Banyule City Council Agenda 31 March 2014 by Banyule City Council

Ordinary Meeting of Council Council Chambers, Service Centre 275 Upper Heidelberg Road, Ivanhoe 31 March 2014 commencing at 7.45pm Following the public forum commencing at approximately 7.30pm and may be extended to 8pm if necessary.

AGENDA

The Mayor’s Acknowledgement of the Wurundjeri People “Our Meeting is being held on the traditional lands (country) of the Wurundjeri people and I wish to acknowledge them as the traditional owners and pay my respects to their Elders.” Apologies and Leave of Absence Confirmation of Minutes Ordinary Meeting of Council held 17 March 2014 Disclosure of Interests 1. Petitions 1.1 Further signatories to petition to retain and reopen Bellfield, Haig Street and Banksia College School Sites ................................................................ 3 1.2 Joint Letter Opposing Proposed Sale of 3 Somerleigh Crescent, Greensborough ....................................................................................................... 6 REPORTS: 2. People – Community Strengthening and Support Nil 3. Planet – Environmental Sustainability Nil 4. Place – Sustainable Amenity and Built Environment Nil

AGENDA (Contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d) 5. Participation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Community Involvement in Community Life 5.1 Advocacy on behalf of the Community - July 2013 to January 2014 ....................... 9 5.2 Proposal to rename parts of Heidelberg Heights ................................................... 11 5.3 Proposal to formally name the Right of Way bounded by Waterdale Road, Jellicoe and Beatty Streets, Ivanhoe.......................................... 16 5.4 Ward Fund Allocations .......................................................................................... 22 6. Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely 6.1 Banyule Ward Funds - Review of Policy ............................................................... 25 6.2 Assembly of Councillors ........................................................................................ 29 7. Sealing of Documents 7.1 Sealing of Documents .......................................................................................... 31 8. Notices of Motion 8.1 On Line Hard Waste Bookings .............................................................................. 33 9. General Business 10. Urgent Business Closure of Meeting to the Public That in accordance with Section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989, Council close the Meeting to members of the public and adjourn for five minutes to allow the public to leave the Chamber prior to considering the following confidential matters. 11. Confidential Matters 11.1 Contractual matters 11.2 Any other matter which the Council or special committee considers would prejudice the Council or any person 11.3 Contractual matters Matters Discussed in Camera That all confidential matters and reports related to the above items remain confidential unless otherwise specified. Closure of Meeting

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 2

1.1

FURTHER SIGNATORIES TO PETITION TO RETAIN AND REOPEN BELLFIELD, HAIG STREET AND BANKSIA COLLEGE SCHOOL SITES

Author:

Michael Hutchison - Projects Coordinator, City Development

Ward:

Olympia

File:

F2013/940

Previous Items Council on 3 March 2014 (Item 1.3 - Petition to retain and reopen Bellfield, Haig Street and Banksia College School sites)

A further 27 signatories to the petition reported to Council on 3 March 2014 have been received.

The petition prayer is as follows: “To the Mayor and Councillors of the Banyule City Council We the undersigned, residents and ratepayers of Banyule City wish to bring to the attention of Council the urgent need to reconsider and stop the subdivision and redevelopment of the three closed school sites. These assets need to be retained and returned to the community for education uses and purposes. Children in the area need access to good quality public education within walking distance from their homes. What happens if your family doesn’t have a car or the means to travel? Should the three existing schools get developed for medium density housing; more families will need access to local schools. Schools are full to overflowing now; there are simply not enough schools. I/we therefore request Banyule City Council to immediately halt the development and/or subdivision of the closed school sites and return the three school sites back to the community for public education uses.” The majority of signatories reside within the Banyule municipality and some from outside. The following tables summarise the location of the new signatories to the petition. The previous signatories have also been included. New signatories (located within Banyule) Location Bellfield Heidelberg Heights Rosanna Heidelberg West

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Signatories 8 3 2 2

Page 3

1.1

Petitions

1.1

FURTHER SIGNATORIES TO PETITION TO RETAIN AND REOPEN BELLFIELD, HAIG STREET AND BANKSIA COLLEGE SCHOOL SITES contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d New signatories with incomplete details Location Did not provide full address

Signatories 1

New signatories (outside Banyule) Location Eltham

Signatories 11

New signatories

Signatories reported to Council 3 March 2014 (within Banyule) Location Ivanhoe Bellfield Heidelberg Heights Heidelberg Rosanna Heidelberg West Montmorency Watsonia Watsonia North Yallambie

Signatories 25 8 7 5 4 1 1 1 1 1

Signatories reported to Council 3 March 2014 with incomplete details Location Signatories Did not provide full address 12 Signatories reported to Council 3 March 2014 (outside Banyule) Location Signatories Northcote 2 McKinnon 2 Middle Park 1 Diamond Creek 1 Oakleigh 1 Abbottsford 1 Coldstream 1 Total signatories

101

The petition reported to Council on 3 March 2014 provided 75 signatories. The 27 additional signatories bring the total number of signatories to the petition to 101. DISCUSSION At its Meeting of 3 March 2014, Council resolved: 1. 2.

Council receives and notes the petition. Council write to Minster for Education and the Shadow Minister for Education, Minister for Planning and Shadow Minister for Planning and all other local members providing a copy of the petition on local educational needs and the loss of the three former school sites.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 4

Petitions

Council request the state government and state opposition confirm its position of delivering on future educational needs in the 3081 local area and any expansion of existing local schools. Council request the Education Department to provide predicated future school enrolment figures for the Banyule area and an indication on the available capacity to meet that demand. Council offers to meet with Education Department officers to discuss education opportunities within Banyule. Council now seek formal advice on government interest in purchasing back part of the former Banksia Secondary College site and or the Bellfield site given its adjacent location to the proposed stadium precinct and community facilities. The primary petitioner be advised and updated of the outcome.

1.1

FURTHER SIGNATORIES TO PETITION TO RETAIN AND REOPEN BELLFIELD, HAIG STREET AND BANKSIA COLLEGE SCHOOL SITES contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

This advocacy is currently underway. The additional received signatories as well as any further signatories received can be included in advocacy work on this matter as it progresses. CONCLUSION These additional and any further signatories to the petition can be included as part of the advocacy that Council resolved to undertake at its meeting of 3 March 2014. RECOMMENDATION That: 1.

Council receives and notes the further signatories to the petition and notes the initial consideration and resolution from its Meeting on the 3rd March 2014 (Resolution CO2014/38).

Future signatories to the petition are noted and included in further advocacy.

The primary petitioner be advised and updated.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Petition Extra Pages Submitted

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 36

Page 5

1.2

JOINT LETTER OPPOSING PROPOSED SALE OF 3 SOMERLEIGH CRESCENT, GREENSBOROUGH

Author:

Daniel Kollmorgen - Acting Manager Strategic & Economic Development, City Development

Ward:

Beale

File:

F2013/1095

A joint letter with 39 signatures has been received opposing the proposed sale of Council owned property at 3 Somerleigh Crescent, Greensborough. The joint letter request is as follows: “On behalf of the local residents of Greenhills, I submit this letter to Council and wish to appear before a Council meeting in support of residents opposed to the possible sale of 3 Somerleigh Crescent in Greensborough. In support of this submission, I make the following comments: 

This land has been enjoyed and used by the local residents since the 1970s when it is was donated to Council, the former Shire of Diamond Valley, as open space as part of the development of Somerleigh Crescent and Rainham Close.



The land is a not just a backyard extension enjoyed by the abutting neighbours.



The neighbours have cleaned up the land from time to time and have removed fallen limbs at their own expense.



Some additional native trees have also been planted.



The land has been used by children of Somerleigh Crescent over the years as a bushland play area.



The land is used on occasions as an informal dog run.



The May 2014 Arboricultural Assessment and Report prepared by Stem Arboriculture for 3 Somerleigh Crescent, identifies a total of 12 trees on the land, mostly large and medium sized Yellow Gums, indigenous to Greenhills.



We believe that the ongoing health and longevity of the outstanding group of mature indigenous trees and the birdlife on the land is best assured if the land remains under the management of Council.



The tall canopy of trees on the land support a host of birdlife including owls, lorikeets, native doves, crows, magpies, galahs and at times Kookaburras. Even a couple of kangaroos and some ducks have used the land as a temporary refuge.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 6

1.2

Petitions



This open space may be small but its wealth of mature trees is important for the ongoing maintenance of good physical health of the local residents.



We recommend that some improvements to the land should be considered for the benefit of the community. Such improvements could include a swing for the children of young families moving into the area as well as the grand children of older residents. A seat would be desirable for folk who wish to rest or enjoy the trees and birdlife.

If Council is determined to sell the land despite the views of the locals then the funds raised from the sale should be spent on open space improvements in the Greenhills area. We understand that the property if sold would be subject to a 173 agreement restricting development. However, we are very concerned that the site could be purchased by a developer who may not have empathy for the area and that these restrictions may not stop a determined individual from removing trees or challenging the restrictions at VCAT. In summary, we feel that it is imperative that the land remain in Council ownership for the benefit of the ongoing community and for the protection of the treed environment. We look forward to a favourable response.” The signatories all reside within the Greenhills area. DISCUSSION At its Meeting on 3 February 2014, Council resolved (CO2014/5) to give public notice of its intention to sell 3 Somerleigh Crescent, Greensborough. A public notice of Council’s intention to sell was advertised in the Diamond Valley Leader on 12 February 2014, letters were sent to surrounding residents and a notice was placed on the site. The period of public notice provides the opportunity for community feedback as required by Section 189 of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) and to hear any submissions received in response to the public notice under Section 223 of the Act. Submissions closed on 12 March 2014. A report will soon be presented to Council to hear and consider submissions received and to determine whether or not to sell the land. The joint letter will be considered as a submission in this process. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Receives and notes the joint letter.

Consider this joint letter as a submission in response to the Notice of Intention to sell 3 Somerleigh Crescent, Greensborough.

Advise the person who submitted the joint letter accordingly.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 7

1.2

JOINT LETTER OPPOSING PROPOSED SALE OF 3 SOMERLEIGH CRESCENT, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d

Petitions

JOINT LETTER OPPOSING PROPOSED SALE OF 3 SOMERLEIGH CRESCENT, GREENSBOROUGH cont’d ATTACHMENTS Title

Joint Letter Cover Letter

Page 37

1.2

No.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 8

5.1

ADVOCACY ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY - JULY 2013 TO JANUARY 2014

Author: File:

Fiona Athersmith - Publications & Media Officer, Corporate Services F2014/406

SUMMARY To inform Council and the community on the advocacy initiatives undertaken on key issues of local, regional and wider relevance, in order to represent the best interests of the Banyule community. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “advocate on behalf of our community”. BACKGROUND Banyule advocates on behalf of the community on key issues in a number of ways, such as: staff attendance and participation at industry forums; submissions; funding applications; meetings with Federal and State Members of Parliament; meetings with key staff from Government Departments work with industry and educational institutions to improve outcomes for Banyule’s community.. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any negative human rights issues. The human rights of our community are affirmed by Council acting on behalf of and in the best interests for our community in matters that affect their lives. This often occurs in areas concern for our community where an individual voice may not be heard. ADVOCATE ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY A key function of Council is to advocate on behalf of the community on issues of importance. By representing the interests of the community in a range of forums, Council has the capacity to attract additional resources to the municipality and resolve complex issues affecting the liveability of the city.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 9

5.1

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

ADVOCACY ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY - JULY 2013 TO JANUARY 2014 cont’d

5.1

HOW BANYULE ADVOCATED IN THE PERIOD JULY 2013 TO JANUARY 2014 This year, our regular biannual report to the community on our advocacy activities adopts a new format to make the information more accessible and useful to the community. This format includes a general introduction about how and why we advocate on behalf of the community and then details our advocacy actions for the reporting period, providing information on what the issue is, how we have advocated on behalf of the community, and the result of our advocacy. This report will be available on our website for download and will be promoted via social media. The report, which includes a comprehensive but not exhaustive list, of our advocacy activities from the period July 2013 to January 2014 is attached. CONCLUSION Council’s advocacy report is provided to the community to demonstrate the advocacy undertaken on key issues of local, regional and wider significance. RECOMMENDATION That the Advocacy Report July 2013 to January 2014 be noted.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 39

Page 10

5.2

PROPOSAL TO RENAME PARTS OF HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS

Author:

Michael Hutchison - Projects Coordinator, City Development

Ward:

Olympia

File:

F2013/365

5.2

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

Previous Items Council on 16 December 2013 (Item 5.1 - Renaming part of Heidleberg Heights) SUMMARY Report back to Council the results of further consultation in relation to the proposal to rename part of Heidelberg Heights bounded by Bell Street, Upper Heidelberg Road, Banksia Street and Waterdale Road to ‘Ivanhoe’ and also formally request Australia Post change the postcode in the area under consideration to 3079. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “engage meaningfully with our community”. BACKGROUND At the Ordinary meeting of 16 December 2013, Council resolved to: 1.

Authorise officers to undertake further consultation in writing to all property owners and residents in the area bounded by Bell Street, Upper Heidelberg Road, Banksia Street and Waterdale Road in relation to either renaming the affected area Ivanhoe or leaving the name of the affected area as Heidelberg Heights.

All surveys to include a reply paid envelope and indicate that due to the level of support to change the name of the affected area, non-responses to the survey will be considered tacit approval to support changing the name to Ivanhoe by adjusting the existing suburb boundary to include the area under consideration.

A report be prepared to Council on the outcome of the further consultation and the survey.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 11

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

PROPOSAL TO RENAME PARTS OF HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS cont’d

5.2

The resolution provided that further consultation be undertaken in relation to renaming the area under consideration to Ivanhoe and indicated that non-responses will be considered tacit approval due to the previously indicated level of support for change. Following this the results were to be reported to Council for consideration. Further investigations and associated work has been progressed and the matter can now be further considered by Council. Locality Plan

Figure 1: Affected area under consideration

HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. CONSULTATION Consultation summary is shown below. Table 1: Summary of consultation key dates

Date 28/01/2014 29/01/2014

Action Council consultation posted

Summary survey Survey consultation package sent to 477 package property owners/occupiers covering 312 properties. Package included:  Explanatory cover letter;  Notification responsibility flyer;  Reply paid envelope;

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 12

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

Date

Action

29/01/2014

Webpage updated

04/02/2014 11/02/2014 18/02/2014 27/02/2014

Public Notice Heidelberg Leader Survey close date

Summary  Survey. Council’s webpage updated inviting community comments on the proposal. in Public Notice advertisement advised of proposal and invited community comments. Findings collated and analysed.

Results of the survey and consultation which closed on 27 February 2014 are shown in Table 2 below. Table 2: Survey summary

Subject Number of surveys sent out

Response result 477 surveys were sent out covering 312 properties (includes all property owners/occupiers in area). Number of responses received 186 (~39% of 477) Number of non-responses 291 (~61% of 477) In favour of change (based on 166 (~89% of 186) responses) Against change (based on 20 (~11% of 186) responses) Total in favour of change 457 (~96% of 477) (including non-responses)* Total against change 20 (~4% of 477) * Property owners/occupiers were informed in the survey consultation package that if no response was received by the closing date it would be considered tacit approval for renaming the area Ivanhoe and changing the postcode to 3079.

A summary of comments from respondents who object to the proposal to include the area under consideration as part of Ivanhoe is as follows:       

Major inconvenience and difficulties of an address change. Too much involved in making changes. Potential increase of Council rates and land tax if property values increase. No need for new name as happy with existing name. Potential confusion for visitors to the area. Waste of time, money and Council resources. Local business concerns including updating stationery, business cards and existing advertising. Associated costs and inconvenience. Some businesses located on Bell Street feel that customers identify these businesses as being in the Heidelberg Heights area and that changing the area to be part of Ivanhoe would potentially cause confusion. It was stated that any confusion may lead to a loss of business.

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION Australia Post Council has been provided Australia Post’s “in principle” written support to realign the postcode boundary of the affected area to Ivanhoe 3079 should the proposed suburb boundary change proceed.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 13

5.2

PROPOSAL TO RENAME PARTS OF HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS cont’d

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.2

PROPOSAL TO RENAME PARTS OF HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS cont’d Office of Geographic Names (OGN) The proposed boundary realignment of the area under consideration to be included as part of Ivanhoe conforms to the relevant principles outlined in the Guidelines for Geographic Names. It is noted that any proposed name change to Ivanhoe is reliant on Australia Post aligning the postcode boundary of 3079 to the new proposed boundary. LEGAL CONSIDERATION Under the Geographic Place Names Act 1998, Council is a naming authority responsible for the development of proposals to name or rename any feature, road or locality within Council jurisdiction. Council must ensure that all proposals conform to the principles outlined in the Guidelines for Geographic Names. These Guidelines were recently updated in 2010 and 2013. DISCUSSION The further consultation undertaken indicates that the local community in the affected area is strongly supportive of a change of name from Heidelberg Heights to Ivanhoe. Several reasons have been presented in relation to this proposal, including that Bell Street is a more logical and “natural” border between Heidelberg Heights and Ivanhoe. Respondents also state that it would be appropriate to include the area under consideration as part of Ivanhoe as it is currently associated and more connected with the neighbourhood area around Banksia Street. Council is now in a position to consider pursuing the inclusion of the area under consideration in Heidelberg Heights as part of Ivanhoe. If a change of suburb name and postcode is to occur, administrative updates to Council databases containing address details of the affected would be required as well as maps and its electronic mapping system. Council would also be required to notify the following parties:        

Local Australia Post offices. Local real estate agents. Gas, water and electricity suppliers. Local mapping agencies. Local police stations. Ambulance branch. Metropolitan Fire Brigade Station. State Emergency Service local headquarters.

The OGN would notify the following parties:   

   

Australia Post. Emergency Services Telecommunications Authority. Emergency Management Spatial Information Network Australia – (Victorian Committee) members including Ambulance Victoria, Victoria Police, Country Fire Authority, State Emergency Service, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Department of Justice and Department of Human Services. Real Estate Institute of Victoria. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Australian Electoral Commission. Melway, UBD and other spatial information or mapping agencies.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 14

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

PROPOSAL TO RENAME PARTS OF HEIDELBERG HEIGHTS cont’d 

This information is also distributed through various networks to international organisations such as Google Earth and Microsoft Virtual Earth.

               

5.2

Property owners and occupiers would need to notify (where applicable): VicRoads. Telephone providers. Internet providers. Insurance providers. Employers. Superannuation membership. Ambulance subscription. Centrelink. Pay TV accounts. Friends, family and other personal contacts. All banks and financial institutions, credit and store cards. Club and memberships. School and other educational institutions. Mailing lists and other subscription services. Online shopping accounts. Others not mentioned above.

This notification information was included in the consultation package mailed to property owners/occupiers. CONCLUSION Consultation indicates that there is significant community support to include the area under consideration as part of Ivanhoe, postcode 3079. RECOMMENDATION That 1.

Council rename the area in Heidelberg Heights that is bounded by Bell Street, Upper Heidelberg Road, Banksia Street and Waterdale Road to “Ivanhoe”.

A submission is lodged to the Office of Geographic Names (OGN).

Australia Post is formally requested to realign the 3079 postcode boundary to be consistent with the new suburb boundary.

Objectors are notified of their right to make a further appeal to the Registrar of Geographic Names. Upon the outcome of the submission to the OGN: thank all persons and community groups involved in the consultation; notify them of Council’s decision and the result of the OGN submission.

The relevant authorities are advised of any address changes on behalf of residents and property owners in the affected area.

Council signage be updated as required.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 15

5.3

PROPOSAL TO FORMALLY NAME THE RIGHT OF WAY BOUNDED BY WATERDALE ROAD, JELLICOE AND BEATTY STREETS, IVANHOE

Author:

Michael Hutchison - Projects Coordinator, City Development

Ward:

Olympia

File:

F2013/1366

SUMMARY Proposal to formally name the Right of Way (laneway) bounded by Waterdale Road, Jellicoe and Beatty Streets, Ivanhoe. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “engage meaningfully with our community”. BACKGROUND In June 2013, Council received a request from A.R.G Planning, on behalf of a Waterdale Road property owner, to consider naming the right of way (laneway) that connects Beatty and Jellicoe Streets behind the Waterdale Road shops in Ivanhoe (see Figure 1 below). This request submitted that naming the right of way would enable the existing “caretaker house” currently fronting the laneway to have its own formal street address and number. This request is related to planning application P469/2013. There are two other similar “caretaker houses” fronting the right of way. It is recognised that there is opportunity for future development along the Right of Way that may be facilitated by naming the right of way.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 16

5.3

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

PROPOSAL TO FORMALLY NAME THE RIGHT OF WAY BOUNDED BY WATERDALE ROAD, JELLICOE AND BEATTY STREETS, IVANHOE cont’d

5.3

Locality Plan

Figure 1: Affected area under consideration

Date 11/10/2013

Action First Council survey consultation package posted

Summary Survey consultation package sent to nearby and abutting property owners/occupiers. Package included:  Explanatory cover letter;  Notification responsibility flyer;  Reply paid envelope;  Survey. 04/11/2013 Survey close date Findings collated and analysed. 04/11/2013 to Research conducted Research conducted to create shortlist of 17/12/2013 possible suitable names for laneway for use in further consultation. 24/01/2014 Second Council survey Survey consultation package sent to 49 consultation package property owners/occupiers covering 29 posted properties. Package included:  Explanatory cover letter;  Notification responsibility flyer;  Reply paid envelope;

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 17

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

5.3

PROPOSAL TO FORMALLY NAME THE RIGHT OF WAY BOUNDED BY WATERDALE ROAD, JELLICOE AND BEATTY STREETS, IVANHOE cont’d Date

Action

29/01/2014

Webpage updated

04/02/2014 11/02/2014 21/02/2014

Public Notice Heidelberg Leader Survey close date

Results of the recent consultation which closed on 21 February 2014 are shown in Table 2 below. Property owners/occupiers were informed in this consultation that if no response was received by the closing date it would be considered tacit approval for the laneway to be assigned the most popular name as indicated by property owners/occupiers. Table 2: Survey summary

Subject Number of surveys sent out Number of responses received Number of non-responses In favour of naming (based on responses) Against naming (based on responses) Total in favour of naming (including non-responses) Total against naming

Response result 49 surveys were sent out covering 29 properties (includes all property owners/occupiers in area). 9 (~18% of 49) 40 (~82% of 49) 9 (100% of 9) 0 (0% of 9) 49 (100% of 49) 0 (0% of 49)

No respondents objected to the proposed naming during the second consultation. In addition to indicating their support for naming the laneway, property owners/occupiers were also required to select which name they most preferred from the shortlist provided. Results are shown in Table 3 below. Table 3: Survey results

Name Vandeleur Bennett

Number of votes 2 (~22% of 9 in favour of naming) 7 (~78% of 9 in favour of naming)

Further discussion of the shortlisted names used in the consultation are shown in Table 4 below. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION Office of Geographic Names (OGN) The community was asked to suggest names during an earlier consultation. Seven suggested names were assessed on their validity for use. All but one was found to be nonconforming to the relevant principles outlined in the Geographic Place Names Guidelines (“Guidelines”).

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 18

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

PROPOSAL TO FORMALLY NAME THE RIGHT OF WAY BOUNDED BY WATERDALE ROAD, JELLICOE AND BEATTY STREETS, IVANHOE cont’d

Two names were shortlisted for use in the second consultation. An assessment of the shortlisted names is shown in Table 4 below. Table 4: Assessment of shortlisted names

Name Vandeleur

Bennett

Origin Community suggestion

Council research

Relevance General Sir John Ormsby Vandeleur (1763 – 1849) commanded a brigade of British cavalry at the Battle of Waterloo.

Comments This name has links to the existing naming theme – i.e. name of an Irish commander of British cavalry during the Napoleonic Wars.

There are no duplicates within Banyule City and it conforms to the Guidelines. Lieutenant General This name has some Gordon Bennett (1887 – links to the existing 1962), born in Victoria, naming theme. served in the Australian Army during both World There are no duplicates War I and World War II. within Banyule City and He was Mentioned in it conforms to the Despatches twice for his Guidelines. actions in the Gallipoli Campaign and became the youngest general in the Australian Army while serving on the Western Front.

LEGAL CONSIDERATION Under the Geographic Place Names Act 1998, Council is a naming authority responsible for the development of proposals to name or rename any feature, road or locality within Council jurisdiction. Council must ensure that all proposals conform to the principles outlined in the Guidelines for Geographic Names. These Guidelines were recently updated in 2010 and 2013. DISCUSSION Consultation was undertaken with a refined survey that included a shortlist consisting of the valid community suggested name “Vandeleur” and the Council researched name “Bennett”. The results of this second consultation indicate that the local community remains supportive of naming the laneway and that respondents prefer the name ‘Bennett’. There are no objections to the naming.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 19

5.3

During further research of the streets surrounding the laneway, including Jellicoe and Beatty Streets, a naming theme became apparent. This theme is referential to significant military figures, namely British admirals and officers who served in the Royal Navy during major conflicts throughout the Napoleonic Wars and World War I.

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

PROPOSAL TO FORMALLY NAME THE RIGHT OF WAY BOUNDED BY WATERDALE ROAD, JELLICOE AND BEATTY STREETS, IVANHOE cont’d

5.3

The community was informed that non-responses would be considered tacit approval for the laneway to be named. Including all non-responses as tacit approval, 100% of property owners/occupiers support the proposed naming. Council is now in a position to consider pursuing the laneway naming. If the laneway is to be named, administrative updates to Council databases containing address details of the affected properties would be required as well as updates to maps and its electronic mapping system. Council would also be required to notify the following parties:        

The OGN would notify the following parties:   

    

Property owners and occupiers would need to notify (where applicable):              

VicRoads. Telephone providers. Internet providers. Insurance providers. Employers. Superannuation membership. Ambulance subscription. Centrelink. Pay TV accounts. Friends, family and other personal contacts. All banks and financial institutions, credit and store cards. Club and memberships. School and other educational institutions. Mailing lists and other subscription services.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 20

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

PROPOSAL TO FORMALLY NAME THE RIGHT OF WAY BOUNDED BY WATERDALE ROAD, JELLICOE AND BEATTY STREETS, IVANHOE cont’d Online shopping accounts. Others not mentioned above.

This notification information was included in the consultation package mailed to property owners/occupiers. CONCLUSION The proposed naming of the Right of Way is likely to be supported by the OGN as the proposal itself and the consultation process conform to the relevant principles outlined in the Guidelines for Geographic Names. The community preferred name “Bennett” conforms to the Guidelines and has links to the existing naming theme. RECOMMENDATION That 1.

Council assign the name “Bennett Lane” to the Right of Way (laneway) bounded by Waterdale Road, Jellicoe and Beatty Streets, Ivanhoe.

Efforts be made to seek support the naming proposal from the Bennett family descendants.

The submission be lodged to the Office of Geographic Names (OGN).

Upon the outcome of the submission to the OGN, thank all persons and community groups involved in the consultation; notify them of Council’s decision and the result of the OGN submission.

The relevant authorities be advised of any address changes on behalf of residents and property owners in the affected area; and

The appropriate signage be erected.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 21

5.3

 

5.4

WARD FUND ALLOCATIONS

Author:

Emily Outlaw - Governance Officer, City Development

File:

F2013/152

5.4

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

SUMMARY To consider one Ward Fund Allocation application which have been submitted in line with the Banyule Council Ward Fund Policy. OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “enable good governance and accountability with minimal risk”. POLICY Council allocates funds from its annual budget to provide an avenue throughout the year for Council to allocate small grants to groups and individuals, or towards projects or events that benefit the Banyule Community. The allocation of these ward funds is subject to the requirements of the Banyule Council Ward Fund Policy. Council recognises that there are community needs and requests, on a small scale, which occur throughout the year, which merit consideration and funding. These requests are usually not known at the time of the adoption of the budget. The establishment of the Banyule Council Ward Fund Policy allows Council the opportunity to fund those grant applications which meet the criteria of the Policy, and in accordance with the procedures set out in the Policy. A key requirement of the Policy is that all applications must support the delivery of the City Plan, be consistent with Council’s strategic directions and provide benefit to Banyule residents and community. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 22

Participation – Community Involvement in Community Life

WARD FUND ALLOCATIONS cont’d APPLICATIONS

1 Councillor Name: Cr Mark Di Pasquale Ward: Bakewell Funding Recipient: Rotary Club of Greensborough Central Amount Requested by Applicant: $1,249.00 Ward Fund Contribution: $1,249.00 Purpose/Reason: Purchase a marquee to be used for future community events and activities that the Rotary Club holds.

5.4

The following ward fund application/s have been received, and having received the support of the respective ward Councillor/s are submitted for approval by Council:

Please Note: Copy of application forms and supporting documentation provided attached (refer Attachment 1). CONCLUSION The ward fund application/s submitted for consideration in this report have been determined by the supporting Councillor to meet the criteria of the Banyule Council Ward Fund Policy. In accordance with the Policy, Council must decide at a Council meeting to approve or reject the application/s.

RECOMMENDATION That: 1.

Council, having considered the Ward Fund applications in line with the Banyule Ward Fund Policy, approve the following applications for payment, subject to all acquittal documentation being provided: 

Rotary Club of Greensborough Central $1,249.00

That the beneficiaries be notified of Council’s decision.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Rotary Club of Greensborough Central Ward Fund application

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 52

Page 23

6.1

BANYULE WARD FUNDS - REVIEW OF POLICY

Author:

Gina Burden - Manager Governance, Information & Laws, City Development

File:

F2014/440

6.1

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

SUMMARY This report considers the review of the Banyule Ward Fund Policy and recommends that the policy be amended to incorporate an Expression of Interest (EOI) process to ensure greater consistency with the administration of Council’s other community grants programs OFFICER DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Section 80C of the Local Government Act 1989 requires members of Council staff, and persons engaged under contract to provide advice to Council, to disclose any direct or indirect interest in a matter to which the advice relates. Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter. CITY PLAN This report is in line with Council’s City Plan key direction to “enable good governance and accountability with minimal risk”. BACKGROUND Council has operated a Ward Fund program since 2006, whereby each Councillor is allocated an equal budgeted annual amount which they are able to recommend to Council be granted to groups, individuals or projects within their wards. The current budgeted amount is $30,000 per Councillor. In March 2013, Council formally adopted a policy for the administration of the Ward Fund Program; the policy was then updated in August 2013 to incorporate some further parameters following a review of Council’s policy by the Local Government Investigation and Compliance Inspectorate (the Inspectorate) In November 2013, the Inspectorate released its State wide report on the Review of Councillor Discretionary Funds (CFDs), which was reported to Council at its meeting on 2 December 2013. In summary, the report highlighted the Inspectorate’s concerns with CFDs, sighted examples of good and poor practices within local government, and in conclusion recommended to the Minister that legislation be introduced to abolish CFDs or mandate their requirements. Since the release of the Inspectorate’s report, to date no further advice has been received regarding what action the Minister will take based on the Inspectorate’s recommendations. Council has therefore continued operating the Ward Fund program under the current policy; however, at its meeting on 17 March 2014, Council considered and adopted the following Notice Of Motion:

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 25

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

BANYULE WARD FUNDS - REVIEW OF POLICY contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d

6.1

â&#x20AC;&#x153;That 1.

Council develop options to refine and improve the operation of Banyule's Ward funding grants program by introducing greater consistency in its application with the other community grants programs administered by Council;

Councillors be actively engaged in the development of these options;

This process be undertaken as a matter of urgent priority given that deliberations concerning the 2014-15 budget are approaching and that Councillors will need to establish the level of funding to be directed to the Ward funding grants program as well as the other community grant programs administered by Council."

The explanation given for the Notice of Motion was that the Ward funding grants program is delivered in a clear, transparent and fully accountable process, and is consistent with State Government legislation and guidelines concerning the operation and governance of Council finances. Nevertheless, Councillors believe that there may be an opportunity to refine and improve the operation of this program by introducing greater consistency in its application with the other community grants programs administered by Council. These changes could also help to address the concerns of some community members regarding the integrity of the program. HUMAN RIGHTS CHARTER In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is in any way limited, restricted, or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues. CONSULTATION Councillors have been consulted with regard to consideration of the options for the future operation of the Ward Fund program and have actively been involved in the preparation of the new EOI process and the amendments to the Policy. This included a briefing of Councillors and an opportunity for Councillors to respond to the draft document. Feedback from Councillors has been incorporated in the proposed amended policy. DISCUSSION Other Council Grant programs Apart from the Ward Funds program, Council operates two other grants programs, these being the Community Grants and the Environment Grants. The key element in the administration of these two grants is the call for expressions of interest which occurs annually. Applications are made online, and the applications received are assessed by officers against a set of criteria. Weightings are also applied in order to prioritise applications.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 26

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

BANYULE WARD FUNDS - REVIEW OF POLICY cont’d

6.1

Another feature is the holding of an annual event to award the grants to the successful recipients. This event is always well attended and received, and showcases the worthwhile initiatives and projects that are being achieved throughout Banyule with the support of these grants. Inspectorate’s view While the Inspectorate in their report to the Minister indicated that, in general the practices of CDFs sit uncomfortably with the Inspectorate, they acknowledged that most councils operate a community grants program of some kind, and considered these to be a good alternative to CDF programs. The Inspectorate stated that the main difference was that the community grants programs had more stringent, transparent and accountable processes. Further they questioned the value of a CDF program at all, when the only difference between the stated objectives of each program is whether or not an individual councillor, or group of councillors, is publicly seen to be giving money to certain persons or groups. In their evaluation of what constitutes an accountable CDF program, the Inspectorate listed the following criteria: Criteria of a good CDF program:      

Application process Criteria for Eligibility Transparent assessment of applications Information regarding CDF recipients Acquittals process Protection against conflicts of interest

The proposed amended Banyule policy and process which has been developed (attached) covers off on all of the criteria of a good CDF program as defined above. New EOI process and amended policy: In their consideration of the options for the future operation of the Ward Funds, Banyule’s Councillors were generally supportive of amending the policy to incorporate an EOI process similar to that of the other Community Grants programs. This includes using an EOI process to both receive and assess the applications, and also to allow for the holding of regular small functions to award the successful recipients, again similar to those functions held for the community and environment grants. Councillors however, will retain a role in recommending of the Ward Funds to Council at the conclusion of the EOI process. The key features of the proposed amended policy, includes:     

Quarterly open EOI process for receiving and accessing applications. Reviewed criteria for assessing whether applications qualify. Priorities defined in terms of which applications will be given greater weighting. Applications to be logged on line using Smarty Grants program (though hard copy applications will also be available). Ability to cross reference applications to determine if they have received prior funding through other Council grants.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 27

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

BANYULE WARD FUNDS - REVIEW OF POLICY cont’d

6.1

     

Initial assessments and recommendations to be made by Officers and then referred to the relevant ward councillors. The current stringent acquittal process will still apply. Increased transparency with regard to applications that are unsuccessful. Public recognition of ward fund recipients through the holding of events similar to that for the awarding of Council’s other community grants. Process for allowing the consideration of urgent ward funds outside of the EOI process. Process for considering Council initiated projects.

In the attachment to this report, the changes to the body of the amended policy has been highlighted in yellow for ease of reference, and the new EOI process and criteria/ weightings has been added to the policy as appendices. TIMELINES Upon Council adoption of the proposed amended policy, the new EOI process will come into effect. It is anticipated that the first of these will be advertised in April and the first quarterly report recommending the allocation of ward funds, resulting from the EOI process, will be reported to Council in May. The process will occur on a quarterly basis from then on. CONCLUSION While, there has been no further advice to date from the Minister as to what action will be taken in relation to the future of CDFs, The majority of Banyule’s Councillors continue to support the retention of a ward fund program and consider that it provides invaluable assistance to the community. However, they have also recognised that there is an opportunity to improve even further the process used at Banyule and to bring it into closer line with the processes used to administer Council’s other community grant programs, which operate very successfully. This will allow greater consistency between the programs, while still allowing Councillors the ability to operate a ward based funding program. RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1.

Adopt the amended Banyule Ward Fund Policy (attached), noting that the amended policy incorporates an expression of interest process and updated criteria for assessing and awarding ward funds in future; and

Advise and forward a copy of the amended Banyule Ward Fund Policy to the Local Government Investigation and Compliance Inspectorate.

ATTACHMENTS No.

Title

Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 54

Page 28

6.2

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS

Author:

Kellie O'Shea - Governance, Information & Laws Project Officer, City Development

File:

F2014/337

SUMMARY Under the Local Government Act 1989 an Assembly of Councillors is defined as: A meeting of an advisory committee of the Council, if at least one Councillor is present or; A planned or scheduled meeting of at least half of the Councillors and one member of Council staff which considers matters that are intended or likely to bea) the subject of a decision of the Council or; b) subject to the exercise of a function, duty or power of the Council that has been delegated to a person or committee. In accordance with Section 80A of the Local Government Act 1989 Council is required to report as soon as possible to an Ordinary Meeting of Council a record of any assemblies of Councillors held. Below is the latest listing of notified assemblies of Councillors held at Banyule City Council. RECORD OF ASSEMBLIES 1

Date of Assembly:

12 March 2014

Type of Meeting:

Banyule Environmental Advisory Committee (BEAC)

Matters Considered:

Councillors Present:

Steven Briffa Craig Langdon

Staff Present:

Fleur Anderson, Environment Officer Clayton Simpson, Resource Conservation Officer Peter Armistead, Arborist - Development Planning

Others Present:

John D’Aloia Alan Leenaerts Matt Hall Jonathan Thom

Conflict of Interest:

Nil

Date of Assembly:

17 March 2014

Type of Meeting:

Ordinary Council Meeting

Matters Considered:

Items on the Council Agenda for the Ordinary Meeting of 17 March 2014 (excluding confidential items) as listed below:

ESO4/VPO5 Application and Tree Removal Local Challenges – BEAC strategic direction Main Yarra Trail Realignment – Banyule Flats Liberty Parade, West Heidelberg - Scouts Hall property - Wilson’s Reserve management plan - WaterMarc energy efficiency star rating

4.1 Warringal Parklands and Banyule Flats

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 29

6.2

Performance - Use Our Resources Wisely

ASSEMBLY OF COUNCILLORS contâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d Heritage Assessment North East Road Link - Quarterly Report 10 Martin Street, Heidelberg Assembly of Councillors Councillor Motions - Status Update Birdwood Avenue, Macleod - Macleod Preschool Parking Issues 8.2 Illegal Motor Bikes - Darebin Creek 8.3 Apprentices - Banyule City Council 8.4 Investigation - Traffic Challenges Bungay Street, Watsonia 8.5 Banyule City Council Ward Funding Grants Program Improvements 8.6 Ivanhoe Primary School - Traffic Concerns in Ailsa Grove 8.7 Youth Council General Business: - Possible Advertising Space within Banyule - Relay for Life Urgent Business: - Confidential Contractual Matter

6.2

4.2 4.3 6.1 6.2 8.1

Councillors Present:

Steven Briffa Mark Di Pasquale Rick Garotti Craig Langdon Tom Melican Jenny Mulholland Wayne Phillips

Staff Present:

Simon McMillan, Chief Executive Officer Allison Beckwith, Director Community Programs Scott Walker, Director City Development Geoff Glynn, Director Assets & City Services Gina Burden, Manager Governance, Information and Laws Emily Outlaw, Council Governance Liaison Officer Daniel Kollmorgen, Acting Manager Strategic & Economic Development Peter Utri, Acting Director Corporate Services Joel Elbourne, Acting Manager Development Services

Others Present:

Nil

Conflict of Interest:

Cr Jenny Mulholland declared an interest in item 4.3 10 Martin Street, Heidelberg, and left the room at 7.20pm, prior to the item being discussed.

RECOMMENDATION That the Assembly of Councillors report be received. ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 30

7.1

SEALING OF DOCUMENTS

Author:

Lorraine James - Property Officer, City Development

Ward:

Beale

File:

F2014/511

7.1

Sealing of Documents

The following documents require the affixing of the Common Seal of Council: 1

PARTY\PARTIES: . OFFICER: FILE NUMBER: DOCUMENT: ADDRESS: WARD: BRIEF EXPLANATION:

Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and Banyule City Council Lorraine James F2014/511 ST5820 Transfer of Land Paraweena Court, Greensborough Beale Despite the title to the ‘road’ known as Paraweena Court, Greensborough, vesting in Council pursuant to Schedule 5 Clause 4 of the Road Management Act 2004, the title remains registered in the name of the original subdivider, a deregistered company namely Netrise Nominees Pty Limited (the deregistered company). Under s601AD(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (the Act) any property of the deregistered company vests in the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). ASIC has the power, under the provisions of the Act, to deal with the property of a deregistered company, including divesting itself of such property. ASIC have agreed to transfer title to the ‘road’ to Council, provided Council meets the nominal cost to lodge the relevant documentation to effect the transfer. The Transfer of Land between the deregistered company and Banyule City Council has been prepared and requires the affixing of Council’s seal to ratify and facilitate the transfer of the title.

RECOMMENDATION That the Common Seal of the Banyule City Council be affixed to the following document: 1.

Transfer of Land between Netrise Nominees Pty Ltd (deregistered) and Banyule City Council to transfer into Council’s name the land comprised in certificate of title volume 6543 folio 564, being the title to Paraweena Court, Greensborough.

ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 31

8.1

ON LINE HARD WASTE BOOKINGS

Author:

Cr Jenny Mulholland

File:

F2014/492

8.1

Notice of Motion

TAKE NOTICE that it is my intention to move: “That Council investigate the opportunity of introducing the ability for residents to book hard waste collections online.” Explanation Since the introduction of the Banyule Waste Service in 2006, residents have been able to receive two booked hard waste collections each calendar year. After implementing the bin based green waste service in 2004, residents then had the choice of two hard waste collections, two bundled branch collections or one of each per year. The service is well received with over 19,500 bookings taken in the last 12 months; however residents can only arrange a collection by phoning Banyule’s Customer Service and booking a suitable date. With the technology now available, Council should investigate the opportunity of offering online bookings as well as any other alternatives that may be viable.

CR JENNY MULHOLLAND Griffin Ward ATTACHMENTS Nil

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 31 March 2014

Page 33

ATTACHMENTS

1.1

Further signatories to petition to retain and reopen Bellfield, Haig Street and Banksia College School Sites Attachment 1

1.2

Joint Letter Opposing Proposed Sale of 3 Somerleigh Crescent, Greensborough Attachment 1

5.1

Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014 .................................... 39

Ward Fund Allocations Attachment 1

6.1

Joint Letter Cover Letter .................................................................. 37

Advocacy on behalf of the Community - July 2013 to January 2014 Attachment 1

5.4

Petition Extra Pages Submitted ....................................................... 36

Rotary Club of Greensborough Central Ward Fund application ....................................................................................... 52

Banyule Ward Funds - Review of Policy Attachment 1

Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process ...................... 54

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 35

Attachment 1: Petition Extra Pages Submitted

Attachment 1

1.1

Item: 1.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 36

1.2

Attachment 1: Joint Letter Cover Letter

Attachment 1

Item: 1.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 37

Attachment 1

1.2

Item: 1.2

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 38

Attachment 1: Joint Letter Cover Letter

5.1

Attachment 1: Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Attachment 1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 39

Attachment 1: Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Attachment 1

5.1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 40

5.1

Attachment 1: Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Attachment 1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 41

Attachment 1: Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Attachment 1

5.1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 42

5.1

Attachment 1: Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Attachment 1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 43

Attachment 1: Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Attachment 1

5.1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 44

5.1

Attachment 1: Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Attachment 1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 45

Attachment 1: Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Attachment 1

5.1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 46

5.1

Attachment 1: Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Attachment 1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 47

Attachment 1: Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Attachment 1

5.1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 48

5.1

Attachment 1: Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Attachment 1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 49

Attachment 1: Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Attachment 1

5.1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 50

5.1

Attachment 1: Advocacy Report July 2013 - January 2014

Attachment 1

Item: 5.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 51

Attachment 1: Rotary Club of Greensborough Central Ward Fund application

Attachment 1

5.4

Item: 5.4

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 52

5.4

Attachment 1: Rotary Club of Greensborough Central Ward Fund application

Attachment 1

Item: 5.4

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 53

Attachment 1: Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process

Attachment 1

6.1

Item: 6.1

BANYULE COUNCIL WARD FUND POLICY

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 54

Item: 6.1

Attachment 1: Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process

PURPOSE ........................................................................................................... 3

BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 3

POLICY PRINCIPLE ........................................................................................... 3

CHARTER OF HUMAN RIGHTS ........................................................................ 3

DEFINITIONS…………………………………………………………………………...4

POLICY STATEMENT ........................................................................................ 4

APPLICATIONS .................................................................................................. 7

ACQUITTAL AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ....................................................... 7

RELATED POLICIES AND REFERENCES…………………………………………8

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 55

Attachment 1

6.1

Table of Contents

Item: 6.1

6.1

Attachment 1: Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process

PURPOSE

The purpose of this Policy is to prescribe the process to be followed for the expenditure of funds from the Banyule Council Ward Fund. It also sets guiding criteria for determining the allocation of funds to individuals and groups within Banyule.

BACKGROUND

Council allocates funds from its annual budget to provide an avenue throughout the year for Council to allocate small grants to groups and individuals, or towards projects or events that benefit the Banyule Community.

Attachment 1

Council recognises that there are community needs and requests, on a small scale, which occur throughout the year, which merit consideration and funding. These requests are usually not known at the time of the adoption of the budget The establishment of the Council Ward Fund allows Council the opportunity to fund those grant applications which meet the criteria of this Policy, and in accordance with the procedures set out in the Policy. The distribution of ward funds will occur in a manner that is transparent and accountable to the citizens of Banyule given that applications for funding will be received through an open Expression of Interest (EOI) process, and all ward funds recommendations must be considered as an item of business during an ordinary meeting of Council. This ensures all ward funds distributions are subject to the highest degree of transparent public scrutiny.

POLICY PRINCIPLE

The Ward Fund has been established for the purpose of allocating small grants to individuals, groups and activities that support the delivery of the City Plan, are consistent with Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s strategic directions, and provide benefit to Banyule residents and community. In allocating Ward Funds, Councillors will be mindful of observing their obligations under the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act), particularly the provisions relating to Conflicts of Interest (s77A), Councillor Conduct Principles (s76BA), and Misuse of Position (s76D). These provisions require Councillors to exercise their duties and judgment in accordance with good governance principles. It is within this context that the Council Ward Funds are to be allocated and administered. 4.

CHARTER OF HUMAN RIGHTS

In developing this Policy, the subject matter has been considered to determine if it raises any human rights issues. In particular, whether the scope of any human right established by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is, in any way, limited, restricted or interfered with by the recommendations contained in this report. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 56

Item: 6.1

Attachment 1: Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process

DEFINITIONS

Organisation

A community group that is incorporated, community based and managed, is not for profit, has open membership to Banyule residents and is not a political body. Examples include sporting or recreational bodies, arts and cultural groups, youth groups, playgroups, environmental groups.

6.1

For the purposes of this policy the terms below have the following meanings:

Project/Activity

Projects or activities that are likely to give rise to sustainable outcomes for the Banyule community, are consistent with Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s broader strategic directions, do not promote dependence on Council, generally demonstrate a strengthening of the community, and are to be delivered within the Banyule municipality. This may include purchase of, or construction of, physical items, plant or equipment where those items are consistent with the purpose, principles and criteria set out in this Policy.

Ward Fund

Ward Fund is a set budget that Council provides annually to each Councillor for distribution to the Banyule community for incidental and minor projects or initiatives.

Individual

A resident of Banyule, but does not include any staff member or Councillor.

Election Period

Means the period that: (a) starts on the last day on which nominations for that election can be received; and (b) ends at 6pm on election day.

Expression of Interest Process

Means the process for calling of ward fund applications and considering applications in accordance with the process specified in Appendix 1 of this policy.

POLICY STATEMENT

6.1

Each Councillor, subject to an annual budget, and in accordance with the guidelines referred to in this policy, will have the discretion to nominate to Council the expenditure of funds to sponsor organisations and individuals within their Ward. Council on an annual basis will allocate an equal sum per Ward to the Ward Fund account. ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 57

Attachment 1

An organisation may be a religious body provided the funds being requested will be used to benefit the whole of Banyule Community and not just those from a particular religious denomination.

Attachment 1

6.1

Item: 6.1

Attachment 1: Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process

6.2

Ward Funds are to be assessed and recommended by Councillors following an Expression of Interest process in accordance with Appendix 1 (EOI Process â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Banyule Ward Funds).

6.3

Reports to Council recommending expenditure of the Ward Funds are to be accompanied by the full application from the applicant and the Councillor Disclosure of Interest Declaration.

6.4

Council will decide at a Council meeting to approve or reject the recommendations of Councillors. It is only following the decision of Council that Councillors should advise applicants whether their request has been successful or not.

6.5

Expenditure of Ward Funds per Councillor will be reported quarterly to Council, and is to include balances for each fund. Detailed lists will also be reported in the Annual Report.

6.6

Funds must not be used for the personal benefit of a Councillor or provided to a person or body that may be considered a conflict of interest under the Act. Councillors are required to complete a declaration form for each funding application nomination to identify any conflict of interest they may have in relation to the funding application. The declaration must be attached to the funding application prior to Council approval.

6.7

If a conflict of interest exists, the Councillor may still support the application by signing the application form but must declare the conflict of interest in accordance with the Act and leave the Chamber for the discussion and vote on the matter. Full details of the application will be appended to the Ward Fund report to Council so that Council is able to consider the application in full knowledge of the details and circumstances of the application. The application should not be approved by Council unless all details are supplied, and the Conflict of Interest declaration is signed by the Councillor/s supporting the application.

6.8

The total amount to be expended by each Councillor must not exceed the annual allocated budget amount including GST. The GST on these payments cannot be claimed from the ATO since the goods and services are not incurred in the normal operations of conducting Council business.

6.9

No Councillor has the authority to approve funding as an individual. The following limits in relation to applications will apply: Individuals $1,000 maximum per application. Councillors may pool their ward funds to a maximum of $1,000 per Councillor in relation to any one application. Organisations With the exception of a contribution to Council owned assets or Council services, a limit of $5,000 for a group or project. Councillors may pool their ward funds to a maximum of $5,000 per Councillor in relation to any one application.

6.9

In accordance with S222(1) of the Act, Ward Funds expenditure constitute information available for inspection to the public during normal working hours and hence will be added to the list of donations and grants noted in Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s public information register.

6.10 Allocations from the Ward funds shall be for the purposes of: ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 58

Item: 6.1

Attachment 1: Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process

6.11

Funding for individuals will be for the purpose of assisting individuals to participate in a sporting, cultural or educational event in which they are either representing their school or organisation located in Banyule, or Banyule, Victoria, or Australia more broadly.

6.12

Unincorporated organisations may only be granted funds if the organisation has established a bank account in the name of the organisation, the details of which have been made available to Council on the application form. Any payment will only be made in the name of the organisation and not in the name of any individual associated with the organisation.

6.13

Where funds have been allocated for the purchase or construction of physical items, and where Council has paid for the entire item, if the items are associated with a Council owned asset, they are to remain the property of Council for the life of the item, or unless otherwise specified in any lease or other agreement.

6.14

Eligibility of applications for funding will be based on the criteria and weightings outlined in Appendix 2 (Banyule Ward Funds Assessment Criteria).

6.15

Ineligible requests include:  Applications representing cost shifting to Council.  Applicants with outstanding acquittals from past Council funding programs.  Funding for retrospective projects or events, ie have already occured.

6.16

During a Council election year:  Council will pro-rata the allocation leading up to the election so that it is restricted to 50% of the annual allocation.  In accordance with Council’s Election Caretaker Policy, no funds will be allocated during the election period.

6.17

During a State or Federal election year, and whereby a Councillor confirms he/she has been endorsed as a candidate or is standing as an independent candidate, the Councillor will not participate in the Ward Fund program, or recommend the expenditure of ward funds, from the time the Councillor becomes aware of their endorsed candidacy, or in the case of an independent candidate from the time of nomination.

6.18

Funding received for an application for a project that does not proceed must be returned to the relevant Ward Councillor’s allocation.

6.19

Any unexpended Ward Funds, up to a maximum of 50% of the total yearly individual Ward Fund allocation, can be carried forward to the next financial year, and will be additional to the next yearly allocation of funds.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 59

Attachment 1

 Ward funding may be used to provide additional funding towards an existing Council funded project, but only where the additional funding requirement is confirmed by a supporting Officer report.

6.1

 Requests for incidental funding within Banyule of eligible Projects/Activities as previously defined.

Attachment 1

6.1

Item: 6.1

Attachment 1: Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process

APPLICATIONS

7.1

All requests for funding under this Policy must be made in accordance with the requirements specified in Appendix 1.

7.2

In making a application, sponsor organisations must demonstrate that the project/activity provides a tangible benefit to Banyule. Details of the time, nature, purpose of the event, activity or item being funded needs to be provided, along with the approximate cost or donation amount required.

7.3

Applications are to include any supporting documentation, such as an invoice and in special circumstances a quotation. All the information related to the application is to be included.

7.4

Individuals requesting funding to attend interstate, national or international events or competitions, must outline the date, location and nature of the event and the expected full cost against which the fund donation will be contributing towards.

7.5

Both organisations and individuals need to advise in their applications if they have made efforts to raise funds through other means or have received other contributions towards the project/activity which is the subject of the application.

7.6

Following the EOI process, Councillors should only accept applications from eligible individuals or organisations. If the Councillor agrees that the request is worthy of an allocation of Ward Funds, the Councillor then completes and submits the Application for Ward Fund Allocation Approval form (which includes the Disclosure of Interest declaration), which is to be submitted with the report to Council.

ACQUITTAL AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

8.1

Successful applicants must spend the allocated money on the project specified in the application. It cannot be used for any other purpose or retained for a future project. Council may seek to recover any money used this way.

8.2

A valid tax invoice to justify the expenditure must be received prior to any funds being advanced to an applicant. A tax invoice must include the ABN of the supplier, the date of supply and either the amount of GST that is included in the price or a statement that the price includes GST and the words “Tax Invoice”.

8.3

Payments made by Council to organisations will generally be for reimbursements of expenditure, not payments in advance of expenditure being incurred, though this will not always be the case given applications for financial donations and general fundraising are acceptable. Payments to individuals to attend interstate, national or international events maybe made in advance of the expenditure being incurred. Since a tax invoice is required as part of Council’s legal obligations for tax record keeping, it is imperative that applicants make the initial payment for goods they need and get a tax invoice for the payment. They should then seek reimbursement of the funds from Council following approval at the applicable Council meeting. This will also ensure that applicants do end up with the goods that the Council intended them to have. On occasions, reimbursements may be able to be made on the basis of official quotes that contain the same information as a tax invoice.

8.4

Where appropriate, successful applicants are required to acknowledge the contribution by Council and the Ward Councillor in any promotional material related to the project/activity.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 60

Item: 6.1

RELATED POLICIES AND REFERENCES

Attachment 1

Local Government Act 1989 Councillor Resources, Expenses and Entitlement Policy Councillor Code of Conduct Election Caretaker Guidelines

6.1

Attachment 1: Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 61

Item: 6.1

Attachment 1: Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process

APPENDIX 1

6.1

EOI PROCESS – BANYULE WARD FUNDS Steps for awarding Ward Funds 1. Call for Expressions of Interest.

Process  Advertisement in local papers calling for expressions of interest to occur on a quarterly basis. First one to occur in April 2014 and quarterly after that.

Responsibility

Communications

 EOI application period to be open for 3 weeks.

Attachment 1

 Applications to be entered online via Smarty Grants Program (same program as used for Community Grants, Environment Grants, and other areas of Council such as Leisure and Culture).  Hard copy forms to be made available to groups or individuals that are unable to, or have difficulty with, lodging applications online. These will then be entered online by the Ward Funds processing officer.

Governance

 Online application requirements to be based on the existing ward fund application requirements with additional information related to assessment criteria (see 3 below)  All information relating to the EOI process, the assessment criteria and Council approval process to be included on Council’s website. A fact sheet is also to be developed which outlines Council’s process for grants funding including ward funds.

2. Assessment processing

 Assessment process to be coordinated by relevant officer. Applications to be extracted from Smarty Grants program and processed.  Applicants to receive acknowledgement.  Applications to be initially reviewed by relevant officer/s to determine if meet the criteria and policy requirements. Recommendation to be made by officer and indicated on the officer assessment form.  Applications to be forwarded to relevant ward councillors with attached officer assessment.  Incomplete applications will not be processed until

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 62

Ward Fund processing Officer

Item: 6.1

Attachment 1: Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process the missing information is provided.. Officer to request the additional information from applicant. Ward Councillors

6.1

 Ward councillors to advise relevant officer which applications they will be supporting and amounts to be allocated to each. Councillors should be mindful of the recommendation from officers.  Councillors that agree to contribute ward funds for an application will still be required to complete and sign off conflicts of interest disclaimer in relation to each individual application they wish to support.  Ward councillors may seek joint support from other councillors for a particular application in accordance with the existing Policy.

3. Criteria for making assessments

Attachment 1

 If a ward councillor does not wish to support a particular application in their ward, they may ask that the other councillors be advised of the application to determine if any other councillor/s wants to support the application.

 The criteria for determining which applications will be successful for receiving ward funding is to be based on the criteria specified in Appendix 2 of this policy.  This criteria is based on similar criteria and parameters to that which apply for the Community Grants and Environment Grants programs  Where there are multiple applications, in order to assist in evaluating applications, weightings/priorities are to be applied in accordance with Appendix 2  Cross checking of grants to occur to ensure applicants have not received funding for the same project from either the Community or Environmental grants, and that any previous ward fund payments have been acquitted correctly.  Councillors will be individually responsible for determining the percentage of their ward fund budget to be allocated for each EOI process. A councillor may choose to allocate all of their yearly ward fund budget in one quarter, none, or a percentage of the allocation.

 Standard report to Council to be submitted for

Ward Fund Processing Officer

Councillors

Governance to

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 63

Item: 6.1

6.1

4. Council decision

Attachment 1: Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process Council decision on the recommended ward fund recipients. The Council report is to be submitted on a quarterly basis following the consideration of each EOI process.  No recipients to be advised until after Council has made its formal decision about the successful recipients. The Finance departments, acquittal requirements are to be included in the notification.  Unsuccessful applicants to be advised in writing post the Council decision.

Attachment 1

5. Acquittal process

 Ward Fund acquittal process to operate in accordance with Section 8 of this policy.

prepare quarterly report and advise unsuccessful applicants.

Manager Finance to liaise with successful applicants as per the current process. Manager Finance

 All acquittal information to be provided by recipients prior to funds being paid.

6. Public recognition of ward fund recipients

 On a quarterly basis, a small scale event is to be organised, preferably after hours, in which the successful recipients of the previous quarter’s ward fund allocations are invited to publically receive their allocations.

Communications to organise the quarterly event and the associated PR.

 The reason for delaying the event until the following quarter is to allow for the acquittals to be completed. The money should not be provided until this process is complete.  The allocations at the quarterly event are to be handed out by the relevant ward councillors.  There will be opportunity from both the ward councillors and the recipients to speak briefly about each of the allocations, and for there to be photo opportunities.  Publication of the quarterly allocations and accompanying photos to appear on Councils website and in the Banner.

7. Allowing for urgent ward funds

 Where an application for ward funding is received outside of the quarterly EOI process which a Councillor determines to be extraordinary, urgent and cannot wait until the next EOI process, the Councillor may seek Council approval through a Notice of Motion at an Ordinary Council Meeting.

Council

 All other criteria and requirements of the Ward Fund Policy will still apply to the assessment of whether the application should be approved.

8. Council

 The Ward Fund Policy allows for Council projects and events to be funded or supported through

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 64

Council

ward funds, where this is supported by an officer report. The EOI process will not apply to these projects.  If a Councillor wishes to support a Council initiated project with ward funds, the Councillor will be required to submit a Notice of Motion requesting a report from the relevant area and giving intention to fund the project through ward funding.

6.1

initiated projects

Attachment 1: Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process

 At a subsequent meeting the report, including supporting documentation regarding costs and relevant ward fund forms will need to be submitted to Council for determination and approval.

Attachment 1

Item: 6.1

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 65

Item: 6.1

Attachment 1: Updated Banyule Ward Fund Policy inc EOI Process

APPENDIX 2

Attachment 1

6.1

BANYULE WARD FUNDS ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Assessment of Wards Fund allocations will be based on meeting the following eligibility criteria: Groups  The group is Banyule based.  The group is not for profit  If unincorporated, the group has a bank account in the group’s name  All information on the ward fund application has been provided  Need, merit and overall benefit to the Banyule community  Supports and is consistent with Council’s City Plan, Community Plan and Council polices  Have not received other funding (eg community grants or environment grants) for the same project  Is not a retrospective project or event which has already taken place prior to seeking funding.  Have complied with acquittal conditions from previous Council funding  Do not represent cost shifting to Council from other levels of government Individuals  Is for the purpose of assisting Banyule residents to participate in a sporting, cultural or educational event (either state, national or international) in which they are either representing:  A school or organisation located in Banyule,  City of Banyule  Victoria; or  Australia PRIORITIES Priority and the greatest weighting will be given to those applications that meet the following:    

Have not received previous ward funding Have less means and ability to fund the project themselves Have the widest benefit to the community or community reach For groups, meets more than one demonstrated City Plan, Community Plan or Council policy objective  Are not, more appropriately, the responsibility of other levels of government.

ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL ON 31 MARCH 2014 Page 66