special council minutes - 3 june 2014 - shire … · special council minutes - 3 june 2014 page 1...

SPECIAL COUNCIL MINUTES - 3 JUNE 2014

Mission Statement:

To support and develop a sustainable, thriving and resilient Community

through leadership and partnership.

TO BE HELD: Tuesday, 3 June 2014 at 11am

LOCATION: Beechworth Supper Room

ATTENDEES: NAME TITLE

Cr Bernard Gaffney Mayor

Cr Peter Croucher Deputy Mayor

Cr Barb Murdoch Councillor

Cr James Trenery Councillor

Cr Jenny O’Connor Councillor

Cr Don Chambers Councillor

Cr Roberta Horne Councillor

Gerry Smith Chief Executive Officer

Mark Florence General Manager Sustainable Communities

Robert Uebergang Acting General Manager Infrastructure Services

Greg Pinkerton General Manager Corporate Services

APOLOGIES:

Vision Statement:

INDIGO – A great place to live, work and visit.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. WELCOME .................................................................................................................3

2. OPENING PRAYER, ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE TRADITIONAL OWNERS OF THE LAND & NATIONAL ANTHEM .......................................................................................3

3. JUNIOR COUNCILLOR ................................................................................................3

4. APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE .........................................................................3

5. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST ..................................................................3

6. OPEN FORUM ...........................................................................................................3

7. CONDOLENCES ..........................................................................................................4

8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MINUTES ..........................................................5

9. DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS ..................................................................................5

10. CORPORATE SERVICES ...............................................................................................6

10.1 Consideration of 2014-15 Budget Submissions ................................................................ 7

10.2 Instrument of Delegation - Chiltern Goods Shed ........................................................... 14

11. SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES .................................................................................. 17

11.1 Planning Permit Application PP14-0001 - Utility Installation, Cue Springs Road, Stanley ...................................................................................................................................... 17

12. INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES .................................................................................... 19

13. GOVERNANCE ......................................................................................................... 19

14. NOTICES OF MOTION .............................................................................................. 20

14.1 Targetted Savings ............................................................................................................ 20

15. COMMITTEE AND DELEGATES REPORTS (ARE ALL FOR INFORMATION ONLY) ........... 21

16. GENERAL BUSINESS ................................................................................................. 21


1. WELCOME

The Mayor opened the meeting at 11.06am, introduced the new CEO, Gerry Smith and welcomed all those in attendance. Gerry Smith, incoming CEO responded. 2. OPENING PRAYER, ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE TRADITIONAL OWNERS OF THE LAND & NATIONAL ANTHEM

Cr Murdoch read the opening prayer and acknowledged the traditional owners of the land. 3. JUNIOR COUNCILLOR

Nil 4. APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Nil. 5. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Nil. 6. OPEN FORUM

6.1 ED TYRIE

1. At the Council meeting on 27 May 2014, I put a question to Council as to whether in consideration of the current application this was the first time the ESO1 had been tested in relation to a water mining facility. Mr Florence agreed this was the case. In light of Mr Florence’s response and the implications that will flow on from it, with regard to the Stanley Plateau, will Council take this into account when considering their decision?

Response: Cr Gaffney – yes. 2. As a result of Stanley Pastoral’s application to VCAT, Council finds itself in a

position that it will have to represent its interests to the Tribunal. Given that situation, will Council consider rejecting the permit application in order that submissions concerning the applicability of the ESO1 as a basis for rejecting the application can be tested?

Response: Cr Gaffney – it would depend whether Council accepts or rejects the application


3. Will Council ensure that an independent advocate represents Council’s and the community’s interests at any VCAT hearing?

Response: Cr Gaffney – again, it would depend whether Council accepts or rejects the application

6.2 MIKE BYRNE

1. Can Council confirm the basis on which the “Council road” from the Stanley Pub to the Alpine Shire boundary was gazetted at some point in the past as being okay for big trucks, despite its width being insufficient and its construction being too light for such use?

Response: Robert Uebergang – Council surmises that the original road would have been declared a B-Double route and may have been upgraded using industry money. 2. Was this gazetted based on AusRoads engineering manuals and, if not, could

they be consulted? From the experiences reported in Alpine Shire about water tankers in Buffalo Creek Road, there will be significant road rehabilitation and improvement costs (and an unsafe road until work completed) that Indigo ratepayers will have to pay for?

Response: Robert Uebergang – AusRoads would not have been consulted. A full investigation of the road would be required to determine the life of the road and its deterioration.

6.3 ROBIN MCLIESH

1. The draft budget states (page 20) that the population of the Shire is ageing and has a greater proportion of older people than the Australian average.

Could the Councillor, or Councillors, that have reviewed the submissions had have acknowledged the importance of Mrs Hawking’s submission for a footpath linking Finch Street and Last Street, ensure that the issue is considered today and a decision made on its inclusion in the 2014/15 budget. The existing track is rough gravel with loose stones, and is both unsuitable and unsafe for people using walking frames, mobile scooters or prams and pushers. If judged suitable for inclusion in the budget, consideration should be given to providing a footpath from Finch Street to Wood Street to meet the intent of this submission.

Response: Cr Gaffney – the matter will be considered today

7. CONDOLENCES

Nil.


8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM PREVIOUS MINUTES

Nil 9. DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS

Nil


10. CORPORATE SERVICES

Greg Pinkerton, General Manager Corporate Services read a statement on behalf of Frank Bonacci, Manager Finance.

At last week’s Ordinary Council Meeting a number of statements were made by a member of the public that questioned the Finance Manager’s treatment of a particular expense. These statements suggested that accounting standards had not been complied with, and/or that there was cause for concern regarding the accounting treatment of project costs. According to section 4.23 of Council’s meeting procedure local law, a staff member subject to individual criticism has a right to make a short statement at a Council meeting. I am making this statement on his behalf.

The accounting treatment of the expense in question was fully compliant, and correctly treated in accordance with accounting standards. This expense has been openly reported at previous council meetings, and published in council reports. The suggestion at last week’s council meeting that this expense was inappropriately capitalised is incorrect.

In relation to questions about general accounting practices it must me noted that council is subject to various internal and external audit procedures including annual compliance audits by the Victorian auditor general. Indigo Shire Council has an enviable record in these audits and neither the finance department, or the finance manager’s integrity have ever been questioned by any internal or external auditor.

Council are committed to complying with all applicable accounting standards, and thank the finance manager and finance department for their continued compliance with these standards.


10.1 CONSIDERATION OF 2014-15 BUDGET SUBMISSIONS

File No: 2014/269

Frank Bonacci - Manager Finance Corporate Services

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to Section 129, 130 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989, Council considers each of the 15 attached submissions, and any late submissions, for the 2014-15 Budget as appended to this Report and make a separate determination on each of those submissions.

RESOLUTION

Pursuant to Section 129, 130 and 223 of the Local Government Act 1989, Council considers each of the 15 attached submissions, and any late submissions, for the 2014-15 Budget as appended to this Report and make a separate determination on each of those submissions.

Moved: Cr Chambers Seconded: Cr Croucher

Carried

RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 1 – CHILTERN COMMUNITY REQUEST

That Council note this item

Moved: Cr Murdoch Seconded: Cr Chambers

Carried

RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 2 – UPGRADING OF SOLDIERS ROAD


Moved: Cr Chambers Seconded: Cr Horne

Carried


RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 3 – WILSON


Moved: Cr Chambers Seconded: Cr O’Connor

Carried

RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 4 – CLYDESDALE



Carried

RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 5 – PLEITNER


Moved: Cr Murdoch Seconded: Cr Horne

Carried

RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 6A – BEECHWORTH SENIOR CITIZENS CENTRE

That Council notifies the Beechworth Senior Citizens Centre Committee to suggest an application to Council’s Community Grants Committee.

Moved: Cr Croucher Seconded: Cr Murdoch

Carried

RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 6B – BEECHWORTH SENIOR CITIZENS CENTRE



Carried


RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 7 – MCLIESH


Moved: Cr Trenery Seconded: Cr Chambers

Carried

RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 8 – WOORAGEE HALL

That Council liaise with the Wooragee Hall Committee to urgently receive their contractors proposal to allow works completion prior to the end of this financial year

Moved: Cr Chambers Seconded: Cr Croucher

Carried

RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 9 – PALMER


Moved: Cr Croucher Seconded: Cr O’Connor

Carried

RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 10 – STEWART


Moved: Cr Chambers Seconded: Cr Horne

Carried

RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 11 – HAWKING


Moved: Cr Murdoch Seconded: Cr Horne

Carried


RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 12 – FOI FEE INCREASE

That the FOI fee increase be included in the 2014/15 Budget

Moved: Cr O’Connor Seconded: Cr Murdoch

Carried

RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 13 – FEDERAL ASSISTANCE GRANT FUNDING SHORTFALL

That Council note this item and recommend the impact be addressed by Council through the SRP later in the year


Carried

RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 14 – RUTHERGLEN WINE EXPERIENCE

That Council include this request for solar panels in the next solar panel roll-out

Moved: Cr O’Connor Seconded: Cr Horne

Carried

RESOLUTION

SUBMISSION 15 – DESTINATION RUTHERGLEN


Moved: Cr Croucher Seconded: Cr Trenery

Carried

INTRODUCTION

Attached to this report is a summary of all the 2014-15 Budget Submissions made through the Section 223 process that have been received by Council up to the closing time for such submissions (which was 5pm 28 May 2014) which includes two submissions received after the close off. The summary also includes officer comments for each submission. Also attached, is a full copy of each of those submissions as received by Council. If any Budget submissions are received subsequent to the preparation of this report, Council is not obliged to consider them; however, Council may resolve to consider them nonetheless.


Council is obliged to consider every Budget submission made and received within the advertised Section 223 period. In order to fulfill this obligation, Council should make a formal resolution on each submission. While Council can move a resolution that deals with several submissions together in the same way, it is advised that a separate resolution for each submission be made. All budget submissions have been formally acknowledged in writing and that acknowledgement letter has advised the submitter that their submission will be considered by Council at today’s Special Council meeting. Any Budget submission(s) supported by Council for inclusion to the 2014-15 Budget will need to have its funding sources identified as explained within the Financial Implications section below. In addition to public submissions to the 2014-15 Budget, Council should also consider any internal submissions to the 2014-15 Budget. These internal submissions are raised where known events or notifications have occurred during the four week Section 223 period, that will have a significant affect or impact upon the Budget. As at 30 May 2014 when this report was finalised, there are two such internal submissions. One of these internal submissions relates to the charge to the statutory fee for Freedom of Information requests and the second to the changes of the Federal Assistant Grant within the recent Federal Budget. BACKGROUND

Section 129 of LGA 1989 states that:

129. Public notice

1. As soon as practicable after a Council has prepared a budget or revised budget, the Council must give public notice.

2. A person has a right to make a submission under section 223 on any proposal contained in the budget or revised budget.

3. In addition to any other requirements specified by this Act, the notice referred to in subsection (1) must:

(a) Contain any details required by the regulations; and

(b) Advise that copies of the budget or revised budget are available for inspection for at least 14 days after the publication of the notice at-

(i) The Council office and any district offices; and

(ii) Any other place required by the regulations.

4. A copy of the budget or revised budget must be displayed at the places specified under subsection (3)(b).

LGA 1989 – Section 130 - Adoption of budget or revised budget

130. Adoption of budget or revised budget


1. A Council may adopt a budget or revised budget if it has complied with all of the relevant requirements of this Act relating to budgets and revised budgets.

2. The Council must give public notice of its decision under subsection (1).

3. The Council must adopt the budget by 31 August each year.

4. The Council must submit a copy of the budget to the Minister by 31 August each year.

5. The Minister may extend the period within which a Council must comply with subsection (4).

6. If a Council fails to submit a copy of the budget to the Minister within the time allowed, the Secretary must ensure that details of the failure are published in the annual report of the Department.

7. A Council must give the Minister any details concerning its budget or revised budget that the Minister requests.

8. A Council must comply with subsection (7)-

(a) Within 14 days of receiving a request in writing for the details from the Minister; or

(b) Within any longer period specified by the Minister in the request.

9. A copy of the budget or revised budget must be available for inspection by the public at-

(a) The Council office and any district offices; and

(b) Any other place required by the regulations.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The financial implications vary and be dependent upon the consideration and outcome for each of thirteen public and two internal submission made for the draft 2014/15 Budget. The Draft 2014-15 Budget contains a balance funding level for the budgeted Cash Flow for 2014-15. Any submissions that are supported by Council for inclusion into the 2014-15 Budget must include a determination of how the inclusion will be funded. There are basically six options to do this.

1. Increase rate revenue

2. Increase other revenue

3. Increase borrowings

4. Remove already approved 2014-15 Operating Budget activities

5. Remove already approved 2014-15 Capital Works projects

6. A combination of the above five options


CONCLUSION

Council is scheduled to formally adopt the 2014/15 Budget at the Ordinary Meeting of Council to be convened Tuesday 24 June 2014. In order for Indigo Shire to comply with the LGA in relation to adoption of the draft 2014/15 Budget, each of the public submissions must be considered and prior to formal adoption of the Budget. It is further recommended that the two internal submissions are also considered and resolved.


10.2 INSTRUMENT OF DELEGATION - CHILTERN GOODS SHED

File No: 2014/280 Susannah Doyle - Tourism & Economic Development Manager

Corporate Services

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorses the establishment of the Chiltern Goods Shed S86 Committee and the associated Instrument of Delegation (attached).

RESOLUTION

That Council endorses the establishment of the Chiltern Goods Shed S86 Committee and the associated Instrument of Delegation (attached).


Carried

MOTION

That the Councillor representative on the Chiltern Goods Shed S86 Committee is Cr Murdoch

Moved: Cr O’Connor Seconded: Cr Horne

Carried

INTRODUCTION

Indigo Shire Council in partnership with Chiltern Tourism & Development Inc. nominated the former Chiltern Goods Shed at Chiltern Railway Station for development as part of the Victorian Government’s Community Use of Vacant Rail Buildings (CUVRB) $10 million program in August 2012. This magnificent former Goods Shed was identified as an ideal location to create a cycle tourism hub, potential art space, community meeting area and possible home for a future Mount Pilot National Park Discovery Centre. The nomination was successful and VicTrack has commenced the capital work required to develop this building. The Heads of Agreement has been signed by Council and VicTrack. The lease documentation is being finalised, with the lease due to commence on 1st July 2014, or on practical completion of the capital works. BACKGROUND

VicTrack expects the works to be completed by 30th June 2014. In preparation for the completion of the capital works on the Chiltern Goods Shed and associated land within the lease, it is proposed that Council will establish a Section 86 Committee to manage the building and associated land and develop its tourism potential.


KEY IMPLICATIONS

The key implications for Council are the need to set up and manage a new Section 86 committee to oversee the management of the Shed. RISK MANAGEMENT

Risk Management activities and responsibilities will be consistent with those of other S86 Committee’s. At the commencement of the lease of the former Chiltern Goods Shed, Indigo Shire Council will ensure that the premise is appropriately insured, incorporating up-to-date valuations and appraisals, and in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act and best Risk Management practice. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The S86 Committee will require Council representation and standard S86 Committee administration. The site rent will cost $500 per annum, excluding the first year of the lease where the fee is waived. Day-to-day running and maintenance costs will be Council’s responsibility. There will also be future costs associated with the fit-out of the building, to be proposed in future years’ budgets. Where possible grants will be sourced to assist with these operation and fit-out costs. POLICY IMPLICATIONS

The Chiltern Goods Shed project will assist with the achievement of the key strategic objective 3: Growing our economic prosperity, as set out in the Council Plan 2013-2017. It will also contribute to strategic actions within Indigo Shire Tourism Strategy 2013-2018:

Strategy 1: Develop Cycle Tourism infrastructure

Strategy 2: Advocate for tourism development of the Shire’s historically significant buildings: 4.2.2: Pursue opportunities with VicTrack to develop the former Chiltern Goods Shed into a cycle tourism hub.

COMMUNICATION

The S86 Committee member nominations will be advertised upon Council approval of the Instrument of Delegation. A public launch is planned on completion of the building works by VicTrack, which would coincide with the commencement of the lease and S86 Committee establishment.


CONCLUSION

Council is taking the lead responsibility for the Chiltern Goods Shed, including taking on the lease of the Goods Shed and the adjacent ‘Gang Camp’ land and management of the Section 86 Committee. Council are asked to endorse the Instrument of Delegation for the establishment of the Chiltern Goods Shed S86 Committee.

Attachments 1. Instrument of Delegation Chiltern Goods Shed


11. SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES

11.1 PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION PP14-0001 - UTILITY INSTALLATION, CUE SPRINGS ROAD, STANLEY

File No: 2014/273 Kath Oswald - Town Planner Sustainable Communities

For Decision

RECOMMENDATION

That Council advise VCAT that in relation to PP14-0001 the decision that Council would have made had it been able to do so would have been to issue a Notice of Decision with the conditions as shown in Attachment 2.

MOTION That Council reject the application PP14-0001-Utility installation, Cue Springs Road, Stanley for the extraction of water

Moved: Cr O’Connor Seconded: Cr Chambers

Carried

There are many reasons for my position, but I will outline them in three broad categories: Environmental Damage I am concerned at the actual and potential environmental damage that could occur through the use of water that has been allocated and capped specifically for agricultural use, being used for bottled water. Neither the Water Act nor the Planning Act take into account the end use of water once it has been extracted, despite the fact that the allocation of the water on this property is specifically for agricultural use in an area that is deemed to be High Value Agricultural Land. The use of this water for transporting out of the area for commercial bottling – an industry itself which is regarded as environmentally damaging, goes against the very spirit of the allocation and capping for agricultural use. The deficiencies in the Water Act and possibly the Planning Act in relation to the end use of water once extracted in not an issue we can address or rectify at LG level, but nor does it exempt us from taking a responsible potion on the management of the natural resources of our Shire as stated in both the Local Government Act and our own Council Plan. In addition I note the Proposal is inconsistent with the purposes of both the Farming Zone and the objectives of the Environmental Significance Overlay.


Safety The hazard of increasing heavy vehicle movements – and I note up to 10 movements/day are allowed under the proposed permit conditions – on the narrow winding road between Stanley and Beechworth is obvious. There is already concern at the number of serious near misses that have occurred in recent times between road users and logging trucks. Increasing the number of trucks can obviously only increase the hazard. We also have evidence that the Pocket B-double trucks are unable to safely manoeuvre the roundabout in Stanley as evidenced in the photos I will table. This clearly creates a potential hazard. VicRoads have stated that this council be rectified by requisitioning land and removing existing established tress for the streetscape to make this intersection manageable for these vehicles. This is a heavy price for the township of Stanley and the taxpayer to bear for the benefit of one private business. It is also detrimental to supporting the stated aim of ISC to increase ecotourism, particularly cycling tourism to which Stanley is a favoured destination. The potential for increasing the amount of water that can be extracted both on this property and potentially others in the area will obviously add a future risk to the safety of road users as the number of trucks movements would increase. Community concern The Local Government Act 3C Objectives of a Council states:

(1) The primary objective of a council is to endeavour to achieve the best outcomes for the local community having regard to the long term and cumulative effects of decisions

It is clear that the overwhelming majority of people in Stanley and surrounding areas are united in their opposition to this development and concerned about the long term impacts of this decision both as it stand in this application and with the setting a precedent that could enable the increased activity of water extraction both on this property and potentially others to the detriment of the very fabric of this community. It is beholden on we Councillors to act in the best interests of both the people and the natural environment of our Shire and it is for these reasons that ask Council to reject his application.


12. INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES

Nil reports. 13. GOVERNANCE

Nil reports.


14. NOTICES OF MOTION

14.1 TARGETTED SAVINGS

TAKE NOTICE that at a meeting of Special Council to be held on 3 June 2014, I intend to move the following motion:

That Council directs the CEO to target savings of $ 138,000 in the operating budget of 2014/15 so that the underlying operating budget position remains unchanged. These savings to be brought to Council prior to the half year budget review.

For this decision, Mayor, Cr Gaffney vacated the Chair and was replaced by Deputy Mayor, Cr Croucher.

MOTION

That Council directs the CEO to target savings of $ 150,000 in the operating budget of 2014/15 so that the underlying operating budget position remains unchanged. These savings to be brought to Council prior to the half year budget review.

Moved: Cr Gaffney Seconded: Cr Chambers

Carried

Explanatory comment

The Federal Government budget puts a freeze on indexation of Federal Government Grants to Local Government. This in affect is a loss of revenue for Indigo Shire Council of $ 138,000 and creates a substantial burden on the community of Indigo Shire.

The only alternative to this motion is a reduction of Capital works or an increase in rates. Our community is suffering enough without the added burden of another rate increase.

Cr Bernard Gaffney Date received 21 May 2014

Attachments Nil


15. COMMITTEE AND DELEGATES REPORTS (ARE ALL FOR INFORMATION ONLY)

Nil reports. 16. GENERAL BUSINESS

16.1 Cr Chambers tabled a report prepared by the Planning Department that will be used to form the basis of Council’s presentation to VCAT.

16.2 Cr Trenery thanked Greg Pinkerton and his supportive team recognising the time and effort brought to the role.

MOTION

That Council deal with an urgent business item and that it be discussed at this meeting


Carried

MOTION

That the motion and amendment of Item 15.2 of 27 May 2014 Ordinary Council Meeting be rescinded.

Moved: Cr Trenery Seconded: Cr Chambers

Carried

MOTION

1. That Council receive a weekly register of active planning permit applications that are subject to the Heritage Overlay in Indigo Shire.

2. That Council reserve the right to call any application to a Council Meeting for decision.

Moved: Cr Trenery Seconded: Cr O’Connor

Carried

MOTION

That the Ordinary Meeting of Council move into Confidential session in accordance with Section 89(2) (f) of the Local Government Act, as it deals with legal matters.

Moved: Cr O’Connor Seconded: Cr Chambers

Carried


Meeting Concluded: 12.50pm

Next Meeting: Tuesday, 24 June 2014 at 6.30pm

special council minutes - 3 june 2014 - shire … · special council minutes - 3 june 2014 page 1...

Documents