1.         Why were ratepayers, attending the special council meeting, on the 20th July 2020 sent to the Banksia Room, when there were plenty of seats still available (allowing for your social distancing measures) in Council Chambers?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

Pre-registered attendees for the Council meeting (not including Council Members or Staff) totalled 3 media and 68 public. This exceeded the permissible capacity of Chambers under the COVID-19 restrictions imposed by the State Government. Therefore, seating was allocated to either the Chambers or Banksia Room to accommodate everyone who had pre-registered based on the order of registrations received and whether the registered attendee had submitted or indicted they would raise, public questions. Of those who had pre-registered, only 3 media and 38 public actually attended on the night (being 56% of those who pre-registered). For that reason, the seating that had been allocated to pre-registered members of the public in the Chambers and who then did not actually attend (a total of 10 seats), remained vacant.  These seats were then offered to arriving members of the public when the 10 seat vacancy became apparent once the meeting commenced.

2.         On what dates were the Forums and Workshops held, in the lead up to the Budget meeting?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

Budget Workshops and discussions were held on 28 January 2020, 16 March 2020, 30 March 2020, 11 May 2020, 23 June 2020, 03 July 2020 and 20 July 2020.

3.    By your own admission, based upon the survey you conducted, earlier this year, it showed that majority of ratepayers would prefer notification of information about their rates and other important matters either via email or a letter in the post. Why then was the decision made to "advertise" the Proposed Differential Rates in the way it was? Who made this decision?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

The decision to utilise the City website and Facebook page as well as the local newspaper to advertise the Proposed Rate in the Dollar for 20/21 follows the same process as previous years.

The communications channels used provide a balance between maximising Ratepayer reach while keeping costs as low as possible.

Mailbox distribution is reserved for select advertising and information distribution only as it is a costly use of ratepayer funds. Email is not an option for sending out mass emails to ratepayers as ratepayers would need to ‘opt in’ to receive advertising from the City. Without this consent, the City would be in breach of Australian privacy laws.

The proposed rate of the dollar is advertised around the same time each year. Ratepayers who would like to review the proposed rate annually are encouraged to regularly check the City’s website to ensure they can have their say.

4.         One of your Key Initiatives is stated as being "Community Engagement", yet members of the public are commenting that they are being "blocked" from trying to engage on your social media channels (some of whom have shown a copy of their comments - which seems very harmless in nature and not at all containing threats, swearing or any other offensive content). Can you please explain this?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

Administration regularly monitors Facebook comments made by page followers and will moderate comments if they are considered to be in breach of the City’s Facebook Community Guidelines, which can be found under the About section of the City’s Facebook page: 

https://www.facebook.com/pg/CityofWanneroo/about/?ref=page_internal

In addition to this, The City’s Facebook page also utilises Facebook’s built in profanity filter which will automatically hide comments that are offensive or contain profanity. 

5.         What do you consider vexatious, in regards to community engagement?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

All views and opinions of City ratepayers and the community are important to the City and vexatious behaviour is not something generally encountered.

Should an individual ratepayer/community member have a particular opinion / concern they feel is not being heard through non-formal engagement channels such as social media, they are encouraged to contact the City directly in person, over the phone, via mail or email.

6.         What was the cost of the pre-printed flyers, handed out at the end of the Special Meeting, held on the 20^th July?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

$155 excluding GST.

7.         Would you consider these flyers of more importance than notifying ratepayers of the Proposed Differential Rates in a more effective manner?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

The proposed Differential Rate in the Dollar is only one part of the Rates calculation and methods used to advertise this has not been raised as ineffective by the community prior to this year. Rates in the dollar as a stand-alone figure do not provide an accurate representation of bottom lines rates charges for ratepayers.

The flyer handed out following Council’s adoption of the 2020/21 Budget aims to provide a snapshot of how Rates are spent, highlighting exactly how the City is planning to spend Ratepayer funds to support a diverse and fast-growing community.

8.         It's been stated numerous times that the preliminary highlighting data, received from Landgate in February 2020 was not adequate for modelling of the budget. Can you please explain how then was the new RID arrived at?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

The valuation data was received from Landgate on 28 April 2020 which was validated and exceptions were queried back to them for which corrections/confirmations were received in May 2020. This data was used to derive the Rate in the Dollar which was advertised to the public on 28 May 2020 for comment.

9.         At the meeting, on the 20th July the question was asked by a member of the public as to whether the significant amount of feedback received in response to the Proposed Differential Rates had any bearing on the Concession package declared at the same meeting. The answer given indicated that this was not the case. Can you please tell me, is community feedback considered a waste of time?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

The community feedback is always important and taken on board by the City and Council Members in budget deliberations.

10.  What was the catering budget, for the workshops and forums? Did this include alcohol?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

No alcohol is provided for any Workshops or Forums. The catering costs for Budget Meetings came to $6,269.26 (ex GST).

11.      Will Council and administration be paying closer attention to information available to them, throughout the process undertaken by the Valuer-General in the future? It has been stated that most "good CEO's and Local governments" would have been preparing for the reductions for at least the last 3 years yet Council maintains that until they received their final rolls, this information was unhelpful in modelling.

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

GRV’s are used for relative comparison purpose in order to make sure fairness and equity of Council rates. The amount of income required from rates depends on the planned service levels and capital works based on community needs of the City. The changes in GRV are not the key driver of fluctuations in the City’s rates revenue.

Since the City advertised the proposed RID, work continued to evaluate various other possible scenarios in developing the 2020/21 Annual Budget and the final package adopted results in 99.2% of Residential Improved properties and 95% of Commercial Industrial properties receiving a rates invoice for the same or less than last year.

The City of Joondalup reported in their Special Council Agenda that 95% of properties will experience the same or a reduction in their Rates Levy compared to the previous year.

12.      Had we not been in the middle of the Covid19 pandemic, and the Premier not asked for a freeze on rates, and Council/Administration have endeavoured to keep the rates low, what might have been the new RID for the 2020/21 rates?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

The City does various scenario modelling as part of its budget deliberations.

The question is hypothetical and would need to be considered in relation to other multiple variables. The RID is just one of these variables and cannot be considered in isolation.

13.  (a) What budget cuts were made, to accomplish the implementation of the       concessions package?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

Please refer to page 13 of the “Adoption of the 2020/21–2023/24 Corporate Business Plan and 2020/21 Annual Budget” which shows the budget amount which has been re-directed to implementation of the recovery and support packages.

13 (b)   Did any members of Council or the CEO take a pay cut?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

The Council and CEO payments are set by the Salaries and Allowances Tribunal.

14.  Will the CEO or other members be getting any pay rises this financial year?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

The Council and CEO payments are set by the Salaries and Allowances Tribunal.

Motorbike and Quad Bike Activity, dunes between Jindalee and Eden Beaches

I speak on behalf of the residents of Seagull Vista in Jindalee, and we ask the Council what they are doing about the illegal 4x4, Motorbike and Quad bike activity that happens daily along the sand dunes between Jindalee Beach and Eden Beach.

There have been numerous close encounters where beach walkers have been walking along the dunes only to be nearly mowed down by motorbikes illegally riding on the dunes.

As residents we pay fairly hefty annual Rates for the Council to uphold Clause 5.9 of the Public Places and Local Government Property Local Law 2015. Not to mention the fact that this beach is our home, and we have had enough of it being desecrated by illegal and anti-social behavior. The dunes are covered in beer cans, broken glass everywhere, and evidence of camp fires can be seen everywhere.  We seek urgent response from the Council on this matter.

Response by Director, Community & Place

The City conducts frequent patrols along its 32 kilometres of coastline to ensure that both public amenity and adherence to the City’s Local Laws is maintained.  In the 2019/20 financial year over 200 dedicated beach patrols were conducted totalling over 2000 hours of community patrol and presence. This was an improvement of 1000 hours in the previous financial year and does not take into account Ranger presence during normal unplanned patrols.

A recent inspection by the City has indicated that the developers, who are in the main the land owners, have undertaken a significant clean-up of the area. There has also been installation of sand piles and boulders at strategic locations to deter unauthorised vehicle access into the dune area and subsequently onto City’s foreshore reserve.

The number of complaints received for activities on the Jindalee beach area for the 2019/20 financial year was reasonably low with three off road vehicle, one anti-social behaviour and seven littering complaints. In response to the complaints and as a result of proactive patrols, the City issued 17 infringement notices and eight written cautions.

The City will continue to work with all stakeholders whilst conducting proactive patrols to ensure the amenity of the area is maintained.

Chief Executive Officer Contract Extension

At the Council meeting held on 13 September 2016, Council resolved to extend the employment contract of the CEO for a further 5 years until September 2021:

“4. AGREES to extend the employment of Mr Daniel Simms as the Chief Executive Officer of the City of Wanneroo for a period of 5 years commencing from September 2016 and concluding in September 2021;”

However, on 24 September 2019, Council resolved for the mayor to initiate negotiations with the CEO for a new employment contract and in the 12 November 2019 meeting it was resolved:

“1. AGREES to extend the employment of Mr Daniel Simms as the Chief Executive Officer of the City of Wanneroo for a period of five years commencing from November 2019 and concluding in November 2024;”

This shows that negotiations for a new contract were initiated a full two (2) years prior to the contract end date. This is extraordinarily unusual.

1.       Why was the contract renewed two years before its expiry?

2.       Who initiated the negotiations for an extension – the CEO or Council?

3.       Has this occurred at any other time in the tenure of the current CEO?

Response by Executive Manager Governance and Legal

The negotiations between the CEO and Council in respect of CEO’s contract of employment were undertaken in accordance with requirements of the Local Government Act 1995, the terms of the CEO’s contract of employment and are consistent with the process previously undertaken.

Employee Qualifications

We refer to our unanswered 2 July 2020 email to Mayor Tracey Roberts, and copied to other Elected Members, following up the City CEO’s inadequate response to our 27 June 2020 email to him regarding the qualifications of a City of Wanneroo Building Surveyor, please confirm:

1.         Is Council satisfied with the level of Mr Simms’ transparency and accountability in relation to the 27 June 2020 questions we asked him?

2.         Has the CEO advised Council of all the WA Auditor General’s audit reports in relation to local government (Reports), including:

i.       Verifying Employee Identity and Credentials (19 June 2019)

ii.      Local Government Building Approvals (26 June 2019)

Iii.    Records Management (9 April 2019)

iv.    Fraud Prevention (15 August 2019)

v.     Local Government Contract Extensions and Variations (4 May 2020)

vi.    Information Systems Audit Report 2020 (25 June 2020)

3.         What actions has Council taken as a result of the learnings from the Reports; for example, what has Council done about the Auditor General’s findings that “LG entities do not effectively monitor and enforce compliance with permits” as stated in the Building Approvals report (extract attached)?

4.         How does Council routinely oversee the CEO’s conduct and performance of Council’s statutory building approval, compliance and enforcement functions?

5.         Has the City of Wanneroo ever employed an individual in a Building Surveyor position that was not a registered building surveyor at the time of their appointment?

6.         If the City has employed an individual as a Building Surveyor that was not registered, has there been any complaints made in relation to any approvals or compliance issues those individuals were involved with?

7.         How many complaints has the City received about the conduct and performance of its building functions over the last 7 years; how many remain unresolved?

8.         How has Council assured itself that issues similar to those raised in the Reports, particularly in relation to Building Approvals, are not present at the City of Wanneroo?

Response by Chief Executive Officer

In relation to Question 1, the question relates to an employee and that in accordance with section 5.41 of the Local Government Act whereby the CEO is responsible for all employment related matters, your question was referred to the CEO to provide a response and not Council.  As with any questions received, the City provides a clear and transparent response however given the subject matter related to an operational decision by the City of Melville, the officer has been advised that the expressed views are not the views or official position of the City. 

In relation to questions 2 and 3, audits undertaken by the Office of Auditor General that involve the local government sector, irrespective of whether the City of Wanneroo is an entity that participated in the audit, are presented to the City’s Audit and Risk Committee, of which all Council Members are members.  As part of this process, the City’s report details the audit findings and recommendations as assessed against the City’s processes and controls, with any issues identified and noted to be addressed.

In relation to question 4, in accordance with Regulation 17 of the Local Government (Audit) Regulations the CEO is required to review, amongst other things, the systems and procedures in relation to legislative compliance at least every 3 years and report the results of that review to the Audit and Risk Committee.  This was reported to the City’s Audit and Risk Committee in early 2020.

In relation to question 5 the City has and does engage individuals as Building Surveyors that are not Registered Building Surveyors. It is not a requirement that a person employed as a Building Surveyor in Local Government be a Registered Building Surveyor Level 1 or 2 or Technician. The City’s Building Surveyors that are not registered do not issue Compliance Certificates Only registered Building Surveyors can issue Certificates of Design Compliance and Building Permits according to their registration. The processing of building permit applications can be undertaken by Building Surveyors who are not registered with a Registered Building Surveyor reviewing and issuing the Certificates and Permits.  

In relation to questions 6 and 7 the City has received 2 formal complaints regarding a Building Surveyor in the last 7 years and none remain unresolved.

In response to Question 8 the OAG Local Government Building Approvals audit report was presented to the City’s Audit and Risk Committee on 13 August 2019 with management comments in relation to each of the findings and recommendations, with no issues identified that required specific attention.

Various Issues

1.         What catering is provided to Councillors and staff at Council Meetings? Is alcohol provided and what is the separate cost of alcohol?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

In acknowledgement of the timing and duration of Council meetings a hot plated meal is provided to Council Members. Alcohol is not served at Council meetings and there is not a separate budget for the provision of alcohol.

2.         What was the total cost last financial year for catering of Council Meetings, including food, laundry and beverages?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

A total of 41 Council meetings (inclusive of Regional Council Meetings, Forums, Briefing Sessions and Audit and other Committees) were conducted in 2019-20. The cost attributed for catering, beverages and laundry to these meetings totalled $64,304 (inc. GST).

3.         What is the Budget amount proposed for 2020/21 for catering for Council Meetings?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

At the Council meeting held on the 20^th July, the 2020-21 Annual Budget was adopted. This included provision for catering of $96,000 to support Council meetings (inclusive of Regional Council Meetings, Forums, Briefing Sessions and Audit and other Committees). This figure is reviewed regularly as part of normal budget monitoring by both Administration and the Council.

4.         What is the total catering budget for Council staff? Is there a Policy relating to catering expenditure? If not, what Guidelines are used?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

The total catering budget for Council and other meetings as detailed in the response to Q1 is inclusive of Council Members and attending staff.

Catering requests are considered under the following circumstances and require approval of a Manager and/or Director.

• Council meetings (inclusive of Regional Council Meetings, Forums, Briefing Sessions and Audit and other Committees/Workshops).
• Citizenship Ceremonies
• Hosting a meeting with an external party
• Executive Leadership meetings
• Internal training only where it extends over a full day

·         Regional Meetings

·         Corporate Events

5.         What is the Policy relating to purchasing alcohol for employee functions?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

Drug and Alcohol Policy – Item 6.  Alcohol Consumption at City Functions and Events.  The only events that may have alcohol purchased are for Corporate events as approved by the CEO.

6.         What was the total cost of the staff Christmas Party for 2019 (including food, DJ, alcohol, marquee) and what is the Budget for 2020?

Response by Director, Community & Place

The cost of the 2019 Staff Christmas Function was $27,908.50 and there is $25,000 budgeted for the 2020 Staff Christmas Function.

7.         Rate Setting – During the previous Financial Year, a number of payments were made to Landgate on at least two occasions (May 19 and September 19) indicating that they were for “GRV/ Interim Valuations”. Did these interim valuations provided by Landgate and paid for indicate the GRV values had fallen so that as early as May 19, Council was aware of the reduced GRV values?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

Landgate payments were made for Gross Rental Valuation (GRV) interim valuations for new properties created as a result of subdivisions and for new buildings and the annual Unimproved Valuations (UV) valuations, noting UV properties are revalued on annual basis.

The City received a standard letter from Landgate in February 2020 indicating the potential downward change in the values of property classes and this was the first communication received from Landgate however, this information is not sufficient to carryout rates modelling exercises. The City has received an appropriate level of revised GRV information in late April 2020 and further updates in May 2020 from Landgate.

8.         Organisational Capability – The Annual Report states that the remaining 5% of the workforce were not required to undertake a performance review in accordance with the relevant legislation. What group of employees are these and why? Regardless of whether it is a legislative requirement, it is standard and best practice anyway. If a performance review is not undertaken, how is their performance measured?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

Section 5.39 of the Local Government Act requires each employee who is employed for a term of more than one year, to complete an annual review of performance.   

The 5% of employees who did not complete an annual review, will be a combination of employees who left the City during the period reported on, those who recently commenced at the City within the last six (6) months, and staff who were on extended periods of leave during the period the annual review is held for e.g. parental leave

9.         Training Costs – A number of courses have been paid for by the Council; however, the prices paid seem far in excess of the training providers advertised price. For example, four people attended a Work Safety and Follow WHS Policy and Procedure course at a cost of $2,410 when the cost for four people as advertised on the trainer’s website would be $480. In September 19, a dogging course cost was $1,045, but the advertised price was $850. Could you explain the differences?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

The course fee of $2410, included four employees attending the  Work Safety and Follow WHS Policy and Procedure course (for the advertised cost of $480).  The higher cost of $2410 was inclusive of an additional onsite training session for Traffic Management at a cost of $1950.

The $1045.00 for the Dogging course includes $850 for the course, $100 for Worksafe verification and $95 for GST.

10.      IT Subscriptions – Council pays in excess of $120,000 per annum for an IT Threat Intelligence report. Was a detailed analysis undertaken of the necessity of this subscription instead of being “good to know”? Does Council use external protection providers and would they not be the ones who need to know?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

The City regularly engages in detailed analysis of vulnerability assessments and ongoing monitoring of cyber threats.  This includes regular Audits by the Office of the Auditor General and other 3^rd party providers, and is working towards compliance with ISO Standards (9001, 14001 and 45001 and 27001 Cyber Security).

11.      How many cyber-attacks occurred against Council in the last 12 months?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

The City monitors cyber threats and vulnerabilities on a 24x7 basis and has defined processes for addressing vulnerabilities. 

12.      Catering – An amount of approximately $180,000 was paid last financial year to a company based outside of the City of Wanneroo boundaries for catering services. Could Council advise what procurement process was undertaken for this work? What services, other than catering Council Meetings, does this business undertake? Given the considerable number of companies located inside the City boundaries, what consideration is given to using local catering companies?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

On 30 May 2018, after a competitive and transparent process, Cherry’s Catering were formally awarded the tender for the provision of catering services for Council and other meetings and civic events (e.g. citizenship ceremonies, volunteer appreciation). Cherry’s Catering is located slightly outside of the City of Wanneroo boundaries (in Malaga), however it is noted that the company is a member of the Wanneroo Business Association.

Since implementation of this tender contract, the City has updated its Purchasing Policy to maximise participation of local and small businesses in the supply of goods, services and works procured or contracted in accordance with the City’s local economy objectives and the City’s Strategic Community Plan. A qualitative weighting is included in the evaluation criteria for formal quotations and public tenders where suppliers are located within the boundaries of the City or where suppliers are able to demonstrate a benefit or contribution to the local economy.

13.      Rate Setting – Did Council do a model based on the reduced GRV and the same cents in the dollar rate as last year? What was the modelled rate amount achieved? If yes, was any attempt made to develop a Budget on that reduced amount? If not, why not? What was the modelled rate amount achieved?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

There were numerous rating models considered including keeping the previous Rate in the Dollar (RID) and the chosen rating model presented the best outcome of 99.25% of residential improved category properties receiving the same or less rates levy than last year and enables the City to continue to provide the services expected for the Community as well as continue to deliver economic stimulus projects as requested by the State Government.

14.      Council has $6.3M Budget provision for the introduction of a three bin system. Can this be deferred for 12 months? If not, why not?

Response by Director, Assets

The City expects to realise substantial operational costs once the three bin service is implemented, due to the savings that are expected in disposal costs. This means that it is likely that the implementation of the three bin system will have the effect of minimising any future Waste Service Charge increases. Failing to implement in the three bin system in 2020-21 is likely to result in an increased Waste Service Charge to residents in 2021-22.

The costs for the three bin system will be expended from a Domestic Waste Reserve and there will be no impact on 2020/21 Waste Service Charge.

15.      Council has $7.17M allocated for fleet management this next financial year. How much of this is for light vehicles and why can’t the replacement schedule be extended by a year? How many light vehicles are scheduled to be replaced this new financial year?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

$588,456 of this budget is allocated for the scheduled replacement of 11 light vehicles. These vehicles are required for community safety and emergency management, traffic and fleet maintenance operational requirements. Vehicle replacements are scheduled to occur to optimise resale value and minimise the change-over cost to the City.

16.      Corporate Business Plan – In the 2019/20 Corporate Business Plan, it is stated that the population is estimated in 2019 to be 220,246. In the current draft Corporate Business Plan, it is stated that the 2020 population is 206,860 – a population reduction of almost 14,000 almost 12 months on. How is the difference explained? The forecast increase of 7,600 by 2023 doesn’t even assist?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

The City utilises the services of forecast.id to estimate future population. Many local governments use this company for population forecasting purposes. The 2019/20 Corporate Business Plan utilised population projection estimates that were prepared by forcast.id in 2018 and these were based on the Australian Bureau of Statistics Estimated Resident Population for the City of Wanneroo as at 2016. The downturn in the property market and the lower demand for dwelling construction over recent years has required the City to have the population forecasts revised down. The forecasts have now been revised by forecast.id using a comprehensive methodology that can be found here: https://forecast.id.com.au/wanneroo/forecast-methodology

17.      The 2019/20 Corporate Business Plan states that there are 599 parks with 2,634 ha. Yet the latest Corporate Business Plan states that there are six less parks, but with 86 more ha. Can Council explain the reduction in parks?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

The reduction in the number of parks is associated with the amalgamation/rationalisation of parks areas, such as areas developed in stages or parks with multiple land parcels.

There has been some data reconciliation errors identified with the number and area of parks. The figures have been reviewed and will be revised in the final report. The numbers should read 594 parks totalling an area of 2,645 hectares.

18.      Conservation Reserves has increased from 130 to 161 on a single year, based on a comparison on Corporate Business Plan’s. Is this correct?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

There has been some data reconciliation errors identified with the number of conservation parks. The figures have been reviewed and will be revised in the final report. The final number should read 149.

19.      The 2020/21 Corporate Business Plan states that the City has 5,338km of foreshore. This is about the distance from Perth to Sydney. Is this distance correct?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

There is a conversion error in the number shown. This should read as 533 hectares and not in kms. The figures have been reviewed and will be revised in the final report.

Other asset data has also been reviewed and will be revised.

20.      28 Community Centres are listed in the 2019/20 Corporate Business Plan, but only 21 are in the 2020/21 Corporate Business Plan. Can Council explain this difference?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance

Some of the Community Centres counted in previous years have been redefined.

Some have been redefined as Leisure/Recreation Centres.

Note the revised data as per table below:

21.      How can the Electors of the City have any confidence whatsoever in Council employees undertaking future planning on our behalf when such fundamental errors are made, especially in critical areas such as population, which would be the drive for almost all planning? Who has been held accountable for any errors either this year or last year?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance:

The official measure of population in jurisdictions in Australia is the Australian Bureau of Statistics Estimated Resident Population (ABS ERP). This measure only becomes finalised every 4 years following the Census. This official measure requires the City to base future projections from the data provided by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. For this reason, the City has utilised the services of forecast.id to perform a comprehensive review of the population projections every 4 years as well as a desktop review following the release ABS ERP data. The comprehensive review that was performed in May 2020 uses a robust methodology and can be viewed here: https://forecast.id.com.au/wanneroo/forecast-methodology The City considers that the previous population projections based on the ABS ERP were on the high side since population growth in the City has slowed in recent years.

22.      The Council has allocated $6.3M in the 2020/21 Budget for a three bin system. Why can’t this be deferred for 12 months to assist ratepayers during this ongoing pandemic?

Response by Director, Assets:

The City expects to realise substantial operational costs once the three bin service is implemented, due to the savings that are expected in disposal costs. This means that it is likely that the implementation of the three bin system will have the effect of minimising any future Waste Service Charge increases. Failing to implement in the three bin system in 2020-21 is likely to result in an increased Waste Service Charge to residents in 2021-22.

The costs for the three bin system will be expended from a Domestic Waste Reserve and there will be no impact on 2020/21 Waste Service Charge.

23.      In response to Ms K.Gowran detailed in the Minutes of the Special Council Meeting 20 July 2020, the Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance responded by stating “The State Government has instructed local governments to continue to employ current workforce.” Who gave this instruction? When was the instruction given? How was it communicated to the City? Was this in the form of a directive or a recommendation?

Response by Director, Corporate Strategy & Performance:

After 2 local governments stood down staff, the Minister for Local Government responded.

In a statement released to the ABC, Mr Templeman urged local governments to take a second look at their balance sheets and redeploy staff in other areas.

"All levels of government, in Australia and internationally, have been looking at their own budgets and stepping up to help their communities weather this difficult period," he said

"I also encourage them to keep as many projects going as possible, bring forward capital works programs where possible to keep people in jobs and consider deferring charges to support small business."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-07/local-gov-struggle-to-keep-staff-coronavirus-jobkeeper-payments/12125312

ABC News Website 7 April 2020

Rates

I am a member of a Facebook group that incorporates the City of Wanneroo Ratepayers.  The purpose of the group is for the ratepayers of the City of Wanneroo to have a place to voice their opinions and concerns of the proposed rates and differentials for 2020 as published in the City of Wanneroo.  This group has achieved 2,100 members since its creation on 11 June 2020.  A poll was released to members on 10 August, shortly after the 2020 rates were sent to residents.  168 responses were received, 134 of which noted a reduction in their rates and 34 noted an increase.  This indicates a 20% increase of residents reporting their rates had gone up.  This is significantly different to the proposed rates advising that 99.25% of residential improved GRV ratepayer category would pay the same or less rates set in 2019/20.  Whilst this poll is not scientific, it does raise questions amongst residents regarding the integrity of the declared percentage as published as a disproportion.

1.         Given the above feedback, how does Council and its members satisfy themselves that the declared 99.25% will actually pay less or equal to the 2019/20 raise actually going to be achieved?

Response by Manager, Finance

The 99.25% was an accurate reflection of the ratepayers in residential improved category who were going to pay the same or less rates compared to 2019/20 and it has been modelled through numerus scenarios and considered by various workshops and Forums by Council Members. Further it is worth noting that 99.25% is a holistic view of approximately 72,500 properties in residential improved category and only 134 responses is not a sufficient representation of the total population of 72,500 properties in this category.

2.         Regarding the article “Race in your Rates”, a scheme to provide an incentive for people to get their rates in early, in 2019 Terms and Conditions, Item 16 advised the competition results would be published on the City’s website.  I am yet to see these results published as the competition closes on 9 September, are we expecting to see these published?  Further to that, on review of the 2020 Terms and Conditions of the Race in Your Rates, it does not state there will be a public announcement of the winners of that particular scheme, will this be the case and if not, why not?

Response by Director, Community & Place

It is anticipated that the results of the Race in Your Rates competition for 2020 will be published on the City’s website, having due regard to privacy requirements of the winners.

3.         The City states there is a proposed budget expenditure of $37.8m on waste and recycling for the 2020/21 budget.  The FAQ on the City’s website states “why is waste listed as a separate charge – In light of increased costs to local landfill and disposal, waste levy charges have been extracted from general rates to provide greater transparency of the cost of waste management and to ensure that waste costs are fully recovered, eliminating the need to subsidise the service through reductions in other projects and programs in the City”. 

On 1 October 2020 the Container Deposit Scheme – Containers for Change is about to start in Western Australia and the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation advises the objectives of that commercial scheme is to increase the recovery and recycling of empty beverage containers and reduce the number of these going to litter or landfill.  These programs are a cornerstone of the Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy 2030 (WARRS).  Targets are set for 2030 ranging from a 10% reduction in waste per capita and increase material recovery to 70% by 2025.  The State Government Waste Levy has been frozen since 2018 at $70 per tonne and the Mindarie Regional Council gate fee has been kept at the 2019/20 level of $205 per tonne.  The Council’s Agenda of 20 July 2020, SCS01-07/20 Adoption of the 2020/21 Annual Budget, the section titled “Waste Service Charge $31m” or attachments, make no acknowledgement of the significant introduction of the Container Waste Deposit Scheme or planning or purposes set out in the budget.  Council resolved at its meeting on 7 April, a 0% increase in the City’s set fees and charges, including the waste service fee, yet it failed to consider any resulting reduction in land fill or waste impact from the Container Deposit Scheme, and the Waste Service Fee of $410 for 2020 has remain unchanged.  How is such a significant event in the waste landscape management fail to be modelled or even commented on in the Budget?

Response by Director, Assets

The waste charge of $410 per residential property covers multiple elements of waste services that the City provides, which include the collection of two bins, one a week and the second every fortnight.  It includes the City’s management of the waste that goes through the landfill site, resource recovery facility or recycling centres.  The City provides litter pick-up, collection of all the bins at the City facilities, parks and beaches, so there is a multitude of services the City provides under that waste fee that is collected. CDS has been mentioned, that is only one component which will come into play during the year.  Currently, those containers are put in the recycling bin which is picked up and sent to recycling centres for processing.  Once CDS is introduced, research suggests there will be some reduction in the recycling which is collected through the bins, but that impact is not known yet.

Further Response by Director Assets

It is advised that in addition to the information provided above, the collection and management of illegal dumping, annual bulk-junk collection and processing, annual bulk green collection and processing, access to the City’s community drop of facility at Wangara Recycling Centre and Waste Education services are also included in the suite of Waste Services provided by the City within the annual waste charge of $410.

Though the introduction of the Container Deposit Scheme is likely to result in a reduction in the amount of comingled recyclables (yellow lid bin waste) that residents dispose of,that since the State initiated a State of Emergency in March, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a marked increase (7%) in the amount of those materials received when compared to the same period in the previous year. Also, this year, the cost of recycling processing has increased due mainly to the market changes associated with the devastating fire at the previous contractor’s facility, in November 2019.

It is also noted that the Waste Charge collected from the City’s residents is only used for the provision of waste services; and all unexpended funds from waste charge are transferred to the City’s Waste Reserve for Waste Services/Waste Management projects such as the implementation of Three Bin Waste collection System and fluctuations in the services provided by the waste management service providers.

Moved Cr Cvitan, Seconded Cr Treby

That the minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 28 July 2020 be confirmed.

Carried Unanimously

1.         Relating to the approved Banksia Grove Structure Plan, can you confirm what is the requirement for fire emergency exits from Planning in this area, is there a legislative requirement for this?

Response by A/Director Planning & Sustainability

In terms of State Planning Policy there needs to be at least two access points in different directions to deal with a potential bushfire.

2.         Does that State Policy get applied to every developmental approval that is done within the City? 

Response by A/Director, Planning & Sustainability

The intent is to deal with bushfire at the earliest possible stage, so Scheme Amendment stage, then Local Structure Plan and then if it has not been dealt with yet, it is dealt with at the development application stage but the preference is for it to be dealt with prior to this stage.

Cr Treby presented a petition of 333 signatories requesting Council to construct a noise wall barrier along Mirrabooka Avenue between Gnangara Road and Hepburn Avenue in the Landsdale/Darch area.  This wall is required to block the noise from increasing traffic and the  industrial area.

Moved Mayor Roberts, Seconded Cr Cvitan

That Item CP02-08/20 Splendid Park Cycling Facility – Community Engagement Outcomes be brought forward as the first report under Item 8 on the Agenda.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

File Ref:                                              40569 – 20/239175

Responsible Officer:                          Director Community and Place

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       8  

Previous Items:                                   CP04-06/20 - Splendid Park Cycling Facility Concept Design and Cost Estimate - Ordinary Council - 02 Jun 2020 7:00pm      

Moved Mayor Roberts, Seconded Cr Treby

That Council:-

1.       NOTES the outcome of the North Coast Cycling Facility Master Plan Implementation Working Group meeting held on 8 July 2020, as follows:

a)      NOTES the outcome of the Splendid Park Cycling Facility Master Plan community engagement (public comment) process held from 8 June 2020 to 3 July 2020, which resulted in the following outcomes;

i.       A total of 348 responses received, with 338 (97.1%) in favour and 10 (2.9%) against of the proposed development of a cycling track at Splendid Park;

ii.      Of those responses 216 (66.1%) indicated a preference for Option 2 (with the flyover), with 111 (33.9%) indicating a preference for Option 1 (without the flyover);

iii.     A total of 20 (6%) comments were received which indicated a preference for either option; and

iv.     Of the 79 responses received from Northern Beaches Cycling Club members, 43 (54.4%) indicated their preference for Option 1 and 36 (45.6%) indicating a preference for Option 2.

b)      NOTES that Administration’s preferred option is Option 1 (Attachment 2) based on the ability to deliver a cycle track and its cost effectiveness; and

c)      RECOMMENDS to Council the implementation of Option 1.

2.       NOTES the outcome of the Splendid Park Cycling Facility Master Plan community engagement (public comment) process held from 8 June 2020 to 3 July 2020, which resulted in the following outcomes;

a)      A total of 348 responses received, with 338 (97.1%) in favour and 10 (2.9%) against of the proposed development of a cycling track at Splendid Park; and

b)      Of the 79 responses received from Northern Beaches Cycling Club members, 43 (54.4%) indicated their preference for Concept 1 and 36 (45.6%) indicating a preference for Concept 2.

3.       NOTES the completion of the Splendid Park Cycling Master Plan Report, as per Attachment 2;

4.       ENDORSES Concept 1 as per Attachment 3, at an estimated cost of $2,287,100 as itemised below, noting that the feasibility of increasing the width of the track as outlined in Concept 1B, will be considered as part of the detailed design:

5.       NOTES that progress of the construction phase of the project is subject to the City’s Community Sport and Recreation Facility Fund grant application for the sum of $762,366 being successful, or securing other external funding to at least the equivalent value or additional municipal funding being identified as a result of the Long Term Financial Plan review, to cover the budget shortfall.

Carried Unanimously

Moved Cr Treby, Seconded Mayor Roberts

That Item CP03-08/20 Community Sporting and Recreation Facilities Fund (CSRFF) – 2021/22 Funding Round be brought forward as the second report under Item 8 on the Agenda.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

File Ref:                                              41146 – 20/322746

Responsible Officer:                          Director Community and Place

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       5         

Moved Cr Sangalli, Seconded Cr Huntley

That Council:-

1.       SUBMITS the following Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Fund applications to the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries for the 2020/21 funding round with the following assessment, project rating and prioritisation, noting a total grant amount sought of $1,377,503:

2.       NOTES that the construction phase of each project is dependent on the successful outcome of the Community Sport and Recreation Facility Fund applications for the 2021/22 funding round (or securing other external funding at least to the equivalent value) and/or funding being identified as a result of the review of the Long Term Financial Plan, with a further report to be presented to Council in March 2021 advising the outcomes of all applications.

Motion to Amend

Moved Cr Treby, Seconded Cr Baker

That PR-4271 Splendid Park New Cycling Facility be ranked as Priority 1 in the table shown in Recommendation 1.

1.           SUBMITS the following Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Fund applications to the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries for the 2020/21 funding round with the following assessment, project rating and prioritisation, noting a total grant amount sought of $1,377,503:

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Substantive Motion as Amended

That Council:-

1.       SUBMITS the following Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Fund applications to the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries for the 2020/21 funding round with the following assessment, project rating and prioritisation, noting a total grant amount sought of $1,377,503:

2.       NOTES that the construction phase of each project is dependent on the successful outcome of the Community Sport and Recreation Facility Fund applications for the 2021/22 funding round (or securing other external funding at least to the equivalent value) and/or funding being identified as a result of the review of the Long Term Financial Plan, with a further report to be presented to Council in March 2021 advising the outcomes of all applications.

The substantive motion as amended was put and

Carried Unanimously

File Ref:                                              3379-38 – 20/306821

Responsible Officer:                          Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       8         

  Moved Cr Aitken, Seconded Cr Newton

That Council:-

1.       Pursuant to subclause 20(2)(e) of the Deemed Provisions of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2 RECOMMENDS to the Western Australian Planning Commission that the proposed Amendment No. 38 to the East Wanneroo Cell 4 Approved Structure Plan No. 6 to rezone Lot 594 Ranworth Road, Hocking partly as Private Clubs/Recreation and to recode the remaining Residential Precinct from Residential R20 to a density range of Residential R25 to R60 as shown in Attachment 2 BE APPROVED subject to the following modifications:

a)      In the Zoning Map and the Structure Plan to re-configure the boundaries of the Private Clubs/Recreation Zone to accommodate a 15-metre wide road reserve connection to Ranworth Road;

b)      In the Structure Plan, recode the portion of the site abutting the existing R20 coded areas located to the immediate north of the site as R25 and to recode the remainder of the site excluding the proposed Business Zoned land at a density range of R25 to R60; and

c)      Amend Schedule 3 Public Open Space Provision: Cell 4 in the Part 1 of ASP 6 to include the following additional POS site:

2.       Pursuant to subclause 20(2)(e) of the Deemed Provisions of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2 RECOMMENDS to the Western Australian Planning Commission that the proposed Amendment No. 38 to the East Wanneroo Cell 4 Approved Structure Plan No. 6 to rezone Lot 594 Ranworth Road, Hocking partly as Business as shown in Attachment 2 SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED for the following reasons:

a)      The proposed Business Zone does not satisfy the Western Australian Planning Commission’ State Planning Policy 4.2 – Activity Centres for Perth and Peel (SPP 4.2) as listed below:

i.       The proposal is contrary to Section 5.6.1(1) of SPP 4.2 as the proposed Business Zone is located within the walkable catchment of the surrounding residential areas;

ii.      The proposal is contrary to Section 5.6.1(4) of SPP 4.2 as the proposed Business Zone encroaches into the approved Residential Precinct under ASP 6;

iii.     The proposal is contrary to Section 5.6.1(4) of SPP 4.2 as the proposed Business Zone constitutes ribbon development along Wanneroo Road which is a regional road; and

iv.     The proposal is contrary to Section 5.6.1(6) of SPP 4.2 as it has not been demonstrated that there is a lack of available sites for business development in the area.

b)      Pursuant to Clause 67(t) of the deemed provisions of District Planning Scheme No.2, the amount of traffic estimated to be generated by the proposed development would have probable effect on the traffic flow and safety in relation to the capacity of the road system in the locality.

3.       Pursuant to subclause 20(2)(a-d) of the deemed provisions of the City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2 PROVIDES a copy of the report on the proposed Amendment No. 38 to East Wanneroo Cell 4 Approved Structure Plan No. 6 to the Western Australian Planning Commission including the schedule of submissions and the City’s response and recommendations.

4.       ADVISES the submitters of its decision.

Carried Unanimously

File Ref:                                              37441 – 20/57650

Responsible Officer:                          Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       10         

Moved Cr Newton, Seconded Cr Miles

That Council:-

1.    Pursuant to Section 50(3)(a) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 DOES NOT SUPPORT Amendment No. 177 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to:

a)    Rezone Lot 9193 Joseph Banks Boulevard, Banksia Grove from Special Residential to Urban Development and amend the scheme map accordingly as shown on Attachment 2 to this report; and

b)    Modify Schedule 11 - Special Residential Provisions relating to Special Residential Zone No.2 by deleting ‘Portion of Lot 9189 Flynn Drive, Banksia Grove’ currently described as Lot 9193 Joseph Banks Boulevard, Banksia Grove,

for the following reasons as advised by the Department of Fire and Emergency Services:

·        The Bushfire Management Plan did not adequately address the policy requirements of the Western Australian Planning Commission’s State Planning Policy 3.7 – Planning in Bushfire Prone Areas and the Guidelines;

·        Significant areas of the lots abutting Carramar Special Rural Zone have a Bushfire Attack Level rating of 40 and Flame Zone; and

·        A Fire Services Access Route should be explored at the rear of the properties to provide defendable space and to reduce the bushfire impact on adjoining properties.

2.     Pursuant to subclause 20(2)(e) of the deemed provisions of the District Planning Scheme No.2 RECOMMENDS to the Western Australian Planning Commission that the proposed Amendment No.4 to Banksia Grove Approved Structure Plan No. 21A to rezone Lot 9193 Joseph Banks Boulevard, Banksia Grove from Special Residential to Residential with a residential density of R10 and to amend the structure plan and the Zoning Map and the R-Code plan accordingly should not be approved for the reasons stated in Resolution 1 above.

3       Advise the submitters of the above decision.

Carried Unanimously

File Ref:                                              40636 – 20/315001

Responsible Officer:                          Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       5         

Moved Cr Cvitan, Seconded Cr Parker

That Council:-

1.       Pursuant to Section 75 of Planning and Development Act 2005 ADOPTS Amendment No. 184 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to allow the use class Smash Repair Station as an Additional Use at Lot 216 (87) Innovation Circuit, Wangara and AMENDS Schedule 2 of the District Planning Scheme No. 2 as follows:

and to Amend the Scheme Map accordingly;

2.       Pursuant to Section 35(2) of Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 RESOLVES that Amendment No. 184 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 is a Standard Amendment for the following reasons:

a)      The Amendment that is consistent with the region planning scheme that applies to the scheme area, other than an amendment that is a basic amendment.

3.       Pursuant to Section 81 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 REFERS Amendment No. 184 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 to the Environmental Protection Authority; and

4.       Subject to approval from Environmental Protection Authority:

a)      NOTIFIES the Western Australian Planning Commission of its intent to advertise Amendment No. 184 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 pursuant to Regulation 47(1) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015; and

b)      ADVERTISES Amendment No. 184 to District Planning Scheme No. 2 for a period of not less than 42 days pursuant to Regulation 47(2) and 47(4) of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015.

Carried Unanimously

File Ref:                                              5734V04 – 20/316277

Responsible Officer:                          Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       1         

Moved Cr Parker, Seconded Cr Newton

That Council APPROVES the actions as contained in Attachment 1 to this report.

Carried Unanimously

File Ref:                                              3516V02 – 20/332026

Responsible Officer:                          Director Planning and Sustainability

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       4         

Moved Cr Cvitan, Seconded Cr Baker

That Council, pursuant to clauses 4 and 5 of the deemed provisions of City of Wanneroo District Planning Scheme No. 2, resolves to ADOPT the draft amended Local Planning Policy 3.1 – Local Planning Strategy Implementation, as contained in Attachment 3, for the purpose of advertising; and ADVERTISE it for public comment for a period of 42 days by way of:

1.       Advertisement in all local newspapers circulating within the City of Wanneroo for two consecutive editions;

2.       Display at the City’s Administration Centre Building and on the City’s Website;

3.       Letters to relevant stakeholders as determined by the Director, Planning and Sustainability; and

4.       Drop-in community information session at an appropriate location in Quinns Rocks within the 42 day public comment period, as determined by the Director, Planning and Sustainability.

Carried Unanimously

Cr Parker, Cr Sangalli and Cr H. Nguyen returned to the meeting at 8:08pm

File Ref:                                              24985V04 – 20/283991

Responsible Officer:                          Director Assets

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

Moved Cr Sangalli, Seconded Cr Huntley

That Council ACCEPTS the tender submitted by Active Discovery, Forpark Australia, Kompan, Miracle, Playmaster, Perth Playground & Rubber, Supreme Shades and West Coast Shade for Tender No. 20040, for the renewal of park assets and installation of new shade sails, for their respective lump sum prices as per the General Conditions of Tendering and as detailed in Attachment 1.

Carried Unanimously

File Ref:                                              2240V02 – 20/335322

Responsible Officer:                          Director Assets

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       3         

Moved Cr Newton, Seconded Cr Sangalli

That Council: -

1.   ENDORSES the draft Waste Plan 2020 – 2025, as contained in Attachments 1, 2 & 3 for community feedback; and

2.   AUTHORISES Administration to submit the draft Waste Plan 2020 – 2025, as contained in Attachments 1, 2 & 3 to the Department of Water, Environment and Regulation for review.

Carried Unanimously

File Ref:                                              25883V06 – 20/328087

Responsible Officer:                          Director Community and Place

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       2         

Moved Cr Treby, Seconded Cr Parker

That Council:-

1.       ENDORSES the high level design principles articulated in this report to inform the detailed design for the Southern Suburbs Library;

2.       APPROVES progressing to tender to engage a consultant to undertake the detailed design phase of the project;

3.       NOTES the proposal for the Stage 2 Youth Innovation Hub as an annex to the Southern Suburbs Library, subject to the procuring of external funding and ENDORSES continued advocacy to the State Government for this funding; and

4.       RECOGNISES and THANKS the schools for their involvement in the community consultation component of the project.

Carried Unanimously

File Ref:                                              30724V05 – 20/280073

Responsible Officer:                          Director Corporate Strategy & Performance

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       6         

Moved Cr Cvitan, Seconded Cr Baker

That Council:

1.      RECEIVES the Financial Activity Statement and commentaries on variances year to date Budget for the period ended 30 June 2020 consisting of:

a)      June 2020 year to date Financial Activity Statement;

b)      June 2020 year to date Net Current Assets Position; and

c)      June 2020 year to date Material Financial Variance Notes.

2.      APPROVES BY ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the following change to the 2019/20 Capital Work Budget:

3.                      

Carried by absolute majority

13/0

File Ref:                                              37350 – 20/316495

Responsible Officer:                          Director Corporate Strategy & Performance

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil        

Moved Cr Treby, Seconded Cr Baker

That Council:

1.       NOTES the Petition PT01-06/20 received at the 30 June 2020 Ordinary Council Meeting;

2.       ACKNOWLEDGES the response to the Petition provided in this report;

3.       AUTHORISES the Director Corporate Strategy and Performance to advise the petition organiser of the details in this report.

Carried Unanimously

File Ref:                                              1859V02 – 20/331866

Responsible Officer:                          Director Corporate Strategy & Performance

Disclosure of Interest:                         Nil

Attachments:                                       Nil       

Moved Cr Treby, Seconded Cr Parker

That Council RECEIVES the list of payments drawn for the month of July 2020, as summarised below:-