Hornsby Shire Council |
Attachment to Report No. ST3/09
Page 0 |
REPORT 0F THE COUNCILLOR WORKSHOP SATURDAY 28th FEBRUARY to |
Prepared for HORNSBY SHIRE COUNCIL |
Prepared March 2009 by: The Miller Group a: e: libby.d@themillergroup.com.au p: 02 9698
8834 Contact:
Libby Darlison m 0404487694 |
Hornsby Shire Council |
Attachment to Report No. ST3/09
Page 1 |
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section A - Integrated Planning and Community Consultation........... 1-3
Section B - Identification of Councillor’s 4yr priorities..................... 4-12
Section C – Identification of Councillor’s 1yr Priorities.................. 13-15
Section D – Potential Revenue Raising or Cost Saving Strategies... 16-18
Appendices
Appendix I - Attendance............................................................................. 19
Appendix II
– Rate Variation.................................................................. 20-21
Appendix III
– Budget Update................................................................ 22-24
Hornsby Shire Council |
Attachment to Report No. ST3/09
Page 2 |
SECTION A
INTEGRATED
PLANNING
1. Open/Community Forum Meetings
The group had a discussion as to whether Open/Community
Forum Meetings should continue to be held. It was agreed that Open Forum
meetings are a good way for the community to have direct contact with
Councillors and should be continued. Some suggestions as to how to make them
more effective included:
· The
possibility of holding no meetings or fewer meetings during 2009, while the
community desire for such meetings was confirmed and other strategies for
community consultation considered.
Council reports stated that in 2007 the meetings received positive
feedback from the residents who attended and were very popular, but in 2008 the
meetings were less well attended and took on more of a political perspective.
Additionally the ‘same’ faces’ seemed to be there at different Forums. Ceasing
or limiting the meetings for 2009 may encourage more people to attend.
· The
possibility of moving away from the “open forum” title to one that better
explains the purpose of the meetings. This may help get the message out to the
community that there is an opportunity for them to get together with
Councillors to express their concerns.
· Holding
meetings at different times of the day to attract other demographics.
· Varying
the locations from previous years to improve accessibility and attendance
.
· Being
more strategic in the way the meetings are held by making them more appealing
and less intimidating to residents. Possibly changing the physical set up (i.e.
from the long table of Councillors and Executives to a less defensive
arrangement).
· The
possibility of running different types of less formal events that allow the
community to have the same kind of contact with Councillors and staff. For
example, a BBQ similar to the one held at Kilpac Park, Epping, which was held
on a Saturday morning, managing to attract around 200 residents.
At
the same time as this is happening it is important for Council to explore as
many opportunities for community engagement/consultation as possible.
2. Integrated Planning Systems - Council Planning
Models
Council
is required by the Department of Local Government (DLG) to develop a Community
Strategic Plan. The purpose of this Plan
is to ascertain the views and the priorities of the community over the next 10
years. The Community Strategic plan covers the next ten years - as a minimum -
so that Council can incorporate and address those priorities in its planning
processes i.e. Council’s 4 year delivery Plan and one year Management Plan.
DLG Guidelines will be releasing
its guidelines for the Integrated Planning Process in April 2009. These Plans
underpin the Community and Management Plans.
Council will report back to
Councillors through the Annual Report/ Management Plan. Quarterly reporting on
the Management Plan will not be required but will most likely continue as a
part of good business practice in any event.
The Integrated Planning Process
will also involve Council producing other plans in line with, and in addition
to, the 10 year Community Plan, the 4 year Delivery Plan and the 1 year
Management Plan. These include a Strategic Asset Management Plan (minimum 10
year plan), Long Term Financial Planning (minimum 10 year plan) and Workforce
Planning (minimum 4 year plan).
As a part of the development of
the Community Plan, Council is also required to do a Community Engagement Plan,
which will involve various forms of engagement with the community. These may
include community panels, surveys, and online forums such as Bang the Table and
targeted engagement, with specific groups such as businesses, social groups
etc.
As a part of Council’s on going policy development, and
in keeping with the new Integrated Planning System, data will be gathered from
various sources- including Census and the Police - about all areas of Hornsby
Shire, to give Council a snap shot of Hornsby Shire residents. This information
will then be used to and track and assess whether Council is improving or
impacting on the community as a consequence of the implementation of Council’s
delivery and Management Plans.
3. Current and Future Planning Processes -
¡ The
Planning Web and Sustainability 2020 Plan
In its Sustainability 2020 Plan Council uses a
Planning Web with 5 key focus areas, viz.
¡ Economy,
¡ Ecology,
¡ Society
and Culture,
¡ Human
Habitat, and
¡ Governance.
The Planning Web assists
Council’s decision-making processes by providing a framework which demonstrates
how all of these elements link. The Planning Web has been constructed so that
it is flexible and does not constrain the Council or the staff, yet achieves
its key purpose of providing better integrated outcome across all Divisions,
and assisting Council in measuring its success/outcomes.
It was suggested by Management,
and agreed by Councillors, that these focus areas and this framework would also
be suitable for Council’s Management Plan.
Feedback from staff regarding the
Planning Web included:
· People
involved in the Sustainable Action Committee have said that they were generally
comfortable that this sort of framework would work for them.
· It will take
about two years for Council to undertake all the engagement with the community,
and will be reporting back to Council many times during this period. It is in
the very early stages right now, and there will be many opportunities for
Councillors to be involved in the process.
· Existing
resources will be used as much as possible.
¡ Community Consultation
Councillors and The Executive
Committee (ExCo) discussed the different strategies currently used - and/or
which could be used in the future - to consult with and gain feedback from the
community. These included:
· Using current
planning documents - 90% of which have already been endorsed by Council. These
plans include strategies and contain research that can be used now rather than
starting the whole process from the beginning. Most of these have already had
community input and just need to be pulled together into a useable format;
· The
suitability of consultation/ feedback tools. They must be designed to reach the
silent community as well as the ‘squeaky wheels’. Residents often do not acknowledge
correspondence from Council. More creative formats will be needed to reach the
wider community;
· Drop in
sessions, visits to the youth centres, setting up an approachable stall at
community events or school fetes to get feedback from the community in a more
relaxed and fun environment;
SECTION B
IDENTIFICATION OF COUNCILLOR’S
FOUR-YEAR PRIORITIES
1. Brick Pit Stadium
An update was provided on the
Brick Pit Stadium project. Key points were:
· Cost of an
extension is $2M, which is unfunded at the moment;
· Do not need
to waste money doing a study on the needs of the facility, as we already know
what is required. A feasibility study would cost $20,000;
· The tender
for the Golf Driving Range was sent out with two responses. Currently tracking
down an independent person to assess the tenders, with a Report due to the May
Ordinary Meeting;
· The Golf
Driving Range will be a source of income for the Council, approximately $50,000
per year;
· Discussions
are currently underway as to how to manage the whole facility, and the
possibility of outsourcing the canteen facilities
· Looking at
other facilities to see how they operate their canteens.
Discussions and suggestions
regarding the Brick Pit Stadium and the possible extensions included:
· The general
agreement that the Brick Pit should be extended as it will bring in an extra
$50,000 profit per year to the Council. Bringing the profit total to $150,000
per year
· The
possibility of outsourcing certain parts or the whole of the operation;
· Concerns
regarding outsourcing and the handing over of maintenance of a Council asset to
external sources and the possible risks.
Report
to be brought back to Council containing information regarding outsourcing
specific parts of the facility and the potential benefits and risks.
2. Kangaroo Point
The
Master Plan for this property is now with the Environment Division.
A
Report is due to come to the March Ordinary Meeting, along with other open
space areas throughout the Shire.
3. Asset rationalisation
Update
There is an approximate $10M
which will need to be included in a community communication process to assist
in prioritising how this money should most effectively be used across various
assets. Council also needs to develop more clearly a strategy for classifying
different asset types.
Action
Bring this issue back to
a Workshop Meeting and discuss further in the context of the open space that
was identified by the previous Council as being surplus.
4. Heritage Conservation areas
Council
has written to the Department of Planning to request that they urgently
reinstate Hornsby’s draft heritage conservation areas to allow us to consider
the heritage matters of those sites. Have not received a response, but Council
is actively pursuing this issue.
Interested
Councillors to organise a meeting with the Executive Manager, Planning, (Scott
Philips) to discuss further.
The Development Application for a
slight extension has been lodged.
Action
A
Report will be coming to Council regarding fee setting and the management of
this site.
Issues concerning non-natural
watercourse drains across private properties were raised:
· Old
ones have not been maintained for a number of years and are causing problems;
· Steps
to cover many of these drains have not been taken, as there is not the funding
for them. The money is currently being used to fund other high priority
drainage issues within the Shire;
· Hydraulic
issues that may cause flooding and environmental problems have also stopped
many of them from being piped;
· Council
considering being more flexible with the policy that was set in the early 90’s,
to allow assessment of these drains and the possibility for them to be piped
over at the expense of the owner.
In-principle agreement to fill
the quarry has been agreed to by the current Council.
It is possible that it could take
up to five years for environmental approvals to go ahead with this development
and there is no guarantee that they would give approval for the quarry to be
filled.
At the workshop meeting held on 28 January 2009, Council
asked to meet again with potential tenderers, however after seeking legal
advice, Council’s solicitor has advised not to do this.
Action
A
consultant has been sourced from GHB to come to speak to Councillors on
Wednesday 25 March 2009 regarding this issue. A paper will be circulated prior
to this day.
NOTE: at this point in the discussion it became
clear that in order for decisions to be made (and actions undertaken)
regarding some of the key priorities needing to be ‘actioned’ over the next four years, a rate
variation would need to be sought from the Minister. In an effort to assist Councillors to
better understand what the Minister is likely to take into account (and
potentially agree to) regarding a rate variation for Hornsby, the General
Manager gave presentation which identified the key issues and challenges. See Appendix II |
The Discussion regarding the future of Hornsby Pool
included the following points:
· General
thoughts about what a better facility would be. An 8 lane, 50 metre pool,
picnic and BBQ areas, change rooms, learn to swim pool, toddler pool, indoor
pool and water slide;
· The
location – current location is the best logistical spot for the pool. It is
near the train, has bus access and good parking close to schools. Hornsby is a
hub for 3 different lines coming into the train station. It is the most
accessible centre for the Shire;
· Different
options and costs of building a new Hornsby Pool facility – To build a brand
new facility could cost between $26M and $30M, to do a rebuild of the facility,
which would include a rebuild of the 50 metre pool, indoor 25 metre learn to
swim pool and kiddy pool for around $15M;
· Which
option would generate more income for the Council in the future?
· Timeframes
– If the process were started now, it would take around four years to complete
a new facility. If it was done as a staged development, the current facility
could remain open.
Action
A report to be brought to Council
based on discussion of two options including financial information.
There was a discussion regarding the condition and use of
existing pools and future requirements for swimming pool facilities in the
Shire (Excluding Hornsby): key points were:
· Estimated
costs are high due to Council choosing more viable options. The pools need to
last;
· The
number of competition swimming facilities around the area that make it hard for
Council’s pools. Macquarie Uni, Ryde, Carlingford Fitness First, Homebush
Olympic Park;
· The
problem that Hornsby Council’s pools have evolved over time and there has never
been a strategic plan done as to where the facilities should be located;
· Is
there a need for so many pools?
· Options
of leasing out some of our pools to private companies to help reduce running
costs of providing the Shire with these facilities;
· Possibility
of building 2 great centres evenly spaced throughout the Shire and closing some
of the other pools throughout the Shire in order to provide them. If great
facilities are going to be provided for the Shire then it may be easier to sell
the idea of closing some of the current ones;
· Could
consider the Housing Strategy coming up when looking at the location of Shire
pools. Where are they going to have the most demand?
· The
closing of Epping pool is being considered as it is due for a major upgrade and
is in a location with many other superior surrounding facilities;
· Possibly
worth retaining the facilely in Galston due to the Housing Strategy and the
expected growth of the area. Could outsource this facility to make it less
costly to Council;
· Concern
over the viability of Berowra Pool. It is going to increase the total loss for
Council, as it will not produce any income for the Council;
· Agreement
that if we can maintain or decrease our net loss that the aquatic centres
throughout the Shire bring to the Council, then we can consider new facilities.
The subsidies of aquatic centres should be capped;
Report
be brought to Council with information regarding the possibility of outsourcing
some of our facilities particularly Epping and Galston.
At
this point in the discussion an update of Council’s current finances was
presented – the key points included:
· Decrease in
Development Application’s · Decrease of
investment income - $786,000 · Election
restricted access. Used to provide $85,000 a year, now it is $200,000 a year
that we need to set aside. · Haven’t
found any asset sales. Have started to borrow more. |
Update
Issues
regarding sporting fields included:
· The
sporting fields throughout the Shire are heavily used, so there is a lot of
impact on the areas;
· Water
restrictions make it harder for us to maintain these fields. There is never
enough money to put into further water saving;
· Turf
wickets are very expensive to maintain;
· We have
a large number of sporting fields throughout the shire compared with other
Council’s, but in terms of expectation from the community we are 11 playing
fields short. We are trying to focus more on unstructured recreation, such as
biking to help cope with this expectation;
· Hornsby
Council has a good reputation for meeting the expectations of the community
during wet weather by letting many games go ahead. This is getting much harder
to maintain;
· There
is no money to create new fields, but the money to maintain the current levels
is within the budget. This is getting much harder to maintain and options to
help keep the current levels of maintenance may need to include reducing the
amount of training that is done on these fields;
· Council
is already charging the most compared to other Councils in terms of fees;
· Looking
into selling off some of the small reserves to produce more money to be spent
on parks.
Discussions regarding the utilisation of Council’s
Community Centres included:
· There
are 24 community centres within the Shire. When you look at the utilisation
over the whole day they do not seem to be very utilised. But when you look at
the peak times of the day their utilisation is very high;
· How
can we increase the utilisation during off peak times? Could lease out some/parts
of facilities to organizations giving Council guaranteed rental income for the
whole day;
· Suggestion
for a large multi-cultural centre in the centre of Hornsby. Possible location
being the William Street car park. Put car park two levels underground with the
centre on top. Possibly have residential units on top of this. Could possibly
enter into a partnership with a private organisation to under take this type of
project;
· Looking
at using the funds from sale of some other properties towards community
centres;
· Other
options for large facilities in the Shire include the RSL war memorial hall.
The RSL has come to the Council regarding this issue, it may be worth exploring
the option of renovating this centre for use as a large Hornsby Community
Facility rather than building a completely new complex;
· With
the limited funding available, if we were prepared to prioritise our current
facilities we could deal with them one at a time using mainly internal
resources. If they were to be looked at all at once the project would require a
lot of extra funding;
· Cannot
rely heavily on Section 94 contributions for these facilities, as they do not
only service the new community, but also the old community. Only a portion of
the costs could be used;
· Report be brought to Council
providing information on the viability of private partnerships and other
options.
Update was provided on current
Council Assets including:
· Roads
to Recovery Program – In the process of receiving funds for this. $2.5M.
Council must then comply with their requirements and maintain agreed
expenditure;
· Council
has not been setting aside enough money to maintain some assets, and had a
short fall that equated to approximately $4M. This is progressively being
caught up;
· In
comparison to other Councils, Hornsby is not doing too badly;
· Council
is putting together a list in terms of Local Open Space, which will be coming
back to a workshop meeting;
· The
Independent Regulatory and Pricing Tribunal (IPART) is now understood to be the
price fixing instrumentality for the State Government. Things such as travel
tickets, street lighting and Development Application fees all fall into IPART’s
area of responsibility;
· Council
does not have the ability to influence the type of street lighting we use. The
streetlights are not ours; therefore we cannot change the way they are
operated.
Discussions regarding lack of development on the Westside
of Hornsby included:
· Due
to budgetary constraints, Council should do some in-house investigations and
have some meetings about the current restrictions and why development is not
occurring in this location;
· Get
feedback from developers on what is viable and what is not. What kind of
developments do they think they can sell? Re-zone if required to help encourage
development;
· Misconceptions
that ‘if you re-zone then the developers will come’. This has not been the case
for the Westside;
· Want
to attract developers with long-term interests in the area;
· If
Hornsby wants to encourage developers, Council need to be seen as doing
something to help the Centre. Continue to improve the streetscape;
· Preference
regarding having a commercial centre that allows residents of the Shire, who
are predominately white collar, to do their work in the Shire and closer to
home. Rather than having everyone leaving the Shire for work;
· Do
research first which can then be reflected in a Master Plan;
· The
Master Plan could cost between $10,000 and $200,000 depending on what the
Council wants from it. Make sure that really extensive preliminary work is done
so that the Master Plan can address all of the issues while being cost
effective.
The
Economic Development Taskforce has previously resolved to do some initial
research into why developers are not attracted to the area. They will also be
speaking to Real Estate Agents, tapping into UDIA resources to find what is
driving people to and from Hornsby.
A
Report will be brought back to Council regarding the results of these
initiatives
This
discussion was conducted in the context of streamlining Council’s
decision-making process to ensure that the best outcomes (over he next year and
for future years) can be secured by Council in the most effective way.
· Councillors
must make a decision regarding the re-structure of the Council within the first
12 months of the term;
· General
Manager has undertaken a survey of staff with a 70 – 80% return, to establish
the views of the staff on organisational structure and how it impedes on the
performance of their duties;
· Possibility
of outsourcing on a large scale throughout the Council;
· If
the Strategy Division was to go, could its functions be absorbed into other
areas of the Council?
· Would
like to see a one-stop help desk with customer service officers following
through with queries to ensure residents are looked after;
· Suggestion
of a ‘three strike’ policy for residents who continually waste the time of the
staff. i.e. bill people for extra investigations they want done that go further
than what has already been sufficiently undertaken;
· Re-look
at the administration of our TPO;
· May
be more beneficial to tweak things throughout the whole Council rather than do
a major re-structure.
Action
Councillors to provide General
Manager with any further suggestions regarding the re-structure of the Council.
General Manager will then collate the information ready for review by
Councillors.
SECTION C
IDENTIFICATION OF COUNCILLOR’S
1. More Efficient Use of Thornleigh Pound
Discussion
A suggestions about investigating
the process of dealing with stray animals at Thornleigh Pound was presented.
The Pound currently destroys approximately 250 animals per year, and it was
suggested there are many other Council Pounds that handle this situation better
than Thornleigh.
It was also suggested that there
needs to be greater community engagement with a view to developing strategies
to improve operations at Thornleigh. This could be done at minimal cost by
consulting with Vets and Pet Shop owners, pet shops and making better use of
Council Website
Action
Councillor Martin to submit a
Notice of Motion to an upcoming Council Meeting.
2. Gosford Council to Provide Access for Commuter
Berthing
Hornsby is in discussion with
Gosford Council regarding greater cooperation from Gosford Council in providing
better commuter berthing facilities at Mooney
Mooney.
The situation with Gosford raised
the broader issue of the availability of parking, for local residents in
particular at, locations across the Shire which attract high visitor/ tourist
numbers, especially, but not only, at weekends.
It was suggested that introducing
a “Sticker System” to the area could help generate some income for Council.
This would allow all residents of the Hornsby Shire to park in this area for
free, but any visiting residents from surrounding Councils would have to pay a
fee to park.
Action
It
was agreed that discussions regarding this issue should continue with Gosford
Council.
3. Cherrybrook Village
¡ Building of a Ramp
Discussion
Suggestions were made to help
reduce the traffic congestion along
· Constructing
a ramp for pedestrians to have access to the village from Greenway Park, which
would reduce the number of cars needing to travel along Shepherds Drive to
reach the main entrance;
· Re-zoning
of the open space between Cherrybrook Village and Greenway Park. Mirvac have
expressed interest in the possible construction of a second main entrance to
the Village on the corner near Greenway Park. Council should re-zone this land
now, so that when they decide to build the entrance it will not take a longer
period of time to then re-zone the land. The constructions could begin as soon
as approval has been given;
· If
the land was re-zoned and Mirvac decided to construct the second entrance,
Council should negotiate the possibility of Mirvac paying for or sharing the
cost of building the pedestrian ramp to join Cherrybrook Village to the park.
It is estimated that the pedestrian ramp would cost approximately $500,000;
· Along
with Greenway Park, there is also the Shire’s largest community hall, car
parking areas and a new childcare centre. All of Council’s best assets in the
Cherrybrook area are not easily accessible from the Village, which is
considered to be the town centre of Cherrybrook. Providing access between these
two locations would be very beneficial to the community and would greatly
reduce the traffic congestion along Shepherds Drive;
· The
possibility of the area being filled to limit the need for a footbridge. Always
looking for places to dispose of fill throughout the Shire.
It was agreed that investigations
would be done regarding Council’s re-zoning of the open space, with no further
commitment to the pedestrian ramp at this stage.
A
report will be brought to Council addressing the feasibility of the project, so
that it can be discussed further, and any future actions to be taken by Council
agreed by Councillors.
Discussions
regarding issues of the narrowness of the two-lane roundabout on
· Council
has received approximately 21 detailed emails from residents concerned with the
narrow lanes at the round about on Shepherds Drive. Many residents have had to
veer onto the side of the road or up onto the round about, to avoid having
accidents with cars in the adjacent lane;
· Plans
have already been done looking at widening the corner. The works will cost
approximately $300,000 to complete, however they will be one off works, which
will not require maintenance;
· Suggestions
that the Cherrybrook Village may be willing to consider another exit point for
the centre, leaving the current entrance for incoming cars only. This would
greatly minimise traffic congestion in this area;
· No
possibility of shaving the round about to provide more room and this would
reduce the sense of deflection for the cars travelling straight ahead. It would
not work like a round about;
· A
review of the traffic and parking conditions outside the aquatic centre further
up the road. This may also help reduce traffic congestion;
· Concerns
regarding the expenditure of the works. Council should explore other options
before committing to this;
· Suggestion
that Council look at replacing the round about with traffic lights. Would be
more costly initially, but may be much more beneficial long term;
· Council
has a certain expenditure on roads, so there is money available. It would be up
to the Councillors to determine what road projects would be undertaken. Council
can then prioritise these projects.
· A
Report is to come back to Council exploring other possible solutions for this
problem, including the possibility of installing traffic lights.
· Possibly
trial some solutions to see if they help the problem before committing to this
or any other major project.
Council will need to spend some money on developing
concept plans for the rebuild of Hornsby Pool. This is estimated to be
approximately $50,000 depending on which option (see above) Council decides to
go with.
SECTION D
POTENTIAL
· Hornsby
Council had the third highest legal costs in the state last year. Council has
currently budgeted for $1.5M for Land and Environment Court cases, want to aim
to reduce this to $750,000;
· There
are fewer development applications coming through Council, in particular the
ones for income generating developments;
· The
new Housing Code removes a lot of uncertainty of issues relating to development
applications. This will make it more black and white when determining applications,
meaning less should go to the Land and Environment Court;
· There
will be a reduced number if applications coming to Council Meetings for
determination. There will no longer be a set number of applications per
meeting, instead only the necessary applications will be brought to Council for
determination.
Action
The Executive Manager –
Planning to investigate possible cost savings regarding the potential reduction
in Das and strategies for solutions before parties go to the Land and
Discussion
Concern
was expressed regarding Council’s below average library expenditure per capita
in comparison to other Councils. Some suggestions on how to help this issue
included:
· Charging
a small fee for Internet usage and some other library facilities. Council
currently receives a funding grant from the State Government, which stops us
from charging for library memberships, but we could look into charging for
certain other services.
· The
possibility of leasing out areas to private companies to run Internet kiosks.
Council would then not be seen as charging for the usage, and it could provide
Council with income to go back into maintenance of our library facilities.
Investigate
what services Council is able to charge for in or associated with the Library.
· Possibility
of looking at the Johnson Rd, and Arcadia Pony Club sites for expanding the
commercial area around the sites, or to be developed as residential;
· Council
should consider turning these sites into something that will generate income
for the Council.
Councillors expressed their ideas about services that may be able to be cut back or re-assessed to help with reduced
Council costs or raising of revenue
Some suggestions included:
· Reviewing
the opening hours of the libraries
· Reviewing
the policy that states that all development applications for any staff members
of Council need to be assessed by a private consultant. Not all applications
need to be assessed by a consultant, and it is a waste of councils’ money
having this done. Investigation into the requirements for this to be done;
· Looking
into the possibility of sub-contracting someone to maintain the sewerage in
Galston. New legislation now allows us to do this;
· Reviewing
of the 55-65 year services;
· Reviewing
youth services;
· Reviewing
the process of street sweepers. Are they needed in all areas? Can they be done
on demand only? Report to be brought back to Council on this matter;
· The
recycling plant in Mt Ku-ring-gai and the possibility of taking in work from
outside of Council to generate some income. Would require a new consent to
allow Council to do this and would also need to make sure that the appropriate
staff and facilities were in place to handle this. Report to be brought back to
Council with information regarding the feasibility of this concept;
· Suggestion
that Council could start a concrete crushing plant in the industrial area of
Asquith, to generate income. Report to be brought back with information on this
idea;
· Moving
the Executive Planner position from the Strategy division and absorbing parts
of this role throughout Council. The salary is currently being paid out of
Section 94 funds, which means that this money could be used for other projects
requiring Section 94 money;
· Currently
Council is employing someone to encourage the community to pursue their own
grants. Review this position year by year to see if it is beneficial to the
community;
· Considering
the option of charging credit card fees. Review the process in which we
currently process credit cards to see if it can be done more cost effectively.
Hornsby
Mall Ambassadors
During daylight hours, Hornsby
Mall Ambassadors operate to offer directions to visitors in the mall, report
inappropriate activities and damage and to generally manage things that are
happening.
Discussion
Discussions over whether or not
the mall requires ambassadors included:
· Review
needs to be done on whether we need the ambassadors. They currently cost
Council approximately $100,000 per year;
· Westfield
has its own security and information staff, which are there to do that same
thing;
· It
is more beneficial to Westfield than the Council having these ambassadors in
the mall;
· If
the CCTV project goes ahead then that would be enough of a deterrent to people
causing security issues in the mall.
Action
· ExCo to review the budget in
detail and identify any items they suggest for the service delivery review.
· It was
agreed that the Hornsby Mall Ambassadors need to be reviewed in the light of
the broader review of services
APPENDIX I
ATTENDANCE
Councillors
Michael
Hutchence
Steve
Russell
Steve
Evans (Deputy Mayor)
Bruce
Mills
Wendy
McMurdo
Nick
Berman (Mayor)
Robert
Browne
Dilip
Chopra
Andrew
Martin
Mick
Smart
Staff
Max
Woodward (Executive Manager, Works)
Scott
Philips (Executive Manager, Planning)
Robert
Ball (General Manager)
Robert
Stephens (Executive Manager, Environment)
Glen
Magus (Manager, Finance)
Gary
Bensley (Executive Manager, Corporate and Community)
Julie
Williams (Acting Executive Manager, Strategy)
Libby
Darlison (Facilitator)
Lauren
Barrett (Note Taker)
Appendix II
¡ Issues
taken into account when a rate variation is applied for:
· The ability
for the Council to argue their point as to why there would be a direct benefit
to the majority of rate payers;
· Knowing the
current rates and levy’s that the council has in place;
· What is the
income lost due to rate pegging?
· Resident
expectations;
· Level of
community support to the increase;
· Community
needs in relation to recreation and the community benefits of the proposed
projects. The risks of proceeding or not proceeding with those projects;
· Analysis of
needs verses wants;
· Support of
the community;
· How much with
the community will gain apposed to how much they will lose;
· Results of
public meetings, focus groups etc.;
· That the
ratepayers who will be charged are going to receive the benefits;
· Financial
point of view that the council doesn’t have any alternatives. Look internally
for funds to be used within the council first;
· Supported by
well document asset management plans. How you are going to spent it and when;
· Have the
needs of ratepayers such as pensioners etc. been addressed;
· Be clear
about which type of rate you are applying for;
· Tangible
statements objectively assessed to support the increase.
¡ Rate Variation in relation to Hornsby Shire Council
· Need
to establish what the basis of the application would be. Possibly Hornsby Pool
or the Quarry;
· Options
to extend the current Quarry rate for a further period or to continue a levy
after the Quarry rate period has finished and use it as a Recreation Facilities
levy;
· If
we extend the current rate to 10 years from now we will get an extra $11M, with
$800,000 being released in the first year and $1.8M in the last. If we extend
the rate to 15 years we will get an extra $27M, with $1.3M in the first year
and $2.4M in the last and if we extend 20 years we will get an extra $40M
· Broad recreation levy
· Quarry
extension levy
· Suggest undertaking a marketing
exercise to see what the community thinks about the options, ready to apply for
the rate increase. If approved, aim to introduce the increase for 1 July 2010.
· If Council does not receive the
rate increase approval, money will be drawn out of the Quarry fund, using some
of it to re-fill the Quarry and to re-establish the program pool at Hornsby
Pool, closing the rest until the funding is available.
· The Minister generally prefers
something that is of benefit to the broader community not just some parts.
Appendix III
BUDGET 09/10 UPDATE
· Councils
budget finely tuned
· What
is the state of the Budget?
· Next
steps in the budget process
¡ 09/10
Budget Challenges
Started with an opening 08/09
deficits of $94,000.
Rate increase is 3% - around
($1.5M)
Labour increased – $1.5M
Debt services increase - $165,000
Street lighting increase -
$400,000 increase (takes total bill to $2.418M)
Decrease of GF investment income
- $786,000
Decrease DA revenue - $850,000
Election restricted asset -
$115,000
No asset sales - $290,000
Moving from 08/09 with a deficit
of $94,000 we are now looking at a deficit of $2.6M
· No increase
to non-labour expenditure (materials and contracts $28M @ 3% $840K, Capex x
$26M @ 3% $780K) - cost control
· Rate increase
determined by state government (0.5% = $250K approx)
· Labour based
on 50 weeks = approx 4% cost reduction $1M)
· Less
maintenance/
Example
of maintaining expenditure – Works is still budgeting to spend $150,000 per
year on footpaths. They are now building 20% less footpaths each year due to
cost increases.
Environment
has managed to increase productivity. Have taken on additional work and
fulfilled expectations but have reduced positions. Increased expenditure and an
increase of 2 big parks and 3 little parks, but with no increase of labour.
The
staff cuts fulfil their part by reducing costs and increasing productivity, but
the councillors’ increase the output of what they want delivered. They often
increase the costs.
Challenges cont.
· Insurance
premium increases
· No increase
in State Library funding in 08/09 due to reduced funding for public libraries.
08/09 Library Net Cost $5.0M with $386K funding from State
· Childcare
legislation changes $400K + F&C increase
· Significant
legal costs as a result of Class 1 appeals to the L&E Court. Only 21% of appeals
were dismissed.
· Reduction in
S94
· Increased
contribution to
· Subsidy to
food shop inspection $100K
· Increasing
the fees for Council’s childcare centres, so that we can use income made from
childcare centres to upgrade them. Making them more self-sufficient and
self-funding.
· Childcare
centres are an asset of Council, and they should be functioning in the
competitive world. They are running at a loss.
· Suggestion
of charging rent for our childcare centres. If Council has to invest in the
centres to bring them up to the current standards, then it would be fair to
bring that into the running costs.
· Expectation
from the community that we have always provided an excellent level of service
in our childcare centres.
· General
agreement that fees need to be increased and rent should be charged. Will have
to also be a gradual transition and not something that can take effect to its
full extent immediately.
– Legal Costs for L&E
Court Cases
· With the reduction of Development
Applications then we should have less to refer to the Land and Environment
Court.
– Reduction in S94 Funds
· Big reduction in Section 94 funds due to less
Development Applications coming through. There has also been a large drop in
large developments, which bring in more Section 94 funds.
· Section 94 funds can only be used for capital
development.
Future Budget Challenges
· Further
street lighting increases (IPART) – 75% over 3 years
· NSW
Fire brigade Commissioner
· Removal
Payroll Tax Exemption $2M+
Careful consideration
during the Budget process:
· No
new services unless full recovery
· Phase-ups
incurring future recurrent costs
· No
expansion of existing services
· Vacancies
Currently
when anyone leaves the organisation, the position goes to a panel (Exco) for consideration
as to whether it needs to be re-filled.
What are the options in
attempting to balance the budget?
· Significant
reduction in costs/service impact
· Asset
sales
· Loan
borrowing
· Special
rate variation
Discussion
· Significant
reduction in costs/service impact and special rate variation are options that
could assist long term, where as asset sales and loan borrowing may only
compound the problem.
· Some
Councils have different rates for different things throughout the Shire. Not
all residents have to pay all the rates, only if they benefit from it.
Possibility of doing this at Hornsby.
Action
FURTHER
research to be done regarding the possibility of having different rates for
different situations and/or and residents across the Shire.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------