proposed local government amalgamations community forum wednesday 20 th february 2013

PROPOSED LOCAL GOVERNMENT

AMALGAMATIONS

COMMUNITY FORUM WEDNESDAY 20th FEBRUARY 2013

Provide an overview of significant changes planned as part of the State Government’s Local Government Reform process;

Seek community feedback on the proposed changes; and

Inform the subsequent submission by the Shire of Serpentine Jarrahdale required by the 5th April 2013.

Forum Purpose

Forum Agenda

Key Outcomes of the Metropolitan Local Government Review Process

Source: October 2012 PowerPoint Presentation by the Chair of the Metropolitan Local Government Review Panel available from the Department of Local Government website.

Web address is : http://metroreform.dlg.wa.gov.au/FinalReport.aspx

The Panel examined international, national and local research and published more than 40 background, briefing and information papers.

Website critical – about 20,000 visits during the review.

Nearly 450 submissions received - available on the website (if permission was given).

Research and Analysis

Source: PowerPoint Presentation by the Chair of the Metropolitan Local Government Review Panel available from the Department of Local Government website.Web address is : http://metroreform.dlg.wa.gov.au/FinalReport.aspx

Two public forums, one local government forum

Meeting with representatives of: each metropolitan local government (25 of 30

accepted) WALGA, LGMA interest groups e.g. Committee for Perth,

Chamber of Commerce and Industry key State Government agencies.

Feedback incorporated by the Panel in finalising the report and recommendations

Consultation


Duplication and wasted resources Inconsistencies in processes and approaches Fragmented approach to local planning Illogical boundaries Great variation in the size and capacity of

local governments. Disparity in service levels Limited capability to address region-wide

issues.

Current Weaknesses


30 recommendations in total The existing Regional Local Governments in the

metropolitan area be dissolved A new structure of local government in

metropolitan Perth be created through specific legislation which reduces the number of local governments in metropolitan Perth to 12, with boundaries as detailed in Section 5 of the report.

Some Key Recommendations


Two options with 12 local governments proposed Option (A) amalgamating existing entities. Option (B) amalgamating and splitting some LGs to

create more strategically focussed boundaries. This is the preferred option.

Local governments created would have an average population in 2026 of around 190,000.

Recommended Structure


less duplication more logical boundaries increased ability to attract and retain the best

professional staff more financially capable local governments more consistency in services across local government

areas better use of existing infrastructure fewer regulations improved capacity to undertake significant projects more effective advocacy for the community and the

region improved capability to address region-wide issues

Benefits Include



Population Outcomes

Reducing the number of local governments with a Swan or Canning River foreshore from 21 to 7

Reducing the number of ‘‘hills’’ councils from 6 to 2

Reducing the number of coastal councils from 11 to 7

Boundaries of local governments abutting the Swan and Canning Rivers be extended out to the river midpoint

Key Elements


Shire of Serpentine Jarrahdale 7 = Proposed City of Armadale boundary

Option A – Non preferred

Shire of Serpentine Jarrahdale 7 = Proposed City of Armadale boundary

8 = Proposed City of Rockingham boundary

Option B – Preferred

A Shire of Serpentine Jarrahdale Perspective

Richard Gorbunow Acting Chief Executive Officer

Council does not support the proposed split and amalgamation of Serpentine Jarrahdale with other LGA’s

We recognise the need for reform We propose a series of reforms as contained

in the following slides. We are a growing community

Council’s Current Position

Loss of identity Loss of autonomy and control over our collective

destiny No resultant benefits with many potential

downsides Limited representation It puts our unique environment at risk Diminished emergency services capability The drivers for this initiative are incomplete Inconsistent messages Our community is split in three parts as a result We are more a part of Peel than Armadale I will explain these in more detail

Why we Oppose the Proposal

Loss of identity The Shire of Serpentine Jarrahdale would cease to

exist We become a part of Armadale or Rockingham or

Murray Our collective voice is weakened

Loss of autonomy and control over our collective destiny We will rely on other decision makers to recognise

our priorities We cannot control what happens at the local level Key local area decision making responsibility is

moved away We rely on a single voice to represent our needs

Our Concerns in More Detail

No resultant benefits with many potential downsides No rate decrease likely to result Services may be reduced and centralised The Review Panel’s benefits are based upon

expediency not community Limited representation

We would have a single voice at the City of Armadale Council table

We are split in 3 parts as a community Our collective voice is lost


It puts our unique environment at risk Others may not value what we have as we do There will be many competing priorities We surrender control to others

Diminished emergency services capability We may no longer have a locally based service Services may become centralised in Armadale

The drivers for this initiative are incomplete The focus of the review is solely on economies of

scale It ignores social capital and environmental value


Loss of identity Loss of autonomy and control over our collective

destiny No resultant benefits with many potential

downsides Limited representation It puts our unique environment at risk Diminished emergency services capability The drivers for this initiative are incomplete Inconsistent messages Our community is split in three parts as a result We are more a part of Peel than Armadale


Inconsistent messages Amalgamation not proposed in earlier reviews in

1974, 1996 or 2006 2009 commendation for sustainable LG practices Now we are too small

Our community is split in three parts as a result We are split between City of Armadale, City of

Rockingham and Shire of Murray We are more a part of Peel than Armadale

We will lose our identity and function as part of the Peel region


Serpentine Jarrahdale remains as is With a reduction in the number of elected

members Regional service delivery opportunities result Boundary changes result west of Kwinana

Freeway Peel based service amalgamations result Alternative reform models for achieving

economies of scale be explored

Our Preferred Approach

Community Forum

Discuss Key Recommendations Amalgamation only Amalgamation and splitting Council’s proposed approach

Community Forum

Complete Forum Feedback Sheet on Proposed Recommendations

Consolidate the feedback received tonight and finalise the workshop summary

Post the summary to the Council webpage Present to full Council Council will prepare and lodge its submission

to Dept of Local Government by 5th April 2013

Community welcomed and encouraged to make their own submissions.

Next Steps

Click here

www.dlg.wa.gov.au

Click here

Department of Local GovernmentGordon Stephenson House140 William StreetPERTH WA 6000

GPO Box R1250PERTH WA 6844

Telephone: (08) 6552 1500Facsimile: (08) 6552 1555Free call: 1800 620 511 (Country Only)Translating and Interpreting Service (TIS) - Tel: 13 14 50

Or at

proposed local government amalgamations community forum wednesday 20 th february 2013

Documents

local research

local government forum

number of local governments

capacity of local governments

capable local governments

web address

powerpoint presentation

metropolitan perth