ordinary meeting of council minutes · 8/22/2017 · ordinary meeting of council minutes 22 august...

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL

MINUTES

22 AUGUST 2017

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL MINUTES 22 AUGUST 2017

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 DECLARATION OF OPENING ............................................................................................... 2

2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY .............................................................................. 2

3 ATTENDANCE ........................................................................................................................... 2

4 RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE ....................... 3

5 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ...................................................................................................... 3

6 APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE ...................................................................... 4

7 PETITIONS, DEPUTATIONS OR PRESENTATIONS ......................................................... 5

CCS278 PETITION – ACCESS WAY ST GEORGES CLOSE .................................................... 5

8 DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: ........................................................... 8

9 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETING – AS

CIRCULATED: ........................................................................................................................... 8

10 ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE CHAIR ................................................................................... 9

11 REPORTS OF DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY SERVICES .................................. 11

DCS337 AMENDED PROPOSAL - LANEWAY EASEMENT 178 – 182 MARINE TERRACE,

GERALDTON ............................................................................................................. 11 DCS340 PROPOSED ROAD DEDICATION AND CLOSURE – MULLEWA ......................... 20 DCS341 FINAL ADOPTION OF THE ‘GERALDTON CITY CENTRE REVITALISATION

PLAN’ LOCAL PLANNING POLICY ........................................................................ 24 DCS342 PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT – OMNIBUS

REZONING ................................................................................................................ 29

12 REPORTS OF CORPORATE & COMMERCIAL SERVICES .......................................... 36

CCS273 APPOINTING AN ACTING MAYOR ......................................................................... 36 CCS274 STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITY TO 31 JULY 2017 ................................... 39 CCS275 DELEGATIONS TO THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER....................................... 42 CCS277 RATES CONCESSIONS 2016-17 MURCHISON REGION ABORIGINAL

CORPORATION ......................................................................................................... 47

13 REPORTS OF INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES ................................................................ 53

IS155 RFT 19 1617 – DESIGN, SUPPLY AND LAY BITUMEN PRODUCTS .................... 53

14 REPORTS OF OFFICE OF THE CEO .................................................................................. 62

15 REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED ............................................................................................... 63

AUGUST - REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED ................................................................................. 63

16 ELECTED MEMBERS MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN

GIVEN ........................................................................................................................................ 65

NOTICE OF MOTION - ABROLHOS TOURISM - COUNCIL POLICY ................................... 65

17 QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN .............. 68

18 URGENT BUSINESS APPROVED BY PRESIDING MEMBER OR BY DECISION OF

THE MEETING ........................................................................................................................ 68

CCS279 APPOINTMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER .............................................. 70

19 CLOSURE ................................................................................................................................. 76

APPENDIX 1 – ATTACHMENTS AND REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED ..................................... 77


2

CITY OF GREATER GERALDTON

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL HELD ON TUESDAY, 22 AUGUST 2017 AT 1.30PM

MULLEWA DISTRICT OFFICE

M I N U T E S DISCLAIMER: The Chairman advises that the purpose of this Council Meeting is to discuss and, where possible, make resolutions about items appearing on the agenda. Whilst Council has the power to resolve such items and may in fact, appear to have done so at the meeting, no person should rely on or act on the basis of such decision or on any advice or information provided by a Member or Officer, or on the content of any discussion occurring, during the course of the meeting. Persons should be aware that the provisions of the Local Government Act 1995 (Section 5.25(e)) and Council’s Meeting Procedures Local Laws establish procedures for revocation or recision of a Council decision. No person should rely on the decisions made by Council until formal advice of the Council decision is received by that person. The City of Greater Geraldton expressly disclaims liability for any loss or damage suffered by any person as a result of relying on or acting on the basis of any resolution of Council, or any advice or information provided by a Member or Officer, or the content of any discussion occurring, during the course of the Council meeting.

1 DECLARATION OF OPENING

The Presiding Member declared the meeting open at 1.29pm.

2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY I would like to respectfully acknowledge the Yamaji people who are the Traditional Owners and First People of the land on which we meet/stand. I would like to pay my respects to the Elders past, present and future for they hold the memories, the traditions, the culture and hopes of Yamaji people.

3 ATTENDANCE

Present: Cr N McIlwaine – Presiding Member Cr G Bylund Cr D J Caudwell Cr N Colliver Cr J Critch Cr S Douglas Cr R D Hall Cr S Keemink Cr M Reymond Cr V Tanti Cr T Thomas Officers: R McKim, A/Chief Executive Officer P Melling, Director of Development & Community Services C Lee, A/Director of Infrastructure Services


3

J Graham, Manager Corporate Services - A/Director of Corporate and Commercial Services S Moulds, PA to the Chief Executive Officer L Pegler, Executive Support Secretary P Kingdon, Coordinator Communications B Pearce, Coordinator Procurement and Risk A Paine, Risk Officer Others: Members of Public: 1 Members of Press: 1 Apologies: Cr L Freer* Noted as an apology until Leave of Absence is approved.

B Davis, Director of Corporate and Commercial Services Leave of Absence: Mayor S Van Styn Cr L Freer

4 RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON

NOTICE Nil.

5 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Questions provided in writing prior to the meeting or at the meeting will receive a formal response. Please note that you cannot make statements in Public Question Time and such statements will not be recorded in the Minutes. Our Local Laws and the Local Government Act require questions to be put to the presiding member and answered by the Council. No questions can be put to individual Councillors. Nil.


4

6 APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Existing Approved Leave

Councillor From To (inclusive)

Mayor S Van Styn 12 August 2017 25 August 2017

Cr N McIlwaine 23 August 2017 2 October 2017

Cr V Tanti 8 September 2017 19 October 2017

Cr R Hall 14 October 2017 1 December 2017 *Note: If Elected Members’ application for leave of absence is for the meeting that the request is submitted, they will be noted as an apology until Council consider the request. The granting of the leave, or refusal to grant the leave and reasons for that refusal, will be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR HALL, SECONDED CR KEEMINK Cr L Freer* requests leave of absence for the period 22 August 2017 to 1 September 2017 inclusive. Cr N Colliver requests leave of absence for the period 6 September 2017 to 14 September 2017 inclusive.

CARRIED 11/0 In accordance with Section 9.3 (2) of the City of Greater Geraldton’s Meeting Procedures Local Law 2011, the motion was passed unopposed.


5

7 PETITIONS, DEPUTATIONS OR PRESENTATIONS

CCS278 PETITION – ACCESS WAY ST GEORGES CLOSE

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-17-60067 AUTHOR: P Bennett, Administration Officer

Corporate Services EXECUTIVE: B Davis, Director Corporate &

Commercial Services DATE OF REPORT: 17 August 2017 FILE REFERENCE: GO/6/0012-05 ATTACHMENTS: Yes – (X1)

Petition

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the receipt of a petition requesting that the City of Greater Geraldton close off the access way at the top (Eastern end) of St Georges Close, Bluff Point. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.20 of the Local Government Act RESOLVES to:

1. RECEIVE the petition requesting closure of the access way at the top (Eastern end) of St Georges Close; and

2. REQUEST the Chief Executive Officer of the City of Greater Geraldton to provide Council with a report on the St Georges Close access way, the subject of the petition, within 60 days.

PROPONENT: The proponent is Mr David Brown as the contact person for the petition. BACKGROUND: A petition has been presented to the Mayor on 31 July 2017 regarding the access way at the top of St Georges Close, Bluff Point. Petitioners being the residents of St Georges Close and the Bluff Point Estate request that the City of Greater Geraldton closes off the access way at the top of St Georges Close in the interest of the security and safety of all residents living in the area and that swift action be taken to return the fence line to a completely closed status. The petition provides the following reasons for the request:

The access way had previously been closed off and the effect on house break-ins, vehicle break-ins, suspicious night time activity, cars coming and going at all hours, foot traffic, scooters, motorbikes and the lesser need for Police patrols had been remarkable.

However with the re-opening of the access way, residents and again concerned about possible house break-ins, vehicle break-ins, anti social behaviour and the ease of access for motorbikes and scooters


6

which will become a safety hazard to the numerous children that live in the area – not to mention the noise factor of motorbikes travelling up the street at all hours of the day and night.

In recent weeks there have again been a number of break ins and intruders in back yards along with people banging on household doors at all hours of the night.

Police patrols have also increased markedly.

It is our understanding that the access way is not a gazetted public thoroughfare and in saying this we would request that swift action be taken to return the fence line to a completely closed status.

ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES:

Economic: There are no economic impacts.

Social: There are no social impacts.

Environmental: There are no environmental impacts.

Cultural & Heritage: There are no cultural or heritage impacts.

RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: Council have previously received petitions – most recently CCS242 28 March 2017. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: The petition is signed by 76 people. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Section 5.10 of the City of Greater Geraldton Meeting Procedures Local Law 2011 details the requirements for dealing with petitions.

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial or resources implications.

INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:

Title: Governance Community Engagement

Strategy 4.1.1 Continuing to engage broadly and proactively with the community

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: There are no impacts to regional outcomes.

RISK MANAGEMENT: Risk is minimised if the City follows the process outlined in the Meeting Procedures Local Law 2011.


7

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED BY CITY OFFICERS: No alternative options have been considered, this petition meets the criteria as stipulated in the Meeting Procedures Local Law 2011. COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR HALL, SECONDED CR KEEMINK That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.20 of the Local Government Act RESOLVES to:

1. RECEIVE the petition requesting closure of the access way at the top (Eastern end) of St Georges Close; and

2. REQUEST the Chief Executive Officer of the City of Greater Geraldton to provide Council with a report on the St Georges Close access way, the subject of the petition, within 60 days.



8

8 DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Cr N Colliver has declared a Financial Indirect Proximity Interest in item DCS337 Amended Proposal – Laneway Easement 178 – 182 Marine Terrace, Geraldton as she is Acting Chair of Pollinators which is a tenant of 1484 Marine Terrace which is owned by one of the proponents. Cr S Douglas declared an impartiality interest in item CCS279 Appointment of Chief Executive Officer, as he worked with one or more of the candidates.

9 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETING – as circulated: RECOMMENDED that the minutes of the Ordinary meeting of Council held on 25 August 2017 as previously circulated, be adopted as a true and correct record of proceedings. COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR BYLUND, SECONDED CR HALL RECOMMENDED that the minutes of the Ordinary meeting of Council held on 25 August 2017 as previously circulated, be adopted as a true and correct record of proceedings.



9

10 ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE CHAIR Events attended by the Mayor or his representative

DATE FUNCTION REPRESENTATIVE

26 July 2017 ABC Radio Interview – Council update Mayor Shane Van Styn

26 July 2017 Spirit Radio Interview – Council update Mayor Shane Van Styn

26 July 2017 GWN Interview – Coastal Erosion Mayor Shane Van Styn

26 July 2017 Community Information Session: Beresford Foreshore Preliminary Landscape and Amenities

Mayor Shane Van Styn

26 July 2017 Announcement of Abrolhos Islands being listed as a Mission Blue Hope Spot


26 July 2017 ACT Midwest 2017 Awards Night Deputy Mayor, Cr Neil McIlwaine

27 July 2017 Introduction of Matt Pickford – Megara to MWCCI and Mid West Development Commission


27 July 2017 GWN Interview - Roads Funding Cuts Mayor Shane Van Styn

28 July 2017 Ex-Victoria District Hospital Staff Association - View of Collection


28 July 2017 Citizenship Ceremony Mayor Shane Van Styn

28 July 2017 GWN Interview – Extended Trading Hours Mayor Shane Van Styn

30 July 2017 MC / Address and Presentations: Chevron City to Surf for Activ


30 July 2017 Art Drive Launch Mayor Shane Van Styn

30 July 2017 11th Battalion Living History Unit - Consecration of the Memorial at the Gallipoli Trench Project (Leane's Trench)

Cr Bob Hall

31 July 2017 Regular Catch up - Mayor and A/CEO Mayor Shane Van Styn

31 July 2017 Regular Catch up - Marketing & Media Mayor Shane Van Styn

31 July 2017 Senior Bowls at the QEII Centre Mayor Shane Van Styn

1 August 2017 WA Regional Capitals Alliance Meeting – by phone


1 August 2017 Photo Opportunity: Opening of Derna Park Toilet Block


1 August 2017 CEO Performance Review Committee – briefing with Lester Blades


1 August 2017 Concept Forum Mayor Shane Van Styn

2 August 2017 C Calitz – Matters relating to Local Government


2 August 2017 Photo Opportunity: CGG & PCYC WA Collaboration Award Winners


2 August 2017 Arc Infrastructure Lunch (formerly Brookfield Rail)


2 August 2017 David Mearns Book Launch Cr Bob Hall

3 August 2017 WALGA Presentation to City of Greater Geraldton: Utilisation Award – VendorPanel User Group 2017

Deputy Mayor Neil McIlwaine

4 August 2017 Meet and Greet Visiting Group from China Cr Bob Hall

4 August 2017 Art Gallery Opening of Exhibition: Yagu Gurlbarl (Big Secret) and People Like Us at the Geraldton Regional Art Gallery

Cr Simon Keemink

7 August 2017 Guardian Photo: Geraldton Airport Mayor Shane Van Styn

7 August 2017 Regular Catch up - Mayor and A/CEO Mayor Shane Van Styn

7 August 2017 Regular Catch up - Marketing & Media Mayor Shane Van Styn

7 August 2017 CEO Performance Review Committee Mayor Shane Van Styn


10

7 August 2017 Regular meeting with Local Member Mr Ian Blayney MLA


8 August 2017 Cr N McIlwaine handover meeting Mayor Shane Van Styn

8 August 2017 ABC Interview – Airport Mayor Shane Van Styn

8 August 2017 Creating a world leading innovation TECH precinct in Geraldton | option for BCM2 Discussion


8 August 2017 A Short – Matters of Local Government Mayor Shane Van Styn

8 August 2017 Mission Blue Steering Committee Mayor Shane Van Styn

8 August 2017 Workshop with Councillors : Delegations to the CEO

9 August 2017 CEO Performance Review Committee Mayor Shane Van Styn

10 August 2017 Meet and Greet - Bank of Queensland Executives from Brisbane

Deputy Mayor Cr Neil McIlwaine

10 August 2017 30th Anniversary Dinner - Sister State Relationship between the State of WA & Zhejiang Province People's Republic of China - Perth


11 August 2017 Cities Reference Group Meeting - Canberra Mayor Shane Van Styn

11 August 2017 Photo Opportunity: QE2 Centre's Knitters Group Donation to King Edward Memorial Hospital

Cr Bob Hall

12 August 2017 Meet and Greet - immerging educational tourism opportunities

Deputy Mayor Cr Neil McIlwaine

13 August 2017 Radio Mamma Interview – Council update Deputy Mayor Cr Neil McIlwaine

15 August 2017 CEO Performance Review Committee Deputy Mayor Cr Neil McIlwaine

15 August 2017 Agenda Forum Deputy Mayor Cr Neil McIlwaine

16 August 2017 Opening of new Woolworths Seacrest store Deputy Mayor Cr Neil McIlwaine

18 August 2017 Citizenship Ceremony Deputy Mayor Cr Neil McIlwaine

19 August 2017 Annual Dinner 2017 - Birdwood House - The Returned Services League of Australia

Cr Bob Hall

20 August 2017 Lighthouse Open Day Deputy Mayor Cr Neil McIlwaine

22 August 2017 Ordinary Meeting of Council – Mullewa Deputy Mayor Cr Neil McIlwaine


11

11 REPORTS OF DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

DCS337 AMENDED PROPOSAL - LANEWAY EASEMENT 178 – 182 MARINE TERRACE, GERALDTON

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-17-50744 AUTHOR: P Melling, Director Development and

Community Services EXECUTIVE: P Melling, Director Development and

Community Services DATE OF REPORT: 10 August 2017 FILE REFERENCE: A11481 ATTACHMENTS: Yes x 3

A. Extract – City Centre Planning Policy B. Laneway Perspective C. Proposed Laneway Easement and Gate

Layout Plan

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: An amended proposal has been received relating to the City gaining an access right for creation of a public “laneway” through the former Lotteries House site on Lot 123 (No.178-182) Marine Terrace. The proposal would give public pedestrian access via the easement through the lot between the hours of 6am and 11pm, seven days a week. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION:

PART A: That Council by 1/3rd Majority pursuant to Section 5.25 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 10 of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 RESOLVES to CONSIDER to RESCIND Part B, Points 1 & 5 of the Council Decision made at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 20 December 2016:

Part B 1. SUBJECT to the applicant satisfactorily completing an easement in

gross in favour of the City (with the easement in place), the City agrees to contribute up to $100,000 for the upgrade of the laneway area only on Lot 123, Marine Terrace, Geraldton to City specifications and standards for pedestrian and vehicular access between Marine Terrace and Foreshore Drive;

5. ADVISE the applicant that gating the laneway at night is not supported.


12

PART B: That Council by Absolute Majority pursuant to Section 5.25 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 10 of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 RESOLVES to RESCIND Part B, Points 1 & 5 of the Council Decision made at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 20 December 2016:


gross in favour of the City (with the easement in place), the City agrees to contribute up to $100,000 for the upgrade of the laneway area only on Lot 123, Marine Terrace, Geraldton to City specifications and standards for pedestrian and vehicular access between Marine Terrace and Foreshore Drive; and


PART C: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.20 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 10 of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 RESOLVES to:

1. ENTER into an Easement in Gross in favour of the City for a 3 metre wide and 5 metre high area between Marine Terrace and Foreshore Drive on Lot 123 (178-182) Marine Terrace, Geraldton, to City specifications and standards for public access between 6am - 11pm, 7 days a week. The fencing and gates to generally be located as depicted on proposed Laneway Easement and Gate Layout Plan as per Attachment No. DCS337C. All ongoing maintenance/ upgrade costs to the pedestrian area, (the subject of the Easement in Gross) to be at the cost of the landowner;

2. OBTAIN an Access Easement for access from Marine Terrace to the switchboard located on the building on Lot 123 in favour of the City (for maintenance purposes to the City’s street lighting power supply switchboard); and

3. AGREES to contribute $100,000 for the easements/ public access rights as defined in 1 & 2 above subject to the deed and those easements being in place on the title of Lot 123 (178-182) Marine Terrace, Geraldton before the payment will be made.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the Landowner of Lot123, 178-182 Marine Tce, Geraldton BACKGROUND: Council at its meeting on 20 December 2016 considered both a Rates Concession and the proposed laneway and resolved as follows: Part A

1. APPROVE the waiver of City of Greater Geraldton planning and building fees and charges for refurbishment of the former Lotteries


13

House located at Lot 123 (No. 178-182) Marine Terrace, Geraldton; and

2. APPROVE a waiver of rates for the refurbishment of the former Lotteries House located at Lot 123 (No. 178-182) Marine Terrace, Geraldton for a period of three years;


gross in favour of the City (with the easement in place), the City agrees to contribute up to $100,000 for the upgrade of the laneway area only on Lot 123, Marine Terrace, Geraldton to City specifications and standards for pedestrian and vehicular access between Marine Terrace and Foreshore Drive;

2. ADVISE the property owner of Lot 123 Marine Terrace, Geraldton that they need to resolve the land tenure issue with Western Power for the power transformer (assumed to have been gifted to Western Power) at no cost to the City;

3. PROVIDES a drainage easement through the site in favour of the City for the existing drainage pipe;

4. SUBMIT the costed laneway upgrade project to Council for consideration as part of the Mid Year Budget Review process; and


The amended proposal submitted by the CBD Property Trust and also subsequent negotiations comprises of the following elements:

1. The CBD Property Trust grant to CGG an Easement in Gross 3 metres wide and 5 metres minimum height limit for purposes of public pedestrian access between the hours of 6am-11pm, 7 days a week.

2. The CGG, in exchange for this easement right for public access grant $100,000 for improvements on the laneway area, not limited to the easement area specifically but to be spent only on the general public access areas. The spend to be as per the listed schedule with payment to be made to CBD Property Trust upon receipt of supplier invoices and associated payment confirmation from CBD Property Trust. Payments to only be made for items on the listed schedule up to a total of $100,000, with any spend on the laneway area over this amount to be met by CBD Property Trust with no liability accepted by Council. It is accepted that costs shown on the schedule may vary however, the total CGG contribution will remain capped and is only to be used towards items on the schedule.

3. The CGG resolves to rescind the previous motion in relation to the gates and moves as follows that the CGG have no objections to gates being installed to secure the laneway outside of the easement times, however steps must be taken to ensure the laneway is publicly accessible at all times that the access is granted by the easement.

4. The CGG staff have the means to unlock/open said gates should any timer or other opening system fail to ensure the gates are open between the hours shown in the easement. Further to this the $100,000 granted to CBD Property Trust must not be used for the installation or supply of


14

the gates and any costs related to the gates will be met in full by CBD Property Trust.

The City’s funding of $100,000 is for the formal granting of public pedestrian access rights via an easement agreement through the site between Marine Terrace and Foreshore Drive. It is noted that several adopted City Centre documents have identified the need to create additional pedestrian links between Marine Terrace and Foreshore Drive including specifically highlighting through Lot 123. If Council were to consider outright purchase of a 3 metre wide access through Lot 123 it would cost at least $100-140,000 in land acquisition and then the cost of construction at $80,000 (and ongoing maintenance). This costing of $80,000 covers only the key components like paving, drainage bollards etc. Council’s original resolution proposed a contribution of up to $100,000 (at that time without having more detailed costings) and this is what the applicant is still seeking as the works proposed are costing significantly more to further enhance the area. This will make the laneway and surrounds an attractive destination in its own right. The attached schematic plans feature the intended design (nearing completion) and the total cost has been estimated at $220,000 and includes shade sails, public art and planter boxes / garden installations. The City’s Executive have considered the amended proposal and there is significant merit in gaining pedestrian access through Lot 123 as recognised in City policies, also achieving an early win for the City Vibrancy project. In addition, the applicants are also amenable to:

a) The Easement in Gross also provides for a new easement for a City drainage pipe that traverses the site (the current easement not reflecting the actual location of the pipe nor its possible access requirements for repairs). The easements for the pipe and pedestrian access are now being collocated within the same three metre wide corridor centred on the drainage pipe location.

b) An easement for City personnel to access the electrical switchboard onsite that supplies power to the City’s streetlights.

It also needs to be noted that any proposal for gating the property will need a separate Development Application which would be determined according to the Council decision (should it be forthcoming) and in accordance with Council’s policies and delegation. The laneway perspective is attached as Attachment No. DCS337B.


15

ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: Revitalisation of the City Centre is a key outcome identified in the Growing Greater Geraldton Plan and in the draft Geraldton City Centre Revitalisation Plan Local Planning Policy. Social: There are benefits to the creation of better linkages in the City Centre that create vibrant spaces that can be activated for events and accessibility. Environmental: There are no known environmental impacts. Cultural & Heritage: This section of Marine Terrace is becoming a creative hub and the laneway has already been utilised for events such as markets and entertainment space. It links heritage buildings in Marine Terrace with the foreshore. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: There are no known relevant precedents. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: Consultation has occurred via a Councillor briefing at the August 1 2017 Concept Forum, Executive Management Team, Manager Urban & Regional Development. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The draft “Geraldton City Centre Revitalisation Plan Local Planning Policy” advises:

“Greater connectivity between the city centre and the foreshore was highlighted as a key priority through the engagement process. Ensuring connections to the foreshore are maintained, as clear view paths and are free of clutter, will reinforce these connections visually. Creating mid-block connections between Marine Terrace and the foreshore will enable more access between the city centre the foreshore, and enable pedestrians to easily enjoy what both places have to offer. Creating open air corridors and active uses along these connections will incentivise pedestrian movement through these spaces, and increase their interest and activity”.

This is reinforced in the Revitalisation Plan Strategies Reference IF7 “Create mid-block connections via existing lanes between Foreshore Drive and Marine Terrace (through open air arcades or similar).”

The adopted City Centre Planning Policy (Pages 35-38 Attachment No. DCS337A) provides policy guidance for the creation of these links (including the provision of a link at this location).


16

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: The cost for the preparation / Execution of the Easement in Gross Deed and the contribution requested would be approximately $102,000. Funding would be from within the existing adopted 2017-18 budget. It is noted that there is no “compensation” element to the applicant for the proposed “Easement in Gross” proposed and the City in generic terms based its calculations on a 3 metre wide access way through the property that would equate to a gross area of 150m2. In terms of land costs, the site was purchased for an average value of $945 per square metre. If the City considered an alternate option to purchase the land for the access, costs potentially for the land alone could be $100,000 - $140,000+. It is noted that the City has worked proactively with the applicants and in fact a component was that the City’s street lighting switchboard was part of the switchboard and meter of the applicants power supply. The City was faced with the option of relocating the switchboard etc. and the only available location in close proximity to the site was in the Marine Terrace median island. This option aesthetically would have also impacted on Marine Terrace and came at a cost estimated initially at over $50,000. As a result of the above the City negotiated to separate the system from the applicants supply, but still located on the property at a supply cost of $20,000. It was found during that process that there was additional Western Power charges incurred above the initial $20,000 price. The additional costs would also have applied to an alternate site increasing its cost potentially over $60,000. The applicants have also agreed to grant the City access rights to the switchboard (something the City did not have before). INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:

Title: Economy 3.1 Growth

Strategy 3.1.1 Promoting Greater Geraldton and its potential business opportunities to facilitate targeted economic development

Strategy 3.1.2 Fostering a community where local business is supported

Strategy 3.1.3 Developing and maintaining infrastructure that increases the potential for business and investment

Strategy 3.1.4 Supporting and facilitating implementation of the Growing Greater Geraldton plan.

Title: Economy 3.2 Lifestyle and Vibrancy

Strategy 3.2.3 Revitalising the CBD through economic, social and cultural vibrancy

Title: Governance 4.1 Community Engagement


Strategy 4.1.2 Responding to community aspirations by providing planning and zoning for future development

Title: Governance 4.4 Financial Sustainability and Performance


17

Strategy 4.4.3 Delivering and ensuring business systems and services support cost effective Council operations and service delivery

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: A revitalised City Centre has got the potential to be an economic stimulant to the region, offering improved business, tourism and lifestyle opportunities. RISK MANAGEMENT: With the City gaining control of the access way via an Easement in Gross it can manage the maintenance of the laneway without reliance on a third party. Insurance of the area will need to be worked through with the City’s insurers. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED BY CITY OFFICERS: The following options were considered by City Officers: The City could refuse the request and not achieve public access through Lot 123 Marine Terrace as identified in City Policy documents but could work with other landowners to achieve alternate access options at the time of those sites being redeveloped. Alternatively, the City could work through the compulsory acquisition process at a cost substantially more to both acquire and then construct an access. It is noted that this could then be long and drawn out via possible Court processes (if challenged). The Executive Recommendation gives a positive outcome for all parties including the general public at a time when the City is promoting its City Centre revitalisation objectives. Cr N Colliver has declared a Financial Indirect Proximity Interest in item DCS337 Amended Proposal – Laneway Easement 178 – 182 Marine Terrace, Geraldton as she is Acting Chair of Pollinators which is a tenant of 1484 Marine Terrace which is owned by one of the proponents and remained in Chambers . COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR DOUGLAS, SECONDED CR TANTI PART A: That Council by 1/3rd Majority pursuant to Section 5.25 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 10 of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 RESOLVES to CONSIDER to RESCIND Part B, Points 1 & 5 of the Council Decision made at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 20 December 2016:

Part B 1. SUBJECT to the applicant satisfactorily completing an easement

in gross in favour of the City (with the easement in place), the City agrees to contribute up to $100,000 for the upgrade of the laneway area only on Lot 123, Marine Terrace, Geraldton to City


18

specifications and standards for pedestrian and vehicular access between Marine Terrace and Foreshore Drive;


CARRIED BY 1/3RD MAJORITY 9/2

Mayor Van Styn N/V

Cr. Douglas YES

Cr. Bylund NO

Cr. Keemink YES

Cr. Hall YES

Cr. Critch YES

Cr. Tanti YES

Cr. Reymond YES

Cr. McIlwaine YES

Cr. Freer N/V

Cr. Colliver YES

Cr. Caudwell NO

Cr. Thomas YES

COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR DOUGLAS, SECONDED CR KEEMINK That Council by Absolute Majority pursuant to Section 5.25 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 10 of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 RESOLVES to RESCIND Part B, Points 1 & 5 of the Council Decision made at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 20 December 2016:


gross in favour of the City (with the easement in place), the City agrees to contribute up to $100,000 for the upgrade of the laneway area only on Lot 123, Marine Terrace, Geraldton to City specifications and standards for pedestrian and vehicular access between Marine Terrace and Foreshore Drive; and


CARRIED BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY 9/2

Mayor Van Styn N/V

Cr. Douglas YES

Cr. Bylund NO

Cr. Keemink YES

Cr. Hall YES

Cr. Critch YES

Cr. Tanti YES


19

Cr. Reymond YES

Cr. McIlwaine YES

Cr. Freer N/V

Cr. Colliver YES

Cr. Caudwell NO

Cr. Thomas YES

COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR DOUGLAS, SECONDED CR HALL PART C: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.20 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 10 of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 RESOLVES to:

1. ENTER into an Easement in Gross in favour of the City for a 3 metre wide and 5 metre high area between Marine Terrace and Foreshore Drive on Lot 123 (178-182) Marine Terrace, Geraldton, to City specifications and standards for public access between 6am - 11pm, 7 days a week. The fencing and gates to generally be located as depicted on proposed Laneway Easement and Gate Layout Plan as per Attachment No. DCS337C. All ongoing maintenance/ upgrade costs to the pedestrian area, (the subject of the Easement in Gross) to be at the cost of the landowner;

2. OBTAIN an Access Easement for access from Marine Terrace to the switchboard located on the building on Lot 123 in favour of the City (for maintenance purposes to the City’s street lighting power supply switchboard); and

3. AGREES to contribute $100,000 for the easements/ public access rights as defined in 1 & 2 above subject to the deed and those easements being in place on the title of Lot 123 (178-182) Marine Terrace, Geraldton before the payment will be made.

CARRIED 9/2

Mayor Van Styn N/V

Cr. Douglas YES

Cr. Bylund NO

Cr. Keemink YES

Cr. Hall YES

Cr. Critch YES

Cr. Tanti YES

Cr. Reymond YES

Cr. McIlwaine YES

Cr. Freer N/V

Cr. Colliver YES

Cr. Caudwell NO

Cr. Thomas YES


20

DCS340 PROPOSED ROAD DEDICATION AND CLOSURE – MULLEWA

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-17-57167 AUTHOR: M Connell, Manager Urban & Regional

Development EXECUTIVE: P Melling, Director Development &

Community Services DATE OF REPORT: 2 August 2017 FILE REFERENCE: SD/2/0003 ATTACHMENTS: Yes (x2)

A. Road Closure Aerial Plan B. Deposited Plan 403047

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: There are a number of land tenure ‘irregularities’ regarding portions of the Mullewa sewerage system that need to be resolved and one of these is for a road dedication and closure. The advertising period has concluded for the closure of a portion of the Carnarvon – Mullewa Road and Stock Street, Mullewa. This report recommends the dedication of land as public road and support of the road closure. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Sections 56 and 58 of the Land Administration Act 1997 RESOLVES to:

1. REQUEST the Minister for Planning, Lands and Heritage to dedicate Lots 382, 383, 384, 385 and 394 as a public road as shown on Deposited Plan 403047;

2. REQUEST the Minister for Planning, Lands and Heritage to close a portion of the Carnarvon – Mullewa Road and Stock Street, shown as Lot 381 on Deposited Plan 403047; and

3. INDEMNIFY the Minister for Planning, Lands and Heritage against any claim for compensation.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: Whilst addressing a land tenure issue in respect to an upgrade to part of the Mullewa sewerage system in 2013 a number of other land tenure irregularities were identified for other parts of the Mullewa sewerage system. Certain sections of the system including the evaporation pond to the north of Mullewa are located on Crown Land. In 1974, the [then] Department of Public Works, constructed the Mullewa Effluent Scheme on portion of unvested Reserve 2301. The ownership of the system was given to the former Shire of Mullewa some time later.


21

It was also identified that parts of Warren Road and the Carnarvon – Mullewa Road are also located on Crown Land. A review of the Mullewa Shire records shows that the Shire Council was aware of this and resolved at its meeting held on 16 May 2001 to dedicate the roads as per Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage (DoPLH) advice they had received. However, other than the Council resolution, the formal process of road dedication and closure was never undertaken by the Shire. City officers have been liaising with the DoPLH and a Deposited Plan 403047 has been created that proposes to:

1. Create a new reserve over proposed Lot 391 for the purpose of protecting the existing sewer filtration pond;

2. Create a new reserve over proposed Lot 387 for the purpose of a pumping station;

3. Dedicate the following proposed Lots as public roads:

Lot 382 (to become part of Bowtell Street);

Lot 383 (to become part of Jose Street);

Lots 384 and 385 (to become part of Warren Road); and

Lot 394 (to become part of the Carnarvon – Mullewa Road. 4. Close Lot 381 (which is the southern portion of the Carnarvon –

Mullewa Road and the northern portion of Stock Street) which will then in turn be amalgamated with the adjoining crown land (proposed Lots 388 and 389).

It is important to note that a Council resolution is only needed in relation to points 3 and 4 above. A road closure aerial plan and the Deposited Plan 403047 are included as Attachment No’s. DCS340A and DCS340B. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: There are no economic issues. Social: There are no social issues. Environmental: There are no environmental issues. Cultural: There are no cultural issues. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: The (former) Shire of Mullewa resolved at its meeting held on 16 May 2001 to dedicate the roads as per the [then] Department of Lands advice they had received at that time.


22

The author is not aware of any relevant precedents. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: The proposed closure was publicly advertised in accordance with the provisions of the Land Administration Act 1997. The advertising period was for 39 days (commencing on Friday 16 June 2017 and concluding on Monday 24 July 2017) and involved the following:

1. A notice appeared in the Geraldton Guardian on 16 June 2017; 2. The closure was publicly displayed at the Civic Centre; 3. The closure was publicly advertised on the City’s website; and 4. The closure was referred to the following:

ATCO Gas Australia;

Western Power;

Telstra;

Water Corporation;

Main Roads WA;

Dept. of Fire & Emergency Services; and

Dept. of Planning. Submissions: As a result of advertising a total of 5 submissions were received (all from servicing authorities with no objection). Copies of the actual submissions are available to Council upon request. There has been no Councillor consultation. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Sections 56 and 58 of the Land Administration Act 1997 provides for the dedication and closure of public roads. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial and resource implications. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:

Title: Governance 4.2 Planning and Policy

Strategy 4.2.2

Responding to community aspirations by providing planning and zoning for future development.

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: There are no regional outcomes. RISK MANAGEMENT: There are no inherent risks with the road dedication and closure.


23

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED BY CITY OCRITFFICERS: There are a number of land tenure ‘irregularities’ regarding portions of the Mullewa sewerage system that need to be resolved. Certain sections of the system including the evaporation pond to the north of Mullewa are located on Crown Land and parts of Warren Road and the Carnarvon – Mullewa Road are located on Crown Land. The option to refuse is therefore not supported. The option to defer is not supported as there is considered sufficient information for Council to determine the matter.

COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR CRITCH, SECONDED CR HALL That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Sections 56 and 58 of the Land Administration Act 1997 RESOLVES to:

1. REQUEST the Minister for Planning, Lands and Heritage to dedicate Lots 382, 383, 384, 385 and 394 as a public road as shown on Deposited Plan 403047;

2. REQUEST the Minister for Planning, Lands and Heritage to close a portion of the Carnarvon – Mullewa Road and Stock Street, shown as Lot 381 on Deposited Plan 403047; and

3. INDEMNIFY the Minister for Planning, Lands and Heritage against any claim for compensation.

CARRIED 11/0

In accordance with Section 9.3 (2) of the City of Greater Geraldton’s Meeting Procedures Local Law 2011, the motion was passed unopposed.


24

DCS341 FINAL ADOPTION OF THE ‘GERALDTON CITY CENTRE REVITALISATION PLAN’ LOCAL PLANNING POLICY

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-17-57413 AUTHOR: M Connell, Manager Urban & Regional

Development EXECUTIVE: P Melling, Director Development &

Community Services DATE OF REPORT: 2 August 2017 FILE REFERENCE: LP/8/0001 ATTACHMENTS: Yes (x2)

A. Schedule of Submissions B. Geraldton City Centre Revitalisation

Plan local planning policy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The advertising period has concluded for the draft policy with 4 submissions being received. This report recommends final adoption of the policy with no modifications. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 2, clause 4 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, RESOLVES to:

1. ADOPT for final approval the ‘Geraldton City Centre Revitalisation Plan’ (Version 1) local planning policy.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: As part of the Growing Greater Geraldton A Growth Plan project a number of supporting / informing documents were produced. One of those, the Geraldton City Centre Revitalisation Plan (Revitalisation Plan) was prepared to guide the future development and revitalisation of the Geraldton City Centre. The Revitalisation Plan provides short, medium and long-term aspirations and strategies that will enable the city centre to move toward success, becoming a true regional capital for the Mid-West and beyond. A successful city centre, for retail, commerce, hospitality, community and civic life, will provide a strong heart for Greater Geraldton as a regional centre. Amongst other things, it links to infrastructure, tourism, reducing leakage from the local economy, employment, civic pride and liveability. The Geraldton City Centre Revitalisation Plan local planning policy is included as Attachment No. DCS341B.


25

Council at its meeting held on 27 June 2017 resolved to:

1. ADOPT the ‘Geraldton City Centre Revitalisation Plan’ (Version 1) local planning policy as a draft for the purpose of public advertising;

2. ADOPT the ‘Geraldton City Centre Revitalisation Plan’ (Version 1) local planning policy for final approval should no objections be received during the advertising period; and

3. REQUIRE staff to present to Council a further report should there be any objections received during the advertising period.

One objection was received during the advertising period and therefore this report is presented to Council. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Through observation, analysis and engagement, the following four key themes emerged as part of the project process.

People The strategies under the theme area ‘people’ are focused on meeting people’s needs as pedestrians and patrons in the city centre, as they are the key users and provide the vibrancy and activity sought in the city centre. Place The strategies under the theme area ‘place’ are focused on enhancing the quality of the city centre in regard to land use, built form, profile, and overall place identity and pride. Infrastructure The strategies under the theme area ‘infrastructure’ are focused on addressing many of the existing infrastructure challenges within the city centre, and improving the accessibility and car parking. Investment / Economy The strategies under the theme area ‘investment / economy’ seek to foster a renewed sense of collaboration amongst all city centre stakeholders, embrace tourism and maintain positive strategies that will enable greater investment.

RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: Council at its meeting held on 28 March 2017 adopted the Growing Greater Geraldton plan. Council at its meeting held on 27 June 2017 adopted the policy as a draft for the purpose of public advertising. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: There has been extensive community and Councillor consultation as part of the Growing Greater Geraldton A Growth Plan project. In addition the


26

preparation of the Revitalisation Plan involved four rounds of community / stakeholder engagement. The draft policy was advertised in accordance with the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 2, clause 4 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015. The advertising period was for 21 days (commencing on Tuesday 4 July 2017 and concluding on Monday 24 July 2017) and involved the following:

1. A notice appeared in the Geraldton Guardian on Tuesday 4 July 2017;

2. The draft policy was available on the City’s website; and 3. The draft policy was publicly displayed at the Civic Centre.

Submissions: As a result of the advertising, a total of 4 submissions were received. Listed below is a summation of the main comments/concerns raised during the public comment period.

Object to the one-way proposal for Cathedral Avenue between Marine Terrace and Foreshore Drive.

Support the two-waying of Foreshore Drive.

The objectives at the start of the document are broad, but lacking the focus on measurable changes. It seems prudent to bring all the measures, metrics and baseline data together into an implementable framework.

It should be acknowledged that City decisions about expanding roads, making cheap land available 20km away, spreading public infrastructure for 1.5km along the foreshore or an ALDI in the outer suburbs will take away from the focus on a city centre. There seems to be little understanding of acknowledgement of the principles of cities – how and why they develop and what function they serve for the population.

There is also little consideration of what experiences in the CBD make it (uniquely) attractive, apart from on page 18/19 which makes only general assertions. Essentially, there could be a much stronger human-centred design approach to the recommendations and strategy implementation.

This strategy seems to assume that government is the primary investor and will invest in public infrastructure. Instead, this could better recognise the leadership model of many cited examples (Renew Newcastle etc.) where the strategies of other groups that are leading already, with their own resources, and are acknowledged and supported.

There’s little quantitative analysis of the most effective and cost-efficient options for achieving objectives or a change in metrics.

There’s something a bit too vague about a) the stakeholder groups and which recommendations are for their benefit, b) the logic behind specific recommendations and how they will benefit those


27

stakeholders and others, and c) ensuring a fair distribution of recommendations across stakeholders. At least if articulated, these can then be assessed, before and after implementation.

Initial concepts for the development of key actions to guide the revitalisation of Geraldton’s CBD.

Various aspirations/suggestions for revitalisation of the city centre. The above points are discussed in the ‘Schedule of Submissions’ which is included as Attachment No. DCS341A and copies of the actual submission are available to Council upon request. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 sets out the requirements and procedure for preparing a local planning policy. The local government may prepare a local planning policy in respect of any matter related to the planning and development of the municipality. A local planning policy must be based on sound town planning principles and may address either strategic or operational considerations in relation to the matters to which the policy applies. In making a determination under the Local Planning Scheme the local government must have regard to each relevant local planning policy to the extent that the policy is consistent with the Scheme. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial and resource implications, however the implementation of the Revitalisation Plan may be further considered in future budget deliberations. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:


Strategy 3.1.4 Supporting and facilitating implementation of the Growing Greater Geraldton plan.

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: Geraldton is aspiring to better fulfil the role as the region’s capital. This recognises the city centre’s important role to not only be a strong heart for Greater Geraldton, but to also service the broader Mid-West region and become a leader in this area. Revitalisation in the context of Geraldton city centre means introducing strategies that can help to address existing issues and challenges, and harness many of the opportunities available. RISK MANAGEMENT: There are no inherent risks with the adoption of the Revitalisation Plan as a local planning policy. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED BY CITY OFFICERS: The Revitalisation Plan provides short, medium and long-term aspirations and strategies that will enable the city centre to move toward success, becoming a true regional capital for the Mid-West and beyond.


28

By adopting the Revitalisation Plan as a local planning policy it enables the City to have regard to the Plan when making a determination under the local planning scheme. The option to refuse is therefore not supported. The option to defer is not supported as there is considered sufficient information for Council to determine the matter. COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR DOUGLAS, SECONDED CR KEEMINK That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Schedule 2, Part 2, clause 4 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015, RESOLVES to:

1. ADOPT for final approval the ‘Geraldton City Centre Revitalisation Plan’ (Version 1) local planning policy.

CARRIED 11/0

Mayor Van Styn N/V

Cr. Douglas YES

Cr. Bylund YES

Cr. Keemink YES

Cr. Hall YES

Cr. Critch YES

Cr. Tanti YES

Cr. Reymond YES

Cr. McIlwaine YES

Cr. Freer N/V

Cr. Colliver YES

Cr. Caudwell YES

Cr. Thomas YES


29

DCS342 PROPOSED LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME AMENDMENT – OMNIBUS REZONING

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-17-59944 AUTHOR: K Elder, Coordinator Strategic Planning EXECUTIVE: P Melling, Director Development &

Community Services DATE OF REPORT: 27 July 2017 FILE REFERENCE: LP/14/0003 ATTACHMENTS: Yes (x1)

Scheme Amendment Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City has prepared an omnibus Local Planning Scheme Amendment (‘amendment’) to correct a number of administrative errors and clarify clauses within the scheme. It also proposes to rezone numerous lots (that were created during and after the gazettal of Local Planning Scheme No. 1) in accordance with endorsed structure plans. This report recommends that Council initiate the amendment and determine that the rezoning is a ‘basic’ amendment. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: Part A: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Part 5, Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 RESOLVES to:

1. AMEND Local Planning Scheme No. 1 as per Local Planning Scheme Amendment No. 3.

Part B: That Council by Simple Majority, pursuant to Part 5, Division 1, Regulation 35 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 RESOLVES to:

1. DETERMINE that the rezoning is a ‘basic’ amendment. 2. MAKES the determination on the following grounds:

a. The amendment is to correct an administrative error; b. The amendment is to ensure consistency with another provision

of the local planning scheme; and c. The amendment is consistent with a structure plan that has

been approved under the scheme for the land to which the amendment related and the scheme currently includes zones of all types that are outlined in the structure plans.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Greater Geraldton.


30

BACKGROUND: An ‘omnibus’ scheme amendment is a planning term used that encompasses a number of minor textural and administrative changes to a Local Planning Scheme. Local Planning Scheme No. 1 (‘the Scheme’) was gazetted on 11 December 2015. This amendment proposes a number of minor modifications to correct various administrative errors and to clarify clauses within the scheme. The amendment also proposes to update the scheme maps to include the recent development of a number of structure planned areas, where the lots were created during or after the gazettal of the scheme. The reasons for and background to the various modifications included in the amendment are outlined as follows: Table 4 within Clause 3.3.2: At present there is no provision within the site and development requirements table for setback requirements where development within the Commercial zone is not adjoining the Residential zone. The amendment proposes to include the words ‘Variable or’ in Table 4 as follows;

Minimum setback Secondary street / side boundary

Variable or as per R-Codes where adjoining Residential zone

Minimum setback Rear boundary / other

Variable or as per R-Codes where adjoining Residential zone

This modification will correct an administrative error and will ensure that there is provision in the scheme for minimum setbacks where development does not adjoin the Residential zone. Table 8 within Clause 3.8.2 and Table 9 within Clause 3.9.2: Tables 8 and 9 within the Scheme outline the site and development requirements within the General Industry and Light Industry zones. At present, the table states that the minimum secondary street/side boundary setback is ‘5m (one side) or as per R-Codes where adjoining Residential zone’. It is however silent on the minimum setback to the other side. The amendment proposes to include the words ‘Nil other’ in Tables 8 and 9 as follows;

Minimum setback Secondary street / side boundary

5 metres (one side), Nil other or as per R-Codes where adjoining Residential zone


31

This modification will correct an administrative error and will clarify the minimum allowable setback for the second side setback. Clause 3.10.1(a): Amend Clause 3.10.1(a) to include the word ‘with’ so that cl. 3.10.1(a) reads as follows:

Provide opportunities for a range of limited rural and related ancillary pursuits where those activities will be consistent with the amenity of the locality and the conservation and landscape attributes of the land.

This will rectify an administrative error. Clause 3.10.2.5: Clause 3.10.2.5 currently reads as

At development stage, and subject to completion of a local development plan in accordance with clause 3.10.2.4, the local government may apply a condition of development approval requiring revegetation in accordance with the approved local development plan.

It is proposed to delete the wording ‘and subject to completion of a local development plan in accordance with clause 3.10.2.4’ so that clause 3.10.2.5 reads as follows;

At development stage, the local government may apply a condition of development approval requiring revegetation in accordance with an approved local development plan.

Currently the inclusion of ‘and subject to completion of a local development plan in accordance with clause 3.10.2.4’ prevents the City from applying a condition for revegetation where a prior subdivision has not occurred. However, there are specific situations where revegetation of the site in association with the development of land would be considered appropriate despite the land not being subdivided prior. Part 6.2 - Definition of ‘trade supplies’: Amend the formatting within the ‘trade supplies’ definition to change the bullet points from (d) (e) (f) (g) to (a) (b) (c) (d). This will rectify an administrative error. Schedule 5 – Parking Requirements: Amend ‘Centre Zone’ in the table to read ‘Regional Centre Zone’. This will rectify an administrative error.


32

Schedule 5 – Parking Requirements: Include a second ‘Note’ at the bottom of Schedule 5 as follows:

Note: The parking ratio for the Regional Centre Zone only applies where the development has a works component that proposes an increase in the floor area, and only applies to that increased floor area. It is not applicable where the development is for a use that has no works component or a development where the works component does not increase the floor area.

As per Clause 1.4 of the Scheme, notes printed in italics do not form part of the scheme and the inclusion of this note does not change the requirements of Schedule 5. The note merely seeks to assist in the interpretation and application of Schedule 5 within the Regional Centre zone which is consistent with clauses within the previous Scheme No. 3 (Geraldton). Normalising developed structure planned areas: As part of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 for structure plans to have the statutory force and effectiveness of a scheme, the approved structure plan is to be incorporated or ‘normalised’ into a scheme. This simply involves rezoning the developed lots to reflect what they were shown as in the structure plan. This is proposed for a number of structure planned areas listed below.

Glenfield Beach Structure Plan

The Glenfield Beach Structure Plan was endorsed on 17 February 2016 and subsequent subdivision and development has occurred in accordance with the approved structure plan. The amendment proposes to rezone the newly created residential lots and road reserves to ‘Residential R25’ and Lot 205 Poseidon Way, Glenfield to ‘Public Open Space’ local scheme reserve in accordance with the endorsed structure plan. Woorree New Town Structure Plan (Geraldton Heights)

The Woorree New Town Structure Plan was endorsed on 8 March 2010 and subsequent subdivision and development has occurred in accordance with the approved structure plan. The amendment proposed to rezone the newly created residential lots and road reserves to ‘Residential R5’ and Reserve 51615 to ‘Public Open Space’ local scheme reserve in accordance with the endorsed structure plan.


33

Deepdale Estate Structure Plan

The Deepdale Estate Structure Plan was endorsed on 28 August 2012 and subsequent subdivision and development has occurred in accordance with the approved structure plan. The area covered by the structure plan is already zoned ‘Residential R2.5’ and ‘Residential R5’, however the newly created Reserve 51686 needs to be appropriately rezoned ‘Foreshore’ and ‘Public Open Space’ local scheme reserve and the R-Codes removed.

A copy of the scheme amendment report is included as Attachment No. DCS342. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: There are no economic issues. Social: There are no social issues. Environmental: As part of the amendment process the Environmental Protection Authority is required to assess the amendment under Part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. Cultural & Heritage: There are no cultural or Heritage issues. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: The author is not aware of any relevant precedents. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: In accordance with the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 there is no requirement to publicly advertise a basic amendment. There has been no Councillor consultation. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Planning and Development Act 2005: Part 5, Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 provides for a local government to amend a local planning scheme.


34

Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015: Normalising a Structure Plan: Under the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 in order for a structure plan to have the statutory force and effect of a scheme, it is to be incorporated or ‘normalised’ into a scheme, via a scheme amendment or as part of a scheme review. Normalising a structure plan into a planning scheme simply involves rezoning the lots created to reflect what they were shown as in the structure plan. Given the above, the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 clearly outlines a general administrative requirement for structure plans to be normalised into a local planning scheme following development. The parts of the amendment proposing to normalise the developed portions of the Glenfield Beach, Woorree New Town (Geraldton Heights) and Deepdale Estate structure plan are therefore consistent with these requirements. Basic Amendment: Part 5, Division 1, Regulation 35 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 requires that the local government resolution must specify whether, in the opinion of the local government the amendment is a basic, standard or complex amendment. In essence a ‘basic’ amendment is one that corrects an administrative error in the scheme or rectifies a zoning anomaly. A ‘standard’ amendment is one that is consistent with a local planning strategy, would have minimal impact on land in the area and does not result in any significant impacts on the land. A ‘complex’ amendment is one that is not consistent with a local planning strategy and is of a scale that will have an impact that is significant relative to the development in the locality. This amendment is therefore considered to be a ‘basic’ amendment under the above criteria. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial or resource implications. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:

Title: Governance 4.2 Planning and Policy

Strategy: 4.2.2 Responding to community aspirations by providing planning and zoning for future development.

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: There are no impacts to regional outcomes.


35

RISK MANAGEMENT: By not initiating this amendment the City’s statutory planning framework will not be correct and up-to-date which is essential in order to guide the City in its decision making process. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED BY CITY OFFICERS: It is considered that the proposed amendment is consistent with the local planning framework. The amendment will ensure that a number of administrative errors are corrected, clauses within the scheme are clarified and that the scheme maps are updated to reflect current developments. The option to not support the initiation of the amendment is therefore not supported. The option to defer is not supported as there is considered sufficient information for Council to determine the matter. COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR CAUDWELL, SECONDED CR TANTI Part A: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Part 5, Section 75 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 RESOLVES to:

1. AMEND Local Planning Scheme No. 1 as per Local Planning Scheme Amendment No. 3.

Part B: That Council by Simple Majority, pursuant to Part 5, Division 1, Regulation 35 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 RESOLVES to:

1. DETERMINE that the rezoning is a ‘basic’ amendment. 2. MAKES the determination on the following grounds:

a. The amendment is to correct an administrative error; b. The amendment is to ensure consistency with another

provision of the local planning scheme; and c. The amendment is consistent with a structure plan that has

been approved under the scheme for the land to which the amendment related and the scheme currently includes zones of all types that are outlined in the structure plans.

CARRIED 11/0



36

12 REPORTS OF CORPORATE & COMMERCIAL SERVICES

CCS273 APPOINTING AN ACTING MAYOR

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-17-59213 AUTHOR: M Adam, Coordinator Governance EXECUTIVE: B Davis , Director Corporate and Commercial

Services DATE OF REPORT: 2 August 2017 FILE REFERENCE: GO/7/0007 ATTACHMENTS: No

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the appointment of a Councillor to be acting Mayor during the period 11 September to 22 September 2017 (inclusive), as the Mayor will be attending the 2017 International Islands Tourism Conference in Zhoushan, China, and the Deputy Mayor will be on leave at this time. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.35(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. APPOINT Councillor ______________ as acting Mayor from 11 September to 22 September 2017 (Inclusive).

PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: The Mayor will be away from 11 September to 22 September 2017, as he will be attending the China trip. The Mayor will therefore not be attending the Agenda Forum on 19 September 2017. The Deputy Mayor will be on leave from 23 August to 2 October (inclusive) and as such will not be able to perform the functions of the Mayor. In accordance with Section 5.35(1)(b) of the Local Government Act 1995, if the Mayor and Deputy Mayor are not available to perform the functions of the Mayor then the Council may appoint a councillor to perform the functions of the Mayor during the period of absence. In the event of more than one Councillor being nominated to act as Mayor for the period, a ballot will be required. The Mayor has nominated Cr Thomas to act as Mayor, for consideration by Council.


37

ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: There are no economic impacts.



Cultural & Heritage: There are no cultural or heritage impacts. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: Cr R Hall was appointed Acting Mayor at the meeting held on 28 October 2014. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: There has been no community/councillor consultation. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Section 5.35 of the Local Government Act 1995 applies. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial or resource implications. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:

Title: Governance 4.1 Community Engagement


Title: Governance 4.5 Good Governance & Leadership

Strategy 4.5.1 Strengthening the governance role of Councillors by informing, resourcing, skilling and supporting their role

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: There are no impacts to regional outcomes. RISK MANAGEMENT: Appointing an acting Mayor provides visible leadership and advocacy for the greater good of the community. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED BY CITY OFFICERS: Where the Council does not appoint a Councillor to act as Mayor in the absence of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor, in accordance with the provisions of section 5.35 (2)of the Local Government Act 1995 the CEO, after consultation with, and obtaining the agreement of 2 councillors selected by the CEO, may perform the functions of mayor.


38

As noted in this item, Mayor S Van Styn nominated Cr T Thomas. The Deputy Mayor called for further nominations. There were no further nominations. COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR HALL, SECONDED CR COLLIVER That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.35(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. APPOINT Councillor Thomas as acting Mayor from 11 September to 22 September 2017 (Inclusive).



39

CCS274 STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITY TO 31 JULY 2017

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-17-61690 AUTHOR: N Jane, Senior Treasury Officer EXECUTIVE: B Davis, Director of Corporate and

Commercial Services DATE OF REPORT: 8 August 2017 FILE REFERENCE: GO/6/0012-05 ATTACHMENTS: Yes (x1)

Monthly Management Report for period to 31 July 2017

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The attached financial reports provide a comprehensive report on the City’s finances to 31 July 2017. The statements in this report include no matters of variance considered to be of concern. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 RESOLVES to:

1. RECEIVE the 31 July 2017 monthly financial activity statements as attached.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: The financial position at the end of July is detailed in the attached report and summarised as follows relative to year-to-date budget expectations: Operating Income $41,217 0.1% Under YTD Budget Operating Expenditure $ 981,973

10.8% Over YTD Budget

Net Operating $1,023,190 2.3% Negative variance

Capital Expenditure

$4,450,679

129% Over YTD Budget

Capital Revenue $6,622 4.3% Over YTD Budget Cash at Bank – Municipal $25,855,075 Cash at Bank – Reserve $10,537,870 Total Funds Invested $31,604,294 Net Rates Collected 9.32%


40

The attached report provides explanatory notes for items greater than 10% or $50,000. This commentary provides Council with an overall understanding of how the finances are progressing in relation to the revised budget. The financial position represented in the July financials shows a variance of $1,023,190 in the net operating result (this takes into account commitments). ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: There are no economic impacts. Social: There are no social impacts. Environmental: There are no environmental impacts. Cultural & Heritage: There are no cultural or heritage impacts. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: Council is provided with financial reports each month. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: There has been no community/councillor consultation. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 require that as a minimum Council is to receive a Statement of Financial Activity. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: Any issues in relation to expenditure and revenue allocations or variance trends are identified and addressed each month. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:


Strategy 4.4.1 Preparing and implementing short to long term financial plans

Strategy 4.4.3 Delivering and ensuring business systems and services support cost effective Council operations and service delivery

Title: Governance 4.5 Good Governance and Leadership

Strategy 4.5.2 Ensuring finance and governance policies, procedures and activities align with legislative requirements and best practice.


41

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: There are no impacts to regional outcomes. RISK MANAGEMENT: There are no risks to be considered. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED: There are no alternative options to consider. COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR REYMOND, SECONDED CR THOMAS That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 RESOLVES to:

1. RECEIVE the 31 July 2017 monthly financial activity statements as attached.

CARRIED 11/0



42

CCS275 DELEGATIONS TO THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-17-56852 AUTHOR: M Adam, Governance Coordinator EXECUTIVE: B Davis, Director Corporate & Commercial

Services DATE OF REPORT: 9 August 2017 FILE REFERENCE: GO/19/0009 ATTACHMENTS: Yes (x1)

Register of Delegated Authority to the Chief Executive Officer 2017-18

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this report is for Council to undertake a formal review of its delegations within the Register of Delegated Authority to the Chief Executive Officer. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: That Council by Absolute Majority pursuant to Section 5.42 and 5.46 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. ENDORSE the review of delegations in accordance with sections 5.46 of the Local Government Act 1995; and

2. DELEGATE the local government functions as listed in the amended Register of Delegated Authority to the Chief Executive Officer 2017-18.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: Section 5.42 of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act) prescribes that Council may delegate its powers or duties to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO). Section 5.43 outlines the limitations on such delegations. Delegation to the CEO is also prescribed within other Legislation. At least once every financial year delegations are to be reviewed by the delegator (Council) under s.5.46 (2) of the Local Government Act 1992. Council last reviewed its delegations on 26 July 2016 (CCS192) and therefore a formal review is required. Local Government Act 1995:

5.42 Delegation of some powers and duties to the CEO

(1) A local government may delegate* to the CEO the exercise of any of its powers or the discharge of any of its duties under-

(a) this Act other than those referred to in Section 5.43; or

(b) the Planning and Development Act 2005 section 214(2), (3) or (5).

* Absolute Majority required


43

5.43. Limits on delegations to CEO

A local government cannot delegate to a CEO any of the following powers or duties —

(a) any power or duty that requires a decision of an absolute majority or a 75% majority

of the local government;

(b) accepting a tender which exceeds an amount determined by the local government for the

purpose of this paragraph;

(c) appointing an auditor;

(d) acquiring or disposing of any property valued at an amount exceeding an amount

determined by the local government for the purpose of this paragraph;

(e) any of the local government’s powers under section 5.98, 5.98A, 5.99, 5.99A or

5.100;

(f) borrowing money on behalf of the local government;

(g) hearing or determining an objection of a kind referred to in section 9.5;

(ha) the power under section 9.49A(4) to authorise a person to sign documents on behalf

of the local government;

(h) any power or duty that requires the approval of the Minister or the Governor;

(i) such other powers or duties as may be prescribed. 5.46 Register of, and records relevant to, delegations to CEO and employees

(2) At least once every financial year, delegations made under this Division are to be reviewed by the delegator.

In accordance with the above requirements, City officers have undertaken a review of the Register of Delegated Authority to the Chief Executive Officer 2016-2017, Councils existing delegations to the CEO. The below amendments have been proposed for council consideration:

The ‘Function delegated’ sections are updated to align with the wording of the Legislation.

Delegations made by Council on 24 January 2017, item DCS315 added to the Register.

Delegation 1.21 - Amendment to the wording of the Council conditions on Delegation, to facilitate the implementation of Council decisions which incorporate payment from the municipal fund.

Delegation 1.22 – An additional delegation enabling the CEO to develop procedures for the authorisation of, and the payment of, accounts, r.11 Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996.

Renumbering of delegations to incorporate the additional delegation 1.22

A draft Register of Delegated Authority to the Chief Executive Officer 2017-18 was forwarded to Councillors for consultation, via briefing note, on 28 June 2017. Councillors conducted an initial review of the draft Register at the Concept Forum on 1 August 2017.


44

On the 8 August 2017 Councillors held a workshop to discuss the draft Delegations Register from Council to the Chief Executive Officer 2017-18. An additional condition on delegation was proposed for delegation P1 - Powers and Duties under Local Planning Scheme No. 1, as below:

Matters of interpretation of Planning Scheme No 1 or interpretation of Council Planning Policies are to be referred by the CEO to Council for determination.

The outcomes of the reviews are presented in the draft Register of Delegated Authority to the Chief Executive Officer 2017-18 as the basis for Council (the delegator) to complete its obligations to review the delegations annually. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: There are no economic impacts.



Cultural & Heritage: There are no cultural or heritage impacts. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: CCS192 Register of Delegated Authority to the Chief Executive Officer 2016-2017 was adopted on 26 July 2016. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: Council were consulted via Briefing Note dated 28 June 2017 and at the Concept Forum on 1 August 2017 and the Delegations workshop on 8 August 2017. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: There are no legislative or policy implications. Section 5.42 (1) of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act) provides that:

1. A local government may delegate* to the CEO the exercise of any of its powers or the discharge of any of its duties under –

a. This Act other than those referred to in section 5.43; or b. The Planning and Development Act 2005 section 214(2), (3) or (5).

*Absolute majority required.

Section 5.43(a) to 5.43(h) of the Act provide limitations on what powers and duties a local government can delegate to its CEO. Section 5.46 prescribes that delegations made under Division 4 of the Act are to be reviewed annually by the delegator.


45

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial or resource implications. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:



REGIONAL OUTCOMES: There are no impacts to regional outcomes. RISK MANAGEMENT: Council can decide not to delegate some of its powers to the CEO however there is risk that without delegation there will be a significant impact on the efficient and effective delivery of services as all decisions requiring the exercise of a delegation would have to go to Council. This would cause a delay in the delivery of services as Council only meets once a month and create a significant additional workload for Elected Members. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED BY CITY OFFICERS: Council can decide not to delegate some of its powers to the CEO however for the reason above it is recommended that Council adopts the reviewed Register of Delegations to the CEO. COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR HALL, SECONDED CR THOMAS That Council by Absolute Majority pursuant to Section 5.42 and 5.46 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. ENDORSE the review of delegations in accordance with sections 5.46 of the Local Government Act 1995; and

2. DELEGATE the local government functions as listed in the amended Register of Delegated Authority to the Chief Executive Officer 2017-18.


Mayor Van Styn N/V

Cr. Douglas YES

Cr. Bylund YES

Cr. Keemink YES

Cr. Hall YES

Cr. Critch YES

Cr. Tanti YES

Cr. Reymond YES

Cr. McIlwaine YES

Cr. Freer N/V

Cr. Colliver YES


46

Cr. Caudwell YES

Cr. Thomas YES


47

CCS277 RATES CONCESSIONS 2016-17 MURCHISON REGION ABORIGINAL CORPORATION

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-17-62582 AUTHOR: B Davis, Director Corporate & Commercial EXECUTIVE: B Davis, Director Corporate & Commercial

Services DATE OF REPORT: 14 August 2017 FILE REFERENCE: RV/4/0003 ATTACHMENTS: Yes (x1)

Properties Owned by MRAC in the CGG District

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This report seeks Council approval of Rates concessions proposed for the 2016-17 financial year for properties owned by the Murchison Region Aboriginal Corporation (MRAC). EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 6.47 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. GRANT Rates concessions for the 2016-17 financial year to a total value of $50,000 for the 59 properties owned by the Murchison Region Aboriginal Corporation (MRAC) within the district of the City as detailed in Attachment A;

2. NOTE that the concessions will be distributed on a proportional basis across each of the 59 properties, on the basis of GRV valuations;

3. AUTHORISE payment of a refund of $50,000 to the Murchison Region Aboriginal Corporation, to give effect to the rates concessions granted for 2016-17; and

4. AUTHORISE the CEO to enter negotiations in good faith with MRAC regarding rates concessions on the 59 properties for 2017-18 and later years, and require the CEO to put related proposals for any concessions to Council for formal resolution.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the Murchison Region Aboriginal Corporation. BACKGROUND: Earlier in 2017, the Murchison Region Aboriginal Corporation (MRAC) made submissions to Council seeking exemption from rates for the 59 properties detailed in Attachment A on the grounds of use of the properties for a charitable purpose, the provision of housing for Aboriginal people. The Corporation owns properties within the City, and elsewhere in neighbouring Murchison Shires, for the purpose of providing rental accommodation for eligible Aboriginal tenants.


48

At its ordinary meeting of 26 April 2017, Council resolved to decline the request as follows:

1. DECLINE a rates exemption request for Murchison Region Aboriginal Corporation on the 59 properties listed in a separate attachment on the basis that the properties are not being used exclusively for a charitable purpose.

MRAC subsequently made application to the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) challenging the City’s rate book for 2016-17, seeking to have the decision of Council overturned, and the 59 properties determined to be exempt from rates. At directions hearings, with the City represented by McLeods Lawyers, SAT ordered that the parties enter mediation and from that opportunity arose for negotiation with MRAC. On the law as it currently stands, and having regard to precedent decisions, the provision of housing for Aboriginal people is seen by the Courts and SAT to satisfy the provisions of the Local Government Act as to ‘charitable purposes’. In summary terms, the position the City took in the negotiation process was that the Ratepayers who are effectively left to subsidise the provision of municipal services, facilities and amenities for residents of any land purportedly used for charitable purposes, should be entitled to be provided with verifiable evidence of the charitable purpose in actual use of the land throughout the year. The City’s view is that for a property to be exempt from City rates for 52 weeks of the year, the land should actually be used for that purpose for 52 weeks of the year, with evidence provided to support any such claim. Similarly, rates exemption should logically not apply to periods when a property is vacant or, in this particular case, if a property is occupied by any non-Aboriginal tenants, with evidence to be provided to the City on those matters. In essence, the City believes it has reasonable grounds to question a blanket year-long exemption on each and every one of the 59 properties, without any evidence burden on MRAC, to justify the significant cost of the subsidy left to be met by increasing the level of rates to be paid by all other ratepayers. In response to the City’s position, and without prejudice to its rights associated with other years, as a result of the negotiation process MRAC put a proposal to the City via their lawyers that it would agree to withdraw its SAT appeal against Council’s April decision, if the City would agree to:

Provide a Concession on rates for the 59 properties for the 2016-17 financial year, to total value of $50,000, spread proportionally across the properties on the basis of GRV valuation; and

Enter negotiations in relation to concessions to apply to the 2017-18 and subsequent financial years.


49

ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: There are no economic impacts.

Social Issues: Provision of rates exemptions or concessions for any group, entity or purpose always requires subsidy by all other Ratepayers. Developed residential properties for which rates are not payable or are reduced, and the residents of such land whether permanent or rental tenants, still require the provision of municipal services, infrastructure, facilities and amenities. Every charitable subsidy effectively requires an increase in the Rates payable by every other Ratepayer. However, Ratepayers in WA have no say whatsoever in which charitable purposes they may wish to subsidise. In the absence of clear and unambiguous definition in Local Government legislation of what should constitute ‘charitable purposes’ for the purposes of rates exemptions or concessions, the determination of which properties may or may not be exempt from rates is undertaken in fact by Courts and Tribunals far removed from communities, rather than being decided by any Community of ratepayers that is actually paying for the charitable subsidy. Less well-off ratepayers in lower socio-economic groups (not just the better off) are impacted by every charitable subsidy provided by a Council to another group.

Environmental Issues: There are no environmental issues.

Cultural & Heritage Issues: This matter relates to provision of rental housing for eligible Aboriginal people, by MRAC, an Aboriginal corporation. There are no heritage issues. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: Council has power under section 6.47 to grant concessions against rates or service charges. From time to time Council has exercised that power e.g. in granting concessions on rates during development or redevelopment of buildings in the CBD, under the auspices of Council’s city centre revitalisation policy. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: There has been no broader community consultation on this matter. The matter was previously discussed with Councillors when first put to Council in April 2017. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: There are no policy implications. The City has already made submissions to the State Government regarding need to amend the Local Government Act in relation to rates exemptions for certain charitable purposes, and will make further submissions as part of the new Government’s announced review of the Act.


50

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: In relation to the 2016-17 financial year, Rates imposed on the 59 properties in question and paid by MRAC totalled $80,127. A refund of $50,000 for the recommended concessions will reduce 2016-17 revenues accordingly. In relation to the 2017-18 financial year, Rates imposed on the 59 properties in question totalled $83,511. Concessions the same as those recommended for 2016-17 would reduce net revenue from rates on the 59 properties to $33,511. Should Council adopt the Executive recommendation, the start point for negotiation with MRAC of concessions for 2017-18 would be the same basis as for 2016-17. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:


Strategy 4.4.2 Ensuring the City’s long term financial planning delivers the community goals and aspirations in a sustainable and affordable manner

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: There are no significant impacts on Regional outcomes. RISK MANAGEMENT MRAC applied to SAT to overturn Council’s April 2017 decision on rates exemptions. During negotiations MRAC subsequently offered to withdraw the SAT application, with a compromise based on concessions for 2016-17. As noted in the Alternative Options section below, the risk inherent in rejecting the compromise offer is that SAT will support the original MRAC application, determine rates exemption on the 59 properties, requiring a $80,127 refund for 2016-17, in lieu of a reduced $50,000 refund. As well, SAT could issue a costs order against the City. Further, the 59 properties will thereafter be determined as rates exempt, with no opportunity for the City to negotiate a concessions-based compromise with MRAC for 2017-18 or later years. Accepting the MRAC offer mitigates the risk of higher revenue loss to the City. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED BY CITY OFFICERS MRAC has offered in good faith to withdraw its SAT challenge against Council’s decision to decline their request for Rates exemption on the 59 properties in question, if Council will agree to $50,000 in total concessions across the 59 properties for 2016-17, and agree to enter negotiations for concessions for subsequent years, as noted above. The alternative to entering an agreement with MRAC based on rates concessions is to reject their compromise position and allow the matter to be dealt with by SAT. Legal counsel to the City is that it is highly likely that the City would lose on the basis of the current law, noting related Court and SAT


51

precedent decisions. SAT could deal with the matter on just the law. The risk of the City persisting to have a full SAT hearing is that the City could lose the matter, have rates exemption for the full 59 properties imposed by SAT for 52 weeks of every year going forward, and run the risk of having SAT issue a costs order against the City. On a matter able to be determined on the law, the City would have very limited opportunity to argue the merits of the difference between intended use of the properties versus actual use for the intended purposes, for 52 weeks of the year, despite the patent reasonableness of the City requiring any charitable purpose claimed to be supported by evidence, to justify the subsidy to be met by all other City ratepayers. Accordingly, the Executive Recommendation is to agree to the MRAC offer, and for the City to provide the suggested concessions across the 59 properties. While negotiation for subsequent years has still to be undertaken, at least for 2016-17 the emergence of a good-faith offer from MRAC indicates their willingness to negotiate, and suggests some recognition on their part of the onerous information requirement, if they were to be obliged to provide the City with evidence, in respect of every year, of actual use of each separate property, per the intended charitable purpose, for 52 weeks of every year. Cr Reymond foreshadowed an alternative motion should the motion be lost, that Council challenge the rates concession at the appropriate level and have it removed from the Local Government Act. COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR COLLIVER, SECONDED CR DOUGLAS That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 6.47 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. GRANT Rates concessions for the 2016-17 financial year to a total value of $50,000 for the 59 properties owned by the Murchison Region Aboriginal Corporation (MRAC) within the district of the City as detailed in Attachment A;

2. NOTE that the concessions will be distributed on a proportional basis across each of the 59 properties, on the basis of GRV valuations;

3. AUTHORISE payment of a refund of $50,000 to the Murchison Region Aboriginal Corporation, to give effect to the rates concessions granted for 2016-17; and

4. AUTHORISE the CEO to enter negotiations in good faith with MRAC regarding rates concessions on the 59 properties for 2017-18 and later years, and require the CEO to put related proposals for any concessions to Council for formal resolution.


52

CARRIED 8/3

Mayor Van Styn N/V

Cr. Douglas YES

Cr. Bylund NO

Cr. Keemink YES

Cr. Hall YES

Cr. Critch YES

Cr. Tanti YES

Cr. Reymond NO

Cr. McIlwaine YES

Cr. Freer N/V

Cr. Colliver YES

Cr. Caudwell NO

Cr. Thomas YES


53

13 REPORTS OF INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES

IS155 RFT 19 1617 – DESIGN, SUPPLY AND LAY BITUMEN PRODUCTS

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-17-60762 AUTHOR: J Crothers, Contract & Procurement

Specialist EXECUTIVE: C Lee, Director Infrastructure Services DATE OF REPORT: 2 August 2017 FILE REFERENCE: GO/6/0013 ATTACHMENTS: Yes (x4 Confidential)

A. Evaluation Report B. Evaluation Workbook Spreadsheet C. Pricing Scenario 1 Traffic Management D. Pricing Scenario 2 Bitumen Products

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this report is to seek Council approval to award tender RFT 19 1617 for the design, supply and laying of bituminous products to the preferred tenderer. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.20 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. AWARD the contract RFT 19 1617 – Design, Supply and Lay of Bituminous Products to the preferred tenderer; and

2. RECORD the tendered rates in the minutes.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Greater Geraldton BACKGROUND:

The City will use the successful tenderer to provide bitumen chip seal services for City road renewal and road maintenance projects. The service includes:

The bitumen seal design;

Traffic management;

Surface cleaning and preparation;

Spray seal of bitumen emulsion or hot bitumen;

Laying and spreading of aggregate (stone);

Rolling surface; and

Sweeping surface. Ten (10) suppliers registered to receive copies of the tender and three (3) submissions were received. The three (3) submissions received were deemed compliant with some minor schedule omissions noted. The tender assessment was undertaken by a panel of five (5) officers with three (3) voting and two (2) non-voting.


54

RFT 19 1617 has a two year duration commencing from the date of award and has a one year extension option at the absolute discretion of the principal. The tender process and assessment was completed in accordance with Council’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy (4.9). The RFT was advertised in the West Australian Newspaper and Tenderlink on 3 June 2017 and Guardian Newspaper on 2 June 2017. The tender was closed on 26 June 2017. The tender selection criteria are as follows:

A. Tenderer’s Experience, Community & Economic Benefit (15%) B. Key Resources (15%) C. Occupational Safety, Environmental & Quality Management (10%) D. Proposed Methodology (10%) E. Price (50%)

The above selection criteria were adopted to ensure the most advantageous tenderer was selected. The successful delivery of bitumen chip seals requires the tenderer to have relevant experience and resources. As the service involves working on roads under traffic, use of hot liquid bitumen, and operating large machinery, the tender also needs to demonstrate good methodology with a focus on quality, safety and environmental issues. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES:

Economic:

Awarding of this tender will result in City funds flowing into the local economy through the employment of local community members as truck drivers, labourers, traffic controllers, supervisors and administration staff.

Social:

Provision of a smooth and well-maintained road network reduces the likelihood of accidents or damage to vehicles, minimising impact on general road users and businesses that rely on them.

Environmental:

Environmental controls are implemented as part of the individual construction and maintenance projects.

Cultural & Heritage:

Cultural and Heritage issues are managed as part of individual construction and maintenance projects.

RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: The City has previously awarded a biennial supply contract for supply only & supply and lay of bituminous products (RFT 09 1415) dated 27 February 2015.


55

COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: Community and Councillor consultation occurs as part of individual construction projects as opposed to the award of the annual supply contracts. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Local Government Act and the City’s Procurement Policy were observed when preparing and awarding this tender. Safe work methods and environmental management in line with legislative requirements will be observed as part of the delivery of the contract. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: Historically, the value of this tender was approximately $1 million per annum. Over a three-year period, the value of the tender is approximately $3 million. INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:

Title: Environment 2.3 Built Environment

Strategy 2.3.3

Providing a fit for purpose, safe and efficient infrastructure network


Strategy 3.1.3

Developing and maintaining infrastructure that increases the potential for business and investment.

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: To facilitate the development of a functional and safe road network through the City of Greater Geraldton which enhances the comfort and safety of the community. RISK MANAGEMENT: Design, supply and laying of bituminous products allows for renewal and maintenance of urban roads and rural roads, which provide smooth and safe transport of goods and personnel. This maintenance work, with good quality products allows roads and overtaking lanes to be maintained at their optimal standard, reducing the risk of damage to vehicles using the City’s roads. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED BY CITY OFFICERS: This tender was called to ensure compliance with the legislative procurement requirements of the Local Government Act. Alternatives to calling this tender include:

1. Call individual quotations and tenders for specific maintenance and construction projects. This option is not supported due to the volume of administrative effort required, and the potential to have higher costs through multiple small purchases; and

2. Use the WALGA Preferred Suppliers Panel. Some of the company’s listed on this panel include:

a. Bitutek Pty Ltd b. Boral Resources WA Ltd c. Downer Infrastructure d. Fulton Hogan Industries Pty Ltd


56

The use of the WALGA Preferred Suppliers Panel would limit opportunities for local suppliers and is not supported. COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR HALL, SECONDED CR THOMAS That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.20 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. AWARD the contract RFT 19 1617 – Design, Supply and Lay of Bituminous Products to the preferred tenderer being Catwest; and

2. RECORD the tendered rates in the minutes, as per below.


57

SUPPLY AND LAY

Job Size Litres

Binder Class / Type

0 – 5,000L 5,001 – 9,500L 9,501 –

14,000L

14,001 –

20,000L

20,001 –

28,000L

>28,001L

Rate excluding

GST

Rate excluding

GST

Rate excluding

GST

Rate excluding

GST

Rate excluding

GST

Rate excluding

GST

Polymer Modified

Bitumen S20E $3.00 $1.99 $1.79 $1.70 $1.63 $1.59

Polymer Modified

Interlayer (SAM) S35E $2.82 $1.81 $1.61 $1.53 $1.46 $1.42

Enrichment (1 : 2) $2.90 $1.81 $1.42 $1.30 $1.30 $1.30

Hot Bitumen C170 $2.40 $1.39 $1.19 $1.10 $1.04 $1.00

Hot Bitumen C320 $2.40 $1.39 $1.19 $1.10 $1.04 $1.00

Cationic Emulsion

Rapidset C170 60/40 $2.29 $1.28 $1.08 $0.99 $0.92 $0.88

Additional Cost for

Design Service Per 1000

Litres $451.50 $150.50 $90.30 $64.50 $45.15 $32.25

Double Washed

Aggregate 7mm (DWA 7) $71.00 $71.00 $71.00 $71.00 $71.00 $71.00

DWA 10 $60.00 $60.00 $60.00 $60.00 $60.00 $60.00

DWA 14 $56.00 $56.00 $56.00 $56.00 $56.00 $56.00


58

OTHER ITEMS Rate Excluding GST

Additional Cost for Design Service ($/1,000L) $32.25

Cost to provide sweeping services before and after works ($/m2) of job area $0.10

$/L Adjustment per % cutback (Extra over above rates for 1% cutter) - Kerosene Only, No Diesel

Type

0 – 5000L 5001 – 9500L 9501 – 14000L 14001 – 20000L 20001 – 28000L >28001L

Rate Excluding

GST

Rate Excluding

GST

Rate Excluding

GST

Rate Excluding

GST

Rate Excluding

GST

Rate Excluding

GST

Hot

Bitumen $0.04 $0.02 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01

Additional cost for pre-coating $/t of

aggregate

Type Rate Excluding GST

Polymer Modified Bitumen $11.50

Polymer Modified Interlayer (SAM) $11.50

Hot Bitumen $11.50


59

Rate Excluding GST

Mobilisations

(Each)

From distance less than 50km from Geraldton Post Office $0.00

From distance greater than 50km and less than 150km

packaged with other works (e.g. Shire of Chapman Valley

etc.) $600.00

Separate Mobilisation (distances greater than 150km) $850.00

* The Principal offers no guarantee of quantities required.

SUPPLY OF GOODS ONLY - (Material only, No Labour, Plant or Traffic Management Required)

$/L based on total L/visit

Type 0 – 5000L 5001 – 9500L 9501 – 14000L

Rate Excluding GST Rate Excluding GST Rate Excluding GST

Emulsion C170 60/40

Slow Setting $1.75 $1.09 $0.99

Cationic Emulsion

Rapidset C170 60/40 $1.68 $1.05 $0.86


60

$/t to be delivered to site stockpile location

Less than 50km Delivery Distance Between 50km and 120km Delivery

Distance

Between 120km and 200km

Delivery Distance

Supply & Deliver

Double Washed

Aggregate to site

Rate Excluding GST Rate Excluding GST Rate Excluding GST

7mm $74.52 $92.40 $110.00

10mm $60.83 $81.95 $99.55

14mm $54.23 $75.35 $92.95

Additional cost for pre-coating $/t of aggregate

Type Rate Excluding GST

Polymer Modified Bitumen $11.50

Polymer Modified Interlayer (SAM) $11.50

Hot Bitumen $11.50


61

CARRIED 11/0

Mayor Van Styn N/V

Cr. Douglas YES

Cr. Bylund YES

Cr. Keemink YES

Cr. Hall YES

Cr. Critch YES

Cr. Tanti YES

Cr. Reymond YES

Cr. McIlwaine YES

Cr. Freer N/V

Cr. Colliver YES

Cr. Caudwell YES

Cr. Thomas YES


62

14 REPORTS OF OFFICE OF THE CEO Nil.


63

15 REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED

AUGUST - REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-17-60304 AUTHOR: R McKim, Acting Chief Executive

Officer EXECUTIVE: R McKim, Acting Chief Executive

Officer DATE OF REPORT: 7 August 2017 FILE REFERENCE: GO/6/0012-04 ATTACHMENTS: Yes (x2)

A. Delegated Determinations & Subdivision Applications

B. List of Accounts Paid Under Delegation – July 2017

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: To receive the Reports of the City of Greater Geraldton. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: PART A That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.22 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to

1. RECEIVE the following appended reports: a. Reports – Development & Community Services:

i. DCSDD125 Delegated Determinations & Subdivision Applications.

PART B That Council by Simple Majority, pursuant to Sections 5.13 and 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 RESOLVES to:

1. RECEIVE the following appended reports: a. Reports – Corporate and Commercial Services:

i. CCS276 Confidential Report – List of Accounts Paid Under Delegation – July 2017.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Greater Geraldton BACKGROUND: Information and items for noting or receiving (i.e. periodic reports, minutes of other meetings) are to be included in an appendix attached to the Council agenda. Any reports received under this Agenda are considered received only. Any recommendations or proposals contained within the “Reports (including Minutes) to be Received” are not approved or endorsed by Council in any


64

way. Any outcomes or recommendations requiring Council approval must be presented separately to Council as a Report for consideration at an Ordinary Meeting of Council. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: Not applicable. LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Not applicable. COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR THOMAS, SECONDED CR HALL PART A That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.22 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. RECEIVE the following appended reports: a. Reports – Development & Community Services:

i. DCSDD125 Delegated Determinations & Subdivision Applications.

PART B That Council by Simple Majority, pursuant to Sections 5.13 and 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 RESOLVES to:

1. RECEIVE the following appended reports: a. Reports – Corporate and Commercial Services:

i. CCS276 Confidential Report – List of Accounts Paid Under Delegation – July 2017.

CARRIED 11/0



65

16 ELECTED MEMBERS MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

NOTICE OF MOTION - ABROLHOS TOURISM - COUNCIL POLICY

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-17-60926 AUTHOR: Cr V Tanti DATE OF REPORT: 8 August 2017 FILE REFERENCE: GO/19/0008 ATTACHMENTS: Yes (x1)

Draft Council Policy CP 2.3 Abrolhos Island Tourism

Councillor Comment I wish to submit a Notice of Motion on the proposed Abrolhos Islands Tourism Policy in order it be considered at the earliest opportunity and be tabled and voted on at the Ordinary Council Meeting in Mullewa on 22 August 2017. Executive Comment Development of Tourism on the Abrolhos Islands is one of the core streams of tourism sector development envisaged in the Mid West Regional Blueprint, and the Mid West Tourism Strategy previously released by the Mid West Development Commission (MWDC), and identified in the Growing Greater Geraldton Plan adopted by Council. It features strongly in the destination management plan work currently being pursued by Progress Midwest, the vehicle jointly created by the City and its economic development partners, including the MWDC and Mid West Chamber of Commerce and Industry (MWCCI). The City is aware of, and supports submissions put to State Government by the [then] Department of Fisheries, proposing State investment in facilities and amenities, to enable growth of Abrolhos Islands Tourism. Consistent with the Community Strategic Plan and the Growing Greater Geraldton Plan, the City will continue to support initiatives funded by the State to enable Abrolhos islands Tourism. The City’s Economic Development, Tourism and Visitors Centre teams (now seconded to Progress Midwest) have been strongly engaged in development of Abrolhos Islands tourism in recent years, working closely with local operators, including Geraldton Air Charter and Shine Aviation, growing the numbers of international tourists visiting Geraldton and the Abrolhos islands. With the Islands now included in the City’s local government district boundaries, regardless of the rate of development of tourism or aquaculture industries, the City now has building control and public health regulatory roles for the Islands. Over coming months, the means to deliver those responsibilities will be defined through engagement with the various State agencies with management control over the Islands – as determined by the new State Labor Government.


66

Support of the policy now proposed by Councillor Tanti is supported by the City’s Executive Management Team. PROPONENT: The proponent is Councillor V Tanti. COUNCILLOR MOTION: That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.20 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. APPROVE the Abrolhos Islands Tourism Policy; 2. MAKES the determination on the following grounds:

a. sustainable and managed tourism on the Abrolhos has the potential to provide a significant and lasting economic boost to Geraldton and the Mid West;

b. sustainable and managed tourism on the Abrolhos has the potential to also offer new employment, business and investment opportunities; and

c. the proposed Policy makes it clear to the State Government that the City is willing and keen to do all it can to facilitate tourism on the Abrolhos and also wishes to be part of the process to the extent that is appropriate and lawful.

COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR TANTI, SECONDED CR KEEMINK That Council by Simple Majority pursuant to Section 5.20 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. APPROVE the Abrolhos Islands Tourism Policy; 2. MAKES the determination on the following grounds:

a. sustainable and managed tourism on the Abrolhos has the potential to provide a significant and lasting economic boost to Geraldton and the Mid West;

b. sustainable and managed tourism on the Abrolhos has the potential to also offer new employment, business and investment opportunities; and

c. the proposed Policy makes it clear to the State Government that the City is willing and keen to do all it can to facilitate tourism on the Abrolhos and also wishes to be part of the process to the extent that is appropriate and lawful; and

3. AUTHORISE the CEO to write to the Premier and relevant Ministers, advising Council position and requesting discussion on how we can progress implementation of the Policy.


67

CARRIED 11/0

Mayor Van Styn N/V

Cr. Douglas YES

Cr. Bylund YES

Cr. Keemink YES

Cr. Hall YES

Cr. Critch YES

Cr. Tanti YES

Cr. Reymond YES

Cr. McIlwaine YES

Cr. Freer N/V

Cr. Colliver YES

Cr. Caudwell YES

Cr. Thomas YES

REASON FOR VARIATION TO THE COUNCILLOR’S MOTION: That Council strengthen the motion to ensure future actions are identified.


68

17 QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN

GIVEN Nil.

18 URGENT BUSINESS APPROVED BY PRESIDING MEMBER OR BY

DECISION OF THE MEETING

EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: That Council by Simple Majority RESOLVES to MOVE behind Closed doors in accordance with section 5.23(2) of the Local Government Act 1995 and section 5.2(i) of Meeting Procedures Local Law, that the following report is confidential as it contains information relating to a contract entered into, or may be entered into by the local government and which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting. The Public, City of Greater Geraldton Executive team and Officers left Chambers at 2.47pm The Minute secretary and J Graham, Manager Corporate Services, were asked to remain in Chambers by the Presiding Member. Cr S Douglas declared an impartiality interest in item CCS279 Appointment of Chief Executive Officer, as he worked with one or more of the candidates and left Chambers at 2.47pm for the confidential discussion. COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR HALL, SECONDED CR THOMAS That Council by Simple Majority RESOLVES to MOVE behind Closed doors in accordance with section 5.23(2) of the Local Government Act 1995 and section 5.2(i) of Meeting Procedures Local Law, that the following attachments are confidential as they contains information relating to a contract entered into, or may be entered into by the local government and which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting.

CARRIED 10/0


A two minute recess was called at 2.47pm, with the meeting resuming at 2.49pm.


69

EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION That Council by Simple Majority RESOLVES to MOVE from behind Closed doors. COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR THOMAS, SECONDED CR HALL That Council by Simple Majority RESOLVES to MOVE from behind closed doors.

CARRIED 10/0

Mayor Van Styn N/V

Cr. Douglas N/V

Cr. Bylund YES

Cr. Keemink YES

Cr. Hall YES

Cr. Critch YES

Cr. Tanti YES

Cr. Reymond YES

Cr. McIlwaine YES

Cr. Freer N/V

Cr. Colliver YES

Cr. Caudwell YES

Cr Douglas returned to Chambers at 3.17pm, but did not vote on Item CCS279 Appointment of Chief Executive Officer, as per his declaration of interest. The Public, City of Greater Geraldton Executive team and Officers returned to Chambers at 3.17pm


70

CCS279 APPOINTMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AGENDA REFERENCE: D-17-64376 AUTHOR: J Graham, Manager Corporate Services EXECUTIVE: Cr N McIlwaine, Deputy Mayor DATE OF REPORT: 18 August 2017 FILE REFERENCE: SM/14/0055-02 ATTACHMENTS: Yes – (x2) Strictly Confidential

A. Lester Blades – Recruitment Selection Report for Council Only

B. Minutes of CEO Performance Review Committee of 15 August 2017 for Council Only

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval of the appointment of the preferred candidate, as per the attached Confidential Report, as Chief Executive Officer for the City of Greater Geraldton. EXECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION: That Council by Absolute Majority in accordance with Section 5.36 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. APPOINT the preferred candidate, as per the Confidential Report and

Minutes of the CEO Performance Review Committee 15 August 2017, as Chief Executive Officer of the City of Greater Geraldton with effect from 28 August 2017.

PROPONENT: The proponent is the City of Greater Geraldton. BACKGROUND: The previous Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Ken Diehm resigned from the organisation in June 2017. The Director of infrastructure Mr Ross McKim was appointed as acting CEO and is currently filling this role In accordance with Section 5.36 of the Local Government Act 1995, a local government is to employ a person to be the CEO of the local government and such person it believes is suitably qualified for the position. Council resolved at the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 26 April 2017 to:

1. APPOINT Mr Ross McKim as the Acting CEO effective from 14 June 2017;

and 2. DELEGATE authority to the CEO Performance Review Committee to:

a. develop and undertake the recruitment process for a new CEO; and b. make a recommendation to Council on the permanent appointment of a

new CEO.

The Committee consists of the following elected members: a) Mayor Van Styn; (Chair)


71

b) Cr B Hall c) Cr T Thomas d) Cr N McIlwaine e) Cr C Caudwell

The Committee reviewed and adjusted the CEO’s Position Description which was circulated to Elected Members for input (a final version is included in the attachment).

The committee sought RFQ’s from external recruitment agencies to assist with the recruitment of the CEO with Lester Blades Executive Search being the organisation chosen (based on price and previous experience in the LG sector).

Jeff Graham, Manager Corporate Services was nominated to assist with local administration of the process and act as liaison between the Committee and Lester Blades.

The position was advertised during July 2017 in a number of state and national newspapers/publications and online, which is included in the Lester Blades report.

Upon closure of the advertising period a total of twenty one (21) applicants were received by Lester Blades who reviewed the applications and conducted fourteen (14) preliminary Interviews.

The Committee was provided with a detailed report on seven (7) “short listed” candidates from Lester Blades. After review, the Committee shortlisted six (6) of the remaining candidates for a second round interview.

The interviews were held in Geraldton on 9 August 2017 after which a preferred candidate was selected for further reference checking. After positive references were received, the Committee unanimously agreed on recommending the preferred candidate to Council for appointment to the CEO’s position.

The preferred candidate’s CV is included in the Lester Blades Confidential Report. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CULTURAL ISSUES: Economic: There are no economic impacts.




72

Cultural & Heritage: There are no cultural or heritage impacts. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS: There are no relevant precedents associated with this matter. COMMUNITY/COUNCILLOR CONSULTATION: The CEO Recruitment Committee, which comprises of the Mayor, Cr McIlwaine, Cr Thomas, Cr Hall and Cr Caudwell, have undertaken the CEO recruitment process in accordance with its charter and now recommends the appointment of a suitable candidate. Three (3) formal and minuted closed meetings were conducted over the recruitment period. All closed meetings were advertised within the prescribed notice period (7 days) in the local newspaper as required under the Local Government Act LEGISLATIVE/POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Section 5.36 of the Local Government Act 1995 and Part 4 Section 18A-F of the Local Government (Administration) Regulations 1996 apply to the appointment of a CEO.

Section 5.36 (2) of the Local Government Act requires:

A person is not to be employed in the position of CEO unless the council —

(a) believes that the person is suitably qualified for the position; and

(b) is satisfied* with the provisions of the proposed employment contract.

* Absolute majority required.

Section 5.39 of the Local Government Act determines the requirements of the CEO’s contract as follows. Relevant sections are below.

(2) A contract under this section —

(a) in the case of an acting or temporary position, cannot be for a term exceeding one year;

(b) in every other case, cannot be for a term exceeding 5 years.

(3) A contract under this section is of no effect unless —

(a) the expiry date is specified in the contract; and

(b) there are specified in the contract performance criteria for the purpose of reviewing the person’s performance; and

(c) any other matter that has been prescribed as a matter to be included in the contract has been included.

(4) A contract under this section is to be renewable and subject to subsection (5) may be varied.


73

(5) A provision in, or condition of, an agreement or arrangement has no effect if it purports to affect the application of any provision of this section.

(7) A CEO is to be paid or provided with such remuneration as is determined by the Salaries and Allowances Tribunal under the Salaries and Allowances Act 1975 section 7A.

(8) A local government is to ensure that subsection (7) is complied with in entering into, or renewing, a contract of employment with a CEO.

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial and budget salary implications as the CEO remuneration is budgeted for each year. Lester Blades fees are fixed at $28,500 (ex GST) of which $19,500 was paid in the last financial year (2016/2017) INTEGRATED PLANNING LINKS:



Strategy 4.5.3. Providing leadership for the community in sustainability issue sand local government reform matter.

REGIONAL OUTCOMES: There are no impacts to regional outcomes. RISK MANAGEMENT: The major risks to the City from not appointing an Acting CEO and promptly starting the CEO recruitment process include:

1. Reduced productivity and efficiency caused by a drop in the

organisational culture; and 2. Key staff departures caused by increased uncertainty in relation to

the future management of the organisation. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED BY CITY OFFICERS: No alternative options were considered.


74

COUNCIL DECISION MOVED CR HALL, SECONDED CR REYMOND That Council by Absolute Majority in accordance with Section 5.36 of the Local Government Act 1995 RESOLVES to:

1. APPOINT the preferred candidate, as per the Confidential Report

and Minutes of the CEO Performance Review Committee 15 August 2017, as Chief Executive Officer of the City of Greater Geraldton with effect from 28 August 2017.


Mayor Van Styn N/V

Cr. Douglas N/V

Cr. Bylund YES

Cr. Keemink YES

Cr. Hall YES

Cr. Critch YES

Cr. Tanti YES

Cr. Reymond YES

Cr. McIlwaine YES

Cr. Freer N/V

Cr. Colliver YES

Cr. Caudwell YES

Cr N McIlwaine advised Chambers that the preferred Candidate is Ross McKim. Ross McKim thanked Council and gave a speech as follows:

Thank you for selecting me to be the City of Greater Geraldton’s next Chief Executive Officer. I am excited, honored and humbled by the prospect.

I very much look forward to working closely with you, the staff and the Community in building on the great work currently underway. I believe you have made a number of very courageous decisions over the last two years which has resulted in a huge and rapid improvement in the City’s financial position. These decisions have not been easy. More needs to be done, but your long term financial plan has chartered the course.

Complementing this endeavour, is the need to develop robust asset renewal programs that will ensure the City’s nearly $1 billion in infrastructure remains fit for purpose.

We have a number of assets reaching the end of their useful lives. We need to better understand this issue so we can efficiently replace these assets at the optimum time. For instance, officers are currently undertaking a review of the sporting tower lights as per the City’s Sporting Facilities Support Review recommendations and the interim news is that this will present another challenge as a number of the tower lights are at the end of their lives.


75

“On the flip side, I also look forward to working with key stakeholders such as the Mid-West Development Commission and the Mid-West Chamber of Commerce and Industry to develop and implement initiatives to assist in the growth of the local economy. The Progress Mid West model combined with the completion of the Growth Plan demonstrates the Council’s commitment to doing all it can to grow the local community.

I also look forward to developing and implementing the City’s customer service strategy and working with local community groups to ensure their input is provided to Councillors as part of the decision making processes.

I very much appreciate the faith the Councillors have shown in me by selecting me for this position. It is very rewarding as it provides me with the opportunity to continue doing what I love – which is serving the local community to the best of my ability. I am passionate about local government and all that it represents and achieves. The people who work in this industry are also passionate about the local community and it is a pleasure to work for them.

I’d like to thank everyone who has supported me over the last two years working with Geraldton and throughout my local government career and also my wife and family who put up with me and the hours I spend away from them. I believe Geraldton has a very bright future ahead of it, and I am excited about making a positive contribution.

Council congratulated Mr McKim on his appointment.


76

19 CLOSURE There being no further business the meeting closed at 3.24pm.


77

APPENDIX 1 – ATTACHMENTS AND REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED Attachments and Reports to be Received are available on the City of Greater Geraldton website at: http://www.cgg.wa.gov.au/your-council/meetings

http://www.cgg.wa.gov.au/your-council/meetings

ordinary meeting of council minutes · 8/22/2017 · ordinary meeting of council minutes 22 august...

Documents