Monday 22 March 2010 - District Council of Elliston - SA.Gov.au
Monday 22 March 2010 - District Council of Elliston - SA.Gov.au
Monday 22 March 2010 - District Council of Elliston - SA.Gov.au
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
The <strong>District</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
Waterloo Bay<br />
<strong>Monday</strong> <strong>22</strong> <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong><br />
<strong>Elliston</strong> <strong>Council</strong> Chambers
The <strong>District</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
Date: <strong>Monday</strong> <strong>22</strong> <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong><br />
Time: 9.30am<br />
Venue: <strong>Elliston</strong> <strong>Council</strong> Chambers<br />
........................................................<br />
Rob Gregor<br />
Chief Executive Officer<br />
AGENDA<br />
9.30am<br />
Welcome<br />
1 Public Question Time<br />
9.40am 2 Apologies<br />
9.45am 3 Confirmation <strong>of</strong> Minutes<br />
That the minutes <strong>of</strong> the Ordinary Meeting held on the <strong>22</strong> February <strong>2010</strong><br />
and the special meeting minutes held on the 15 February <strong>2010</strong> as<br />
circulated and tabled in the minute book be taken as read and<br />
confirmed.<br />
9.50am 4 Conflict <strong>of</strong> Interest<br />
Elected Member and Officers Declaration <strong>of</strong> matters that may constitute<br />
Conflict <strong>of</strong> Interest, in relation to the Agenda business <strong>of</strong> this meeting.<br />
5 Business Arising from Minutes<br />
Rates Exemption Request<br />
That <strong>Council</strong> <strong>au</strong>thorise the write <strong>of</strong>f <strong>of</strong> rates amounting to $269.10 on<br />
Assessment Number 93 70435504, being allotment 3 Railway Terrace,<br />
Lock due to the property being exempt from rates pursuant to the<br />
Railways (Operation & Access) Act 1997.<br />
195.2009 That the motion lay on the table, until further investigation on<br />
use <strong>of</strong> the land is undertaken.<br />
Cr Hancock /Cr Hitchcock<br />
CARRIED<br />
TV Tower Fund update<br />
437.2009 That the <strong>Council</strong> <strong>au</strong>thorises the CEO to respond to Mrs<br />
Cooper’s enquiry with the information from the agenda and the <strong>Council</strong><br />
instructs the CEO to arrange the necessary calculation to refund the<br />
balance <strong>of</strong> accumulated TV Reserve Fund based on pro-rata <strong>of</strong> each<br />
individual’s contribution and conduct a postal survey among <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
resident in order to understand their preference on whether:-<br />
1) The resident (users) shall opt for refund <strong>of</strong> accumulated TV<br />
Tower Reserve fund.<br />
2) The resident shall agree to close down <strong>of</strong> Bramfield TV Tower<br />
Operation from next Financial Year.
The <strong>Council</strong> directs on the Survey methodology and suggests the<br />
following points:-<br />
1) Survey letter should go to TV Levy payers only.<br />
2) Methods <strong>of</strong> the Survey – By Post.<br />
3) Draft survey to be presented in the <strong>Council</strong> meeting.<br />
Cr Hancock / Cr Seaman<br />
CARRIED<br />
6 Rescinding <strong>of</strong> Resolution<br />
Nil<br />
7 Motion with Notice<br />
Nil<br />
10.00am 8 Environmental Development Assessment Manager Report<br />
10.30 am Morning Tea<br />
Information and Action<br />
• Delegated Powers<br />
• Revised Costal Development Plan Amendment<br />
• Better Development Plan <strong>Council</strong> Review<br />
• <strong>Elliston</strong> Links Land Management Agreement, Recommendation for<br />
section 90 Briefing<br />
Information Only<br />
• Venus Bay Public Toilets – Section 41 Committee<br />
• N & D May – Development Application<br />
• Election Commission <strong>SA</strong><br />
That the Environmental Development Assessment Manager’s Report as<br />
printed in the Agenda, circulated and tabled be accepted<br />
10.45am 9 Works Co-ordinator Report<br />
Information and Action<br />
• Road Rubble Authorisation for Sheringa Beach Road<br />
• Purchase <strong>of</strong> New Works Ute Pre-budget<br />
• Letter from the Lions Club <strong>of</strong> Lock Inc. Seeking Permission to<br />
Undertake Maintenance at the Lock Cemetery<br />
• Draft Dog Registration Fee Schedule<br />
• Level Crossing Black Spot Funding<br />
• Fire Prevention<br />
For Information Only<br />
• Dog Pound / Management Audit<br />
• Letter from Mrs A Evans regarding Street Signage in <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
• Letter from Cr Ross Seaman Expressing Concerns at the Repairs<br />
carried out to the Venus Bay Jetty Groin<br />
• Port Kenny Public Toilets<br />
• Letter from ECIC regarding Damage to Chairs<br />
• Letter from Liz Penfold MP regarding the Width <strong>of</strong> the Tod<br />
Highway between Karkoo and Kyancutta<br />
• Letter from Brett Pearce for KT & JL Pearce Proposing Co-funding<br />
for Road Re-sheeting<br />
• Palkagee Road<br />
• Car Park Alterations
• Grader Warranty Repairs<br />
• Road Program January <strong>2010</strong><br />
• Letters and Correspondence<br />
Reports Attached<br />
• Road Construction Expenditure<br />
- Resheeting<br />
• Road Maintenance – Grading & Other<br />
• Flood Damage Road Repairs<br />
• R2R Projects<br />
That the Works Co-ordinator Report, as printed in the Agenda,<br />
circulated and tabled, be accepted.<br />
11.15am 10<br />
Relieving Deputy CEO Report’s<br />
Action Items<br />
• Street Numbering Policy – Draft<br />
• <strong>Elliston</strong> Street Numbers<br />
• Responsible Officers for Clubs (volunteer, non-pr<strong>of</strong>it or otherwise)<br />
• Occupational Health Safety & Welfare and Risk Management<br />
• Relieving DCEO Report<br />
11.30pm 11<br />
That the Reliving Deputy CEO’s, as printed in the Agenda, circulated<br />
and tabled, be accepted.<br />
Corporate Services Manager Report<br />
Information and Action<br />
• Time Capsule for New LGA Premises<br />
• Application from <strong>Elliston</strong> Progress & Tourism Association (EPTA)<br />
Information Only<br />
• Financial Help for <strong>Council</strong> “Local <strong>Gov</strong>ernment Disaster Fund –<br />
Circular 5.2”<br />
• Inclusion <strong>of</strong> Corporate Services Manager’s Position in the<br />
Contract, Tendering and Purchase Policy as Sub-delegation<br />
• Letter received from <strong>Elliston</strong> Playground Steering Committee<br />
(EPSC)<br />
• Minutes from the Audit Committee Meeting<br />
• Eyre Peninsula Rate Survey<br />
• Fines & Interest for Port Kenny Water Supply<br />
• Final Budget figures after Budget Revision<br />
• Natural Resources Management(NRM) Levy Rate Equalisation<br />
Process<br />
• <strong>2010</strong> Strengthening EP Program<br />
• Election <strong>of</strong> Board Member for Australia Day <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>SA</strong><br />
• Proposed Extension <strong>of</strong> Water Main in Wookata Drive, <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
• Corporate Services Manager’s Report<br />
Reports Attached<br />
• Monthly Income Statement & Balance Sheet<br />
• Monthly Income & Expenditure by Function<br />
• Community Support Register<br />
That the Corporate Services Manager Report, as printed in the<br />
Agenda, circulated and tabled, be accepted.<br />
12.30pm<br />
LUNCH BREAK
1.30pm 12 Chief Executive Officers Report<br />
Information and Action<br />
• Progress <strong>of</strong> Regional Development Board (RDA) Funding<br />
Agreement<br />
• Lock & <strong>District</strong>s Heritage Museum - Results <strong>of</strong> Public Opinion<br />
Survey<br />
• Application for Extension <strong>of</strong> Licensed Area at the <strong>Elliston</strong> Sports<br />
Centre<br />
• Wirangu (2) Native Title Claim<br />
Information Only<br />
• Centrex Mining – Update<br />
• OHS – Introduction <strong>of</strong> the One System Policies<br />
• OHS – A Sign <strong>of</strong> Good Sense<br />
• <strong>Elliston</strong> Stormwater Upgrade<br />
• D & N May – Complaint regarding the Processing <strong>of</strong> Development<br />
Application -933/011/10<br />
• <strong>Council</strong>lor Seaman – E Mail regarding Cost and Process Used for<br />
Undertaking an Independent Efficiency Assessment<br />
• Venus Bay Caravan Park<br />
• Port Kenny – Proposed Brackish Water Desalination Trial<br />
• Contingency Planning<br />
That the Chief Executive Officers Report, as printed in the Agenda,<br />
circulated and tabled, be accepted.<br />
2.15pm 13 Chairman’s Report<br />
14 Petitions<br />
Nil<br />
15 Tenders / Expression <strong>of</strong> Interests<br />
Nil<br />
2.25pm 16 Questions with Notice<br />
Nil<br />
17 Questions without Notice<br />
2.35pm 18 Other Business<br />
3.10pm 19 Date <strong>of</strong> Next Meeting<br />
3.15pm 20 Closure
The <strong>District</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
Environmental Development Assessment<br />
Managers Report<br />
To <strong>Council</strong> Meeting<br />
ACTION & INFORMATION<br />
<strong>22</strong> nd <strong>March</strong> 2009<br />
Delegated Powers<br />
Moved Cr. xxx, Seconded Cr. xxx that the development applications as approved by the<br />
Environmental & Development Assessment Manager, in accordance to Section 20 <strong>of</strong> the Development<br />
Act, 1993 as amended, be ratified by <strong>Council</strong>.<br />
Development Applicant Address Development<br />
Number<br />
933/020/10 WL & MB Williams & Sons Sec 91S, Hd <strong>of</strong> Colton <strong>SA</strong> 5670 Implement Shed<br />
P/L<br />
933/023/10 Gary Manners 28 Sixth Street, <strong>Elliston</strong> <strong>SA</strong> 5670 Hobby Craft Shed<br />
933/011/10 N & D May Sec 148 Hd <strong>of</strong> Ward, <strong>Elliston</strong> <strong>SA</strong> Kitchen & Bathroom<br />
5670<br />
Renovations<br />
933/013/10 C & T Fleming Lot 50 Sixth St, <strong>Elliston</strong> <strong>SA</strong> 5670 Cut & Fill <strong>of</strong> Allotment<br />
933/009/10 L Pryor Lt 101 Sixth St, <strong>Elliston</strong> <strong>SA</strong> 5670 Residential Dwelling<br />
933/018/10 Dahlitz Constructions P/L<br />
Daniel Robinson<br />
Lt 50 Chintabie St, <strong>Elliston</strong> <strong>SA</strong><br />
5670<br />
933/025/10 Dahlitz Constructions P/L Lt 50 Chintabie St, <strong>Elliston</strong> <strong>SA</strong><br />
Daniel Robinson<br />
5670<br />
933/017/10 C & J Palmer 45 Flinders Hwy, Port Kenny <strong>SA</strong><br />
5671<br />
Garage<br />
Shed<br />
Garage<br />
Revised Coastal Development Plan Amendment<br />
The revised Coastal Development Plan Amendment report including EDAM’s responses is in the<br />
February <strong>2010</strong> EDAM agenda report due to this item being placed on the table at the February <strong>22</strong> nd<br />
<strong>2010</strong> <strong>Council</strong> meeting. – Please refer to the Feb 10 report.<br />
Recommendation: From the February <strong>2010</strong> Agenda<br />
That the <strong>District</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Elliston</strong> adopts this Report on the Principles & Objectives <strong>of</strong> Development<br />
Control for the Coastal Conservation Zone, Coastal Open Space Zone and the Coastal mixed Use<br />
zone as presented by EDAM and further more:<br />
a) instructs Edam to re-assess the Better Development Plan as presented by Planning <strong>SA</strong> to<br />
ensure that <strong>Council</strong>’s amendments have been adequately included; and<br />
b) Complete the assessment <strong>of</strong> all <strong>of</strong> the coastal mapping to ensure that <strong>Council</strong> obtains the best<br />
result on all land adjacent to the coast to meet its legally existing uses.<br />
Following its receipt and review <strong>of</strong> the additional information, the <strong>Council</strong> will then formalise its position<br />
regarding the acceptance or otherwise <strong>of</strong> Planning <strong>SA</strong>’s most recent proposals.
Better Development Plan <strong>Council</strong> Review<br />
This report is to advise the <strong>Council</strong> that EDAM has reviewed the whole <strong>of</strong> the Better Development<br />
Plan (BDP) as presented by Planning <strong>SA</strong>. The BDP process has also included the three coastal<br />
areas/zones. (Coastal Conservation, Coastal Open Space and the Coastal Mixed used zones)<br />
It is important for <strong>Council</strong> to note that the mapping portion <strong>of</strong> the BDP as presented by Planning <strong>SA</strong> in<br />
conjunction with input from the Coastal Protection Authority has NOT BEEN COMPLETED.<br />
The reason for this is that it may take further onsite investigations to ensure that the proposed<br />
amendments reflect with the previous instructions from the <strong>Council</strong>.<br />
The following Principles <strong>of</strong> Development Control will require further attention subject to the <strong>Council</strong><br />
agreeing with EDAM’s recommendation/proposals. To assist in this process, <strong>Council</strong>lors, could you<br />
please refer to the check list attached to this report.<br />
For simplicity the Red items require further attention by <strong>Council</strong>. All other items in Green do not<br />
require any further action.<br />
Page 51 - PDC 6 (a&b).<br />
This PDC relates to the development <strong>of</strong> “Battle Axe Type” land divisions. Other <strong>Council</strong>s on the Eyre<br />
Peninsula have generally agreed that this type <strong>of</strong> development creates further problems in the future<br />
due to the configuration <strong>of</strong> the allotments, such as:-<br />
Access for emergency service vehicles;<br />
Overshadowing <strong>of</strong> buildings adjacent to the battle axe allotment. (especially when two or more<br />
storey’s buildings are constructed)<br />
Provisions <strong>of</strong> essential services to the proposed buildings;<br />
Lack <strong>of</strong> proper streets or thoroughfares provided by the developer;<br />
Conflict with adjoining land owners which then expect the <strong>Council</strong> to arbitrate or resolve;<br />
Dust and noise problems created when access roads are not properly surfaced;<br />
Disposal <strong>of</strong> stormwater and effluent generated by those allotments.<br />
Summary<br />
It is EDAM’s view that this type <strong>of</strong> residential development should not exist within any Residential<br />
Zone, regardless <strong>of</strong> the township within the DC <strong>Elliston</strong> area. To assist in the future assessment with<br />
this type <strong>of</strong> development it would be prudent that it be listed as a Non-Complying Development within<br />
all residential zones.<br />
Page 161 – Exemption.<br />
The exemption referred to above on p.161 is in relation to those townships or settlements which are<br />
currently within the Water Protection Zone.<br />
Summary<br />
The two areas <strong>of</strong> concern are the settlements <strong>of</strong> Sheringa and Bramfield as any development within<br />
those two settlements will require additional consultation with the Natural Resources Management<br />
Board under the relevant Legislation. For example, for an addition to an existing dwelling it will require<br />
further consultation with NRM, incur additional costs to the applicant and create further delays up to<br />
six weeks prior to <strong>Council</strong> delivering its development decision.<br />
In addition to the above it would be prudent for <strong>Council</strong> to also include the gazetted township <strong>of</strong> Talia<br />
whilst reviewing this cl<strong>au</strong>se. The logic for including Talia settlement is to cater for future development<br />
<strong>of</strong> the area as land adjacent to the coast is becoming a scarce commodity.
Additional Amendments Required by the <strong>Council</strong>.<br />
The following proposal has been considered as an extension to the CEO’s report on a recent<br />
Development Application assessed by <strong>Council</strong> staff as a Category 1 Public Notification.<br />
A summary <strong>of</strong> the development process has already been provided by other staff, <strong>Council</strong>lors should<br />
now be aware <strong>of</strong> the complex system that is already in place. It is EDAM’s opinion that this Category<br />
(Cat 1) type <strong>of</strong> development has been inserted by the Minister <strong>of</strong> Planning via Planning <strong>SA</strong> during the<br />
development <strong>of</strong> the Primary Industry Planning Module. This Module dictates the set up and structure<br />
<strong>of</strong> each zone within all the <strong>Council</strong>s Development Plans including DC <strong>Elliston</strong>.<br />
Assessment staff are aware <strong>of</strong> the delays this c<strong>au</strong>ses to what is initially a very simple development<br />
application. We are also concerned on the additional costs which in most cases are borne by the<br />
applicant.<br />
The DC <strong>Elliston</strong> Development Plan dictates the following;-<br />
Public Notification<br />
56 Those kinds <strong>of</strong> development listed in Table Ell/1, 2 and 3, together with the following kinds <strong>of</strong><br />
development, are assigned as Category 1 Development in the Primary Industry Zone:<br />
Alterations and additions to existing development, other than existing development in the nature<br />
<strong>of</strong> intensive<br />
Summary<br />
As this is a Ministerial cl<strong>au</strong>se it would be prudent for the development assessment staff to discuss this<br />
matter with Planning <strong>SA</strong> to determine if the portion <strong>of</strong> the cl<strong>au</strong>se dealing with alteration and additions<br />
to residential dwellings can be deleted.<br />
The logic for this is as follows:-<br />
To prevent unnecessary delays for relatively simple Development Applications;<br />
To prevent additional costs to the applicant;<br />
Most types <strong>of</strong> these developments are only <strong>of</strong> a minor nature;<br />
Most types <strong>of</strong> these developments cannot be viewed from a public road or thoroughfare;<br />
Most types <strong>of</strong> these developments do not change the existing use <strong>of</strong> the buildings;<br />
Very seldom does <strong>Council</strong> receive an objection from an adjoining owner;<br />
Final Summary & Action Required<br />
The content <strong>of</strong> this report should be considered in conjunction with the previous development<br />
amendment reports and the addendum attached to those reports.<br />
As <strong>Council</strong>s Environmental Development Assessment Manager, I advise you that it is my opinion that<br />
<strong>Council</strong> has reached a reasonable compromise as to the Development Principles, Objectives and<br />
Desired Characters <strong>of</strong> the Better Development Plan (BDP) as presented by Planning <strong>SA</strong>.<br />
The compromises reached where either by varying the requirements <strong>of</strong> Planning <strong>SA</strong> to meet <strong>Council</strong>s<br />
needs or Planning <strong>SA</strong> clearly detailing the requirements <strong>of</strong> various pieces <strong>of</strong> Legislation which <strong>Council</strong><br />
had to meet.<br />
<strong>Council</strong>lors, you should all be fully aware that this does not include the mapping as presented by<br />
Planning <strong>SA</strong> and the Coast Protection Authority.<br />
In adopting this version <strong>of</strong> the Better Development Plan it will quite likely result in some loss to tourist<br />
accommodation or facilities and residential activities especially in the three coastal zones.<br />
The options available to the <strong>Council</strong> are to adopt this amended version now or wait until the whole <strong>of</strong><br />
the mapping assessment has been completed. It is my opinion that the BDP can be adopted now and<br />
<strong>Council</strong> staff can continue to work on the mapping process.
It should also be noted that if <strong>Council</strong> agree and adopts the BDP (excluding mapping) then staff will<br />
have to inform all concerned landowners in writing <strong>of</strong> the progress made up to date as you will be<br />
accepting the Planning <strong>SA</strong> compromise.<br />
OUTSTANDING MAPPING PROCESS<br />
The following items still require further investigations which relate to the mapping <strong>of</strong> the various zones<br />
<strong>of</strong> the <strong>Elliston</strong> Development Plan:-<br />
Coastal zoning boundaries;<br />
Building envelopes to existing dwellings;<br />
Coastal sand dunes;<br />
<strong>Council</strong> infrastructure mapping for example the Venus Bay Refuse Depot;<br />
Mapping <strong>of</strong> Venus Bay and Port Kenny bore fields;<br />
Recommendation:<br />
EDAM has provided four varying options for the <strong>Council</strong> to consider in relation to Adopting or<br />
Rejecting the Better Development Plan and the Zone Mapping presented by Planning <strong>SA</strong>, as follows;<br />
(1) (a) Adopt the Planning <strong>SA</strong> version <strong>of</strong> the Better Development Plan subject to the exclusion<br />
<strong>of</strong> the 3 following conditions;<br />
(i) The plan excludes all “Battleaxe” type <strong>of</strong> land division developments within the<br />
Zones where residential development is undertaken.<br />
(ii) The settlements <strong>of</strong> Sheringa and Bramfield and the gazetted township <strong>of</strong> Talia<br />
removed from the Water Protection Zone.<br />
(iii) The removal <strong>of</strong> the “Addition and Alterations to Existing Development” cl<strong>au</strong>se<br />
removed from Category 1, Public Notification which is currently within the<br />
Primary Industry Zone.<br />
(b) Reject all <strong>of</strong> the mapping proposed by Planning <strong>SA</strong> which still needs further clarification<br />
and investigation on the following items and instruct EDAM to pursue further reduction<br />
in the zoning which may benefit the Landholders, Stakeholders and the <strong>Council</strong>.<br />
(i) Coastal zoning boundaries;<br />
(ii) Building envelopes to existing dwellings;<br />
(iii) Coastal sand dunes;<br />
(iv) <strong>Council</strong> infrastructure mapping for example the Venus Bay Refuse Depot;<br />
(v) Mapping <strong>of</strong> Venus Bay and Port Kenny bore fields;<br />
(c) That the CEO notifies all Landholders, Stakeholders in writing that <strong>Council</strong> will be<br />
accepting the Planning <strong>SA</strong> Better Development Plan, with the above conditions.<br />
(2) Adopt the entire Better Development Plan present by Planning <strong>SA</strong> excluding all mapping<br />
and the CEO to notify all Landholders, Stakeholders in writing that the <strong>Council</strong> will be<br />
accepting the BDP and has excluded the mapping presented by Planning <strong>SA</strong>.<br />
(3) Adopt the entire Better Development Plan and the Zone mapping presented by Planning<br />
<strong>SA</strong>, which will then be required to be placed out for Public Consultation with the Community.<br />
(4) Adopt the entire Better Development Plan as presented by Planning <strong>SA</strong> and Reject the<br />
entire Zone mapping.<br />
PLEASE NOTE:<br />
If the <strong>Council</strong> rejects all <strong>of</strong> the Better Development Plan it may lead to the Minister for Planning and<br />
Local <strong>Gov</strong>ernment over ruling the <strong>District</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Elliston</strong> and developing a Ministerial Development<br />
Plan for the <strong>Elliston</strong> <strong>Council</strong>.
<strong>Elliston</strong> Links Land Management Agreement<br />
<strong>Council</strong> to discuss the solicitors briefing which has been provided to the <strong>Council</strong>lors in the Confidential<br />
Agenda in relation to the <strong>Elliston</strong> links Land Management Agreement.<br />
Recommendation for Section 90 Briefing<br />
That the <strong>Council</strong> orders the public to be excluded, with the exception <strong>of</strong> serving <strong>Council</strong>lors and senior<br />
administration staff (CEO and DCEO, CSM, EDAM & EDAM Trainee) to remain in the room during<br />
consideration <strong>of</strong> the items being presented on the basis that it will receive, discuss and consider<br />
information by way <strong>of</strong> reports in relation to matters <strong>of</strong> a confidential and commercial business nature, a<br />
Solicitors briefing and other matters that may result in future legal action.<br />
The <strong>Council</strong> is therefore satisfied that the principle that its meetings should be conducted in a place<br />
open to the public has been outweighed in relation to these matters by the need to keep the<br />
discussion, the reports, the briefing and supporting documentation confidential on the basis that it<br />
concerns sensitive and commercial in confidence material, therefore the briefing is to be undertaken<br />
utilising the provisions <strong>of</strong> Section 90 (2) <strong>of</strong> the Local <strong>Gov</strong>ernment Act 1999.<br />
INFORMATION ONLY<br />
Venus Bay Public Toilets – Section 41 Committee<br />
Please find attached a copy <strong>of</strong> the minutes from the recent Section 41 Committee meeting held on the<br />
7 th <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong> for the Venus Bay Toilet Project.<br />
Please also find attached a response which CSM and EDAM worked on in order to ensure that<br />
accounting / payment or planning delays are kept to a minimum.<br />
While these items may seem complex to the committee, they are required <strong>Council</strong> procedures /<br />
policies and if the Committee is willing to address them early on in the projects process, then no unnecessary<br />
delay will be c<strong>au</strong>sed by Administration, OH&S or Risk Management.<br />
N & D May – Development Application<br />
<strong>Council</strong> is advised that the Development Application lodged by N & D May was assessed in a proper<br />
and orderly fashion as per the requirements <strong>of</strong> the Development Act and the <strong>Council</strong>’s Development<br />
Plan. During all stages <strong>of</strong> the assessment process EDAM was informed <strong>of</strong> the ongoing progression<br />
and Joanne (EDAM trainee) clarified all the steps taken with EDAM prior to advising the May’s on<br />
each relevant stage. To assess the Application in any other format would place <strong>Council</strong> in a<br />
precarious position and render the proposed Development decision null and void.<br />
Assessment staff are very much aware <strong>of</strong> the process required and the length <strong>of</strong> time incurred for<br />
what generally is seen as a minor development. However, the process must be carried out to ensure<br />
that the <strong>Council</strong>’s decision can be defended in the Courts should the staff’s decision be challenged in<br />
the Environmental, Resources & Development Court.<br />
Joanne should be congratulated in the manner in which she dealt with the whole assessment process<br />
during my absence.<br />
Electoral Commission <strong>SA</strong><br />
Please find attached correspondence received from the Electoral Commission in relation to the<br />
removal <strong>of</strong> previous <strong>au</strong>tomatic enrolment provisions for the <strong>Council</strong> Elections. The LGA and the<br />
Electoral Commission are formulating an Information Package for all <strong>Council</strong>’s to use to assist and<br />
notify the electors that are not currently on the <strong>Council</strong>’s Voters Roll.<br />
Recommendation: That the Environmental Development Assessment Manager’s Report as printed<br />
in the Agenda, circulated and tabled be accepted.<br />
Joss Heinen<br />
Environmental Development<br />
Assessment Manager
The <strong>District</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
Works Coordinator’s Report<br />
INFORMATION AND ACTION<br />
To <strong>Council</strong> Meeting<br />
<strong>22</strong> nd <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong><br />
Road Rubble Authorisation for Sheringa Beach Road<br />
After extensive testing along the Sheringa Beach Road area no rubble has been found that meets the<br />
requirements <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Council</strong>s Road Infrastructure Policy, however samples taken from <strong>Council</strong>s previous pit<br />
indicate that it is close to meeting the standard required in <strong>Council</strong>s policy.<br />
A copy <strong>of</strong> the sample data has been provided and I seek <strong>Council</strong>’s direction on whether to use the rubble or<br />
to continue searching in areas further afield. Note: this will delay work schedules and costs will increase.<br />
Action: I seek <strong>Council</strong>s direction on this issue.<br />
Purchase <strong>of</strong> New Works Ute Pre-budget<br />
Replacement <strong>of</strong> the Works staff utility will be included in the <strong>2010</strong>/11 Budget as the replacement km have<br />
been reached, however as there is a 4 month waiting period for the vehicle I seek <strong>Council</strong>’s <strong>au</strong>thorisation to<br />
pre order now for delivery in July.<br />
Action: I seek <strong>Council</strong>’s <strong>au</strong>thorisation to pre order the new works ute to be included in the <strong>2010</strong>/11 budget.<br />
Letter from the Lions Club <strong>of</strong> Lock Inc. Seeking Permission to Undertake Maintenance at the Lock<br />
Cemetery<br />
The Lions Club <strong>of</strong> Lock have requested <strong>Council</strong>s permission to carry out repairs and maintenance at the<br />
Lock cemetery including: replace the rusting entrance gates, vegetation control and stabilising the Niche<br />
wall.<br />
Volunteer organisations such as the Lions Club provide a valuable service to the Community and I<br />
recommend that the subject to complying with all relevant OHS & W requirements the <strong>Council</strong> permit the<br />
Lions Club <strong>of</strong> Lock to carry out repairs and maintenance at the Lock Cemetery.<br />
They have also raised concerns regarding an unsightly property adjacent the cemetery, an inspection <strong>of</strong> the<br />
area will be conducted by the Environmental Development Officer and the result placed before <strong>Council</strong> for<br />
their consideration<br />
I have contacted Mr John Pearce the Clubs secretary and provided advice with regard to the broad<br />
changes to the OHS & W Legislation and the implications <strong>of</strong> increased OHS scrutiny from Safe-work <strong>SA</strong><br />
and the major documentation changes with the introduction <strong>of</strong> the extremely detailed “One System OHS<br />
Policy”. (refer to CEO report)<br />
<strong>Council</strong> is required under the legislation to ensure all staff, contractors and Volunteers meet the criteria with<br />
appropriate training, work practices and procedures.<br />
As the Lock Loins Club is an incorporated organisation it would be required to provide insurance for its<br />
members and they would be treated as an organisation rather than <strong>Council</strong> volunteers with both parties<br />
engaging into a formal relationship identifying the roles <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Council</strong> and <strong>of</strong> the Club.
The Club is required to carry out all work in compliance with the relevant OHS & W policies including<br />
appropriate licences for any equipment being used, correct PPE (Protective Clothing), show evidence <strong>of</strong><br />
appropriate training or relevant qualifications for the work to be undertaken and appropriate manual<br />
handling training etc.<br />
The club would need to appoint a suitable “Responsible Person” to be on site at all times and to be<br />
responsible for the work undertaken.<br />
<strong>Council</strong> staff will be required to carry out a Hazard assessment with the Responsible Person and ensure<br />
ongoing monitoring <strong>of</strong> the project.<br />
Recommendation: That the <strong>District</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Elliston</strong> permit the Lions Club <strong>of</strong> Lock Inc. to carry out<br />
repairs and maintenance at the Lock Cemetery subject to complying with all relevant OHS & W<br />
requirements and the implementation <strong>of</strong> a formal agreement between the <strong>Council</strong> and the Club regarding<br />
the details <strong>of</strong> the proposed works.<br />
Draft Dog Registration Fee Schedule<br />
Please find attached letter from the Dog and Cat Management Board in regards to dog registration fee<br />
schedules for the <strong>2010</strong>-2011 registration period. The board requires <strong>Council</strong>s decision on weather they<br />
intend to increase the fees or remain at the current level.<br />
The <strong>Council</strong>’s current Dog Registration Fees are provided with a maximum fee <strong>of</strong> $40.00 for a General Dog<br />
Registration.<br />
Action: I seek <strong>Council</strong>’s direction on this matter.<br />
Level Crossing Black Spot Funding<br />
DTEI is seeking nominations for level crossing black spot funding, <strong>Council</strong> may be eligible to apply for this<br />
funding however the criteria has not been evaluated and I seek <strong>Council</strong>s direction on whether they wish<br />
staff to investigate the funding program further to see if DC <strong>Elliston</strong> can access this funding .<br />
Action: I seek <strong>Council</strong>’s direction on this matter.<br />
Fire Prevention<br />
Recent Fire Prevention discussions regarding the new Fire Management Committees indicates that these<br />
committees will decide the appropriate Fire Prevention measures and advise <strong>Council</strong>s <strong>of</strong> their obligations<br />
with regard to those activities, including the maintenance <strong>of</strong> Fire access tracks.<br />
The new Committees are not yet in place but the CFS has indicated that they will be formalised prior to the<br />
Fire danger season this year and whilst it is not yet clear <strong>of</strong> the impact the committees decisions will have<br />
on <strong>Council</strong> budgets I seek <strong>Council</strong>s direction on providing a courtesy advice to the CFS outlining <strong>Council</strong>s<br />
budget process and <strong>of</strong> the timeframes for requesting budget funding.<br />
Note: Fire track maintenance has not been included in the current Fire prevention budget.<br />
Action: I seek <strong>Council</strong>’s direction on this matter.<br />
INFORMATION ONLY<br />
Dog Pound/ Management Audit<br />
In 2009 an <strong>au</strong>dit <strong>of</strong> <strong>Council</strong>s Dog management practices and Pound inspection was carried out by the Dog<br />
and Cat management Board.<br />
A copy <strong>of</strong> the <strong>au</strong>dit findings and recommendations has been included for <strong>Council</strong>s information.
Letter from Mrs A Evans regarding Street Signage in <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
Mrs Evans has written to the <strong>Council</strong> advising <strong>of</strong> some missing street signs in <strong>Elliston</strong> and <strong>of</strong> the difficulty <strong>of</strong><br />
locating house numbers.<br />
<strong>Council</strong> has a street numbering program underway with <strong>au</strong>diting currently in <strong>Elliston</strong>, the process includes<br />
inspecting each property to ascertain the frontage, the end result will provide correctly allocated numbers<br />
for all properties in the <strong>Elliston</strong> town ship and adjacent residential areas.<br />
With regards to the street signs, an <strong>au</strong>dit was immediately carried out to determine the locations needing<br />
additional signs, approximately 30 signs are required in various locations throughout the township area.<br />
The signage has been ordered however please refer to the CEO’s report highlighting the ongoing budget<br />
implications.<br />
Letter from Cr Ross Seaman Expressing Concerns at the Repairs carried out to the Venus Bay Jetty<br />
Groin.<br />
Mr Seaman’s expressed concern at the size <strong>of</strong> the rubble used to backfill a large eroded hole in the groin at<br />
the start <strong>of</strong> the Venus bay Jetty.<br />
Mr Seaman’s letter was forwarded to DETI Marine division and a copy <strong>of</strong> the correspondents has been<br />
included, but further details could not be obtained as the DTEI contact has been on sick leave.<br />
Port Kenny Public Toilets<br />
Recently the Port Kenny toilet facilities water usage has increased significantly and some repairs have<br />
been carried out to reduce water leaks including the unbudgeted replacement <strong>of</strong> three cisterns, in view <strong>of</strong><br />
the age <strong>of</strong> the facilities other components will also require replacing, however it is feasible that water other<br />
than that used for toilet flushing or hand washing could have been taken.<br />
While the old Port Kenny Water system provided fluctuating low pressure the new water system provides<br />
constant and increased pressure and some <strong>of</strong> the old fittings have subsequently failed.<br />
Letter from ECIC regarding Damage to Chairs<br />
The ECIC provided chairs for the Australia Day celebrations and while it is disappointing that some chairs<br />
sustained damage it is not entirely unusual for this type <strong>of</strong> seating to break from time to time especially<br />
when members <strong>of</strong> the public assist with stacking.<br />
The damaged chairs will be replaced and we thank the ECIC for providing the seating free <strong>of</strong> charge for this<br />
community event.<br />
Letter from Liz Penfold MP regarding the Width <strong>of</strong> the Tod Highway between Karkoo and Kyancutta<br />
Please find attached correspondence received from Liz Penfold MP including a copy <strong>of</strong> the Hon Minister<br />
Patrick Conlon’s response with regard to the width <strong>of</strong> the Tod Highway.<br />
Minister Conlon has advised Mrs Penfold MP that an upgrade is not currently planned for the northern end<br />
<strong>of</strong> the Tod Highway due to its low traffic volumes<br />
At its last ordinary meeting in February <strong>Council</strong> directed that a letter be sent to the Wudinna <strong>District</strong> <strong>Council</strong><br />
in support <strong>of</strong> their letter to the Department for Transport Energy & Infrastructure expressing concerns<br />
regarding the safety on sections <strong>of</strong> the Tod highway between Kyancutta and Karkoo.<br />
Letter from Mr Brett Pearce for KT and JL Pearce Proposing Co-funding for Road Re-sheeting<br />
Mr Pearce is requesting that <strong>Council</strong> consider re-sheeting a 4 km section <strong>of</strong> Dearman Road in a co funding<br />
arrangement in the upcoming budget.
Dearman Road is classed as a Cat 4 road and <strong>Council</strong>s policy states that Category 4 roads serve only as<br />
access to private property and have limited formation.<br />
They provide direct access to farms, private organisations or other private business premises for the<br />
movement <strong>of</strong> plant and machinery and they need not be all weather roads, Cat 4 roads are generally<br />
maintained to the following standards;<br />
• 0-1grades per year<br />
• Minimal attention (no re-sheeting target, 20 year useful life).<br />
• <strong>Council</strong> will pay 50% <strong>of</strong> maintenance costs up to a total <strong>of</strong> $6000/km for maintaining Category 4<br />
roads (property access roads) that are due for renewal in a particular year, with property owners<br />
to pay the balance <strong>of</strong> costs incurred when renewing the roads subject to the annual budget<br />
process.<br />
This road will be provided for <strong>Council</strong>s consideration as a co funded category 4 road in the upcoming<br />
budget process and Mr Pearce has been advised <strong>of</strong> the process.<br />
Palkagee Road<br />
Surface damage has occurred on the Eastern end <strong>of</strong> Palkagee Road due to recent movements <strong>of</strong> trucks<br />
transporting Gypsum, <strong>Council</strong> was advised <strong>of</strong> the damage occurring on the road by a member <strong>of</strong> the public<br />
and contacted the operations manager immediately to reassess the routes available to the carriers and a<br />
suitable alternate route was advised to the drivers which has reduced the volumes on Palkagee Rd.<br />
After the recent rainfall <strong>Council</strong>’s patrol grader carried out grading on the road to repair the surface.<br />
Car Park Alterations<br />
The alterations to the car parking areas on Little Bay Rd and the Venus Bay cliffs is almost complete, work<br />
will begin at other coastal areas in the coming weeks.<br />
Please be advised that several <strong>of</strong> the large boulders placed at the Little Bay car park area have been<br />
relocated by members <strong>of</strong> the public to gain access to the cliff edge with vehicles, these areas will be<br />
repaired with lager boulders and at additional expense.<br />
Grader Warranty Repairs<br />
Warranty repairs to repair a f<strong>au</strong>lty fuel sender unit and leaking hub seal on the 770 John Deere Grader<br />
were carried out during a recent Works staff RDO by John Deere technicians at Lock.<br />
The 770 JD is now at the end <strong>of</strong> its 6000hr warranty period.<br />
Road Program January <strong>2010</strong><br />
Gantt chart attached.<br />
Construction on the No Where Else Road is almost completed; works will begin shortly on the Sheringa<br />
Beach Road.<br />
Reports Attached<br />
Road Construction Expenditure<br />
- Resheeting<br />
Road Maintenance – Grading & Other<br />
Flood Damage Road Repairs<br />
R2R Projects
Letters and Correspondence<br />
Letter From:<br />
Regarding:<br />
Response:<br />
Letter From:<br />
Regarding:<br />
Response:<br />
Letter From:<br />
Regarding:<br />
Response:<br />
Letter From:<br />
Regarding:<br />
Response:<br />
Letter From:<br />
Regarding:<br />
Response:<br />
Letter From:<br />
Regarding:<br />
Response:<br />
Lock Lions Club Inc<br />
Request for permission to undertake maintenance at Lock Cemetery<br />
Awaiting <strong>Council</strong> decision<br />
Andrea Evans<br />
Street signage in <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
Letter attached<br />
Ross Seaman<br />
Concerns at the repairs carried out to the Venus Bay Jetty groin<br />
Nil required<br />
ECIC<br />
Damage to chairs<br />
Nil<br />
Liz Penfold MP<br />
Width <strong>of</strong> Tod Highway<br />
Nil required<br />
Brett Pearce for KT and JL<br />
Proposing co-funding for road resheeting<br />
Letter attached<br />
Recommendation: That the Works Coordinator’s Report as printed in the Agenda, circulated and tabled<br />
be accepted.<br />
Wayne Scholz<br />
Works Coordinator
The <strong>District</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
Relieving Deputy CEO Report<br />
To <strong>Council</strong> Meeting<br />
<strong>22</strong> nd <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong><br />
ACTION ITEMS<br />
Street Numbering Policy – DRAFT<br />
Street numbering has been undertaken in Venus Bay and Port Kenny and a proposed system for<br />
<strong>Elliston</strong> is included in this report. One <strong>of</strong> the motivating factors for undertaking this task has been<br />
to identify properties to make it easier for emergency services (mainly ambulance but could be<br />
CFS & SES etc) to find the house/property. In the last few months there have been instances at<br />
Venus Bay and <strong>Elliston</strong> which highlighted the inadequacies <strong>of</strong> the current numbering system.<br />
A DRAFT Street Numbering Policy has been put together to assist in the future but to also help<br />
with the <strong>Elliston</strong> proposal (<strong>Elliston</strong> is a bit difficult due to house frontages on corners varying<br />
throughout the town).<br />
I recommend the Draft Policy be adopted prior to adopting the numbering system for <strong>Elliston</strong>.<br />
Recommendation: That <strong>Council</strong> adopts the Street Numbering Policy as presented in the Draft<br />
form.<br />
<strong>Elliston</strong> Street Numbers<br />
The street numbers in <strong>Elliston</strong> required a review, with some allotments in newer subdivisions not<br />
having been allocated a number and some inconsistencies in the rest <strong>of</strong> <strong>Elliston</strong>.<br />
<strong>22</strong>0—Numbering <strong>of</strong> adjacent premises and allotments<br />
(1) A council may adopt a numbering system for buildings and allotments adjoining a<br />
road.<br />
This is particularly important to ensure that emergency services such as ambulance(recently there<br />
was some confusion for the ambulance in <strong>Elliston</strong> in finding the correct address), CFS etc are able<br />
to find their desired location but it is also becoming increasingly important for landowners to be<br />
able to identify their residential property address for drivers licences, Telstra connections, Solar<br />
power subsidies etc.<br />
Pursuant to Section <strong>22</strong>0 (6) <strong>of</strong> the Local <strong>Gov</strong>ernment Act 1999 “an owner <strong>of</strong> land must, at the<br />
request <strong>of</strong> the council, ensure that the appropriate number for the owner’s building or allotment is<br />
displayed in a form directed or approved by the council”. I’m not suggesting that <strong>Council</strong> will want<br />
to enforce this sub-section <strong>of</strong> the Act but it would be nice if landowners did identify their properties<br />
with the relevant street number.<br />
Included in my Report are maps showing the proposed numbering system for <strong>Elliston</strong>. <strong>Council</strong><br />
may like to go out for community consultation on this or you may wish to adopt the numbering<br />
system as presented. I will point out that the numbers were allocated using the Draft Street<br />
Numbering Policy as a guide. There will be some property owners who may not like to have their<br />
current number changed (where possible they have remained the same) but it is really important to<br />
have a logical system in place.<br />
Recommendation:<br />
Option 1.<br />
That pursuant to Section <strong>22</strong>0 <strong>of</strong> the Local <strong>Gov</strong>ernment Act 1999, <strong>Council</strong> adopts the<br />
numbering system for <strong>Elliston</strong> township and adjoining residential areas as listed in the maps<br />
attached to the Relieving Deputy Chief Executive Officer’s Report for the <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong> <strong>Council</strong>
meeting. Administration be <strong>au</strong>thorised to formally advise all relevant landowners in writing <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>Council</strong>’s decision. In addition, Administration advise in writing the following<br />
<strong>au</strong>thorities/organisations;<br />
• Valuer-General<br />
• Australia Post<br />
• Australian Electoral Commission<br />
• Any other notification required by Statute or Regulation.<br />
• The Australian Gas Light Company (AGL)<br />
• ET<strong>SA</strong> Utilities<br />
• Origin Energy<br />
• Telstra<br />
• <strong>SA</strong> Water Corporation<br />
Option 2.<br />
That <strong>Council</strong> in accordance with <strong>Council</strong>’s Consultation Policy the Proposed Street Numbering<br />
System (as listed in the map attached to the Relieving Deputy Chief Executive Officer’s Report for<br />
the <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong> <strong>Council</strong> meeting) for <strong>Elliston</strong> township and adjacent residential areas be put out for<br />
community consultation.<br />
Responsible Officers – for Clubs (volunteer, non-pr<strong>of</strong>it or otherwise)<br />
Attached is a copy <strong>of</strong> correspondence received from Liz Penfold which she sent to the EPLGA<br />
(attachments to her letter include a letter from Port Neill Bowling Club with information received<br />
from Bowls <strong>SA</strong>). Bowls <strong>SA</strong> sent the information to all Bowls Associations which highlights a<br />
change <strong>of</strong> “heart” by Safe Work <strong>SA</strong> regarding Responsible Officers and volunteers and I quote<br />
from that advice:<br />
“Due to recent recommendations from Safe Work <strong>SA</strong> the Bowls <strong>SA</strong> Memo sent to<br />
Clubs in July 2008 regarding Responsible Officers has been revised. The original advice<br />
from Safe Work <strong>SA</strong> indicated that not all clubs needed to be compliant as Volunteer Clubs<br />
were exempt (as they did not have any employees). This information has since been<br />
modified by Safe Work <strong>SA</strong> and now all Clubs in <strong>SA</strong> that carry on a business must comply”.<br />
Advice is available from the Safe Work <strong>SA</strong> website www.safework.sa.gov.<strong>au</strong><br />
However, just a couple <strong>of</strong> points worth noting are:<br />
“There is a requirement under the Occupational Health, Safety and Welfare Act 1986<br />
that each body corporate that carries on business in South Australia must appoint one or<br />
more responsible <strong>of</strong>ficers for the purpose <strong>of</strong> this section – section61.”<br />
“What does carrying on a business mean?<br />
“This means that the organisation is conducting some form <strong>of</strong> business/trade in <strong>SA</strong>.<br />
For example an organisation that produces, sells or provides products or services for<br />
reward as part <strong>of</strong> its operations is likely to be conducting a business (including bar trade at a<br />
club).<br />
“We are a sporting/recreational organisation. Do we have to appoint a responsible<br />
<strong>of</strong>ficer?<br />
“The principal object <strong>of</strong> these organisations may be to foster a particular sport or<br />
hobby and provide social and recreational activities for its members. While that may be the<br />
principal reason for the organisation coming into existence, does it engage in any<br />
commercial activities that would mean it is carrying on a business? For example:<br />
- Does it <strong>of</strong>fer services such as coaching, training, and the use <strong>of</strong> its facilities and<br />
hold events where a fee is charged for non-members?<br />
- If the sporting body has a clubroom, do they sell alcohol and food to members as<br />
well as the general public?<br />
If the answer is yes, and these other activities are not insubstantial, then it may indicate that
the organisation is engaging in trading activities and therefore carrying on a business.”<br />
I’ve included this information to show the imposition being placed on volunteers and that it is not<br />
new. Volunteers <strong>of</strong> <strong>Council</strong> will be considered as employees and have the same rights and<br />
obligations as paid employees, including the need for them to be trained and have knowledge <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>Council</strong>’s OH&S policies and procedures (appropriate personal protective clothing etc, etc, etc).<br />
Recommendation: That <strong>Council</strong> note the information.<br />
Occupational Health Safety and Welfare and Risk Management<br />
The LGA Mutual Liability Scheme conducted an information session following the recent EPLGA<br />
Conference at Cowell. I understand the CEO attended with a <strong>Council</strong>lor. The new “One System”<br />
was again discussed with a number <strong>of</strong> CEOs voicing their concerns over the complexity <strong>of</strong> the<br />
system. It was made very clear that the system was developed to ensure it met the Safe Work <strong>SA</strong><br />
requirements and was not an “over kill” as being suggested by some CEOs and their staff.<br />
What it did highlight was that “One System” needs to be adopted as a matter <strong>of</strong> some urgency. It<br />
was pointed out to LGAMLS that it would take some time to have “One System” fully operational as<br />
most <strong>Council</strong>s don’t have sufficient human and financial resources. However, even though that<br />
may be the case the fact is that if <strong>Council</strong>s don’t adopt and use “One System” they will still have to<br />
do something very similar at the very least.<br />
To demonstrate the complexity and potential time to implement the system I’ve attached the OHS<br />
Contractor Management Policy and Procedures. It can be seen from these documents the extra<br />
requirements being applicable to contractors if they want to be considered for <strong>Council</strong> work.<br />
The Policies required are as follows and they all have procedures <strong>of</strong> varying complexities:<br />
- Hazard Management Policy<br />
- OHS Administration Policy<br />
- OHS Communication and Consultation Policy<br />
- Contractor Management Policy<br />
- Emergency Management Policy<br />
- Hazardous Work Policy<br />
At this stage some <strong>of</strong> the Procedures have been adopted by the OH&S Committee with others in<br />
Draft format. The Contractor Management Policy has been adopted with the others in Draft format.<br />
Each Policy and Procedure has been developed in Draft format by the LGAMLS with <strong>Council</strong>s<br />
required to adapt to their circumstance (little change is recommended otherwise they may not meet<br />
Work Safe <strong>SA</strong> standards).<br />
I would urge <strong>Council</strong> to be aware <strong>of</strong> their (and the CEO) obligations under legislation but also<br />
understand that this process is going to take time and resources. I know you’ve heard this before<br />
but the CEO has asked me to again reinforce given the recent presentation made by the LGAMLS<br />
following the EPLGA Conference.<br />
Recommendation: That <strong>Council</strong> note the information.<br />
Relieving DCEO Report<br />
Recommendation: That the Relieving DCEO Report as printed in the Agenda, circulated and<br />
tabled be accepted.<br />
John Rumbelow<br />
Relieving DCEO
The <strong>District</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
Corporate Services Manager Report<br />
To <strong>Council</strong> Meeting<br />
<strong>22</strong> <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong><br />
Time Capsule for New LGA Premises<br />
The Local <strong>Gov</strong>ernment Office will be shifted to a new <strong>of</strong>fice at 148 Form Street Adelaide.<br />
Therefore Local <strong>Gov</strong>ernment Association (LGA) inviting all <strong>Council</strong>s to submit items for<br />
inclusion in the <strong>2010</strong> Time Capsule Container. Due to limited space, submitted items must<br />
be placed in a sealed A4 envelope with the <strong>Council</strong>’s name written on the front. Submitted<br />
items should be capable <strong>of</strong> surviving 30 years in storage without suffering significant<br />
deterioration. The item should be send by 31 st <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong>.<br />
Action: - I seek the <strong>Council</strong>’s direction.<br />
Application from <strong>Elliston</strong> Progress & Tourism Association (EPTA)<br />
EPTA is organising “Australian Salmon Fishing Championship-<strong>2010</strong>” from 1 st June to 31 st<br />
August <strong>2010</strong>. EPTA has submitted a Funding Request Application Form on 12 th <strong>March</strong><br />
<strong>2010</strong>. In the application form EPTA has requested for $2,500 from the <strong>Council</strong>. However<br />
according to minute number 290.2009 the <strong>Council</strong> has allocated $2000 for Salmon<br />
Competition out <strong>of</strong> the total Community Support Fund.<br />
Action:- I seek the <strong>Council</strong> direction.<br />
Information Only<br />
Financial Help for <strong>Council</strong> “Local <strong>Gov</strong>ernment Disaster Fund – Circular 5.2”.<br />
Refer to my letter to the Grant Commission dated 26 th Feb <strong>2010</strong> and the Grant<br />
Commission’s Office reply back on the same day . It has stated that:<br />
“Under the Fund’s guidelines for an event to be considered a disaster the extent<br />
<strong>of</strong> the damage (to uninsurable infrastructure) must exceed 5% <strong>of</strong> council’s rate<br />
revenue. If this is the case, council’s generally contact us, and we determine<br />
whether to send over an engineer to assess the damage and the pre-flood<br />
condition <strong>of</strong> the infrastructure. At the very least it is important to take lots <strong>of</strong><br />
pictures once the flood water has subsided and before council starts to repair the<br />
damage.<br />
Once council has submitted the claim, we would have it assessed by the<br />
engineer for the costing etc. In assessing the claim the Management Committee<br />
would expect the council to contribute 10% <strong>of</strong> the cost <strong>of</strong> remediation towards the<br />
claim.”<br />
The <strong>of</strong>ficer also attached a copy <strong>of</strong> guidelines for councils in making submissions to the<br />
Fund.<br />
Please note: The <strong>Council</strong>’s 2009/10 “Gl Code 010100 - Rate Declared Income” as <strong>of</strong><br />
10/03/<strong>2010</strong> is $1,260,523.75 and the <strong>Council</strong>’s budgeted storm damaged road repair cost<br />
is $75,000. Therefore the total storm damaged road repair cost is 5.94% <strong>of</strong> the total Rate<br />
Declared Income (75000/1,260,523x100=5.94%).<br />
However there are other conditions too, the administration needs further clarification<br />
before it can give a confirmed answer to the <strong>Council</strong>
Inclusion <strong>of</strong> Corporate Service Manager’s Position in the Contract, Tendering &<br />
Purchase Policy as Sub-delegation<br />
Under the present status <strong>of</strong> the Contract, Tendering & Purchase Policy, there is no<br />
mention <strong>of</strong> the purchasing <strong>au</strong>thority for the position <strong>of</strong> Corporate Service Manager under<br />
“Discretionary Limits <strong>of</strong> Authority”. Therefore CEO will <strong>au</strong>thorise Corporate Service<br />
Manager’s position to purchase upto $9999.00 for a individual item purchase whereas in<br />
the case <strong>of</strong> bulk invoice billing from a single contractor or a creditor, it is $30,000 for<br />
smooth functioning <strong>of</strong> the operational work. This change will be incorporated under “Policy<br />
for Supply <strong>of</strong> Goods and Services” sub point “Discretionary Limits <strong>of</strong> Authority” as sub<br />
delegation by CEO.<br />
Other than that there is no mention <strong>of</strong> the position <strong>of</strong> Corporate Service Manager under the<br />
topic a) Method <strong>of</strong> Procurement <strong>of</strong> Goods and Services a) Tenders in the Contract,<br />
Tendering & Purchase Policy whereas I am involved in these process ever since I am<br />
holding the position <strong>of</strong> Corporate Service Manager. Therefore I have requested CEO to<br />
provide sub-delegated <strong>au</strong>thority to the position <strong>of</strong> Corporate Service Manager.<br />
Letter from <strong>Elliston</strong> Playground Steering Committee (EPSC)<br />
I have received a letter from EPSC on 10 th <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong> and as per the letter EPSC has<br />
agreed all the points <strong>of</strong> minutes 039.<strong>2010</strong> (relating to <strong>Council</strong> Meeting <strong>22</strong> nd February<br />
<strong>2010</strong>). Therefore I have <strong>au</strong>thorised payment <strong>of</strong> $5000 to EPSC as per <strong>Council</strong> resolution<br />
039.<strong>2010</strong>.<br />
Minutes <strong>of</strong> the Audit Committee Meeting<br />
The <strong>Council</strong>’s 2 nd Audit Committee Meeting held on 3 rd <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong> and the copy <strong>of</strong> the<br />
minutes is attached<br />
Eyre Peninsula Rate Survey<br />
DC Tumby Bay has conducted a rate survey <strong>of</strong> all Eyre Peninsula <strong>Council</strong>s and copy <strong>of</strong><br />
that report is attached.<br />
Fines and Interest for Port Kenny Water Supply<br />
As per a re-clarified e-mail (dated 25 th Feb & 27 th Feb <strong>2010</strong>) from Kate Oliver, Senior<br />
Associate ( Norman Waterhouse Lawyers) , the <strong>Council</strong> can charge fine & interest for Port<br />
Kenny Water Supply.<br />
Final Budget Figure after Budget Revision<br />
The revised operating expenditure after Budget Review is $3,476,508 and the revised<br />
budget deficit shall be ($378,806) and the total Capital Expenditure is $2,050,576.<br />
I would also like to remind the <strong>Council</strong> we have received $257,884 as early grant at the<br />
flag end <strong>of</strong> 2008/09 financial year which was supposed to be this year’s revenue. This<br />
event had distorted the <strong>Council</strong>’s actual financial information in 2008/09 & 2009/10.<br />
Therefore the actual adjusted deficit shall be $120,9<strong>22</strong> (if Grant was not prepaid).<br />
[Please note: In 2009/10 the <strong>Council</strong> Operating Surplus/Deficit line shall have exactly the<br />
opposite effect <strong>of</strong> last year’s Operating Surplus/ Deficit line]<br />
Some <strong>of</strong> the main reasons <strong>of</strong> Budget over run are 1) Repair <strong>of</strong> Storm Damaged Roads 2)<br />
Setting up safety measure at Venus Bay Incident area .I would also like to highlight to the<br />
<strong>Council</strong> that the <strong>Council</strong>’s Signage & Traffic Management actual expenses will be over the<br />
current budget and the reason for this is due to several factors, which include:<br />
• Unbudgeted purchase for Storm Damaged road signs<br />
• Unbudgeted purchase <strong>of</strong> road works and safety signage for Emergencies
• Installation <strong>of</strong> additional “Risk” signage at Venus Bay and coastal areas following<br />
the Venus Bay incident and subsequent assessment.<br />
• Installation <strong>of</strong> traffic signage in Venus Bay following the Venus Bay incident and<br />
subsequent assessment.<br />
• Installation <strong>of</strong> improved traffic signage at Little Bay Rd and Anxious Bay Rd ( Clifftop<br />
Drive) following the Venus Bay incident and subsequent assessment.<br />
Natural Resources Management (NRM) Levy Rate Equalisation Process<br />
NRM Board is in the process <strong>of</strong> equalising all the <strong>Council</strong>’s contribution <strong>of</strong> levy over the<br />
next two years. Once this process will be completed, the <strong>Council</strong>’s shares <strong>of</strong> the levy will<br />
be proportional to the number <strong>of</strong> rateable properties from 2011/2012.<br />
<strong>2010</strong> Strengthening EP Program<br />
The Eyre Peninsula Natural Resources Management Board and Eyre Regional<br />
Development Board are organising <strong>2010</strong> Strengthening EP program and the detail is<br />
attached.<br />
Election <strong>of</strong> Board Member for Australia Day <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> South Australia<br />
Nomination for the Board Members starting from 1 st <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong> and the last day for filling<br />
up the nomination form is 26 th <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong>.<br />
In relation to Australia Day <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> South Australia, I would like to inform that there are<br />
changes for the forthcoming Annual General Meeting <strong>of</strong> Australia Day <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> South<br />
Australia. For the first time these elections will be conducted by postal ballot.<br />
Proposed Extension <strong>of</strong> Water Main in Wookata Drive, <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
<strong>SA</strong> Water has approved the construction <strong>of</strong> a water main in Wookata Drive, <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
(Section 341 and Section 348) for direct water connection.<br />
Financial Reports:<br />
• Monthly Income Statement and Balance Sheet<br />
• Monthly Income and Expenditure by Function<br />
• Community Support Register<br />
Recommendation: That the Financial Reports which compare Actual with Budgets for the<br />
period to 11 th <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong> and the Community Support Register, be received.<br />
Corporate Services Manager Report<br />
Recommendation: That the Corporate Services Manager Report as printed in the<br />
Agenda, circulated and tabled be accepted.<br />
Kuntal Goswami<br />
Corporate Services Manager
<strong>District</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Elliston</strong><br />
Chief Executive Officer's Report<br />
FOR INFORMATION AND ACTION<br />
To <strong>Council</strong> Meeting<br />
<strong>22</strong> <strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong><br />
Progress <strong>of</strong> Regional Development Board (RDA) Funding Agreement<br />
I refer to the attached e-mails regarding this matter and to the amended Funding<br />
Agreement documents which bec<strong>au</strong>se <strong>of</strong> their size have been placed into the <strong>Council</strong>lor<br />
information packs.<br />
The following updates were received at the recent EPLGA executive Meeting:<br />
• Mr M cant has become the Executive Officer for the new RDA<br />
• The RDA Board has <strong>au</strong>thorised signing <strong>of</strong> the Federal <strong>Gov</strong>ernment funding<br />
agreement<br />
• The RDA Board has not yet agreed to the <strong>SA</strong> governments funding agreement<br />
• The RDA Board is concerned that the proposed agreement enables the Minister to<br />
micro Manage and the RDA will have a high level reporting and compliance task<br />
I do not think that much will be gained by further deferring the signing <strong>of</strong> the State/local<br />
<strong>Gov</strong>ernment Funding Agreement.<br />
Action: the <strong>Council</strong> <strong>au</strong>thorises the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer to sign and affix<br />
the <strong>of</strong>ficial <strong>Council</strong> seal to the recently amended State/Local <strong>Gov</strong>ernment /RDA Funding<br />
Agreement.<br />
Lock & <strong>District</strong>s Heritage Museum - Results <strong>of</strong> Public Opinion Survey<br />
I refer to the attached summary <strong>of</strong> the recent community survey undertaken regarding the<br />
future ownership and management structure for the Lock and districts Heritage Museum.<br />
Summary <strong>of</strong> Points for <strong>Council</strong> consideration:<br />
• Only about 18% <strong>of</strong> the Lock community responded to this survey and as Lock is<br />
known as a town that has very active community groups, this small return seems to<br />
indicate a fairly low level <strong>of</strong> interest in this matter (outside <strong>of</strong> the groups immediately<br />
concerned with the future <strong>of</strong> the facility).<br />
• Option two (transfer <strong>of</strong> all buildings and land to the Lock and Murdinga Progress<br />
Association) received 15 votes<br />
• Option one (transfer all <strong>of</strong> the buildings on the land into ownership <strong>of</strong> a new building<br />
trust) received 13 votes.<br />
• The next highest voting was for a variation to that theme which left the land to the<br />
LMPTA and the buildings with the Lock & <strong>District</strong>s Heritage Museum (11 votes).<br />
• In almost all instances it is the land that appreciates in value over time and old<br />
buildings depreciate and become more costly to maintain as time passes.
• It is feasible for <strong>Council</strong> to provide the buildings into the ownership <strong>of</strong> a bona-fide<br />
association while the land remains with <strong>Council</strong> and funding (by reimbursement) is<br />
provided by the <strong>Council</strong> to assist in repairs/maintenance. That would be consistent<br />
with what is occurring with the ex CWA building at Port Kenny.<br />
• ABARE stats’ support the view that DC <strong>Elliston</strong> has an expanding senior population<br />
and a shrinking younger population and this is an important factor for the future <strong>of</strong><br />
the facility, particularly as the older members <strong>of</strong> these groups become less active.<br />
• The <strong>Council</strong> has two active groups wishing to have ownership <strong>of</strong> this facility and<br />
they deserve to be rewarded for their efforts, however, I believe the <strong>Council</strong> should<br />
carefully consider all <strong>of</strong> the relevant factors before it before providing me with<br />
further direction.<br />
Action: I seek <strong>Council</strong>’s (detailed) direction on this matter.<br />
Application for Extension <strong>of</strong> Licensed Area at the <strong>Elliston</strong> Sports Centre<br />
I refer to the attached detail.<br />
Action I seek <strong>Council</strong>s direction on this matter<br />
Wirangu (2) Native Title Claim<br />
As per the attached; a Solicitors briefing then negotiations are scheduled for 25 and 26<br />
<strong>March</strong> <strong>2010</strong> and <strong>Council</strong> representatives are sought.<br />
<strong>Council</strong> will need to formally resolve who attends and provides representation on their<br />
behalf.<br />
Action: I seek <strong>Council</strong>’s nominations and direction on this matter<br />
FOR INFORMATION ONLY<br />
Centrex Mining – Update<br />
While this information has not been confirmed to us by Centrex, an ERDB update at the<br />
recent EPLGA meeting advised that their focus had now switched to the “Sheep Hill” Port<br />
Option and road transport via the Balumbah – Kinnaird road.<br />
OHS – Introduction <strong>of</strong> the One System Policies<br />
<strong>Council</strong> is aware that I have raised my concerns to LGAMLS Manager regarding the short<br />
time lines proposed for this process, the complexity and the wording within some <strong>of</strong> the<br />
proposed One System (across Local <strong>Gov</strong>ernment ) OHS policies.<br />
Thankfully <strong>Council</strong> has been supportive in regards provision <strong>of</strong> budgeting for an extra<br />
resource and the vetting, rewriting (if necessary) and implementation <strong>of</strong> these policies will<br />
be one <strong>of</strong> the key Responsibilities for the new DCEO.<br />
My concerns plus those <strong>of</strong> a South coast <strong>Council</strong> CEO resulted in an update being<br />
provided to all EP <strong>Council</strong>’s by the LGAMLS after the recent EPLGA conference.<br />
This was attended by our Deputy Chairman and me. Some <strong>of</strong> the most pertinent points to<br />
arise were:<br />
• The schemes own action is being forced by Safe-Work <strong>SA</strong> <strong>au</strong>dits and via their<br />
expectations <strong>of</strong> significantly increased compliance.
• Compliance can only be demonstrated by very detailed paperwork trails for every<br />
activity.<br />
• If compliance is not satisfied then the schemes self insurers License is at Risk<br />
• Based on the most recent Audit, no EP <strong>Council</strong>s are fully compliant but some are<br />
further advanced than others<br />
• To generate and maintain the paper trail requires a large amount <strong>of</strong> resources and<br />
has high cost<br />
• It is likely that some EP <strong>Council</strong>s will require 2 to 3 years in order to be fully<br />
compliant<br />
• It appeared that only DCE <strong>Elliston</strong> and City <strong>of</strong> Whyalla fully appreciated how large<br />
and costly this task will be (potentially 10 to 15% <strong>of</strong> a small <strong>Council</strong>’s total operating<br />
budget is likely to eventually be consumed in this task).<br />
• Requests were made by all <strong>Council</strong>’s for greater levels <strong>of</strong> assistance from our<br />
Regional Risk Managers<br />
• I have requested the LGAMLS to make the same presentation to a future <strong>Council</strong><br />
meeting.<br />
OHS – A Sign <strong>of</strong> Good Sense<br />
The attached article outlines a High Court decision that quashed a prosecution and set<br />
strict limits on the drafting <strong>of</strong> OHS prosecutions.<br />
Given the significant changes proposed for national OHS & W Legislation, this is a very<br />
positive sign that prosecuters must be very thorough in preparing their work and quite<br />
clear on what measures the defendants could and should have taken to avoid the<br />
occurrence.<br />
<strong>Elliston</strong> Stormwater Upgrade<br />
A well qualified Civil Engineer who has recently taken up residence in Ceduna has been<br />
approached to provide a detailed quote for assessment <strong>of</strong> the various management<br />
options and he has recently been on site to look over the town layout and existing storm<br />
water system.<br />
His on-site advice was very practical and it is expected that he will request us to arrange<br />
for a series <strong>of</strong> levels to be taken in order to fill gaps in the earlier report, prior to preparing<br />
a quote.<br />
D & N May – Complaint regarding the Processing <strong>of</strong> Development Application -<br />
933/011/10<br />
From time to time, errors do occur with information stored in <strong>Council</strong> files and with that<br />
supplied to <strong>Council</strong> by clients as do misunderstandings <strong>of</strong> conversations.<br />
Bec<strong>au</strong>se the Planning and Development portfolio is extremely complex and few <strong>of</strong> us are<br />
fully conversant with every bit <strong>of</strong> the detail that must be considered when assessing an<br />
application, it requires a careful and formal approach and actions are not normally taken<br />
on the basis <strong>of</strong> phone conversations or incomplete data.<br />
Under normal circumstances both parties deal with any errors and misunderstandings it in<br />
a co-operative manner and they set about correcting the problem.
That corrective work is normally overseen by the most experienced/senior responsible<br />
person in (in this case EDAM) and if it cannot be resolved at that level, then it would<br />
normally be subject to internal review and then dealt with ‘in house” through the CEO,<br />
Chairman and Deputy Chairman.<br />
That two-step process then provides good opportunity for correction to occur and it affords<br />
protection to the reputations <strong>of</strong> all parties involved should the matter be difficult to resolve.<br />
However, as these particular complaints were aired in a public meeting, then a further<br />
letter <strong>of</strong> complaint was mailed to each <strong>Council</strong>lor, it now becomes necessary to provide the<br />
responses in the public forum.<br />
An in depth review was done by me and a preliminary report on the May’s complaints plus<br />
supporting documentation has been provided to the Chairman, Deputy Chairman and the<br />
May’s, who were also invited to provide me with any information which they felt may have<br />
been missed during preparation <strong>of</strong> the report. That report is available to <strong>Council</strong>lors on<br />
request.<br />
On 11 <strong>March</strong>, a further series <strong>of</strong> questions and demands was received from the May’s and<br />
I have attached my response plus the May’s (second) letter <strong>of</strong> complaint.<br />
<strong>Council</strong>lor Seaman – E Mail regarding Cost and Process Used for Undertaking an<br />
Independent Efficiency Assessment<br />
The attached e-mail has been passed to me and I <strong>of</strong>fer the following comment for <strong>Council</strong><br />
consideration:<br />
• The <strong>Council</strong> <strong>au</strong>thorised the process and set aside $8,000 in its 2009/210 budget.<br />
• UHY-Haines Norton are well recognised Local <strong>Gov</strong>ernment Consultants and<br />
particularly for the quality <strong>of</strong> their work.<br />
• At short-notice Mr Bolaffi (UHY Haines Norton) had provided expert assistance to<br />
this <strong>Council</strong>’s Internal Audit Panel and that position allows him to gain a very<br />
detailed overview into a wide range <strong>of</strong> <strong>Council</strong>’s operations, policies and practices.<br />
• That type <strong>of</strong> insight simply could not be available to other consultants and while the<br />
timelines in which to add the Assessment into his other work schedule were very<br />
short, I felt that doing so would provide the best value to the <strong>Council</strong>’s future<br />
planning as the unique arrangement will allow for a very thorough assessment to be<br />
made.<br />
• I was mindful <strong>of</strong> budgets and the arrangement is for two successive sections <strong>of</strong><br />
work to be undertaken over two Financial Periods at $6,000 each year.<br />
• In view <strong>of</strong> short timelines, it was not feasible to call for Public Tenders and not<br />
wanting to forgo a valuable opportunity, I put the proposal to the Chairman and<br />
Deputy Chairman and they agreed with it.<br />
• Cr Seaman obviously has strong views on this matter and he does not personally<br />
agree with what occurred, however, the <strong>Council</strong>’s Contracts, Tendering and<br />
Purchasing Policy does allow for this situation I.E. Page 4 “formal tender process to<br />
be undertaken unless it is not practical“and page 5 “the monetary limit for the<br />
provision <strong>of</strong> goods and services above which tenders must be called is $10,000 and<br />
above. The monetary limit will not apply if the Chief Executive Officer determines<br />
that it is impractical to call for tenders in the circumstances <strong>of</strong> a particular case.
• While it is always preferable to work within the usual guidelines <strong>of</strong> <strong>Council</strong> Policies,<br />
the above cl<strong>au</strong>ses cater for exceptional situations and this matter was first<br />
discussed with the Chairman and Deputy Chairman, whose collective<br />
responsibilities include providing a considered opinion to the CEO on behalf <strong>of</strong> the<br />
<strong>Council</strong> when such situations do arise.<br />
• <strong>Council</strong>lor Seaman previously commented that he was concerned bec<strong>au</strong>se the<br />
“Assessor” was a “Black and White” Accountant type. As I don’t believe that Policy<br />
has been breached and nor has the 2009/10 budget limit, could the <strong>Council</strong>lor be<br />
concerned that that Mr Bolaffi might actually provide <strong>Council</strong> with an in depth,<br />
properly verified and well balanced report which highlights both our strengths and<br />
our weaknesses, and right across the “<strong>Gov</strong>ernance” structure (i.e. CEO, Admin’ and<br />
<strong>Council</strong>)?<br />
The <strong>Council</strong> has periodically been made aware by me <strong>of</strong> various calculated risks<br />
being taken, weaknesses in our administration and <strong>Gov</strong>ernance system, reactive<br />
management by descending priorities, reactive decision making rather than by<br />
strategic planning and the root c<strong>au</strong>se <strong>of</strong> much <strong>of</strong> this is related to limited budgets,<br />
tight staffing levels and a high level <strong>of</strong> desire to place the <strong>Council</strong> in a good financial<br />
Position before reaching full compliance in other areas. Therefore I will be the most<br />
surprised <strong>of</strong> all if every one <strong>of</strong> these issues plus more were not included in Mr<br />
Bolaffi’s Report<br />
Venus Bay Caravan Park<br />
I have received the signed Lease and Sale Agreement documents from the Southern’s<br />
Solicitor.<br />
As the Agreements require the Southern’s to pay certain preparation costs, I previously<br />
forwarded them an invoice and suggested that <strong>Council</strong> would arrange for counter- signing<br />
upon receipt <strong>of</strong> their payment. At the time <strong>of</strong> preparing the agenda, no payment had been<br />
received.<br />
Port Kenny – Proposed Brackish Water Desalination Trial<br />
No further updates have been received from the interested company; however, they have<br />
been provided a full analysis <strong>of</strong> water at both <strong>of</strong> the likely locations for testing their plant.<br />
Contingency Planning<br />
Following on from <strong>Council</strong> resolution number 024-<strong>2010</strong> I am awaiting responses from our<br />
Solicitors but hope to provided information and draft contracts to <strong>Council</strong>lors prior to their<br />
next meeting. If the <strong>Council</strong> does have queries or a particular concern, please provide<br />
them to me prior to the meeting so that I can then assemble further information.<br />
Recommendation: That the Chief Executive Officer’s Report as printed in the Agenda,<br />
circulated and tabled, be accepted.<br />
Rob Gregor<br />
Chief Executive Officer