Minutes of Council Meeting - Monday, 12 December 2022

11.1 38 The Ridge, BLACKBURN (LOT 1 TP 336665) – The removal of trees and to construct and carry out works within 4 metres of vegetation associated with a driveway/entry pathway

City Planning and Development

Director City Development

FILE NUMBER: WH/2021/1035
ATTACHMENT

SUMMARY

The application proposes to undertake driveway and entry pathway works in the site frontage within 4 metres of protected vegetation and the removal of three (3) protected trees (Pittosporum undulatum - Sweet Pittosporum) located within the northern side setback area. The construction of the dwelling does not trigger the need for a planning permit.

Subject to the implementation of tree protection measures including the submission of a specialised tree management plan the proposed driveway/entry pathway works will not adversely impact the health of trees 41, 42, 43, 44 and 54 located within the site frontage.

The three (3) trees (Pittosporum undulatum - Sweet Pittosporum) are recommended for removal as they are nominated as having a low retention value with minimal contribution to the existing and preferred landscape character. The remaining trees to be kept on site are all large established trees within the subject site which continue to contribute to the landscape character.

If approved, the applicant proposes to replant eight (8) additional canopy trees on the site, with four (4) to be located in the front setback, three (3) located within the northern side setback and one (1) located within the southern side setback area, ensuring that the landscape character of the bush environment area is further enhanced.

This application was advertised, and a total of thirteen (13) objections were received.

This report assesses the application against the relevant provisions of the Whitehorse Planning Scheme, and considers the objector concerns. It is recommended that the proposal be approved, subject to conditions.

Council Resolution

Moved by Cr Massoud, Seconded by Cr McNeill

A. That Council being the Responsible Authority, having caused Application WH/2021/1035 for 38 The Ridge, BLACKBURN (LOT 1 TP 336665) to be advertised and having received and noted the objections is of the opinion that the granting of a Planning Permit for the removal of trees and to construct and carry out works within 4 metres of vegetation associated with a Dwelling is acceptable and should not unreasonably impact the amenity of adjacent properties and therefore issue.

B. Council resolve to issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit under the Whitehorse Planning Scheme to the land described as 38 The Ridge, BLACKBURN (LOT 1 TP 336665) for the removal of trees and to construct and carry out works within 4 metres of vegetation associated with a Dwelling, subject to the following conditions:

1. Before the works commence, or vegetation removed, amended plans must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority in a digital format. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale, and be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show:

a) The locations of the Tree Protection Zones described in Condition 7, with all nominated trees clearly identified and numbered on both the site and landscape plans and the requirements of Condition 7 to be annotated on the development plan and landscape plan.

b) An amended landscape plan to detail any changes required by the above conditions.

All of the above must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Once approved these plans must always accord with the endorsed plan and must not be altered or modified without the further written consent of the Responsible Authority.

2. The layout of the site and the size, design and location of the buildings and works permitted must always accord with the endorsed plan and must not be altered or modified without the further written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. Prior to the completion of the driveway works, landscaping and tree planting must be undertaken in accordance with the endorsed landscape plan that forms part of this permit, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

4. The garden areas shown on the endorsed plan must only be used as gardens and must be maintained in a proper, tidy and healthy condition to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Should any tree or shrub be removed or destroyed it must be replaced by a tree or shrub of a similar size and variety.

5. Prior to the commencement of any site works, including demolition and excavation, the Responsible Authority must be provided with evidence that a project arborist has been engaged as part of the ongoing consultant team to oversee all buildings and works, and to ensure the development does not have a detrimental impact on the ongoing health and stability of the trees to be retained. The project arborist must have a qualification in arboriculture and hold a minimum Diploma in Horticulture (Arboriculture) to be the project arborist.

6. Evidence of the appointment of the project arborist must be submitted to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority (quoting the Planning Permit number and site address, emailed to customer.service@whitehorse.vic.gov.au) not less than seven (7) days before the commencement of works on site.

7. Prior to the commencement of any buildings or works, a Tree Protection Plan (TPP) report must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the TPP will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The TPP must be written in accordance with the requirements set out on Page 21, under Section 5.2 Tree Protection Plan in AS4970-2009 Protection of Trees on Development Sites, and must include (but not be limited to) the following:

a) Tree Protection Zone Fencing Measures for all retained trees on the subject site, surrounding lots and within the road reserve.

b) Detail how Trees 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 16, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 37, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 47, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57 and 60 will be protected Pre-Construction, Construction Stage and Post Construction, and must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority (RA) and written by a qualified arborist with a minimum Diploma in Horticulture (Arboriculture).

c) Tree Protection Plan (TPP) must detail how all hard surfaces, including decking’s and paths, proposed within the Tree Protection Zones of Trees shown to be retained will be constructed using permeable materials; be constructed above current grade; and be constructed on foundations that maintain appropriate permeability for each tree, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority (RA).

d) Tree Protection Plan (TPP) must detail how any services to be located within the Tree Protection Zones of Trees to be retained will either be located outside of the Tree Protection Zones, bored under the tree protection zones, or installed using hydro excavation under the supervision of the project arborist.

e) Require the establishment and maintenance during and until completion of all buildings and works including landscaping, around the following trees in accordance with the distances and measures specified below, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority:

i. Tree 1 (Eucalyptus melliodora) – 4.8 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

ii. Tree 4 (Corymbia ficifolia) – 3.0 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

iii. Tree 6 (Eucalyptus melliodora) – 5.8 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

iv. Tree 8 (Eucalyptus nicholii) – 2.0 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

v. Tree 9 (Eucalyptus melliodora) – 5.5 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

vi. Tree 16 (Pittosporum undulatum) – 4.8 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

vii. Tree 18 (Pittosporum undulatum) – 2.8 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

viii. Tree 21 (Eucalyptus melliodora) – 4.4 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

ix. Tree 22 (Eucalyptus melliodora) – 3.6 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

x. Tree 23 (Ligustrum lucidum) – 4.2 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xi. Tree 24 (Pittosporum undulatum) – 2.0 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xii. Tree 25 (Eucalyptus melliodora) – 2.8 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xiii. Tree 26 (Lagunaria patersonia) – 3.6 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xiv. Tree 27 (Eucalyptus melliodora) – 6.7 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xv. Tree 28 (Pittosporum undulatum) – 3.07 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xvi. Tree 30 (Acacia floribunda) – 2.2 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xvii. Tree 37 (Grevillea robusta) – 3.96 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xviii. Tree 40 (Brachychiton rupestris) – 5.6 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xix. Tree 41 (Eucalyptus melliodora) – 6.36 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xx. Tree 42 (Eucalyptus melliodora) – 6.84 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xxi. Tree 43 (Araucaria heterophylla) – 2.5 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xxii. Tree 44 (Eucalyptus botryoides) – 4.6 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xxiii. Tree 45 (Camellia sasanqua) – 2.0 metre radius from the centre of the tree base.

xxiv. Tree 47 (Acacia longifolia) – 2.0 metre radius from the centre of the tree base.

xxv. Tree 51 – (Fraxinus angustifolia) – 2.0 metre radius from the centre of the tree base.

xxvi. Tree 52 (Pittosporum undulatum) – 2.0 metre radius from the centre of the tree base.

xxvii. Tree 53 (Pittosporum styphelioides) – 10.4 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xxviii. Tree 54 (Corymbia maculata) – 5.2 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xxix. Tree 55 (Corymbia maculata) – 7.6 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xxx. Tree 56 (Pittosporum undulatum) – 2.4 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xxxi. Street Tree 57 (Pittosporum undulatum) – 2.0 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

xxxii. Street Tree 60 (Pittosporum undulatum) – 2.0 metres radius from the centre of the tree base.

f) Tree Protection Zone measures are to be established in accordance with Australian Standard 4970-2009 and are to include the following:

i. Erection of solid chain mesh or similar type fencing at a minimum height of 1.8 metres in height held in place with concrete feet.

ii. Signage placed around the outer edge of perimeter the fencing identifying the area as a TPZ. The signage should be visible from within the development, with the lettering complying with AS 1319.

iii. Mulch across the surface of the TPZ to a depth of 100mm and undertake supplementary provide watering/irrigation within the TPZ, prior and during any works performed.

iv. No excavation, constructions works or activities, grade changes, surface treatments or storage of materials of any kind are permitted within the TPZ unless otherwise approved within this permit or further approved in writing by the Responsible Authority.

v. All supports and bracing should be outside the TPZ and any excavation for supports or bracing should avoid damaging roots where possible.

vi. No trenching is allowed within the TPZ for the installation of utility services unless tree sensitive installation methods such as boring have been approved by the Responsible Authority.

vii. Where construction is approved within the TPZ, fencing and mulching should be placed at the outer point of the construction area.

viii. Where there are approved works within the TPZ, it may only be reduced to the required amount by an authorized person only during approved construction within the TPZ, and must be restored in accordance with the above requirements at all other times.

8. The vegetation removal as shown on the approved plans must not be altered without the prior consent of the Responsible Authority.

9. The ongoing maintenance of the replacement trees must be undertaken to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. If the planted tree dies or is removed, they must be replaced within two (2) months and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

10. The replacement planting must be of good quality, correctly maintained and planted within loose native soil mix and mulch in a location that supports its long-term retention and growth.

11. No other trees on site that are protected by the Whitehorse Planning Scheme may be removed, lopped or destroyed without the written consent of the Responsible Authority. All existing trees to be retained and trees required by this permit to be planted shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

12. The applicant is required to contact Council’s Planning Enforcement Officer in writing within three (3) months of planting to allow a site inspection of the replacement canopy trees.

13. The existing street trees must not be removed or damaged except with the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

14. The subject land must be drained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

15. Prior to works commencing the Applicant/Owner is to submit design plans for all proposed engineering works external to the site. The plans are to be submitted as separate engineering drawings for assessment by the Responsible Authority.

16. The Applicant/Owner is responsible to pay for all costs associated with reinstatement and/or alterations to Council or other Public Authority assets as a result of the development. The Applicant/Owner is responsible to obtain all relevant permits and consents from Council at least 7 days prior to the commencement of any works on the land and is to obtain prior specific written approval for any works involving the alteration of Council or other Public Authority assets. Adequate protection is to be provided to Council’s infrastructure prior to works commencing and during the construction process.

17. The qualified civil engineer when undertaking civil design must ensure that the landscape plan/s and drainage plan/s are compatible. The stormwater drainage and on site detention system must be located outside the tree protection zone (TPZ) of any trees to be retained.

18. Floor levels need to be amended if vehicle access to the garage cannot be achieved. The architect and/or designer must ensure that vehicle access is to conform to the Australian Standards for Off-Street Parking (AS/NZS 2890.1:2004).

19. The legal point of discharge is external to the site and as such a stormwater drainage network must be constructed to the legal point of discharge at the applicant cost.

20. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

a) The works are not commenced within two (2) years from the date of issue of this permit;

b) The works and tree removal are not completed within four (4) years from the date of this permit.

The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing pursuant to the provisions of Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Permit Notes:

A. This application was not assessed against ResCode.

B. The granting of this permit does not obviate the necessity from compliance with the requirements of any other authority under any act, regulation or local law.

C. The design and construction of the stormwater drainage system up to the point of discharge from an allotment is to be approved by the appointed Building Surveyor.

D. All proposed changes to the vehicle crossing are to be constructed in accordance with the submitted details, Whitehorse Council’s – Vehicle Crossing General Specifications and standard drawings.

E. The Applicant/Owner is to accurately survey and identify on the design plans all assets in public land that may be impacted by the proposed development. The assets may include all public authority services (i.e. gas, water, sewer, electricity, telephone, traffic signals etc.) and the location of street trees or vegetation. If any changes are proposed to these assets then the evidence of the approval is to be submitted to Council and all works are to be funded by the Applicant/Owner. This includes any modifications to the road reserve, including footpath, naturestrip and kerb and channel.

F. There is to be no change to the levels of the public land, including the road reserve or other Council property as a result of the development, without the prior approval of Council. All requirements for access for all-abilities (Disability Discrimination Access) are to be resolved within the site and not in public land.

C. Has made this decision having particular regard to the requirements of Sections 58, 59, 60 and 61 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Carried Unanimously

MELWAYS REFERENCE 48 A12

Applicant: WestUrban Group

Zoning: Neighbourhood Residential Zone Schedule 1

Overlays: Significant Landscape Overlay – Schedule 2

Relevant Clauses:

Clause 12.05-2S Landscapes

Clause 15.01-2S Building design

Clause 21.05 Environment

Clause 21.06 Housing

Clause 22.03 Residential Development

Clause 22.04 Tree Conservation

Clause 32.09 Neighbourhood Residential Zone – Schedule 1

Clause 42.03 Significant Landscape Overlay – Schedule 2

Clause 65 Decision Guidelines

Ward: Lake

Aerial image of subject site

BACKGROUND

Site History

Planning Permit WH/2000/11212 was issued on 15 June 2000 allowing for the removal of one protected tree and pruning of two (2) protected trees.

Plan for the removal of one (1) Corymbia maculata tree.

Application History

Following advertising of the proposal, as a means of responding to the objections received, the application was formally amended on 17 May 2022 and further amended on 29 June 2022 under Section 57A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 making the following changes:

· The workshop behind the garage removed.

· Spa relocated from alfresco area to behind garage (with workshop removed).

· Reduction in size of the rear alfresco decking.

· Front porch size reduced.

· Front setback increased from 10.2 to 11 metres.

· Front porch setback increased to 11 metres.

· Front fence removed.

· Driveway shape adjusted to 3 metres in width within the structural root zone of Tree 41 and 42.

· Permeable surface nominated for driveway and pedestrian path.

· External storage shed moved into garage.

· The ground and upper level floor layout adjusted to respond to above-mentioned changes.

· The building height remains at 8.91 metres.

· Revised landscape planting response.

As a result of the Section 57A amendment, the proposal does not require a planning permit under the SLO2 for ‘buildings’ and the proposed design response will not form part of the assessment.

The Site and Surrounds

The subject site is located on the south-west side of The Ridge, approximately 100 metres south of the intersection with Naughton Grove. The site is irregular in shape with a frontage width of 26.06 metres to The Ridge, a maximum depth of 46.23 metres and comprises an area of 1,150 square metres.

The site contains a single storey brick dwelling with a flat roof form. A vehicle crossover and carport are located adjacent to the south corner. The site has a slope of 1.6 metres across the site’s frontage and then slopes a further 3.7 metres towards the rear boundary. A 1.83 metres wide easement is located across the length of the rear boundary.

The applicant’s arborist report provides an assessment of 59 trees. This includes trees 1, 2, 5 – 15, 26 – 44, 46 – 50, and 52–56 within the subject site and trees 3, 4, 16–25, 45, 51 within adjoining lots and trees within the road reserve.

The site is located within a residential setting where there is a predominance of established and mature native canopy trees. The presence of these upper canopy trees and dense understorey vegetation contributes to the well-established ‘bush environment’ landscape character.

Within the immediate context, the following is noted:

North

The adjoining lot to the north, at 40 The Ridge, contains a single storey rendered brick dwelling. The dwelling has a carport and wall adjacent to the common boundary. This lot contains Tree 4 in proximity to the common boundary.

South-east

The adjoining lot to the south-east, at 34 The Ridge, contains a single storey brick dwelling. The dwelling is setback 11.3 metres to The Ridge and 2.3 metres from the common boundary.

South

The adjoining lot to the south, at 137 Blackburn Road is a large lot (approximately 1.8 hectares in size). The lot is used for a community use with the building setback approximately 57 metres from the common boundary. Within this lot are trees 21, 22 and 23 within proximity to the common boundary.

West

The adjoining lot to the west, at 133 Blackburn Road, contains a large dwelling. The dwelling is setback approximately 50 metres from the common boundary.

Planning Controls

Neighbourhood Residential Zone, Schedule 1 (NRZ1)

Under Schedule 1 of the Neighbourhood Residential Zone, a permit is not required to construct a single dwelling as the lot size is greater than 500 square metres. The proposed dwelling is within the 9 metre mandatory height standard of the NRZ.

Significant Landscape Overlay – Schedule 2 (SLO2)

In accordance with Clause 42.03 of the Significant Landscape Overlay – Schedule 2, a planning permit is required to destroy, remove or lop a tree.

This does not apply to (inter alia):

· A tree having a single trunk circumference of 0.5 metre or less at a height of one metre above ground level.

· The pruning of a tree for regeneration or ornamental shaping.

· A tree which is dead or dying to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

In accordance with Clause 42.03 (SLO2), a Planning Permit is also required to construct a building or carry out works within 4m of a tree protected under the provisions of the SLO2 (outlined above).

As noted above, this application is only for works within 4 metres of vegetation with the relevant ‘building’ exemptions under the SLO2 being applied. Resultantly, as it does not trigger the need for a planning permit, the design response associated with the dwelling will not be assessed in this report.

PROPOSAL

Whilst it is proposed to remove 13 trees from the subject site, only trees 11, 12 and 13 are protected under the SLO2 and require a Planning Permit for removal.

Council’s arborist has inspected the trees and confirmed trees 2, 3, 14, 15, 32, 33, 46, 48 and 49 have a trunk circumference of less than 0.5 metres at a height of one (1) metre above the ground level and do not require a permit for removal. Council’s arborist has also advised that tree 10 is dead and therefore does not require a permit for its removal. Its details are included in the table further below for reference.

The proposal includes eight (8) replacement plantings on the site, with four (4) to be located in the front setback, three (3) located within the northern side setback and one (1) located within the southern side setback area. The proposed replanting species are listed as either Lightwood (Acacia implexa), Blackwood (Acacia melanoxylon), Black Sheoak (Allocaasuarina littoralis), Silver Banksia (Banksia marginate) or Narrow Leaved Peppermint (Eucalyptus radiata).

The size of the protected trees proposed for removal as depicted in the Arborist Report submitted with the application dated 8 December 2021 and are set out below as follows:

Arborist Report dated 8 December 2021

Tree No.	Common name & Species	Trunk Circumference (m)	Status / value	Health	Recommendation / Permit Required?
2	Weeping Bottle Brush (Callistemon viminalis)	0.07	Dead / Irreversible Decline	Fair	Not protected under SLO2 (trunk circumference less than 0.5 metre at a height of one metre above ground level)
7	Weeping Bottle Brush (Callistemon viminalis)	0.09	Dead / Irreversible Decline	Fair	Not protected under SLO2 (trunk circumference less than 0.5 metre at a height of one metre above ground level)
10	Yellow Box (Eucalyptus Melliodora)	0.19	Dead / Irreversible Decline	Poor	Removal. Tree is deemed dead and does not require a planning permit for removal.*
11	Sweet Pittosporum (Pittosporum Undulatum)	0.19	Low	Fair	Removal. Triggers the need for a permit.
12	Sweet Pittosporum (Pittosporum Undulatum)	0.3	Low	Fair	Removal. Triggers the need for a permit.
13	Sweet Pittosporum (Pittosporum Undulatum)	0.184	Low	Fair	Removal. Triggers the need for a permit.
14	Mandarin (Citrus reticulata)	0.093	Low	Good	Not protected under SLO2 (trunk circumference less than 0.5 metre at a height of one metre above ground level)
15	Ovens Wattle (Acacia pravissima)	0.103	Low	Fair	Not protected under SLO2 (trunk circumference less than 0.5 metre at a height of one metre above ground level)
32	Sweet Pittosporum (Pittosporum Undulatum)	0.12	Dead / Irreversible Decline	Poor	Not protected under SLO2 (trunk circumference less than 0.5 metre at a height of one metre above ground level)
Tree No.	Common name & Species	Trunk Circumference (m)	Status / value	Health	Recommendation / Permit Required?
33	Snow in Summer Cerastium tomentosum)	0.11	Dead/Irreversible Decline	Fair	Not protected under SLO2 (trunk circumference less than 0.5 metre at a height of one metre above ground level)
46	Sweet Pittosporum (Pittosporum Undulatum)	0.316	Low	Fair	Not protected under SLO2 (trunk circumference less than 0.5 metre at a height of one metre above ground level)
48	Pincushion Hakea (Hakea laurina)	0.05	Dead/Irreversible Decline	Fair	Not protected under SLO2 (trunk circumference less than 0.5 metre at a height of one metre above ground level)
49	Weeping Bottle Brush (Callistemon viminalis)	0.05	Low	Fair	Not protected under SLO2 (trunk circumference less than 0.5 metre at a height of one metre above ground level)

Source – ARBkey, dated 8 December 2021.

* Council’s consulting arborist has confirmed Tree 10 is dead and does not require a planning permit to remove.

Under Clause 42.03-2 a permit is required to undertake works within four metres of protected trees. This includes Trees 41, 42, 43, 44 and 54.

Tree No.	Common name & Species	Trunk Circumference (m)	Status / value	Health	Recommendation / Permit Required?
41	Yellow Box (Eucalyptus Melliodora)	0.53	High	Good	Protected under SLO2. Implement tree protection measures.
42	Yellow Box (Eucalyptus Melliodora)	0.57	High	Good	Protected under SLO2. Implement tree protection measures.
43	Norfolk Island Pine (Araucaria Heterophylla)	0.5	Low	Fair	Protected under SLO2. Implement tree protection measures.
44	Southern Mahogany (Eucalyptus Botryoides)	0.39	Medium	Fair	Protected under SLO2. Implement tree protection measures.
54	Spotted Gum (Corymbia Maculate)	0.44	High	Good	Protected under SLO2. Implement tree protection measures.

Schedule 2 to the Overlay sets out a number of ‘permit triggers’ for buildings and works. The following requirements are not mandatory, rather they are ‘permit triggers’. The table below outlines which components of the proposal trigger the need for a planning permit.

A permit is not required to construct a building or construct or carry out works provided all of the following is met:

Permit requirement	Measure
Buildings:
The building is no higher than two storeys or 9 metres.	The dwelling is no higher than two storeys or 9 metres. It is 8.9 metres high. No permit required
The building is set back at least 9 metres from the front boundary for a single storey building or 11 metres for a two-storey building	The double storey dwelling is setback a minimum of 11 metres to the front porch. No permit required
The building is set back at least 3 metres from a boundary to a road at least 4 metres wide (other than the front boundary) for a building wall height of no more than 3.6 metres or 3 metres plus half the building wall height if the building wall height is more than 3.6 metres.	N/A
The building is set back at least 1.2 metres from any other boundary for a building wall height of no more than 3.6 metres or 1.5 metres plus half the building wall height if the building wall height is more than 3.6 metres	The setbacks to side and rear exceed the permit triggers. The setbacks are: Southern (side) setbacks to boundary: · Ground floor – 7.6 metres · First floor - 8.3 metres Northern (side) setbacks to boundary: · Ground floor – 4.1 metres · First floor – 5.3 metres Western (rear) setback to boundary: · Ground floor – 14 metres · First floor – 17 metres No permit required
The building is less than 33 per cent of the site area at ground level and 25 per cent of the site area at first floor level, excluding hard surfaces and impervious areas.	The site coverage is 21% No permit required
Works:
Set back more than 4 metres from any vegetation that requires a permit to remove, destroy or lop under the provisions of this schedule.	Works (driveway/entry pathway) within 4 metres of trees 41, 42, 43, 44 and 54. Permit required
Comprising hard surfaced and impervious areas (including tennis courts and swimming pools, but excluding buildings) are less than 17 per cent of the site area.	The hard surface/impervious areas is 6% No permit required
The total area of all buildings and hard surfaces and impervious areas (including tennis courts and swimming pools are less than 50 per cent of the site area.	The total building and paving hard surface coverage is 27%. No permit required

The table above demonstrates that a permit is only required for tree removal and works (associated with the driveway and entry pathway) within 4 metres of protected trees.

For further detail, refer to:

· Development Plans, prepared by West Urban, Revision D, dated 28 June 2022.

· Landscape Plan, prepared by Justin Hutchison, dated 18 July 2022

· Arborist Report, prepared by ARBkey, dated 8 December 2021

CONSULTATION

Public Notice

The application was advertised by mail to the adjacent and nearby property owners and occupiers and by erecting notices to the Ridge Street frontage. Following the advertising period 13 objections (13 objector properties) were received.

The issues raised are summarised as follows:

· Contravenes the provisions of the Whitehorse Planning Scheme, in particular the Significant Landscape Overlay, Schedule 2 and Local Planning Policy Framework.

· Tree removal is a loss of character and habitat for the area.

· Encroachment into the trees to be retained.

· Previous tree removal within road reserve.

· The building and front fence is not subservient to the environment.

· Poor architectural response with large flat façade, and white render

· Over development.

· Landscaping plan provides for inadequate replanting to offset impacts to character and / or habitat.

· Reduction in amenity for pedestrians and adjoining properties.

As noted above, amended plans were received under Section 57A of the Act. These plans were informally circulated to objector parties on 25 August 2022. No updated objection responses were received following circulation of the Section 57 amended plans.

The amended plans were not readvertised as the changes made resulted in increased boundary setbacks, and did not create any additional material detriment to adjoining properties. The circulation of amended plans to objectors allowed for parties to be made aware of the changes made.

Consultation Forum

A Consultation Forum was held via Zoom on 5 October 2022. Four (4) objectors, the applicant and Council officers attended the meeting. The meeting was chaired by the Ward Councillor - Councillor Massoud.

Key points discussed during the forum meeting related to the removal of vegetation, the sufficiency of replacement planting and the encroachment impacts to trees.

No resolution was reached between the parties during the meeting.

Referrals

External

Melbourne Water

The application was referred to Melbourne Water under Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Melbourne Water do no object to the proposal.

Internal

Assets Engineering Department

The original plans have been reviewed by Council’s Asset Engineer, who supports the proposal subject to standard drainage and assets conditions. Due to the change in permit triggers with the amended plans, these conditions are no longer appropriate.

Planning Arborist

The application was referred to and reviewed by Council’s consulting arborist, who provided the following (summarised) response:

· The removal of SLO2 trees 11, 12 and 13 are supported; as the trees are woody weed species that make minimal contribution to the landscape character, and as such are no longer worthy of retention.

· Trees 2, 5, 7, 14, 15, 29, 31, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 48, 49 and 50 do not require a planning permit for removal as they have a single trunk circumference of 0.5 metre or less at a height of one metre above ground level.

· Tree 10 is considered to be dead due to its poor health and does not require a Planning Permit for removal.

· Subject to the implementation of tree protection measures including the requirement for the submission of a specialised tree management plan the proposed works within proximity to trees to be retained can be supported.

Parks and Natural Environment Department

The proposal has been reviewed by Council’s and Natural Environment Department, who raised no concern to the proposal, and recommended tree protection measures to be included in any permit issued. They authorised the removal of Street trees 58 and 59 (Sweet Pittosporum) due to poor health and structure.

Tree Education Officer

The application was referred to Councils Tree Education Officer, who supported the proposal and selected replacement planting tree species.

DISCUSSION

The key considerations in this application include the extent of the tree removal and whether the works within 4 metres of protected trees are an acceptable outcome in the context of the planning scheme provisions.

The primary planning control, being the Significant Landscape Overlay – Schedule 2 (SLO2) requires protection of landscape character attributed to the quality of the environment, which includes vegetation notable for its height, density, maturity, and high proportion of Australian native trees, which in turn contributes to valuable bird and wildlife habitat.

The landscape character objectives to be achieved under this Overlay are to retain the dominance of vegetation cover, retention and regeneration of native vegetation or wildlife habitat and to ensure a reasonable proportion of the lot is free for tall trees in a natural garden setting.

In this context, the key considerations to be given weight in this assessment are:

· What is the policy framework for the vegetation removal?

· Can the extent of vegetation removal be justified?

· What is the role of replacement planting?

Planning and Local Planning Policy Framework

Planning and Local Planning Policy Framework Objectives under Clause 12.05-2S (Landscapes) seek to protect and enhance significant landscapes that contribute to character, identity and sustainability of environments. The policy provides strategies which seek to ensure that development does not detract from the natural qualities of significant landscape areas and recognise the natural landscape for its aesthetic and environmental value.

Policy under Clause 21.05 (Environment), makes the connection between natural, visual and built environment. This connection influences neighbourhood character, landscape qualities, climate and health and wellbeing for individuals in the area. The landscape qualities are identified as contributing factors towards improving open space areas for passive and active recreation and the conservation and enhancement of trees and their canopy coverage is identified as integral to maintaining and achieving the above-mentioned elements.

The Tree Conservation Policy at Clause 22.04 (Tree Conservation) in its objectives refers to minimising the loss of significant trees and promoting the regeneration of established trees as a valued resource in the Whitehorse area. Policy and performance standards in respect of tree retention and regeneration are provided within this clause and will be discussed within the assessment section of this report.

The limitations on tree removal and retention of a high proportion of trees contributes to the identified landscape values of the site and surrounds as recognised under Clause 12.05-2S and the Significant Landscape Overlay – Schedule 2.

Significant Landscape Overlay, Schedule 2

The subject site falls within the Significant Landscape Overlay – Schedule 2 (SLO2) which seeks to ensure the key objectives of retaining the dominance of vegetation cover, retention and regeneration of vegetation to protect habitat, ensuring sufficient space is provided and kept free of buildings for tall trees to be planted, and encouraging a tree-dominated landscape are achieved. The Overlay is recognised as an important part of the Whitehorse Planning Scheme, and as such considerable weight is placed upon an application’s ability to meet the objectives and decision guidelines of this overlay.

Tree Removal

The application seeks permission to remove 13 trees (2, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 32, 33, 46, 48 and 49) of which only three (3) trees (trees 11, 12 and 13) are protected under the SLO2.

The main consideration in this element of the assessment relates to the proposed tree removal meeting the objectives of the SLO2 provisions. The objective of most relevance to this consideration includes ‘to retain the dominance of vegetation cover in keeping with the bush character environment’ and ‘to encourage the retention and regeneration of native vegetation for the protection of wildlife habitat.’

Trees 11, 12 and 13 (Pittosporum undulatum – sweet pittosporum) are known as an invasive species, but not formally declared as an environmental weed species in Victoria. It is, however, listed as an environmental weed in many municipalities, including under schedule 9 to the SLO in the Whitehorse Planning Scheme. These specimen have been assessed as ‘low’ retention value. This is consistent between both the applicant’s report and the review undertaken by council’s independent consulting arborist of the application material.

Buildings and works

As noted above, there are no proposed buildings within 4 metres of protected vegetation. The works that require permission are only associated with the minor cuts associated with the driveway and entry pathway, which encroach into trees 41, 42, 43, 44 and 52.

The proposed works, whilst minor in nature, do result in a major encroachment to trees 41 and 42 and a minor encroachment to trees 43, 44 and 52, trees that are all sought for retention. All works have been supported by Council’s arborist.

The major encroachment impacts to trees 41 and 42 can be supported as the new driveway will be located within the same footprint of the existing driveway with only an additional minor cut attributed to these works as the driveway is predominantly above the natural ground level. Therefore, subject to the implementation of specialised tree protection measures ensuring that the cut for the driveway is tightly managed, the proposal will not adversely impact any trees shown for retention.

Whilst the loss of trees from the site, on face value will have an immediate impact on the canopy cover of the site and surrounds, the replanting able to be achieved and enforced, over time will ensure the re-establishment of canopy trees that provide a presence of vegetation within the subject site and wider streetscape. It will also contribute to the longer term future of the canopy of Whitehorse, which can only be increased through replanting as revegetation alone will not replace what is lost through natural decline.

It is considered the property can accommodate appropriate replacement trees which meet decision guidelines of the overlay. The applicant’s landscape plan shows:

· One (1) x Acacia implexa – Lightwood 9m high.

· One (1) x Acacia melanoxylon – Blackwood 15m high.

· Three (3) x Allocasuarina littoralis – Black Sheoak 8m high.

· Two (2) x Banksia marginata – Silver Banksia – 5m high.

· One (1) x Eucalyptus radiata – Narrow Leaved Peppermint – 15m high.

These indigenous trees will be complimented by 17 large-size indigenous shrubs, 72 medium-sized native / indigenous shrubs, 91 ground covers and 134 tussocks (314 in total). Once established, new landscaping amongst the new and existing trees will create the desired bush environment landscape setting.

A decision guideline within the SLO2 requires consideration of whether there is the capacity to achieve an average density of one tree reaching a height of over 15 metres to each 150 square metres of site area (equating to the provision of 7 trees). Within the front setback area alone, trees 41, 42, 43, 44, 53, 54, 55, 56 (8 trees) are to be retained (which are either 15m+ or have the capacity to reach 15m). The landscape plan proposes a further 3 trees within the front setback and within the rear yard is the retention of a further 17 trees. This proposal can achieve a tree density in excess of one per 150 square metres.

Given the combined low site coverage and hard surface/impervious area (27%), tree retention and capacity for further landscaping, the proposal can ensure the new dwelling will nestle into the landscape, surrounded by bush-like native and indigenous gardens and meet the relevant objectives and decision guidelines contained in the SLO2. The fact that the building itself does not trigger the need for a planning permit is an indication that the building has been designed with the SLO2 as a critical consideration.

Objectors Concerns not Previously Addressed

Matters of consistency with local planning policies, neighbourhood character, and tree loss and tree impact have been discussed above. The outstanding matters to be addressed are as follows:

Impacts to local fauna

Objectors raised concern with the loss of a number of Pittosporum undulatum – Sweet Pittosporum resulting in potential habitat impacts. Given that a substantial number of trees are retained through the site, the removal of these trees will not contribute to wildlife habitat loss.

Overdevelopment

The footprint of the proposed development only takes up a small portion of the site, preserving 73% of the land as permeable surfaces. The development will retain most of the existing trees on the lot with the trees to be removed of low arboricultural value and mostly weed species. On this basis, the proposal is not an over-development.

Front fence

Objections raised concern with the front fence being inconsistent with the Bush Environment character. The amended plans have deleted the fence, to allow for existing and new landscaping to flow uninterrupted into the road reserve.

CONCLUSION

The proposal is considered to be an acceptable response that satisfies the relevant provisions contained within the Whitehorse Planning Scheme, including the State and Local Planning Policies, the SLO2.

The proposal is consistent with the Whitehorse Planning Scheme as the trees for removal make minimal contribution to the landscape character and tree protection measures can be implemented throughout the construction process to ensure remaining trees are protected. The proposal will enable replacement planting and landscaping to offset the loss of amenity, landscape contribution and habitat for the site through conditions to the permit.

A total of 13 objections were received as a result of public notice and all of the issues raised have been discussed as required.

It is considered that the application should be approved.

Attachments

1 Development Plans

2 Landscape Plan

3 Arborist Report

Whitehorse City Council

Council Minutes 12 December 2022

11.3 Customer Service Centres

Service Excellence

Executive Manager Transformation

SUMMARY

Council currently operates three Customer Service Centres across the municipality which are located at:

· Nunawading, Nunawading Civic Centre

· Box Hill, Box Hill Town Hall

· Forest Hill, Forest Hill Chase Shopping Centre

Whilst Box Hill and Forest Hill Customer Service Centres have been operating for over thirty years, customer visitation has been in steady decline in recent years. Concurrently, the demand and expectation for online transactions has increased exponentially in the last decade and particularly since 2020 where the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic saw many customers switch to online channels. Council’s Customer Service team does not have the capacity to manage the demand of online customer channels with the current operating model focused on delivering three in person Customer Service Centres.

The objective of this report is to provide Council with considered options to enable a decision to be made on:

· The number of Customer Service Centres that Council provides across the municipality.

· The future continuation of Customer Service Centres currently operating from Box Hill Town Hall and Forest Hill Shopping Centre.

Three options have been assessed as reasonable and viable:

1. Continue to operate three Customer Service Centres as per current service provision.

2. Operate one Customer Service Centre at Nunawading. Reduce hours at Box Hill Customer Service Centre from 1 January 2023, and close on or by 28 April 2023. Close Box Hill and Forest Hill Service Centres on or by 28 April 2023.

3. Operate two Customer Service Centres: Nunawading and Forest Hill Service Centres. Reduce hours at Forest Hill Customer Service Centre from 1 January 2023 and close on 30 June 2025. Reduce hours at Box Hill Customer Service Centre from 1 January 2023, and close on or by 28 April 2023.

MOTION

Moved by Cr Munroe, Seconded by Cr Skilbeck

That Council:

1. Affirm that the main location for in-person Customer Service will continue to be at the Council Office at Nunawading.

2. Reduce operating hours at Box Hill and Forest Hill Customer Service Centres from 1 January 2023.

3. Close Box Hill and Forest Hill Customer Service Centres on or by 28 April 2023.

4. Endorse the Director Corporate Services to commence implementation of the change and communications to Community and staff.

Amended motion

Moved by Cr Cutts, Seconded by Cr Carr

That Council:

1. Affirm that the main location for in-person Customer Service will continue to be at the Council Office at Nunawading.

2. Reduce operating hours at Forest Hill Customer Service Centre from January 2023 and close the service on 30 June 2025

3. Close Box Hill Customer Service Centre from January 2023.

4. Endorse the Director Corporate Services to commence implementation of the change and communications to Community and staff.

The amended motion was put the vote and LOST

A Division was called.

Division

For

Cr Carr

Cr Cutts

Cr Lane

Cr McNeill

Cr Stennett

Against

Cr Barker

Cr Davenport

Cr Massoud

Cr Munroe

Cr Skilbeck

On the results of the Division the motion was declared equal

The Mayor as chair exercised the casting vote and declared the motion CARRIED

Procedural Motion

Moved by Cr Stennett, Seconded by Cr Cutts

That the Motion be put.

Carried

the Amended Motion moved by Cr Cutts and seconded by Cr Carr as amended was then put and LOST

A Division was called.

Division

For

Cr Carr

Cr Cutts

Cr Lane

Cr McNeill

Cr Munroe

Cr Stennett

Against

Cr Barker

Cr Davenport

Cr Massoud

Cr Skilbeck

On the results of the Division the motion was declared carried and the following became the Council Resolution

council resolution

Moved by Cr Cutts, Seconded by Cr Carr

That Council:

1. Affirm that the main location for in-person Customer Service will continue to be at the Council Office at Nunawading.

2. Reduce operating hours at Forest Hill Customer Service Centre from January 2023 and close the service on 30 June 2025.

3. Close Box Hill Customer Service Centre from January 2023.

4. Endorse the Director Corporate Services to commence implementation of the change and communications to Community and staff.

CARRIED

Key Matters

The way in which customers engage and want to engage with Council is changing. In response to these changes, a review was conducted and a summarised analysis is outlined below:

Customer behaviour – increased preference and utilisation of digital channels

Digital customer channels, introduced in last 7 years, enable customers to self-serve at a time convenient to them, improving the customer experience. These new channels are seeing consistent growth, in line with global trends.

Channel	Description	Difference FY20/21 to 21/22
Snap Send Solve	A digital app where customers can easily report an issue using a smart phone’s camera and GPS location, at a time convenient to them. It is an efficient, accurate way of Council receiving service requests and allocating them to service areas.	20,224 transactions in 2021/22 (37% increase from 2020/21)
Pay, Apply, Report	The ability for customer to self-serve online via the Council website when submitting an application, making a payment, reporting an issue or requesting service.	12,208 transactions in 2021/22 (31% increase from 2020/21)
Webchat	A live chat tool available on Council’s website that allows customers to communicate back and forth using written person-to-person interaction. It supports customers trying to self-serve or access information from the website in a cost effective, convenient way.	7,262 transactions in 2021/22 (30% increase from 2020/21)
Chatbot / Webchat ‘Ed’	A computer program that proactively reaches out to customers when they use Council’s website. It simulates human written conversation using pre-defined questions and answers	11,120 transactions in 2021/22 (4 % increase from 2020/21)

In addition to the FY2020/21 and FY2021/22 comparative increase shown in the table above, Snap Send Solve has also seen a significant 65 percent increase in transactions between July and October 2022 (see figure below).

This indicates that the ease in which the community can report issues via Snap Send Solve is contributing to not only channel switch but also higher net volume of customer requests.

1. Figure 1: Snap Send Solve Requests July to October 2022.

Impact to In-Person Channels

The increase in digital channels has aligned with a concurrent decrease in the number of customers utilising the Customer Service Centres. Over the past five years, Nunawading, Box Hill and Forest Hill Customer Service Centres have had a decrease in the number of in-person customer interactions and transactions. Whilst the most significant drop came after the COVID-19 lockdowns, the utilisation was decreasing in the years preceding.

The figure below shows that Box Hill had 5-22 customers and Forest Hill had between 16-30 customers. A peak period was measured (aligning to a schedule rates payment due date), and there was little change at Box Hill but Forest Hill had 69 visitors.

Approximately 30 per cent of Box Hill customer interactions are asking for directions (mainly for the Box Hill Town Hall), and not actually making a Council enquiry, seeking a service or initiating a transaction. This is a small number of in-person customers per day. Council serve a few dozen in-person visitors per day across both Forest Hill and Box Hill, many of whom are dropping off recycling, making an enquiry or asking for directions within the Town Hall. Transactions range from a few seconds to longer, but are on average are shorter than 5 minutes each. This is compared to 400-800 phone calls per day, around 80 Snap Send Solve reports and up to several dozen webchats (with capacity for considerable growth.)

At Forest Hill 30 per cent of interactions were to collect something, mostly the Whitehorse News and 28 per cent came in for a simple enquiry which could be done via other channels. Of the 69 Forest Hill visitors during a peak day, 53 were coming to pay their rates (with 16 paying cash, and the remainder paying by EFTPOS/Credit Card). Importantly, rates payments can also be made in person at the Post Office, also located within the Forest Hill Shopping Centre.

Figure 2: Visitation to Forest Hill and Box Hill Customer Service Centres by day of the week. Source: Time and Motion Study. Note: that the data was collected
Customer Feedback

A survey was conducted with 48 customers participating during their visit to either Box Hill or Forest Hill. The results indicated:

· Customers reported attending Box Hill because it is close to home

· Customers reported attending Forest Hill because it is convenient being located in the shopping centre and close to public transport.

· Survey respondents were asked if they use other channels:

o 50% contact us by phone and online

o 11% online only

o 18% phone only

o 20% said they would prefer to only contact us in person

This suggests that there are viable alternatives to in-person services and customers in most instances are familiar with and able to utilise alternative channels.

Some of Customer Service Centre services can be outsourced to neighbouring locations, some still remaining in person, and other services can be provided utilising another channel or through Nunawading Customer Service.

Accommodation - Forest Hill Shopping Centre Lease

Forest Hill operates under a Heads of Agreement with the Chase Shopping Centre, with low ‘peppercorn’ rent, ($12 per annum) which expires on 6 December 2025. After this date, the expected rental will increase depending on location prominence.

The Service Centre is currently in an inconspicuous location and has not been refurbished for at least 20 years. If Council decided to continue operating a Customer Service Centre at Forest Hill Chase, then it would need to commit to a new lease in 2025. It would be beneficial to move the Customer Service Centre to a more prominent location within Forest Hill Chase to maximise the potential visibility and accessibility to customers. This would be an additional cost to Council and continues to carry the risk of being under-utilised.

Resource Management & Utilisation

To open the Customer Service Centres for their current opening hours requires 190 hours of rostered Customer Service Officer time. Forest Hill and Box Hill each require 2.5 full time equivalent (FTE) staff per day per centre, a total of five FTE (6 headcount). This is due to:

· Both centres accept cash payments; Council’s Cash Collection Policy stipulates a minimum of two employees are required at all times, including break coverage.

· The lunch relief requirement triggers minimum shift requirements under Council’s Collective Agreement 2022.

More than 190 hours (5 FTE, minimum 6 head count), are required to be rostered at those two centres, to maintain opening hours of 9am-5pm, and provide between 13 (off-peak) and 39 (rates peak) hours of direct in-person service.

The Customer Service Centres service an average of 13 hours of direct customer interactions conducted in an average week (source: time and motion study conducted in 2022). The remainder of the rostered Customer Service Officer time (at the two Customer Service Centres) is used to serve other customer channels (phone & digital). The digital and phone which serve a much higher volume of customers.

The proportion of Customer Service Officer’s time that is committed to serving in person channels vs other channels is summarised in the figure below.

2. Figure 3: Activity breakdown by Service Centre Offices. Source; Time in Motion Study 16 -24 June 2022

In addition to the direct resources required to deliver the service, resourcing multiple Customer Service Centres requires the management of operational challenges, including:

· Requirement to roster 5 FTE (6 head count) of highly trained staff across Box Hill and Forest Hill imposes a complex rostering burden.

· The time to train staff to be capable of working at Box Hill and Forest Hill is many weeks longer than for those to work at the Civic Centre.

· Limited ability to provide training and professional development, team meetings and other rostering opportunities, such as an early morning roster to quickly move weekend and overnight Snap Send Solve reports to the relevant service areas.

Strategic Alignment

The key strategic priorities that are relevant to this review:

Whitehorse 2040 Community Vision

Theme 3: Innovation and Creativity

Key priority 3.2: Whitehorse is a smart city meeting and exceeding global standards. Our policies are connected to innovative forms of technology-based public engagement. Community, businesses, students, social sectors and entrepreneurs are connected through digital platforms.

Key priority 3.3: We have easy access and ways of engaging with information about civic (governance), civil (people), community and environment.

Whitehorse Council Plan 2021 – 2025

Strategic Direction 3: Our Diverse and Inclusive Community

Objective 3. Increase social inclusion, community participation and access to community services.

Strategic Direction 6: An Empowered Collaborative Community

Objective 6: Excellent customer experience and service delivery

backgroundA Review has investigated the utilisation of Council’s three customer service centres. A brief summary of the three centres is included below:

· The Nunawading Customer Service Centre is conveniently co-located with the main accommodation for Council’s office-based employees. The Nunawading Customer Service Centre is the only Centre with a full-time Planning and Building Service Desk.

· Forest Hill Customer Service Centre has operated from multiple locations within the Chase Shopping Centre and currently operates on the second floor, near the Forest Hill Community Centre.

· Box Hill Customer Service Centre operates out of the Box Hill Town Hall which is owned and managed by Council, the cost for rent and utilities is borne by the Town Hall Management rather than Customer Service.

The three Customer Service Centres are open for in-person services Monday to Friday 9am to 5pm. Whilst full-service is available at Nunawading, Box Hill and Forest Hill Customer Service Centres, customers typically utilise the Box Hill and Forest Hill Customer Service Centres for:

· Payments (cash, cheque, eftpos);

· Enquiries (such as rates, parking permits, payments, bins liners, referrals);

· Drop or submit (such as recycling, sharps containers, forms);

· Collection (such as Whitehorse News, sharps containers, brochures, bin liners);

· Reception (such as deliveries, directions).

Discussion and Options

Options have been presented to address the following key issues:

· The financial and resource costs required to manage Customer Service Centres is high compared to other channels. In-person customer service channels are utilised by a small number of customers compared to the large and rapidly growing number of customers using digital channels. The digital channels are becoming increasingly difficult to service by the Customer Service team due to lack of capacity.

· The current Customer Service opening hours require lunch relief and therefore an additional staff member per day to open. There is a large number of experienced staff rostered to cover the small number of in-person customers.

· From December 2025, Council will be required to pay commercial rates at Forest Hill as the current ‘peppercorn’ lease expires. By 2025 it is expected that there will be even fewer customers to service in-person. Moving to a more prominent shopping centre location would require extra costs but still risk being under-utilised.

· The Forest Hill Customer Service Centre experiences an increase in customers during peak periods and is valued for its convenience in the Forest Hill Chase Shopping Centre, particularly by older customers.

· Many of the services provided from the Customer Service Centre can still be provided via Nunawading, or an alternative nearby location or online.

There are three viable options which are summarised in the table below.

Option	Nunawading	Forest Hill	Box Hill	Consideration / rationale
Option 1: Continue to operate three Customer Service Centres service centres as per current provision. No change to location or service provision other than hours.	No change	No change	No change	Option 1 maintains Council’s physical presence across three locations in the municipality, making no changes to the current operating model. The existing pressures on staff to maintain the service levels will be strained and may compromise service standards.
Option 2: Operate one Customer Service Centre at Nunawading. Close Box Hill and Forest Hill Customer Service Centres.	No change	Change operating hours from 1 January 2023. Close 28 April 2023.	Change operating hours from 1 January 2023. Close 28 April 2023.	This option will provide the maximum operating cost and resourcing cost benefits. The resourcing gain can be used to service the high volume of customers on the other online channels. As part of the transition-to-close plan, reduce the operating days/hours of Forest Hill as follows: · From 1 January 2023, open Tuesday to Friday 10.00am to 2pm. Closed Saturday to Monday. · Resourcing Forest Hill and Box Hill with two staff, rostering 34 hours in total per site week. Shorter shifts negate the need for lunch relief. Closing Monday would allow time to process the weekend digital requests.
Option 3: Operate two Customer Service Centres, Nunawading and Forest Hill Service Centres. Close Box Hill.	No change	Change opening hours from 1 January 2023. Close 30 June 2025.	Change opening hours from 1 January 2023. Close 28 April 2023.	Adopt change in Forest Hill operating days/hours as per Option 2. Option 3 presents a longer transition-to-close plan which minimises the risk of negative community response to the change. The timing of the Forest Hill closure aligns to the lease expiry maximising the current peppercorn arrangement and would not require future high cost of rent and refurbishment. Option 3 does not have the maximum financial and operating benefit: · Full current operating costs would continue while operating hours would reduce to 16 hours per week. · Resources would still be required to manage multiple Customer Service Centres (e.g. rostering, IT, training etc.).

Considerations for options 2 and 3 – closing Customer Service Centres

If Box Hill and/or Forest Hill Customer Service Centres were to close, in-person customers would be redirected to the Nunawading, phone or online service options. Other alternatives are being explored, where customers could be re-directed to, that are close by, and some still remain in person.

Frequently Used Services	Alternative
Complex transactions	For enquiries that require Council staff trained in providing the necessary support customers would be re-directed to Nunawading, phone or online channels.
Payment of fees	Payments for the core transactions such as rates, animal registrations and bins can be paid at any Australia Post Office if paid by the due date. Payments can be made by card, cash or cheque. Others can be paid online or over the phone.
Collecting and dropping sharps	Currently collection and pick up services are provided from Nunawading and Box Hill; Forest Hill provides a pick up container only service. An alternative that Council is currently investigating is the Department of Health Needle and Syringe Program (NSP) run by the Department of Health that has multiple locations around Victoria.
Directions	Council is investigating the purchase and installation of way-finding signage to install at the Box Hill Town Hall, regardless of the outcome. If Box Hill was to close, Council staff from the Town Hall would be trained on how to assist or re-direct customers. Directions are not an issue at Forest Hill.
Recycling	There are existing alternative locations provided at Bunnings and Coles. In addition to these, suitable alternative nearby options would be explored, provided by Council. The Box Hill libraries is a good alternative as libraries have a high number of visitors and appeal to most demographics.
Caddy Bin Liners	For logistical reasons, Customers are only able to collect these from Nunawading Civic Centre.
Collection of Whitehorse News and Calendars	Various options including: Nunawading Civic Centre, Box Hill Library, and Forest Hill Chase Community Space. Utilise the new Positive Aging Team which will be established in July 2023 to consider alternatives. Some ideas include: mailed out as a subscription, have volunteers dropping to subscribers and doing social check ins. The Positive Ageing function would support targeting the social needs, technology needs and connection for older people in a way that is intentionally designed.
Referral Services and Social Connection	Customers would be encouraged to reach out to other services including: Box Hill · Library · Health Ability · Neighbourhood and community houses - 3 located in Box Hill Forest Hill · Forest Hill Community Space, which is open Mon – Fri 9.30am – 4.30pm, on the same level as the existing Customer Service Centre
Other Services	Dropping off cat cages, printing, collection of parking permits would occur only at Nunawading

SUPPORTING REPORT DETAILS

Legislative and Risk Implications

Risk implications have been assessed against three criteria:

1. Community Experience and Outcomes– impact on accessibility, responsiveness, fairness and equity.

2. Financial Sustainability – impact on long term financial sustainability.

3. Operational Feasibility – impact on productivity, employees and operations.

The risk implications are summarised in the table below:

	Benefits	Risks
Option 1: Continue to operation three Customer Service Centres.	· Continuity of service to customers. · Convenience and choice of location; particularly for those who prefer in-person interaction, find it difficult to transact online or access Nunawading.	· Providing a high cost service/channel to a relatively small number of residents. · Opportunity cost: ineffective utilisation of resources (employee time) required to manage the operations of multiple locations. · Without the resource-salary gains the growing channels service levels my decline.
Option 2: Operate one Customer Service Centre, Close two.	· All services available from one location. This means that customers receive the full suite of Council services. · Cashable savings and future cost avoidance. · Operating efficiency gains of 26 hours from resources (employee time) able to support growing channels. · Enables higher utilisation of Nunawading and self-serve options · Increased adaptability and flexibility in the roster.	· Opportunity cost: giving up access to low cost rental accommodation. · Risk of reducing rating of Annual community survey results.

Benefits

Risks

Option 1: Continue to operation three Customer Service Centres.

· Continuity of service to customers.

· Convenience and choice of location; particularly for those who prefer in-person interaction, find it difficult to transact online or access Nunawading.

· Providing a high cost service/channel to a relatively small number of residents.

· Opportunity cost: ineffective utilisation of resources (employee time) required to manage the operations of multiple locations.

· Without the resource-salary gains the growing channels service levels my decline.

Option 2:

Operate one Customer Service Centre, Close two.

· All services available from one location. This means that customers receive the full suite of Council services.

· Cashable savings and future cost avoidance.

· Operating efficiency gains of 26 hours from resources (employee time) able to support growing channels.

· Enables higher utilisation of Nunawading and self-serve options

· Increased adaptability and flexibility in the roster.

· Opportunity cost: giving up access to low cost rental accommodation.

· Risk of reducing rating of Annual community survey results.

Option 3: Operate two Service Centres until 2025. Close one.

· Future cashable savings and cost avoidance (mostly post 2025).

· Operating efficiency gains of 13 hours from resources per week.

· Provides a convenient location for customers who like to utilise council services whilst utilising other shopping centre services.

· Additional in person services are available during the peak periods.

· Little to no change to operational resourcing savings.

· That utilisation continues to decline whilst it is still being serviced.

The Box Hill Town Hall Hub occupants operate under lease and licence agreements which make reference to building rules. The current Box Hill Town Hall Community Hub Building Rules & Tenant Information states the Hub provides a complimentary mix of services where community groups have office space, meeting rooms, can make bookings for community facilities etc. as well as access Council services through a customer service and reception desk. The lease and licence agreements make provision for Council to update and amend the building rules. If the Customer Service Centre is closed, as part of the implementation plan it is recommended Council:

· Advise the occupants of the closure of the customer service desk;

· Update the building rules to reflect the change and provide the updated building rules to the tenants and licensee in accordance with the terms of the agreements.

The Forest Hill lease with the Forest Hill Chase Shopping Centre expires on 6 December 2025. After this date a new lease agreement would need to be arranged. Termination of the Lease and exiting the building, would require obligations to be met such as making good (how property is to be left), and removal of any fixture or fittings. Terminating early would require the remainder of the contract to be paid out.

Equity, Inclusion, and Human Rights Considerations

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006. It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.

In accordance with the requirements of the Gender Equality Act 2020 a Gender Impact Assessment undertaken. The impacts identified are summarised in the table below.

Impact	Mitigation
Utilise Forest Hill to undertake multiple tasks, often those with disabilities, caring for young families (possibly women) or retirees	Whilst the Nunawading Customer Service Centre cannot replace the convenient location of Box Hill and Forest Hill Customer Service Centres, some suggestions to make centres accessible and welcoming for all include: · Consider adding parents parking (usually bigger and in an accessible location) · Consider creating a breast feeding friendly space which would also support immunisation services. · Provide way signage or any instructions in relation to alternative locations in Chinese and English; to also include contact details for agencies which specialise in providing support for referrals and advice about family violence, sexual assault, income support, housing, legal issues and others.
Like the convenience to attend a Customer Service Centre in the period before and after school drop off / pick up
Experience social isolation or who have developed relationships with Customer Service staff and/or enjoy popping in for company	Alternative nearby locations have been identified for customers that may feel the impacts of social isolation and support will be provided to transition.
Customers and carers of children, older people or people with disabilities who like to have under cover parking	As an alternative location, Nunawading is accessible by bus and car and provides ample parking, including disability parking and has close access to the Civic Centre. Entry to parking is via a service lane which provides a good level of safety, particularly for the older age group or people with prams and wheel chairs that may be less confident of driving or need additional time to get out of the car. There is no over cover shelter for protection from the weather that is available from Forest Hill.

Community Engagement

The following research and engagement was undertaken as part of a review of the Customer Service Centres.

In June 2022, Officers conducted a Pop-Up engagement event at Box Hill Shopping Centre to reach the Chinese speaking community, with the purpose of gauging their interest interacting with Council and what their perceived barriers were.

In June 2022, a Customer Survey was undertaken by a non-Customer Service representatives at both Box Hill and Forest Hill. This was to obtain an understanding of why customers utilise those particular Customer Service Centres.

Three Time and Motion studies were conducted to understand how the Service Centres were being utilised by the community and to get an indication of staff time spent on in-person customer interactions.

· The first study was conducted at all Customer Service Centres in June 2022 and recorded by Customer Service Staff.

· The second study was conducted at Box Hill Service Centre for one week in August 2022 followed by one week at Forest Hill Customer Service Centre in September 2022. This was conducted by a non-Customer Service staff member employed specifically to undertake the survey.

· The third study was undertaken for one day at Box Hill and Forest Hill Customer Service Centres to capture the interactions during a known peak period of interaction – this was capturing the immediate period before Rates payments were due in September 2022.

Financial and Resource Implications

The table below summarises the financial impact of the three options over 10 years from FY23/24 to 32/33.

Financial Impact over 10 years FY23/24 to 32/33	Option 1 – Maintain three service centres	Option 2 – Maintain one service centre	Option 3 – Maintain two service centres until 2025
Cashable savings*	$0	$163.7K	$134.1K
Cost avoidance**	$0	$105.6K	$98.9K
Total	$0	$269.3K	*$233.0K*
Other Costs (not included in the impact above)	· Potential relocation or upgrade costs for Forest Hill · Potential increased rent if moving to a more prominent location at Forest Hill · Capital renewal costs for Box Hill. · Signage for Box Hill	· End of lease, make good costs · Signage for Box Hill	· End of lease, make good costs · Signage for Box Hill
Cashable = Electricity, Cash collection, cleaning, building maintenance, security monitoring, floral arrangements and office supplies *Cost avoidance = Forest Hill rent

Cost avoidance equates consists of Forest Hill rent increase that is currently not reflected in the Long Term Financial Plan. This is a conservative estimate assuming the current Forest Hill location. After this date, the expected rental has been quoted at between $13,113 and $75,600 per year depending on location prominence.

Forest Hill Customer Service location does not enable a great customer experience - it is small and poorly laid out with insufficient storage and poor staff amenity. It has been set up to minimise risk of robbery and COVID (with Perspex screens), the acoustics are poor and staff have difficulty managing phone calls due to noise levels.

Human resource efficiency (hours saved) would be redirected to supporting the increased demand for on-line transactions. Other efficiency would be saved in maintaining these sites, including managing cleaning and cash collection contracts, site inspections and IT trouble shooting. The human resource efficiency impact of each option is estimated in the table below:

Human Resource efficiency	Option 1 - Keep 3	Option 2 – Keep 1	Option 3 – Keep 2
Human Resource efficiency	Approximate Hours Per Week
Managing resourcing and rostering	0	3	3
Opening and closing	0	10	5
Servicing in person interactions	0	13	5
Total HR efficiency	0	26	13

Innovation and Continuous Improvement

Reducing the number of Customer Service Centres will result in a greater resource flexibility which enables:

· Improved customer experience within current service costs through the ability allocate resources to improving digital service delivery;

· Improved customer experience with the ability for management to improve allocation of channel responsibility, productivity management and quality assurance;

· Enhanced ability to manage the net growth in (customer-centric, efficient) customer interactions through Snap Send Solve and webchat;

· Improved employee experience from greater role flexibility/productivity (rostering to single channel for longer, ability to attend training etc.);

· Faster time to train staff (better supervision and training opportunities).

Collaboration

Council’s provision of in-person Customer Service Centres was compared with five other neighbouring Councils provision. Whitehorse City Council has more Customer Service Centres than its five neighbouring Councils, all of which have a similar, or bigger, geographic footprint to Whitehorse (see table below).

Council	Number of Customer Service Centres
Whitehorse	3
Monash, Maroondah	2
Knox, Boroondara, Manningham	1

Conflict of Interest

The Local Government Act 2020 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.

Conclusion

The utilisation of Council’s in-person Customer Service Centres (interactions and transactions at Box Hill and Forest Hill) has been investigated to determine the future provision of this service.

This report recommends Council change the in-person service model by reducing the number of Customer Service Centres from three to one. This would mean that Nunawading Customer Service Centre was the only location for in-person customer enquiries commencing after 28 April 2023. As part of the transition for closing Forest Hill and Box Hill, the report recommends a reduction in operating hours from 1 January 2023, which also obtains operational efficiencies.

After 28 April 2023, some services, will require alternative nearby locations (e.g. recycling and sharps bin collection and disposal). This aligns with Council’s commitment to being responsive to changing needs whilst continuing to support customers who value in-person service interactions.

The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 8.27pm.

The Mayor reconvened the meeting at 8.33pm.

Whitehorse City Council

Council Minutes 12 December 2022

11.5 Community Grants Review 2022

Community Engagement and Development

Director Community Services

ATTACHMENT

SUMMARY

The Community Engagement and Development Department has undertaken a review (including a thorough community engagement process and benchmarking with other Councils in the Eastern region as well as Yarra City Council) of the Whitehorse Community Grants Program to ensure the program continuously improves into the future as well as strengthening the connection to the Whitehorse Community Vision 2040 (and therefore the Whitehorse Council Plan).

The review also responds to the recent Victorian Auditor-General's Office (VAGO) Report, which provides recommendations relating to local government community grants programs, with a focus on their governance arrangements.

The Whitehorse Community Grants program is highly valued by the community. It provides financial and in-kind support to not-for-profit organisations and incorporated associations within the municipality to enable them to provide a range of programs, projects, services and activities that align with the strategic objectives of Council and have positive health and wellbeing outcomes for the local community.

The grants review process consisted of:

· Research;

· Benchmarking;

· Thematic analysis;

· Internal Grant mapping;

· A required focus on the VAGO (and internal auditors recommendations);

· Pinnacle Group Australia also undertook internal (including with Councillors and cross-Council departments) and external community engagement (with successful and non-successful grant applicants and the broader community) to explore program reach, purpose, administration, strategic alignment and the grant categories.

A number of recommendations are included in the Community Grants Review Report (attachment 1), which have been informed by the Community Grants review process and includes changes to the grant categories which are intended to strengthen the Community Grants Program now and into the future.

MOTION

Moved by Cr Davenport, Seconded by Cr Stennett

That Council endorses the:

1. Recommendations in the Community Grants Review Report.

2. Revised Community Grants Policy with the following changes:

a) Retains the Discount Support free tipping as part of the Whitehorse Community Grants program.

b) Retains the Discount Support hall hire program as part of the Whitehorse Community Grants program.

c) Removes Clause 7.25 from the Community Grants Policy, allowing Council to fund activities that occur in a gambling venue or that are sponsored by the gambling industry.

Amended motion

Moved by Cr Munroe, Seconded by Cr Massoud

That Council endorses the:

1. Recommendations in the Community Grants Review Report.

2. Revised Community Grants Policy with the following changes:

a) Retains the Discount Support free tipping as part of the Whitehorse Community Grants program.

b) Retains the Discount Support hall hire program as part of the Whitehorse Community Grants program.

c) Alters clause 7.25 of the Community Grants Policy, to ‘activities that are sponsored by gambling businesses’.

A Division was called.

Division

For

Cr Massoud

Cr McNeill

Cr Munroe

Cr Skilbeck

Cr Stennett

Against

Cr Barker

Cr Carr

Cr Cutts

Cr Davenport

Cr Lane

On the results of the Division the motion was declared equal

The Mayor as chair exercised the casting vote and declared the motion LOST

The Mayor put the Motion as moved by Cr Davenport and seconded by Cr Stennett to the vote in parts as follows:

Point 1 was put to the vote:

That Council endorses the:

1. Recommendations in the Community Grants Review Report.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Point 2a was put to the vote:

That Council endorses the:

2. Revised Community Grants Policy with the following changes:

a) Retains the Discount Support free tipping

LOST

A Division was called.

Division

For

Cr Cutts

Cr Davenport

Cr Lane

Cr Stennett

Against

Cr Barker

Cr Carr

Cr Massoud

Cr McNeill

Cr Munroe

Cr Skilbeck

On the results of the Division the motion was declared lost

Point 2b was put to the vote:

That Council endorses the:

2. Revised Community Grants Policy with the following changes:

a) Retains the Discount Support hall hire program as part of the Whitehorse Community Grants program.

CARRIED

Point 2c was put to the vote:

That Council endorses the:

2. Revised Community Grants Policy with the following changes:

c) Removes Clause 7.25 from the Community Grants Policy, allowing Council to fund activities that occur in a gambling venue or that are sponsored by the gambling industry.

CARRIED

At the conclusion of the voting in parts the Council Resolution is as follows:

Council Resolution

Moved by Cr Davenport, Seconded by Cr Stennett

That Council endorses the:

1. Recommendations in the Community Grants Review Report.

2. Revised Community Grants Policy with the following changes:

a) Retains the Discount Support hall hire program as part of the Whitehorse Community Grants program.

b) Removes Clause 7.25 from the Community Grants Policy, allowing Council to fund activities that occur in a gambling venue or that are sponsored by the gambling industry.

CARRIED

Key Matters

· The Victorian Auditor-General's Office Report tabled the ‘Fraud Control Over Local Government Grants Report’ and made nine recommendations to all Victorian councils about strengthening their fraud controls and improving their guidance and training for grant related fraud, including that Councillors no longer assess and make recommendations on grant applications, prior to all of the grants recommendations being presented to Council for adoption. An alternative approach is recommended with the establishment of an Officer Panel to discuss all applications and provide a final recommendation against each application. A recommendations report will be produced and presented to Council for adoption.

· The community engagement process identified gaps in the current community grants program including targeting new and emerging community groups and that there is an opportunity to strengthen the alignment between grant categories and the Whitehorse 2040 Community Vision.

· New grant categories have been developed based on feedback from the external engagement process that requested streamlining of the grant categories to facilitate better applicant understanding of the grants and ensure greater alignment to the Whitehorse 2040 Community Vision.

· It is recommended that Council no longer funds the Discount Support Free Tipping Grant Program from the 2024/25 financial year and that the funding is reinvested into the substantive community grants program. No other Council in the Eastern Region funds support to dispose of waste and the cost of waste to landfill has risen exponentially over the past five years. Without intervention this will continue to be an increasing financial cost to Council.

· Overall there will be no financial impacts as a result of the recommendations contained in this report, other than a potential increase in available funds if the Discount Support Free Tipping Program discontinues.

Strategic Alignment

The initiatives financially supported by the Whitehorse Community Grants program respond to the Whitehorse Community Vision 2040, the Whitehorse Council Plan and the Whitehorse Municipal Public Health and Wellbeing plan. The following table presents the Strategic alignment of the Community Grants Program:

Strategic Document	Relevant Priorities
Community Vision	- Diverse and Inclusive Community - Empowered and Collaborative Community - Health and Wellbeing
Council Plan	3.2 Celebrate difference and leading the community towards cohesion.
	4.3.1 Work with community organisations to promote and encourage social connections and support community participation for isolated members of the community.
	7.1 Advocate on behalf of the community and respond where appropriate to health and wellbeing needs.
	7.3 Enhance social connection within the community by facilitating social support groups for those in need and provide opportunities for participation and community involvement.
Municipal Public Health and Wellbeing Plan	Priorities: - Mental wellbeing - Physical activity - Social and neighbourhood connection - Social inclusion, including digital inclusion - Climate change mitigation

Policy

The Whitehorse Community Grants Policy defines the parameters of the Community Grants Program and guides the overall management/administration of the Community Grants Program. The Policy then informs the Community Grant Guidelines which detail the operational aspects of the program. The guidelines are reviewed and revised annually, reflecting updated timelines and incorporating operational information received through community feedback.

The revised Policy (see attachment 2) has been drafted based on the review recommendations outlined in this report. This includes revised policy objectives and reflects the new grant categories and funding amounts.

background

The Whitehorse Community Grants program is highly valued by the community. For many years, Whitehorse City Council has provided financial support to a range of local not for profit groups, clubs and organisations to deliver initiatives to the community, all of which have positive health and wellbeing outcomes.

In May 2022, the Victorian Auditor General Office (VAGO) tabled the ‘Fraud Control Over Local Government Grants Report’ in the Victorian Parliament, containing recommendations relating to Local Government grant programs across the State. Although Whitehorse City Council was not one of the audited Councils, our internal auditors are ensuring that these recommendations are implemented, reported on and their progress tracked. As a result of this, and with a focus on continuous improvement it is now timely to review the Whitehorse Community Grants program.

Discussion and Options

The Community Grants Review Report recommendations have been informed by the Community Grants review process, including stakeholder and community engagement, benchmarking of other councils, as well as the VAGO and internal auditor recommendations. The recommendations are:

Continuation of Community Grants Program

1. Whitehorse City Council continues to support the Community Grants Program for not-for-profit organisations and incorporated associations to deliver programs and initiatives that benefit the health and wellbeing of the people of Whitehorse.

Justification

The positive outcomes of the community grants program include:

· Improved health and wellbeing outcomes for the community;

· Increased reach/community participation across the grant categories;

· Community organisations have greater capacity and are supported to deliver initiatives which reflect the diversity of Whitehorse;

· Strong alignment to the Whitehorse Community Vision 2040 so that the program responds to the priorities of the local community.

Victorian Auditor General Office (VAGO) and Internal Auditors Recommendations

2. All VAGO recommendations will be implemented (see p.23 of Attachment 1 for the full list of VAGO Recommendations). Performance metrics will also be developed for the community grants program by February 2023, in time for the opening of the community grants program as a way of evaluating the outcomes and impacts of the Community Grants Program, which will be informed by data collected from the grants acquittal process.

Justification

Implementation of the VAGO recommendations will:

· Minimise and mitigate risks;

· Improve governance processes including conflicts of interest and transparency;

· Improve consistency of grant programs; and

· Improve monitoring and evaluation of the program.

The VAGO recommendations include that Councillors no longer assess and make recommendations on grant applications, prior to all of the grants recommendations being presented to Council for adoption. An alternative approach is recommended with the establishment of an Officer Panel to discuss all applications and provide a final recommendation against each application. A recommendations report will be produced and presented to Council for adoption.

Alignment to Whitehorse Council Plan

3. All Community Grants will be aligned to one or more of the Council Plan strategic directions (which ensures alignment to the Whitehorse 2040 Community Vision) and applicants will be required to identify the alignment between their initiatives and the Council Plan strategic directions listed below:

· Innovation, Transformation and Creativity

· A Thriving Local Economy, Business, Employment, Education and Skill Development

· Diverse and Inclusive Community

· Our Built Environment, Movement and Public Places

· Sustainable Climate Change and Environmental Care

· An Empowered and Collaborative Community

· Health and Wellbeing

· Governance and Leadership

Justification

· The Community Grants Program is a key initiative that works towards achieving the strategic directions of the Whitehorse Council Plan and priority themes of the 2040 Community Vision.

· Alignment is important because supporting applications that link to the Council Plan and 2040 Community Vision assists Council to achieve its own strategic priorities, which respond to and are linked to the community’s priorities.

· This recommendation is supported by the community engagement findings, including feedback from Councillors and the broader community.

· Benchmarking demonstrates that other councils’ community grants programs are aligned to their Council Plan and community visions’.

Consolidation of Grant Programs

4. A number of separate grants programs exist across Council. It is recommended that the following grant programs are consolidated into the substantive Community Grants Program:

· Whitehorse Education Assistance Grant

· Artist in Schools Program

· Activation Booster Fund

· Intergenerational Grants

5. Organisations that receive funding or are the responsibility of another level of government can apply for community grants if the initiative is outside of their core business – i.e. if a school wants to deliver a program or initiative that the State Government would/does not fund but which has a positive outcome for the Whitehorse community, they can submit a grant application.

Justification

· Administering all community grant programs through SmartyGrants provides greater transparency and consistency, as well as ensures strong governance arrangements.

· By incorporating cross-Council non-substantive grants programs into the substantive grants program, it will ensure a coordinated approach to grant offerings to the community. These will become subcategories, with their respective budget allocations moving across to the community grants program and funding capped at existing budget allocations.

· The rationale for partial integration is because the grant programs are meeting a community need (for example the Whitehorse Education Assistance Grant has financially assisted approximately 24 Whitehorse students each year who are experiencing financial hardship). These programs have distinct eligibility criteria (for example the Activation Booster Fund requires the applicant to book an activation pod prior to applying for the grant) and the grants have different funding limits and are capped based on existing budget allocations.

· Cross-Council non-substantive grants programs that are available to individuals will not be included in the substantive community grants program, as they do not meet the eligibility criteria (for example providing funding to individual community members).

· Allowing organisations that are the responsibility of another level of government (for example schools) to receive funding for an initiative that is outside of their core business but that aligns with the Council Plan, will better enable Council to continue meeting community need.

Community Grants Program Categories

6. The proposed grant categories and funding amounts are listed in the following table:

Grant Category	Description	Funding Level
Seed Funding Grant	This grant provides organisations the opportunity to test new initiatives, programs or services. It provides an opportunity for organisations to respond to emerging community needs/trends.	Up to $3,000
Creativity Grant	This grant focuses on the delivery of arts and culture initiatives including festivals, activations and events. This includes the following subcategories: · Artists in School program · Activation Booster program	Up to $3,000 Funding amounts for subcategories are dependent on application and available budget.
Diversity and Inclusion Grant	This grant seeks to foster social inclusion and increase the participation of diverse communities across Whitehorse.	Up to $3,000
Environmental Sustainability Grant	This grant will support organisations to improve their sustainability practices and or promote sustainability in the community.	Up to $3,000
Health and Wellbeing Grant	This grant focuses on improving the overall health and wellbeing of the community through a range of initiatives. For example healthy eating programs, active participation, mental health initiatives, supporting volunteers and vulnerable groups etc. This includes the following subcategory: · Whitehorse Education Assistance Grant.	Up to $3,000 Up to $400
Positive Ageing Participation Grant	This grant focuses on programs, services and initiatives that support positive ageing in the community, including initiatives to tackle ageism, social inclusion and participation initiatives, digital inclusion and intergenerational activities. This grant category incorporates the existing Whitehorse Seniors Participation Grant as a subcategory. This grant supports seniors’ groups within the City of Whitehorse to provide participation opportunities that support the health and wellbeing of their members.	Up to $3,000 Up to $1,000 based on membership numbers
Small Equipment Grant	Enables the purchase of small equipment to support the operation of community organisations, enabling them to deliver services, programs and initiatives that are aligned with the Whitehorse 2040 Community Vision.	Up to $1,000
Major Grant Category	The purpose of these grants is to support larger scale programs, services, projects, initiatives or activities that will significantly benefit the Whitehorse community and deliver positive health and wellbeing outcomes for Whitehorse	Up to $10,000
Partnership Grant (4 year service agreement – tendered grants and non-tendered grants)	Partnership Grants will be the subject of a further review. Recommendations will be presented to Council in 2023.

Justification

The Grant categories and funding amounts listed above represent the type of applications received over the past two years, as well as respond to feedback from the external engagement process that requested streamlining of the grant categories to facilitate better applicant understanding of the grants.

New grant categories (Seed Funding, Creativity, Diversity and Inclusion, Environmental Sustainability, Health and Wellbeing, Positive Ageing Participation) align with the Council Plan and 2040 Community Vision, as well as Council’s focus on positive ageing and supporting our older population to age in place as active valued citizens. The categories also provide a clear line of sight between the Council’s funding support and the priorities of the community. Having clearly defined grant categories will assist community organisations understanding by providing greater clarity and encourage other organisations to apply. Greater clarity in funding categories will also lead to more diversity in the types of applications submitted.

The major grant category will remain unchanged based on an assessment of previous applications. The remainder of the grant categories would have previously fallen into the historical minor grant category (with funding up to $3,000 that will now apply to the new grant categories).

The Seniors Participation Grant which sits under the Positive Ageing Participation Grant category will remain at $1,000 and will continue to be based on membership numbers. The funding will enable older people groups to participate in the life of the community.

The Pinnacle Report identified stakeholder feedback that supported changing the current Community Grant categories including:

· ‘Review the grant categories and their allocated funding including the addition of new categories.’

· ‘Make the categories more specific – Not simply Minor or Major.’

· ‘Cultural Diversity Grants for multicultural activities and for people from diverse background to put ideas into action.’

Partnership Grants

7. Continue to fund the partnership grant recipients while undertaking a thorough review of the Partnership Grants. The current Partnership Grant arrangements conclude at the end of June 2023, but it is recommend that agreements be extended for a further 12 month period while the review is being undertaken. This also provides an opportunity for Council to engage with organisations that may be impacted as a result of the review.

8. The ongoing management of contracts relating to organisations delivering Partnership Grant initiatives will be the Council department directly aligned to the work of the Partnership Grant being delivered.

9. Council continues to support the provision of a Family, Youth and Children’s Support and Counselling Service to the Whitehorse community. The funding and management of the contract will be removed from the Community Grants Program and will sit with the department aligned to the program (Family & Children’s Services Department). Outcomes will be specified and reported as part of the tender.

Justification

· The ongoing management of contracts relating to organisations delivering Partnership Grant initiatives will be the Council department directly aligned to the work of each particular grant.

· Council continues to support the provision of a Family, Youth and Children’s Support and Counselling Service to the Whitehorse community. The funding and management of the contract will be removed from the Community Grants Program and will sit with the department aligned to the program (Family & Children’s Services Department). Outcomes will be specified and reported as part of the tender.

· In 1999 Council ceased the operation of the in-house Counselling Service model to young people and their families and resolved to move to a model where Council funds an external organisation to provide these services to the Whitehorse community into the future. Eastern Access Community Service currently hold this contract until 2025 and the total amount is $1,136,725 over a four year period.

· Due to the complex nature of Partnership Grants (neighbourhood houses, Whitehorse Preschool Association, Lunar New Year, Life Skills Program and Emergency Relief) a separate review will take place with recommendations presented to Council in 2023.

Discount Support Free Tipping Grant

10. Council no longer funds the Discount Support Free Tipping Grant Program ($34,666) from the 2024/25 financial year and the funding is reinvested into the substantive community grants program.

Justification

· The highest number of general rubbish vouchers are awarded to two regional service providers (RSPCA and the Eastern Emergency Relief Network who receive 23 and 24 vouchers respectively).

· No other Council in the Eastern Region funds support to dispose of waste and Whitehorse may be funding waste to landfill that should be shared among the eastern region councils.

· Discontinuing the Discount Support Free Tipping Grant encourages community organisations to develop better sustainable waste and recycling management practices that align with Council’s priorities.

· The cost of waste to landfill has risen exponentially over the past five years and without intervention this will continue to be an increasing financial cost to Council.

Discount Support Hall Hire Grant

11. Discount Support Hall Hire will no longer be part of the community grants program and will be addressed separately as part of the Review of Fees and Charges Project. However, the current Discount Support hall hire process will remain for 2023 as bookings for Council spaces have already opened from September for 2023. A transition plan will be developed by May 2023 so that the move out of the Community Grants program is seamless. Any savings from the substantive Discount Support Hall Hire program is recommended to be reinvested into the Fees and Charges process as discount support will be automatically applied at the time of booking.

Justification

Principles have been developed as part of the Fees and Charges Project so that the process and cost to access Council venues is seamless, equitable and transparent for community organisations and can be managed at the time of booking and therefore avoids administrative duplication.

Grant Rounds

12. It is recommended that one annual grant round continues. If there are unallocated funds from the grant round, a second annual grant round may be opened and promoted to the community. The second grant round will exclude partnership grants.

Justification

· The majority of Councils benchmarked offer one annual grant round. This is because the administration of more than one round per year is resource intensive, difficult to manage within a financial year cycle, as well as being challenging for groups to expend their funds within the financial year.

· Council supports the community financially through the community grants program and would like to maximise the funding support to community organisations. If the grant allocation is expended in the first round, a second round will not be implemented.

Promotion and Support

13. Host a grant celebration event each year to promote program outcomes and achievements and identify opportunities for groups to share ideas, partner and collaborate for future applications.

14. Create online resources to support the application process and translate them into the most common languages in Whitehorse.

15. Provide enhanced support to older people and culturally diverse groups, including people with low digital literacy, to complete the application process.

16. Promote successful grant applicants on Council’s corporate website, including a description of the initiative.

Justification

· It is important that the ‘hard to reach’ and ‘hardly reached’ are aware of the community grants program. As a result, community engagement strategies will be developed to reach new and emerging community groups and support them in applying for a grant.

· Providing a platform for grant recipients to come together allows organisations to learn from each other, avoid duplication and form partnership opportunities and this was supported by community engagement findings.

Recognition of Council Funding

17. All organisations receiving community grant funding must recognise Council in their promotional material for the services, programs or initiatives funded by the community grants program.

Justification

· Recognition of Council’s financial support to meet the needs/priorities of the local community.

· The reach of the program will be enhanced as a result of the additional promotion.

Community Grants Policy Objectives

18. The Community Grants Program objectives are revised to the following:

· Provide a transparent and rigorous process to the Community Grants Program, to support good governance and the appropriate distribution of public funds.

· Strengthen the Whitehorse community through support of a diverse range of activities, services, and programs that are responsive to community needs.

· Create a resilient community that embraces the history and diversity of Whitehorse, promotes learning, growing and thriving, as well as being safe, healthy and inclusive.

· Build the capacity of local organisations and strengthen partnerships within the Whitehorse community to support planned growth, collaboration and sustainability.

Justification

The objectives of the Community Grants Policy require updating based on feedback from internal and external engagement to ensure alignment with the Whitehorse Council Plan and the 2040 Community Vision, as well as reflect best practice in grant making.

Whitehorse Community Grants Policy and Guidelines

19. The Community Grants Policy (Appendix 1) and Guidelines (in place by February 2023) are updated to reflect the following changes:

· Revised Policy objectives

· Grant categories and funding amounts

· Acquittal processes

· Assessment criteria and scoring

· Incorporation of Gender Equity and Child Safe Standard question in the application as it is a legislative requirement

· Updated privacy policy

SUPPORTING REPORT DETAILS

Legislative and Risk Implications

There are no legal or risk implications arising from the recommendation contained in this report, however if the VAGO recommendations are not supported by Council it may increase the risk of fraud and makes it harder for Council to show that its grant program is transparent, equitable and benefits the community.

Equity, Inclusion, and Human Rights Considerations

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.

It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.

Community Engagement

Pinnacle Group Australia undertook the engagement process with Councillors, across Council departments and the community for the community grants review. This included engagement with the following groups:

· A workshop with Councillors and the Executive Leadership Team.

· Four focus groups with: cross-Council departments (particularly those which assess and put forward recommendations).

· A selection of community organisations, groups and clubs that have been past recipients of community grants; and a selection of community organisations, groups and clubs that were unsuccessful in their application for a community grant (11 internal stakeholders and 13 community organisations, groups and club members).

· An online survey of the broader community via Your Say Whitehorse to understand why some groups, clubs and organisations do not apply for funding through the Community Grants Program (42 responses).

Engagement with stakeholders considered:

· The aim and purpose of the Grants Program now and into the future.

· The reach of the Grants Program and the gaps that currently exist.

· Greater alignment to the Whitehorse 2040 Community Vision, the Council Plan and the Whitehorse Health and Wellbeing Plan.

· Grant streams, categories and funding amounts.

· Promotion and marketing of the Grants Program.

Some of the key engagement findings were that the community feel the program is a vital and appreciates Council’s support to the community. The program enables groups, clubs and organisations to deliver programs and initiatives they may not otherwise be able to, as well as enabling the continued operations of their group, or the ability to expand their delivery to impact a greater number of people across Whitehorse.

Some barriers and challenges completing applications exist, including the complexity and burden of the application form, particularly for those with low literacy and/or digital literacy and non-English speaking applicants. Officers will provide greater support to organisations that require assistance as well as continuing grant writing workshops and information sessions about the grants program.

Gaps identified with the program include targeting new and emerging community groups and an opportunity was identified to strengthen the alignment between grant categories and the Whitehorse 2040 Community Vision. Also identified was the opportunity to celebrate and share successful program outcomes with the broader community.

This feedback has been incorporated in the Community Grant Review Report recommendations that are also detailed in this report.

Financial and Resource Implications

Current Grants Program

Promotion, assessment, implementation and management of the Community Grants Program is resourced through the Community Engagement and Development annual budget, which increases by the rate cap annually.

Grant Category	Total 2022/2023 Amount
Cash Grants (Annual)	$153,331.89
Partnership Grants	$749,910.53
Discount Support Free Tipping	$34,663.27
Discount Support Hall Hire	$314,744.40
Total	$1,252,650.09

As stipulated in the revised Community Grants Policy, the level of financial assistance available is in-line with Council’s budget allocation and its priorities. No applicant can be guaranteed funding, nor can any applicant be guaranteed to receive the full requested amount.

Financial Implications of Grant Review Recommendations

Grant applicants will not be able to access increased funding amounts, as funding is a reallocation from the annual cash grants – minor grants category – which was up to $3,000, to the newly created grant categories (Seed Funding, Creativity, Diversity and Inclusion, Environmental Sustainability, Health and Wellbeing), all of which have the same funding limit. The Seniors Participation Grant that will form a subcategory of the Positive Ageing Participation category will also continue to fund applications up to $1,000 based on membership numbers.

Organisations that might not have previously applied for community grants may now apply based on a greater understanding of what can be applied for under each grant category. The development of community engagement strategies will also assist with reaching new and emerging community groups and supporting them to apply for a grant. However additional grant applications does not necessarily equate to more applications being funded. Applications will still undergo an assessment process, and will be managed as part of the community grants budget. An Officer Panel will provide greater oversight to ensure there is a more equitable distribution of funds across the grant categories, within existing resources.

Funding amounts for the Small Equipment Grant and Major Grant categories will remain the same ($1,500 and $10,000 respectively).

Removing the Family, Youth and Children’s Support and Counselling Service from the Community Grants Program to become a tendered contract (managed by Family & Children’s Services) will have no financial impact on the Community Grants Program, as the funding will move across and sit in the Family & Children’s Services budget.

The incorporation of cross-Council non-substantive grant programs (specifically the Whitehorse Education Assistance Grant, Artist in Schools Program, Activation Booster Fund and Intergenerational Grant) as subcategories in the substantive grant program will also see their respective budget allocations move across to the community grants program and funding capped at existing budget allocations. This will therefore mean an increase to the substantive Community Grants Program, however this funding will be targeted to the grants that will be incorporated into the substantive grants program.

As the Discount Support Hall Hire will no longer be part of the community grants program, it is recommended that any savings from the substantive Discount Support Hall Hire program will be reinvested into the Fees and Charges process as discount support, which will be applied at the time of booking.

The recommended discontinuation of Discount Support Free Tipping Grant Program ($34,666) from the 2024/25 financial year will see a significant saving for Council that is recommended to be reinvested into the substantive community grants program to accommodate any increase in applications based on the new grant categories.

There will also be no caps on individual grant categories, except where the grant funding is moving across from an internal grant program that was not previously part of the substantive grants program. This means funding can be spread across categories to enable the maximum number of grant applications to be funded.

Overall there will be no financial impacts as a result of the recommendations contained in this report, other than a potential increase if the Discount Support Free Tipping Program discontinues.

Innovation and Continuous Improvement

A number of key expected outcomes will result from implementation of the recommendations in this report including:

· Stronger governance arrangements will be achieved by implementing the VAGO Report recommendations, with a focus on fraud controls, training, conflicts of interest, risk management and monitoring and evaluation.

· Greater transparency and clarity for organisations applying for a community grant. Organisations can clearly see which grant category aligns with their initiative. Organisations that might not have previously applied may now apply based on a greater understanding of what can be applied for under each grant category.

· Broadened program reach and encouragement of new partnerships. By hosting a grant celebration event each year and promoting successful grant applicants on Council’s corporate website, it will broaden the program reach and enable grant recipients to learn from each other, avoid duplication and explore partnership opportunities.

· More diversity in the types of applications submitted. Greater clarity in funding categories will lead to more diversity in the types of applications submitted.

· Strengthened alignment to Council and community priorities. Ensuring alignment to Whitehorse Community Vison 2040 and the Council Plan means that a diverse range of activities, services, and programs are delivered through the Community Grants Program that are responsive to community needs and identified priorities and have positive impacts in terms of social connection and community capacity building.

· Better evaluation of program outcomes. Council will develop performance metrics for the community grants program by February 2023 in time for the opening of the Community Grants program.

Collaboration

The Community Grants Review involved collaboration with Cross-Council departments, particularly those which assess and put forward recommendations, as well as with the other departments that are responsible for administering grants programs outside of the substantive Community Grants Program, which are recommended for consolidation into the substantive Community Grants Program.

Conflict of Interest

Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter.

Conclusion

The recommendations outlined in this report will improve and streamline Council processes, as well as ensure a better-governed program. The types of programs and services delivered will be more aligned to the priorities of the community and therefore result in better outcomes for the Whitehorse community. Community groups and organisations applying for community grants will also find the process clearer and easier to apply. While the overall financial impact on Council will not change, funding will be better spread across the categories to make sure it is directed where it will be of most benefit to the community.

AttachmentS

1 Community Grants Review Report December 2022

2 Appendix 1 - Community Grants Policy

3 Appendix 2 - Pinnacle Group Community Engagement Findings Report

4 Appendix 3 - Community Grants Benchmarking

Whitehorse City Council

Council Minutes 12 December 2022

11.6 Audit and Risk Committee Annual Performance Evaluation

Governance and Integrity

Director Corporate Services

SUMMARY

The Local Government Act 2020 (LGA) s54(4) requires the Audit & Risk Committee (ARC) to undertake an annual self-assessment of its performance against its Charter and provide a copy of the annual assessment to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) for tabling at the next Council meeting.

To meet the above legislative requirement, an ARC Self-Assessment Survey was developed and sent to all members.

The survey was structured in two parts – ‘Part A: Measuring Effectiveness’ and ‘Part B: Performance against Key Responsibilities of the Charter’.

The results of the completed surveys were compiled into a report and provided to the ARC at the November 2022 ARC meeting. The survey findings, including key opportunities for improvement and a plan for delivery, were discussed in the meeting.

The outcomes of the annual self-assessment are provided to Council, through the CEO, in this report.

Council Resolution

Moved by Cr Davenport, Seconded by Cr Massoud

That Council note the Audit and Risk Committee’s Annual Performance Evaluation.

Carried Unanimously

Key Matters

The survey was developed and sent to all members to meet the requirements of the ARC Charter, Annual Work Plan and LGA 2020.

The survey was structured in two parts:

· Part A: Measuring Effectiveness; and

· Part B: Performance against Key Responsibilities of the Charter.

In relation to Part A: Measuring Effectiveness:

· Respondents rated the effectiveness of the ARC as a whole in areas such as diversity of skills and experience, relationships, approach to working, conduct of meetings and reporting. There were nine areas of focus with each rated from 1 – very little effectiveness to 5 – fully effective.

· The total score was 36 out of 45 (80%).

· The highest scoring areas of effectiveness were the ARC’s working relationship with management and the hybrid approach to meetings (i.e. in-person and virtual), which scored 4.7 out of 5.

· The lowest scoring area of effectiveness was the ARC being appropriately informed between meetings, which scored 3.0 out of 5.

In relation to Part B: Performance against Key Responsibilities of the Charter:

· Survey respondents assessed whether the ARC Charter had been complied with.

· The ARC assessed that there was full compliance with the key responsibilities of the Charter.

· The ARC rated its overall performance and effectiveness as 5 out of 6, which equates to more than adequate.

Further details about the findings and opportunities for improvement, are provided below.

Strategic Alignment

This report aligns with Objective 8.3: Good Governance and Integrity of the Council Plan.

Policy

The ARC self-assessment was undertaken in accordance with the following:

· ARC Charter

· ARC Annual Work Plan

· LGA 2020

background

The survey was structured in two parts:

· Part A: Measuring Effectiveness – This section was designed to capture the ARC’s effectiveness in a less tangible space. It asked questions to measure the effectiveness of the ARC as a whole.

· Part B: Performance against Key Responsibilities of the Charter – This section listed the key responsibilities as laid out in the Charter, which is the basis for the Annual Work Plan and reflects the requirements of the LGA 2020.

A copy of the survey was sent out to all members of the ARC.

Results of Part A: Measuring Effectiveness

The results of this section are summarised in the table below:

Area	Average rating (out of 5)
1. Diversity of skills and experience	4.0
2. Advice on emerging issues	3.3
3. Information received from management	4.3
4. Annual Work Plan	4.3
5. Committee meetings	3.7
6. Communication between members	4.0
7. Relationship with management	4.7
8. Appropriately informed between meetings	3.0
9. Approach to meetings (in-person and virtual)	4.7
Total (out of 45)	36.0

Results of Part B: Performance against Key Responsibilities of the Charter (including Overall Performance)

The results of this section are summarised in the table below:

Key Requirements of the Charter	Compliant Yes/No
1. Monitor Compliance of Council Policies and Procedures	Yes
2. Monitor Council Financial and Performance Reporting	Yes
3. Monitor and Provide Advice on Risk Management, Fraud Prevention Systems and Controls	Yes
4. Oversee Internal and External Audit Functions	Yes
5. Composition and Terms of Office	Yes
6. Meetings	Yes
7. Reporting to Council	Yes

Overall, members rated the ARC’s performance across Parts A and B of the Survey as follows:

Less than Adequate	Adequate	More than Adequate
		ü

Key Strengths

The key strengths identified in the survey responses were:

· Skills and experience matrix for independent members has been completed and will be useful to monitor the range of skills and experience on the ARC, particularly among the independent members.

· Agenda papers are well set out and ARC meetings cover key areas.

· ARC members have a very open relationship and work well with management.

· The hybrid approach to meetings provides flexibility and works well.

· Financial reporting is good and data analytics program is excellent.

· Responses to integrity agency reports are well thought out and prepared.

· Engagement with internal auditors is good. Communication is clear and open. Discussions around plans and scope is robust and challenging.

Key Opportunities for Improvement and Actions Taken

The key opportunities for improvement identified in the survey responses and discussed by the Committee at the November 2022 ARC meeting were:

· Agenda Structure – Continue to monitor the agenda structure to ensure time is spent on topics of most importance at each ARC meeting. At the beginning of each meeting, the ARC has agreed it will confirm the agenda order and priorities.

· ARC Work Plan – The current work plan will be reviewed and monitored to ensure the ARC focuses on areas of interest/significance and can continue to be responsive to current and emerging areas.

· ARC Meeting Protocols – ARC members confirmed meeting protocols, noting the ARC is not subject to the requirements of the Governance Rules. It was agreed that in-person meetings are preferable but virtual attendance is a good back-up arrangement.

· Risk Management Focus – The ARC confirmed the importance of its role in relation to the risk management framework and noted the value in continuing to receive minutes/reports of various management committees where risk and governance topics are discussed.

· ARC Reporting – The ARC noted the improvements made to the ARC Charter in relation to reporting and has recommended the new Charter to Council for adoption.

SUPPORTING REPORT DETAILS

Legislative and Risk Implications

This report is prepared in accordance with the LGA 2020 s54(4).

Equity, Inclusion, and Human Rights Considerations

It is considered that the subject matter does not raise any human rights issues.

Community Engagement

No community engagement was required for this report.

Financial and Resource Implications

There are no financial or resource implications arising from the recommendation contained in this report.

Innovation and Continuous Improvement

There are no Innovation and Continuous Improvement matters arising from the recommendation contained in this report, other than the ‘Key Opportunities for Improvement’ detailed in the ‘Discussion and Options’ section above.

Collaboration

Members of the ARC were consulted in the preparation of this report.

Conflict of Interest

Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter.

Conclusion

Council to note the ARC’s Annual Performance Evaluation as required by the LGA 2020 s54(4).

Whitehorse City Council

Council Minutes 12 December 2022

11.7 Proposed adoption of the Whitehorse City Council Governance Rules

Governance and Integrity

Director Corporate Services

ATTACHMENT

SUMMARY

Under the Local Government Act 2020 local councils are required to develop and keep in force Governance Rules.

The Whitehorse Governance Rules (Rules) inclusive of the Election Period Policy were adopted on 24 August 2020 with a review of the rules being undertaken in 2021.

Council operates within the Rules which provide guidance on the meeting procedure for Council meetings and advice relating to election/caretaker period conventions.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic Council had the temporary legislative ability to conduct meetings virtually without having to amend or make adjustments to their respective Governance Rules.

Changes to the Local Government Act 2020 were made in March this year to allow for councils to alter their Governance Rules to include processes for conducting Council meetings by electronic means of communication. The current ability to conduct Council meetings by electronic means was made under pandemic orders which has now expired.

On 24 October 2022 Council endorsed the Draft Whitehorse Governance Rules inclusive of the Election Period Policy for community consultation, to seek feedback on proposed amendments to the Rules as drafted. Councillors have also had the opportunity to provide feedback.

The most substantial amendment to the Rules included provisions for virtual Council Meetings some other amendments proposed included:

· Notice of Motion deadline

· Debate and calling for speakers for/against

· Introducing a Motion or an Amendment

· Order or Business

· Divisions

There have also been some minor amendments made throughout the document such as grammar, formatting, consistency with numbering and other edits to text. The document has also deleted the use of gender specific terminology and included gender neutral language throughout

The community consultation process was undertaken for a 3 week period from 26 October 2022 to 16 November 2022 where a dedicated ‘Your Say Whitehorse’ page was established and the community were given the opportunity to provide feedback.

Consultation feedback has been collated and assessed and considered in the context of the legislation, meeting procedure and governance requirements relating to formally constituted council meetings and associated processes. There are no suggested changes arising from the community feedback.

Feedback from Councillors about the Physical and Remote Attendance provisions included that the rules should outline a preferred attendance mode and that reasons for electronic means for individuals are for exceptional circumstances. It is recommended that Council confirm its preferred mode of attendance at Council meetings is in-person unless circumstances necessitate attendance remotely by electronic means.

Details of the feedback obtained has been included in Attachment 1 of this report.

The proposed Rules are attached to this report at Attachment 2.

MOTION

Moved by Cr Davenport, Seconded by Cr Stennett

That Council

1. Acknowledges and thanks the submitters for the review of the Governance Rules undertaken in accordance with section 60(3) of the Local Government Act 2020 (Act).

2. Confirms its preferred mode of attendance at Council meetings is in-person unless circumstances necessitate attendance remotely by electronic means.

3. In accordance with Section 60(1) of the Local Government Act 2020 adopts the Whitehorse Governance Rules inclusive of the Election Period Policy incorporating the change to include the ‘preferred mode of attendance as in person’ as per point 2 above and with the following changes:

a. In Clause 26.1, change the required notice for Notices of Motion from 14 days to 7 days prior to a Council meeting.

b. Delete Clause 26.7 relating to Notice of Motion lapsing time period before it can be listed again.

c. Delete the sentence in clause 47.3 “unless deferring implementation of the resolution would have the effect of depriving the resolution of efficacy”.

d. In Clause 60, amend the calling for a division to only when called by a Councillor and add the relevant clauses from the current Governance Rules (clauses 60.2 and 60.3).

4. Notes that the rules will come into effect on 1 January 2023, be applicable procedure for any Council meetings after this date and will be available on Council’s website.

The Mayor put the Motion to the vote in parts as follows:

Point 3a was put to the vote:

That Council

a. In Clause 26.1, change the required notice for Notices of Motion from 14 days to 7 days prior to a Council meeting.

Carried Unanimously

Point 3b was put to the vote:

That Council

b. Delete Clause 26.7 relating to Notice of Motion lapsing time period before it can be listed again.

Carried

Point 3c was put to the vote:

That Council

c. Delete the sentence in clause 47.3 “unless deferring implementation of the resolution would have the effect of depriving the resolution of efficacy”.

LOST

Point 3d was put to the vote:

d. In Clause 60, amend the calling for a division to only when called by a Councillor and add the relevant clauses from the current Governance Rules (clauses 60.2 and 60.3).

CARRIED

Points 1, 2 and 4 were put to the vote:

That Council

1. Acknowledges and thanks the submitters for the review of the Governance Rules undertaken in accordance with section 60(3) of the Local Government Act 2020 (Act).

2. Confirms its preferred mode of attendance at Council meetings is in-person unless circumstances necessitate attendance remotely by electronic means.

4. Notes that the rules will come into effect on 1 January 2023, be applicable procedure for any Council meetings after this date and will be available on Council’s website.

Carried

At the conclusion of the voting in parts the Council Resolution is as follows:

COUNCIL RESOLUTION

Moved by Cr Davenport, Seconded by Cr Stennett

That Council

1. Acknowledges and thanks the submitters for the review of the Governance Rules undertaken in accordance with section 60(3) of the Local Government Act 2020 (Act).

2. Confirms its preferred mode of attendance at Council meetings is in-person unless circumstances necessitate attendance remotely by electronic means.

a. In Clause 26.1, change the required notice for Notices of Motion from 14 days to 7 days prior to a Council meeting.

b. Delete Clause 26.7 relating to Notice of Motion lapsing time period before it can be listed again.

c. In Clause 60, amend the calling for a division to only when called by a Councillor and add the relevant clauses from the current Governance Rules (clauses 60.2 and 60.3).

4. Notes that the rules will come into effect on 1 January 2023, be applicable procedure for any Council meetings after this date and will be available on Council’s website.

Key Matters

· In response to the community consultation of the Draft Whitehorse Governance Rules 12 submitters provided feedback with 7 providing written commentary and the remaining 5 indicating they had viewed the Rules however didn’t leave a comment.

· Details of the feedback obtained has been included in Attachment 1.

· All submissions received were anonymous and not all of the feedback was relevant to the proposed changes.

· As there has been no overall objection to the changes there are no further changes or revisions proposed to be made to the Rules.

Strategic Alignment

Objective 8.3 of the Council Plan 2021-2025 Good Governance and Integrity states:

Compliance with Council policies, legislative requirements and regulations needs to be maintained an upheld.

background

· The Whitehorse Governance Rules were adopted on 24 August 2020 as required under the Local Government Act 2020 with a review of the rules being undertaken in 2021 the review provided for a new council meeting cycle and cessation of delegated committee.

· The rules govern the meeting procedures for Council Meetings and include the Election Period Policy.

During the Pandemic, Ministerial Guidelines were issued to allow Councils to facilitate virtual meetings. The Guidelines have now ceased application (start of September) with legislation introduced (Regulatory Legislation Amendment (Reform) Act 2022) to allow Councils to incorporate appropriate provisions in its Governance Rules.· The most substantial insertion and change to the Whitehorse Governance Rules the new provisions further provide that Councillors, and members of delegated committees, may attend and be present by electronic means of communication provided they comply with the Governance Rules (section 61(6A)).

· It is important to note that Council had the ability under Chapter 2, Division 16 part 73 (Meetings Conducted Remotely) in the current Governance Rules to be able to undertake electronic meetings, however the new legislation requires Council to place further parameters on when it may conduct a virtual or hybrid meeting, therefore the Rules need to be amended.

· Various small amendments were made throughout the document such as grammar, formatting, consistency with numbering and other edits to text. The document has also deleted the use of gender specific terminology and included gender neutral language throughout.

Other changes recommended were:

§ Notice of Motion deadline

§ Debate and calling for speakers for/against

§ Introducing a Motion or an Amendment

§ Order or Business

§ Divisions

SUPPORTING REPORT DETAILS

Legislative and Risk Implications

· The review of the Governance Rules has been undertaken in line with Section 60 of the Local Government Act 2020

· Section 60 of the Act focuses on the provisions for preparing, adopting and keeping in force the Governance Rules

· Section 60(4) prescribes that a process of community engagement is followed in developing or amending the Governance Rules

· Councils Community Engagement Policy will be followed as part of this review.

· Under Section 66 of the Act, a council or delegated committee must keep a meeting open to the public except in specified circumstances. New provisions insert a definition of “Open to the public” to mean, in the case of a council or joint meeting of councils, or a delegated or joint delegated committee:

§ Either, attendance in person by a member of the public, or a meeting that is broadcasted live on the council internet site; or

§ A meeting that is recorded and published on the council internet site as soon as practicable after the meeting (in the case of a delegated or joint delegated committee only); or

§ Any other prescribed means of meeting.

Equity, Inclusion, and Human Rights Considerations

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006. The suggested changes support the principles in the Equal Opportunity Act.

Community Engagement

Pursuant to Section 60(3) of the Local Government Act 2020 a community engagement process was undertaken on the Draft Whitehorse Governance Rules review.

Community engagement and understanding the views of the community on how Council undertake Council meetings, and the governance arrangement and meeting procedures associated with the Governance Rules is not only a legislative requirement under the Act, but very important in understanding genuine and meaningful views from the community for consideration.

The community consultation process for the Draft Rules was undertaken for a 3 week period from 26 October 2022 to 16 November 2022.

A dedicated ‘Your Say Whitehorse’ page was established and the community were given the opportunity to provide feedback. There were 156 visits to the page and the Draft Rules document was downloaded 14 times.

A total of 12 submitters provided feedback with 7 providing written commentary and the remaining 5 indicating they had viewed the Draft Governance Rules however didn’t leave a comment.

A number of the comments received were not relevant to the proposed changes and were questions not necessarily feedback, it is noted that an all comments/questions were submitted anonymously.

The submissions in their entirety are available in Attachment 1.

The table below summarises the questions/feedback sought:

1. Supports the proposed changes and thanked Council for inviting ratepayer feedback on the matter.

2. If a Notice of Motion register isn’t maintained will there be a record of when they lapse.

Officer Comments:

· Council uses a Council and Agenda electronic system that allows for tracking.

3. Moving ‘Urgent Business’ to the first item on the agenda should it be ‘Public Participation’ in case a query raised by the public would formulate an ‘Urgent Business’ item.

Notice of Motions being submitted 2 weeks prior to the meeting will this be made available to the public.

Public Question Time if there is more than one question on a similar topic, then all the questions should be read out concurrently/ together, and then answered collectively. It is important that the public know and hear the subtlety of each question.

The minutes of the meeting to show all the individual questions, in full including the preamble. This ensures transparency for members of the public wanting to understand the question/issue more completely.

Officer Comments:

· Whilst Urgent Business will be moved to be the first item of business, the public participation options will still remain prior to any reports or urgent business.

· Notice of Motions are included in the Council Agenda as they are now, there is no change other than having Councillors submit earlier.

· Public questions are currently grouped on similar topics.

4. Prayer should be removed from the Council Meeting.

5. Members of the public who take the time to attend should be given some time to speak if they want, even if it is limited to five minutes.

Officer Comments:

· There are two options to address Council, members of the gallery can submit a public presentation or question.

6. Definition of urgent business is too restrictive.

7. Notice of Motion unfair that it needs to be submitted at prior to the Council Meeting as a matter could arise within the time set a few days is a much more reasonable scenario.

The Chair has too many discretions with regards to setting aside queries and this breaches the idea of transparency for residents.

Officer Comments:

· Urgent Business exists for items that arise between the publishing of the agenda and the meeting that is urgent in nature.

· Notice of Motions cannot be used for matters that arise prior to the Council Meeting. Council operates a fortnightly cycle of Council Meetings providing opportunity for reports to be included in the agenda rather than needing to rely on urgent business.

· The definition of Urgent Business has been reviewed to provide clarity on urgency, the review included benchmarking of other Council clauses.

8. Transparency any decisions by council are not presently in the public domain or are made under delegation, not really providing transparency.

The importance of community engagement many decisions are made with limited engagement, which leads to lack of community confidence and respect for council’s processes.

Public Questions could the box be reinstated at customer service centres.

Online meetings - how does the chair know who is online view of the Council Meeting and how will the chair know who has voted on an item. If a councillor drops out of a meeting meaning that a quorum is not possible however can re-join the meeting and the quorum achieved will the meeting recommence.

Officer Comments:

· Council is revising the way it presents information as per Council’s Public Transparency Policy on its website including decisions made under delegation.

· The Public questions box applied to the former delegated committees, which Council no longer has. The online form allows people to access from their home, mobile or a place that has internet such as the local library. For those without internet, staff can assist over the telephone, or those who still wish to come into the office, can be assisted by staff to complete the online form or provide a hard copy that can be completed.

· Online meetings – The Rules state that the Mayor must be able to see and hear and the Councillor who is online. Where there may be a drop out, Council can take a recess. It would be unlikely that a quorum would not be met, these provisions are for exceptional circumstances.

Councillor feedback

Some Councillors provided feedback on the new provisions relating to electronic meetings and that the Governance Rules need to provide for further guidance or preferred stance on when it would be used.

Financial and Resource Implications

Further exploration of IT equipment and software is required to implement a hybrid Council Meeting approach should the need occur. Any financial impacts will be included in future operational budgets.

Innovation and Continuous Improvement

A number of the suggested changes in the Rules will assist with the smooth running of Council meetings.

Collaboration

No collaboration was required for this report.

Conflict of Interest

Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter.

Conclusion

The consultation process has indicated that there is no overall objection to the proposed changes, it is therefore recommended that Council adopt the Whitehorse Governance Rules inclusive of the Election Period Policy as presented in Attachment 2.

AttachmentS

1 Feedback on Draft Whitehorse Governance Rules - 2022

2 Whitehorse Governance Rules -12 December 2022

Attendance

Cr Davenport left the Chamber at 9.47pm

Cr Davenport returned to the Chamber at 9.50 pm

Whitehorse City Council

Council Minutes 12 December 2022

11.8 Parkland Advisory Committee Governance

Parks and Natural Environment

Director Infrastructure

ATTACHMENT

SUMMARY

Parkland Advisory Committees (or equivalent versions of) have been active since 1965. Volunteers have significantly contributed to the ongoing care and maintenance of Council’s parks and bushland reserves.

To ensure good governance, a review into the framework and management of Parkland Advisory Committees (PACs) was undertaken in consultation with PAC members and volunteers. The review has determined a number of required changes to enable volunteers to continue to undertake valuable work and ensure the long term sustainability of PACs with appropriate risk mitigation measures to make sure that Council Volunteers are safe and both Volunteers and Council are protected.

The proposed changes provide a structure that supports environmental parkland volunteering in Whitehorse. Existing PACs are supported to remain as PACs (if they desire) with volunteer members registered directly with Council, and additional risk mitigation measures implemented. If an existing PAC elects to seek to be an Incorporated or Unincorporated Body, Council officers will facilitate and support the transition, and Volunteers of this group will not be registered directly with Council. Risk mitigation measures and Council’s management of working bees will be undertaken in the same manner for a PAC or Incorporated or Unincorporated Groups.

As part of the consultation process, Council received feedback that the existing PAC Terms of Reference was overly complicated and difficult to apply in many instances. A revised Terms of Reference for PACs has been developed in consultation with PACs to make it more streamlined and practical for PAC’s and Council to be able to manage requirements (Attachment 1).

To ensure efficiency and continuity, it is proposed that Council’s Parks and Natural Environment Department undertakes all ongoing management of PACs including recruitment, inductions, training and reviews in accordance with Council’s volunteer management requirements.

Engagement with PACs and volunteers has been undertaken throughout the review process including forums, surveys and regular email communication. PACs and volunteers are keen to continue with parkland volunteering activities and the majority of Volunteers are supportive of the proposed changes to ensure the long term sustainability of PACs and ongoing partnership with Council.

Council Resolution

Moved by Cr Cutts, Seconded by Cr Stennett

That Council:

1. Notes the revised arrangements that supports environmental parkland volunteering in Whitehorse as part of a Parkland Advisory Committee or Incorporated or Unincorporated Group as outlined in this report;

2. Endorses a system of Parkland Advisory Committees with volunteer members registered directly with Council, and risk mitigation measures implemented;

3. Endorses the Terms of Reference as shown in Attachment 1 and authorises the Chief Executive Officer or his delegate to undertake revision and updating as required in consultation with Parkland Advisory Committees;

4. Notes that the Parks and Natural Environment Department will undertake the recruitment, induction, training, reviews and ongoing management of Parkland Advisory Committees on three year terms in accordance with the Terms Of reference shown in Attachment 1; and

5. Extends existing Parkland Advisory Committee appointments up to 30 June 2023 to enable Parkland Advisory Committee volunteer recruitment to be undertaken under the new Terms Of reference shown in Attachment 1.

Carried Unanimously

Key Matters

Parkland Advisory Committees (PACs) have been active in various forms since 1965. Volunteers have significantly contributed to the ongoing care and maintenance of Council’s parks, and have been instrumental in past conservation activities that have preserved remnant bushland for the current and future community to enjoy. Council officers and PACs have worked in partnership to achieve significant results over a long period of time.

The current volunteering model of PACs is much loved by many current volunteers but does have a number of governance shortcomings. The review into PAC governance highlighted a number of risks, and Council Officers have investigated all options to determine the best model to meet all requirements. Ongoing consultation with PAC members and volunteers has been undertaken throughout the review process, with the aim to:

· Manage and minimise the risk to PAC Committee members, Volunteers and Council;

· Ensure our Volunteers are safe, and both Volunteers and Council are protected;

· Ensure appropriate risk management safety measures;

· Clarify Voluntary Workers Insurance arrangements;

· Continue existing volunteering work which is currently undertaken in parks and enjoyed by volunteers;

· Increase and enhance volunteer participation across the municipality within current groups and facilitate the potential for more groups to establish;

· Ensure long term sustainability for Parkland volunteering in Whitehorse; and

· Ensure model is financially sustainable and scrutinise resource requirements.

Fundamental to mitigating risk issues for PAC members, volunteers and Council is for there to be a higher level of procedural guidance and supervision of PAC activities undertaken by volunteers under the auspice of Council or need for PACs to become an Incorporated or Unincorporated Body and be responsible for managing their own activities, volunteer management and insurance.

Strategic Alignment

This report aligns with the following Strategic Directions of the Council Plan:

Strategic Direction 3: Our Diverse and Inclusive Community Objective

3.1.4: Continue to support, promote and celebrate volunteer programs to encourage people of all ages, abilities and diverse backgrounds to participate in opportunities.

Strategic Direction 4: Our Built Environment; Movement, and Public Places

Objective 4.4: Facilitate opportunities for the community to interact and immerse with natural and built environments.

Strategic Direction 5: Sustainable Climate & Environmental Care

5.2.1: Continue to sustainably manage, enhance and increase trees and vegetation in Council’s streetscapes, parks and gardens, with species that enhance neighbourhood character, support biodiversity and are adaptable to a changing climate.

Strategic Direction 6: An Empowered Collaborative Community

6.1.1: Create opportunities for shared decision making through active community engagement and ensure results are shared with the community.

Strategic Direction 8: Governance and Leadership

8.3.3: Ensure risk management is an integral part of our planning and decision-making processes.

Policy

This report contributes to the following Council Polices and Strategies:

· Whitehorse Open Space Strategy 2007–2022 (under development)

· Urban Forest Strategy 2021-2031

· Urban Biodiversity Strategy 2014-2024

· Community Engagement Policy

background

In early 2019 a Consultant was appointed to review governance arrangements and prepare a Report relating to Parkland Advisory Committees (PACs).

The review included consultation with current PAC members and Council Officers to gain a better understanding of how the current arrangement was operating. It identified areas for improvement.

The review found, amongst other things that the current volunteers enjoy volunteering and want to continue volunteering in the future. Council recognises the significant benefits that volunteering in Whitehorse offers both Council and Volunteers and wants to continue to support volunteering in Whitehorse. The review also identified a number of governance issues and Council officers also identified a number of risk and insurance related matters. More broadly, volunteer management across Council’s operations was also being reviewed.

A forum was held on 15 July 2021 to seek feedback on the review, with representatives invited from all PACs. This forum was designed to provide information for PAC members, and provide some potential options that Council was investigating. The review and an information sheet was provided to each PAC at the conclusion of this forum.

At the forum in July 2021, feedback was sought on an option that was designed to address some of the findings in the review and to address some of the governance and risk related issues.

The PACs collaborated to provide a coordinated response to many of the issues at hand, with a detailed submission submitted on 24 January 2022 for consideration. This submission helped inform the further investigations and to develop a further option.

While the investigations and discussions have continued, a number of changes to the way PACs conduct activities have been introduced to mitigate the risk related issues. This has allowed, subject to COVID-19 restrictions, volunteer activities to continue.

At the Council meeting on 22 November 2021, as part of Notice of Motion 160, Council resolved:

That Council:

1. Requests officers to prepare advice to Councillors which outlines the implications of retaining the current Parkland Advisory Committee structure until at least 30 June 2022, including current insurance arrangements.

2. Requests officers to conduct a workshop that invites Councillors, senior Whitehorse City Council staff and representatives of the 13 Parkland Advisory Committees to attend to identify concerns over the current structures, insurance capacities and to identify resolutions to those.

3. Makes no changes to the Parkland Advisory Committee structure until parts 1 and 2 above are completed and a report on the future arrangements for Parkland Advisory Committees is presented to Council.

Relevant advice was provided to Councillors and the workshop was convened.

A workshop was held in May 2022, with all Councillors and representatives from all PACs invited. This workshop provided the opportunity for further discussion in addition to a presentation of ongoing research and investigations, responses to the PAC submission items, risk management requirements, insurance considerations, and a proposed framework to enable volunteering in parklands into the future. A session exploring options for modifying the Terms of Reference for PACs to ease the administration burdens was also undertaken on the night.

Discussion and Options

Council officers have investigated and researched many options and frameworks for Environmental Volunteers at other Councils and organisations. Each has its own resourcing requirements, risks and levels of risk mitigation. Parkland volunteering in Whitehorse is unique given the existing PAC structure and long history of volunteering.

Most other Councils do not have environmental volunteers registered directly to Council, and operate with Incorporated and/or Unincorporated bodies that are ‘Friends of’ groups. While Incorporation was floated as a mechanism to address many of the issues at the July 2021 forum, this was not favourably received by the PACs and is not being pursued by Council. Most PACs see this requirement as a separation from Council that would reduce the good will and partnerships that have been developed over a long period of time, in addition to being burdensome and detrimental to their existence.

Council staff have undertaken a risk assessment into the working bee components of the PACs which is considered the highest area of risk for both Volunteers and Council. As a result, interim risk mitigation measures have been formalised to enable working bees to continue. Many of these measures were already informally in place. It is proposed that these measures, or similar, will become part of the permanent management strategy in the future.

The measure include:

· Working bee application form submitted to Council;

· Approved activities continue to be restricted to low risk activities (eg: no power tools or chemicals);

· Identify PPE required for working bee activities;

· Working bee supervisor to undertake briefing before working bee events;

· Complete Working bee safety checklist prior to working bee events;

· PAC Working bee supervisor to be present at all working bee events; and

· Council staff attend working bees to ensure activates reflect the approved application and are being undertaken safely.

SUPPORTING REPORT DETAILS

Legislative and Risk Implications

Insurance for Council is undertaken through MAV Personal Accident and Public Liability Insurance, consistent with all Victorian Councils. Volunteers are covered by this insurance, but Council has major responsibilities when it comes to Volunteers to qualify the coverage. Council needs to increase risk mitigation and management in the area of PAC volunteers. The recommended framework aims to practicably address the risk mitigation requirements to appropriately manage the risk and qualify for insurance coverage, ensure volunteer and community safety, undertake additional management requirements without a significant resource increase, and provide an appropriate model to support environmental volunteering into the future. There is an element of risk acceptance and resourcing requirements that is unavoidable.

Risk Mitigation:

· PAC members are Council volunteers and are registered in Better Impact (Council’s volunteer management system)

· Volunteers working for PACs are registered in Better Impact

· Council will manage each volunteer more closely

· Each PAC required to have a minimum of one working bee supervisor who attends all working bees. Ideally each PAC will have two working bee supervisors to ensure flexibility but Council is understanding that this may not be achievable for some PACs

· PAC office bearers and working bee supervisors to receive induction and applicable OHS training organised and run by Council

· Volunteers required to have a position description, including specific roles of office bearers and working bee supervisors

· Volunteers may be required to be managed by Council staff

· PACs to submit a working bee application form to be approved by Council prior to works, which will identify date, time and location of working bee event, PPE, tools and tasks to be used/performed on the day, working bee supervisor for the working bee event and any another safety related requirements (e.g. current Covid-19 requirements)

· Approved activities will continue to be restricted to low risk activities (eg: no power tools or chemicals)

· PPE required for working bee activities is identified and documented

· Working bee supervisor to complete a site safety inspection of the work area prior to the event and to undertake a pre working bee briefing with working bee participants

· Council to work with PACs to develop an annual maintenance plan that will guide working bee activities (locations and tasks) so that both Council and PACs are delivering complementary high quality results, and to ensure safety and insurance coverage is managed.

· The annual maintenance plan will feed the working bee applications for each working bee event that will need to be submitted and approved by Council prior to working bee taking place

· Council staff will undertake a minimum of two inspections at working bee events for each PAC per annum.

· Council will inspect and supply appropriate hand tools for working bees

· All record keeping submitted by PACs to Council

· Any Incorporated or Unincorporated Bodies would be required to provide appropriate evidence of governance and insurance to Council

· Any Incorporated and Unincorporated groups will have the same working bee risk mitigation requirements as above

Equity, Inclusion, and Human Rights Considerations

In developing this report to Council, the subject matter has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.Strengthening of risk mitigation procedures and introduction of Child Safe Standards for Volunteer activities provides improved protection for Volunteers, the Community, and Council.

Community Engagement

Extensive engagement has been undertaken with PACs and volunteers. Forums have been held in July 2021 and May 2022. Two consultation surveys have been undertaken using Council’s YourSay platform, in addition to regular ongoing communication including meetings, phone and email correspondence.

The PACs members have worked collaboratively to provide coordinated responses to many issues.

Relevant Council departments have been involved with the review and development of procedures, framework and recommendations.

Financial and Resource Implications

The majority of PAC management will be undertaken within existing resources from the Parks and Natural Environment Department, including management of administration requirements, auditing, recruitment, performance management, and communications.

It is anticipated additional resources will be required to manage expanded requirements including:

· Additional training budget for PAC Working Bee Supervisors office bearers and some volunteers to include first aid, CPR etc. Estimated to be $10,000 p/a

· Additional funding for tools and equipment for each PAC to ensure suitability and safety. Estimated initial cost of $9,000, with annual ongoing cost of $1,000.

· Additional overtime staff labour component to monitor working bees held on weekends. Estimated to be $4,000 p/a

Parks and Natural Environment Department will include this budget requirement and monitor and review operating expenses in the first financial year, and report on additional funding for consideration in future budgets if required.

Innovation and Continuous Improvement

There are no Innovation and Continuous Improvement matters arising from the recommendation contained in this report.

Collaboration

In investigating volunteer management options, a number of other Councils were contacted.

Conflict of Interest

Council officers involved in the preparation of this report have no conflict of interest in this matter.

Conclusion

Endorsement of the recommendations will provide a future direction for Parkland Volunteering in Whitehorse, and ensure sustainability and continuity for Parkland Advisory Committees. It will also enable the important voluntary work they undertake in Council’s parks and the environment to continue.

If endorsed, Council Officers will work with PACs and volunteers to implement the new requirements. Recruitment and training will be organised in early 2023, with specific requirements discussed with each PAC.

Attachment

1 Terms of Reference - PAC - Nov 2022

Councillor Informal Briefing – 28 November 2022 6.30pm - 6.51pm
Matter/s Discussed: · Public Question Submissions · Public Question Time · Council Agenda Items 28 November 2022	Councillors Present	Officers Present
	Cr Lane (Mayor & Chair)	S McMillan J Green L Letic S Cann S Sullivan S White V Ferlaino K Woods S Lozsan J Samy
Disclosures of Conflict of Interest	None Disclosed
Councillor /Officer attendance following disclosure	None Disclosed

Councillor Briefing – 5 December 2022 6.30pm – 10.10pm
· Matter/s Discussed: · KPMG Briefing · Open Space Strategy Background Investigation and Community Consultation · MPCRG Quarterly Progress Update · Major Projects Update – ERP · Quarterly Performance Report, July to September 2022/23 · Community Grants Review 2022 · Draft Council Agenda 12 December 2022 · Proposed acquisition of land at 383-387 Mont Albert Road · Civic Awards 2023 · Draft Interaction with Developers and Lobbyists Policy · I&EDS 2023-27- Economic Analysis & Community Engagement Reports	Councillors Present	Officers Present
	Cr Lane (Mayor & Chair)	S McMillan J Green L Letic S Cann S Sullivan S White C Altan V Ferlaino S Singh S Lozsan T Jenvey M Ackland S Belmore C Clarke D Seddon R Hood T Peak L Hall B Fenton N Jones I Wang
Disclosures of Conflict of Interest	None Disclosed
Councillor /Officer attendance following disclosure	None Disclosed