Coffs Harbour City Council

19 August 2020

 

Ordinary Council Meeting

 

The above meeting will be held remotely via audio-visual link on:

 

Thursday 27 August 2020

 

The meeting commences at 5.00pm and your attendance is requested.

 

 

AGENDA

 

1.         Opening of Ordinary Meeting

2.         Acknowledgment of Country

3.         Public Forum

4.         Disclosure of Interest

5.         Apologies

6.         Leaves of Absence

7.         Mayoral Minute

8.         Confirmation of Minutes

9.         Rescission Motion

10.      Notices of Motion – General

11.      General Manager’s Reports

12.      Notices of Motion – Business Services

13.      Directorate Reports – Business Services

14.      Notices of Motion – Sustainable Communities

15.      Directorate Reports – Sustainable Communities

16.      Notices of Motion – Sustainable Infrastructure

17.      Directorate Reports – Sustainable Infrastructure

18.      Questions On Notice

19.      Matters of an Urgent Nature

20.      Consideration of Confidential Items (if any)

21.      Close of Ordinary Meeting

 

 

Steve McGrath

General Manager

 

 


Order of Business

 

  

Notices of Motion General

NOM20/10      Seek Legal Advice Adverse Occupier - Unoccupied Lands East of the Railway Line and North of Marina Drive Jetty Foreshores............. 3

NOM20/11      Policy Development for Council Undertaking Development......... 5

General Manager's Reports

GM20/20         Council Committees - Review of the Australia Day Committee Terms of Reference......................................................................................................... 6

Directorate Reports - Business Services

BS20/47          Bank and Investment Balances for June 2020........................................ 11

BS20/48          Bank and Investment Balances for July 2020........................................ 33

BS20/49          Certification of Draft 2019/20 Annual Financial Statements......... 54

BS20/50          Coffs Harbour Airport Long Term Lease - Stage 3 Tender for Binding Bids......................................................................................................... 187

Directorate Reports - Sustainable Communities

SC20/44          2017-2021 Delivery Program - Six-Monthly Report – January to June 2020.......................................................................................................................... 193

SC20/45          Development Application No. 0564/20 - Plant Nursery, Landscaping Material Supplies and Cafe - Lot 17 DP 1141168, 16 Wakelands Road, Sapphire Beach.................................................................................................. 244

SC20/46          Development Application No. 0825/20 - Subdivision - Lot 377 DP 752817 and Lot 368 DP 752817, 84 Hood Street and 67 Mildura Street, Coffs Harbour................................................................................................................ 304

Directorate Reports - Sustainable Infrastructure

SI20/15           Engagement of Construction Project Management Services for the West Woolgoolga Sports Complex Project.............................. 329   


NOM20/10   Seek Legal Advice Adverse Occupier - Unoccupied Lands East of the Railway Line and North of Marina Drive Jetty Foreshores

Attachments:          Nil

 

Motion:

Councillor Amos has given notice of his intention to move the following:

"Council seek legal opinion as to if Adverse Occupier title may apply to unoccupied lands east of the railway line and north of Marina Drive at Coffs Harbour Jetty Foreshores.  In particular council seek to clarify if any of the subject land has been previously ‘dedicated under any act for a public purpose’.  Any resulting claim would be on behalf of the community of Coffs Harbour."

 

Rationale:

“The land concerned has, for all intents and purposes, been assumed by the community as being local, community land. It is still assumed to be community land by practically all of the community.

 

The land has been used for purposes such as markets, informal parking and concerts for many decades.”

 

Notes:  Source... Registry General’s Guidelines

 

Possessory title

 

The principle of indefeasibility (the State guarantee as to ownership of land) applies only to Torrens title land. Ownership of Old System title is certain only if another person with a better claim cannot be established. The Common Law has always regarded the possession or occupation of a parcel of land as sufficient evidence of ownership. Consequently, a trespasser (or adverse occupier) who has been allowed unmolested and uninterrupted possession of a parcel will, in time, displace the documentary owner and bar his/her rights to recover the land.

 

The quality of possession is a matter for the Courts, but a general concept is that the activity must be sufficient to establish the occupier as owner in the eyes of the neighbourhood. It should be such that the dispossessed owner could readily assess, in passing, that he was being displaced in title.

 

An applicant for a title on the grounds of possession must necessarily support his claim by a plan of survey to establish the area of enclosure, and by statutory declarations from several uninterested persons testifying to the extent and nature of the occupancy relied on. He should also demonstrate who, but for his possession, would be entitled to the land, and this is taken to require the lodgment of a schedule setting out a search of the documentary title.

 

Possession against the Crown

 

To be successful the Limitations Act 1969 provides that adverse possession must be proved for a period of 30 years against the Crown commencing from 1 January 1970. Where the possession commenced prior to 1 January 1970 a period of possession of at least 60 years must be shown.

 

No claim for adverse possession against the Crown can be made in cases of land:

 

·    set out as road under any Act

·    left between Crown Grants for use as road or driftway

·    dedicated under any Act for a public purpose

·    reserved in any Crown Grant, or

·    comprised in an uncompleted conditional Crown purchase or other subsisting tenure.

 

Possession against private ownership

 

The Limitations Act 1969 provides that a claim of adverse possession may be made against a Common Law owner after a period of 12 years. This however relates to adverse possession commencing after 1 January 1970 and does not apply to any applicant before 1982 where a period of 20 years is required.

Staff Comment:

Legal opinion can be sought and a report provided.  A search of the Real Property Act 1900, Section 45D(3) reads, in part, as follows:

 

(3)     A possessory application may not be made in respect of an estate or interest in any land, or in any part of any land, of which:

 

(a)     Her Majesty or a Minister of the Crown,

(b)     a statutory body representing the Crown,

(c)     a corporation which is constituted by an Act and of which, in the case of a corporation aggregate, at least one of the members is appointed by the Governor or a Minister of the Crown, or

(d)     a council, county council or joint organisation within the meaning of the Local Government Act 1993, or

(e)     the owner of a transacted distribution system or transacted transmission system under the Electricity Network Assets (Authorised Transactions) Act 2015,

 

is the registered proprietor.

 

 


NOM20/11   Policy Development for Council Undertaking Development

Attachments:          Nil

 

Motion:

Councillor Townley has given notice of her intention to move the following:

"Council develop a comprehensive policy which outlines parameters for Council acting as a developer."

 

Rationale:

“From time to time, Council may wish to lodge Development Applications or Planning Proposals for Council-owned land.  Clearly, there are potential conflicts when Council has a dual role as both proponent and consent authority.  Clear and transparent pathways are needed to guide the passage of all Council-led applications.

 

Sometimes these proposals will be minor, such as small boundary adjustments or transfer of easements.  Sometimes they could be major such as proposals to rezone large areas of Council land.

 

While at present there is understanding of role separation, there is no adopted policy or guidelines.  Therefore, it is suggested that a policy document be formulated and exhibited with a view to adoption.”

Staff Comment:

The above rationale identifies two discrete categories, being:

 

1.   Property matters such as boundary adjustments and transfer of easements; and

2.   Planning matters such as development applications and planning proposals.

 

For property matters, where no planning consents are required, internal procedures are used to guide the process and authorisation occurs in accordance with Council’s established delegations.

 

Within the planning matters there are points of initiation and consent between which potential conflicts of interest can arise. Planning consents for development applications are currently governed by Council’s Development Applications – Consideration by Council Policy.

 

Given the Notice of Motion relates to ‘Council acting as a developer’, it is assumed that the policy request relates more to the initiation of planning matters for Council land.

 

 

  


GM20/20      Council Committees - Review of the Australia Day Committee Terms of Reference

Author:                        Governance Coordinator

Authoriser:                  Group Leader Governance

MyCoffs:                      A.1 A vibrant and inclusive place

Attachments:              ATT1  GM20/20  Draft Terms of Reference - Australia Day Committee  

 

Executive Summary

The Australia Day Committee’s membership has recently declined.  In advance of seeking new members, Council has reviewed and updated the Committee’s Terms of Reference to ensure its continuing suitability.

 

The purpose of this report is to present the amended Australia Day Committee’s Terms of Reference for Council adoption and advise Council of the plans to seek expressions of interest from the community for new members.

 

 

Recommendation:

That Council

1.    Adopts the amended Australia Day Committee Terms of Reference.

2.    Notes that Council will be seeking expressions of interest for new members to join the Australia Day Committee.

 

Report

Description of Item:

The Australia Day Committee assists Council with planning the annual Australia Day Community Event, determines the Australia Day Award categories and selects the winners.  Recently, the Committee’s numbers have declined with the resignation of a number of long term members.  As a result, Council plans to seek expressions of interest from the community for new members to join the committee.  Prior to seeking new members, Council reviewed and updated the Committee’s Terms of Reference, which are attached to this report.

 

The purpose of this report is to present the revised Terms of Reference for adoption by Council in advance of seeking new committee members.

Issues:

The key amendments to the Terms of Reference relate to committee’s composition with the following changes:

 

·     The addition of a second Councillor on the committee (it is planned that the appointment of the second Councillor will be considered at the same meeting that Council considers new nominees for this committee).

·     An increase to the number of community member positions from five to eight.

·     Membership to include various demographics.

Options:

1.    Adopt the amended Australia Day Committee Terms of Reference.

2.    Make further amendments to the Australia Day Committee Terms of Reference, and then adopt them.

3.    Reject the amended Australia Day Committee Terms of Reference, meaning that the current Terms of Reference will remain in place.

Sustainability Assessment:

•     Environment

There are no environmental impacts relating to this report.

•     Social

Appointing community members to Council committees:

 

-    Recognises and uses the valuable skills and abilities within the community,

-    Improves and increases Council’s ability to provide functions and services,

-    Enables a sense of community ownership and involvement,

-    Contributes to the communities well-being.

•     Civic Leadership

This approach is consistent with the Council’s MyCoffs Community Strategic Plan:

 

-    A.1 A vibrant and inclusive place.

-    B.2 A community achieving its potential.

Economic – Broader Economic Implications

Committees are formed to help Council facilitate services and functions using community volunteers with varied expertise.  Broadly this taps into the wealth of community knowledge and experience, whilst acknowledging and supporting local skills.

•     Economic - Delivery Program/Operational Plan Implications

Whilst some committees can be self-funding, most require Council technical, secretarial or administration support, which is covered within Council’s Operational Plan and budget setting process.

 

The time and assistance provided to Council by volunteers represents significant cost savings.

Risk Analysis:

There are no specific risks associated with the appointment of committee members and revision of the relevant terms of reference.

Consultation:

Consultation has occurred and continues to occur with various stakeholders involved with the Australia Day Committee.

Related Policy, Precedents and / or Statutory Requirements:

S 355 and s377 Local Government Act 1993.

Implementation Date / Priority:

Immediate.

Conclusion:

That Council adopts the recommendation within this report.

 

 


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


BS20/47       Bank and Investment Balances for June 2020

Author:                        Section Leader Financial Planning

Authoriser:                  Director Business Services

MyCoffs:                      D.2 We have effective use of public resources.

Attachments:              ATT1  BS20/47   Investment Performance Report for the Month Ended 30 June 2020  

 

Executive Summary

Council’s Bank Balances and Investments as at 30 June 2020 totalled $224,574,947.88.  Council receives independent advice and invests surplus funds in accordance with Council’s Investment Policy to maximise investment income and preserve capital to assist with funding requirements for projects listed under the Delivery Program and associated Operational Plans.

 

 

Recommendation:

That Council note the bank balances and investments totalling $224,574,947.88 (including from loans, Developer Contributions and other avenues that form the restricted accounts and are committed for future works) as at 30 June 2020.

 

Report

Description of Item:

A copy of the state of Bank Balances and Investments as at 30 June 2020 is attached.  Also included is a summary of Council’s Socially Responsible Investment Performance.  It should be noted that Council is required to account for investments in accordance with the Australian International Financial Reporting Standards.  Term deposits are shown at face value and all other investment balances at the end of each month reflect market value movements, which would be inclusive of accrued interest.

 

Interest when paid, say quarterly, would result in reductions in the market value of the investments.  The Investment Report reflects the above requirements and reflects the interest earned (or accrued) on each investment, based on the acquisition price.

 

Reports written by Laminar Group Pty Ltd (Council’s investment portfolio advisors), which examine economic and financial markets data for June 2020 are available in the Councillors’ Resource Centre.

Issues:

There are no issues associated with this report.

Options:

As this report is for noting only, an options analysis is not required.

Sustainability Assessment:

•     Environment

Included in the monthly report is a summary of Council’s Socially Responsible Investment Performance (refer Attachment 1).

•     Social

There are no perceived current or future social impacts from the information contained in this report.

•     Civic Leadership

Council invests surplus funds to maximise investment income and preserve capital to assist with funding requirements for projects listed under the Delivery Program and associated Operational Plans.

•     Economic – Broader Economic Implications

Council’s investments are held according to the requirements stated within Council’s Investment Policy and the returns are acceptable in relation thereto.  In the long term, earnings from investments can vary due to economic conditions and financial markets.  Council constructs its investment portfolio with consideration of current conditions and to comply with the Office of Local Government Investment Policy Guidelines.

•     Economic - Delivery Program/Operational Plan Implications

As at 30 June 2020, it is noted that the total bank and investment balance was $224,574,947.88 comprising restricted and unrestricted General, Trust, Water and Sewerage Fund cash and investments.

Risk Analysis:

The likelihood of risks associated with New South Wales Local Government’s investing funds is now remote due to the conservative nature of investments permitted under statutory requirements.  The risk of capital not being returned in relation to each individual investment Council owns is indicated in the attachment.  Council officers have considered the risk to its portfolio in light of the recent COVID-19 pandemic.  Council has portfolio policy limits and risk management related strategy that provide protection against exposure to investment related risks.  Council also has maximum holding limits based on credit quality and counterparty limits and there is not considered to be a significant increase in these risks at this point in time.

 

The main risks for Council’s investment portfolio are liquidity and credit risk, both of which are being managed under the advice of Laminar Group Pty Ltd.  Liquidity risk is the risk that the Council is unable to redeem the investment at a fair price within a timely period and thereby incurs additional costs (or in the worst case is unable to execute its spending plans).  Credit risk is the risk of loss of principal stemming from a financial institutions failure to repay that principal when that principal is due.  Council is compensated for assuming credit risk by way of interest payments from the financial institutions issuing the investment security.

 

Credit risk is rated by various rating agencies.  Investment securities in Council’s current portfolio are rated by either Standard and Poors or Fitch, with the majority of the portfolio rated by Standard and Poors.  Standard and Poors credit ratings and an explanation of their ratings are as follows:


 

 

Rating

Ratings Explanation

AAA

Extremely strong capacity to meet financial commitments.  Highest Rating.

AA

Very strong capacity to meet financial commitments.

A

Strong capacity to meet financial commitments, but somewhat susceptible to adverse economic conditions and changes in circumstances.

BBB

Adequate capacity to meet financial commitments, but more subject to adverse economic conditions.

BBB-

Considered lowest investment grade by market participants.

BB+

Considered highest speculative grade by market participants.

BB

Less vulnerable in the near term but faces major ongoing uncertainties to adverse business, financial and economic conditions.

B

More vulnerable to adverse business, financial and economic conditions but currently has the capacity to meet financial commitments.

CCC

Currently vulnerable and dependent on favourable business, financial and economic conditions to meet financial commitments.

CC

Currently highly vulnerable.

C

Currently highly vulnerable obligations and other defined circumstances.

D

Payment default on financial commitments.

 

Ratings from ‘AA’ to ‘CCC’ may be modified by the addition of a plus (+) or minus (-) sign to show relative standing within the major rating categories.

 

Types of investment securities by credit risk ranking from highest to lowest are as follows:

 

·    Deposits/Covered Bonds – these share first ranking

·    Senior debt – Floating Rate Notes/Fixed Coupon Bonds.

·    Subordinated debt

·    Hybrids

·    Preference shares

·    Equity shares (common shares).

 

Subordinated debt, hybrids, preference and equity shares are not a permitted investment under the current Ministerial Order.  Term deposits of $250,000 or less per financial institution are covered under the Commonwealth Government Deposit Guarantee Scheme and therefore by default have the same credit rating as the Commonwealth Government, i.e. AAA.

 

All credit unions, building societies and mutual banks are Authorised Deposit-taking Institutions (ADIs) and are regulated in the same way as all other Australian banks.  ADIs are regulated by the Australian Securities and Investment Commission under the Corporations Act 2001, and by the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority under the Banking Act 1959.

Consultation:

Council’s investment advisors, Laminar Group Pty Ltd have been consulted in the preparation of this report.

Related Policy, Precedents and / or Statutory Requirements:

Council funds have been invested in accordance with Council’s Investment Policy (POL‑049), which was adopted on 24 August 2017.

Local Government Act 1993 – Section 625

Local Government Act 1993 – Investment Order (dated 12 January 2011)

Local Government General Regulation 2005

The Trustee Amendment (Discretionary Investments) Act 1997 – Sections 14A(2), 14C(1) and 14C(2)

Implementation Date / Priority:

Nil.

Conclusion:

Council should consider the information provided in the report and the Councillors’ Resource Centre and the recommendation provided.

 

 

 


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


BS20/48       Bank and Investment Balances for July 2020

Author:                        Section Leader Financial Planning

Authoriser:                  Director Business Services

MyCoffs:                      D.2 We have effective use of public resources.

Attachments:              ATT1  BS20/48   Investment Performance Report for the Month Ended 31 July 2020  

 

Executive Summary

Council’s Bank Balances and Investments as at 31 July 2020 totalled $217,843,746.59.  Council receives independent advice and invests surplus funds in accordance with Council’s Investment Policy to maximise investment income and preserve capital to assist with funding requirements for projects listed under the Delivery Program and associated Operational Plans.

 

 

Recommendation:

That Council note the bank balances and investments totalling $217,843,746.59 (including from loans, Developer Contributions and other avenues that form the restricted accounts and are committed for future works) as at 31 July 2020.

 

Report

Description of Item:

A copy of the state of Bank Balances and Investments as at 31 July 2020 is attached.  Also included is a summary of Council’s Socially Responsible Investment Performance.  It should be noted that Council is required to account for investments in accordance with the Australian International Financial Reporting Standards.  Term deposits are shown at face value and all other investment balances at the end of each month reflect market value movements, which would be inclusive of accrued interest.

 

Interest when paid, say quarterly, would result in reductions in the market value of the investments.  The Investment Report reflects the above requirements and reflects the interest earned (or accrued) on each investment, based on the acquisition price.

 

Reports written by Laminar Group Pty Ltd (Council’s investment portfolio advisors), which examine economic and financial markets data for July 2020 are available in the Councillors’ Resource Centre.

Issues:

There are no issues associated with this report.

Options:

As this report is for noting only, an options analysis is not required.

Sustainability Assessment:

•     Environment

Included in the monthly report is a summary of Council’s Socially Responsible Investment Performance (refer Attachment 1).

•     Social

There are no perceived current or future social impacts from the information contained in this report.

•     Civic Leadership

Council invests surplus funds to maximise investment income and preserve capital to assist with funding requirements for projects listed under the Delivery Program and associated Operational Plans.

•     Economic – Broader Economic Implications

Council’s investments are held according to the requirements stated within Council’s Investment Policy and the returns are acceptable in relation thereto.  In the long term, earnings from investments can vary due to economic conditions and financial markets.  Council constructs its investment portfolio with consideration of current conditions and to comply with the Office of Local Government Investment Policy Guidelines.

•     Economic - Delivery Program/Operational Plan Implications

As at 31 July 2020, it is noted that the total bank and investment balance was $217,843,746.59 comprising restricted and unrestricted General, Trust, Water and Sewerage Fund cash and investments.

Risk Analysis:

The likelihood of risks associated with New South Wales Local Government’s investing funds is now remote due to the conservative nature of investments permitted under statutory requirements.  The risk of capital not being returned in relation to each individual investment Council owns is indicated in the attachment.  Council officers have considered the risk to its portfolio in light of the recent COVID-19 pandemic.  Council has portfolio policy limits and risk management related strategy that provide protection against exposure to investment related risks.  Council also has maximum holding limits based on credit quality and counterparty limits and there is not considered to be a significant increase in these risks at this point in time.

 

The main risks for Council’s investment portfolio are liquidity and credit risk, both of which are being managed under the advice of Laminar Group Pty Ltd.  Liquidity risk is the risk that the Council is unable to redeem the investment at a fair price within a timely period and thereby incurs additional costs (or in the worst case is unable to execute its spending plans).  Credit risk is the risk of loss of principal stemming from a financial institutions failure to repay that principal when that principal is due.  Council is compensated for assuming credit risk by way of interest payments from the financial institutions issuing the investment security.

 

Credit risk is rated by various rating agencies.  Investment securities in Council’s current portfolio are rated by either Standard and Poors or Fitch, with the majority of the portfolio rated by Standard and Poors.  Standard and Poors credit ratings and an explanation of their ratings are as follows:


 

 

Rating

Ratings Explanation

AAA

Extremely strong capacity to meet financial commitments.  Highest Rating.

AA

Very strong capacity to meet financial commitments.

A

Strong capacity to meet financial commitments, but somewhat susceptible to adverse economic conditions and changes in circumstances.

BBB

Adequate capacity to meet financial commitments, but more subject to adverse economic conditions.

BBB-

Considered lowest investment grade by market participants.

BB+

Considered highest speculative grade by market participants.

BB

Less vulnerable in the near term but faces major ongoing uncertainties to adverse business, financial and economic conditions.

B

More vulnerable to adverse business, financial and economic conditions but currently has the capacity to meet financial commitments.

CCC

Currently vulnerable and dependent on favourable business, financial and economic conditions to meet financial commitments.

CC

Currently highly vulnerable.

C

Currently highly vulnerable obligations and other defined circumstances.

D

Payment default on financial commitments.

 

Ratings from ‘AA’ to ‘CCC’ may be modified by the addition of a plus (+) or minus (-) sign to show relative standing within the major rating categories.

 

Types of investment securities by credit risk ranking from highest to lowest are as follows:

 

·    Deposits/Covered Bonds – these share first ranking

·    Senior debt – Floating Rate Notes/Fixed Coupon Bonds.

·    Subordinated debt

·    Hybrids

·    Preference shares

·    Equity shares (common shares).

 

Subordinated debt, hybrids, preference and equity shares are not a permitted investment under the current Ministerial Order.  Term deposits of $250,000 or less per financial institution are covered under the Commonwealth Government Deposit Guarantee Scheme and therefore by default have the same credit rating as the Commonwealth Government, i.e. AAA.

 

All credit unions, building societies and mutual banks are Authorised Deposit-taking Institutions (ADIs) and are regulated in the same way as all other Australian banks.  ADIs are regulated by the Australian Securities and Investment Commission under the Corporations Act 2001, and by the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority under the Banking Act 1959.

Consultation:

Council’s investment advisors, Laminar Group Pty Ltd have been consulted in the preparation of this report.

Related Policy, Precedents and / or Statutory Requirements:

Council funds have been invested in accordance with Council’s Investment Policy (POL‑049), which was adopted on 24 August 2017.

Local Government Act 1993 – Section 625

Local Government Act 1993 – Investment Order (dated 12 January 2011)

Local Government General Regulation 2005

The Trustee Amendment (Discretionary Investments) Act 1997 – Sections 14A(2), 14C(1) and 14C(2)

Implementation Date / Priority:

Nil.

Conclusion:

Council should consider the information provided in the report and the Councillors’ Resource Centre and the recommendation provided.

 

 

 


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


BS20/49       Certification of Draft 2019/20 Annual Financial Statements

Author:                        Section Leader Financial Support

Authoriser:                  Director Business Services

MyCoffs:                      D.2 We have effective use of public resources.

Attachments:              ATT1  BS20/49   Draft 2019/20 General Purpose Financial Statements

ATT2  BS20/49   Draft 2019/20 Special Purpose Financial Statements  

 

Executive Summary

The draft Annual Financial Statements, which include the General Purpose Financial Statements, the Special Purpose Financial Statements and the Special Schedules, are required to be certified to meet legislative requirements in relation to the completion and audit of the Annual Financial Statements for 2019/2020.

 

Recommendation:

That Council approve the General Purpose Financial Statements – Statement by Councillors and Management and Special Purpose Financial Statements – Statement by Councillors and Management forms for 2019/2020 for completion by the designated signatories.

 

Report

Description of Item:

Tabled at this meeting are the draft Annual Financial Statements (which includes General Purpose Financial Statements, Special Purpose Financial Statements and Special Schedules) for 2019/2020.

 

Included are two statements:

 

1.    General Purpose Financial Statements – Statement by Councillors and Management; and

2.    Special Purpose Financial Statements – Statement by Councillors and Management.

 

Both Statements by Councillors and Management are required to be signed prior to the submission of the Annual Financial Statements to the Office of Local Government.  The auditor does not provide the audit reports (which are also required to be included in the Statements sent to the Office of Local Government), until signed copies of the Statements have been received.

 

No analysis of the draft documents is provided in this report. Council staff will provide an analysis of the audited Annual Financial Statements after a review of the draft documents has been undertaken by Council’s auditors, The Audit Office of NSW.  However, it is of note that the Income Statement includes significant one-off adjustments recognised through the revaluation of transport and stormwater drainage infrastructure assets and demolition of some property assets, with consequently $15.334 million in net losses from the disposal of assets.  There is also a revaluation decrement/impairment of $0.907 million and impacts, particularly on the commercial business units’ performance, from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Issues:

Failure to approve the draft Annual Financial Statements will result in non-compliance with relevant legislation.

Options:

This report is to enable Council to ‘certify’ the draft Annual Financial Statements for 2019/2020.  This is required by legislation and therefore is the only option available to Council.

Sustainability Assessment:

•     Environment

There are no perceived current or future environmental impacts.

•     Social

There are no perceived current or future social impacts.

•     Civic Leadership

There are no perceived current or future civic leadership impacts.

•     Economic – Broader Economic Implications

There are no perceived current or future economic impacts.

•     Economic - Delivery Program/Operational Plan Implications

There are no Delivery Program or Operational Plan implications.

Risk Analysis:

A risk assessment has been carried out and it is considered that endorsement of the recommendation does not present a risk to Council.  However, non-endorsement of the statements provides a risk of non-compliance with legislation to the Council.

Consultation:

The draft Annual Financial Statements were collated with the assistance of various Council staff members in accordance with the Office of Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting Update No. 28 March 2020 and Australian International Financial Reporting Standards.

Related Policy, Precedents and / or Statutory Requirements:

The Financial Statements are prepared and presented on an annual basis in accordance with statutory and regulatory requirements.

 

The Annual Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with:

 

1.    The Local Government Act 1993 and amendments

2.    Local Government Regulations

3.    Australian Accounting Standards (AASBs)

4.    The “Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting” published by the Office of Local Government

5.    The “Asset Accounting Manual” published by the Office of Local Government

6.    Instructions issued in circulars released by the Office of Local Government

7.    NSW Government Policy Statements “Application of National Competition Policy to Local Government”

8.    Office of Local Government guidelines “Pricing & Costing for Council Businesses: A guide to Competitive Neutrality”

9.    Council’s Policies and Procedures

Implementation Date / Priority:

The draft Annual Financial Statements will be authorised for issue within statutory timelines.

Conclusion:

This report provides Council with the draft Annual Financial Statements for the 2019/2020 financial year.  Once audited, the final Annual Financial Statements will be presented to Council with an analysis.

 

 

 


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


BS20/50       Coffs Harbour Airport Long Term Lease - Stage 3 Tender for Binding Bids

Author:                        Commercial and Compliance Manager

Authoriser:                  Director Business Services

MyCoffs:                      D.1 Our leaders give us confidence in the future

Attachments:              ATT1  BS20/50   CONFIDENTIAL Issues and Options

Confidential in accordance with Section 10A(2)(c) of the Local Government Act as it contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

ATT2  BS20/50   CONFIDENTIAL Binding Bids Evaluation Report  

ATT3  BS20/50   CONFIDENTIAL Binding Bids  

ATT4  BS20/50   CONFIDENTIAL Airport Lease Transaction Documents   

 

Executive Summary

In December 2018 Council resolved to progress the Airport Lease Model for the Coffs Harbour Airport (CHA) to the next stages of due diligence and an expression of interest for non-binding bids.

 

In May 2019 Council resolved to appoint KPMG as independent expert advisors for the airport lease process.  Since their appointment KPMG has undertaken a significant review of all relevant information and reports to date, and provided a gap analysis to inform further due diligence work required to ensure a comprehensive Information Memorandum (IM) could be provided to potential bidders for the airport lease.  The IM was used to inform bidders during the Non-Binding Bids stage and in November 2019 Council considered the Non-Binding Bids received and resolved to progress the process to the Tender for Binding Bids stage.

 

The Tender for Binding Bids was released on 12 June 2020 at 3pm for a period of 21 days.  During the tender period Council received a request to extend the deadline for submissions.  As a result, the tender close date was extended two weeks with tenders officially closing on 17 July 2020 at 3pm.

 

Significant analysis of the Binding Bids has been undertaken by Council’s Evaluation Panel and Council’s Commercial Advisors, KPMG and Legal Advisors, Ashurst and this report brings before Council the outcomes of the Binding Bids evaluation.  The lease process has been undertaken in line with the strict requirements of the Airport Lease Probity Plan which has been overseen by external probity advisors O’Connor Marsden (OCM).

 

 

Recommendation:

That Council:

1.       Progress the airport lease through negotiation in line with the recommendation contained within the Binding Bids Evaluation Report (Confidential Attachment 2).

2.       Receive a further report on the outcome of the negotiations.

 

Report

Description of Item:

The Coffs Harbour Airport (CHA) is currently managed through a mixed model with Airport Management Services provided by a contractor and the operations undertaken through a Council commercial business unit.

 

Following an options study to inform consideration of future governance and management options for CHA, Council resolved in December 2018 to progress the Airport Lease Model to the next stages of due diligence and an expression of interest for non-binding bids.

 

In May 2019 Council resolved to appoint KPMG as independent expert advisors for the airport lease process and in November 2019 Council considered the Non-Binding Bids received and resolved to progress the process to the Tender for Binding Bids stage.

 

The following diagram was developed by KPMG and provides a high level overview of the lease process and indicative timing for the stages of the process.

 

Stage 1. Review

Gap Analysis report undertaken to understand information gaps and establish action plan for the transaction

Stage 2. Expressions of Interest and Non-Binding Bids

-  Marketing Sounding to gauge appetite and process / information expectations

-  Registration of Interest / Advertising Campaign

-  Receipt of Confidentiality Deed Polls

-  Issuance of Information Memorandum (IM) and Process Letter

-  Non-Binding Bids Formal Process (1st – 29th October 2019)

-  Bid receipt and evaluation

Stage 3. Tender for Binding Bids

Stage 4. Preferred Tenderer Lease Negotiations and Execution

Stage 5. Lease Monitoring

Jun - Aug 19                     Aug - Oct 19                                   Nov 19 - Aug 20*            Sep - Oct 20*               

* Indicative timing

 

The timing of the Tender for Binding Bids stage has extended by six months due to the impact of COVID-19.

 

Stage 1:  Review

 

Since their appointment KPMG undertook a significant review of all relevant information and reports to date, provided a gap analysis to inform further due diligence work required to ensure a comprehensive Information Memorandum (IM) could be provided to potential bidders for the airport lease.

 

Stage 2:  EOI and Non-Binding Bids

 

The key elements of the Stage 2 Non-Binding Bids process are explained as follows:

 

a)    Market Sounding

 

KPMG conducted market soundings with potential infrastructure/airport investors to determine the level of market appetite and interest in the Coffs Harbour Airport Lease, in addition to confirm key transaction requirements.  The key transaction requirements were incorporated into term sheets for the airport lease, reflecting the common terms of other airport leases and market expectations.

 

b)    Registration of Interest (ROI)

 

The ROI campaign was launched in parallel with formal advertising.  An advertisement was prepared and listed in the Australian Financial Review on Tuesday, 27 August 2019.  In tandem, the newspaper advertisement was distributed to an email database, comprising 99 groups which either directly own/operate or have financial interests in airports both locally and globally.

 

Through the ROI process, parties that had shown interest in the opportunity or had requested further information were provided the ROI document, comprising an 8-page summary on the opportunity, with a request for interested parties to submit details.

 

c)    Non-Binding Bids - Formal Process (1 – 29 October 2019)

 

Upon receipt of a signed Confidentiality Deed Poll (CDP), the IM was issued. Parties were also offered the opportunity for KPMG to present the information contained within the IM document and discuss the long term lease opportunity.

 

KPMG and associates, Ashurst lawyers and probity advisors, OCM worked with the Council project team to advance the lease process through to the conclusion of the Stage 2 Non-Binding Bids.  An evaluation report was provided to Council on 28 November 2019 and Council resolved:

 

That Council:

1.    Progress the Airport Lease Model to the Tender for Binding Bids Stage.

2.    Consider and adopt the recommendations as detailed in the Evaluation Report (Confidential Attachment 2).

3.    Allocate $700,000 from the Coffs Harbour Airport Business Unit Reserve to fund the lease process.

4.    Note that a further report on the outcome of the Tender for Binding Bids Stage will be provided to Council for consideration.

 

Stage 3:  Tender for Binding Bids

 

Subsequent to the resolution to progress to the Tender for Binding Bids, KPMG and associates, Ashurst lawyers and probity advisors, OCM continued to work with the Council project team to advance the lease process through to the conclusion of the Stage 3 Tender for Binding Bids.

 

Prior to going to Tender, considerable additional Due Diligence was undertaken by Council including the development of a Baseline Environmental Report and the further development of key transaction documentation on which the Binding Bids would be based.  These documents included the Lease, the Implementation Agreement, a Development Agreement (linked to the Airport Enterprise Park), a Transitional Services Agreement and several supporting documents.

 

As noted in the issues section below, COVID-19 impacted upon the indicative timeframe for this stage and Tenders for Binding Bids were not released until 12 June 2020 at 3pm.  The tender period was for 21 days but during the tender period a request was received to extend the submission deadline until 17 July 2020 at 3pm.  This request was deemed to not disadvantage Council or compromise the process and was approved.  The Tender for Binding Bids officially closed on 17 July 2020 at 3pm.

 

Since the tender closed, significant analysis of the Binding Bids has been undertaken by Council’s Assessment Panel and Council’s Commercial Advisors KPMG and Legal Advisors Ashurst with oversight being provided by external probity advisors O’Connor Marsden (OCM).

 

During evaluation several clarifications on the bids were sought and these clarifications have also been considered as part of the tender evaluation.

 

The Binding Bids Analysis and Advice Report provided by KPMG, with legal analysis from Ashurst, is included in the attached Binding Bids Evaluation Report (Confidential Attachment 2).

Issues:

Issues in relation to the Tender for Binding Bids are detailed in Confidential Attachment 1 - Issues and Options, the Binding Bids Evaluation Report and the KPMG Binding Bid Analysis and Advice Report.

 

Several key issues presented themselves during the Binding Bids stage that added complexity to the transaction and caused considerable timing delays.  Issues included:

 

·    Withdrawal of Tiger Air services from Coffs Harbour

·    COVID-19 Pandemic

·    Virgin Australia entering into Voluntary Administration

 

These three key issues had the potential to significantly impact the transaction and strong consideration was given to delaying the Tender for Binding Bids until the full impacts of these issues were known.  In consultation with Council’s advisors, it was established that a potential lessee would hold a long term view of the lease that extended beyond the immediate impacts and that the lease value identified during the Non-Binding Bids stage could be preserved as part of the Tender for Binding Bids.  On that basis it was determined to proceed with the formal Tender for the airport lease.

Options:

In relation to this report Council has the following options.

 

1.    Adopt the recommendation provided to Council and proceed to final negotiations.  A further report of the outcome of this stage will be provided to Council for consideration.

2.    Reject the recommendation and postpone the lease process until a later date.  Interim management arrangements would be required during this period. Also, the likely time delay, say at least five years, would require the due diligence materials to be reconstituted with similar lease process costs incurred.

3.    Reject the recommendation and advance an Airport Management Contract model.  This model was assessed by consultants as the next best model to pursue after a long term lease.  An airport management contract can be for five years or longer, with options to extend.  In total this represents a minimum commitment in the order of say five to ten years.

4.    Reject the recommendation and retain the current management model.  This option will not provide Council with a way forward to adopt a more effective governance model for Coffs Harbour Airport.  The risks previously identified in the current model will remain.

5.    Reject the recommendation and insource airport management through the recruitment of necessary qualified staff. The risks previously identified in the current model will also remain in this model.

 

These options are further discussed in Confidential Attachment 1 - Issues and Options.

Sustainability Assessment:

•     Environment

There are no environmental impacts as a result of the recommendation in this report to progress the airport lease model to the next stage of the process.

•     Social

There are no social impacts as a result of the recommendation in this report to progress the airport lease model to the next stage of the process.

•     Civic Leadership

The airport lease process is evidence-based and demonstrates a strategic approach to addressing existing issues and long term requirements to ensure the continued growth and prosperity of the airport.  This approach is consistent with the MyCoffs Community Strategic Plan objective:

 

-     D2.1 We effectively manage the planning and provision of regional public services and infrastructure.

•     Economic – Broader Economic Implications

Addressing the long term governance arrangements for CHA will ensure that the airport can continue its contribution to Council, services to the community and contribution to the economic growth of the region.  There are several investment and growth opportunities that the airport lease model would support, being:

 

-      Business development;

-      Enterprise Park; and

-      International operations.

•     Economic - Delivery Program/Operational Plan Implications

Costs associated with the Airport Lease Process are being funded through reserves.  Costs to date total $1.6m including Commercial/Financial Advisory services, Tax Advisory services, Legal services, Technical Advisory services and assessments, Market and Traffic Forecasts, Environmental investigations and Probity Advisors.  Further costs associated with the lease negotiations and financial close will see total costs increase to in the order of $2m.

 

Importantly, the investment in the Non-Binding Bids and Binding Bids processes need to be considered in the context of the likely returns to Council and the community from a successful binding bid and potential lease, as identified in the Confidential Attachment 2. Also, consistent with Council’s requirement from its consideration of Stage 2 Non-Binding Bids, the Stage 3 Binding Bids has achieved a net present value of financial consideration greater than the Stage 2 Non-Binding Bids.

Risk Analysis:

The airport lease model minimises Council’s risk exposure and also provides a mechanism to advance important investment and growth opportunities without reliance on ratepayer and other public funds.  The advent of COVID-19 and the Virgin Australia administration has highlighted the risks that can have significant impacts upon the airport business and a lease provides Council with a valid mitigation strategy for these risks.  Council will be provided a further decision point at the end of negotiations; however, if a lease is negotiated broadly in line with Binding Bids, it would be unreasonable for Council to not negotiate and finalise a lease agreement.  Withdrawing at the end of Binding Bids may present reputational and financial risks.

Consultation:

Ongoing briefings and communications have been provided to Councillors throughout the process.  Recent briefings have been held in relation to the lease, one on the transaction documents, lease structure and key terms, and one on the Binding Bids received by Council and their evaluation.

Related Policy, Precedents and / or Statutory Requirements:

CHA’s land holdings are freehold property classified as operational land.  The land holdings are subject to a Deed of Agreement with the Commonwealth.  Legal due diligence has been undertaken to ensure statutory and regulatory requirements are met under any lease.

Implementation Date / Priority:

Once Council adopts the recommendation, negotiations will commence.  It is expected that the negotiations will take 2-3 weeks to complete with a further report being brought to Council in 4-6 weeks.

Conclusion:

The airport lease process has now been progressed through to the Tender for Binding Bids.  These have been evaluated and are reported to Council for formal consideration.  It is recommended that Council approved further negotiations in line with the information provided in the confidential attachments.

 

A further report will be provided to Council for consideration on the outcome of the negotiation stage.

 

  


SC20/44       2017-2021 Delivery Program - Six-Monthly Report – January to June 2020

Author:                        Senior Corporate Planner

Authoriser:                  Director Sustainable Communities

MyCoffs:                      D.2 We have effective use of public resources.

Attachments:              ATT1  SC20/44   2017-2021 Delivery Program - Six-Monthly Report - January to June 2020  

 

Executive Summary

Under the Local Government Act, Council is required to report six-monthly on its progress against the principal activities detailed in the Delivery Program.

The Six-Monthly Progress Reporting (for the period 1 January to 30 June 2020) on the Coffs Harbour City Council 2017-2021 Delivery Program (Year 3) is tabled at this time. This Six-Monthly Progress Report identifies achievements and challenges recorded during the reporting period and provides updates on Council services, projects and key operational activities.

There are 252 Operational Plan actions detailed in the six-monthly report. The majority are recorded as being On Track; 60 are listed as Needing Attention, 4 as Critical and 8 on hold, generally reflecting the impacts of competing operational priorities or external factors such as COVID-19.

The report represents a considerable record of achievement by Council and its workforce in delivering positive outcomes for the Coffs Harbour Local Government Area (LGA) community.

 

Recommendation:

That Council adopts the attached Six-Monthly Progress Report (for the period 1 January to 30 June 2020) on the Coffs Harbour City Council 2017-2021 Delivery Program (Year 3) for public release.

 

Report

Description of Item:

Coffs Harbour City Council began implementing its 2017-2021 Delivery Program (Year 3) on 1 July 2019. The Delivery Program must include a method of assessment to determine the effectiveness of Council’s principal activities in achieving the objectives of the MyCoffs Community Strategic Plan. Progress reports must be provided to Council at least every six months. While it is a legislative requirement, the Six-Monthly Progress Report also represents a valuable opportunity for the organisation to evaluate its performance and account to the local community. It should be noted that due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Delivery Program has been extended a year to 2022.

The Six-Monthly Progress Report (for the period 1 January to 30 June 2020) on the Coffs Harbour City Council 2017-2021 Delivery Program (Year 3) is tabled at this time. Once adopted, the six-monthly report will be posted on Council’s website and printed copies will be made available at Council’s display locations.

Issues:

The Six-Monthly Progress Report is an overview of Council’s activities – undertaken through the 2019/20 Operational Plan - that respond to the objectives and strategies of Coffs Harbour’s MyCoffs Community Strategic Plan. It refers to the period 1 January to 30 June 2020.

In the Operational Plan, Council details a range of actions (projects and ongoing tasks) that are aligned with one or more of the Strategies that are set out in the MyCoffs Community Strategic Plan.

The progress updates include ‘traffic lights’ which indicate whether an action is On Track (green light), Needs Attention (yellow light), or Critical (red light). A grey traffic light indicates an action is On Hold - in these cases, the action may be yet to start, not active this reporting cycle, or awaiting funding or the outcome of other processes including the development of data systems.

During the period, progress reports were submitted for a total of 252 actions implemented by Council. The updates indicate the majority of actions are On Track. A total of 60 actions are recorded as Needing Attention, 4 as Critical and 8 on hold; these reflect resourcing/workload issues, delays associated with the introduction of new systems or processes, and/or the impact of external factors including the COVID-19 pandemic. Progress reports indicate how it is proposed to bring these actions back On Track.

The report represents a considerable record of achievement by Council and its workforce in delivering positive outcomes for the Coffs Harbour LGA community. The reporting period saw many highlights including:

-     Two very successful Elton John concerts were held in February;

-     Winner of multiple awards for planning and engineering excellence including for the Jetty4Shores development;

-     The proposed West Woolgoolga Sports Complex moved closer to reality with the announcement in June of a $10m Federal Government grant towards the project;

-     Construction of the Coffs Harbour Airport Enterprise Park commenced after the Federal Government delivered $10 million for the project in January;

-     The Local Growth Management Strategy – Rural Lands Component was adopted;

-     Over 798,700 people visited our local patrolled beaches in the past 12 months.

-     Plans for a Youth Space for 8-15 year olds at Sandy Beach Reserve are a step closer following the announcement that the NSW Government is providing $150,000 funding towards the $300,000 cost of the project;

-     S7:11 sport infrastructure works - Polwarth Drive Oval lighting was completed;

-     The Positive Ageing Strategy and Library, Museum, Gallery Strategic Plan was adopted;

-     Extensive water, sewer and transport asset works were undertaken;

-     Delivery of land management, community, environmental and sustainability initiatives;

-     Delivery of a range of community, economic and sporting programs.

A number of actions that were expected to be completed during the term of the 2019/20 Operational Plan have extended and being included in the 2020/21 Operational Plan.

Options:

As this report is to enable compliance with a legislative requirement and the public release of an information resource for Council and the community, an options analysis is not required.

•     Environment

Apart from printing and energy costs associated with compiling the report, there are no environmental impacts flowing from the preparation of the Six-Monthly Progress Report (for the period 1 January to 30 June 2020) on the Coffs Harbour City Council 2017-2021 Delivery Program (Year 3). However, the report considers Council’s progress and performance in regard to the delivery of environmental strategies for the Coffs Harbour LGA.

•     Social

Similarly, the report considers Council’s progress and performance in regard to the delivery of social strategies for the Coffs Harbour LGA. The preparation and publication of the report is consistent with Council’s commitment to accountability to the community.

•     Civic Leadership

The Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework enables Council to identify and respond to community aspirations and co-ordinate the provision of appropriate works and services to help achieve the objectives of the MyCoffs Community Strategic Plan (CSP). This is consistent with the CSP strategy D.2 We have effective use of public resources.

•     Economic – Broader Economic Implications

The report considers Council’s progress and performance in regard to the delivery of strategies aimed at stimulating the economic sustainability of the Coffs Harbour LGA.

•     Economic - Delivery Program/Operational Plan Implications

The annual development and review of the Delivery Program and Operational Plan are accommodated within Council’s budget structure. This expenditure is monitored through Council’s monthly and quarterly budget reviews.

•     Risk Analysis:

The preparation of a Six-Monthly Progress Report is a legislative requirement. A risk analysis is not applicable in this instance.

Consultation:

The preparation of this report involved engagement with leadership and staff responsible for reportable actions across Council.

Related Policy, Precedents and / or Statutory Requirements:

Section 404 of the Local Government Act 1993 applies. In summary, it requires that:

-     A council must have a Delivery Program, detailing the principal activities it will undertake to achieve the objectives established in the Community Strategic Plan, within the resources available under the Resourcing Strategy.

-     The Delivery Program must include a method of assessment to determine the effectiveness of each principal activity detailed in the Delivery Program in achieving the objectives at which the activity is directed.

-     The General Manager must ensure that progress reports are provided to the council, with respect to the principal activities detailed in the Delivery Program, at least every 6 months.

Implementation Date / Priority:

If adopted by Council, the Six-Monthly Progress Report (for the period 1 January to 30 June 2020) on the Coffs Harbour City Council 2017-2021 Delivery Program (Year 3) will be published as soon as it is practical to do so.

Conclusion:

The Six-Monthly Progress Report (for the period 1 January to 30 June 2020) on the Coffs Harbour City Council 2017-2021 Delivery Program (Year 3) identifies specific achievements or challenges (such as COVID-19 pandemic) recorded during the reporting period and provides updates on Council Services, projects and key operational activities.

While it satisfies a legislative requirement, the report is a valuable resource to assist the community to understand what Council does and how effective it is in helping to achieve the objectives of the MyCoffs Community Strategic Plan.

It is recommended that Council adopt the report for public release.

 

 


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


SC20/45       Development Application No. 0564/20 - Plant Nursery, Landscaping Material Supplies and Cafe - Lot 17 DP 1141168, 16 Wakelands Road, Sapphire Beach

Author:                        Development Assessment Officer

Authoriser:                  Director Sustainable Communities

MyCoffs:                      C.1 Liveable neighbourhoods with a defined identity

Attachments:              ATT1  SC20/45   Development Application No. 0564/20 - S4.15 Evaluation

ATT2  SC20/45   Development Application No. 0564/20 - Plans

ATT3  SC20/45   Development Application No. 0564/20 - Draft Conditions

ATT4  SC20/45   CONFIDENTIAL Development Application No. 0564/20 - Submissions

Confidential in accordance with Section 10A(2)(e) of the Local Government Act as it contains information that would, if disclosed, prejudice the maintenance of law.  

      

 

 

Executive Summary

This report provides an assessment of Development Application No. 0564/20 for a plant nursey, landscaping material supplies and cafe at 16 Wakelands Road, Sapphire Beach.

At its meeting of 12 October 2017, Council adopted the ‘Development Applications - Consideration by Council Policy’, which outlined:

That development applications for approval involving substantial aspects of the following elements be referred to Council for determination:

-     Significant public interest and community input;

-     A proposed variation to the Local Environmental Plan that varies from the development standard by more than 10%;

-     Significant land use; and

-     Major environmental issues.

Following public exhibition of the application, Council received eleven submissions (including a petition). Accordingly, this matter is reported to Council for determination due to ‘significant public interest and community input’.

 

Recommendation:

That Council:

1.       Approve Development Application No. 0564/20 for a plant nursery, landscaping material supplies and cafe at Lot 17 DP 1141168, 16 Wakelands Road, Sapphire Beach subject to the conditions in Attachment 3.

2.       Advise persons who made a submission on Development Application No. 0564/20 of Council’s decision.

 

REPORT:

Applicant:

Casa Koala

Landowner:

Steve New Landscaping Pty Ltd

Land:

Lot 17 DP 1141168, 16 Wakelands Road, Sapphire Beach

Zone:

RU2 Rural Landscape

Description:

Plant Nursery, Landscape Material Supplies and Cafe

Description of Item:

•     The Site

The site is legally known as Lot 17 within Deposited Plan 1141168. The street address is 16 Wakelands Road, Sapphire Beach. The site is located on the northern side of Wakelands Road at the intersection with Solitary Islands Way. The allotment is an irregular rectangular shape and has a fall of approximately six metres from its highest point to its lowest point.

The property has an area of 3.68 hectares and a significant part of the site is currently being used for a nursery including plant propagation and landscape and gardening supplies. There is an existing shed, a shade house area and growing area and bulk bins for landscaping materials within the site. An existing dwelling is located along the south western portion of the site.

•     Background

In January 2018, Council approved a ‘plant nursery’ under Development Consent No. 0032/18. This development consent approved a plant nursery, including a plant growing area, shade house and seven (7) on-site parking spaces (staff), and one (1) access point for the entrance and exit of vehicles.

Additional information submitted at the time of the application gave specific details around the proposal. The applicant provided details regarding the use of the site was for growing plants and 95% of the plants produced would be grown on site. There would be no sales to the general public and sales would be through online, over the phone or using landscaping contractors with a registered ABN.

It is noted that there are a number of currently unauthorised activities occurring on site which the subject development application, in part, seeks to address.

•     The Development

The proposal is for a plant nursery, landscaping material supplies and café.

It is proposed to propagate plants on the site that are available to be purchased in bulk and for use as part of the landscaping business proposed to operate from the property. The proposal will also provide a variety of species of plants and landscaping material for purchase by the public.

The proposal includes a new building on site for the nursery building, storage and café. The new building will include display areas for small plants, garden furniture, garden features and other garden decorations. Three storerooms will provide for goods adjoining. An external display deck area (adjoining the café) and child playground area for guests and visitors is also proposed.

The proposal includes growing areas and a wholesale supplies shed. The landscaping material supplies will predominantly occur on the north western part of the site. A new driveway is proposed for customer, operational and delivery vehicle access to this area. This area will consist of an impervious bulk bin area and will provide various garden growing supplies such as mulch, sand, bark, gravel, and decorative stones.

It is proposed that the nursery, landscaping material supplies and café will operate from 7am to 5pm Monday to Friday and 8am to 4pm Saturday and Sunday.

It is anticipated that 20 staff will be employed.

Machinery located on-site will comprise the following:

-     One 3 tonne loader (for loading and unloading in the bulk bin area),

-     One forklift (for moving plants and loading and unloading),

-     Two rigid body trucks (for landscape contract works off site),

-     One all-terrain vehicle (for staff movement over the site).

Vehicle access will be provided from two access points from Wakelands Road. An existing access to a dwelling house on the property will be relocated to combine with one of the new access points. The existing access point near the intersection of Wakelands Road and Solitary Islands Way will be relocated five metres to the west (further west from the intersection). The two access points will separate vehicle movements such as delivery vehicles, staff vehicles and trucks from general public vehicles. Each access point will allow for two-way traffic movements.

Vehicle movement for the development includes customers, staff, operational vehicles and delivery vehicles. Delivery vehicle movements are for the delivery of landscaping materials and propagated plants. Plant deliveries will occur in small and bulk amounts. The expected delivery vehicle movements are one semi-trailer per week, five truck and dog per day, 8 small trucks per day.

Issues:

The main assessment issues for the proposed development are:

-     Access to the site,

-     Traffic management to and from the site,

-     Parking and manoeuvring within the development,

-     Operational use of the site.

These issues are detailed in the Section 4.15 Evaluation Report as Attachment 1 to this report.

Options:

1.   Adopt the recommendation thereby granting approval to the application, subject to conditions.

2.   Refuse the application and list reasons for refusal.

Sustainability Assessment:

•     Environment

A complete assessment of potential environmental impacts is provided in the Section 4.15 Evaluation Report as Attachment 1 to this report.

•     Social

A complete assessment of potential social impacts is provided in the Section 4.15 Evaluation Report as Attachment 1 to this report.

•     Civic Leadership

The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the ‘MyCoffs Community Strategic Plan’ particularly the ‘A Place for Community’ theme, which requires amongst other things that development occur in a way that is environmentally, socially and economically responsible.

•     Economic – Broader Economic Implications

The proposed development is not expected to result in any significant broader economic implications.

•     Economic - Delivery Program/Operational Plan Implications

There are no implications for Council’s Delivery Program/adopted Operational Plan.

Risk Analysis:

A risk analysis has been undertaken and it is considered that approval of the development application as recommended, does not pose a significant risk to Council.

Consultation:

The development was advertised and notified in accordance with the requirements of Council’s Community Participation and Engagement Plan for a period of fourteen (14) days and eleven (11) submissions were received.

A full copy of all of the submissions is a confidential attachment to this report (Attachment 4) as the submissions may contain personal or private information or other considerations against disclosure as prescribed under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009.

Related Policy, Precedents and / or Statutory Requirements:

The statutory instruments relevant to the development include the following:

-    Coffs Harbour Local Environmental Plan 2013

-    Coffs Harbour Development Control Plan 2015

-     State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land

-    State Environmental Planning Policy No 64 – Advertising and Signage

-    State Environmental Planning Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2019

Implementation Date / Priority:

In the event that Council adopts the recommendation, a formal notice of determination will be issued for the development application. A formal notice of determination is valid for five years and the applicant can act on the development consent at any time within that period, subject to meeting any relevant conditions of the consent.

Conclusion:

A comprehensive assessment of the application has been undertaken in accordance with all statutory requirements and it is recommended that the application be approved subject to a number of standard conditions (Attachment 3).

 

 


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


SC20/46       Development Application No. 0825/20 - Subdivision - Lot 377 DP 752817 and Lot 368 DP 752817, 84 Hood Street and 67 Mildura Street, Coffs Harbour

Author:                        Development Assessment Officer

Authoriser:                  Director Sustainable Communities

MyCoffs:                      B.2 A community achieving its potential

Attachments:              ATT1  SC20/46   Development Application No. 0825/20 - S4.15 Evaluation Report

ATT2  SC20/46   Development Application No. 0825/20 - Plans

ATT3  SC20/46   Development Application No. 0825/20 - Draft Conditions  

      

 

 

Executive Summary

This report provides an assessment of Development Application No. 0825/20 for a subdivision at Lots 377 and 368 in DP 752817, 84 Hood Street and 67 Mildura Street, Coffs Harbour.

At its meeting of 12 October 2017, Council adopted the ‘Development Applications - Consideration by Council Policy’, which outlined:

That development applications for approval involving substantial aspects of the following elements be referred to Council for determination:

-     Significant public interest and community input;

-     A proposed variation to the Local Environmental Plan that varies from the development standard by more than 10%;

-     Significant land use; and

-     Major environmental issues.

The development application is reported to Council for determination because it proposes to vary a development standard in the Local Environmental Plan by more than 10%.

 

Recommendation:

That Council:

1.       Support the request to vary a development standard made pursuant to Clause 4.6 of Coffs Harbour Local Environmental Plan 2013 for the variation to the minimum subdivision lot size under clause 4.1 of Coffs Harbour Local Environmental Plan 2013 in this particular case.

2.       Approve Development Application No. 0825/20 for a subdivision at Lots 377 and 368 in DP 752817, 84 Hood Street and 67 Mildura Street, Coffs Harbour, subject to the conditions in Attachment 3.

 

REPORT:

Applicant:

Mr T & Mrs A Merrick

Landowner:

Mr TF & Mrs AP Merrick and Mr AE & Ms TP Johnson 

Land:

Lots 377 and 368 DP 758817, 84 Hood Street and 67 Mildura Street, Coffs Harbour

Zone:

R3 - Medium Density Residential 

Description:

Subdivision (Boundary Adjustment)

Description of Item:

•     The Site

The site is legally described as Lots 377 and 368 in DP 758817. Lot 377 has frontage to an unformed Crown reserve to the north west, is rectangular in shape and comprises an area of approximately 935.8m². Lot 368 has frontage to Mildura Street (a Council maintained road) to the south east, is rectangular in shape and compromises an area of 1,005m². Adjoining land to the south east and north east comprises a mix of residential development and public land containing outdoor recreational facilities.

The land is zoned R3 – Medium Density Residential with a minimum lot size of 1,200m² under the Coffs Harbour Local Environmental Plan 2013

Lot 377 and Lot 368 are each currently developed with a single dwelling house.

•     The Development

The development involves the subdivision of two existing Torrens title lots, by altering the area and common boundary between the two lots.  The subdivision will result in proposed Lot 1 to contain the existing dwelling located in Lot 377, comprising an area of 633.5m² and proposed Lot 2 to contain the existing dwelling located in Lot 368, comprising an area of 1,310m².

A variation to the 1,200m² minimum subdivision lot size development standard is sought for proposed Lot 1.

Issues:

The main assessment issue for the proposed development is variation to the minimum lot size development standard

This issue is detailed in the Section 4.15 Evaluation Report as Attachment 1 to this report.

Options:

1.   Adopt the recommendation thereby granting approval to the application, subject to conditions.

2.   Refuse the application and list reasons for refusal.

Sustainability Assessment:

•     Environment

A complete assessment of potential environmental impacts is provided in the Section 4.15 Evaluation Report as Attachment 1 to this report.

•     Social

A complete assessment of potential social impacts is provided in the Section 4.15 Evaluation Report as Attachment 1 to this report.

•     Civic Leadership

The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the ‘MyCoffs Community Strategic Plan’ particularly the ‘A Place for Community’ theme, which requires amongst other things that development occur in a way that is environmentally, socially and economically responsible.

•     Economic – Broader Economic Implications

The proposed development is not expected to result in any significant broader economic implications.

•     Economic - Delivery Program/Operational Plan Implications

There are no implications for Council’s Delivery Program/adopted Operational Plan.

Risk Analysis:

A risk analysis has been undertaken and it is considered that approval of the development application as recommended, does not pose a significant risk to Council.

Consultation:

In accordance with the provisions of Councils Community Participation and Engagement Plan, the application was notified to nearby and adjoining landowners with an opportunity to provide a submission from 16 June 2020 to 30 June 2020. There were no submissions received during the public exhibition period.

Related Policy, Precedents and / or Statutory Requirements:

The statutory instruments relevant to the development include the following:

-    Coffs Harbour Local Environmental Plan 2013

-    Coffs Harbour Development Control Plan 2015

-     State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

-     State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land

Implementation Date / Priority:

In the event that Council adopts the recommendation, a formal notice of determination will be issued for the development application. A formal notice of determination is valid for five years and the applicant can act on the development consent at any time within that period, subject to meeting any relevant conditions of the consent.

Conclusion:

A comprehensive assessment of the application has been undertaken in accordance with all statutory requirements and it is recommended that the application be approved subject to a number of standard conditions (Attachment 3).

 

 


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


SI20/15         Engagement of Construction Project Management Services for the West Woolgoolga Sports Complex Project

Author:                        Director Sustainable Infrastructure

Authoriser:                  Director Sustainable Infrastructure

MyCoffs:                      D.1 Our leaders give us confidence in the future

Attachments:              Nil

 

Executive Summary

Council is currently proceeding at pace with the Detailed Design (Phase 1) of the West Woolgoolga Sports Complex Project prior to transitioning into Construction (Phase 2) in the near future. Due to the compressed nature of the timeframes within which this project has necessarily been undertaken there will, in the very near future, be some overlap between the two phases.

The detailed design of the Project (Phase 1) has to date been delivered by consultant project manager APP, via an engagement under a contract issued consequent to a tender offered by Council.

The Project’s financing is underpinned by significant external grant funding. A number of grant-related conditions have dictated a regime of strict compliance to time-bound delivery targets and a reliance on external (to Council) project resources including the consultant Project Manager. The combination of rigid grant milestones which must be met in order to safeguard compliance with grant commitments, the upcoming overlap of Project phases, and the future necessity to appoint a further external project manager for the upcoming Phase 2 (Construction) present an extreme risk to the Project.

The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council utilise the provisions of s55 (3) of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) for the continued engagement of project management resource APP into Phase 2 of the Project because of the existence of extenuating circumstances, as identified in this report, which meet the requirements of s55 (3) of the Act in this specific case.

This report details the scope and the allowable application of s55 (3) of the Act, and outlines the extenuating circumstances which apply in the case of the procurement of Project Management services for Construction (Phase 2)  of the West Woolgoolga Sports Complex Project.

 

Recommendation:

That Council:

1.       Note that Detailed Design (Phase 1) of the West Woolgoolga Sports Complex Project is being delivered under the leadership of a consultant project manager.

2.       Note that highly significant risks to the West Woolgoolga Sports Complex Project will arise unless there is continuity of project management leadership into the Construction (Phase 2) of the Project.

3.       Note that the specific circumstances as described above, and as expanded upon in the body of this report, constitute ‘extenuating circumstances’ in accordance with provisions in s55 (3) (i) of the Local Government Act 1993.

4.       Note the advice in this report that a satisfactory result would not be achieved by inviting tenders for project management resources.

5.       Delegate authority to the General Manager to directly deal with consultant project management provider APP and other parties if required with the aim of concluding an engagement for the Construction (Phase 2) of the West Woolgoolga Sports Complex Project.

6.       Note that negotiations with all parties will be conducted in accordance with the Independent Commission Against Corruption ”Direct negotiations: Guidelines for managing risk (August 2018)” and the Coffs Harbour City Council Procurement Policy.

 

Report

Description of Item:

Council’s adoption of the 19/20 Operational Plan and Delivery Program in June 2019 had the effect of opening the Detailed Design (Phase 1) of the West Woolgoolga Sports Complex (WWSC) Project. As a component of Project initiation, Council tendered a contract for Project Management Services and consequently appointed APP to that role. Given that only the Detailed Design (Phase 1) of the WWSC Project was funded at that time, APP’s commission was necessarily limited to that component only.

 

Since that time Council has received further significant funding which is now sufficient to execute Construction (Phase 2) of the Project. Council now needs to consider the appointment of external Project Management resources for Phase 2.

 

Council would be aware that the WWSC Project has been accelerated within a very compressed timeframe as a result of unexpected grant funding being offered. To date the risks associated with accelerated delivery have been effectively controlled via the appointment of external project management resources via a public tender engagement process.

 

At the time of commissioning this Project Council was in receipt of grant funding sufficient only for the Detailed Design phase of the Project. Further funding enabling construction became available only at a later date. APP’s original commission and engagement with the Project will cease with the completion of the Phase 1 (Detailed Design). In the normal course of events Council would be placing a new open tender to seek a Project Manager for the critical Construction (Phase 2) in order to complete the WWSC Project.

 

This next phase of the Project will entail the necessary and ongoing management of project risks, which generally comprise the commonly encountered project risk areas of Time, Cost and Quality. There are however several risks in the WWSC Project which will be specifically elevated beyond normal levels.

 

Specific Risk One: In the specific case of the WWSC Project an identified area of extreme project risk arises during Phase 2 (Construction) due to the strict time and delivery targets set by the funding bodies in their offered agreements. A failure to effectively manage the timely completion of these construction milestones carries an elevated risk of breaching several elements of the funding agreements, with a potential consequent loss of grant funding.

 

Specific Risk Two: A further significant Project Risk to be managed during Phase 2 (Construction) is the risk that the Detailed Design of all individual project elements are seamlessly translated into the final, comprehensive and complete physical complex. Any delay in the transition from Phase 1 to Phase 2 will add a further major risk to the timing of the delivery of the Project which will also put existing grant funding at risk.

 

Specific Risk Three: Due to the necessarily highly compressed delivery timeframe for the WWSC Project, the initiation of construction (Phase 2) will precede the actual completion of detailed design (Phase 1). As a result, the construction of some elements will begin prior to all detailed design tasks being finalised on other elements.

 

The standard process of tendering for a replacement Project Management resource for Phase 2 (Construction) may result in having two separate project management resources from different companies concurrently managing two separate bodies of work (Detailed Design, and Construction) on the same Project at the same time. This outcome is not optimal, creates the opportunity for conflict, and would certainly complicate the usual knowledge transfer (handover) process between the two parties during a clean transition from the design phase to the construct phase. Given both Phases will necessarily overlap because of the accelerated delivery of the WWSC Project, the potential of this risk is further elevated in this specific case.

 

This report therefore recommends that the appropriate course of action to effectively mitigate the Specific Project Risks detailed above is to maintain the continuity of APP’s involvement with the Project into Phase 2 in preference to placing an open tender for replacement resources to the market.

Issues:

Project Risk

 

In terms of Council’s Project Risk Framework, the key issues can be described as follows:

There is an assessed extreme Project Risk that a change of Project Management resource at this point in the WWSC Project will result in the following impacts which would be detrimental to the Project’s targeted Time, Cost and Quality Outcomes:

 

-     Additional Project Delivery Time Would Be Required – The selection of a new project delivery team will impact on the existing project delivery schedule due to the requirement that a significant amount of additional time would need to be consumed as the Project Board inducts the new players into the design detail, background, and history. This risk elevates the potential of breaching the time-bound outcomes inherent in the grant funding agreements.

 

-     Additional Project Costs Would Be Incurred - Significant staff and Project Board time would be required to re-brief/communicate design and functional requirements as described above to a replacement project manager. This would impact as a risk of additional project costs and as an elevated risk that design and functional requirements are not delivered smoothly.

 

-     Lower Project Quality Achievement – The integrity inherent in the current detailed design would be compromised, and stakeholder/community expectations potentially impacted, as a result of the resulting disconnection of the core project team’s significant corporate knowledge from the Project at this stage.

 

The Tendering Provisions in the Local Government Act

 

1.   Sect 55 (1) of the Local Government 1993 provides generally that a council must undertake a tender process before entering into a contract for services valued at more than $250,000.

2.   Nevertheless, s55 (3) of the Act then provides a number of circumstances where a council is released from the necessity to comply with the s55 (1) requirement to tender.

3.   It is of interest that the number of circumstances listed in s55 (3) which release a council from the requirement to tender actually exceeds the number of circumstances in s55 (1) in which a council must tender.

4.   Amongst other things, S55 (3)(i) states that a Council is released from the s55 (1) requirement to tender when seeking to enter a contract: “…where, because of extenuating circumstances, remoteness of locality or the unavailability of competitive or reliable tenderers, a council decides by resolution (which states the reasons for the decision) that a satisfactory result would not be achieved by inviting tenders.”

5.   The inclusion of s55 (3) in the Act is an acknowledgment that the s55 (1) general requirement to tender, if allowed to operate without moderation for specific circumstances, can be detrimental to the actual targeted outcomes of effectiveness, efficiency and value-for-money that the Act envisages. These circumstances, if they arise, are referred to in the Act as “Extenuating Circumstances”.

6.   The use of the ‘Extenuating Circumstances’ provision in the Act has been tested at law in SOCARES Support Group Inc v Cessnock City Council [2012] NSWLEC 23 (SOCARES), where Her Honour Pain J found that: ‘the relevant test [ie. whether or not extenuating circumstances existed] is whether the Council was satisfied of a certain matter [ie. that extenuating circumstances did indeed exist] on the basis of the material before it’.

7.   The decision in SOCARES therefore operates so that if a council satisfies itself that the circumstances in the context of the proposed contract are extenuating the tendering provisions of the LG Act will not apply.

The decision in SOCARES effectively defines “extenuating circumstances” to be any circumstances which a council, by resolution, determines are ‘extenuating’ having considered the information on the matter as put before them.

Options:

1.   Council may adopt the recommendations. It is assessed that this course of action will provide a maximum of mitigation for the identified risks to the project.

 

2.   Council may decline to adopt the recommendation. It is assessed that this course of action will provide a minimum of mitigation for the identified risks to the project.

Sustainability Assessment:

•     Environment

This report has no environmental impact.

•     Social

This report has no social impact.

•     Civic Leadership

Council is empowered by the s55 provisions of the LG Act 1993 to consider and decide whether ‘extenuating circumstances’ exist in the specific case of the West Woolgoolga Sports Complex Project.

•     Economic – Broader Economic Implications

There are no broader economic implications which arise due to this report or its recommendations.

•     Economic - Delivery Program/Operational Plan Implications

The purpose of this report is to minimise and mitigate risks to the execution of the current Delivery Program and Operational Plan. The implications of not doing so are expanded upon in the Issues section of this report under the sub-heading “Project Risks”.

Risk Analysis:

The process of concluding engagements for project management or any other service via direct dealing requires appropriate risk mitigation measures to ensure that Council’s principles of fairness; impartiality; accountability; transparency; and value for money are met. In identifying the appropriate risk mitigation measures for those objectives Council is led by the Independent Commission Against Corruption’s issued guidelines for managing risk in direct dealings.

 

In this particular matter Council has an advantage in one key area of risk in that APP has already met the competitive tests for selection during the procurement for Phase One (Detailed Design) of the project and APP’s previously tendered rates are known.

Consultation:

Significant internal consultation with all relevant staff, and the Project Board, have been undertaken.

Related Policy, Precedents and / or Statutory Requirements:

•        Local Government Act 1993 (esp s55)

•        CHCC Procurement Policy

•        SOCARES Support Group Inc v Cessnock City Council [2012] NSWLEC 23 (SOCARES)

•        ICAC Direct Negotiations: Guidelines for managing risk (August 2018)

Implementation Date / Priority:

Immediate upon resolution.

Conclusion:

This report recommends that significant risks to the West Woolgoolga Sports Complex Project will arise unless there is a continuity of project management leadership in the remaining phase of the Project. The report therefore recommends that Council consider that the circumstances described in the body of this report constitute ‘extenuating circumstances’ in accordance with provisions in s55 (3) (i) of the Local Government Act 1993, and on that basis delegate authority to the General Manager to directly deal with APP with the aim of engaging APP for the final phase of the project.

This outcome will be achieved with a Resolution in accordance with the Recommendations as provided in this report.