ices

by c

ounc

ils in

the

man

agem

ent o

f pla

nnin

g an

d de

velo

pmen

t in

thei

r mun

icipa

l are

a.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

The

plan

ning

sch

eme

mus

t ref

lect

the

econ

omic

, soc

ial a

nd e

nviro

nmen

tal v

iew

s of

the

com

mun

ity a

nd b

e im

plem

ente

d in

an

effic

ient

an

d ef

fect

ive

man

ner.

IND

ICA

TO

R

3.2.

1

DA

YS

TO

OBT

AIN

APP

RO

VA

LS

(Per

mitt

ed u

se p

lann

ing,

disc

retio

nary

pla

nnin

g, a

nd b

uild

ings

) N

ote:

thre

e se

para

te m

easu

res

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Ave

rage

num

ber

of c

alen

dar

days

for

coun

cils

to p

roce

ss p

lann

ing

and

build

ing

appr

oval

s.

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

M

easu

res

the

turn

arou

nd ti

me

of p

lann

ing

and

build

ing

appr

oval

pro

cess

es.

Del

ays

in p

roce

ssin

g ca

n ha

ve a

sig

nific

ant f

inan

cial

impa

ct

on th

e ap

plic

ants

and

dow

nstr

eam

pro

vide

rs.

It is

a m

easu

re o

f the

tota

l num

ber

of d

ays

take

n -

no

allo

wan

ces

are

mad

e fo

r de

lays

to

obta

in a

dditi

onal

info

rmat

ion

etc.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G F

AC

TO

RS

nu

mbe

r an

d ex

perie

nce

of p

lann

ing

and

regu

lato

ry s

taff

nu

mbe

r an

d co

mpl

exity

of a

pplic

atio

ns

le

vel o

f bui

ldin

g an

d de

velo

pmen

t act

ivity

with

in th

e m

unic

ipal

are

a

co

unci

l sys

tem

s an

d pr

oced

ures

ex

tern

al c

ertif

icat

ion

of b

uild

ing

plan

s

ad

ditio

nal i

nfor

mat

ion

soug

ht

in

volv

emen

t of e

xter

nal b

odie

s an

d ot

her

legi

slatio

n

le

vel o

f del

egat

ion

Page 56: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

50

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

UA

UA

UA

UA

UA

30

28

35

30

.53

42

32

14

3.5

4

Gle

no

rch

y

22

26

26

34

23

32

34

32

35

34

47

71

27

Ho

bart

2

02

42

62

62

93

43

63

6.5

37

39

23

26

29

19

14

Lau

nc

esto

n

15

17

29

30

33

27

29

46

47

47

33

45

32

37

31

Gro

up

ave

rag

e1

8.9

22

.32

7.0

30

.02

8.3

30

.73

1.8

37

.43

7.4

38

.52

0.8

24

.81

8.0

17

.91

4.0

Me

diu

m C

ou

nc

ils

Bri

gh

ton

5

16

14

18

33

28

30

30

35

41

14

14

36

10

Bu

rnie

2

63

54

02

11

53

14

43

83

23

29

12

35

7

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

25

24

21

25

23

24

31

30

27

28

14

19

19

17

15

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

15

13

13

13

11

30

25

24

24

20

87

77

8

De

vo

np

ort

6

10

11

10

82

83

63

7.4

87

53

52

06

61

1.2

32

61

01

0

Hu

on

Valle

y

31

37

31

42

40

37

39

36

42

21

14

20

22

28

21

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

33

34

30

26

23

50

44

40

39

33

21

20

17

18

15

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

15

15

15

.51

72

82

52

72

8.4

27

33

71

16

.14

9U

A

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

11

6.9

82

01

13

52

9.5

29

36

36

78

17

12

14

So

rell

21

21

21

21

21

42

42

42

40

40

21

21

21

77

Wara

tah

-Wy

ny

ard

2

02

21

16

18

33

33

27

20

33

56

53

4

We

st

Tam

ar

91

22

12

01

22

42

61

43

02

88

11

11

43

Gro

up

ave

rag

e1

8.1

20

.51

9.7

19

.92

0.2

32

.33

3.9

31

.33

2.3

30

.41

1.2

12

.91

1.9

10

.51

0.4

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

1

21

21

41

01

43

52

22

82

82

58

87

41

0

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

00

03

13

13

33

53

63

93

90

00

31

31

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

2

12

02

01

1.5

73

53

43

83

4.5

36

20

05

4.7

5

Do

rse

t 1

41

51

51

51

03

23

03

03

03

01

52

12

12

11

5

Flin

de

rs

22

21

41

42

82

82

84

24

21

01

01

52

82

8

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

77

17

95

25

25

35

31

39

10

10

13

15

19

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

2

62

53

73

53

64

14

04

03

93

92

21

81

91

21

3

Ke

nti

sh

7

72

83

03

02

12

13

53

83

81

01

01

01

01

0

Kin

g Isla

nd

7

72

26

12

35

35

34

26

39

99

22

1

Latr

ob

e

35

30

22

14

14

30

35

29

35

35

22

14

14

14

14

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

21

25

23

17

.83

20

38

36

38

30

.36

36

16

14

14

14

16

Tasm

an

2

31

22

81

81

83

03

13

73

83

62

02

01

81

41

5

We

st

Co

ast

28

28

28

28

28

28

28

28

28

28

77

77

7

G

rou

p a

vera

ge

15

.61

4.6

19

.71

8.4

18

.43

1.6

30

.83

3.5

33

.83

5.5

13

.01

0.8

11

.21

3.6

14

.2

Sta

te A

vera

ge

17

.01

8.0

20

.52

0.3

20

.23

1.8

32

.23

3.2

33

.63

3.8

13

.31

3.6

12

.41

2.9

12

.6

20

03

-04

20

04

-05

20

06

-07

20

05

-06

20

05

-06

20

06

-07

20

02

- 0

32

00

4-0

5

Da

ys t

o O

bta

in A

pp

rov

als

Pe

rmit

te

d u

se

Pla

nn

ing

20

02

- 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

2 - 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

4-0

52

00

5-0

62

00

6-0

7

Da

ys t

o O

bta

in A

pp

rov

als

Dis

cre

tio

na

ry P

lan

nin

g

Da

ys t

o O

bta

in A

pp

rov

als

–B

uild

ing

s

Page 57: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

51

Page 58: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

52

3.2

PL

AN

NIN

G A

ND

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T c

ontin

ued

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

over

s se

rvice

s by

cou

ncils

in th

e m

anag

emen

t of p

lann

ing

and

deve

lopm

ent i

n th

eir m

unici

pal a

rea.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

The

plan

ning

sch

eme

mus

t ref

lect

the

econ

omic

, soc

ial a

nd e

nviro

nmen

tal v

iew

s of

the

com

mun

ity a

nd b

e im

plem

ente

d in

an

effic

ient

and

effe

ctiv

e m

anne

r. T

hese

mea

sure

s re

flect

the

leve

l of e

cono

mic

act

ivity

in th

e lo

cal g

over

nmen

t are

a.

IND

ICA

TO

R

3.2.

2

NU

MBE

R O

F PL

AN

NIN

G A

PPLI

CA

TIO

NS

LOD

GED

Not

e: N

ew In

dica

tor

2005

-200

6

3.2.

3

NU

MBE

R O

F BU

ILD

ING

APP

LIC

AT

ION

S LO

DG

ED

Not

e: N

ew In

dica

tor

2005

-200

6

IND

ICA

TO

R C

ALC

ULA

TIO

N

Num

ber

of a

pplic

atio

ns lo

dged

dur

ing

the

year

IND

ICA

TO

R E

XPL

AN

AT

ION

Th

e N

umbe

r of

App

licat

ions

Lod

ged:

Thi

s in

dica

tes

the

exte

nt o

f pla

nnin

g an

d bu

ildin

g ac

tiviti

es in

an

area

and

is a

n ap

prox

imat

e in

dica

tor

of e

cono

mic

act

ivity

in t

he a

rea.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G F

AC

TO

RS

• po

pula

tion

of th

e ar

ea

• so

cio-

econ

omic

sta

tus

of th

e ar

ea

• ec

onom

ic g

row

th in

the

area

Page 59: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

53

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

1,3

26

1,4

43

1,2

50

56

15

78

1,3

26

1,4

43

1,2

50

75

97

94

Gle

no

rch

y

83

79

40

88

13

82

38

08

37

94

08

81

52

05

22

Ho

ba

rt

1,2

10

2,4

40

2,5

03

91

29

78

1,2

10

2,4

40

2,5

03

79

67

16

La

un

ce

sto

n

1,5

52

2,0

99

1,6

78

70

77

28

1,5

52

2,0

99

1,6

78

1,0

22

1,0

63

Gro

up a

vera

ge1

,23

11

,73

11

,57

86

41

66

61

,23

11

,73

11

,57

87

74

77

4M

ed

ium

Co

un

cil

s

Bri

gh

ton

3

24

86

08

19

40

34

72

32

48

60

81

93

60

33

2

Bu

rnie

4

18

55

24

82

22

72

05

41

85

52

48

23

77

33

1

Ce

ntr

al

Co

ast

45

36

48

56

21

49

16

04

53

64

85

62

43

74

41

De

rwe

nt

Va

lle

y

30

83

78

38

73

45

21

83

08

37

83

87

34

71

98

De

vo

np

ort

6

01

53

92

86

20

52

74

60

15

39

28

61

88

37

7

Hu

on

Va

lle

y

55

09

33

85

45

09

37

25

50

93

38

54

25

13

72

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

1,3

08

1,6

86

1,9

05

83

18

26

1,3

08

1,6

86

1,9

05

78

98

37

Me

an

de

r V

all

ey

59

96

71

75

53

12

32

15

99

67

17

55

38

63

59

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

52

77

76

63

03

11

34

15

27

77

66

30

26

43

08

So

rell

3

32

51

48

52

37

93

98

33

25

14

85

23

65

32

8

Wa

rata

h-W

yn

ya

rd

63

26

58

48

92

80

24

06

32

65

84

89

23

32

24

We

st

Ta

ma

r 6

03

73

26

97

18

12

16

60

37

32

69

74

56

45

6

Gro

up a

vera

ge5

55

74

67

27

34

43

37

55

57

46

72

73

71

38

0S

ma

ll C

ou

ncil

s

Bre

ak

O'D

ay

40

64

97

59

84

25

33

94

06

49

75

98

53

13

40

Ce

ntr

al

Hig

hla

nd

s

21

83

37

23

41

52

12

72

18

33

72

34

11

29

3

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

2

07

26

42

59

13

61

53

20

72

64

25

91

52

17

1

Do

rse

t 2

83

39

53

20

23

29

82

83

39

53

20

95

21

6

Fli

nd

ers

9

59

96

75

14

39

59

96

74

13

9

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

18

22

13

32

43

07

15

01

82

21

33

24

16

42

01

Gla

mo

rga

n-S

pri

ng

Ba

y

46

76

10

51

92

89

24

44

67

61

05

19

21

12

20

Ken

tish

1

50

23

22

44

13

41

35

15

02

32

24

41

43

15

0

Kin

g I

sla

nd

7

31

03

10

43

42

77

31

03

10

44

13

0

La

tro

be

3

99

51

13

58

14

11

56

39

95

11

35

82

68

26

6

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

15

83

43

32

31

24

20

71

58

34

33

23

14

91

56

Ta

sm

an

1

36

19

32

43

94

95

13

61

93

24

31

04

10

8

We

st

Co

ast

12

51

57

62

84

11

81

25

15

76

27

59

2

G

roup

ave

rage

22

33

04

28

11

69

14

62

23

30

42

81

16

01

60

Stat

e A

vera

ge4

99

68

46

44

30

72

97

49

96

84

64

43

32

33

6

Nu

mb

er o

f P

lan

nin

g A

pp

lica

tio

ns L

od

ge

d *

20

02

- 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

4-0

52

00

5-0

62

00

6-0

7

Nu

mb

er o

f B

uil

din

g A

pp

lica

tio

ns L

od

ge

d *

20

02

- 0

32

00

6-0

7

* In

dic

ato

r ch

an

ge

d 2

00

5-2

00

6.

Fig

ure

s f

or

20

01

-20

02

to

20

04

-20

05

in

clu

de

pla

nn

ing

an

d b

uil

din

g,

an

d a

re n

ot

co

mp

ara

ble

wit

h f

igu

res s

ince

20

05

-20

06

.

20

03

-04

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

Page 60: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

54

KEY

RES

ULT

AR

EA

4

INFR

AST

RU

CT

UR

E A

ND

UT

ILIT

IES

4.1

ROA

DS,

FO

OTP

ATH

S A

ND

TRA

FFIC

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

onta

ins

info

rmat

ion

abou

t tho

se e

ssen

tial s

ervic

es th

at lo

cal g

over

nmen

t pro

vides

in T

asm

ania

, inc

ludi

ng ro

ads,

wat

er a

nd s

ewer

age

prov

ision

and

was

te m

anag

emen

t.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Sa

fe r

oads

and

foot

path

s, ef

ficie

nt a

nd a

cces

sible

tran

spor

t net

wor

ks.

IND

ICA

TO

R

4.1.

1

RA

TIO

OF

TO

TA

L EX

PEN

DIT

UR

E O

N R

OA

DS

AN

D

FOO

TPA

TH

S T

O D

EPR

ECIA

TIO

N

4.1.

2

ST

AT

E O

F T

HE

RO

AD

S A

ND

FO

OT

PAT

HS

ASS

ETS

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Tota

l cap

ital a

nd o

pera

tiona

l exp

endi

ture

on

road

s an

d fo

otpa

ths

Tota

l dep

reci

atio

n ex

pens

e of

roa

ds a

nd fo

otpa

ths

Writ

ten

dow

n va

lue

of r

oads

and

foot

path

s Re

plac

emen

t val

ue o

f roa

ds

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

Ratio

of T

otal

Exp

endi

ture

on

Road

s an

d Fo

otpa

ths

to

Dep

reci

atio

n: M

easu

res

the

actu

al e

xpen

ditu

re o

n ro

ad a

sset

s as

a

ratio

of t

he d

eple

tion

in th

e ro

ad a

sset

s re

flect

ed in

the

annu

al

depr

ecia

tion

char

ge.

Stat

e of

the

Ass

ets:

Mea

sure

s th

e cu

rren

t con

ditio

n of

the

asse

t bas

e by

co

mpa

ring

the

writ

ten

dow

n va

lue

with

the

curr

ent r

epla

cem

ent v

alue

.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

bu

dget

ary

cons

trai

nts

tr

affic

vol

ume

and

road

usa

ge

as

set r

eval

uatio

n po

licie

s

as

set c

apita

lisat

ion

polic

ies

m

aint

enan

ce p

olic

ies

bu

dget

ary

cons

trai

nts

tr

affic

vol

ume

and

road

usa

ges

as

set l

ife/d

epre

ciat

ion

polic

ies

as

set r

eval

uatio

n po

licie

s

as

set c

apita

lisat

ion

polic

ies

m

aint

enan

ce p

olic

ies

nu

mbe

r of

new

ass

ets

%

%

Page 61: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

55

Cit

ies

Cla

re

nce

84

.31

10

.11

24

.71

03

.81

43

.46

0.0

57

.35

5.7

56

.55

3.0

Gle

no

rch

y

14

0.4

16

1.6

11

7.0

12

8.1

94

.75

3.9

53

.35

5.8

55

.45

3.6

Ho

bart

50

.64

9.7

58

.86

5.0

65

.36

5.9

69

.26

6.8

64

.66

2.7

Lau

nce

sto

n

17

8.7

16

0.2

18

6.4

16

7.6

18

2.2

46

.94

9.9

50

.35

9.9

59

.2

Gro

up

av

era

ge

11

3.5

12

0.4

12

1.7

11

6.1

12

1.4

56

.75

7.4

57

.25

9.1

57

.1M

ed

ium

Co

un

cil

s

Brig

hto

n

84

.11

20

.81

18

.51

32

.41

34

.89

8.1

79

.88

0.4

81

.37

9.6

Bu

rn

ie

11

8.5

79

.31

32

.41

26

.41

20

.34

7.9

46

.75

8.9

57

.85

5.2

Ce

ntral C

oast

12

8.4

13

4.7

14

4.9

13

4.9

11

9.6

69

.36

7.8

69

.16

6.8

65

.4

De

rw

en

t V

alle

y

14

5.5

12

0.9

14

1.6

10

3.8

99

.84

0.9

56

.25

4.7

54

.15

3.1

De

vo

np

ort

84

.71

12

.19

7.1

10

8.5

14

4.4

50

.74

9.7

49

.24

8.2

47

.5

Hu

on

Valle

y

16

8.0

14

6.9

12

9.1

16

5.5

19

5.6

41

.14

1.0

39

.94

0.4

41

.2

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

12

1.8

14

2.2

13

9.0

11

3.0

87

.56

0.2

59

.65

9.2

59

.25

7.5

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

16

7.7

14

6.2

12

4.1

14

5.6

13

6.1

57

.35

6.3

55

.65

5.0

77

.8

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

19

3.3

14

2.7

15

9.6

14

2.4

14

2.7

78

.67

8.0

77

.66

9.4

68

.8

So

re

ll

76

.36

8.7

68

.85

6.1

64

.56

1.8

59

.45

5.1

56

.55

4.0

Waratah

-Wyn

yard

2

56

.73

31

.32

62

.72

96

.13

01

.65

5.0

55

.35

4.7

55

.95

6.7

We

st T

am

ar

22

2.2

27

0.7

23

1.6

26

3.3

23

1.5

41

.94

1.1

69

.07

5.3

74

.2

Gro

up

av

era

ge

14

7.3

15

1.4

14

5.8

14

9.0

14

8.2

58

.65

7.6

60

.36

0.0

60

.9S

ma

ll C

ou

nc

ils

Bre

ak

O'D

ay

49

.71

36

.42

41

.01

97

.41

94

.15

6.8

55

.35

1.7

69

.86

8.4

Ce

ntral H

igh

lan

ds

82

.77

7.8

12

1.6

10

3.1

88

.36

2.1

59

.45

7.0

55

.35

4.9

Cir

cu

lar H

ead

3

23

.13

75

.02

91

.33

09

.73

55

.66

3.2

61

.96

0.8

60

.05

9.3

Do

rse

t

15

5.1

11

7.7

90

.21

09

.21

29

.06

7.2

65

.16

3.6

62

.24

3.1

Flin

de

rs

41

.54

3.0

52

.46

1.9

59

.15

4.1

50

.84

6.4

47

.34

8.8

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

21

0.2

14

9.4

91

.46

7.8

11

9.8

36

.13

5.2

72

.17

2.9

72

.7

Gla

mo

rg

an

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

20

2.1

11

8.8

13

3.3

97

.37

3.5

68

.96

8.1

66

.27

3.2

71

.9

Ke

ntis

h

73

.91

33

.31

52

.51

77

.41

58

.25

3.2

52

.54

3.3

50

.04

4.2

Kin

g Isla

nd

2

62

.31

12

.01

37

.91

38

.01

86

.92

2.9

22

.26

2.0

62

.16

1.5

Latro

be

2

06

.21

95

.51

87

.81

80

.01

65

.95

1.9

51

.04

9.7

50

.05

0.1

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

64

.81

05

.81

39

.02

17

.11

37

.95

7.6

59

.55

5.4

53

.85

5.1

Tasm

an

1

38

.21

59

.11

32

.11

75

.41

59

.53

5.3

33

.84

2.0

41

.04

3.5

We

st C

oast

13

1.4

96

.31

03

.25

03

.43

89

.96

3.0

59

.15

5.8

55

.45

8.9

G

ro

up

av

era

ge

14

9.3

14

0.0

14

4.1

17

9.8

17

0.6

53

.35

1.8

55

.85

7.9

56

.3

Sta

te A

vera

ge

14

3.5

14

2.0

14

1.7

15

8.3

15

4.5

55

.95

5.0

57

.95

8.9

58

.3

%

20

02

- 0

3

%%

20

03

-04

%

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

%%

%%

%%

Sta

te

of t

he

As

se

ts

Ro

ad

s a

nd

Fo

otp

ath

s

Ra

tio

of T

ota

l E

xp

en

dit

ure

Ro

ad

s a

nd

Fo

otp

ath

s t

o D

ep

re

cia

tio

n

20

02

- 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

4-0

52

00

5-0

62

00

6-0

72

00

6-0

7

Page 62: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

56

Page 63: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

57

4.1

RO

AD

S, F

OO

TPA

TH

S A

ND

TR

AFF

IC c

ontin

ued

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

onta

ins

info

rmat

ion

abou

t tho

se e

ssen

tial s

ervic

es th

at lo

cal g

over

nmen

t pro

vides

in T

asm

ania

, inc

ludi

ng ro

ads,

wat

er a

nd s

ewer

age

prov

ision

and

was

te m

anag

emen

t.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Safe

roa

ds a

nd fo

otpa

ths,

effic

ient

and

acc

essib

le tr

ansp

ort n

etw

orks

.

IND

ICA

TO

R

4.1.

3

EX

PEN

DIT

UR

E PE

R K

ILO

MET

RE

OF

SEA

LED

RO

AD

(CA

PITA

L / M

AIN

TEN

AN

CE)

4.1.

4 EX

PEN

DIT

UR

E PE

R K

ILO

MET

RE

OF

UN

SEA

LED

RO

AD

(CA

PITA

L / M

AIN

TEN

AN

CE)

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Tota

l cap

ital a

nd m

aint

enan

ce e

xpen

ditu

re o

n se

aled

roa

ds a

nd

foot

path

s

Num

ber

of k

ilom

etre

s of

sea

led

road

s in

cou

ncil

area

Tota

l cap

ital a

nd m

aint

enan

ce e

xpen

ditu

re o

n un

seal

ed r

oads

and

fo

otpa

ths

Num

ber

of k

ilom

etre

s of

uns

eale

d ro

ads

in c

ounc

il ar

ea

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

Ex

pend

iture

per

Kilo

met

re o

f Sea

led

Road

: Thi

s m

easu

re p

rovi

des

an

indi

cato

r of

mai

ntai

ning

and

ren

ewin

g th

e se

aled

roa

d as

set.

Expe

nditu

re p

er K

ilom

etre

of U

nsea

led

Road

: Thi

s m

easu

re

prov

ides

an

indi

cato

r of

mai

ntai

ning

and

ren

ewin

g th

e un

seal

ed

road

ass

et.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

to

pogr

aphy

and

terr

ain

tr

affic

vol

ume

and

road

usa

ge

ro

ad ty

pes

and

spec

ifica

tion

st

ate

of th

e ro

ad a

sset

s

m

aint

enan

ce a

nd a

ccou

ntin

g po

licie

s

m

ajor

wor

ks

to

pogr

aphy

and

terr

ain

tr

affic

vol

ume

and

road

usa

ge

ro

ad ty

pes

and

spec

ifica

tion

st

ate

of th

e ro

ad a

sset

s

m

aint

enan

ce a

nd a

ccou

ntin

g po

licie

s

m

ajor

wor

ks

Page 64: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

58

Citie

s

Cla

re

nc

e6

,51

36

,64

24

,13

64

,83

81

0,1

79

4,3

13

4,2

29

5,3

58

7,6

92

9,1

45

Gle

no

rc

hy

1

2,4

46

13

,49

21

3,2

88

8,6

17

12

,77

26

,76

74

,70

66

,40

25

,29

45

,55

6

Ho

bart

12

,48

51

1,7

74

10

,76

91

1,9

49

14

,42

57

,00

77

,81

26

,62

51

1,6

67

11

,66

7

Lau

nc

esto

n

13

,31

68

,50

89

,93

08

,75

01

2,7

78

2,5

04

3,2

53

5,3

83

3,4

64

3,3

57

Gro

up

avera

ge

11

,19

01

0,1

04

9,5

31

8,5

39

12

,53

85

,14

85

,00

05

,94

27

,02

97

,43

1

Me

diu

m C

ou

nc

ils

Brig

hto

n

4,2

66

7,5

81

7,8

56

8,5

54

8,3

49

8,0

86

3,2

37

1,7

45

2,1

19

2,4

95

Bu

rn

ie

9,4

95

6,1

40

12

,56

78

,71

81

0,5

76

2,5

55

1,5

66

2,7

36

9,7

32

4,0

36

Ce

ntral C

oast

5,0

85

5,4

05

6,5

48

6,1

66

5,8

38

2,5

06

2,6

78

2,0

38

2,2

15

2,5

74

De

rw

en

t V

alle

y

7,9

29

12

,79

81

2,9

63

7,0

25

11

,97

21

,53

71

,40

01

,84

71

,97

29

35

De

vo

np

ort

4,9

92

8,8

54

6,9

88

8,1

39

13

,01

92

,96

62

,54

82

,71

82

,71

83

,10

9

Hu

on

Valle

y

5,0

93

6,7

86

8,2

05

18

,43

32

0,3

25

1,7

07

2,2

77

1,8

82

1,2

95

1,9

27

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

UA

15

,53

71

2,6

07

10

,48

21

1,9

85

UA

4,8

66

6,0

06

4,4

22

4,7

62

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

5,7

26

4,8

83

3,1

07

4,4

37

5,0

19

1,3

15

1,4

85

2,2

66

2,5

98

2,4

46

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

4,5

38

3,4

45

4,3

07

4,1

57

4,5

31

1,3

83

1,4

80

1,3

82

1,5

87

1,1

45

So

re

ll

11

,41

57

,40

17

,40

29

,01

77

,00

23

,19

64

,65

44

,43

83

,11

74

,02

2

Waratah

-Wy

ny

ard

8

,03

81

0,8

50

8,5

31

9,2

47

10

,54

82

,56

12

,24

62

,87

25

,18

43

,14

3

We

st T

am

ar

5,7

99

7,4

60

6,7

08

9,0

63

7,2

50

2,9

81

3,6

92

3,1

27

3,3

89

6,8

03

Gro

up

avera

ge

6,5

80

8,0

95

8,1

49

8,6

20

9,7

01

2,7

99

2,6

77

2,7

55

3,3

62

3,1

16

Sm

all C

ou

nc

ils

Bre

ak O

'Day

1

,77

05

,57

39

,88

05

,22

46

,49

46

18

1,4

00

1,2

13

2,1

41

1,6

08

Ce

ntral H

igh

lan

ds

9,5

44

7,1

12

2,7

63

1,9

67

3,8

13

77

88

06

1,0

71

1,3

50

2,1

23

Cir

cu

lar H

ead

1

0,3

50

10

,27

95

,02

78

,49

08

,44

72

,25

82

,98

03

,13

62

,87

03

,34

6

Do

rse

t

6,0

65

9,0

07

4,7

56

4,0

06

4,3

02

2,3

40

1,6

09

1,8

90

1,8

58

1,7

43

Flin

de

rs

1,9

80

1,9

91

2,9

59

4,0

80

4,0

99

1,0

23

1,1

17

1,2

15

1,2

66

1,2

29

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

7,6

68

6,4

01

6,1

58

3,4

59

5,3

57

2,4

79

1,6

85

1,6

00

1,6

71

5,1

67

Gla

mo

rg

an

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

5

,06

42

,11

83

,53

83

,42

53

,12

51

,39

21

,12

51

,67

92

,06

01

,20

9

Ke

ntis

h

51

51

,13

71

,22

65

,01

73

,87

91

,65

03

,42

54

,80

33

,19

13

,03

4

Kin

g Isla

nd

1

,97

22

,81

66

,86

97

,87

91

4,3

45

1,3

70

1,8

32

1,7

24

1,3

72

1,1

75

Latro

be

4

,69

93

,85

04

,49

73

,90

36

,88

03

,15

65

,30

56

,26

56

,56

84

,29

3

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

2,9

43

6,3

40

7,5

55

7,1

72

4,4

76

1,2

02

1,3

94

1,6

09

4,0

21

3,5

50

Tasm

an

3

,08

63

,91

74

,96

73

,15

05

,85

02

,67

13

,05

42

,61

94

,96

63

,66

7

We

st C

oast

2,0

64

1,8

53

5,3

72

7,1

24

20

,08

03

,29

12

,20

61

,72

02

0,9

82

5,8

42

G

ro

up

avera

ge

4,4

40

4,8

00

5,0

44

4,9

92

7,0

11

1,8

64

2,1

49

2,3

49

4,1

78

2,9

22

Sta

te A

vera

ge

6,2

45

6,8

95

6,9

47

6,9

82

8,8

87

2,7

00

2,7

61

3,0

13

4,2

34

3,6

24

20

03

-04

$

20

06

-07

$

20

04

-05

$

20

05

-06

$

20

05

-06

$

20

06

-07

$

20

02

- 0

3

$$

20

02

- 0

32

00

3-0

4

$

20

04

-05

$

Ex

pe

nd

itu

re

pe

r K

ilo

me

tre

of S

ea

led

Ro

ad

(C

ap

ita

l/M

ain

te

na

nc

e)

Ex

pe

nd

itu

re

pe

r K

ilo

me

tre

of U

ns

ea

led

Ro

ad

(C

ap

ita

l/M

ain

te

na

nc

e)

Page 65: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

59

20

02

-0

32

00

3-0

42

00

4-0

52

00

5-0

62

00

6-0

7

Cit

ies

11

,19

0

10

,10

4

9,5

31

8

,53

9

12

,53

8

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s6

,58

0

8,0

95

8

,14

9

8,6

20

9

,70

1

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s4

,44

0

4,8

00

5

,04

4

4,9

92

7

,01

1

Sta

te A

ve

rag

e6

,24

5

6,8

95

6

,94

7

6,9

82

8

,88

7

0

2,0

00

4,0

00

6,0

00

8,0

00

10

,00

0

12

,00

0

14

,00

0

Dollars

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r

Ex

pen

dit

ure

per

Kil

om

etr

e o

f Seale

d R

oad

(Ca

pit

al/

Ma

inte

na

nce

)

20

02

-03

20

03

-04

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

20

06

-07

Cit

ies

5,1

48

5

,00

0

5,9

42

7

,02

9

7,4

31

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s2

,79

9

2,6

77

2

,75

5

3,3

62

3

,11

6

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s1

,86

4

2,1

49

2

,34

9

4,1

78

2

,92

2

Sta

te A

ve

rag

e2

,70

0

2,7

61

3

,01

3

4,2

34

3

,62

4

0

2,0

00

4,0

00

6,0

00

8,0

00

10

,00

0

12

,00

0

14

,00

0

Dollars

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

rs

Ex

pen

dit

ure

per

Kil

om

etr

e o

f U

nseale

d R

oad

(Ca

pit

al/

Ma

inte

na

nce

)

Page 66: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

60

4.2

WA

TER

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

onta

ins

info

rmat

ion

abou

t tho

se e

ssen

tial s

ervic

es th

at lo

cal g

over

nmen

t pro

vides

in T

asm

ania

, inc

ludi

ng ro

ads,

wat

er a

nd s

ewer

age

prov

ision

and

was

te m

anag

emen

t.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Th

e re

liabl

e pr

ovisi

on o

f a c

ontin

uous

sup

ply

of s

afe

drin

king

wat

er, a

nd e

quita

ble

pric

ing.

IND

ICA

TO

R

4.2.

1

OU

TC

OM

E O

F W

AT

ER Q

UA

LIT

Y

TES

TS

4.2.

2

NU

MBE

R O

F BR

EAK

S IN

R

ETIC

ULA

TIO

N S

YST

EMS

per

100

kms

4.2.

3

AV

ERA

GE

NU

MBE

R O

F D

AY

S O

F W

AT

ER R

EST

RIC

TIO

NS

IN

DIC

AT

OR

C

ALC

ULA

TIO

N

Num

ber

of

wat

er q

ualit

y te

sts

that

met

sta

ndar

d

Num

ber

of w

ater

qua

lity

test

s co

nduc

ted

Num

ber

of b

reak

s in

wat

er m

ains

Per

100

Kilo

met

res

of w

ater

mai

ns

Tota

l num

ber

of d

ays

of w

ater

res

tric

tions

(a

ll sc

hem

es)

Tota

l num

ber

of s

chem

es

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

Out

com

e of

Wat

er Q

ualit

y Te

sts:

Mea

sure

s th

e ex

tent

to w

hich

wat

er p

rovi

ded

by

coun

cils

mee

ts a

ccep

ted

envi

ronm

enta

l st

anda

rds.

Num

ber

of B

reak

s in

Ret

icul

atio

n Sy

stem

s: Th

is is

an in

dica

tion

of th

e co

nditi

on a

nd

relia

bilit

y of

the

syst

ems.

Ave

rage

Num

ber

of D

ays

of W

ater

Re

stric

tions

: Thi

s m

easu

re p

rovi

des

an

indi

catio

n of

the

capa

city

and

rel

iabi

lity

of w

ater

sys

tem

s. M

ay a

lso r

efle

ct

coun

cil p

olic

y on

the

quan

tity

of w

ater

pr

e-pu

rcha

sed

from

a s

uppl

ier.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

st

anda

rd o

f ins

talle

d in

frast

ruct

ure

m

ajor

sys

tem

s fa

ilure

s

w

eath

er in

terfe

renc

e

la

ck o

f com

plia

nce

with

reg

ulat

ions

ag

e an

d st

ate

of th

e as

set

or

igin

al in

frast

ruct

ure

spec

ifica

tions

m

aint

enan

ce/r

epla

cem

ent p

olic

ies

to

pogr

aphy

and

soi

l typ

es

ca

paci

ty o

f ins

talle

d sy

stem

s

us

er p

ays

and

met

erin

g po

licie

s

se

ason

al p

opul

atio

n an

d de

man

d ch

ange

s

w

eath

er p

atte

rns

%

Page 67: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

61

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

10

0.0

10

0.0

97

.39

7.8

99

.06

2.3

60

.53

8.5

31

.35

7.3

10

01

22

00

0

Gle

no

rch

y

98

.19

8.2

98

.79

8.6

98

.74

.54

.44

.93

0.7

41

.81

25

12

20

07

3

Ho

bart

9

5.1

93

.89

3.8

10

0.0

10

0.0

26

.02

3.9

27

.02

6.3

32

.08

81

17

00

25

Lau

nc

esto

n

82

.09

2.8

99

.49

2.4

99

.21

1.4

0.0

17

.12

4.0

26

.60

00

00

Gro

up

av

era

ge

93

.89

6.2

97

.39

7.2

99

.22

6.0

22

.22

1.9

28

.13

9.4

78

90

00

33

Me

diu

m C

ou

nc

ils

Bri

gh

ton

9

1.7

96

.48

9.9

94

.09

6.4

UA

0.0

0.0

41

.53

9.6

00

00

0

Bu

rnie

1

00

.01

00

.01

00

.01

00

.01

00

.03

.43

.12

.53

.08

.00

00

00

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

97

.09

8.9

10

0.0

99

.59

9.8

23

.52

2.5

11

.58

.31

5.0

00

00

0

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

94

.69

7.3

97

.49

9.0

10

0.0

70

.08

5.0

0.0

25

.81

4.2

50

12

21

03

08

De

vo

np

ort

1

00

.01

00

.09

8.4

98

.35

1.6

13

.03

.47

.91

.73

.90

00

00

Hu

on

Valle

y

67

.98

6.8

72

.29

9.0

97

.95

5.6

61

.16

2.2

54

.05

0.5

70

10

91

20

01

0

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

96

.89

5.8

97

.48

7.1

92

.8U

A5

.05

.37

.27

.21

21

12

20

00

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

94

.49

4.4

97

.19

4.4

93

.62

4.4

22

.61

1.1

7.6

6.1

00

70

22

0

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

91

.77

6.4

99

.29

0.1

92

.1N

AN

AN

AN

AU

A1

01

02

34

6

So

rell

10

0.0

10

0.0

10

0.0

97

.49

7.4

48

.64

2.9

44

.42

8.6

25

.00

00

00

Wara

tah

-Wy

ny

ard

9

7.1

99

.39

8.7

99

.29

9.3

10

.75

.70

.07

.27

.10

00

00

We

st

Tam

ar

10

0.0

10

0.0

10

0.0

10

0.0

10

0.0

66

.36

0.4

70

.45

2.7

10

2.8

00

00

0

Gro

up

ave

rag

e9

4.3

95

.49

5.9

96

.59

3.4

35

.12

8.3

19

.62

1.6

25

.42

13

02

63

11

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

7

8.4

78

.49

6.3

93

.38

0.5

14

.41

4.3

10

.68

.16

.66

44

20

3

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

75

.07

9.8

82

.47

9.3

86

.43

7.5

61

.58

8.5

19

2.3

19

2.3

00

00

30

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

9

8.1

99

.79

8.4

99

.71

01

.6U

A2

7.8

51

.99

.30

.00

00

00

Do

rse

t 5

0.0

82

.89

0.8

90

.88

6.7

4.4

3.0

2.2

4.4

3.7

11

25

81

03

91

6

Flin

de

rs

0.0

0.0

31

.29

4.6

10

0.0

28

.62

3.8

23

.82

8.6

23

.86

00

00

60

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

10

0.0

10

0.0

10

0.0

10

0.0

10

0.0

25

.82

4.2

37

.15

1.4

58

.60

00

00

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

7

5.9

98

.89

9.0

85

.22

2.9

17

.52

5.6

26

.48

4.1

67

.51

05

63

36

54

17

3

Ke

nti

sh

9

1.7

10

0.0

10

0.0

10

0.0

10

0.0

54

.22

8.0

36

.02

8.0

44

.70

00

00

Kin

g Isla

nd

1

00

.01

00

.09

1.5

97

.91

00

.01

44

.45

5.6

33

.32

2.2

11

.19

39

39

04

54

5

Latr

ob

e

45

.74

2.1

87

.41

00

.09

8.0

10

.93

5.9

31

.41

9.6

7.6

00

00

0

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

95

.21

00

.01

00

.09

2.7

97

.31

3.8

15

.81

8.6

13

.71

6.7

65

30

00

33

Tasm

an

N

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

A

We

st

Co

ast

98

.93

.72

.49

6.3

98

.02

10

.21

43

.21

12

.51

27

.31

27

.30

00

00

G

rou

p a

vera

ge

75

.77

3.8

81

.69

4.2

89

.35

1.1

38

.23

9.4

49

.14

6.7

42

21

47

32

37

Sta

te A

vera

ge

86

.38

6.3

90

.09

5.6

92

.54

0.9

31

.82

8.7

34

.83

6.9

38

35

31

20

31

20

05

-06

%%

20

04

-05

%

20

03

-04

%

20

02

- 0

32

00

4-0

52

00

5-0

62

00

6-0

7

%

20

02

- 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

5-0

62

00

4-0

52

00

6-0

72

00

2 - 0

32

00

6-0

72

00

3-0

4

Ou

tc

om

e o

f W

ate

r Q

ua

lity

Te

sts

Nu

mb

er

of

Bre

ak

s i

n

Re

tic

ula

tio

n S

ys

te

m p

er

10

0 k

m

Nu

mb

er

of

Da

ys

of

Wa

te

r

Re

stri

ctio

ns

Page 68: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

62

Page 69: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

63

4.2

WA

TER

con

tinue

d

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

onta

ins

info

rmat

ion

abou

t tho

se e

ssen

tial s

ervic

es th

at lo

cal g

over

nmen

t pro

vides

in T

asm

ania

, inc

ludi

ng ro

ads,

wat

er a

nd s

ewer

age

prov

ision

and

was

te m

anag

emen

t.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Th

e re

liabl

e pr

ovisi

on o

f a c

ontin

uous

sup

ply

of s

afe

drin

king

wat

er, a

nd e

quita

ble

pric

ing.

IND

ICA

TO

R

4.2.

4

UN

IT C

OST

PER

KIL

OLI

TR

E 4.

2.5

A

VER

AG

E W

AT

ER

CO

NSU

MPT

ION

PER

CO

NN

ECT

ION

4.

2.6

W

AT

ER S

YST

EM L

OSS

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

To

tal o

pera

ting

wat

er e

xpen

ses

Tota

l vol

ume

of w

ater

pur

chas

ed

Tota

l num

ber

of k

ilolit

res

(Kl)

supp

lied

Num

ber

of c

onne

ctio

ns

Wat

er p

urch

ased

– w

ater

use

d

Tota

l vol

ume

of w

ater

pur

chas

ed

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

Uni

t Cos

t per

Kilo

litre

: Thi

s m

easu

res

the

cost

to c

ounc

il of

pro

vidi

ng w

ater

to th

e co

mm

unity

.

Ave

rage

Wat

er C

onsu

mpt

ion

per

Con

nect

ion:

Thi

s m

easu

res

aver

age

wat

er

cons

umpt

ion

per

annu

m b

y th

e co

mm

unity

. It

incl

udes

wat

er u

sed

on

publ

ic p

arks

and

gar

dens

.

Wat

er S

yste

m L

oss:

Thi

s in

dica

tes

syst

em in

tegr

ity, b

ut m

easu

rem

ent w

ill re

quire

uni

vers

al m

eter

ing.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

di

stan

ce a

nd q

ualit

y of

wat

er s

uppl

y

siz

e an

d de

nsity

of p

opul

atio

n se

rved

to

pogr

aphy

of a

rea

se

ason

al a

nd r

ural

dem

and

de

prec

iatio

n an

d m

aint

enan

ce p

olic

ies

co

st a

lloca

tion

polic

ies

sy

stem

cap

acity

and

use

of r

estr

ictio

ns

us

er-p

ays

and

met

erin

g po

licie

s

w

eath

er p

atte

rns

le

vel o

f ind

ustr

ial u

sage

se

ason

al p

opul

atio

n ch

ange

s

un

-met

ered

usa

ge

sy

stem

leak

s

ev

apor

atio

n

ille

gal c

onne

ctio

ns/d

amag

e

ac

cura

cy o

f met

ers

%

Page 70: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

64

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

0.8

00

.84

0.8

80

.96

0.9

04

46

.24

32

.84

24

.84

10

.44

44

.2U

AU

AN

o C

olle

cti

on

NA

NA

Gle

no

rch

y

0.6

40

.70

0.8

20

.99

0.8

85

81

.75

54

.95

54

.74

72

.65

26

.5U

AU

AN

o C

olle

cti

on

UA

UA

Ho

bart

0

.76

0.7

90

.84

0.9

20

.90

52

0.2

50

8.9

53

2.9

44

6.5

45

9.4

UA

UA

No

Co

lle

cti

on

0.0

0.0

Lau

nc

esto

n

1.1

41

.19

1.2

01

.29

1.1

73

66

.73

54

.93

77

.73

49

.63

76

.02

5.4

23

.5N

o C

olle

cti

on

13

.62

2.7

Gro

up

avera

ge

0.8

30

.88

0.9

31

.04

0.9

64

78

.74

62

.94

72

.54

19

.84

51

.52

5.4

23

.5N

o C

oll

ectio

n6

.81

1.4

Me

diu

m C

ou

nc

ils

Bri

gh

ton

1

.00

1.6

51

.65

0.9

20

.85

34

8.5

30

2.1

28

4.0

29

3.1

33

7.7

UA

UA

No

Co

lle

cti

on

9.2

8.1

Bu

rnie

0

.69

0.4

50

.84

0.9

40

.89

46

9.9

58

5.8

42

5.2

36

2.8

36

3.8

UA

UA

No

Co

lle

cti

on

UA

UA

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

0.7

10

.68

0.6

50

.75

0.8

25

54

.75

86

.46

29

.36

03

.45

59

.6U

AU

AN

o C

olle

cti

on

UA

UA

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

1.1

61

.21

1.2

71

.53

1.4

94

57

.94

50

.44

94

.13

77

.24

26

.3U

AU

AN

o C

olle

cti

on

UA

UA

De

vo

np

ort

0

.94

0.9

50

.97

1.1

01

.10

44

2.8

47

3.2

46

2.9

40

3.6

41

8.4

19

.21

5.2

No

Co

lle

cti

on

19

.41

5.8

Hu

on

Valle

y

0.4

30

.40

0.4

40

.43

0.3

76

59

.96

66

.76

32

.36

04

.25

97

.9U

AU

AN

o C

olle

cti

on

UA

UA

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

0.7

00

.78

0.8

20

.87

0.9

24

30

.74

04

.53

83

.33

77

.43

92

.4U

AU

AN

o C

olle

cti

on

UA

UA

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

0.5

12

.13

0.7

80

.82

0.8

24

69

.22

40

.73

09

.43

30

.43

73

.92

1.9

24

.3N

o C

olle

cti

on

19

.32

0.6

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

UA

0.4

40

.43

0.8

10

.65

UA

UA

UA

44

3.7

42

0.7

UA

UA

No

Co

lle

cti

on

33

.54

7.4

So

rell

0.7

30

.72

0.9

50

.84

1.7

73

87

.13

91

.14

11

.23

60

.54

17

.47

.91

1.0

No

Co

lle

cti

on

0.0

0.0

Wara

tah

-Wy

ny

ard

1

.13

1.0

31

.05

0.9

80

.91

37

6.0

40

4.1

38

7.7

36

7.4

44

2.4

UA

0.0

No

Co

lle

cti

on

UA

UA

We

st

Tam

ar

1.0

51

.06

‡ 2

.29

1.0

90

.99

29

4.7

28

1.8

29

5.3

26

1.7

33

1.1

UA

15

.1N

o C

olle

cti

on

12

.71

5.4

Gro

up

avera

ge

0.8

20

.96

0.9

00

.92

0.9

64

44

.74

35

.24

28

.63

98

.84

23

.51

6.3

13

.1N

o C

oll

ectio

n1

5.7

17

.9

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

0

.45

0.7

61

.13

1.1

51

.04

51

9.3

30

1.4

23

2.7

24

0.2

27

9.7

3.6

6.2

No

Co

lle

cti

on

17

.01

4.6

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

UA

0.0

00

.72

1.1

70

.91

UA

0.0

61

7.0

44

8.0

52

3.7

UA

UA

No

Co

lle

cti

on

UA

0.7

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

0

.63

0.7

50

.75

0.7

90

.82

82

2.2

74

3.4

74

6.9

70

8.3

72

3.2

UA

UA

No

Co

lle

cti

on

4.0

11

.5

Do

rse

t 0

.65

0.9

01

.38

1.6

31

.94

44

0.5

28

9.3

24

5.9

14

7.7

21

7.5

15

.01

4.9

No

Co

lle

cti

on

UA

UA

Flin

de

rs

2.0

00

.53

0.6

00

.63

0.1

51

52

.13

18

.33

06

.63

28

.88

82

.2U

AU

AN

o C

olle

cti

on

0.0

0.0

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

1.0

00

.88

1.0

91

.17

1.2

64

11

.13

13

.12

73

.82

73

.02

87

.52

1.6

37

.7N

o C

olle

cti

on

7.4

25

.5

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

1

.71

1.8

51

.88

1.8

11

.46

18

1.6

17

9.1

17

6.6

21

4.5

24

7.5

UA

UA

No

Co

lle

cti

on

UA

35

.1

Ke

nti

sh

1

.14

1.0

71

.14

1.4

61

.04

31

7.5

32

0.8

34

2.9

26

9.2

33

2.2

UA

UA

No

Co

lle

cti

on

0.2

0.4

Kin

g Isla

nd

0

.95

0.9

01

.25

1.5

71

.49

44

0.6

33

5.8

31

1.6

25

3.9

25

9.0

UA

UA

No

Co

lle

cti

on

55

.65

5.6

Latr

ob

e

0.9

31

.04

0.9

31

.00

1.0

23

62

.13

54

.73

78

.43

39

.73

53

.6U

AU

AN

o C

olle

cti

on

UA

UA

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

1.1

20

.91

1.1

81

.31

0.9

43

40

.13

64

.83

04

.43

33

.65

47

.2U

AU

AN

o C

olle

cti

on

3.5

26

.1

Tasm

an

N

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

o C

olle

cti

on

NA

NA

We

st

Co

ast

0.5

70

.77

0.5

80

.60

0.6

44

42

.54

52

.25

18

.54

49

.44

49

.49

.01

0.0

No

Co

lle

cti

on

UA

UA

G

ro

up

avera

ge

1.0

10

.86

1.0

51

.19

1.0

64

02

.73

31

.13

71

.33

33

.94

25

.21

2.3

17

.2N

o C

oll

ectio

n1

2.5

18

.8

Sta

te A

vera

ge

0.9

10

.91

0.9

71

.05

1.0

04

32

.13

93

.04

09

.63

74

.04

28

.21

5.4

15

.8N

o C

oll

ectio

n1

3.0

17

.6

Un

it C

os

t P

er K

ilo

litre

Av

era

ge

Wa

te

r C

on

su

mp

tio

n p

er

Co

nn

ec

tio

nW

ate

r S

ys

te

m L

os

s † %

20

06

-07

%%

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

%

20

03

-04

20

05

-06

Kl

20

04

-05

Kl

%

20

06

-07

Kl

20

02

- 0

32

00

3-0

4

Kl

20

02

- 0

3

Kl

20

06

-07

$

20

05

-06

$

20

02

- 0

3

$

20

04

-05

$

20

03

-04

$

‡W

est

Tam

ar

Co

un

cil

-T

he

com

parati

ve

ad

juste

du

nit

co

st

for

West

Tam

ar

is$

1.0

0aft

er

allo

win

gfo

r$

2.8

98

Masset

writ

e-o

ff.

†D

ata

no

t co

llecte

d 2

00

4-0

5.

Page 71: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

65

Page 72: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

66

4.3

SEW

ERA

GE

AN

D D

RA

INA

GE

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

onta

ins

info

rmat

ion

abou

t tho

se e

ssen

tial s

ervic

es th

at lo

cal g

over

nmen

t pro

vides

in T

asm

ania

, inc

ludi

ng ro

ads,

wat

er a

nd s

ewer

age

prov

ision

and

was

te m

anag

emen

t.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Relia

ble

sew

erag

e sy

stem

s w

ith e

ffici

ent a

nd e

ffect

ive

oper

atio

ns a

nd e

nviro

nmen

tally

acc

epta

ble

trea

tmen

t.

IND

ICA

TO

R

4.3.

1

NU

MBE

R O

F N

OT

IFIA

BLE

INC

IDEN

TS

(SEW

ERA

GE)

4.

3.2

A

VER

AG

E C

OST

PER

SEW

ERA

GE

CO

NN

ECT

ION

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Num

ber

of n

otifi

able

inci

dent

s (r

epor

ted

to th

e D

epar

tmen

t of P

rimar

y In

dust

ries,

and

Wat

er)

eg, P

ump

and

pipe

failu

re, r

ain

inci

dent

s, et

c.

Tota

l ope

ratin

g ex

pens

es o

f sew

erag

e sy

stem

N

umbe

r of

con

nect

ions

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

N

otifi

able

Inci

dent

s: M

easu

res

the

relia

bilit

y of

the

sew

erag

e sy

stem

s. A

vera

ge C

ost p

er S

ewer

age

Con

nect

ion:

Mea

sure

s th

e av

erag

e co

st o

f pro

vidi

ng a

sew

erag

e se

rvic

e, in

clud

ing

disp

osal

, to

a pr

oper

ty.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

st

anda

rd o

f ins

talle

d st

ruct

ure

m

ajor

sys

tem

s fa

ilure

s

w

eath

er/n

atur

al in

terfe

renc

e

la

ck o

f com

plia

nce

with

reg

ulat

ions

sc

ale

of o

pera

tions

ag

e an

d co

nditi

on o

f inf

rast

ruct

ure

nu

mbe

r of

pum

ping

sta

tions

di

stan

ce fr

om p

lant

and

leve

l of t

reat

men

t req

uire

d

siz

e an

d de

nsity

of p

opul

atio

n se

rved

to

pogr

aphy

of r

etic

ulat

ion

area

us

e of

com

bine

d st

orm

wat

er a

nd s

ewer

age

syst

ems

co

st a

lloca

tion

polic

ies

de

prec

iatio

n an

d m

aint

enan

ce p

olic

ies

op

erat

iona

l diff

icul

ties

Page 73: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

67

Citie

s

Cla

ren

ce

54

41

43

13

35

63

84

47

14

68

Gle

no

rch

y

35

10

47

19

51

93

20

91

98

19

7

Ho

bart

7

75

12

92

94

30

13

12

34

63

64

Lau

nc

esto

n

27

79

34

38

31

39

04

99

51

85

63

40

7

Gro

up

avera

ge

11

24

13

14

13

29

83

37

35

63

95

35

9

Me

diu

m C

ou

nc

ils

Bri

gh

ton

0

55

10

52

44

35

03

05

22

62

26

Bu

rnie

1

87

11

59

29

92

58

36

13

09

31

9

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

85

41

38

28

82

86

29

52

93

32

5

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

00

00

03

33

31

63

31

41

04

10

De

vo

np

ort

2

32

41

02

72

43

62

40

14

03

34

43

63

Hu

on

Valle

y

31

01

12

44

31

83

24

81

55

79

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

20

33

23

74

40

34

08

43

64

58

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

00

01

01

25

16

41

98

19

72

39

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

10

12

41

69

27

62

95

37

83

25

So

rell

01

20

01

33

10

85

19

21

13

90

Wara

tah

-Wy

ny

ard

3

00

29

30

33

02

29

83

99

35

9

We

st

Tam

ar

13

20

93

01

78

16

62

26

23

62

50

Gro

up

avera

ge

65

46

52

54

27

93

30

35

43

53

Sm

all C

ou

nc

ils

Bre

ak O

'Day

4

21

00

20

91

88

20

42

31

22

9

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

00

00

02

02

25

62

42

54

72

57

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

0

00

00

47

14

89

45

54

25

45

3

Do

rse

t 0

00

00

37

93

51

34

82

67

20

2

Flin

de

rs

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

00

00

05

03

40

63

84

43

14

67

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

0

33

20

20

02

99

27

43

54

23

7

Ke

nti

sh

0

00

00

25

43

65

24

61

00

09

49

Kin

g Isla

nd

0

00

00

40

72

13

32

14

40

33

2

Latr

ob

e

33

24

11

78

21

21

99

29

72

28

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

21

11

01

93

19

11

80

22

22

31

Tasm

an

N

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

AN

A

We

st

Co

ast

00

10

02

10

27

52

58

23

72

53

G

ro

up

avera

ge

11

11

02

91

29

52

83

37

13

49

Sta

te A

vera

ge

56

44

42

76

29

43

15

36

73

53

20

05

-06

$

Nu

mb

er o

f N

otif

iab

le I

nc

ide

nts

(S

ew

era

ge

)A

ve

ra

ge

Co

st p

er S

ew

era

ge

Co

nn

ec

tio

n

No.

No.

No.

No.

20

02

-

03

20

03

-04

20

06

-07

$

20

03

-04

$

20

04

-05

$

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

20

06

-07

No.

20

02

-

03

$

Page 74: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

68

Page 75: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

69

4.4

WA

STE

MA

NA

GEM

ENT

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Th

is ca

tego

ry c

onta

ins

info

rmat

ion

abou

t tho

se e

ssen

tial s

ervic

es th

at lo

cal g

over

nmen

t pro

vides

in T

asm

ania

, inc

ludi

ng ro

ads,

wat

er a

nd s

ewer

age

prov

ision

and

w

aste

man

agem

ent.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

Re

liabl

e w

aste

man

agem

ent s

yste

m w

ith e

ffici

ent a

nd e

ffect

ive

oper

atio

ns a

nd e

nviro

nmen

tally

acc

epta

ble

trea

tmen

t.

IND

ICA

TO

R

4.4.

1

AV

ERA

GE

CO

ST O

F W

AST

E M

AN

AG

EMEN

T P

ER

PRO

PER

TY

4.

4.2

A

VER

AG

E C

OST

OF

WA

STE

MA

NA

GEM

ENT

PER

CA

PIT

A

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

Tota

l ope

ratin

g ex

pens

es o

f was

te m

anag

emen

t

Num

ber

rate

able

pro

pert

ies

Tota

l ope

ratin

g ex

pens

es o

f was

te m

anag

emen

t

Popu

latio

n of

cou

ncil

area

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

A

vera

ge C

ost o

f Was

te M

anag

emen

t per

pro

pert

y: T

his

indi

cate

s th

e av

erag

e co

st o

f was

te m

anag

emen

t ser

vice

s pr

ovid

ed p

er p

rope

rty.

A

vera

ge C

ost o

f Was

te M

anag

emen

t per

Cap

ita: T

his

indi

cate

s th

e av

erag

e co

st o

f was

te m

anag

emen

t ser

vice

s pr

ovid

ed p

er h

ead

of

popu

latio

n. It

pro

vide

s an

indi

catio

n of

the

scal

e of

the

was

te

man

agem

ent o

pera

tions

.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

ty

pe a

nd s

cale

of a

vaila

ble

disp

osal

faci

litie

s

ty

pe o

f rec

yclin

g se

rvic

es p

rovi

ded

fre

quen

cy a

nd v

olum

e al

low

ance

for

garb

age

colle

ctio

n

de

nsity

of p

opul

atio

n an

d di

stan

ce fr

om d

ispos

al fa

cilit

y

in

dust

rial u

sers

of w

aste

man

agem

ent f

acilit

ies

co

st a

lloca

tion

polic

ies

am

ount

of w

aste

rec

eive

d fro

m o

utsid

e th

e m

unic

ipal

are

a

ty

pe a

nd s

cale

of a

vaila

ble

disp

osal

faci

litie

s

ty

pe o

f rec

yclin

g se

rvic

es p

rovi

ded

fre

quen

cy a

nd v

olum

e al

low

ance

for

garb

age

colle

ctio

n

de

nsity

of p

opul

atio

n an

d di

stan

ce fr

om d

ispos

al fa

cilit

y

in

dust

rial u

sers

of w

aste

man

agem

ent f

acilit

ies

co

st a

lloca

tion

polic

ies

am

ount

of w

aste

rec

eive

d fro

m o

utsid

e th

e m

unic

ipal

are

a

Page 76: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

70

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

16

01

61

13

71

63

15

27

06

96

17

26

8

Gle

no

rch

y

12

91

24

13

21

62

14

85

65

35

87

16

8

Ho

bart

1

56

19

42

10

23

62

13

73

89

97

11

01

00

Lau

nce

sto

n

12

51

35

13

31

22

12

15

76

05

95

45

5

Gro

up

av

era

ge

14

31

54

15

31

70

15

96

46

86

97

77

3M

ed

ium

Co

un

cil

s

Bri

gh

ton

2

80

12

11

25

11

71

20

11

85

25

54

95

0

Bu

rnie

1

51

16

11

92

22

22

41

71

74

89

10

31

11

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

12

81

42

14

91

64

16

75

76

46

97

68

2

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

12

81

13

12

31

22

12

46

35

66

25

96

3

De

vo

np

ort

1

73

19

41

91

20

22

41

80

88

87

94

11

3

Hu

on

Valle

y

77

60

89

98

32

46

35

54

59

20

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

94

97

10

19

71

08

44

45

47

44

51

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

90

11

01

07

12

81

29

44

54

52

62

62

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

10

21

05

10

21

06

12

14

85

05

05

25

9

So

rell

10

81

81

13

11

02

01

74

12

74

73

13

2

Wara

tah

-Wyn

yard

1

04

10

61

10

10

51

07

52

55

58

55

56

We

st

Tam

ar

96

99

10

51

19

15

04

64

65

05

77

2

Gro

up

av

era

ge

12

71

11

12

61

32

14

56

25

36

26

57

3S

ma

ll C

ou

nc

ils

Bre

ak

O'D

ay

89

91

93

98

12

58

88

78

99

31

22

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

86

11

19

41

04

89

12

31

60

14

01

62

13

7

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

1

40

12

19

67

99

87

66

85

44

85

9

Do

rse

t 1

08

10

31

28

79

43

67

68

87

56

30

Flin

de

rs

43

35

96

34

51

58

53

87

52

79

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

71

84

12

81

09

14

54

24

85

76

58

5

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

66

14

91

65

82

16

48

21

77

20

09

52

06

Ke

nti

sh

6

37

77

48

17

83

84

54

34

74

7

Kin

g Isla

nd

1

39

12

81

57

14

26

91

16

11

21

46

13

56

2

Latr

ob

e

84

97

10

51

15

12

04

75

35

96

47

0

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

80

91

97

11

31

10

43

49

55

65

64

Tasm

an

6

31

74

10

51

06

10

08

21

56

59

15

11

41

We

st

Co

ast

16

21

74

97

13

11

34

13

91

56

15

11

20

11

7

G

rou

p a

ver

ag

e9

21

11

11

09

81

02

77

93

94

89

94

Sta

te A

ver

ag

e1

14

11

71

23

12

21

28

69

71

78

77

82

$$

20

03

-04

20

04

-05

20

05

-06

20

06

-07

Av

era

ge

Co

st o

f

Wa

ste

Ma

na

ge

me

nt

pe

r P

rop

ert

y

Av

era

ge

Co

st o

f

Wa

ste

Ma

na

ge

me

nt

pe

r C

ap

ita

$$

$$

$$

$$

20

02

- 0

32

00

3-0

42

00

5-0

62

00

2 -

03

20

04

-05

20

06

-07

Page 77: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

71

Page 78: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

72

KE

Y R

ES

UL

T A

RE

A

5

CO

MM

UN

ITY

SER

VIC

ES A

ND

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T

5.1

SOC

IAL

AN

D C

OM

MU

NIT

Y S

ERV

ICES

5.2

REC

REA

TIO

N A

ND

CU

LTU

RE

FAC

ILIT

IES

CA

TEG

OR

Y

DEF

INIT

ION

Co

uncil

s m

aint

ain

a va

riety

of p

olici

es, s

ervic

es, p

rogr

ams

and

facil

ities

to a

ssist

com

mun

ity m

embe

rs to

max

imise

qua

lity

of li

fe.

OBJ

ECT

IVE

In

form

ed c

omm

unity

(on

cou

ncil

obje

ctiv

es, s

trat

egie

s an

d po

licie

s).

Com

mun

ity in

put i

nto

the

deve

lopm

ent o

f pol

icy

and

plan

s.

Acc

ess

to c

ounc

il pr

ogra

ms

and

serv

ices

.

IND

ICA

TO

R

5.

1.1

S

OC

IAL

AN

D C

OM

MU

NIT

Y S

ERV

ICES

EX

PEN

DIT

UR

E PE

R C

API

TA

5.

2.1

R

ECR

EAT

ION

AL

AN

D C

ULT

UR

AL

FAC

ILIT

IES

EXPE

ND

ITU

RE

PER

CA

PIT

A

IND

ICA

TO

R

CA

LCU

LAT

ION

To

tal s

ocia

l and

com

mun

ity s

ervi

ces

expe

nditu

re

Popu

latio

n of

cou

ncil

area

Tota

l rec

reat

iona

l and

cul

tura

l fac

ilitie

s ex

pend

iture

Popu

latio

n of

cou

ncil

area

IND

ICA

TO

R

EXPL

AN

AT

ION

So

cial

and

Com

mun

ity S

ervi

ces

Expe

nditu

re p

er C

apita

: M

easu

res

the

leve

l of s

pend

ing

on s

ocia

l and

com

mun

ity s

ervi

ces

and

prog

ram

s. T

hese

incl

ude

nurs

ing

hom

es, f

amily

day

car

e an

d ch

ildca

re.

Recr

eatio

nal a

nd C

ultu

ral F

acilit

ies

Expe

nditu

re p

er C

apita

: M

easu

res

the

leve

l of s

pend

ing

on r

ecre

atio

nal a

nd c

ultu

ral f

acilit

ies

in a

n ar

ea.

This

incl

udes

exp

endi

ture

on

halls

and

civ

ic c

entr

es, p

arks

an

d re

serv

es, a

nd s

port

s fa

cilit

ies.

INFL

UEN

CIN

G

FAC

TO

RS

ra

nge

of s

ervi

ces

and

prog

ram

s pr

ovid

ed

bu

dget

ary

cons

trai

nts

and

coun

cil p

riorit

ies

ag

e pr

ofile

of p

opul

atio

n (d

iffer

ent d

eman

ds o

n se

rvic

es)

co

st a

lloca

tion

polic

ies

ra

nge

of s

ervi

ces

prov

ided

by

othe

rs

ra

nge

of fa

cilit

ies

and

serv

ices

pro

vide

d

pr

ovisi

on fo

r us

ers

outs

ide

of c

ounc

il ar

ea (

regi

onal

faci

litie

s)

bu

dget

ary

cons

trai

nts

and

coun

cil p

riorit

ies

de

prec

iatio

n an

d m

aint

enan

ce p

olic

ies

ag

e pr

ofile

of p

opul

atio

n (d

iffer

ent d

eman

ds o

n se

rvic

es)

co

st a

lloca

tion

polic

ies

Page 79: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

73

Cit

ies

Cla

ren

ce

44

47

50

48

53

69

74

91

93

88

Gle

no

rch

y

10

71

06

10

49

91

00

72

89

95

98

10

1

Ho

bart

3

63

54

16

05

82

58

30

93

37

39

34

00

Lau

nce

sto

n

56

56

52

23

22

92

45

25

92

55

Gro

up

av

era

ge

48

49

50

53

54

15

61

75

19

22

11

21

1M

ed

ium

Co

un

cil

s

Bri

gh

ton

3

43

74

32

04

69

50

48

57

58

Bu

rnie

8

68

61

07

12

41

47

20

61

86

24

72

77

25

1

Ce

ntr

al C

oast

57

54

52

60

66

10

01

01

11

91

27

12

9

De

rwe

nt

Valle

y

87

85

85

93

89

11

21

03

11

21

03

86

De

vo

np

ort

1

11

31

37

10

15

21

61

18

91

81

19

1

Hu

on

Valle

y

20

72

22

17

73

05

32

34

61

93

82

64

8

Kin

gb

oro

ug

h

42

42

44

40

35

95

95

92

10

91

06

Me

an

de

r V

alle

y

53

04

46

43

46

76

36

3

No

rth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

21

31

39

37

35

55

63

74

71

84

So

rell

85

46

10

89

88

82

31

82

23

33

4

Wara

tah

-Wyn

yard

4

14

96

06

16

38

28

18

49

31

10

We

st

Tam

ar

00

05

65

57

26

27

18

7

Gro

up

av

era

ge

56

56

61

71

72

88

82

96

10

11

04

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak

O'D

ay

00

00

07

04

05

06

67

6

Ce

ntr

al H

igh

lan

ds

50

00

25

47

16

68

37

8

Cir

cu

lar

He

ad

2

00

00

82

87

98

80

91

Do

rse

t 3

56

12

41

05

10

91

32

11

81

24

Flin

de

rs

68

83

10

11

30

12

22

36

13

99

49

30

Ge

org

e T

ow

n

22

31

29

29

46

16

41

54

21

11

81

20

1

Gla

mo

rgan

-Sp

rin

g B

ay

40

01

00

07

88

91

87

10

5

Ke

nti

sh

2

00

00

91

45

83

14

41

26

Kin

g Isla

nd

4

31

22

03

70

24

20

10

41

22

46

Latr

ob

e

18

19

12

19

20

83

95

86

75

12

3

So

uth

ern

Mid

lan

ds

54

81

11

33

40

48

49

53

61

Tasm

an

8

21

96

91

,05

91

,18

61

,24

66

42

92

36

83

4

We

st

Co

ast

00

67

49

36

10

51

12

10

61

89

23

8

G

rou

p a

ver

ag

e8

39

51

00

11

31

14

10

97

29

21

05

10

0

Sta

te A

ver

ag

e6

77

27

78

88

81

07

90

10

71

18

11

7

$$

20

02

-03

$2

00

4-0

5

$2

00

3-0

4

$$

20

06

-07

$

Re

cre

atio

na

l a

nd

Cu

ltu

ra

l F

ac

ilit

ies

Ex

pe

nd

itu

re

pe

r C

ap

ita

So

cia

l a

nd

Co

mm

un

ity

Se

rv

ice

s

Ex

pe

nd

itu

re

pe

r C

ap

ita

20

06

-07

20

05

-06

20

04

-05

$2

00

5-0

6

$2

00

2-0

3

$2

00

3-0

4

Page 80: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

74

Page 81: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

75

APP

END

IX 1

D

ata

prov

ided

by

loca

l gov

ernm

ent

finan

cial

yea

r 20

06-2

007

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

2,7

31

3,6

03

6,6

95

7,8

29

20,6

15

041,4

73

Gle

norc

hy

2,8

00

804

11,0

88

9,0

55

14,3

23

038,0

69

Hobart

5,6

21

4,3

06

11,1

82

8,1

29

32,6

65

061,9

03

Launcesto

n4,5

90

2,2

84

7,7

05

13,3

52

30,3

23

369

58,6

23

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n436

585

914

1,9

74

3,6

98

46

7,6

53

Burn

ie1,0

50

1,1

44

4,1

04

2,9

36

11,0

60

43

20,3

38

Centr

al C

oast

348

853

2,3

14

1,7

42

8,1

42

013,4

00

Derw

ent

Valley

161

291

1,3

98

978

3,5

48

17

6,3

92

Devonport

1,5

15

929

3,4

43

5,0

50

13,2

83

024,2

19

Huon V

alley

296

300

1,6

96

1,1

56

5,8

72

09,3

21

Kin

gboro

ugh

788

1,0

80

3,4

77

5,9

24

11,7

33

023,0

03

Meander

Valley

743

675

1,0

10

1,4

40

6,3

01

010,1

69

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

276

328

1,1

93

664

4,4

14

50

6,9

26

Sore

ll290

1,1

92

529

996

5,1

22

116

8,2

46

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

283

498

1,4

26

1,8

32

5,1

34

09,1

73

West

Tam

ar

726

1,2

72

1,9

91

2,1

66

6,0

87

59

12,3

00

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

209

768

670

1,1

61

3,1

96

06,0

05

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

139

367

231

143

1,6

83

02,5

63

Circula

r H

ead

202

536

515

1,1

92

4,7

29

19

7,1

93

Dors

et

189

546

591

766

3,7

70

05,8

62

Flinders

38

98

93

0703

0932

Georg

e T

ow

n158

493

653

651

3,7

83

05,7

38

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

244

708

1,1

42

920

3,4

09

109

6,5

32

Kentish

123

139

474

422

2,6

34

03,7

92

Kin

g Isla

nd

65

272

252

203

1,0

86

01,8

78

Latr

obe

194

445

1,5

63

1,1

84

3,3

01

06,6

87

South

ern

Mid

lands

125

93

364

240

2,1

37

264

3,2

22

Tasm

an

100

322

08

2,3

04

02,7

34

West

Coast

167

759

1,5

26

1,0

98

2,1

53

05,7

04

To

tal

24,6

08

25,6

91

68,2

39

73,2

11

217,2

09

1,0

93

410,0

51

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Da

ta P

ro

vid

ed

by

L

oc

al G

ov

ern

me

nt

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r

20

06

-20

07

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

Re

ve

nu

e -

Ra

tes

an

d A

nn

ua

l C

ha

rg

es

Fire L

evy

Specia

l R

ate

sG

arb

age

Wate

r

$'0

00

Sew

era

ge

Genera

l R

ate

s

$'0

00

To

tal

Ra

tes

an

d A

nn

ua

l C

ha

rg

es:

$'0

00

$'0

00

Page 82: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

76

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

2,1

42

61

99

131

1,5

77

303

24,0

28

8,3

43

Gle

norc

hy

771

999

170

86

2,8

13

946

412

3,2

68

9,4

66

Hobart

840

1,3

24

13

25

691

876

136

1,9

63

5,8

68

Launcesto

n1,4

53

2,0

60

1,7

21

1,2

20

135

1,7

14

348

08,6

51

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n1,0

04

371

00

483

198

02,2

82

4,3

37

Burn

ie948

868

460

165

132

659

25

1,0

93

4,3

51

Centr

al C

oast

1,7

38

1,3

10

167

225

462

573

620

05,0

95

Derw

ent

Valley

805

583

356

20

202

174

290

92,4

40

Devo

nport

689

757

274

2,6

18

139

721

13

4,3

79

9,5

91

Huon V

alley

1,3

38

1,1

82

1,1

88

414

561

1,0

57

00

5,7

40

Kin

gboro

ugh

849

947

259

145

852

593

701

7,7

03

12,0

49

Meander

Valley

1,3

99

1,5

30

29

130

586

208

275

04,1

57

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

1,3

36

1,7

10

34

120

163

969

098

4,4

30

Sore

ll730

640

117

619

301

0471

2,7

79

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

1,2

73

960

190

07

583

0647

3,6

59

West

Tam

ar

1,5

13

782

288

516

857

101

2,4

25

5,9

87

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

1,0

74

1,1

86

123

108

90

49

031

2,6

61

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

671

981

65

80

357

00

2,0

81

Circula

r H

ead

1,0

87

1,2

85

15

00

465

29

655

3,5

36

Dors

et

1,0

57

1,3

65

298

1,9

07

328

1,7

09

93

06,7

59

Flinders

513

470

171

1,9

55

79

147

00

3,3

35

Georg

e T

ow

n781

538

210

487

96

239

47

02,3

97

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

588

487

222

112

449

169

00

2,0

27

Kentish

868

887

7111

18

301

00

2,1

93

Kin

g Isla

nd

463

538

35

359

31

313

00

1,7

39

Latr

obe

590

488

20

179

10

46

81,9

72

3,3

11

South

ern

Mid

lands

988

1,3

60

124

1,3

97

622

051

894

5,4

35

Tasm

an

360

326

895

377

1,3

81

165

00

3,5

04

West

Coast

960

479

200

241

10

200

63

67

2,2

18

To

tal

28,8

27

26,4

72

7,6

34

12,5

63

12,5

55

14,8

91

3,2

15

31,9

84

138,1

40

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Da

ta P

rov

ide

d b

y

Lo

ca

l G

ov

ern

me

nt

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r 2

00

6-2

00

7

$'0

00

Priva

te S

ecto

r C

ontr

ibutions

Assets

Acquired

Without

Cost

To

tal

Gra

nts

a

nd

C

on

trib

uti

on

s:

Re

ve

nu

e -

Gra

nts

an

d C

on

trib

uti

on

s

Gra

nts

C

om

mis

sio

n

Base G

rant

Gra

nts

C

om

mis

sio

n

Local R

oads

Sta

te C

urr

ent

Gra

nts

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

Sta

te C

apital

Gra

nts

Com

monw

ealth

Curr

ent

Gra

nts

Com

monw

ealth

Capital G

rants

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

Page 83: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

77

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

4,2

89

2,9

95

66

1,6

35

-607

533

01,6

27

58,7

26

Gle

norc

hy

11,2

79

768

151

1,0

39

-1,2

61

1,1

16

01,0

45

60,6

27

Hobart

20,3

80

2,4

51

3,6

88

986

-34

776

6,1

52

11,5

67

102,1

70

Launcesto

n15,3

87

3,5

19

1,2

90

1,6

46

01,4

20

04,3

56

90,5

37

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n2,7

06

291

0157

84

00

241

15,2

29

Burn

ie8,1

98

601

478

417

822

00

1,7

18

35,2

06

Centr

al C

oast

3,8

46

698

36

196

-88

194

0338

23,3

76

Derw

ent

Valley

960

194

0146

104

00

250

10,2

36

Devo

nport

7,2

60

579

460

427

-1,0

37

00

-150

41,5

00

Huon V

alley

2,1

19

685

00

-167

2,1

04

01,9

37

19,8

02

Kin

gboro

ugh

3,9

30

1,1

46

0541

90

0549

40,6

78

Meander

Valley

2,0

06

881

0127

39

00

165

17,3

79

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

2,6

46

438

30

-289

00

-286

14,1

54

Sore

ll1,7

63

327

16

1,4

64

-128

311

01,6

62

14,7

77

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

2,5

20

501

0142

-333

00

-191

15,6

63

West

Tam

ar

3,3

31

668

3422

217

00

641

22,9

27

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

1,1

71

598

00

-77

239

0162

10,5

97

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

308

359

00

-40

905

162

1,0

27

6,3

38

Circula

r H

ead

3,4

35

746

0115

-191

192

0116

15,0

27

Dors

et

1,3

78

692

00

-187

00

-187

14,5

04

Flinders

677

295

00

40

00

40

5,2

80

Georg

e T

ow

n1,6

16

229

043

-192

58

0-9

19,8

89

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

1,8

71

44

00

35

00

35

10,5

09

Kentish

542

208

128

7213

0249

6,9

84

Kin

g Isla

nd

1,1

83

216

00

-206

228

022

5,0

37

Latr

obe

1,4

52

193

2106

760

259

01,1

26

12,7

70

South

ern

Mid

lands

801

219

051

-91

90

-30

9,6

47

Tasm

an

811

123

052

-23

188

0217

7,3

89

West

Coast

1,4

54

241

00

-332

0430

98

9,7

15

To

tal

109,3

21

20,9

02

6,1

93

9,7

40

-3,1

68

8,7

46

6,7

43

28,2

54

706,6

68

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Da

ta P

rov

ide

d b

y

Lo

ca

l G

ov

ern

me

nt

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r 2

00

6-2

00

7

Oth

er

Re

ve

nu

e

User

Fees a

nd

Charg

es

Inte

rest

Pro

fits

fro

m

Auth

orities

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

Pro

fit

/ Loss o

n

Sale

of A

ssets

Curr

ent

Reve

nue

n e

cF

ines

Oth

er

Re

ve

nu

e

To

tal

$'0

00

$'0

00

Capital R

eve

nue

n e

c

$'0

00

To

tal

Re

ve

nu

e

Page 84: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

78

$'0

00

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

1,3

62

6,3

63

733

5,1

65

6,1

78

3,8

08

3,3

69

2,6

92

4,1

36

1,5

55

35,3

60

Gle

norc

hy

1,2

56

9,1

20

2,6

18

3,1

73

8,1

09

2,2

66

3,0

16

4,4

06

4,4

76

3,2

39

41,6

79

Hobart

1,3

50

1,6

18

10,7

50

12,9

12

7,9

61

5,7

92

4,4

91

2,8

63

16,5

60

2,4

87

66,7

83

Launcesto

n1,1

23

8,2

03

7,0

02

5,8

52

8,6

51

6,4

23

3,3

59

351

13,9

36

5,1

44

60,0

44

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n162

628

566

1,1

00

1,4

30

771

722

51

667

2,7

22

8,8

18

Burn

ie597

3,4

89

1,7

47

3,1

25

1,1

11

1,3

78

1,6

44

2,8

29

4,0

72

1,6

69

21,6

63

Centr

al C

oast

477

2,8

77

1,9

89

1,3

34

3,2

24

1,4

69

1,6

32

1,3

24

1,9

85

389

16,7

02

Derw

ent

Valle

y390

1,3

73

331

412

1,6

87

764

572

860

660

377

7,4

26

Devo

nport

695

4,0

32

2,3

82

2,8

83

3,8

99

2,1

86

2,8

23

239

4,7

33

902

24,7

74

Huon V

alle

y466

3,3

42

610

1,1

31

828

384

277

4,6

24

693

179

12,5

34

Kin

gboro

ugh

565

3,8

33

2,8

18

3,1

43

2,7

22

2,6

91

1,6

21

1,1

16

2,7

06

369

21,5

85

Meander

Valle

y200

1,7

09

785

1,3

05

1,3

37

688

1,1

50

63

819

2,2

35

10,2

91

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

183

2,1

01

1,4

37

1,7

80

1,0

34

852

686

393

751

382

9,6

00

Sore

ll447

1,6

61

1,1

97

640

1,4

52

634

1,5

51

1,0

57

341

1,1

28

10,1

09

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

277

2,2

67

669

1,5

96

1,4

98

974

768

854

1,2

21

74

10,1

98

West

Tam

ar

372

2,2

61

1,6

60

1,6

33

2,1

03

647

1,0

83

110

1,5

76

650

12,0

96

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

133

1,5

93

695

1,1

80

692

284

754

0381

600

6,3

13

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

350

1,0

95

289

1,0

60

209

89

298

5117

03,5

13

Circula

r H

ead

70

3,2

05

140

1,7

76

1,1

95

414

411

2506

1,4

13

9,1

32

Dors

et

838

1,4

88

981

535

929

71

201

30

776

618

6,4

66

Flin

ders

43

949

312

713

24

070

104

0264

2,4

80

Georg

e T

ow

n121

1,3

05

800

807

735

743

576

298

1,0

71

469

6,9

26

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

390

905

544

631

926

277

890

0363

2,4

13

7,3

38

Kentish

375

1,0

13

640

1,0

47

298

635

274

0505

04,7

89

Kin

g Isla

nd

103

835

456

624

131

81

105

061

1,3

09

3,7

06

Latr

obe

160

2,4

58

723

570

1,0

83

339

622

97

827

564

7,4

43

South

ern

Mid

lands

144

1,1

67

1,1

24

794

547

131

366

12

280

23

4,5

89

Tasm

an

153

1,4

01

266

352

083

307

2,8

45

73

202

5,6

82

West

Coast

157

2,1

44

525

1,0

51

866

470

561

170

722

13

6,6

80

To

tal

12,9

59

74,4

36

44,7

90

58,3

25

60,8

61

35,3

48

34,2

00

27,3

95

65,0

14

31,3

91

444,7

18

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Da

ta P

rov

ide

d b

y

Lo

ca

l G

ov

ern

me

nt

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r 2

00

6-2

00

7

Com

munity

H

ealth

and

Safe

ty

Expenses (

excl.

Depre

cia

tion)

$'0

00

Com

munity

A

menity

Expenses

(excl.

Depre

cia

tion)

Roads,

Footp

ath

s a

nd

Tra

ffic

Expenses

(excl.

Depre

cia

tion)

Wate

r S

yste

m

Expenses

(excl.

Depre

cia

tion)

Sew

era

ge

Syste

ms

Expenses

(excl.

Depre

cia

tion)

Govern

ance

Expenses

(excl.

Depre

cia

tion)

$'0

00

$'0

00

Waste

M

anagem

ent

Expenses

(excl.

Depre

cia

tion)

Socia

l and

Com

munity

S

erv

ice

Expenses

(excl.

Depre

cia

tion)

Recre

atio

nal a

nd

Cultu

ral

Expenses

(excl.

Depre

cia

tion)

$'0

00

Tota

l Functio

nal

Expenses

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

Fu

ncti

on

al

Ex

pe

nse

s

All

Oth

er

Expenses (

Excl.

Depre

cia

tion)

Page 85: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

79

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

0806

06,0

77

1,5

49

4,0

45

72

0354

012,9

04

Gle

norc

hy

00

2,0

75

6,0

97

2,0

01

2,0

18

00

02,4

79

14,6

70

Hobart

71,6

30

1,6

13

10,8

76

1,4

77

2,4

56

448

32

3,2

61

226

22,0

25

Launcesto

n14

851

3,7

15

5,9

06

2,7

37

4,4

69

218

02,5

19

860

21,2

89

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n0

104

104

891

206

322

00

165

63

1,8

56

Burn

ie11

870

1,1

20

3,2

28

1,5

69

1,1

44

535

59

881

334

9,7

52

Centr

al C

oast

13

185

378

3,4

33

279

849

113

87

761

84

6,1

83

Derw

ent

Valley

22

12

11,6

27

208

253

41

0173

82,3

44

Devo

nport

02,3

23

927

3,1

72

1,2

41

1,5

61

00

19

09,2

42

Huon V

alley

0321

02,3

71

250

333

12

42

00

3,3

29

Kin

gboro

ugh

4307

1,0

28

5,3

68

1,0

02

1,6

20

10

0639

09,9

78

Meander

Valley

15

162

202

2,8

10

549

628

32

10

370

96

4,8

74

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

26

106

171

2,7

75

492

627

47

39

294

108

4,6

85

Sore

ll16

59

25

3,4

28

180

276

50

571

234

4,3

45

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

10

345

41,3

28

173

560

620

304

16

2,7

67

West

Tam

ar

0346

37

1,8

69

524

645

460

10

306

10

4,2

07

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

475

71,5

38

277

304

40

94

245

2,5

48

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

27

59

35

2,6

06

111

56

20

064

02,9

79

Circula

r H

ead

1390

21,3

36

97

358

70

0242

10

2,5

06

Dors

et

072

52,2

22

388

341

14

1122

292

3,4

58

Flinders

036

75

1,1

77

25

00

40

100

1,4

17

Georg

e T

ow

n9

116

99

1,3

24

193

285

09

286

26

2,3

46

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

00

01,0

01

381

378

00

90

81

1,9

31

Kentish

0144

21

1,0

38

86

229

60

246

01,7

70

Kin

g Isla

nd

046

0872

73

79

00

16

84

1,1

70

Latr

obe

8191

146

1,2

47

232

388

281

267

20

2,5

81

South

ern

Mid

lands

7173

97

2,4

97

169

67

63

74

03,0

94

Tasm

an

249

39

558

028

20

43

650

795

West

Coast

2105

20

601

150

398

45

18

507

01,8

46

To

tal

198

9,8

82

11,9

44

79,2

74

16,6

19

24,7

17

2,2

33

463

12,1

31

5,4

28

162,8

90

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Da

ta P

rov

ide

d b

y

Lo

ca

l G

ov

ern

me

nt

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r 2

00

6-2

00

7

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

De

pre

cia

tio

n a

nd

Am

ort

isa

tio

n E

xp

en

se

C

om

munity

Health a

nd

Safe

ty A

ssets

S

ew

era

ge

Syste

ms

Assets

W

aste

M

anagem

ent

Assets

S

ocia

l and

Com

munity

Serv

ice

Assets

R

ecre

ational

and C

ultura

l F

acilitie

s

Assets

G

ove

rnance

Assets

C

om

munity

Am

enity

Assets

R

oads,

Footp

ath

s

and T

raffic

Tota

l D

epre

cia

tion

and

Am

ort

isation

Expense:

O

ther

Assets

(incl.

Buildin

gs,

Pla

nt,

E

quip

ment,

IT

nec)

W

ate

r S

yste

m

Assets

Page 86: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

80

To

tal O

the

r E

xp

en

ses

$'0

00

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

1,4

30

773

00

2,7

86

4,9

89

53,2

53

5,4

73

40,8

61

46,3

34

Gle

norc

hy

1,4

55

1,0

99

77

129

2,8

00

5,5

60

61,9

08

-1,2

81

64,3

74

63,0

93

Hobart

953

2,1

08

433

152

5,6

84

9,3

30

98,1

38

4,0

32

69,5

97

73,6

29

Launce

sto

n601

1,7

57

179

148

4,5

93

7,2

78

88,6

10

1,9

27

4,9

57

6,8

84

Me

diu

m C

ou

nc

ils

Brighto

n259

95

0121

406

881

11,5

55

3,6

74

17,6

37

21,3

11

Burn

ie737

627

089

1,0

31

2,4

84

33,8

98

1,3

07

-27

1,2

80

Centr

al C

oast

31

427

057

347

862

23,7

46

-371

33,7

61

33,3

90

Derw

ent V

alle

y139

103

00

178

420

10,1

90

45

6,2

34

6,2

79

Devonport

673

678

046

1,5

05

2,9

02

36,9

18

4,5

82

20,2

28

24,8

10

Huon V

alle

y31

279

00

298

607

16,4

70

3,3

32

589

3,9

21

Kin

gboro

ugh

51

520

243

71

788

1,6

72

33,2

36

7,4

42

85,2

84

92,7

26

Meander

Valle

y0

162

755

42

735

1,6

94

16,8

58

521

63,6

85

64,2

06

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

0202

022

281

505

14,7

91

-637

23,7

15

23,0

78

Sore

ll266

212

024

409

912

15,3

65

-588

5,7

10

5,1

22

Wara

tah -

Wynya

rd189

207

28

0276

701

13,6

66

1,9

97

3,3

24

5,3

21

West T

am

ar

130

257

045

710

1,1

42

17,4

45

5,4

81

15,8

66

21,3

48

Sm

all C

ou

ncils

Bre

ak O

'Day

138

130

22

0205

495

9,3

56

1,2

41

6,2

37

7,4

78

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

230

00

139

171

6,6

64

-327

8,0

50

7,7

23

Circula

r H

ead

57

114

00

202

374

12,0

12

3,0

15

8,7

05

11,7

20

Dors

et

116

114

13

31

212

486

10,4

10

4,0

94

-14,2

79

-10,1

85

Flin

ders

06

00

44

50

3,9

47

1,3

33

-317

1,0

16

Georg

e T

ow

n122

114

39

18

156

450

9,7

22

167

1,7

17

1,8

84

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

176

118

016

234

544

9,8

13

696

0696

Kentish

40

31

015

120

207

6,7

66

218

17,5

50

17,7

68

Kin

g Isla

nd

42

43

00

63

148

5,0

24

14

157

170

Latr

obe

111

125

013

202

451

10,4

74

2,2

95

4,5

13

6,8

09

South

ern

Mid

lands

83

96

013

122

314

7,9

97

1,6

50

8,6

08

10,2

58

Tasm

an

107

128

00

100

335

6,8

12

577

455

1,0

32

West C

oast

130

112

00

155

398

8,9

24

791

1,3

26

2,1

17

To

tal

8,0

72

10,6

66

1,7

89

1,0

51

24,7

81

46,3

59

653,9

68

52,7

00

498,5

17

551,2

18

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Data

Pro

vid

ed

by

Lo

cal

Go

vern

men

tF

inan

cia

l Y

ear

2006-2

007

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

Payr

oll

Tax

$'0

00

Fri

nge B

enefits

T

ax

$'0

00

$'0

00

Tota

l R

evenue,

Expense a

nd

Valu

ation

adju

stm

ent

reco

gnis

ed

dire

ctly in

Equity

Tota

l C

hanges

in E

quity

Oth

er

Ex

pe

ns

es

Govern

ment

Levie

s P

aid

Rehabili

tation

Pro

vis

ion

Tota

l O

pera

ting

Exp

en

se

s:

Annual

Opera

tional

Surp

lus /

(Deficit)

Inte

rest P

aid

Page 87: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

81

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

1,9

00

61

1,5

68

46,0

02

9,0

22

36,9

80

498,1

90

22,3

62

512,8

08

Gle

norc

hy

672

01,5

50

13,3

10

12,8

22

488

624,3

63

22,3

94

602,4

57

Hobart

850

126

2,7

95

43,2

78

15,6

81

27,5

97

806,5

96

23,5

55

810,6

38

Launcesto

n1,6

13

42

5,6

91

70,1

87

26,7

33

43,4

54

932,4

64

15,0

92

960,8

26

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n129

0410

4,7

66

2,5

91

2,1

76

116,0

49

2,9

27

115,2

98

Burn

ie889

01,6

05

11,4

57

6,5

83

4,8

74

329,8

38

17,5

56

317,1

57

Centr

al C

oast

296

01,0

17

10,0

92

4,0

50

6,0

42

279,8

47

1,9

84

283,9

04

Derw

ent

Valley

425

0423

3,3

02

2,6

15

687

75,5

63

1,6

12

74,6

37

Devo

nport

470

70

3,8

49

12,2

06

7,4

52

4,7

54

367,6

65

8,9

06

363,5

13

Huon V

alley

314

0319

10,7

44

1,9

07

8,8

37

95,8

67

580

104,1

23

Kin

gboro

ugh

584

0443

17,8

61

5,8

49

12,0

12

407,4

81

1,3

86

418,1

07

Meander

Valley

288

0627

13,6

91

1,9

38

11,7

54

211,2

37

2,2

84

220,7

06

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

140

0633

5,5

40

1,8

59

3,6

82

184,8

93

117

188,4

58

Sore

ll230

0358

5,4

19

3,5

59

1,8

60

117,6

82

3,3

08

116,2

34

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

89

0533

5,9

02

2,9

36

2,9

66

92,9

99

2,3

69

93,5

95

West

Tam

ar

495

0197

11,6

91

2,9

14

8,7

77

193,5

44

1,8

99

200,4

21

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

169

0180

7,3

37

2,4

42

4,8

95

94,0

59

2,1

80

96,7

73

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

179

0245

6,3

38

878

5,4

60

100,3

08

20

105,7

47

Circula

r H

ead

80

1,1

31

10,9

98

2,1

93

8,8

05

78,8

91

754

86,9

42

Dors

et

135

0404

13,3

16

1,8

79

11,4

37

98,7

47

1,9

77

108,2

07

Flinders

119

0136

7,1

78

269

6,9

10

33,9

38

174

40,6

74

Georg

e T

ow

n94

0189

4,8

55

2,0

99

2,7

57

91,0

05

2,1

58

91,6

03

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

182

0344

1,3

62

1,2

99

63

56,0

79

2,4

82

53,6

60

Kentish

50

0151

6,0

74

1,1

72

4,9

03

56,0

38

2,0

86

58,8

55

Kin

g Isla

nd

136

0159

4,2

17

1,2

69

2,9

48

51,7

75

1,0

62

53,6

61

Latr

obe

27

0159

2,0

64

2,3

08

-244

82,0

79

2,2

37

79,5

98

South

ern

Mid

lands

288

0300

5,5

30

1,0

22

4,5

08

77,2

07

1,3

22

80,3

93

Tasm

an

170

0166

1,0

14

1,2

13

-199

14,4

63

1,3

88

12,8

76

West

Coast

298

0182

2,9

59

2,1

96

762

54,3

99

1,5

18

53,6

43

To

tal

11,2

38

300

25,7

61

358,6

89

128,7

48

229,9

41

6,2

23,2

65

147,6

90

6,3

05,5

17

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Da

ta P

ro

vid

ed

by

Lo

ca

l G

ov

ern

me

nt

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r

20

06

-20

07

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

Net

Assets

Non C

urr

ent

Lia

bilitie

s

Rate

Debto

rs

(excl. D

efe

rred

Rate

Debto

rs)

$'0

00

Work

ing

Capital

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

Tota

l C

urr

ent

Assets

Rate

Debto

rs

Postp

oned

All O

ther

Curr

ent

Assets

As

se

ts a

nd

Lia

bilit

ies

Ou

tsta

nd

ing

Ra

tes

Non C

urr

ent

Assets

Tota

l C

urr

ent

Lia

bilitie

s

Page 88: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

82

No.

No.

No.

No.

No.

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

50,8

08

22,6

63

20,7

52

19,5

47

37,5

17

Gle

norc

hy

44,1

79

20,4

22

18,8

50

16,8

02

31,8

72

Hobart

49,5

56

23,1

50

20,6

16

19,5

09

35,9

69

Launcesto

n64,6

20

29,4

79

24,8

71

25,5

98

45,7

17

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n14,3

29

6,0

23

4,8

90

4,3

47

9,2

80

Burn

ie19,7

01

9,0

43

7,4

87

8,4

44

13,9

86

Centr

al C

oast

21,2

59

10,4

58

7,8

40

9,2

10

15,8

56

Derw

ent

Valle

y9,6

92

4,9

52

3,5

76

3,8

41

6,6

88

Devo

nport

24,8

80

11,7

10

9,7

45

10,0

26

18,1

54

Huon V

alle

y14,4

42

9,0

66

5,9

80

6,9

51

10,5

44

Kin

gboro

ugh

31,7

06

15,0

65

12,2

85

12,5

84

23,1

61

Meander

Valle

y18,9

38

9,1

51

7,2

15

8,1

32

13,5

86

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

12,5

05

6,0

80

4,3

42

6,0

04

8,9

94

Sore

ll12,1

31

7,9

81

5,7

23

5,1

77

9,0

15

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

13,8

15

7,2

23

5,5

84

6,0

06

10,0

88

West

Tam

ar

21,5

43

10,3

05

8,1

16

8,6

84

15,5

29

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

6,2

18

6,0

56

3,7

38

3,6

31

5,0

65

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

2,3

16

3,5

84

2,1

12

1,7

44

2,7

56

Circula

r H

ead

8,1

88

4,9

15

2,8

96

4,0

12

5,7

21

Dors

et

7,2

53

5,0

34

3,0

60

3,7

35

5,4

56

Flin

ders

881

1,3

78

760

589

774

Georg

e T

ow

n6,7

44

3,9

76

2,6

51

3,3

19

5,0

35

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

4,3

29

5,4

18

3,5

33

2,8

57

4,1

46

Kentish

5,9

65

3,5

82

2,2

19

2,7

88

4,2

56

Kin

g Isla

nd

1,7

03

1,5

18

567

940

1,3

05

Latr

obe

8,8

88

5,1

92

3,5

89

3,9

59

6,7

34

South

ern

Mid

lands

5,8

45

3,3

77

2,5

35

2,6

61

4,1

91

Tasm

an

2,3

17

3,2

57

2,0

06

1,6

94

2,2

52

West

Coast

5,1

71

4,5

38

2,6

92

2,2

83

3,4

44

To

tal

489,9

22

254,5

96

200,2

30

205,0

74

357,0

91

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Da

ta P

rov

ide

d b

y

Lo

ca

l G

ov

ern

me

nt

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r 2

00

6-2

00

7

Mu

nic

ipa

l Sta

tis

tic

sG

ov

ern

an

ce

Tota

l P

opula

tion

Within

Munic

ipal

are

a

Tota

l N

um

ber

of

Rate

able

P

ropert

ies

Num

ber

of R

ate

able

R

esid

ential

Pro

pert

ies

Num

ber

of E

lecto

rs

Who V

ote

d in E

lection

Tota

l N

um

ber

of E

lecto

rs

Elig

ible

to

Vote

as a

t O

cto

ber

2007

Page 89: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

83

$'0

00

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

51,8

17

47,1

81

55,0

91

51,2

08

31,9

34

3,1

52

5,2

14

6,2

62

2,1

04

8,3

65

2,8

77

1,2

93

Gle

norc

hy

55,7

68

59,9

67

59,7

81

58,3

15

28,1

17

4,2

84

4,7

06

7,8

56

1,1

33

8,9

90

1,9

50

2,9

04

Hobart

90,0

66

94,6

42

95,7

55

94,0

76

33,6

31

5,4

35

9,1

50

11,1

48

3,4

37

14,5

85

1,0

13

4,7

70

Launcesto

n87,4

20

88,7

32

98,8

00

85,5

18

37,0

97

5,4

27

11,7

39

1,2

36

15,9

30

17,1

66

6,7

15

2,6

31

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n14,7

29

11,4

02

14,2

88

11,1

99

6,7

33

701

1,7

77

02,4

77

2,4

77

500

572

Burn

ie34,2

72

33,8

57

34,9

57

33,1

87

10,9

80

8,7

69

9,2

94

7,0

77

10,9

87

18,0

64

9,7

69

961

Centr

al C

oast

23,5

20

23,2

77

22,7

32

22,2

31

10,4

93

2,4

60

3,8

89

2,8

56

3,4

93

6,3

49

2,7

00

291

Derw

ent

Valley

9,8

97

8,2

61

10,7

68

10,6

21

5,2

21

1,7

81

1,4

05

2,7

50

436

3,1

86

1,4

30

570

Devo

nport

35,1

85

35,5

93

39,3

58

35,2

88

15,4

71

3,6

61

4,8

12

5,8

56

2,6

17

8,4

73

6,2

60

2,0

69

Huon V

alley

16,9

85

16,9

85

18,5

16

16,3

86

6,3

58

2,9

51

1,5

19

2,8

66

1,6

04

4,4

70

0243

Kin

gboro

ugh

30,4

36

30,4

00

35,7

03

29,7

23

17,8

40

1,4

51

6,9

82

6,2

20

2,2

13

8,4

33

5,5

83

52

Meander

Valley

18,1

17

15,1

06

18,4

20

15,1

36

6,9

30

2,6

08

3,8

13

4,3

33

2,0

88

6,4

21

2,3

51

0

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

13,0

84

12,5

52

15,3

69

13,8

49

3,8

66

3,0

67

4,6

88

4,2

48

3,5

07

7,7

55

4,8

67

0

Sore

ll12,8

77

14,3

97

13,5

02

13,7

95

6,5

74

3,1

23

1,2

39

3,9

13

449

4,3

62

1,3

39

412

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

14,6

59

14,1

62

17,0

61

13,4

55

6,1

93

2,4

19

2,6

42

3,3

33

1,7

28

5,0

61

1,1

16

680

West

Tam

ar

18,4

35

17,7

34

19,8

44

15,9

86

10,1

45

2,6

60

2,2

60

4,3

36

584

4,9

20

4,0

86

387

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

10,7

90

9,9

38

12,7

77

8,6

04

3,7

06

1,9

23

6,6

87

2,3

46

6,2

64

8,6

10

7,2

75

172

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

5,4

38

6,3

54

6,3

75

7,5

55

1,1

79

1,2

41

398

436

1,2

03

1,6

40

1,1

28

14

Circula

r H

ead

13,5

95

13,4

62

13,9

53

11,0

98

3,3

27

2,9

73

1,1

83

2,1

94

1,9

63

4,1

56

1,5

55

180

Dors

et

12,0

51

12,1

68

11,2

37

9,9

23

3,3

08

1,9

80

1,9

11

3,3

50

541

3,8

91

1,3

28

167

Flinders

3,7

09

5,0

46

3,2

75

3,8

42

112

268

982

01,2

50

1,2

50

331

0

Georg

e T

ow

n9,2

57

8,9

87

10,3

78

8,6

41

2,9

77

972

1,9

04

1,9

59

918

2,8

77

UA

557

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

10,1

79

9,8

23

9,6

21

9,5

53

4,1

25

935

500

1,1

53

282

1,4

35

587

271

Kentish

6,9

95

6,4

66

7,1

13

7,0

03

2,0

95

838

2,5

17

132

3,2

23

3,3

55

2,1

78

41

Kin

g Isla

nd

4,7

21

4,6

08

4,9

36

4,6

99

1,0

50

916

1,0

68

443

1,5

41

1,9

83

335

61

Latr

obe

10,1

93

9,8

15

11,7

90

9,3

25

4,0

97

1,8

59

1,7

77

1,6

73

1,9

63

3,6

37

468

414

South

ern

Mid

lands

7,5

59

7,5

75

7,6

10

7,3

23

1,5

54

2,3

20

781

840

2,2

60

3,1

01

1,3

17

159

Tasm

an

6,6

61

6,4

75

2,8

41

6,4

85

1,7

97

615

234

580

269

849

373

216

West

Coast

10,6

06

10,6

06

11,1

76

8,7

89

3,7

72

2,5

64

229

1,7

13

1,0

80

2,7

92

2,7

21

338

To

tal

639,0

21

635,5

70

683,0

24

622,8

13

270,6

82

73,3

53

95,2

99

91,1

11

34,8

82,0

86

34,8

82,0

86

72,1

54

20,4

25

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Da

ta P

rov

ide

d b

y

Lo

ca

l G

ov

ern

me

nt

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r 2

00

6-2

00

7

Tota

l B

udgete

d

Revenue

Tota

l B

udgete

d

Opera

ting

Expenses

Last Y

ear's

Tota

l R

evenue

Fin

an

ce

Capital

Expenditure

Exis

ting

Assets

Last Y

ear's

Tota

l O

pera

ting

Expenses

Tota

l R

esid

ential

Rate

s

charg

es

Tota

l O

uts

ourc

ed

Capital

Expenditure

Tota

l C

apital

Expenditure

on R

oads,

Footp

ath

s &

Tra

ffic

All

Oth

er

Capital

Expenditure

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

Capital

Expenditure

N

ew

Assets

$'0

00

Tota

l R

epaym

ents

of

Loan

Princip

al

$'0

00

Tota

l C

apital

Expenditure

Page 90: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

84

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

12,7

89

194

237

18

1,7

26

146

465,4

16

Gle

norc

hy

19,8

90

317

307

27

2,0

19

6,9

13

592,7

65

Hobart

34,8

26

857

581

85

3,9

77

4,5

86

1,1

48,0

56

Launcesto

n31,2

49

385

483

64

3,6

08

2,3

61

898,6

29

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n2,2

20

60

57

3404

165

90,7

13

Burn

ie13,9

22

249

229

23

995

792

396,7

49

Centr

al C

oast

8,7

11

152

150

12

911

2,2

83

262,5

01

Derw

ent

Valley

2,7

75

38

54

8253

13

87,3

87

Devo

nport

12,7

32

138

207

26

1,6

19

1,9

13

353,7

11

Huon V

alley

7,4

31

57

147

32

564

124

273,9

35

Kin

gboro

ugh

9,5

43

184

176

29

900

540

374,1

60

Meander

Valley

4,5

06

85

75

7252

39

147,9

57

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

4,4

20

83

75

11

351

276

139,2

67

Sore

ll4,5

22

48

85

11

479

498

196,7

52

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

4,4

19

87

88

8589

240

148,0

94

West

Tam

ar

5,4

70

85

93

9464

220

157,2

32

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

3,4

74

133

66

5265

3,7

70

103,7

45

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

1,5

86

10

32

3121

34

56,2

31

Circula

r H

ead

3,0

08

94

56

7297

350

108,6

80

Dors

et

2,8

82

48

52

3220

40

105,5

70

Flinders

1,0

92

24

16

4123

033,8

50

Georg

e T

ow

n2,7

24

59

49

3353

093,4

48

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

3,2

13

39

49

6202

12

76,4

69

Kentish

1,4

83

48

30

2120

22

60,3

54

Kin

g Isla

nd

1,3

43

21

28

4265

276

45,7

20

Latr

obe

3,0

23

79

61

5300

64

118,7

05

South

ern

Mid

lands

2,2

90

28

46

1282

291

93,1

77

Tasm

an

3,2

73

41

56

8466

532

99,4

12

West

Coast

3,0

92

27

57

14

420

93

115,9

00

To

tal

211,9

08

3,6

68

3,6

42

436

22,5

45

26,5

91

6,8

44,5

86

Hours

Lost

Due t

o

Inju

ryT

ota

l H

ou

rs

Wo

rke

d

Hours

Tota

l D

ays P

aid

and

Unpaid

Sic

k L

eave

No.

No.

$D

ays

Hu

ma

n R

es

ou

rce

Ma

na

ge

me

nt

$'0

00

Em

plo

yee E

xpenses

Tra

inin

g a

nd

Education E

xpenses

Num

ber

of F

ull T

ime

Equiv

ale

nt

Em

plo

yees (

FTE

s)

Num

ber

of F

TE

Term

inations

Hours

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Da

ta P

rov

ide

d b

y

Lo

ca

l G

ov

ern

me

nt

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r 2

00

6-2

00

7

Page 91: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

85

No.

No.

No.

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

1,3

63

71,7

54

130,7

08

160

293

50

Gle

norc

hy

1,4

22

92,7

81

152,9

59

287

293

241

Hobart

2,9

13

107,9

33

189,1

61

465

742

898

Launcesto

n1,4

38

76,4

11

274,4

16

350

600

1,0

17

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n130

42,4

74

55,4

50

45

56

108

Burn

ie991

13,0

02

44,5

59

154

140

197

Centr

al C

oast

410

20,8

35

41,2

01

75

155

280

Derw

ent

Valley

63

8,2

82

11,6

31

23

79

87

Devo

nport

862

46,6

81

113,7

42

154

163

250

Huon V

alley

288

18,9

87

42,2

55

88

139

142

Kin

gboro

ugh

694

51,2

45

73,1

90

148

217

217

Meander

Valley

303

32,8

71

43,6

15

50

107

55

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

215

9,8

67

22,9

95

51

129

57

Sore

ll126

16,3

75

137,8

00

75

120

172

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

263

6,1

31

18,6

17

50

102

42

West

Tam

ar

494

25,6

13

56,2

64

80

108

115

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

129

18,3

31

29,3

34

45

85

79

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

121

5,1

03

8,2

83

19

53

53

Circula

r H

ead

209

9,1

50

9,1

50

34

110

36

Dors

et

228

4,2

04

12,4

31

35

54

68

Flinders

57

500

5,0

00

12

12

30

Georg

e T

ow

n145

UA

UA

29

46

46

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

164

3,1

08

6,7

61

30

137

115

Kentish

193

10,8

15

16,1

25

23

38

58

Kin

g Isla

nd

38

420

3,8

18

15

35

40

Latr

obe

181

6,5

04

18,4

64

36

76

69

South

ern

Mid

lands

136

9,3

50

11,3

51

33

48

46

Tasm

an

72

5,8

88

7,5

72

28

44

65

West

Coast

83

12,1

98

17,4

26

35

69

69

To

tal

13,7

31

726,8

13

1,5

54,2

78

2,6

29

4,2

50

4,7

02

Info

rma

tio

n S

ys

tem

s

$'0

00

Co

mm

un

ity

He

alt

h a

nd

Sa

fety

Tota

l N

um

ber

of

Food H

andling

Pre

mis

es

Tota

l N

um

ber

of

Inspections o

f F

ood

Handling P

rem

ises

No.

Info

rmation S

yste

ms

Expenses (

inclu

din

g

Depre

cia

tion)

Num

ber

of E

lectr

onic

S

erv

ice D

elive

ry

Receip

ts

Tra

nsactions

Tota

l N

um

ber

of A

ll

Receip

ts

Tra

nsactions

Tota

l N

um

ber

of

Term

inals

(in

clu

din

g

PC

s)

In U

se

No.

Page 92: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

86

No.

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

UA

34

4437

794

Gle

norc

hy

23

34

7380

522

Hobart

29

39

14

978

716

Launcesto

n33

47

31

728

1,0

63

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n33

41

10

472

332

Burn

ie15

32

7205

331

Centr

al C

oast

23

28

15

160

441

Derw

ent

Valle

y11

20

8218

198

Devo

nport

820

10

274

377

Huon V

alle

y40

21

21

372

372

Kin

gboro

ugh

23

33

15

826

837

Meander

Valle

y28

33

UA

321

359

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

11

36

14

341

308

Sore

ll21

40

7398

328

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

18

33

4240

224

West

Tam

ar

12

28

3216

456

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

14

25

10

339

340

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

31

39

31

127

93

Circula

r H

ead

736

5153

171

Dors

et

10

30

15

98

216

Flin

ders

14

42

28

43

39

Georg

e T

ow

n5

39

19

150

201

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

36

39

13

244

220

Kentish

30

38

10

135

150

Kin

g Isla

nd

12

39

127

30

Latr

obe

14

35

14

156

266

South

ern

Mid

lands

20

36

16

207

156

Tasm

an

18

36

15

95

108

West

Coast

28

28

7118

92

To

tal

567

981

354

9,7

40

9,7

40

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Da

ta P

rov

ide

d b

y

Lo

ca

l G

ov

ern

me

nt

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r 2

00

6-2

00

7

Days

P

lannin

g

perm

itte

d

use

Tota

l N

um

ber

of all

Pla

nn

ing

Applic

ations

Lodged

Nu

mb

er

of

Ca

len

da

r d

ay

s t

o P

roc

es

s P

lan

nin

g

an

d D

ev

elo

pm

en

t A

pp

lica

tio

ns

Nu

mb

er

of

Pla

nn

ing

an

d

De

ve

lop

me

nt

Ap

plic

ati

on

lod

ge

d

Days

Days

No.

P

lannin

g

dis

cre

tionary

use

B

uild

ing

Tota

l N

um

ber

of all

Bu

ild

ing

Applic

ations

Lodged

Page 93: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

87

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

626

508

1,6

09

2,7

43

3,2

73

77

2,6

23

5,9

72

Gle

norc

hy

701

100

872

1,6

73

2,9

90

01,1

14

4,1

04

Hobart

708

70

1,0

28

1,8

05

3,4

76

01,8

17

5,2

92

Launcesto

n2,4

61

598

2,7

78

5,8

36

3,9

79

191

755

4,9

25

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n496

40

0536

622

43

0665

Burn

ie1,2

42

106

373

1,7

21

1,7

62

95

304

2,1

61

Centr

al C

oast

1,3

09

322

94

1,7

26

1,8

55

23

503

2,3

80

Derw

ent

Valley

110

104

149

363

1,0

52

114

95

1,2

61

Devo

nport

1,0

86

44

663

1,7

93

1,8

69

0917

2,7

86

Huon V

alley

1,0

54

1,1

74

251

2,4

79

2,1

57

00

2,1

57

Kin

gboro

ugh

1,7

84

1,2

86

320

3,3

89

1,3

09

00

1,3

09

Meander

Valley

1,0

63

238

153

1,4

54

1,9

08

381

81

2,3

70

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

1,3

72

382

27

1,7

80

1,1

92

91

896

2,1

80

Sore

ll152

315

67

535

852

682

144

1,6

77

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

1,2

17

466

60

1,7

43

1,5

98

353

313

2,2

64

West

Tam

ar

658

583

426

1,6

67

1,4

30

573

657

2,6

60

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

540

537

105

1,1

82

836

0967

1,8

02

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

121

840

99

1,0

60

241

555

445

1,2

41

Circula

r H

ead

731

1,4

11

397

2,5

39

1,7

44

175

295

2,2

14

Dors

et

357

357

443

1,1

58

697

504

509

1,7

09

Flinders

222

383

0606

77

013

90

Georg

e T

ow

n165

118

44

327

756

403

99

1,2

59

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

249

107

36

392

217

93

34

344

Kentish

451

466

45

962

476

204

0680

Kin

g Isla

nd

147

397

306

850

527

172

80

779

Latr

obe

635

254

64

953

913

12

192

1,1

17

South

ern

Mid

lands

312

939

176

1,4

27

481

1,2

83

253

2,0

16

Tasm

an

87

292

0379

264

247

0511

West

Coast

654

162

33

848

993

382

122

1,4

96

To

tal

20,7

11

12,5

98

10,6

18

43,9

28

39,5

43

6,6

54

13,2

26

59,4

23

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Da

ta P

rov

ide

d b

y

Lo

ca

l G

ov

ern

me

nt

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r 2

00

6-2

00

7

Ro

ad

s, Fo

otp

ath

s a

nd

Traff

ic (

Exclu

din

g P

ark

ing

Op

erati

on

s)

Main

tenance

Expenditure

on

Seale

d R

oads

Main

tenance

Expenditure

on

Unseale

d R

oads

Oth

er

Main

tenance

Expenditure

on

Roads,

Footp

ath

s a

nd

Tra

ffic

Tota

l M

ain

tenance

Expenditure

on

Roads,

Footp

ath

s &

Tra

ffic

Capital

Expenditure

on

Seale

d R

oads

Capital

Expenditure

on

Unseale

d R

oads

Oth

er

Capital

Expenditure

on

Roads,

Footp

ath

s a

nd

Tra

ffic

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

$'0

00

Tota

l C

apital

Expenditure

on

Roads,

Footp

ath

s &

Tra

ffic

Page 94: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

88

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

249

134

383

460

64

158,9

21

300,0

04

00

0

Gle

norc

hy

251

38

289

216

18

159,9

00

298,1

36

110,2

72

270,3

03

115,4

13

Hobart

290

0290

60

6234,1

25

373,3

61

9,3

37,0

00

6,4

67,0

00

989,0

00

Launcesto

n365

139

504

0235

235

226,1

64

382,1

41

4,3

13,8

42

3,1

06,1

11

232,5

79

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n67

67

134

033

33

48,7

75

61,2

48

00

0

Burn

ie135

149

284

050

50

91,9

13

166,6

30

1,6

17,5

89

866,6

83

59,5

50

Centr

al C

oast

128

414

542

1133

134

112,8

61

172,6

94

27,4

07

56,6

20

52,4

57

Derw

ent

Valle

y32

65

97

4229

233

28,6

92

54,0

56

00

0

Devo

nport

155

72

227

014

14

85,1

42

179,1

36

1,5

65,6

91

971,6

57

57,7

02

Huon V

alle

y24

134

158

10

599

609

36,8

04

89,3

31

NA

NA

NA

Kin

gboro

ugh

124

134

258

0270

270

202,3

85

351,8

45

00

0

Meander

Valle

y110

482

592

6247

253

129,2

34

166,1

76

00

0

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

101

465

566

14

399

413

96,8

08

140,6

30

00

0

Sore

ll73

70

143

38

210

248

53,1

25

98,4

46

00

0

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

71

196

267

3258

261

34,5

36

60,9

59

04,5

36

5,2

64

West

Tam

ar

84

204

288

5165

170

99,7

04

134,4

62

NA

NA

NA

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

89

123

212

27

307

334

50,5

68

73,9

35

00

0

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

16

79

95

2655

657

84,3

60

153,7

00

NA

NA

NA

Circula

r H

ead

51

242

293

1473

474

38,7

98

65,3

98

00

0

Dors

et

46

199

245

9485

494

50,4

15

117,0

41

00

0

Flin

ders

667

73

3309

312

28,0

02

57,3

72

NA

NA

NA

Georg

e T

ow

n68

104

172

398

101

44,0

60

60,6

42

00

0

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

71

78

149

149

16

165

24,7

49

34,4

31

00

0

Kentish

47

192

239

1220

221

28,1

28

63,6

50

00

0

Kin

g Isla

nd

11

36

47

6478

484

36,8

24

59,8

39

NA

NA

NA

Latr

obe

65

160

225

161

62

26,1

93

52,2

88

027,7

49

20,6

33

South

ern

Mid

lands

30

147

177

13

613

626

58,6

60

106,5

31

00

0

Tasm

an

654

60

2145

147

6,5

29

15,0

15

NA

NA

NA

West

Coast

67

15

82

17

76

93

22,2

34

37,7

43

24,0

96

10,7

12

495

To

tal

2,8

32

4,2

59

7,0

91

327

6,8

53

7,1

80

2,2

98,6

10

3,9

26,8

41

16,9

95,8

97

11,7

81,3

71

1,5

33,0

93

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Da

ta P

rov

ide

d b

y

Lo

ca

l G

ov

ern

me

nt

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r 2

00

6-2

00

7

Km

s$'0

00

$'0

00

Repla

cem

ent

Valu

e o

f R

oads

On

an

d O

ff S

tre

et

Park

ing

Op

era

tio

ns

$$

$

Revenue f

rom

Park

ing

Opera

tions

Opera

ting

Expenses o

f Park

ing

Opera

tions (

not

Incl D

epn)

Depre

cia

tion a

nd

Am

ort

isatio

n o

f Park

ing

Infr

astr

uctu

re

Ro

ad

s, Fo

otp

ath

s a

nd

Tra

ffic

(Exclu

din

g P

ark

ing

Op

era

tio

ns

) C

on

t.

Tota

l Kilo

metr

es

of

Council

Managed

Unseale

d R

oad

Km

sK

ms

Tota

l Kilo

metr

es

of

Council

Managed U

rban

Seale

d R

oad

Written D

ow

n

Valu

e o

f R

oads

Tota

l Kilo

metr

es

of

Council

Managed R

ura

l S

eale

d R

oad

Km

sK

ms

Tota

l Kilo

metr

es

of

Council

Managed R

ura

l U

nseale

d R

oad

Tota

l Kilo

metr

es

of

Council

Managed S

eale

d

Road

Tota

l Kilo

metr

es

of

Council

Managed U

rban

Unseale

d R

oad

Km

s

Page 95: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

89

No.

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

598

604

232

405

08,5

85,0

00

NA

19,3

29

1142,0

76

416,7

68

337,3

21

Gle

norc

hy

153

155

206

493

73

11,4

73,7

83

UA

21,7

93

1216,0

00

721,7

16

271,0

00

Hobart

765

765

147

460

74

10,4

51,8

19

10,4

51,8

19

22,7

49

3351,5

58

922,6

43

290,1

55

Launcesto

n381

384

141

531

09,7

01,3

54

7,4

95,0

73

25,8

00

40

31

26,7

93

293,2

06

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

s

Brighto

n159

165

80

202

01,9

35,7

59

1,7

78,5

00

5,7

32

131,8

99

54,8

41

44,5

48

Burn

ie368

368

16

199

03,0

01,0

00

UA

8,2

50

10

97,9

04

525,3

00

Centr

al C

oast

598

599

29

193

04,2

91,6

16

NA

7,6

69

10

87,1

35

7,7

37

Derw

ent

Valle

y215

215

17

120

78

1,2

75,1

51

UA

2,9

91

10

16,4

40

02,4

83

18,4

46

Devo

nport

94

182

9231

04,6

91,4

54

3,9

49,7

76

11,2

12

10

24

10,3

34

421,4

82

Huon V

alle

y284

290

101

200

88

2,9

00,0

00

UA

4,8

50

97,9

61

11,2

38

22,1

63

Kin

gboro

ugh

323

348

22

306

04,0

54,7

89

UA

10,3

33

10

29,4

12

13,3

86

Meander

Valle

y338

361

12

198

159

2,2

99,5

90

1,8

26,1

19

6,1

51

80

05,5

01

0

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

433

470

UA

178

50

2,3

47,2

58

1,2

35,7

80

5,5

79

90

44,5

56

0

Sore

ll76

78

21

84

0923,7

73

923,7

73

2,2

13

117,0

65

02,3

36

41,1

30

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

451

454

9126

01,8

29,9

52

UA

4,1

36

12,3

04

94,2

71

83,6

99

West

Tam

ar

180

180

254

247

02,6

45,5

14

2,2

39,0

38

7,9

91

10

05,1

74

NA

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

s

Bre

ak O

'Day

95

118

10

152

20

927,6

33

792,3

71

3,3

16

66,8

42

02,5

75

116,0

99

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

95

110

100

52

182

352,4

49

349,9

24

673

60

0565

0

Circula

r H

ead

312

307

054

01,5

72,1

76

1,3

91,9

25

2,1

74

10

01,7

03

970

Dors

et

72

83

5135

158

678,0

00

UA

3,1

17

10

37,6

86

02,0

34

59,1

74

Flin

ders

37

37

521

120

322,0

00

322,0

00

365

20

00

0

Georg

e T

ow

n24

24

41

70

0737,2

63

549,5

43

2,5

64

26,7

81

02,2

01

46,2

49

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

49

214

85

126

365

895,0

00

581,0

00

3,6

16

542,1

57

02,7

69

78,0

94

Kentish

29

29

17

38

0371,4

53

370,0

00

1,1

18

00

0910

1,9

76

Kin

g Isla

nd

67

67

218

90

136,4

94

60,6

64

527

20

0482

8,3

36

Latr

obe

337

344

9119

01,2

93,4

87

NA

3,6

58

10

13,1

90

45,3

74

South

ern

Mid

lands

36

37

17

102

130

764,5

00

564,7

81

1,3

97

430,4

42

0854

18,4

85

Tasm

an

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

0N

A

West

Coast

299

305

112

88

01,6

00,0

00

UA

3,5

60

736,5

90

03,4

32

85,5

21

To

tal

6,8

68

7,2

93

1,6

99

5,1

48

1,5

87

82,0

58,2

67

34,8

82,0

86

192,8

63

945,8

01

945,8

01

114

173,8

20

2,8

29,8

51

No.

No.

No.

$N

o.

No.

Tota

l Num

ber

of

Wate

r S

chem

es

Km

Days

Kl

Kl

Tota

l Num

ber

of

Report

ed

Bre

aks

in

Wate

r S

yste

m

Tota

l Num

ber

of

Kilo

litre

s

Purc

hased /

Pro

duced

Tota

l Num

ber

of

Days

Wate

r R

estr

ictio

ns

During the

Year

Tota

l K

ilom

etr

es o

f R

etic

ula

tion

Num

ber

of

Wate

r Q

ualit

y

Tests

Num

ber

of

Wate

r Q

ualit

y

Tests

Whic

h

Met

Sta

ndard

s

No.

Wa

ter

Se

we

rag

e a

nd

Dra

ina

ge

Inte

rest Paid

on

Sew

era

ge

Infr

astr

uctu

re

Debt

Tota

l Num

ber

of

Sew

era

ge

Connectio

ns

Num

ber

of

Notif

iable

Incid

ents

Inte

rest Paid

on

Wate

r In

frastr

uctu

re

Debt

Tota

l Num

ber

of

Kilo

litre

s

Used

$

Tota

l Num

ber

of

Wate

r C

onnectio

ns

AP

PE

ND

IX 1

Da

ta P

rov

ide

d b

y

Lo

ca

l G

ov

ern

me

nt

Fin

an

cia

l Y

ea

r 2

00

6-2

00

7

Page 96: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

90

APP

END

IX 2

C

ounc

il pr

ofile

info

rmat

ion

E

sti

ma

ted

R

es

ide

nt

Po

pu

lati

on

J

un

e 2

00

6

Are

a

Po

pu

lati

on

D

en

sit

y

No

.0

-14

15

-24

25

-64

65

+k

m2

Pe

rso

ns

/km

2

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

50808

19

13

53

15

377

135

Gle

norc

hy

44179

19

13

51

17

121

365

Hobart

49556

15

19

53

14

78

637

Launcesto

n64620

19

15

51

15

1411

46

Me

diu

m C

ou

ncil

sB

righto

n14329

28

14

52

7171

84

Burn

ie19701

21

13

51

14

610

32

Centr

al C

oast

21259

19

11

52

17

931

23

Derw

ent

Valle

y9692

21

12

54

13

4103

2

Devo

nport

24880

20

12

51

17

111

224

Huon V

alle

y14442

22

11

54

13

5497

3

Kin

gboro

ugh

31706

21

13

53

13

719

44

Meander

Valle

y18938

21

11

54

14

3320

6

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

12505

21

11

53

15

5126

2

Sore

ll12131

21

12

54

13

583

21

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

13815

20

12

52

16

3526

4

West

Tam

ar

21543

21

12

52

15

690

31

Sm

all

Co

un

cil

sB

reak O

'Day

6218

19

856

18

3521

2

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

2316

19

11

57

14

7976

<

1

Circula

r H

ead

8188

23

13

52

12

4891

2

Dors

et

7253

20

12

51

17

3223

2

Flin

ders

881

16

860

17

1994

<

1

Georg

e T

ow

n6744

22

12

53

13

653

10

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

4329

16

757

19

2587

2

Kentish

5965

22

12

55

12

1155

5

Kin

g Isla

nd

1703

17

11

56

16

1094

2

Latr

obe

8888

19

11

54

16

600

15

South

ern

Mid

lands

5845

22

11

55

11

2611

2

Tasm

an

2317

17

760

16

659

4

West

Coast

5171

22

12

55

11

9574

1

Pe

rso

ns

Ag

ed

(%

) a

s a

t J

un

e 2

00

6A

PP

EN

DIX

2:

Co

un

cil

Pro

file

In

form

ati

on

Page 97: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

91

Em

plo

ym

en

t a

s a

t 2

00

6

ce

ns

us

da

ta

Pri

mar

y in

du

stri

es

and

m

anu

fact

uri

ng

Re

tail

and

w

ho

lesa

le

trad

e

Pro

pe

rty

and

b

usi

ne

ss

serv

ice

sE

du

cati

on

He

alth

an

d

com

mu

nit

y se

rvic

es

Oth

er

Nu

mb

er

Cit

ies

Cla

rence

3622

3 4

05

8

421

2

050

3

372

1

374

22244

Gle

norc

hy

3473

3 1

81

6

177

1

031

3

634

436

17932

Hobart

2254

3 0

61

1

0 2

91

2

816

4

173

1

179

23774

Launcesto

n5174

4 8

93

8

608

2

549

4

097

1

550

26871

Me

diu

m C

ou

nci

lsB

righto

n1279

921

1

659

258

728

359

5204

Burn

ie1940

1 3

82

2

334

568

986

465

7675

Centr

al C

oast

2510

1 2

72

2

346

735

1

043

520

8426

Derw

ent

Valle

y1096

475

999

182

649

200

3601

Devo

nport

2567

1 7

29

2

811

749

1

165

526

9547

Huon V

alle

y1900

741

1

442

366

698

332

5479

Kin

gboro

ugh

2543

2 1

35

5

131

1

489

2

288

861

14447

Meander

Valle

y2379

1 3

98

2

260

546

1

085

533

8201

Nort

hern

Mid

lands

1643

834

1

382

313

692

316

5180

Sore

ll1269

794

1

746

304

638

446

5197

Wara

tah -

Wynyard

1613

844

1

403

425

668

330

5283

West

Tam

ar

2086

1 4

39

2

778

928

1

311

555

9097

Sm

all

Co

un

cils

Bre

ak O

'Day

621

269

577

173

227

107

1974

Centr

al H

ighla

nds

432

40

213

41

82

44

852

Circula

r H

ead

1917

461

750

216

232

187

3763

Dors

et

1350

376

638

153

343

26

2886

Flin

ders

181

42

120

33

44

33

453

Georg

e T

ow

n887

289

597

150

265

147

2335

Gla

morg

an -

Spring B

ay

617

207

596

74

139

83

1716

Kentish

800

346

646

123

266

147

2328

Kin

g Isla

nd

508

99

105

47

62

92

913

Latr

obe

1305

536

990

246

470

223

3770

South

ern

Mid

lands

926

331

566

149

265

138

2375

Tasm

an

240

64

262

56

140

53

815

West

Coast

795

160

696

140

144

120

2055

AP

PE

ND

IX 2

: C

ou

nc

il P

rofi

le

Info

rma

tio

n

Em

plo

ye

d P

ers

on

s b

y In

du

str

y a

s a

t 2

00

6 (

ce

ns

us

da

ta)

Page 98: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

92

APPENDIX 3 Classification concordance

Council KPI Classification

ABS Purpose Classification Council Function

Accounting (Not otherwise allocated)

Councillors Expenses (Allowances, meetings, support)

Customer Service (Not otherwise allocated)

Election Costs

General Managers Expenses (Not otherwise allocated)

Human Resources (Not otherwise allocated)

Information Technology (Not otherwise allocated)

LGAT & Regional Organisation (Not otherwise allocated)

Public Relations - Council

Rating (Not otherwise allocated)

Records Management (Not otherwise allocated)

Corporate Services (Not otherwise allocated)

Strategic Planning

Technical Management and Support (Not otherwise allocated)

Fire Protection Services

SES Contributions

Enforcement of By-Laws

Animal and Nuisance Control

Infant Health Services

Immunisation Services

Environmental Health - Inspections and General Services

Flood Protection

Street Cleaning

Stormwater Drainage

Community and Regional Development Biodiversity/Habitat protection

Building Inspections

Statutory Planning - Town Planning and Development Applications

Crematoriums and Cemeteries

Public Conveniences

Drinking Fountains

Public Clocks

Street Furniture

Street Lighting

Assistance Programs for the Disabled

Nursing Homes/Aged Care

Transport services associated with Aged Care

Recreation services for the Aged

Housing Rental Housing for council employees and others

Housing Information Dissemination

Welfare

Child Care

Family Day Care

Public Order, Fire and Safety

Community and Public Health

Other Protection of the Environment / Biodiversity

Community Amenities

Nursing Homes / Aged Care

Welfare

Social and Community Services

Governance Legislative, Executive, Financial and Fiscal Affairs

Community Health and Safety

Community Amenities

Page 99: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

93

Council KPI Classification

ABS Purpose Classification Council Function

Garbage and Refuse Disposal

Garbage Collection

Recycling

Water Production and Purchase

Water Reticulation

Sewerage Reticulation

Sewerage Treatment

Plumbing Inspections

Parks and Reserves

Playgrounds

Swimming Pools

Sports Facilities - Indoor and outdoor

Halls and Civic Centres

Art Galleries

Museums

Theatres

Libraries

Road, Bridge and Street Construction

Road, Bridge and Street Maintenance

Road Design and Research

Road and Highway Extensions

Traffic Lights

On and Off street Parking

Bikeway Maintenance

Roadside Revegetation and Landscaping

Footbridges

Heavy Vehicle Regulations

Noise Attenuation

Safety and Traffic Improvements

Air, Water, Rail Harbour and Airport Facilities

Operation of Rail Transport Facilities

Cable and Wireless Communications

Saleyards and Markets

Development Support and Incentives

Marketing and Promotion - Tourism, Events and CBD

Other

Unallocatable Private Works

Other Economic Affairs

Other Purpose

Cultural Facilities and Services

Road Bridge and Street Infrastructure

Road Plant Parking and Other Road Transport

Transport and Communications

Recreation and Culture

Roads, footpaths and traffic expenses

Other (not elsewhere classified)

Recreation Facilities & Services

Water Systems Water

Sewerage Systems Sewerage

Waste Management Household Garbage / Solid Waste Management

Page 100: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

94

APPENDIX 4 Customer Satisfaction Survey

Local Government Association of Tasmania October 2006

Summary of the Results

This is the third round of research designed to provide a snapshot of the satisfaction residents have with local councils across Tasmania, and to produce a State-wide benchmark against which councils may wish to measure the satisfaction of their residents with respect to the services they provide. It follows surveys conducted in October 2001 and August 2002.

Nine areas of council services were identified, within these areas some 31 distinctive service areas were identified. 1240 Tasmanian residents were interviewed by telephone, selected from all Tasmanian local government areas.

Summary Table 2 - Satisfaction with Council Services in the Nine Service Areas

Service Area Number of Elements

Satisfaction Score %

2001 2002 2006

Customer Service 7 82 83 81

Water and Sewerage 3 77 78 77

Waste Management 4 76 77 76

Community Health and Safety 3 76 74 74

Recreational and Cultural Facilities and Programs

5 71 71 70

Social and Community Services 2 67 68 66

Informing Residents about Council Activities & Decisions

3 63 65 62

Roads, Footpaths and Traffic 3 63 65 60

Planning and Development 1 62 64 58

Average Satisfaction with Council’s Performance*

31 71 72 69

Average satisfaction across Tasmania obtained by aggregating the scores for each of the nine customer service areas fell from 72% in 2002 to 69% in 2006. Scores for each of the areas were marginally lower. This may reflect either lower performance achievements or rising community expectations.

Page 101: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

95

When a single question asking for overall satisfaction with council performance was put towards the end of the survey, the satisfaction level recorded was 72% compared with 74% in 2001.

Areas with the highest level of customer satisfaction were, ’The Standards of Customer Service Provided by Councils‘, ’Water and Sewerage‘, ’Waste Management‘ and ’Community Health and Safety‘. The lowest levels of satisfaction were recorded for, ’Planning and Development‘, ’Informing Council Residents about Council Activities and Decisions‘ and ’Roads, Footpaths and Traffic‘. Once again this replicated the results of earlier surveys. “Roads, Footpaths and Traffic” was identified as the area greatest in need of improvement.

In 2001 residents were also asked about the importance they attached to each service. This information was not sought in the 2002 survey because it is known that importance ratings vary little if at all over a short period of time. The importance scores were obtained in the 2006 survey. They show very little change from the 2001 survey.

Figure 1 – Average Importance and Performance Scores

State-wide results should not be taken as an indication of the overall satisfaction levels in any individual council, or of satisfaction with respect to any particular service.

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

Average Importance and Performance Scores

Importance Satisfaction 2001 Satisfaction 2002 Satisfaction 2006

Page 102: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

96

The full report is available at: http://www.lgat.tas.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/Community_Satisfaction_Survey.pdf

Page 103: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania
Page 104: Measuring Performance Council in · PDF file1 PREFACE The Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Committee is pleased to present the eighth KPI report measuring council performance in Tasmania

CONTACT DETAILS

Local Government DivisionDepartment of Premier and Cabinet

GPO Box 123, Hobart TAS 7001Phone: (03) 6233 6758Email: [email protected]: (03) 6233 5602Visit: www.dpac.tas.gov.au