Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 4

Declaration of Interest (Notes for Your Guidance)

A member who has a Financial Interest in any matter to be discussed at a Council or Committee Meeting, which will be attended by the member, must disclose the nature of the interest:

a) In a written notice given to the Chief Executive Officers before the Meeting or;

b) At the Meeting, immediately before the matter is discussed.

A member, who makes a disclosure in respect to an interest, must not:

c) Preside at the part of the Meeting, relation to the matter or;

d) Participate in, or be present during any discussion or decision-making procedure relative to the matter, unless to the extent that the disclosing member is allowed to do so under Section 5.68 or Section 5.69 of the Local Government Act 1995.

Notes on Financial Interest (For your Guidance)

The following notes are a basic guide for Councillors when they are considering whether they have a Financial Interest in a matter.

1. A Financial Interest requiring disclosure occurs when a Council decision might advantageously or detrimentally affect the Councillor or a person closely associated with the Councillor and is capable of being measured in money terms. There are expectations in the Local Government Act 1995 but they should not be relied on without advice, unless the situation is very clear.

2. If a Councillor is a member of an Association (which is a Body Corporate) with not less than 10 members i.e sporting, social, religious ect, and the Councillor is not a holder of office of profit or a guarantor, and has not leased land to or from the club, i.e, if the Councillor is an ordinary member of the Association, the Councillor has a common and not a financial interest in any matter to that Association.

3. If an interest is shared in common with a significant number of electors and ratepayers, then the obligation to disclose that interest does not arise. Each case need to be considered.

4. If in doubt declare.

5. As stated in (b) above, if written notice disclosing the interest has not been given to the Chief Executive Officer before the meeting, then it must be given when the matter arises in the Agenda, and immediately before the matter is discussed.

6. Ordinarily the disclosing Councillor must leave the meeting room before discussion commences. The only exceptions are:

6.1 Where the Councillor discloses the extent of the interest, and Council carries a motion under s.5.68(1)(b)(ii) of the Local Government Act; or

6.2 Where the Minister allows the Councillor to participate under s.5.69(3) of the Local Government Act, with or without conditions.

Interests Affecting Proximity

1) For the purposes of this subdivision, a person has a proximity interest in a matter if the matter concerns;

a) a proposed change to a planning scheme affecting land that adjoins the person’s land;

b) a proposed change to the zoning or use of land that adjoins the person’s land; or

c) a proposed development (as defined in section 5.63(5)) of land that adjoins the person’s land.

2) In this section, land (the proposal land) adjoins a person’s land if;

a) The proposal land, not being a thoroughfare, has a common boundary with the person’s land;

b) The proposal land, or any part of it, is directly across a thoroughfare from, the person’s land; or

c) The proposal land is that part of a thoroughfare that has a common boundary with the person’s land.

3) In this section a reference to a person’s land is a reference to any land owned by the person or in which the person has any estate or interest.

Interests Affecting Impartiality

Definition: An interest that would give rise to a reasonable belief that the impartiality of the person having the interest would be adversely affected, but does not include an interest as referred to in Section 5.60 of the ‘Act’.

A member who has an Interest Affecting Impartiality in any matter to be discussed at a Council or Committee Meeting, which will be attended by the member, must disclose the nature of the interest;

a) In a written notice given to the Chief Executive Officers before the Meeting or;

b) At the Meeting, immediately before the matter is discussed.

Impact of an Impartiality Closure

There are very different outcomes resulting from disclosing an interest affecting impartiality compared to that of a financial interest. With the declaration of a financial interest, an elected member leaves the room and does not vote.

With the declaration of this new type of interest, the elected member stays in the room, participates in the debate and votes. In effect then, following disclosure of an interest affecting impartiality, the member’s involvement in the Meeting continues as if no interest existed.

THIS PAGE HAS INTENTIONALLY BEEN LEFT BLANK

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 9

SHIRE OF ESPERANCE

AGENDA

Ordinary Council Meeting
TO BE HELD IN Council Chambers ON 28 October 2014

COMMENCING AT 4pm

1. OFFICIAL OPENING

2. ATTENDANCE

Members

Cr V Brown Acting President Rural Ward

Cr N Bowman Rural Ward

Cr L McIntyre Town Ward

Cr R Horan Town Ward

Cr B Stewart, JP Town Ward

Cr B Parker Rural Ward

Shire Officers

Mr W M (Matthew) Scott Chief Executive Officer

Mr S Burge Director Corporate Resources

Mr G Harris Director Asset Management

Mr R Hilton Executive Manager - Community Division

Mr R Hindley Executive Manager - Statutory Division

Mr T Ayres Executive Manager – Commercial Division

Mrs H Hall Executive Assistant

Miss S Fitzgerald Trainee Administration Officer

Members of the Public & Press

3. APOLOGIES & NOTIFICATION OF GRANTED LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Cr M Heasman President Town Ward

Cr K Hall Town Ward

Cr P Griffiths Town Ward

4. APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

5. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE PERSON PRESIDING WITHOUT DISCUSSION

6. DECLARATION OF MEMBERS INTERESTS

6.1 Declarations of Financial Interests – Local Government Act Section 5.60a

6.2 Declarations of Proximity Interests – Local Government Act Section 5.60b

6.3 Declarations of Impartiality Interests – Admin Regulations Section 34c

7. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

8. PUBLIC ADDRESSES / DEPUTATIONS

9. Petitions

Nil

10. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

That the Minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting of the 23 September 2014, the Special Council Meeting of the 30 September 2014, and the Special Council Meeting of the 14 October 2014 be confirmed as true and correct records.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

11. DELEGATES’ REPORTS WITHOUT DISCUSSION

12. MATTERS REQUIRING A DETERMINATION OF COUNCIL

12.1 External Services - Statutory Division

Item: 12.1.1

Development Application - Industrial Shed and Retaining Walls - Lot 429 (10) Simpson Street, Chadwick

Author/s	Peter Wilks	Town Planning Officer
Authorisor/s	Richard Hindley	Executive Manager - Statutory Division

File Ref: D14/21209

Applicant

Cartman Designs on behalf of Stuart McIntyre and Debbie Howard

Location/Address

Lot 439 (10) Simpson Street, Chadwick

Executive Summary

For Council to consider and determine an application for an Industrial Shed, and Retaining Walls at Lot 439 (10) Simpson Street, Chadwick. Variations to the front and side setbacks, maximum building height, car parking and landscaping requirements are proposed.

Recommendation in Brief

For Council to approve Development Application 10.2014.2706.1 for an Industrial Shed and Retaining Walls at Lot 439 (10) Simpson Street, Chadwick.

Background

An application was submitted on 7 October 2014 seeking planning approval for the proposed Industrial Shed, and Retaining Walls at Lot 439 (10) Simpson Street, Chadwick.

The proposal called for a 1364 square metre Industrial Shed to replace the existing industrial building, as well as retaining walls along parts of the northern and western boundaries.

The subject land is 4267 square metres in size and is zoned ‘Industry – General’. The existing Industrial Shed on the premises was approved in 1993 and is now proposed for demolition to make way for larger buildings to better support the same industrial operations.

Officer’s Comment

	Requirement	Proposed
Maximum Plot Ratio	0.5 (50% of site)	31.2%	Complies
Minimum Setbacks
- Front	12 metres	9.694 metres	Does not comply however this is the setback of the existing approved building.
- Side	3 metres	3 metres to building. Nil setback for Retaining Walls	Building Complies however the Retaining Walls do not comply
- Rear	3 metres	34.5 metres.	Complies
Maximum Building Height	9 metres	11.845 metres	Does not comply however under Amendment No. 14 which is due to be gazetted in the coming weeks the proposal will comply.
Minimum Landscaping	25% of the area within 12 metres of the front boundary.	Approximately 5% of the front 12 metres to be landscaped.	Does not comply due to the retention of the Abrasive Blasting plant on site and the need to provide access for road trains and oversized loads to enter the site.
Minimum Car Spaces	1 per 100 square metres gross floor area plus 1 per 40 square metres gross office floor area. 1340 square metres of Industrial Floor Area plus approximately 22 square metres of Office proposed requires 18 metres of office requires 14 car parking bays.	9 car parking bays proposed.	Does not comply however sufficient area is on site for informal parking to make up the shortfall.

The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding area and consistent with the objectives of the ‘Industry – General’ zone. Due regard has been given to the criteria set out in Clause 10.2 in the Scheme. The proposed development will not generate significant traffic and will not impact on public safety or the safe movement of vehicles. The proposed vehicle access provides sufficient space for loading and unloading onsite.

With regards to the development standards of the Scheme, the application proposes variations to the front setback, side setback, building height, car parking and landscaping provisions of the Industry – General zone.

The proposed 9.694 metre front setback to the Industrial Shed is a reduction from the Scheme requirement of 12 metres. Schedule 8 of the Scheme specifies a 20 metre front setback for the Industry - General zone which may be reduced to 12 metres in the following circumstances:

i) At the discretion of the local government, may be reduced to a minimum of 12m where the front and side walls within 20m of the frontage are to be constructed of a hard, durable material but not including metal cladding and may incorporate glazing as approved by the local government.

ii) Where the development adjoins a road, not a Highway or an Important Local Road, the Council may reduce the front setback distance to a minimum of 12 metres.

The proposed Colorbond sheeting and zinc cladding, although identified a durable material, is contrary to this provision of the Scheme.

Simpson Street is not considered a ‘Major or Important Local Road’ under the Scheme.

The proposal does not trigger the Industrial Design Guidelines as it is not located within the policy area (adjacent to Norseman, Harbour or Shelden Roads).

The reduced front setback will result in an impact on the visual amenity of the area, particularly in combination with the over height nature of the structure, however it is noted that the proposed front setback is identical to that of the existing building on site and that the reason for the reduced front setback is to retain existing fixed plant on site. Furthermore the existing building was approved with a front setback of 4 metres in 1993.

It is noted that five applications for proposals with similar reduced setbacks on nearby lots have been approved by Council in the past eighteen months:

· Lot 753 Berrigan Street, Chadwick, was approved with a 3 metre front setback by Council at the Ordinary Council Meeting held 23 July 2013;

· Lot 754 Berrigan Street, Chadwick, was approved with a 3 metre front setback by Council at the Ordinary Council Meeting held 27 August 2013;

· Lot 702 Effie Turner Drive, Chadwick was approved with a 3 metre front setback by Council at the Ordinary Council Meeting held 25 March 2014;

· Lot 466 Rogers Street, Chadwick was approved with a 2.6 metre front setback by Council at the Ordinary Council Meeting held 22 April 2014; and

· Lot 1 (3A) Rogers Street, Chadwick was approved with a 5.6 metre front setback by Council at the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 22 July 2014.

The reduced side setbacks are not seen to be significant as the reduction is for the purposes of Retaining Walls, which is a common feature of many Retaining Walls and allow for better use of the land.

The proposed building height of 11.845 exceeds the 9 metre limit of Clause 5.15 of Local Planning Scheme No. 23 however it is noted that Amendment 14 to Local Planning Scheme No. 23 which is currently with the Department of Planning for final approval contains an amendment to Clause 5.15 which would increase the building height limit of the Industry – General zone to 12 metres which the proposal complies with. The existing building was also approved in excess of 9 metres in height, with a height to the top of the ridge of 9.56 metres, plus an exhaust silencer of unknown dimensions.

The reduction in car parking is proposed due to the relatively small workforce on site. Sufficient space is available for informal car parking if additional car parking spaces are required, however it is not practical for the proponent to provide formalised and sealed car parking bays that far from Simpson Street. The applicant has stated that the existing business has 4 employees, with the potential for 3 more if expansion proves feasible (see Attachment B).

The reduction of landscaping is significantly less than the 25% of the front 12 metres of the property that is required (approximately 5% of the front 12 metres is proposed as landscaping), however due to the need to retain the existing Abrasive Blasting plant on site and the need to provide access for road trains and oversized loads to enter the site, it is seen that the reduction in landscaping can be justified.

The design of the stormwater disposal system is to yet to be confirmed due to on-going discussions with Shire of Esperance Asset Management Division. The applicant aims to connect the development to an extension of the Shire of Esperance stormwater drainage that is due to be installed in the next 12 to 24 months, however if this does not prove feasible all stormwater will be required to be retained on site.

Consultation

As a variation to Scheme standards was proposed the process outlined in Clause 5.5 of Local Planning Scheme No. 23 was undertaken. Four non-objections from all of the adjoining landowners were received on 8 October 2014 in accordance with Clause 9.4 of Local Planning Scheme No. 23.

Financial Implications

Nil

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

The statutory implications arising from this report are:

· Planning and Development Act 2005

· Local Planning Scheme No. 23

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Local Planning Strategy

Precinct 3 – Norseman, Harbour and Shelden Roads General Industrial

Strategies:

· Encourage the development of industrial uses and serviced industrial lots. Where reticulated sewerage is not available to existing lots ensure appropriate waste disposal methods are considered.

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

Economic

3.8 Facilitate and guide high quality and efficient building and development across the Shire.

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a .	Planning Application
b .	Applicants Justification

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council approve Development Application 10.2014.2706.1 for an Industrial Shed, Retaining Walls and associated Earthworks at Lot 439 (10) Simpson Street, Chadwick subject to the following conditions:

1. Development shall be carried out and fully implemented in accordance with the details indicated on the stamped approved plan(s) unless otherwise required or agreed in writing by the Shire of Esperance (Planning Services).

2. The approved Industrial Shed shall not be used for purposes of human habitation.

3. All earthworks and retaining walls shall be undertaken in accordance with plans and specifications certified by a qualified Engineer as being consistent with standard engineering practices, to the satisfaction of the Shire of Esperance (Building Services).

4. The vehicle crossover is to be constructed, drained and sealed to the satisfaction and specifications of the Shire of Esperance (Asset Management Division) – refer enclosed vehicle crossover application form.

5. A minimum of nine (9) car parking bays are to be provided on-site in accordance with the requirements of Australian Standard AS2890.1:2004 Parking Facilities – Off-street Car Parking and the Building Code of Australia.

6. Prior to the commencement of the use, vehicle parking, manoeuvring and circulation areas shall be suitably constructed, sealed (asphalt, concrete or brick pavers), drained, kerbed, marked (including disabled bays) and thereafter maintained.

7. All car parking areas and access ways shall be maintained for their stated purpose at all times and shall not be used for display or general storage purposes.

8. No parking or display of vehicles and/or equipment shall occur within the road verge area at any time.

9. All delivery vehicles must be located entirely on the site during loading and unloading of goods associated with the use of the site.

10. All stormwater and drainage run off is to be connected to a legal point of discharge (as determined by Asset Management Division) or to an approved on site disposal system prior to occupation of the development for its approved purpose to the satisfaction of the Shire of Esperance (Asset Management Division).

11. The existing infrastructure located within the road reserve shall be retained and protected during the construction process period with any damage to the infrastructure being repaired to the satisfaction of the Shire of Esperance (Asset Management Division).

12. The provision of all services, including augmentation of existing services, necessary as a consequence of any proposed development shall be at the cost of the developer and at no cost to the Shire of Esperance.

13. The approved development shall be connected to a reticulated water supply provided by a licensed water provider.

14. The approved development shall be connected to an approved effluent disposal system prior to commencement of the development and/or use to the satisfaction of the Shire of Esperance (Environmental Health Services).

15. The works involved in the implementation of the development must not cause sand drift and/or dust nuisance. In the event that the Shire of Esperance is aware of, or is made aware of, the existence of a dust problem, measures such as installation of sprinklers, use of water tanks, mulching, or other land management systems as appropriate may be required to be installed or implemented to prevent or control dust nuisance, and such measures shall be installed or implemented within the time and manner directed by the Shire of Esperance (Environmental Health Services).

16. During construction stage, adjoining lots are not to be disturbed without the prior written consent of the affected owner(s).

17. The proposed operations, during and after construction, are required to comply with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.

18. The use and development hereby approved must not create community safety concerns, or otherwise adversely affect the amenity of the subject locality by reason of (or the appearance or emission of) smoke, fumes, noise, vibration, odour, vapour, dust, waste water, waste products or other pollutants.

19. All fencing shall be in accordance with the Shire of Esperance Local Law Relating to Fencing.

And the following advice notes:

1. THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PERMIT. In accordance with the provisions of the Building Act 2011, an application for a building permit is required to be submitted and approved by the Shire of Esperance (Building Services) prior to any works commencing on-site.

2. THIS IS NOT A DEMOLITION PERMIT. In accordance with the provisions of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, an application for a demolition permit is required to be submitted and approved by the Shire of Esperance (Building Services) prior to the demolition of any existing building(s) on-site.

3. The development is to comply with the Building Code of Australia, Building Regulations and the Local Government Act.

4. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that building setbacks correspond with the legal description of the land. This may necessitate re-surveying and re-pegging the site. The Shire of Esperance will take no responsibility for incorrectly located buildings.

5. It is the responsibility of the developer to search the title of the property to ascertain the presence of any easements and/or restrictive covenants that may apply.

6. The developer is to liaise with Shire of Esperance (Development Compliance) to determine if any signs proposed to be erected on-site require the separate approval of the Shire of Esperance (Planning Approval and/or Signs Licence) prior to erection of such.

7. The proposed development is satisfactory to Shire of Esperance Environmental Health Services subject to compliance with the following legislation:

· Health Act 1911

· Occupational Health Safety and Welfare Regulations 1988

· Sewerage (Lighting, Ventilation and Construction) Regulations 1971

· Shire of Esperance Health Local Laws 2004

· Metropolitan Water Supply, Sewerage and Drainage By-Laws 1981

· Health Act (Carbon Monoxide) Regulations

· Health (Air Handling and Water Systems) Regulations 1994

· Health (Treatment of Sewage and Disposal of Effluent and Liquid Waste) Regulations 1974

8. Should the current effluent disposal system on site fail or be required to be upgraded or removed, an application must be submitted to Shire of Esperance Environmental Health Services for the new or upgraded effluent disposal system.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 22

12.2 Asset Management

Item: 12.2.1

RFQ 16-14 Replacement of a Landfill Compactor

Author/s	Chris Hubble	Technical Officer
Authorisor/s	Gavin Harris	Acting Chief Executive Officer

File Ref: D14/20315

Applicant

Internal

Location/Address

Asset Management

Executive Summary

To consider quotations for the supply and delivery of one new Landfill Compactor utilising the trade-in of the Shire’s existing 1996 816F Caterpillar Landfill Compactor and the outright purchase offers received in relation to a WALGA disposal tender.

Recommendation in Brief

1) Not accept the outright purchase offers from Smith Broughton & Sons, Pickles Auctions, or Allused Pty Ltd under WALGA disposal tender RFT 041_14 (Plant 6); and

2) Accept quotation RFQ 16-14 from Tutt Bryant Equipment for the supply, and delivery of one new B572RB-2 landfill compactor as specified utilising trade in of the Shire’s existing 1996 Caterpillar landfill compactor.

Background

In accordance with the Council’s adopted Plant Asset Management Plan, Caterpillar Landfill Compactor 816F (1996), Shire ID L51, Plant ID. 117005 is due to be changed over as per the 2014-15 budget.

The WALGA Preferred Supplier System was used to obtain quotes from three (3) suppliers of landfill compactors being Westrac Pty Ltd, Tutt Bryant Equipment, and GCM Enviro Pty Ltd.

WALGA was engaged to run a tender for the disposal of the Shire’s existing landfill compactor which was advertised under WALGA Disposal Tender RFT 041-14 (Plant 6) on Wednesday the 13^th August, 2014 and closed Monday 25^th August, 2014. Three tenders were received for the outright purchase under the WALGA disposal tender RTF 041-14.

Three (3) companies submitted five (5) quotations to replace the landfill compactor including trade changeover figures.

The quotations were evaluated with the following criteria:

Description of Qualitative Criteria	Weighting
Whole of Life Costs	50%
Mechanical Assessment	25%
Provision of Service Abilities	5%
Operator Assessment	20%

The assessment matrix (below) allows the tenders / quotations to be evaluated in an unbiased manner whereby the supplier with the highest overall points may be considered to be the most advantageous quotation. This is to be used as a guide only during the assessment and is not necessarily binding.

The quotation received from Westrac Pty Ltd failed to meet the specification criteria that stated the new landfill compactor was to have a minimum weight of 25000kg, and was not considered in the evaluation.

Officer’s Comment

Shire staff evaluated the machinery from the supplied technical information, photos, internet, discussion with the various sales representatives and previous experience.

Assessment

Company	Tutt Bryant Equipment	GCM Enviro Pty Ltd	GCM Enviro Pty Ltd
Make and Model	Bomag B572RB-2	Tana E260	Tana E320
Score	88.76	79.14	74.24

From the above table the highest scoring machine was the Bomag B572RB-2, scoring 9.62 and 14.52 percentage points higher than the Tana E260 and Tana E320 respectively.

The Bomag B572RB-2, Tana E260, and Tana E320 are all purpose built landfill compactors, the Bomag B572RB-2 operates four (4) polygonal wheels with landfill compaction teeth, and both the Tana E260 and E320 operate two (2) round compaction drums with landfill compaction teeth.

It is believed the four wheeled system of the Bomag B572RB-2 will provide superior compaction efficiency, due to increased concentration of crushing down force on each wheel, while taking an equal amount of passes to cover the same surface area as the Tana models. It is also believed the four wheeled system of the Bomag will provide better stability and traction on the built up style of landfill the Shire of Esperance operates.

The Bomag B572RB-2 has a sealed engine compartment that will prevent dust, debris, and landfill from entering, providing a cleaner and more hygienic working environment for servicing and maintenance.

Consultation

Workshop Supervisor

Plant Operators

Company Representatives

WALGA

Works Supervisor

Director of Asset Management

Financial Implications

Council has allocated $632,000 (excluding GST) net changeover in its 2014/15 Budget. The net actual changeover for this landfill compactor is $82,000 (excluding GST) under budget. See confidential attachment for quotation comparison.

Asset Management Implications

It is important to ensure that fleet is changed over at the optimal time whereby a suitable trade value is obtained while limiting the need to undertake significant maintenance on plant prior to trading. This ensures that the Shire keeps a modern, up-to-date fleet that is capable of undertaking the significant work required within the Shire of Esperance.

This replacement is in accordance with Council’s adopted Fleet Asset Management Plan and the 10 Year Plant Replacement Program contained within.

Statutory Implications

Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 Part 4 and Section 3.57 of the Local Government Act 1995.

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

Economic

3.1 Deliver a diverse range of affordable services and infrastructure across the Shire.

3.3 Deliver and advocate for a diverse and safe transport system which is efficient and meets the needs of all users.

3.5 Maintain the Shire’s robust asset management practices and maintenance programs.

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a .

RFQ 16/14 Landfill Compactor Comparison for Council - Confidential

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council

3) Not accept the outright purchase offers from Smith Broughton & Sons, Pickles Auctions, or Allused Pty Ltd under WALGA disposal tender RFT 041_14 (Plant 6); and

4) Accept quotation RFQ 16-14 from Tutt Bryant Equipment for the supply, and delivery of one new B572RB-2 landfill compactor as specified utilising trade in of the Shire’s existing 1996 Caterpillar landfill compactor.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 25

Item: 12.2.2

Esperance Coastal Management Plan - Thomas River (Reserve 518)

Author/s	Rod Hilton	Executive Manager Community Division
Authorisor/s	Gavin Harris	Acting Chief Executive Officer

File Ref: D14/21023

Applicant

Internal

Location/Address

Coastal Reserves

Executive Summary

To consider Coastal Tenure issues in relation to Thomas River Reserve 518 prior to finalization of the Coastal Reserves Implementation Plan.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council initiates the transfer of the vesting of Thomas River Reserve 518 to the WA Conservation Commission.

Background

At the April 2014 Council meeting (Res. O0414-001) Council resolved to:

1. Receive and advertise the Esperance Coastal Management Plan for public comment for a period of 21 days; and

2. Subject to the receipt of any community comments, direct the CEO to prepare a draft implementation plan of the Esperance Coastal Management Plan.

The Plan was subsequently advertised in the Esperance Express on Wednesday 30^th April 2014. There were no public submissions received by the end of the submission period on 14^th May 2014.

The Plan was further reviewed by the Department of Parks and Wildlife to correct some minor discrepancies before being presented to a Council briefing held 9^th September 2014.

At the briefing, staff sought Council direction on the recommendations of the Plan regarding coastal tenure (Page 9) as these could have a significant impact on the development of the Implementation Plan.

Coastal Tenure
CT1	Seek management of unallocated reserves (e.g. Reserve 24486 and 15042)	S	SoE, Landgate
CT2	Consider handing over Management Order of Reserves 518, 3805, (Thomas River and Israelite Bay) with DPaW	M-L	SoE, DPaW
CT3	Amalgamate fisherman leases with surrounding reserves (e.g. Reserve 38086 at Israelite Bay and Reserve 36979 at Nares Island)	M	SoE, Landgate

In accordance with Recommendation CT2 of the Coastal Management Plan staff have proposed that Council consider the future management of the Thomas River Reserve as there are significant maintenance issues associated with the operation of this coastal camping area.

Officer’s Comment

Staff have been directed to commence preparation of the Implementation Plan. A significant component of the Plan involves expenditure on the Thomas River Reserve.

This Reserve is surrounded by the Cape Arid National Park in a 104ha enclave, 130km east of Esperance. It is vested in the Shire for the purpose of camping and recreation. There is no beach frontage but the southern boundary fronts the Thomas River. Infrastructure on site includes 12 camping sites, 5 picnic tables, 3 shade shelters, a rainwater tank, a sealed vault male and female toilet, a male and female rota loo composting toilet.

The campsite has been managed by National Park Rangers since 2004. Prior to this Shire Rangers visited the campsite once a week. They were supported, by default, by the National Park Rangers whom dealt with the daily issues that arose during the busy holiday periods. The availability of resident National Park Rangers and the proximity of the National Park campsite to the Shire campsite made management from Esperance appear illogical and inefficient. This resulted in an Agreement with the Department of Parks and Wildlife (DePAW) to manage the shire camping area in return for retention of camping fees collected and a commitment from the Shire to maintain the access roads and the replacement of infrastructure.

On the 20^th December 2001 the Coastal Reserves Working Party recommended to Council the transfer of Reserve 518 to the WA Conservation Commission. The motion was lost. (OCM.12.01-0165)

The current issues for council to consider are:

1. Current Management Agreement with DePAW expires 2015

2. DePAW has expressed an interest in amalgamating Reserve 518 into the National Park.

3. Toilet block needs to be replaced – Hired porta loos supplemented campsite requirements last year. Estimated cost to replace toilets $69,000 depending on quality. (e.g.Observatory Beach toilet cost $50,000; West Beach toilet cost $150,000)

4. Beach access washed out – This is an annual event. Shared responsibility with DePAW $2,000 ea for temporary crossing

5. Dog control is a problem – It is illegal to transport dogs across or through a National Park. Campers not adhering to rules. DePAW Rangers have to deal with people and dogs on beaches.

6. Vegetation under threat – campers cutting wood for camp fires.

7. Camp fees collected via donations $500 under Shire management, Camp fees collected by National Park Rangers $11,000

8. Identified hazard of pedestrians and vehicles using same access onto beach.

Options:

1. Retain vesting and continue Agreement with DePAW to manage Reserve 518 on behalf of the Shire of Esperance. Current Agreement expires 2015. Infrastructure replacement estimated at $100,000 over next 6 years plus the Coastal Management Plan recommended upgrades of $88,500.

2. Retain vesting and engage a “Camp Host” or contract caretaker during the busy holiday seasons. Estimated cost $11,000 for 1 visit a week by Rangers and $2,000 for Camp Host operational requirements for 13 weeks plus replacement of infrastructure as above.

3. Retain vesting and increase the number of visits by Shire Rangers during holiday periods. Estimated cost $7,000 for 3 visits a week for 13 weeks plus $8,000 for 1 visit a week for 39 weeks plus replacement of infrastructure as above.

4. Transfer the responsibility for the management and operation of Reserve 518 to another body e.g. The WA Conservation Commission, and remove the Shire from any future liability and maintenance responsibilities.

As it currently identified in the Coastal Management Plan there is $88,500 worth of new and upgraded works required excluding the need to replace existing toilets which could cost in the vicinity of $100,000. Council now needs to determine if the Thomas River Reserve should be retained by Council in which case expenditure under the implementation plan would be considered a high priority. Alternatively if the reserve is surrendered then priorities for works under the implementation plan would be directed elsewhere in the first instance

Consultation

The Coastal Management Plan is a review of the Coastal Management Plan 2002 (Field,2002). Consultation during the review has been limited to:

1. The Coastal Reserves Working Group as identified on page 132 of the Plan

2. Advertising for public comment – Esperance Express April 30^th 2014.

Financial Implications

The financial implications arising from this report are dependent on decisions to be made on Coastal Tenure and which reserves Council wishes to retain or gain management responsibility for. The Long Term Financial Plan currently includes forecast expenditure on implementation of the Coastal Management Plan in its current format. A reduction in management responsibility will result in reduced financial accountability.

Asset Management Implications

The Coastal Management Plan if endorsed in its current format less Thomas River

	Capital	Annual	Comments
Capital	$841,480	$93,498	As per LTFP over 9 years
Renewal (ongoing costs)	$731,112	$81,235	As per LTFP over 9 years
Maintenance (ongoing cost)		$237,864	As per draft annual budget for operations 2014/15
		$412,587	Per year
Less Thomas River
Capital	-$88,500	$-9,833
Renewal	-$100,000	$-11,111
Maintenance		-$13,000
		$378,643	A saving of $33,944 Per year

Statutory Implications

Nil

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

Theme 2. Environment

Strategy 2.3 Provide equitable access for all users to our environment while balancing the protection of natural assets.

Corporate Business Plan 2013/2014 – 2016/2017

Action 2.3.3 Review and update the Coastal Management Plan and coordinate implementation schedule.

Environmental Considerations

The environmental considerations arising from this report are included within the report.

Attachments

Thomas River - Reserve 518

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council initiate the process to transfer the vesting of Thomas River Reserve 518 to the WA Conservation Commission for management by the Department of Parks and Wildlife

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 30

Item: 12.2.3

Review of Regulated Regular Passenger Transport Air Routes in WA

Author/s	Scott McKenzie	Manager Commercial Enterprises
Authorisor/s	Gavin Harris	Acting Chief Executive Officer

File Ref: D14/21108

Applicant

Internal

Location/Address

Executive Summary

The State Government has released a position paper in relation to the regulation of regular public transport air routes beyond February 2016.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council advise the Department of Transport that the Shire of Esperance supports reduced regulation on the Perth-Esperance air route beyond 2016, provided that a minimum of 15 flights per week is maintained and the State Government continues to provide oversight on;

· Scheduling,

· Pricing, and

· Community Consultation.

Background

Since 2011, Virgin Australia Regional Airlines (VARA) has been operating the Perth-Esperance protected route under deed arrangements with the State Government. The deed is in place until 27^th February 2016 and contains an option for an extension of up to five years.

In July 2013 the Department of Transport commenced a review of the 8 Regulated Regular Passenger Transport (RPT) routes in WA. A new approach is proposed for air route regulation beyond February 2016 which recognises the economic and social context specific to the route and is based on preliminary community and stakeholder feedback, passenger survey data and other statistical reports.

The State Government prefers a light-handed regulatory approach for RPT routes in WA and aims to;

· Ensure an adequate level of RPT air services on regional routes in WA.

· Foster competition on RPT routes.

· Ensure charter services do not detract from the viability of RPT air services.

· Impose minimum costs of the resource sector and charter operators.

· Reduce costs of unnecessary red tape and minimize direct costs to the State Government.

With the above intentions, the State Government has prepared a position paper, entitled Review of Regulated Regular Public Transport Air Routes in Western Australia. The position paper reviews the 8 protected routes and proposes a specific recommendation for each route.

The position paper supports the below recommendation with the following key findings;

· The Perth-Esperance route is one of the busiest regulated routes in WA.

· Airfares are high with a limited number of discounted fares being offered. The lack of competition on the route inhibits the potential for price discounting.

· The risk of de-regulating the Perth-Esperance route is relatively low. Nevertheless, there is a significant likelihood that if the route were to be opened to competition that only one operator would operate the route.

With regard to the Perth-Esperance route the State Government recommendation is “Reduce regulation on the Perth-Esperance air route beyond February 2016 and open the route to potential competition. The State Government will ensure oversight of scheduling, pricing and community engagement for air services if appropriate”.

The complete Review of Regulated Regular Public Transport Air Routes in WA report can be downloaded from the Department of Transport – Aviation website

http://www.transport.wa.gov.au/aviation/review-of-regulated-air-routes-in-wa.asp

Officer’s Comment

It is believed that the State Government intend to monitor the key factors that impact on the community’s needs with regard to air services. Scheduling, Pricing and Consultation are deemed by the State Government to be of the highest priority and factors that influence the success of the route.

The State Government is also attempting to leave the option open for another airline to provide a competing service. The author is of the understanding that somehow the deed will dissolve or the State will have a withdrawal clause if a competing airline services the Perth-Esperance route.

It is firmly believed that the worst case scenario would be an unregulated monopoly airline providing a service with no oversight on scheduling and pricing.

Consultation

The Department of Transport has conducted consultation with the Esperance Community Consultation Group.

Financial Implications

Nil

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

Nil

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

Theme 3: Economic

3.3. Deliver and advocate for a diverse and safe transport system which is efficient and meets the needs of all users.

Corporate Business Plan 2014/2015 – 2017/2018

Action 3.3.1.3 Manage the Esperance Airport

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

Perth - Esperance Air Rote Snapshot

Officer’s Recommendation

· Scheduling,

· Pricing, and

· Community Consultation.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 35

Item: 12.2.4

RFQ 07-14 Replacement of a Grader

Author/s	Chris Hubble	Technical Officer
Authorisor/s	Gavin Harris	Acting Chief Executive Officer

File Ref: D14/21204

Applicant

Internal

Location/Address

Asset Management

Executive Summary

To consider quotations for the supply, delivery and licensing of one new Grader utilising the trade-in of the Shire’s existing 2008 12M Caterpillar Grader and the outright purchase offers received in relation to a WALGA disposal tender.

Recommendation in Brief

Council should:

1) Accept the outright purchase offer from Smith Broughton & Sons under WALGA disposal tender RFT 041_14 (Plant 1); and

2) Accept quotation RFQ 07/14 from Komatsu Australia Pty Ltd for the supply, delivery and licensing of one new GD555-5 Grader as specified, for a net changeover of $183,000.00.

Background

In accordance with the Councils adopted Plant Asset Management Plan Caterpillar Grader 12M (2008), Registration E25096, Shire ID G39, Plant ID. 90021 is due to be changed over as per the 2014-15 budget.

The WALGA Preferred Supplier System was used to obtain quotes from three (3) suppliers of graders being Westrac Pty Ltd, Komatsu Australia Pty Ltd, and Hitachi Construction Machinery (Aust).

WALGA was engaged to run a tender for the disposal of the Shire’s existing Grader which was advertised under WALGA Disposal Tender RFT 041-14 (Plant 1) on Wednesday the 13th August, 2014 and closed Wednesday 25^th August, 2014. Five (5) tenders were received for the outright purchase.

Three (3) companies submitted four (4) quotations to replace the Grader including trade changeover figures.

The quotations were evaluated with the following criteria:

Description of Qualitative Criteria	Weighting
Whole of Life Costs	50%
Mechanical Assessment	25%
Provision of Service Abilities	5%
Operator Assessment	20%

Hitachi Construction Machinery (Aust) submitted two (2) models of Grader for consideration, the 670G and 670GP. These machines are identical except for their control systems. The 670G was chosen for comparison out of the two as it more closely matched the specifications in RFQ 07-14, and fits within budget better than the 670GP.

Officer’s Comment

Shire staff evaluated the machinery from the supplied technical information, photos, internet, discussion with the various sales representatives and previous experience.

Assessment

Company	Westrac Pty Ltd	Komatsu Australia Pty Ltd	Hitachi Construction Machinery (Aust)
Make and Model	Caterpillar 12 M	Komatsu GD 555-5	John Deere 670 G
Score	79.61	81.60	75.06

From the above table two highest scores were very close with the Komatsu GD555-5 and the Caterpillar 12 M within 2 percentage points.

The Shire has been operating a fleet of Caterpillar graders for a number of years, therefore with the scores between the Caterpillar and Komatsu being so close, Shire officers requested that Komatsu supply a demo model of the GD555. A demonstration was held in Esperance on 7 October 2014 where Shire officers and grader operators inspected, operated, and compared to the current Caterpillar 12M model. The Komatsu grader has a wheel and lever system while the Caterpillar grader is operated with a wheel and joystick control. This is not seen as an issue in operation, as the Shire’s operators are competent in operating such a system.

The Komatsu GD555-5 has more power and weight than the Caterpillar 12M which is considered advantageous for the type of work the grader would be used for.

Westrac have offered in their tender to provide the labour for the first 250 hour service on the Caterpillar free of charge, and the Shire will still have to provide parts and oils. Komatsu have offered in their tender to provide the first 250, 500, 1000, 1500, and 2000 hour services completely free of charge, they will also cover parts, oils, sampling, labour, travel, and accommodation. Komatsu have valued this service at roughly $20,000.

Komatsu have a service facility with qualified mechanics in Kalgoorlie, making delivery of parts, and travel for any maintenance only a minor issue in comparison to Caterpillar having a Westrac facility located in Esperance.

Consultation

Workshop Supervisor

Plant Operators

Company Representatives

WALGA

Works Supervisors

Director of Engineering Services

Financial Implications

Council has allocated $240,400 (excluding GST) net changeover in its 2014/15 Budget. The net actual changeover for this Grader (taking into account disposal of existing grader to Smith Broughton & Sons, and Komatsu Australia Pty Ltd’s no-trade discount) is $57,400.00 (excluding GST) under budget. See confidential attachment for quotation comparison.

Asset Management Implications

This replacement is in accordance with Council’s adopted Fleet Asset Management Plan and the 10 Year Plant Replacement Program contained within.

Statutory Implications

Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 Part 4 and Section 3.57 of the Local Government Act 1995.

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

Theme 3: Economic

3.1 Deliver a diverse range of affordable services and infrastructure across the Shire.

3.3 Deliver and advocate for a diverse and safe transport system which is efficient and meets the needs of all users.

3.5 Maintain the Shire’s robust asset management practices and maintenance programs.

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

RFQ 07/14 Grader Comparison for Council - Confidential

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council

1) Accept the outright purchase offer from Smith Broughton & Sons under WALGA disposal tender RFT 041_14 (Plant 1); and

2) Accept quotation RFQ 07/14 from Komatsu Australia Pty Ltd for the supply, delivery and licensing of one new GD555-5 Grader as specified, for a net changeover of $183,000.00.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 38

12.3 Corporate Resources

Item: 12.3.1

Rate Exemption Applications

Author/s	Shane Burge	Director Corporate Resources
Authorisor/s	Gavin Harris	Acting Chief Executive Officer

File Ref: D14/19838

Applicant

Noongar Mia Mia Pty Ltd

Esperance Aged Care Facility Inc.

Esperance Crisis Accommodation Service Inc.

Location/Address

Noongar Mia Mia Pty Ltd- various residential locations around Esperance

Esperance Aged Care Facility Inc.- 4 Randell Street, Esperance

Esperance Crisis Accommodation Inc.- 14 Emily Street, Esperance

Executive Summary

For Council to consider granting rates exemptions to various properties around Esperance under Section 6.26(2)(g) (Charitable purpose exemption) of the Local Government Act 1995.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council-

1. Deny the application from Noongar Mia Mia for a rates exemption under Section 6.26(2)(g) of the Local Government Act 1995 for properties being managed by Noongar Mia Mia under the community housing program.

2. Grant a rate exemption under Section 6.26(2)(g) of the Local Government Act 1995 to Esperance Aged Care Facility Inc. for Lots 890, 891 and 894 (Assessment 65086 and 73015) from the 1^st July 2013.

3. Refund rates that were paid during 2013/14 to Esperance Aged Care Facility totalling $10,986.36.

4. Grant a rate exemption under Section 6.26(2)(g) of the Local Government Act 1995 to Esperance Crisis Accommodation Service Inc. for Lot 7, 14 Emily Street (Assessment 3335) from the 1^st July 2014.

Background

Applications for rates exemptions under Section 6.26(2)(g)- Charitable purpose have been received from three organizations being Noongar Mia Mia (NMM), Esperance Aged Care Facility (EACF) and Esperance Crisis Accommodation Service (ECAS).

NMM is an Indigenous owned and controlled not-for-profit organisation that provides and manages rental accommodation exclusively for Indigenous people and their families. NMM recognises and acknowledges the unique Family, Community and Cultural characteristics of Indigenous people and, further aims to be recognised as a socially and culturally aware valued supplier of affordable housing for Indigenous People in Western Australia. Community Housing Programs provide long term rental accommodation for people on low to moderate incomes. NMM are endorsed as a charitable institution under Subdivision 50-B of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997.

NMM currently has management control of 21 properties within Esperance, 8 that have been provided via a head lease from the Department of Housing for a period of seven years and 13 that have been provided by Esperance Aboriginal Corporation Inc. NMM lease the properties to disadvantaged indigenous clients at up to 75% of the market rent and if the tenant is a Centrelink participant, they are charged a rate of 25% of their income.

Esperance Aged Care Facility has successfully run the Recherche Rotary Hostel for a number of years as an aged care facility on Lots 890,891 and 894. The Shire of Esperance was originally granted Lots 891 and 894 via a Crown Grant for the purpose of “Frail Aged Hostel” in 1991. The Shire of Esperance entered into a formal lease with Esperance Aged Care Facility Inc. for the lease of the sites commencing on the 1^st December 2002 for a term of 10 years with a option to renew for a further 10 years. During this time the EACF was exempt from rates, presumably under Section 6.26(2)(g) of the Local Government Act and through the lease of the land from the Shire.

On the 27/11/2012 lots 891 and 894 were transferred to the Esperance Aged Care Facility, at which time the Valuer General provided a valuation and rates were calculated. Interim rates of $10,986.36 were paid by the EACF during April 2014. There is no record on file to show that Council had made any decision regarding an exemption under Section 6.26(g) of the Local Government Act 1995.

Esperance Crisis Accommodation Service is a not-for-profit organisation that provides short term accommodation for families, singles, men and women who are in crisis or homeless. ECA currently has two facilities in Esperance, one at 14 Emily Street and another at 13 Jehu Street. The property at 14 Emily Street is owned by the Department of Housing and leased to Esperance Crisis Accommodation. The property in Jehu Street was provided with a rates exemption from 1/7/2003 as it fitted the charitable purpose clause in the Act.

If the Council did offer rates exemptions it would only be for the rates component of the Rates Notice. All other charges inclusive of rubbish, waste levy, and emergency services levy would still apply.

Officer’s Comment

Section 6.26(2)(g) of the Act provides that “land used exclusively for charitable purposes” is not rateable by a local government. There is no clear definition in the Act as to how this clause should be interpreted and as such there is inconsistencies in the interpretation and application of charitable land use provisions by local governments. Although there is no clear definition there has been case law and ‘general practice’ as well as guidance from government inquiries that can be used as a guide to help local government determine any rate exemptions provided under this section of the Act.

An independent inquiry in 2001 was conducted by the Commonwealth into definitional issues relating to charitable, religious and community not-for-profit organizations. This inquiry along with the WA Charitable Collections Act 1946 define the term “charitable purpose”. Each definition appears to have its origin from the Charitable Uses Act 1601 and the House of Lords case of 1891 which define charitable purpose to include: relief of the aged, impotent and poor, the advancement of education and religion and other purposes of benefit to the community.

Mere ownership of land by a charitable organization does not in itself bring that land within the scope of Section 6.26(g). It is only where the use of the land is for a charitable purpose that the sub-section applies. Accordingly, land in private, as opposed to charitable ownership, could be exclusively used for a charitable purpose. This view was also supported it the case of William Trustees v Inland Revenue Commissioners (1947).

Legal opinion indicates that payment for services rendered by an institution does not deny that institution charitable status, provided the profits do not accrue to an individual or non-charitable objects. However if the charges function to exclude the element of public benefit, then this may be found to be inconsistent with charity.

Noongar Mia Mia is a Pty Ltd corporation that has individual directors and currently has control of 21 properties from the Esperance Aboriginal Corporation and the Department of Housing under the Community Housing Program. As a community housing provider NMM need to comply with the requirements set out by the Department of Housing and need to charge rents that are within the thresholds set out by the Department. Currently NMM lease the properties to disadvantaged indigenous clients at up to 75% of the market rent and if the tenant is a Centrelink participant, they are charged a rate of 25% of their income. The Department of Housing has commenced using community housing organisations as they are skilled in matching people to properties by assigning housing according to individual requirements and paying attention to location, design and support needs.

It is important to note that had the housing remained with the Department of Housing that rates would continue to be paid as current practice is to pay rates on all housing under their control. The Water Corporation has advised that it does not treat community housing as exempt property for the purpose of water rates. There is no clear legal case that can be referenced in relation to community housing accommodation that should be exempt from rates as the details of each application is slightly different. The most recent and relevant case is Bindibindi v Shire of Ashburton where the Supreme Court determined that land was being used for charitable purpose as it was being used to provide low cost rental housing for economically disadvantaged Aboriginal people. It is also important to note that the difference between NMM and the Bindibindi case was that the accommodation was rented in the Bindibindi case at rentals that appeared to be significantly below those charged by Homeswest. Bindi Bindi was also an incorporated association, whereas NMM is a Pty Ltd corporation.

In considering whether an exemption for housing accommodation is warranted and equitable, the circumstances facing financially disadvantaged people that own or rent a ‘normal’ residential dwelling is relevant. Owners that are financially disadvantaged and are a pensioner or senior, would be able to receive a rates concession through the State Government rates concession scheme. Financially disadvantaged renters in the private rental market would be able to receive Commonwealth rent assistance. The rates concession scheme is not relevant to community housing as it does not apply to rental accommodation however, like those in the private housing market, renters in community housing would also be eligible to receive Commonwealth rent assistance. Granting a rate concession on properties with this use would be effectively cost shifting from the Commonwealth Government through to local government.

An inquiry by the Local Government Advisory Board in 2005 indicated that legal opinion appeared to indicate that to determine whether community housing is a charitable land use or not will depend on whether the rent that is being charged is below market value and whether the housing is being provided for the relief of poverty or the aged or the impotent. The same inquiry concluded that “given that people on low to moderate incomes who own their own homes are required to pay rates, it would be unfair that community housing provided to people in similar financial circumstances should be exempt from being rated. As such the Board considers that community housing should be rated.”

It is recommended that Noongar Mia Mia be denied a rates exemption under Section 6.26(2)(g) due to the following reasons-

· to ensure equity with private renters who all have access to Commonwealth rent assistance,

· had the properties remained under management by Department of Housing the property would continue to pay rates,

· the rent charged by NMM for their properties are in line with guidelines established by the Department of Housing which are similar to those rents being charged by Department of Housing.

The Esperance Aged Care Facility use of the land as an aged care facility fits within the charitable purpose definition to include: relief of the aged, impotent and poor, the advancement of education and religion and other purposes of benefit to the community. Legal advice indicates that there is little doubt that aged care facilities, such as nursing homes and hostels, are charitable in nature and should not be rated. It is common throughout WA local governments that aged care facilities are exempt under Section 6.26(2)(g) and this is also in line with previous practice by the Shire of Esperance whilst the land was under the “crown grant’ to the Shire of Esperance. The Water Corporation has indicated that an aged care facility operated by a not-for-profit group is treated as exempt, while not required to pay water rates is however charged for water consumption. EACF was charged interim rates during the 2013/14 year which they paid.

It is recommended that Esperance Aged Care Facility Lots 890, 891 and 894 (Assessments 65086 and 73015) be granted rates exemption under Section 6.26(2)(g) from the 1^st July 2013 and any land rates that were paid during that time be refunded to Esperance Aged Care Facility.

Esperance Crisis Accommodation Service Inc. provides accommodation that is temporary, provides housing for people who are homeless or in an immediate housing crisis. The Local Government Advisory Board conducted an inquiry into Section 6.26(2)(g) of the Act during 2005 and made comment in relation to crisis accommodation. “If this type of accommodation was not provided, it is likely that persons in need would access alternative accommodation provided by Government. Given that Government owned land used for a public purpose is not rateable, it appears to be appropriate for crisis accommodation to be similarly treated”. The Local Government Advisory Board concluded that crisis accommodation should be rate exempt.

Esperance Crisis Accommodation Service Inc has provided information that shows that the rate that is charged is generally below the market. ECAS also do not turn people away if they are unable to pay rent. Although there is no clear case law to help determine if crisis accommodation should be exempt from rates, the Shire of Esperance has previously offered a rate exemption for another property in Jehu Street that is used and operated by Esperance Crisis Accommodation Service Inc. for similar purpose.

It is recommended that Esperance Crisis Accommodation Service Inc. property at 14 Emily Street (Assessment 3335) does fit the criteria for a charitable purpose and be granted a rates exemption under Section 6.26(2)(g) from the 1^st July 2014.

Consultation

Information from the applicants has been received to make a recommendation based upon Case Law and general local government interpretation of the Act.

Financial Implications

The financial implications arising from this report are that provided rates exemption were provided to all the properties the following financial impact per year is as follows-

Noongar Mia Mia Pty Ltd for the 21 properties amount to $23,901.80

Esperance Aged Care Accommodation Inc. rates for 2014/15 amount to $35,928.36 and rates that were paid in the 2013/14 year amount to $10,986.36

Esperance Crisis Accommodation Inc. rates for 2014/15 amount to $1,368.90

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

Section 6.26(2)(g) of the Local Government Act 1995

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

Theme 4: Civic Leadership

Strategy 4.5 Be innovative in the management of Shire operations, services, staff and resources to create a resilient and financially stable Shire.

Corporate Business Plan 2013/2014 – 2016/2017

Action 4.5.19 Manage Shire Rates

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a.	Charitable Rates Request- Noongar Mia Mia - Confidential
b .	Charitable Rates Request- Esperance Aged Care Facility - Confidential
c .	Charitable Rates Request- Esperance Crisis Accommodation - Confidential

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council-

3. Refund rates that were paid during 2013/14 to Esperance Aged Care Facility totalling $10,986.36.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 43

Item: 12.3.2

Request to access Reserve Funding for Community Halls

Author/s	Jennifer Parry	Manager Corporate Support
Authorisor/s	Shane Burge	Director Corporate Resources

File Ref: D14/20651

Applicant

Condingup and District Recreation Association Inc

Location/Address

Lot 168 Sutcliffe Street Condingup

Executive Summary

For Council to consider providing financial assistance to Condingup and District Recreation Association (CDRA) for replacement of all existing window glass to safety glass in the Condingup Community Hall.

Recommendation in Brief

1. Provides assistance to Condingup & District Recreation Association to replace window glass in hall to the amount of $1,430.00 inc GST; and

2. Amends its 2014/15 Budget for Building Maintenance Reserve as follows;

Description		Budget Figure	Amended Figure	Variation
Building Maintenance - Condingup Community Hall	W1767	0	1430	1430
Building Maintenance & Renewal Reserve	01-3290-955-900	0	(1430)	(1430)
Net result				0

Background

A verbal request was received on Tuesday 30 September 2014 from Anita Chalmer, CDRA Secretary requesting information on the process required for their association to access Shire’s Reserve Funding for Community Halls to assist them in raising the funds required to replace all the existing window glass in the community centre with safety glass. Ms Chalmer was instructed to submit an application for assistance along with a quote for the proposed work.

The written request as attached was received same day supported by a letter from Condingup Basketball Association (attached) pointing out the risks that the large low panes of non-safety glass pose to patrons and visitors to the centre and especially children.

Officer’s Comment

Shire policy CORP 012: Reserve Funding for Community Halls states that in order to access the reserve funding for community halls, certain criteria need to be met. CDRA fulfill the majority of these criteria with the exception to their lease. Their current lease is due to expire on 24 October 2014 and at the time of writing this report I await confirmation that CDRA wish to exercise their option for a further 10 year term, this report is written anticipating that the lease will be extended.

The policy specifies that funding will be allocated to each hall calculated on a percentage basis of the size of each hall/centre compared with the size of a ‘standard hall’. The current average of the five (5) standard halls is 305 m². This percentage is then applied to the cost of the structural component of the renovation or replacement. The area of 1273 m² for Condingup Community Hall was ascertained from the asset valuation carried out by the Shire earlier this year.

The quote (attached) for replacement of glass in Condingup Community Hall to meet safety standards is $5,960.

The formula as applied is: 305 m²/ 1273 m² = 24% $5960 x 24% = $1,430

Ms Chalmer was also provided with the contact details of the Shire Community Development Officer to assist in ways of obtaining the remaining funds required to complete the project ($4,530) and also links to Lotterywest and Department of Sport & Recreation who may be able to assist with further grant funding.

With regard to the request for flood lighting as mentioned in attachment B; this is a request from Condingup Basketball Association to Condingup District Recreation Association and is not addressed in this report.

Consultation

External Compliance

AS 1288-2006 Glass in buildings-Selection and installation

Lotterywest

Department of Sport & Recreation

Financial Implications

Description		Budget Figure	Amended Figure	Variation
Building Maintenance - Condingup Community Hall	W1767	0	1430	1430
Building Maintenance & Renewal Reserve	01-3290-955-900	0	(1430)	(1430)
Net result				0

Asset Management Implications

Asset management implications are minimal as the CDRA are responsible for operational and maintenance costs with Shire assisting with replacement, extension or upgrading of structural components.

Statutory Implications

Nil

Policy Implications

This item relates to CORP 012: Reserve Funding for Community Halls.

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

1.1 Create a social environment that is accessible and inclusive for all ages and abilities

1.4 Encourage and support volunteers and community groups

1.5 Create and maintain a safe environment for the community

3.5 Maintain the Shire’s robust asset management practices and maintenance programs

Corporate Business Plan 2013/2014 – 2016/2017

Action

3.7.2 Provide support and advice to community groups

4.5.12 Manage shire leases and insurances

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

a.	Request for assistance to replace Condingup Community Centre Glass
b.	Condingup Basketball Association request for window glass upgrade
c .	Stearnes quote to replace window glass in Condingup Community Centre

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council:

1. Provides assistance to Condingup & District Recreation Association to replace window glass in hall to the amount of $1,430.00 inc GST; and

2. Amends its 2014/15 Budget for Building Maintenance Reserve as follows;

Description		Budget Figure	Amended Figure	Variation
Building Maintenance - Condingup Community Hall	W1767	0	1430	1430
Building Maintenance & Renewal Reserve	01-3290-955-900	0	(1430)	(1430)
Net result				0

Voting Requirement Absolute Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 49

Item: 12.3.3

Surrender of existing lease on Old Methodist Church Museum Village

Author/s	Jennifer Parry	Manager Corporate Support
Authorisor/s	Shane Burge	Director Corporate Resources

File Ref: D14/21125

Applicant

Windabout Lakes Christian Church

Location/Address

Portion of Lot 61 (60) Dempster Street Esperance

Executive Summary

For Council to consider allowing Windabout Lakes Christian Church Inc (WLCC) to surrender their lease on the Old Methodist Church in Museum Village.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council agrees to accept the surrender of lease by Windabout Lakes Christian Church on the Old Methodist Church in Museum Village and request that CEO advertise the property to lease.

Background

In August 2013 Council agreed to lease the Old Methodist Church to WLCC from 1 November 2013 until 31 December 2015. This was the second lease to the group for this property; they have occupied the building since July 2008.

A letter was received on 9 September 2014 signed by John Barlow as former Pastor of Windabout Lakes Christian Church advising that “As of Sunday 31/8/14, Windabout Lakes Christian Church has ceased to exist.” The letter stated that the group had decided that they were going to voluntarily wind up their association, but advised a week later that they had reconsidered and decided to stay incorporated for another 12 months; they would still however request that they be permitted to terminate their lease at the end of September.

Officer’s Comment

Mr Barlow advised Manager Corporate Support that due to ill health, he would need to relocate to Perth at very short notice. This was the reason that WLCC were requesting to terminate their lease.

Several requests to lease the property have already been received. Recommendation is that the property be advertised for expressions of interest to lease providing opportunity for other groups or persons to lease the property.

Consultation

Archive records

Asset Management

Financial Implication

WLCC have paid their rent until 31 October 2014. If the property was to remain vacant the loss of rent until the end of lease (31 December 2015) would be $7,446.72 ex GST. This scenario would appear unlikely due to the interest shown in the property without advertising its availability.

Asset Management Implications

Following WLCC vacating the property, a joint inspection was carried out by Manager Corporate Support and the Property Building Co-ordinator. As there was no property condition report carried out prior to the WLCC taking possession of the building, the current condition must be accepted. For a new tenant to take possession, it is strongly recommended that one window which is in poor condition be covered with timber from the inside and painted to match the walls at an estimated cost of $400.00 . The cost of replacing an identical window in 2012/13 was in excess of $4000.00.

Statutory Implications

Local Government Act 1995 - Section 3.58 Disposing of Property

Policy Implications

This item relates to Council Policy CORP 004 for Building and Property Leases.

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

4.5 Be innovative in the management of Shire operations, services, staff and resources to create a resilient and financially stable Shire

Corporate Business Plan 2013/2014 – 2016/2017

4.5.12 Manage Shire leases and insurances

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

WLCC Request to terminate lease

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council

1. agrees to accept the surrender of lease by Windabout Lakes Christian Church on the Old Methodist Church in Museum Village as of 31 October 2014; and

2. request that CEO advertise the property to lease.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 53

Item: 12.3.4

Lease Amendment - Portion of Lot 907 (26) Effie Turner Drive - Men in Sheds

Author/s	Jennifer Parry	Manager Corporate Support
Authorisor/s	Shane Burge	Director Corporate Resources

File Ref: D14/20830

Applicant

Esperance Men In Sheds Inc

Location/Address

Portion of Lot 907 (26) Effie Turner Drive, Chadwick

Executive Summary

For Council to consider consenting to an increased lease area for Esperance Men In Sheds (EMIS) which would allow an additional shed to be constructed.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council consents to Esperance Men In Sheds increasing their lease area from the current 701.97 m² to a proposed area of 1778 m² subject to certain conditions.

Background

In 2006 a joint application for planning consent was approved to Esperance Men In Sheds (EMIS) and Esperance Rotary Club (ERC) for the proposed construction of three (3) industrial sheds totaling 987m² (800m², 147m² and 40m²). The application was approved with conditions including amended parking arrangements and incorporated landscaping which were required prior to the commencement of building works. These planned works never proceeded.

In 2007 EMIS applied for building licence for the shed in their current location which was approved in December 2007. The building on the front of the block for Rotary was relocated around the same time.

In 2012 Officers were again asked to investigate the possibility of a larger shed construction for EMIS and an additional shed at the front of the currently proposed structure for the Combined Services Clubs of Esperance (Apex Club of Esperance, Lions Club of Esperance, Rotary Club of Esperance and Rotary Club of Esperance Bay). This option too went no further.

Recently EMIS have made new enquiries to Shire Officers requesting to construct an additional shed on Reserve 48015 as they consider that they have outgrown their existing shed and require more storage room. EMIS were advised that their initial proposed location of a new shed would not be permitted as the section of Reserve 48015 on the corner of Effie Turner Drive and Simpson Street is an open drain which caters for a one in one hundred year storm event and as such cannot be built upon.

Shire Engineering Managers met with EMIS representatives earlier this year in order to assist the group and advise areas that may be possible for a new shed to be located. Following this meeting EMIS lodged a new planning application.

When Shire receives an application for planning on a Shire controlled Reserve, the current process includes having details checked by the Manager Corporate Support to ensure that there is a current valid lease in place and that the application complies with current lease conditions. In this instance it was noted that their current lease area was not large enough to cater for the new proposed construction and would require an amendment. To amend the lease, approval is required from Council and the Minister for Lands.

Officer’s Comment

It is recommended that the amended lease area be approved with stringent conditions placed on the planning approval to ensure that the site amenity is improved and that the storage of materials around the property does not continue.

Whilst investigating this application it has been noted that EMIS existing shed goes beyond the northern boundary of this Reserve. Approval can currently only be granted to extend the lease within the existing boundaries. Applications will now be required to alter the northern boundary of the Reserve.

Consultation

Statutory Division - External Compliance

Esperance Rotary Club

Financial Implications

It is recommended that a $110.00 lease amendment fee be charged; with any legal fees (if required) to be charged in addition at cost.

Asset Management Implications

Asset management implications associated with this item are minimal as the lease is a land only lease with EMIS being responsible for all operational, maintenance and renewal costs.

Statutory Implications

Local Government Act 1995 - Section 3.58 Disposing of Property

Land Administration Act 1997 - Section 18 Crown Land Transaction that Minister’s Approval

Policy Implications

This item relates to Council Policy CORP 004 for Building and Property Leases.

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2012 - 2022

1.6 Develop and promote active and passive sport and recreation opportunities for all ages

2.3 Provide equitable access for all users to our environment while balancing the protection of natural assets

3.5 Maintain the Shire’s robust asset management practices and maintenance programs

4.2 Maintain a clear, transparent and ethical decision making process

Corporate Business Plan

3.5 Maintain the Shire’s robust asset management practices and maintenance programs

4.2 Maintain a clear, transparent and ethical decision making process

4.5.12 Manage Shire leases and insurances

Environmental Considerations

The environmental has been taken into consideration being that the leased area is so close to the one in one hundred year open drain. EMIS originally wanted to place the proposed shed further to the east on the reserve; but Engineering Officers inspected the area and discussed with members of the EMIS the reasons why the new shed would need to go in the currently proposed location.

Attachments

a.	Exisiting Lease Area - Esperance Men in Sheds
b.	Proposed New Lease Area - Esperance Men in Sheds

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council consent to Esperance Men In Sheds increasing their lease area at Lot 907 Effie Turner Drive Chadwick (Reserve 48015) from the current 701.97 m² to a proposed area of 1778 m² as indicated on the attached plan, subject to the following conditions;

1. Approval from the Minister for Lands in accordance with Land Administration Act 1997 s.18;

2. A lease amendment fee of $110.00 be charged, along with reimbursement to Council for any legal fees (if required) at cost;

3. Esperance Men In Sheds be made aware that Planning and Building Approvals are required for any development on this increased lease area; and

4. Request the CEO to commence discussions with Department of Lands to amend the current northern Reserve boundary.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 104

Item: 12.3.6

Material Variance Reporting - Monthly Financial Reporting

Author/s	Beth O'Callaghan	Manager Financial Services
Authorisor/s	Shane Burge	Director Corporate Resources

File Ref: D14/20627

Applicant

Internal

Location/Address

Shire of Esperance

Executive Summary

This report is seeking Council endorsement for the setting of the material variance reporting for the monthly financial report.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council, for the 2014/15 financial year adopts a variance in the Statement of Financial Activity of $100,000 or 10% (whichever is the lesser) for the reporting of variances between the year to date budget and year to date actual information to be considered material for disclosure purposes.

Background

Amendments to the Financial Management Regulations 1996 were gazette on 31 March 2005 and included changes to the monthly reporting requirements of local governments, effective from 1 July 2005. Regulation 34 of the Financial Management Regulations now require a local government to prepare a monthly Statement of Financial Activity, reporting on the sources and applications of funds for that month and to report on any material variances occurring between the actual and budgeted results with the intention for establishing a minimum standard across the industry.

The Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 R34 (5) require that each financial year, a local government is to adopt a percentage or value, calculated in accordance with AAS, to be used in statements of financial activity for reporting material variances.

The current materiality level as set by Resolution O0913-006 is $100,000 or 10% (whichever is the lesser).

Officer’s Comment

Local Government (Financial Management) Regulation 34 (5) requires that each financial year a local government adopts a percentage or value, calculated in accordance with AAS5, to be used in statement of financial activity for reporting material variances. AAS5 is the abbreviation for Australian Accounting Standard number 5, Materiality.

AAS5 states that “information is material if its omission, misstatement or non-disclosure has the potential to adversely affect decisions about the allocation of scarce resources made by users of the financial report or the discharge or accountability by the management or governing body of the entity”. AAS5 also states that “quantitative thresholds used as guidance for determining the materiality of any amount of an item must, of necessity, be drawn at arbitrary levels. Materiality is a matter of professional judgement influenced by characteristics of the entity and the perceptions as to who are, or likely to be, the users of the financial reports, and their information needs”.

AAS5 provides some guidance as to what may be regarded as a material amount when dealing with the balance sheet, operating statement and statement of cashflow when it states an amount which is equal to or greater than 10 per cent of the base amount may be considered to be material while an amount less than or equal to 5 per cent may not be material, unless in both cases there is a convincing argument to the contrary.

On the basis of this guidance and having regard to the fact that the users of this financial information are management and Council requiring assistance with making management decisions, the 10 per cent would be reasonable lower limit for highlighting material variances. However, this limit could be adjusted in the future if necessary and the use of this limit also does not preclude reporting lesser variances if it is considered their disclosure would be of benefit to the user of the financial report.

Having regard to the guideline established in Accounting Standard AASB 1031 and considering the financial characteristics of the Shire of Esperance, it is recommended that the current materiality level remains appropriate and should be maintained for the 2014/15 financial year.

Consultation

Nil

Financial Implications

Whilst there are no immediate financial implications, the adoption of a materiality level has the potential to affect future decision-making and accountability. Reports showing year to date financial performance allows monitoring of actual expenditure, revenue and overall results against budget targets.

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

Section 6.4 of the Local Government Act 1995 specifies that a local government is to prepare such other financial reports as are prescribed.

Regulation 34 of the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 states:

(1) A local government is to prepare each month a statement of financial activity reporting on the revenue and expenditure, as set out in the annual budget under regulation 22(1)(d), for that month in the following detail:

(a) Annual budget estimates, taking into account any expenditure incurred for an additional purpose under section 6.8(1)(b) or (c);

(b) Budget estimates to the end of the month to which the statement relates;

(d) Material variances between the comparable amounts referred to in paragraphs (b) and (c) and;

(e) The net current assets at the end of the month to which the statement relates.

Sections 2, 3, 4 and 5 prescribe further details of information to be included in the monthly statement of financial activity.

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

Theme 4 - Civic Leadership

Strategy: 4.5 Be innovative in the management of Shire operations, services, staff and resources to create a resilient and financially stable Shire.

Corporate Business Plan 2013/2014 – 2016/2017

Action: 4.5.15 Manage Financial Services

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

Nil

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council, for the 2014/15 financial year adopts a variance in the Statement of Financial Activity of $100,000 or 10% (whichever is lesser) for the reporting of variances between the year to date budget and year to date actual information to be considered material for disclosure purposes.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 107

12.4 External Services - Commercial Division

Item: 12.4.1

Bay of Isles Leisure Centre Fees and Charges Amendment for VacSwim and Interm Pool Entry

Author/s	Jaye Jose	Manager Bay of Isles Leisure Centre
Authorisor/s	Trevor Ayers	Executive Manager Commercial Division

File Ref: D14/20325

Applicant

Internal

Location/Address

Bay of Isles Leisure Centre (BOILC)

Executive Summary

For Council to endorse a pool entry fee per child that incorporates lane hire fees for the Department of Education Interm Swimming and VacSwim Programs that will apply for the full 2015 calendar year.

Recommendation in Brief

That council:

1. Include in the current fees and charges an Interm Swimming and VacSwim Swimming Entry Fee of $4.50 per child for the 2015 Calendar year.

2. Advise all schools that Interm Swimming will only be provided via a block invoice directly to the school.

3. Recognise that children holding a Bay of Isles Leisure Centre aquatic membership do not pay the VacSwim or Interm Swimming Entry Fee.

4. Advertise that the new Interm and VacSwim Entry Fee will take effect from the 1^st of January 2015.

Background

In July 2014 Council reviewed its fees and charges and introduced a lane fee hire for Interm Swimming and VacSwim programs. Correspondence was received from the Esperance Primary School (8 August 2014) advising it is unable to pass on increased pool entry costs to parents and carers due to Department of Education Guidelines and Policy that requires it to inform parents and carers of fees and charges in November of each preceding year. Schools operate on a calendar year not a financial year which inevitably brings them into conflict when new fees and charges are introduced mid year. A resolution was passed at the August Ordinary Council Meeting which included the following:

‘Direct the CEO to develop a Interm Swimming Attendance and VacSwim fee per child, based on:

a. The estimated attendance provided by the Schools; and

b. The actual hourly cost of the Bay of Isles Leisure Centre (BOILC);

for Council’s consideration at the October 2014 Ordinary Meeting of Council; ‘

Some Schools have provided estimated attendance numbers and based on 1200 students enrolled and the recommend $12.25 per hour per lane hire in the UHY Haines Norton operating costs review the above recommendations have been produced. Endorse Entry Fees for the Interm Swimming and VacSwim Programs per child that absorbs lane hire fees.

Officer’s Comment

The BOILC supports all children having the ability to learn to swim and supports the Interm and VacSwim programs by allowing free entry to Instructors, storage of equipment for Interm Swimming and VacSwim programs at BOILC, Esperance Beach and Duke of Orleans Bay. The area for the BOILC swimming instructors is made available to Interm and VacSwim instructors and on occasions BOILC equipment has been used as the Education Department have a limited budget and items like mannequins for CPR are owned by the BOILC and made available to Interm and VacSwim, as EAR and CPR are skills that benefit the community as a whole.

The BOILC supports the introduction of the Interm and VacSwim Entry Fee as during these programs exclusive use is required by the Education Department. The proposed fee allows for potential increases in the future given this fee applies much further into the future than other BOILC fees, as schools need to be able to inform parents and carers of all proposed charges for school programs up to 13 months in advance. It also incorporates the lane hire component into the fee to simplify calculating charges for both the leisure centre and schools.

The BOILC would not like to see current and future members of the BOILC disadvantaged by the proposed new fee and therefore it is proposed that memberships cover all components of the Interm and Vacswim Entry Fee.

Consultation

All Schools in the district have been requested for their expected utilisation of the BOILC for Interm Swimming next year.

Following the August Ordinary Council meeting the Shire CEO requested clarification from the Minister for Education regarding the conflict between the legislative process required of the Shire to set its fees and charges and the legislative process required of the schools to advise the required contributions and charges for the coming year. The response is attached for information.

This letter was also forwarded to the following:

a) The Minister for Local Government and Communities;

b) Local Members of Parliament; and

c) The West Australian Local Government Association (WALGA);

Financial Implications

The financial implications arising from this report apply only to 6 months of the current budget. No implications have been included for the remaining months in 2015 as no budget for that period currently exists.

Description	Budget Figure	Amended Figure	Variation

Pool Admissions	210,000	213,000	3,000
Net result

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

The statutory implication associated with this item is purely the adoption of an additional fee.

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

Theme 1 Social

1.6 Develop and promote active and passive sport and recreation opportunities for all ages

Theme 3 Economic

3.1 Deliver a diverse range of services and infrastructure across the Shire

Corporate Business Plan 2013/2014 – 2016/2017

Action

1.6.1.2 Manage the Bay of Isles of Leisure Centre and programs

3.1.1.7 Maintain Shire buildings

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

Response from Minister for Education

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council:

1. Include in the current fees and charges an Interm and VacSwim Entry Fee of $4.50 per child for the 2015 Calendar year.

2. Advise all schools that Interm Swimming will only be provided via a block invoice directly to the school.

3. Recognise that children that hold a Bay of Isles Leisure Centre aquatic membership do not pay the VacSwim or Interm Swimming Entry Fee.

4. Advertise that the new Interm and VacSwim Entry Fee will take effect from the 1^st of January 2015.

Voting Requirement Absolute Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 113

Item: 12.4.2

Endorsement of Esperance Regional Economic Development Strategy for Community Consultation

Author/s	Trevor Ayers	Executive Manager Commercial Division
Authorisor/s	Gavin Harris	Director Asset Management

File Ref: D14/20452

Applicant

Goldfields Esperance Development Commission (GEDC)

Location/Address

This strategy focuses on the entire sub-region encompassed within the Shires of Esperance, Dundas and Ravensthorpe.

Executive Summary

The Esperance Regional Economic Development Strategy has now reached final draft status and endorsement is needed to enable community feedback to be sought prior to finalizing the document.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council;

1. Receive the Esperance Regional Economic Development Strategy.

2. Direct the Chief Executive Officer to advertise the Esperance Regional Economic Development Strategy for public submissions for a period of three weeks.

3. Provide all submissions to the Goldfields Esperance Development Commission for compilation with submissions received by other partner organisations, to enable the strategy to be finalised.

Background

The Esperance Regional Economic Development Strategy is one of the projects funded through the SuperTowns Program. Due to its regional focus the GEDC has lead the project in partnership with the Esperance Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the Shires of Esperance, Dundas and Ravensthorpe.

Council originally appointed the consultants undertaking this project at a Special Meeting held on the 3 September 2013:

That Council award Tender 0913 Esperance Regional Economic Development Strategy to AEC Group Ltd at the fixed price of $130,056 (ex GST), this is made up of:

1. Original tender price of $101,927 (excluding GST).

2. Inclusion of two optional items (Development of Investment Attraction Marketing Material and Investment Attraction Campaign) at the additional price of $28,129 (excluding GST).

Since then there has been a range of desktop investigations and targeted conversations undertaken by the consultants. This work resulted in a draft strategy being developed that was presented to the five partner organisations at a workshop held at the Esperance Shire Council Chambers in August 2014. The comments and feedback from this workshop have since been incorporated into the attached draft document now presented for endorsement.

Officer’s Comment

The Esperance Regional Economic Development Strategy is now largely completed. It is now ready for feedback to be sought from within the Esperance community to enable it to be finalised. The Esperance Chamber of Commerce and Industry has already called for submissions from within its membership, while the GEDC will not be advertising for any commentary and we are uncertain of the process the Shires of Dundas and Ravensthorpe are taking at this point in time.

The agreement is that each partner organisation will compile any submissions received and provide it to the GEDC who will them combine all feedback and liaise with the consultants to incorporate this into a final document for consideration for final endorsement by each organisation. The document is not finalised until all five organisations are prepared to endorse it.

Consultation

The development of the Esperance Regional Economic Development Strategy has included wide ranging consultation with a range of stakeholders across and outside the sub-region. In particular, Council has had several opportunities to provide input into the development of this strategy, including hosting the workshop in August where the initial draft was presented to the partner organisations by Ashley Page and Michael Campbell from the AEC Group. This final draft incorporates the feedback provided at this workshop.

Financial Implications

All costs of undertaking this strategy are already budgeted for and have come from external sources.

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

Nil

Policy Implications

This recommendation is consistent with the Shire of Esperance Community Engagement Policy.

Strategic Implications

Planning Our Future – A Growth Plan for Esperance and the South-East Region

The key initiative identified under Guiding Principle 1- Grow Our Economy is:

‘Esperance Economic Development Program’

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

Theme 3: Economic

Goal: Promoting sustainable and diverse economic development opportunities that make the Shire of Esperance and attractive place to live, work and play.

Strategy 3.6 – Advocate and plan for population growth and diverse residential and economic development in a sustainable manner.

Corporate Business Plan 2013/2014 – 2016/2017

Action: 3.6.1 – Develop and Economic Development Plan and coordinate implementation.

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

Esperance Regional Economic Development Strategy Final Draft - Under Separate Cover

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council;

1. Receive the Esperance Regional Economic Development Strategy.

2. Direct the Chief Executive Officer to advertise the Esperance Regional Economic Development Strategy for public submissions for a period of three weeks.

3. Provide all submissions to the Goldfields Esperance Development Commission at the close of the submission period, for compilation with submissions received by other partner organisations to enable the strategy to be finalised.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 116

Item: 12.4.3

RV Friendly Trial

Author/s	Ross Beckett	Manager Community Enterprises
Authorisor/s	Trevor Ayers	Executive Manager Commercial Division

File Ref: D14/20323

Applicant

Internal

Location/Address

Executive Summary

Following Council’s previous support for the Goldfields Esperance Region being nominated as a RV Friendly region this item recommends the trial of a RV Friendly site within the Esperance town site to enable Esperance to meet the RV Friendly requirements. It is only proposed to initiate a trial at this stage to better understand the implications on the town prior to a longer term decision being made on whether a low cost camping area should be provided for fully self contained vehicles.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council trial the provision of a low cost self contained camping area within the confines of the Greater Sports Ground for a period of 12 months at a cost of $10 per night, commencing on the 1/12/2014.

Background

Council supported the concept of the Goldfields Esperance Region being nominated as a RV Friendly region at March 2013 Ordinary Council Meeting (full resolution below):

That Council:

1 Supports the concept of the Goldfields Esperance Region being nominated as a RV Friendly Region; and

2 Advises the Goldfields Esperance Tourism Alliance and the Goldfields Esperance Development Commission that the Shire of Esperance considers itself to be a RV Friendly community as it complies with all of the conditions required to be listed as a RV Friendly Town except for the provision of short term (24hr; 48hr; 72hr plus) parking within reasonable distance to CBD due to the options of low cost camping in the National Parks and Shire Reserves available within a 120km radius of the Esperance town site.

At the last GVROC Technical Officers meeting the RV Friendly Region concept was raised again with a discussion regarding the progression of each of the Shires towards achieving RV Friendly status. While it appears the majority of Shires are moving towards this status it is also obvious that the region will not achieve RV Friendly Region status without Esperance becoming an RV Friendly Town.

Following this Phil and Pamela Chadd (Roving Ambassadors for the City of Kalgoorlie and members of the Campervan and Motorhome Club of Australia) held an informal discussion with Council about the RV Friendly concept around Western Australia. A particular focus was how to maximise the benefits from the 2015 National CMCA Rally, being held in Albany in October (Albany has recently become a RV Friendly Town). This rally runs for a week and is expected to attract over 1,000 vehicles, with a large percentage heading in from interstate. The advertising begins early next year, with RV Friendly towns obtaining a certain amount of free advertising. Given that the majority of the interstate vehicles are likely to be considering passing through Esperance at least once, ensuring they stop to understand what Esperance has to offer, was considered vital.

The information provided by the City of Kalgoorlie-Boulder through the GVROC discussions suggests that a large percentage of the vehicles that stop at their RV Friendly site move on into one of the local caravan parks once they understand what the Kalgoorlie area has to offer.

We have recently received advice from the Shire of Menzies that they are not interested in pursuing the RV Friendly badge, however on following this up with Phil Chadd, he advised that this will not have any effect on whether the region becomes a RV Friendly region. This is because the townsite itself is not seen as being strategic in terms of the RV market, with the existing facilities within the Shire considered appropriate within the context of the region as a whole.

Officer’s Comment

By trialling the RV Friendly concept for a period of 12 months it will ensure we are able to maximise the number of visitors attracted to Esperance from the CMCA rally being held in Esperance as well as better understanding the real opportunities and implications from allowing low cost camping in a central location. At present there is a significant disparity between the information provided by the Caravan Park Association and the CMCA, which is to be expected given they are both interest groups.

Conducting a trial locally will allow us to evaluate the actual outcomes, both negative and positive, before making a more permanent decision on this issue. While the trial is suggested to run for 12 months, the evaluation and decision regarding whether to continue past the trial period is suggested to occur following the conclusion of the 2014/15 Summer tourist season.

Internal discussions have so far identified two potential sites:

1. The corner of Black Street and Harbour Road inside the Greater Sports Ground

2. Vacant land opposite the Civic Centre and behind the Shire Administration Building on Council Place.

Both these sites provide flat vacant land that is in close proximity to existing Shire facilities to assist with oversight. Site 1 is the preferred site however will require closure over the Esperance Show period as well as a change to the procedures during events including all senior football games held at the Greater Sports Ground as the Black Street entrance will need to be maintained as an access point for recreational vehicles.

Site 2 does provide a closer point to the town centre and won’t require closing etc for any period, however is a much more visible site with some residential properties in relatively close proximity. For this reason site 1 has been preferred in the recommendation.

The two locations that have been identified both have impacts on differing community members and Council may wish to advertise one or both locations for community comment prior to endorsing the trial period. In this case it is suggested that the concept be endorsed for community consultation, with a period of 21 days being provided for submissions to be received, following the concept being advertised.

In the event that Council decides it no longer wishes to support the progression of the region towards RV Friendly status then it is suggested that the following be resolved;

That Council advises the Goldfields Esperance Tourism Alliance and the Goldfields Esperance Development Commission that the Shire of Esperance no longer supports the progression of the Goldfields Esperance region towards RV Friendly Region status and will not be taking any further actions to achieve this.

Consultation

This item was generated following an informal discussion Council hosted that included representatives from the Goldfields Esperance Development Commission, Tourism Esperance and Esperance Chamber of Commerce and Industry at which Phil and Pamela Chadd presented.

It also includes input from the Shire’s Executive Management Team.

Financial Implications

The financial implications arising from this report are uncertain as the number of people likely to use this facility is completely unknown. The only expected cost is the provision of rubbish bins (and rubbish removal) and signage, however the actual full signage requirements is dependent on the site chosen.

Utilising the Bay of Isles Leisure Centre and/or Visitor Centre as the collection point for overnight fees removes any additional staff costs for undertaking this. It is important to note that while there are expected increases in staffing costs arising from this recommendation, this is due to any additional duties being incorporated within existing workloads. To this effect, not only would the collection of fees be undertaken by existing staff, but any call on Rangers (or other staff) to police the camping area would have a commensurate effect on existing duties.

Asset Management Implications

Nil – the only asset being provided is a piece of flat ground.

Statutory Implications

The statutory implication associated with this item is the adoption of an additional fee.

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

Strategy 4.5: Be innovative in the management of Shire operations, services, staff and resources to create a resilient and financially stable Shire.

Corporate Business Plan 2013/2014 – 2016/2017

Action 4.5.1.17: Coordinate opportunities for Shire of Esperance freehold and managed properties.

This item also supports the GVROC desire to work towards an RV Friendly region.

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

Nil

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council

1. Trial the provision of a low cost site for self-contained recreation vehicles that meets ‘RV Friendly’ requirements between the dates of 1/12/2014 and 30/11/2015.

2. Confirm the location as the hard stand area inside the Greater Sports Ground on the corner of Black Street and Harbour Road as the ‘RV Friendly’ site, with a maximum of eight sites being made available.

3. Adopt a $10 per night fee for using the ‘RV Friendly site’ for the 2014/15 year, with vehicles only being allowed to use the site for one consecutive night (maximum 24 hours).

4. Seek feedback from stakeholders on the impacts of the ‘RV Friendly’ site following the 2015 Easter period prior to making a decision on whether to make the site a permanent RV Friendly site or remove the provision of low cost camping for fully self-contained vehicles at the completion of the trial period.

Voting Requirement Absolute Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 120

Item: 12.4.4

Tourism Esperance - Proposed Governance Structure

Author/s	Ross Beckett	Manager Community Enterprises
Authorisor/s	Trevor Ayers	Executive Manager Commercial Division

File Ref: D14/21014

Applicant

Tourism Esperance

Recommendation in Brief

That Council receives the report titled ‘Proposed Governance Structure’ (Final report – revised August 2014).

Background

At the March 2014 Ordinary Council Meeting it was resolved;

That Council:

1. Reaffirms it’s commitment to the process of assisting to facilitate the identification of a new (appropriate) governance structure for tourism in Esperance.

2. Confirms it’s contribution of $2,500 towards the identification of a new governance structure, provided matching funds are provided by Tourism Esperance and Tourism WA commits $2,000.

3. Agrees to underwrite any funding required over $7,000 jointly with Tourism Esperance, provided all other avenues of funding available until the end of May 2014 are actively pursued in the first instance.

4. Agrees to this project being managed by Tourism Esperance with support from the Shire of Esperance and Tourism WA.

KPP were engaged to produce the report and it has subsequently been presented to and received by Tourism Esperance.

Officer’s Comment

On the 19^th of August 2014 the Council was briefed on the attached KPP report in its draft form. The report is now finalised and is being widely discussed within the Esperance Tourism industry, including discussions about the future management of the Esperance Visitor Centre.

It is recommended that this report purely be ‘received’ by Council as any action in respect of the recommendations within the report will only be brought to Council for consideration following an application by Tourism Esperance.

Consultation

KPP

Tourism Esperance

Local Stakeholders.

Attachments

Proposed Governance Structure - Under Separate Cover

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council receives the report titled ‘Proposed Governance Structure’ (Final report – revised August 2014).

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

12.5 External Service - Community Division

Item: 12.5.1

Application to Keep more than Two Dogs - 157 Goldfields Rd. Esperance

Author/s	Rod Hilton	Executive Manager Community Division
Authorisor/s	Gavin Harris	Director Asset Management

File Ref: D14/19105

Applicant

Jennifer Anne Dickinson

Location/Address

157 Goldfields Rd. Esperance

Executive Summary

Council is requested to approve an application from Mrs. J. Dickinson to keep three dogs at 157 Goldfields Rd Esperance.

Recommendation in Brief

That approval be granted to Mrs J Dickinson to keep three dogs at 157 Goldfields Rd. Esperance subject to compliance with the Dog Act and the Shire of Esperance Dogs Local Law.

Background

Mrs Jennifer Dickinson has applied to keep the following dogs at her 157 Goldfields Rd residence:

Breed	Sex	Colour	Name	Age
Staffy/Kelpie	F	Black	Gracie	6 years
Maltese/Shitzu	F	White/Gold	Susie	8 years
Maltese Terrier	F	White/Gold	Nonsense	8 months

Mrs Dickinson has relocated into 157 Goldfields Rd from a leased rural property where the Kelpie was kept as a working dog and the 2 Maltese as house dogs.

The Shire of Esperance Dogs Local Law Clause 3.1 (2) limits the number of dogs permitted to be kept within the town site to 2 dogs over the age of 3 months and the young of those dogs up until they reach 3 months of age. Section 26 (3) of the Dog Act 1976 permits a local government to grant an exemption subject to any conditions it may choose to apply but cannot authorise the keeping of more than 6 dogs that have reached the age of 3 months. Any authorisation given can be revoked or varied at any time.

Officer’s Comment

The Kelpie (Gracie) and the Maltese/Shitzu (Susie) are both registered. An application to licence the 3^rd dog, the Maltese Terrier (Nonsense) has been lodged but not accepted due to the limit on the number of dogs that may be kept on the premise.

Rangers have assessed the premises and found them to be sufficient to contain the dogs on the property. The neighbours at 159 and 155 Goldfields Rd have reported to Rangers by way of signed statements that they have no objection to the keeping of 3 dogs at 157 Goldfields Rd.

Rangers have explained to Mrs Dickinson that if the dogs cause a nuisance through noise or health reasons that any approval to keep more than 2 dogs may be revoked.

Consultation

Rangers have met with neighbors either side of 157 Goldfields Rd to advise them of the application to keep more than 2 dogs. There have been no objections to the application.

Financial Implications

Nil

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

The statutory implications associated with this item are contained within the:

Dogs Local Law Section 3.2 (2)(a) – Maximum number of dogs that may be kept

Dog Act 1976 Section 26 (3) - Local government may grant exemptions to number of dogs that may be kept in or on premises

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

Theme 1 Social

1.5 Create and Maintain a safe environment for the community

Corporate Business Plan 2013/2014 – 2016/2017

Action 1.5.1.3 manage animal control

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

Nil

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council grant approval to Mrs J Dickinson to keep three dogs, namely a staffy/kelpie crossbreed named Gracie, a maltese/shitzu crossbreed named Susie and a maltese terrier named Nonsense, at 157 Goldfields Rd. Esperance subject to the following conditions:

1.This approval only applies to the keeping of the aforementioned dogs; and

2. This approval may be withdrawn at any time if substantiated complaints are received due to the dogs causing a nuisance or the dogs become unregistered.

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 125

Agenda Briefing Sessions and

Ordinary Council Meetings for

January – December 2015

In accordance with section 5.25(g) of the Local Government Act 1995, Public notice is hereby given of Council Ordinary and Agenda Briefing Sessions for January – December 2015.

Meeting Type	Time/Date	Location
Agenda Briefing Session	1pm Tuesday 20 January	Council Chambers
Ordinary Council Meeting	4pm Tuesday 27 January	Council Chambers
Agenda Briefing Session	1pm Tuesday 17 February	Council Chambers
Ordinary Council Meeting	4pm Tuesday 24 February	Council Chambers
Agenda Briefing Session	1pm Tuesday 17 March	Council Chambers
Ordinary Council Meeting	4pm Tuesday 24 March	Council Chambers
Agenda Briefing Session	1pm Tuesday 21 April	Council Chambers
Ordinary Council Meeting	4pm Tuesday 28 April	Council Chambers
Agenda Briefing Session	1pm Tuesday 19 May	Council Chambers
Ordinary Council Meeting	4pm Tuesday 26 May	Council Chambers
Agenda Briefing Session	1pm Tuesday 16 June	Council Chambers
Ordinary Council Meeting	4pm Tuesday 23 June	Council Chambers
Agenda Briefing Session	1pm Tuesday 21 July	Council Chambers
Ordinary Council Meeting	4pm Tuesday 28 July	Council Chambers
Agenda Briefing Session	1pm Tuesday 18 August	Council Chambers
Ordinary Council Meeting	4pm Tuesday 25 August	Council Chambers
Agenda Briefing Session	1pm Tuesday 15 September	Council Chambers
Ordinary Council Meeting	4pm Tuesday 22 September	Council Chambers
Agenda Briefing Session	1pm Tuesday 20 October	Council Chambers
Ordinary Council Meeting	4pm Tuesday 27 October	Council Chambers
Agenda Briefing Session	1pm Tuesday 17 November	Council Chambers
Ordinary Council Meeting	4pm Tuesday 24 November	Council Chambers
Agenda Briefing Session	1pm Tuesday 8 December	Council Chambers
Ordinary Council Meeting	4pm Tuesday 15 December	Council Chambers

Please be advised that the above dates are subject to change.

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 126

Item: 12.6.2

Proposed Financial Agreement with the Esperance Indoor Sports Stadium Management Committee Inc.

Author/s	Trevor Ayers	Executive Manager Commercial Division
Authorisor/s	Gavin Harris	Director Asset Management

File Ref: D14/20516

Applicant

Internal report

Location/Address

N/A

Executive Summary

This report proposes a formal instrument of agreement with the Esperance Indoor Sports Management Committee Inc to enable them to access funds previously identified by Council to assist with upgrades to the Indoor Sports Stadium.

Recommendation in Brief

That Council;

1. Endorse the attached draft Financial Assistance Agreement with the Esperance Indoor Stadium Management Committee Inc.

2. Delegate to the CEO the ability to negotiate minor amendments (if required) in the finalisation of this agreement

Background

As part of the Council’s 2014/15 budgeting process funds have been identified to assist the Esperance Indoor Sports Management Committee Inc. in undertaking an upgrade to the Indoor Sport Stadium. In order to progress making these funds available to the management committee a draft Financial Assistance Agreement is attached for endorsement.

Officer’s Comment

It is believed that an agreement of this nature provides the clarity and understanding of the expectations and obligations of both the Shire and the Esperance Indoor Sports Management Committee in regards to the expenditure of this money. The agreement has been modeled on State Government agreements as the proposed upgrades to the Indoor Sports Stadium identify significant State funding as part of the funding mix. Keeping our funding agreement in similar form to those likely to be generated by the State Government hopefully simplifies the management of these agreements for the Esperance Indoor Sports Stadium Committee.

It is likely that as we finalise this agreement with the Esperance Indoor Sports Stadium Committee small amendments will be required and it is proposed that Council delegate authority to the CEO to negotiate and finalise any required minor amendments.

Consultation

This draft FAA has been reviewed by both the Shires Executive Management Team and representatives from the Esperance Indoor Sports Stadium Committee.

Financial Implications

There are no direct financial implications arising from this report as the funds identified have already been allocated by Council in its 2014/15 budget and strategic planning processes. This report purely deals with the documentation required to enable these funds to be transferred to the Esperance Indoor Sports Management Committee.

Asset Management Implications

Nil

Statutory Implications

Nil

Policy Implications

Nil

Strategic Implications

Strategic Community Plan 2012-2022

Theme 3: Economy

Strategy 3.4: Create and strengthen partnerships to advocate for and deliver community facilities, and services and major infrastructure

Corporate Business Plan 2013/2014 – 2016/2017

Action 3.4.1.2: Develop and coordinate an organisation wide approach to external grant funding

Environmental Considerations

Nil

Attachments

Draft Financial Assistance Agreement - Under Separate Cover

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council;

1. Endorse the attached draft Financial Assistance Agreement with the Esperance Indoor Stadium Management Committee Inc.

2. Delegate to the CEO the ability to negotiate minor amendments (if required) in the finalisation of this agreement

Voting Requirement Simple Majority

Ordinary Council: Agenda

28 October 2014 Page 133

SHIRE OF ESPERANCE

MINUTES

Lake Monjingup Community Development Group Meeting

HELD IN Chambers Meeting Room ON
1 OCTOBER 2014

COMMENCING AT 4pm

1. OFFICIAL OPENING

The Presiding Member declared the meeting open at 4.01pm.

2. ATTENDANCE

Members

Cr Lara McIntyre Shire of Esperance

George Starcevich Community Member

Norma Warren Community Member

Kylie Bishop Community Member

Dave Cowap Community Member

Mike Gibbs Community Member

Ex Officio

Brian Warren Honorary Caretaker

Lynda Horn Community Services Officer

Public

3. APOLOGIES & NOTIFICATION OF GRANTED LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Caroline Aylott Esperance Regional Forum

Jason Rhodes Manager Parks and Gardens

Trish Gardener Environmental Officer

4. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Nil

5. Deputations, Presentations, Inspections, Petitions

Nil

6. DECLARATION OF MEMBERS INTERESTS

6.1 Declarations of Financial Interests – Local Government Act Section 5.60a

Nil

6.2 Declarations of Proximity Interests – Local Government Act Section 5.60b

Nil

6.3 Declarations of Impartiality Interests – Admin Regulations Section 34c

Nil

7. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Moved: G Starcevich

Seconded: K Bishop

That the Minutes of the Lake Monjingup Community Development Group Meeting of the 3 September 2014 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

CARRIED

8. Matters Requiring a Determination of Committee

Nil

9. Reports

Item: 9.1 honorary Caretaker Report October 2014

B Warren reported that the reserves are looking very good and Active and the Work for the Dole team have been undertaking some good works. There is still concern with the amount of vandalism occurring with bollards being run over and the visitors book being destroyed. There has been some wind damage to the Environmental centre with some roofing sheets having come off. Works request is being logged to have the roof panels replaced.

10. Financial Reports

10.1 2014/2015 Financial Report as of 26 September 2014

The report entitled 2014/2015 Financial Report as of 26 September 2014 has been tabled and noted by the committee

11. NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE

Nil

12. CLOSURE

The Presiding Member declared the meeting closed at 4.13pm.

These Minutes were confirmed at a meeting held on _____________________

Signed ________________________________________

Presiding Member at the meeting at which the Minutes were confirmed.

Dated_____________________

14. Motions of which Notice has been Given

Nil

15. MEMBERS QUESTIONS WITH OR WITHOUT NOTICE

16. URGENT BUSINESS APPROVED BY DECISION

17. MATTERS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS

Officer’s Comment:

It is recommended that the meeting is behind closed doors for the following item, in accordance with section 5.23(2) of the Local Government Act 1995.

Item: 17.1

Expressions of Interest - EO0114 - Mobile Food Van Sites Esperance Tanker Jetty

Confidential Item

This report is considered confidential in accordance with the Local Government Act 1995, as it relates to a matter that if disclosed, would reveal information about the business, professional, commercial or financial affairs of a person, where the information is held by, or is about, a person other than the local government (Section 5.23(2)(e)(iii)).

18. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

19. CLOSURE

Disclosure of Financial, Proximity or Impartiality Interests

Local Government Act 1995 – Section 5.65, 5.70 and 5.71 and Local Government (Administration) Regulation 34C

Declaration of Interest (Notes for Your Guidance)

Author/s	Helen Hall	Executive Assistant
Authorisor/s	Gavin Harris	Director Asset Management

Author/s	Lynda Horn	Community Services Officer
Authorisor/s	Rod Hilton	Director Community Services