Agenda of Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 9

12/6/2019

REPORT TITLE: Budget Estimates 2019-20

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Acting Director City Governance

1. Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1. The purpose of this report is to present the City’s 2019-20 Estimates and Annual Plan for consideration. It is proposed that the Estimates be formally adopted at the Council meeting on 17 June 2019.

2. Report Summary

2.1. This report presents the City’s 2019-20 Estimates and Annual Plan together with the Long Term Financial Management Plan 2020 – 2040.

2.2. The Estimates propose a 3.5% increase in rates to fund the increased cost of providing Council services. The increase in the state government fire levy is in addition to this.

2.3. In total, rates revenue will increase by $4 million over the previous year resulting from an increase in rates to fund the increased cost of providing Council services, an increase in the Tasmanian Government Fire Service Levy and growth in the rate base from development activity.

2.4. It is proposed that the 2019-20 Estimates, 2019-20 Annual Plan, and Long Term Financial Management Plan 2020-2040 be formally adopted at the Council meeting on 17 June 2019.

3. Budget Estimates Recommendation

That:

1. The expenses, revenues, capital expenditure, and plant and equipment expenditure detailed in the document ‘City of Hobart, Budget Estimates, for the 2019-20 Financial Year’ be approved.

2. New borrowings of up to $20M be approved for infrastructure.

3. The Council delegate to the General Manager the power to enter into loan agreements to source the above borrowings on the most favourable terms.

4. The General Rate be 6.87 cents in the dollar of assessed annual value (AAV).

5. The following Service Rates be made:

(i) A Stormwater Removal Service Rate of 0.38 cents in the dollar of AAV; and

(ii) A Fire Service Rate of 1.13 cents in the dollar of AAV.

6. A Waste Management Service Charge be made and varied according to the use or predominant use of land as follows:

(i) A Service charge of $250 to apply to residential properties;

(ii) A Service charge of $500 to apply to non-residential properties;

7. A Waste Management Service Charge of $50 be made for kerbside green waste collection for all rateable land within the municipal area to which Council supplies or makes available a green waste collection service utilising a green waste collection bin.

8. A Landfill Rehabilitation Service Charge be made and varied according to the use or predominant use of land as follows:

(i) A Service charge of $10 to apply to residential properties;

(ii) A Service charge of $20 to apply to non-residential properties.

9. The rates be subject to the following remissions:

(i) A remission of 0.83 cents in the dollar on the AAV of any land or building which is within the Fern Tree Volunteer Brigade Rating District as defined by the State Fire Commission.

(ii) A remission of 0.85 cents in the dollar on the AAV of any land or building which is within areas other than Permanent Brigade Rating Districts or the Fern Tree Volunteer Brigade Rating District as defined by the State Fire Commission.

10. Unspent 2018-19 capital funding be carried-forward into 2019-20, with any necessary adjustments to be made in the September 2019 quarter financial report to Council.

11. The interest rate on unpaid rates be 8.1% per annum, charged monthly.

12. The 2019-20 Annual Plan be adopted.

13. The Long Term Financial Management plan 2020-40 be adopted.

14. The following delegations be approved:

(i) Pursuant to Section 22 of the Local Government Act 1993, the Council delegate to the General Manager the power to expend monies on Council’s behalf identified as Delegation Classification 1 items in the Council’s Annual Plan; and, the Council authorise the General Manager to delegate, pursuant Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993, to such employees of the Council as he considers appropriate, the power to expend monies on Council’s behalf identified as Delegation Classification 1 items in the Council’s Annual Plan.

(ii) Pursuant to Section 22 of the Local Government Act 1993, the Council delegate to all the Council Committees the power to expend monies on Council’s behalf identified as Delegation Classification 2 items in the Council’s Annual Plan.

4. Background

4.1. The budget process for 2019-20 has included workshops/briefings with Elected Members and Committee/Council meetings on 5 February, 13 February, 18 February and 14 May to discuss matters impacting on the 2019-20 Estimates and the 10 year capital works program.

4.2. The Estimates have now been drafted and are presented for consideration.

Estimates Preparation

4.3. The Estimates documents comprise:

4.3.1. This report;

4.3.2. A separate document – ‘City of Hobart, Budget Estimates for the 2019-20 Financial Year’, which is attached – refer Attachment A. This document contains discussion of all elements comprising the Estimates;

4.3.3. The Annual Plan for the 2019-2020 Financial Year, which is attached – refer Attachment B. This document is required pursuant to Section 71 of the Local Government Act 1993. It is required to set out how the objectives of Council’s Strategic Plan are to be met, including a summary of the Estimates adopted, and is to be formally adopted by the Council; and

4.3.4. The updated Long-Term Financial Management Plan 2020-2040 (LTFMP), which is attached – refer Attachment C.

Estimates Overview

4.4. The Estimates propose a 3.5% increase in rates to fund the increased cost of providing Council services.

4.5. In total, rates revenue will be $88.6 million, an increase of $4 million over the previous year. This includes growth in the rate base from development activity of $0.59 million and an increase in the fire protection service rate (to fund the increase in the State Government Fire Service Levy which is collected by Council on behalf of the Tasmanian Government) of $0.45 million.

4.6. This increase is comprised of; -

4.6.1. An decrease in the total cents in the dollar of Assessed Annual Values (AAV) from 9.98 cents to 8.38 cents;

4.6.2. Waste management service charges of $250 for residential properties and $500 for non-residential properties (amounts are unchanged from the previous year);

4.6.3. Landfill rehabilitation service charges remain unchanged from the previous year at $10 for residential properties and $20 for non-residential properties; and

4.6.4. A kerbside green waste collection service charge of $50 for properties meeting certain criteria within the municipal area to which Council supplies or makes available a green waste collection service utilising a green waste collection bin. This amount is unchanged from the previous year.

Property Valuation Adjustment Factors (Indexation)

4.7. As reported to Finance and Governance Committee on 14 May 2019, pursuant to the Valuation of Land Act 2001, AAVs are adjusted every two years according to the adjustment factors published by the Valuer-General. The Valuer-General has recently published AAV adjustment factors to apply from 1 July 2019.

4.8. While AAV indexation does not directly impact the Estimates, it does impact the distribution of the rate burden, and the impact on individual ratepayers will vary. In general terms, AAV indexation will result in a minor shift in the rate burden from residential properties to non-residential properties. Residential properties will therefore pay slightly less, and non-residential properties will pay slightly more.

4.9. The combination of amounts which vary according to property value (rates) and amounts which do not vary according to property value (charges) results in differing impacts across the rate base.

4.10. The Estimates propose a 3.5% increase in rates to fund the increased cost of providing Council services.

4.11. The Fire Services Contribution, which Council is obliged to pay to the Tasmanian Fire Service has increased by 6.0% ($0.65 million). Pursuant to the Fire Service Act 1979, local government acts as a collection agent for this levy, which is then paid directly to the State Fire Commission.

4.12. As detailed in the report to May Finance and Governance Committee, AAV indexation will result in a minor shift in the rate burden from the residential sector to the non-residential sector. Residential properties will therefore experience slightly lower rate increases than indicated above, and non-residential properties will experience slightly higher rate increases than indicated above, as follows:

4.13. Most residential properties will receive rate increases of between 2.7% ($38) and 3.2% ($124). The average residential ratepayer will receive a rate increase of 3.0% ($74) plus fire protection rates of $11. Most non-residential properties will receive rate increases of between 3.8% and 4.3%.

4.14. It should be noted that although the Hobart March CPI was 2.1%, the December CPI was 3% and the council cost index, as issued by the Local Government Association of Tasmania, is 3.38%.

4.15. The 2019-20 rate resolution is attached – refer Attachment D.

Operating Result

4.16. Greater detail is contained within the Budget Estimates document, however some factors impacting on Council’s modest forecast underlying operating result of $0.76 million are: -

4.16.1. An expected increase in depreciation expenses of $1.242 million due to Council’s rolling program of asset revaluations/indexation and new assets, and an expected decrease in depreciation expenses of $0.35 million due to transfers of Davey and Macquarie Streets and Brooker Avenue to the Department of State Growth, together producing a net increase in depreciation expenses of $0.892 million (4.2%);

4.16.2. An increase in the State Government fire levy of $0.65 million (6.0%);

4.16.3. Southern Cross Care rates decision on independent living units equating to $0.4 million of lost rates revenue per annum;

4.16.4. Severe weather event on 10 May 2018;

4.16.5. Increase in tourism numbers to the City;

4.16.6. An increase in other expenses $0.3 million (6.8%); and

4.16.7. An increase in interest revenue $0.21 million (28.8%).

Cash Flows

4.17. Council’s cash balance is forecast to increase by $5.91 million from $21.27 million at 30 June 2019 to $27.18 million at 30 June 2020.

4.18. Cash provided by operating activities will increase by $1.02 million, from $21.90 million in 2018-19 to $22.92 million in 2019-20.

Financing

4.19. New borrowings of up to $20 million will be undertaken in 2019-20, and existing debt of $3.19 million will be retired.

Capital Expenditure – New Assets/Upgrades and Asset Renewal

4.20. The 2019-20 budget provides capital works funding of $37.4 million, comprising asset renewal of $22 million and new assets/upgrades of $15.4 million.

4.21. Council considered and endorsed the proposed 2019-20 capital works program on 18 February 2019 subject to any future variation that Council may approve prior to approving the 2019-20 budget. Council also endorsed the proposed capital works programs for 2020-21 and 2021-22 to enable preliminary planning to occur.

4.22. Asset renewal expenditure is split between infrastructure assets ($17.79 million) and plant and equipment ($4.22 million). The level of asset renewal funding provided for 2019-20 is 70% (benchmark 100%) because a number of “Transforming Hobart” projects will take precedence, resulting in some asset renewal works being deferred. This will also be the case for the following two years

4.23. Some significant projects and programs include:

· $5.6 million for the DKHAC refurbishment;

· $2.1 million for road overlays;

· $1.7 million for Building renewals;

· $1.98 million for Stormwater renewals;

· $1.9 million for Sporting Facilities;

· $1.42 million for footpath renewals;

· $1 million for Salamanca pedestrian works;

· $1.25 million for New Town Retail Precinct upgrade; and

· $1.0 million for Elizabeth Street Bus Mall - Construction.

Long Term Financial Management Plan

4.24. The 2019-20 Estimates have been prepared in accordance with the updated LTFMP (refer Attachment C), and produce outcomes which are consistent with the plan. These are:

4.24.1. The achievement of modest underlying surpluses;

4.24.2. Debt and liabilities increasing as a result of the expanded capital works program but remaining within reasonable benchmarks; and

4.24.3. Asset renewal funding equal to 100% of known requirements (identified in Council’s Asset Management Plans).

Unspent Plant and Capital Funds

4.25. As part of the budget approval process it is proposed that unspent capital budgets from 2018-19 be carried forward into 2019-20. Based on year-to-date expenditure, carry-forwards are expected to be around $18 million for projects, and around $1 million for plant and equipment. This includes the DKHAC refurbishment, various traffic and roadworks and the replacement of core business systems. This figure is the expected unexpended cash for capital works only recognising the works program itself is substantially progressed.

5. Proposal and Implementation

5.1. It is proposed that the 2019-20 Estimates be formally considered at the Finance and Governance Committee meeting to be held on 12 June, and be listed on the Council meeting agenda for 17 June for formal adoption.

5.2. Subject to any amendments that may arise following the Finance and Governance Committee’s consideration, the following are the draft resolutions that would be presented to Council on 17 June: -

5.2.1. The expenses, revenues, capital expenditure, and plant and equipment expenditure detailed in the document ‘City of Hobart, Budget Estimates, for the 2019-2020 Financial Year’ be approved.

5.2.2. New borrowings of up to $20M be approved for infrastructure.

5.2.3. The Council delegate to the General Manager the power to enter into loan agreements to source the above borrowings on the most favourable terms.

5.2.4. The General Rate be 6.87 cents in the dollar of assessed annual value (AAV).

5.2.5. The following Service Rates be made:

5.2.5.1. A Stormwater Removal Service Rate of 0.38 cents in the dollar of AAV; and

5.2.5.2. A Fire Service Rate of 1.13 cents in the dollar of AAV.

5.2.6. A Waste Management Service Charge be made and varied according to the use or predominant use of land as follows:

5.2.6.1. A Service charge of $250 to apply to residential properties;

5.2.6.2. A Service charge of $500 to apply to non-residential properties.

5.2.7. A Waste Management Service Charge of $50 be made for kerbside green waste collection for all rateable land within the municipal area to which Council supplies or makes available a green waste collection service utilising a green waste collection bin.

5.2.8. A Landfill Rehabilitation Service Charge be made and varied according to the use or predominant use of land as follows:

5.2.8.1. A service charge of $10 to apply to residential properties;

5.2.8.2. A service charge of $20 to apply to non-residential properties.

5.2.9. The rates be subject to the following remissions:

5.2.9.1. A remission of 0.83 cents in the dollar on the AAV of any land or building which is within the Fern Tree Volunteer Brigade Rating District as defined by the State Fire Commission.

5.2.9.2. A remission of 0.85 cents in the dollar on the AAV of any land or building which is within areas other than Permanent Brigade Rating Districts or the Fern Tree Volunteer Brigade Rating District as defined by the State Fire Commission.

5.2.10. Unspent 2018-19 capital funding be carried-forward into 2019-20, with any necessary adjustments to be made in the September 2019 quarter financial report to Council.

5.2.11. The interest rate on unpaid rates be 8.1% per annum, charged monthly.

5.2.12. The 2019-20 Annual Plan be adopted.

5.2.13. The Long Term Financial Management plan 2020-40 be adopted.

5.2.14. The following delegations be approved:

5.2.14.1. Pursuant to Section 22 of the Local Government Act 1993, the Council delegate to the General Manager the power to expend monies on Council’s behalf identified as Delegation Classification 1 items in the Council’s Annual Plan; and, the Council authorise the General Manager to delegate, pursuant Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993, to such employees of the Council as he considers appropriate, the power to expend monies on Council’s behalf identified as Delegation Classification 1 items in the Council’s Annual Plan.

5.2.14.2. Pursuant to Section 22 of the Local Government Act 1993, the Council delegate to all the Council Committees the power to expend monies on Council’s behalf identified as Delegation Classification 2 items in the Council’s Annual Plan.

5.3. In respect of the interest rate to be applied to outstanding rates (see 4.2.11) the Local Government Act 1993 at section 128 provides for a maximum rate that can be charged. That rate is the 10 year long term bond rate (on the last business day in February) plus a risk premium of up to 6%. For 2019-20 this calculation results in a maximum rate of 8.1% and this is the rate being recommended.

6. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1. Goal 5 – Governance is applicable in considering this report, particularly strategic objective:

“5.1 The organisation is relevant to the community and provides good governance and transparent decision-making.

5.1.7 Continually review and update the Long Term Financial Management Plan.

5.1.8 Ensure a rating system that supports fairness, capacity to pay and effectiveness”

6.2. The Budget Estimates provide the resource allocation to deliver on community expectations as expressed in Council’s Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-25.

7. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

7.1. Section 82 of the Local Government Act 1993 requires the General Manager to prepare Estimates of Council’s revenue and expenditure for each financial year, and details what the Estimates must contain.

7.2. The Estimates must be adopted by Council before 31 August by absolute majority.

7.3. As noted above, the 2019-20 Estimates have been prepared in accordance with the updated Long Term Financial Management Plan (refer Attachment C), and produce outcomes which are consistent with the plan, including the provision for contingencies and reserves.

8. Marketing and Media

8.1. Communication of the Council’s approval of the Estimates and General Rates charge will be by a combination of a media release, publication of the Lord Mayor’s budget speech, information on the Council’s website and Facebook pages, an insert with the first rates instalment notice, and a City News article.

9. Community and Stakeholder Engagement

9.1. The preparation of the 2019-20 budget was primarily guided by the City’s Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-2025 and Long-Term Financial Management Plan.

9.2. An engagement process via the City’s Your Say Hobart portal, using the Budget Allocator tool commenced on 21 March and was open for a period of three weeks. A summary of the results is provided at Attachment E.

10. Delegation

10.1. Approval of the Estimates is delegated to Council.

As signatory to this report, I certify that, pursuant to Section 55(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, I hold no interest, as referred to in Section 49 of the Local Government Act 1993, in matters contained in this report.

Lara MacDonell

Acting Director City Governance

Date: 7 June 2019

File Reference: F19/57884

Attachment a: 2019-20 Budget Estimates ⇩

Attachment b: 2019-20 Annual Plan ⇩

Attachment c: 2020-40 Long-term Financial Management Plan ⇩

Attachment d: 2019-20 Rates Resolution ⇩

Attachment e: 2019-20 Budget Your Say Summary ⇩

Item No. 6.2

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 156

12/6/2019

Memorandum: Finance and Governance Committee

Financial Report as at 31 March 2019

The purpose of this memorandum is to present Council’s Financial Report for the period ending 31 March 2019 and to seek approval for changes to the 2018-19 Estimates (budget). It should be noted that this report shows the City’s financial position for the first 9 months of the year.

The Financial Report as at 31 March 2019 is attached, refer Attachment A. The Financial Report provides details of:

· The Council’s financial position as at 31 March 2019;

· The result of operations for the first nine months of the 2018-2019 financial year;

· Forecasts for 30 June 2019; and

· Progress towards the achievement of the Council’s financial sustainability outcomes.

Highlights from the 31 March 2019 financial report are provided as follows:

Item	Commentary
Operating result	· The YTD Underlying Surplus of $823K, is favourable against budget by $147K. · The revised forecast 30 June 2019 underlying result is currently a surplus of $0.9M being $1.03M greater than the December forecast, $0.03M less than the September forecast and $0.55M less than the original budget. · The main reasons for the decline are: o increases to Taste of Tasmania costs $0.4M approved by Council at its 18 June 2018 meeting, o the inclusion of the 2017-18 operating carry forwards of $0.3M approved by Council as part of the financial report for the period 30 September 2018, o Council approved further changes to the Estimates as part of the financial report for the period 30 September 2018 which resulted in the forecast underlying surplus for 2018-19 increasing by $0.19M, from $0.74M to $0.93M. o Council approved further changes to the Estimates as part of the financial report for the period 31 December 2018 which resulted in the forecast underlying result for 2018-19 decreasing by $1.06M, from a surplus of $0.93M to a deficit of $0.13M. o reduction in rates revenue $0.4M (Southern Cross refund), o increases to interest expense $0.3M (borrowed earlier than anticipated), o increases to depreciation/asset write-offs $0.2M, and o decreases in expected parking revenue $1.4M. · Year to date Expenses overall are $1.3M (1.3%) favourable to budget. · In more detail: o Labour costs are slightly favourable due to lower than expected wages and salaries and external labour. o Materials and Services are favourable due to expensed project delays, Civil Maintenance construction delays and reduced costs for the Taste of Tasmania and City Cleansing. The favourable variances are partially offset with unbudgeted costs for contractors in Design Services and higher than expected recruitment, legal and training costs for Corporate Services. · Revenues overall are $1.2M (1.2%) unfavourable to budget. This includes offsetting favourable and unfavourable variances: o Favourable variances include rates, car parks, fees and charges and operating grants. o Unfavourable variances include fines, on-street parking, interest and rents. · The final operating result may differ from the current forecast for the following reasons: o Current budget variances which are assumed to be timing variances (and therefore forecasts have not been amended) may prove to be permanent variances; and o Further variances could arise during the remainder of the year.
Capital expenditure	· With 75% of the year elapsed, capital expenditure is under spent for Plant and Equipment (36% of budget spent) and for Projects (57.4% of budget spent), but on track for a record spend nonetheless.
Budget changes	· As noted above, requested budget changes will result in a net decrease of $1.03M in the forecast operating result (from a deficit of $0.13M to a surplus of $0.9M). · Operating changes include increases for depreciation $617K, rates $76K, car park revenue $135K, operating grants $221K, and rent revenue $60K and decreases for labour $63K, materials and services $2.2M, energy $46K, financial costs $31K, asset write offs $430K, other expenses $107K, fees and charges revenue $93K, on street parking revenue $563K, fines revenue $1.2M and interest revenue $129K. · Operating changes not impacting the underlying result include increases for 2019-20 Finance Assistance grants $1.3M and net costs relating to the 2018 storm event. · Changes in projects total $1.6M are numerous and most are either reallocations or offset capital grant income/contributions. Increases include $1.5M for the Council Business System Replacement and $200K for the reinstatement of the unspent ICAP consultancies budget allocation from 2017-18. $189K of increases offset decreases in operating costs and $75K offset decreases in PPE costs. · Changes in PPE net to an increase of $180K and include a decrease of $75K for fleet purchases (transferred to projects) and increases for equipment for DKHAC $120K, a generator for emergency events $49K and Civil Maintenance equipment $69K. $206K of the increases offset net operating budget decreases.
Cash position	· The cash position is sound given the drawdown of the $20M loan. The cash balance at 30 June 2019 is expected to be $12M, although this will depend on final capital expenditure. · The proposed changes to the Estimates will result in net expenditure increasing and the forecast cash balance decreasing by $0.5M, primarily due to increased capital expenditure. · The final cash balance may differ from the current forecast for the following reasons: o Current budget variances which are assumed to be timing variances (and therefore forecasts have not been amended) may prove to be permanent variances, o Further variances could arise during the remainder of the year, and o Capital expenditure could be higher or lower than forecast.
KPIs	· Budget targets for six of Council’s eight financial sustainability indicators are not forecast to be met. o Indicator 1 – Underlying Surplus and indicator 2 – Underlying Surplus ratio are not expected to be met due to the reduced forecast. If an underlying deficit is recorded, this will be outside of accepted benchmarks. o Indicator 3 - Net Financial Liabilities and Indicator 4 – Net Financial Liabilities ratio are not expected to be met due to a reduction in cash forecasts mainly from increased capital expenditure and increased operating costs. o Indicator 5 – Net Interest Expense Cover ratio is not expected to be met due to interest expense increasing as a result of the timing of borrowings being bought forward. o Indicator 6 – Asset Sustainability ratio is not expected to be met due to the impacts from asset revaluations. o Indicator 7 – Asset Consumption ratio and Indicator 8 – Asset Renewal Funding ratio are expected to be met. · Despite not meeting targets, indicators 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6 will still be well within accepted benchmarks.
Other Matters	· Flood costs and recoveries have been excluded from the underlying result. To date, $783K of net operating costs and $507K of asset replacement costs have been incurred in the 2018-19 year. · The first claim for recovery of the storm costs incurred in 2017-18 and costs up to November 2018 has been lodged and will improve the cash position.

REcommendation

That:

1. That the information be received and noted.

2. The Council approve the changes to the 2018-19 Estimates listed in tables 4, 5, 7 and 9 of Attachment A, the financial impacts of which are to increase the underlying surplus by $1.03M, and to decrease the cash balance by $0.5M.

3. That Council note that the Council remains in a strong, sustainable financial position.

Karelyn Stephens

Budget and Reporting Manager

Lara MacDonell

Acting Director City Governance

Date: 5 June 2019

File Reference: F19/70419

Attachment a: Financial Report as at 31 March 2019 ⇩

Item No. 6.3

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 188

12/6/2019

REPORT TITLE: Local Government Act 1993 - Petitions, Polls and Meetings

REPORT PROVIDED BY: General Manager

1. Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1. The purpose of this report is to respond to a Notice of Motion adopted by the Council at its meeting of 15 April 2019 in relation to Part 6 of the Local Government Act 1993 (“the Act”) which deals with petitions, polls and public meetings.

2. Report Summary

2.1. The Council resolved to review Part 6 of the Local Government Act 1993 which deals with petitions, polls and public meetings.

2.2. Given the Council’s recent experience going through the process for receiving a petition and conducting a public meeting and elector poll it has highlighted a number of issues with this part of the Act. These issues include:

2.2.1. Receiving electronic petitions;

2.2.2. Thresholds for public meetings and elector polls;

2.2.3. Timeframes;

2.2.4. Submissions process;

2.2.5. Public meeting process; and

2.2.6. Cost.

2.3. It is recommended that while these issues are important, they are best dealt with as part of the current review into the Tasmanian local government legislative framework.

2.4. As such it is proposed that the General Manager write to the Director of Local Government conveying these issues for inclusion as part of the review.

3. Recommendation

That the General Manager write to the Director of Local Government highlighting the concerns with Part 6 of the Local Government Act 1993 raised in this report for consideration as part of the current review of the Tasmanian local government legislative framework.

4. Background

4.1. At its meeting of 15 April 2019, the Council considered a notice of motion in relation to reviewing Part 6 of the Act.

4.2. This arises as a result of the Council’s recent experience in conducting two public meetings and currently being in the process of conducting an elector poll.

4.3. The Council resolved:

That in order to enhance the democratic process a report be prepared to review Part 6 of the Local Government Act 1993 in relation to petitions, polls and meetings with a view to the Act being amended to place controls around the requirements for councils to hold elector meetings and conduct elector polls, including:

(i) the threshold for petitions requiring councils to hold an elector meeting or conduct an elector poll

(ii) the timing of an elector poll

(iii) the costs to communities for both and

(iv) the potential for electronic elector polls to be undertaken online,

while addressing anomalies and unintended consequences.

4.4. Part 6 of the Act provides the process for submitting a petition to Council, deals with a petition seeking a public meeting, sets-out the requirements for conducting a public meeting and allows for electors to seek an elector poll as well as providing for the process of that. A copy of Part 6 of the Act is included as Attachment A to this report.

4.5. Given the Council’s recent experience in operating within this part of the Act it is opportune to consider some of the issues experienced. These issues are explored below and incorporate those specifically raised in the Council’s resolution of 15 April.

Electronic Petitions

4.6. Amendments were made to the Act as part of the recent Targeted Review to specifically provide for electronic petitions, however it is considered that there are still some ‘grey areas’ in dealing with petitions which are collated via electronic means given the various ways this can be done.

4.7. It is also important to ensure that any process is not overly bureaucratic so as to impose difficulties in submitting a complying petition.

Pre-conditions for valid petitions

4.8. In order for a petition to be validly tabled it needs to:

4.8.1. Comply with s57 of the Act (administrative type issues);

4.8.2. Not be defamatory; and

4.8.3. Not propose unlawful action.

4.9. The obligation to make this determination is placed on the General Manager It is considered that this could be a significant challenge given that a petition would be presented to the General Manager moments before a Council meeting and the petition is to be tabled at the next ordinary Council meeting. In a practical sense this allows very little time to make such a determination, which adopting a practical approach, could result in it being delayed until the following Council meeting, however that does represent a risk to the General Manager.

4.10. Additionally, making an assessment on whether the petition is defamatory is an unreasonable and inappropriate position for the General Manager. Whilst the intent of this provision is clear, it is suggested that it ought to be refined so as to avoid doubt.

Public Meeting and Elector Poll Threshold

4.11. Currently, the threshold number of signatures of electors for a petition to require the Council to conduct a public meeting or an elector poll is 1,000 or 5%, whichever is the lesser.

4.12. Clearly the intent of these provisions is to allow members of the community the ability to participate and engage in the business of its council, however this does need to be balanced with the impact of that participation.

4.13. These thresholds have not changed since the Act was first enacted in 1993. It could be expected at that time, obtaining signatures on a petition was a far more labour intensive proposition than it is today. Given the use of the internet in creating and publicising petitions it is far easier to obtain a significant number of signatures in a relatively short period of time.

4.14. As such, it is considered appropriate that the number of signatures required ought to be increased to reflect the original intent of the Act.

Timeframes for Public Meeting & Elector Poll

4.15. Currently, the timeframes set-out in the Act are very tight when considering the practical logistics involved in conducting a public meeting and elector poll. It’s clear that the intent of these provisions are to ensure that public meetings and elector polls are conducted in a timely fashion, however it would be appropriate to increase these timeframes so as to make the process more manageable at the operational level.

4.16. Additionally, if the Council was already dealing with a matter the subject of petition requesting an elector poll then the provision for a process for the Council to obtain a deferral of the elector poll until it had considered the issue would be appropriate. This could be a Ministerial power, for example.

Submission Process

4.17. It is a requirement of a public meeting that submissions are invited and a summary is available at a public meeting. In a practical sense this is quite challenging and resource intensive.

4.18. With the Council’s recent experience, there were 213 submissions received in relation to the building heights public meeting and 524 submissions for the cable car public meeting.

4.19. These submissions were all required to be read and considered in order to form part of a summary which was available at the public meeting. Given the already tight timeframes, this was a challenge.

4.20. Again, with a lot of observations in this part of the Act, it is considered that this issue arises partially due to the passage of time and the increased use of technology making it far easier to provide submissions.

4.21. This is obviously a positive so far as engagement in the democratic process is concerned, however it does require review to ensure that it is manageable in a practical sense.

Public Meeting Process

4.22. The legislation is quite broad with respect to how a public meeting is to be conducted. This clearly provides broad discretion and freedom in the format for the meeting, however it is important that sufficient prescription is provided in order to ensure that all community members interested in an issue are afforded the opportunity to participate and be heard.

Cost

4.23. As Council would be aware, the cost of conducting an elector poll is significant. Undertaking an elector poll electronically is not precluded in the current drafting, however it would be subject to the process of the Tasmanian Electoral Commission (TEC) in conducting the poll.

4.24. It is therefore suggested that this is more an issue for discussion with the TEC rather than requiring a legislative amendment.

Legislative Review

4.25. The current review of the local government legislative framework is at a stage where a directions paper is due to be released in the next few months providing an overview of the major policy reforms that are proposed arising from the consultation undertaken to-date.

4.26. This part of the Act is clearly within the scope of the review and it is considered that an appropriate approach to the issues raised in this report would be to convey these to the Director of Local Government for inclusion and consideration as part of the review.

4.27. It is considered unlikely that a legislative amendment outside of the review process would be supported by the Government and that dealing with this as part of the review process is the appropriate course of action.

5. Proposal and Implementation

5.1. It is proposed that the General Manager write to the Director of Local Government highlighting the concerns with Part 6 of the Local Government Act 1993 raised in this report for consideration as part of the current review of the Tasmanian local government legislative framework.

6. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1. Considering issues associated with the Act strongly align with the Council’s Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-2025 in that it is a strategic objective to have an engaged civic culture where people feel part of decision-making.

7. Financial Implications

7.1. None arise from this report.

8. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1 These have been addressed in the body of this report.

9. Delegation

9.1. This matter requires consideration by the Council.

N D Heath

General Manager

Date: 4 June 2019

File Reference: F19/71168; 16-1-2

Attachment a: Part 6 Local Government Act 1993 ⇩

Item No. 6.5

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 201

12/6/2019

Memorandum: Finance and Governance Committee

Town Hall - Provision of Additional Flagpoles

Background/Proposal:

The purpose of this report is to canvass the potential for the provision of additional flagpoles on the Town Hall site.

At its meeting of 21 August, 2017, the Council requested that a report be prepared canvassing the cost of purchasing and installing additional flagpoles on the Elizabeth Street frontage of the Town Hall.

The City of Hobart flag is flown on both the Town Hall and Council Centre buildings.

The Australian Aboriginal Flag is flown on permanent display from the Davey Street aspect of the Town Hall.

As the civic seat of the City of Hobart, flags flown from the Town Hall masthead are interchanged in accordance with notifications issued to government agencies through the State Government Protocol Office. This is also the case on the Council Centre building, except where a Council resolution may involve the display of an alternate flag, as was the case some time ago with the Rainbow Flag.

In terms of the location of the poles, there is no available space at the rear of the building and the existing trees on the Elizabeth Street frontage would prevent such an installation.

If the City wishes to have the capacity to fly a range of flags simultaneously, the ideal approach would be to provide a row of 4 to 6 poles which can accommodate multiple flags, whilst complying with the protocols issued through State Protocol.

The most appropriate location for the poles is at the front of the Town Hall where there is plenty of space to display the flags in a prominent setting.

There are currently 14 holes in place in front of the Town Hall, seven either side of the portico. They have been used sporadically in the past on civic occasions. There is no evidence that they have been in place on a permanent basis at any point and therefore their use is temporary.

The Council can continue to utilise the existing holes on a temporary basis, subject to removal on those occasions when the space on the Town Hall Forecourt may be required for civic or other activities.

The use of the existing infrastructure in this manner obviates any requirement for the lodgement of an application for planning and/or potential building approval; which would be the case if the flagpoles were to be in permanent use; or if the Council wanted to change the locations of the flagpoles, thereby creating the need for new infrastructure. In those circumstances, a planning permit would likely trigger heritage and archaeological considerations.

A concept drawing is attached showing a range of configurations for the use of the existing holes. It is proposed that a maximum of 6 flagpoles be used to accommodate the range of flags used by the City. The Australian Aboriginal flag could also be relocated from the rear of the building, subject to appropriate consultation.

Council’s Senior Cultural Heritage Officer has been consulted and has raised no objection to the use of the flagpoles on the Town Hall forecourt. The preferred configuration is the one-sided location towards Argyle Street, as shown in the attached drawing.

Financial Considerations:

The cost of an individual flagpole including installation is estimated at $1,200 each.

The price of flags varies according to the quality of manufacture. An order of cost would range between $200 (for occasional use) and $850 (for regular use). Flags are purchased as required from within the City’s operational property budget.

If approved, funding of $7,200 for up to six flagpoles would be allocated from the Corporate Property budget in the 2019/2020 Annual Plan.

REcommendation

That:

1. That Council utilise a row of up to six of the existing flagpole holes located towards the Argyle Street side of the Town Hall Forecourt, as shown in the attached plan, to enable the co-ordinated display of flags.

2. A policy be developed to manage the flagpoles on both the Town Hall and Council Centre buildings, including the display of flags and those occasions when the Town Hall poles will be temporarily removed for civic purposes.

3. The purchase and installation of the flagpoles estimated at $7200 be funded from the Corporate Property function of the 2018/2019 Annual Plan.

M_johns_adobe signature

Margaret Johns

Group Manager City Government and Customer Relations

Date: 7 June 2019

File Reference: F19/53814

Item No. 6.6

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 205

12/6/2019

REPORT TITLE: Revised City of Hobart Code for Tenders and Contracts

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Acting Director City Governance

1. Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval of a revised City of Hobart Code for Tenders and Contracts.

1.2. The community benefit is consistent with strategic objective 5.1 in the City of Hobart Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-25, being to deliver best value for money through strategic procurement decision-making.

2. Report Summary

2.1. Under the Local Government Act 1993 (Tas) (LG Act), Council is required to adopt a Code for tenders and contracts (Code), review it every 4 years and make it available to the public. The Code is to include specific matters as set out in the Local Government General Regulations 2015 (Tas) (the Regulations).

2.2. The City has had a Code since March 2012 and before that a Code of Public Tendering. It is regularly reviewed.

2.3. The Code has been recently reviewed and updated to reflect contemporary procurement best practice and to improve readability.

2.4. The Code was considered at the March Finance and Governance Committee where it was deferred to receive a further report on the implications of reducing the City’s first procurement threshold where a minimum of one written quotation should be sought from $10,000 to $5,000.

2.5. The Code was further considered at the April Finance and Governance Committee, whereat Committee resolved that the first threshold where a minimum of one quotation is to be sought is reduced from $10,000 to $5,000.

2.6. The revised Code was thereafter considered by Council at its 15 April 2019 meeting where it was referred back to Committee for further consideration of how quotations are sought for consultancy services.

2.7. A revised version of the Code is presented to Council for approval. Details of how quotations are sought for consultancy services are including in this covering report.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. The Report ‘Revised City of Hobart Code for Tenders and Contracts’ be received and noted.

2. Council adopt the revised City of Hobart Code for Tenders and Contracts marked as Attachment A to this report.

3. The General Manager be authorised to finalise the City of Hobart Code for Tenders and Contracts and arrange for it to be made available to the public in paper format from the Council’s Customer Service Centre and in electronic format from Council’s website.

4. Background

4.1. Section 333B of the LG Act requires Council to adopt a Code for tenders and contracts, review it every 4 years and make it available to the public.

4.2. The Code must include specific matters, set out in Regulation 28 of the Local Government (General) Regulations 2015 (Tas) – refer Attachment A.

4.3. The purpose of the Code is to provide a framework for best practice procurement. The Code sets out how the City will meet its legislative obligations in respect to procurement, tendering and contracting. The Code includes a statement of ethics which underlines best practices to be applied by the City’s officers who organise or participate in procurement and service providers when they offer and are engaged to provide the City with goods, services or works.

4.4. The City has had a Code since March 2012 and before that a Code of Public Tendering.

4.5. The Code is regularly reviewed to ensure it remains reflective of best practice procurement, ensuring risks are managed to an appropriate level to achieve the City’s procurement activities and achieve best value for money for the City.

4.6. The most recent review was conducted in March 2018 where Council approved a revised Code to reflect Council’s decision to revise its tender and quotation exemption reporting processes.

4.7. At that time Council noted that the Code would be the subject of annual review and any further changes to the Code would be presented to Committee / Council in due course.

4.8. The Code has been recently reviewed and updated to reflect contemporary procurement best practice and to improve readability. The review included a legal review to ensure the Code complies with its legislative requirements.

4.9. The Code was considered at the March Finance and Governance Committee where it was deferred to receive a further report on the implications of reducing the City’s first procurement threshold where a minimum of one written quotation should be sought from $10,000 to $5,000.

4.10. The Code, with a report on the implication of reducing the $value of the first procurement threshold, was further considered at the April Finance and Governance Committee, whereat Committee resolved that:

Council adopt the revised City of Hobart Code for Tenders and Contracts marked as Attachment B to this report, noting that the first threshold where a minimum of one quotation is to be sought is reduced from $10,000 to $5,000.

The General Manager be authorised to finalise the City of Hobart Code for Tenders and Contracts and arrange for it to be made available to the public in paper format from the Council’s Customer Service Centre and in electronic format from Council’s website.

4.11. The revised Code with the amended first procurement threshold was thereafter considered by Council at its 15 April 2019 meeting where it was referred back to Committee for further consideration of how quotations are sought for consultancy services.

4.12. The revised Code is presented to the Council for approval – refer Attachment B. Further information on how quotations are sought for consultancy services is included in the sections below.

Consultancy Services

4.13. At the 15 April 2019 Council meeting, a question was asked whether Council should tender for all consultancy services irrespective of value.

4.14. For the majority of its consultancy services the City has already public tendered and established a Standing Contract with a Panel of Providers.

4.15. There is very little of the Council’s expenditure on consultancy services not already under Contract established as a result of a public tender process.

4.16. As outlined in section 2 of the Code, if the City already has a Contract in place with particular supplier(s) for goods, services or works and they are capable of meeting the City’s requirements, the City’s officers must procure goods, services or works from those suppliers.

4.17. Examples of the types of consultancy services Contracts already in place are for architecture, building surveying, civil and structural engineering, electrical engineering, environmental engineering, hydraulics engineering, landscaping design, geotechnical engineering, mechanical engineering, planning consultancy, quantity surveying, traffic engineering, marketing and design, smart city technology partners and project management.

4.18. As outlined in section 5.5 of the Code, when purchasing from a Panel established via a public tender process, the City will seek written quotations from panel members in line with its procurement thresholds.

4.19. The City also has an annual process whereby Council’s expenditure is reviewed to determine any significant areas of spend not already under contract. If this is found, a process is undertaken to publicly tender for the goods, services or works identified.

4.20. Officers can also request that a Contract be created for a specific category of expenditure and this is always done through a public process.

4.21. It should be noted that the City’s procurement thresholds are minimum thresholds and officers frequently obtain more than the minimum number of quotations to ensure that open competition is achieved in the market when goods, services or works are required. Equally a tender process is undertaken for amounts below the tendering threshold if it is determined appropriate to do so and to ensure that best value is obtained for the goods, services or works.

5. Proposal and Implementation

5.1. It is proposed that the Council adopt the attached City of Hobart Code for Tenders and Contracts, as amended, and make copies available to the public in a paper format from the Customer Service Centre and in electronic format prominently from the Council’s website as required under section 333(B)(4) of the LG Act, which states that:

5.1.1. The general manager is to make a copy of the council's code and any amendments to the code available –

(a) for public inspection at the public office during ordinary office hours; and

(b) for purchase at a reasonable charge; and

(c) on its internet site free of charge.

5.2. The revised Code will also be made available from the City’s e-tendering portal TenderLink.

5.3. It is also proposed that Council note that the City has already been out to tender for the majority of its consultancy services and quotations are sought by Officers under the City’s procurement thresholds from the City’s contracted Panel of Providers.

6. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1. This report proposes amendments to the City of Hobart Code for Tenders and Contracts.

6.2. This report is consistent with strategic objective 5.1 in the City of Hobart Capital City Strategic Plan 2015-25, being to deliver best value for money through strategic procurement decision-making.

7. Financial Implications

7.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1. There are no financial implications arising from this report.

7.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

7.2.1. Not applicable.

7.3. Asset Related Implications

7.3.1. Not applicable.

8. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1. These are considered elsewhere in this report.

9. Delegation

9.1. This matter is delegated to Council.

Lara MacDonell

Acting Director City Governance

Date: 6 June 2019

File Reference: F19/70421

Attachment a: Regulation 28 - Code for Tenders and Contracts ⇩

Attachment b: Revised City of Hobart Code for Tenders and Contracts ⇩

Item No. 6.8

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 257

12/6/2019

REPORT TITLE: Lease - Christina Henri - Part of Level 4 Council Centre

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Manager Inclusive, Resilient and Creative Communities

Director Community Life

1. Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1. The purpose of this report is for the Council to consider a proposal to continue the leasing of office space on level 4 of the Council Centre building for a further two years to Dr Christina Henri at no charge.

1.2. Dr Henri’s projects relate to Australia’s female convicts and their children, with specific interest focussing on the Tasmanian Aspect of this Colonial story. Her art has attracted national international attention.

2. Report Summary

2.1. Dr Henri has been occupying an office space on Level 4 of the Council Centre since late 2016 at no cost and been acknowledged as a Cultural Tourism Ambassador for the City of Hobart.

2.2. Dr Henri has written to the Council requesting that in light of her continued delivery of projects specifically relating to the history of the Hobart area that a new lease agreement be developed for a further two years at no cost. Dr Henri’s proposal is shown at Attachment A to this report. The office space is shown at Attachment B to this report.

2.3. Dr Henri’s “Roses from the Heart” memorial project is ongoing and is a major international project involving participants world-wide. Its cultural tourism potential has already attracted tourists from across the globe to visit Hobart and retrace the steps of women transported to Van Diemen’s Land during the 1800s.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. The Council grant a lease to Dr Christina Henri for an office space located on level 4 of the Council Centre building for a period of two years at no cost.

2. The lease and associated grant value of $3,200 be recorded in the City’s Annual Report in accordance with its policy on ‘Leases to Non-Profit Organisations’.

3. The General Manager be authorised to negotiate the terms and conditions of the lease.

4. Background

4.1. The Council in 2016 approved the provision of an office space on level 4 of the Hobart Council Centre at no cost to Dr Christina Henri following the conclusion of her honorary artist-in-residence at the Cascade Female Factory.

4.2. Dr Henri was also acknowledged as a Cultural Tourism Ambassador for the City of Hobart.

4.3. Dr Henri’s projects relate to Australia’s female convicts and their children, with specific interest focussing on the Tasmanian aspect of this colonial story. Her art has attracted national and international attention. Dr Henri is regularly visited by overseas, interstate and intrastate participants of her memorials who bring their bonnet tributes to Dr Henri in Hobart. This provides the opportunity to connect with her and to visit the places relating to the lives of the women and children that their tribute recognises.

4.4. Dr Henri considers that her art memorials are of benefit to the City of Hobart. Since 2010, she has been travelling to the United Kingdom and to Ireland holding events, linking our State and country with these European countries through the mutually connecting history of female convicts and their children transported to Van Diemen’s Land and the mainland.

4.5. Dr Henri has provided a proposal detailing her achievements over the past two years and her plans for the future. The proposal is shown at Attachment A.

4.6. The office space that Dr Henri is seeking to lease is 16/m2 and in accordance with the most recent market valuation for this space, the market value would be $200/m2 per annum, equating to a grant of $3,200.

4.7. The City’s policy titled Leases to Non-Profit Organisations sets out a number of criteria against which lease proposals seeking reduced rental are to be assessed. The table below provides commentary regarding the proposal against the criteria in the policy.

Criteria	Comments
Use, or proposed use of the property	Proposing to use property as office, work, meeting and storage space for the “Roses from the heart” project.
Alignment with the Council Strategic Plan and other relevant Council strategic documents	Aligns well with Social Inclusion and Creative Hobart Strategies.
Level of community benefit – proposed or provided, which could include one or more of the following: · Health and wellbeing · Lifelong learning · Arts and culture · Social inclusion · Heritage and history · Economic · Environment / environment management · Welfare	Dr Henri is a well-respected local artist who is delivering an ongoing international project involving participants world-wide. Its cultural tourism potential has already attracted tourists from across the globe to visit Hobart and retrace the steps of women transported to Van Diemen’s Land during the 1800s.
Value of land and buildings	The value of the office space according to the most recent market valuation is approximately $200/m2. The value of the proposed lease space would be approximately $3,200 pa.
Potential for alternative use	The space is currently occupied by Dr Henri.
Viability and capability of the organisation	There have been no concerns with Dr Henri utilising this office space over the past two years and she has included details of her upcoming plans in her proposal.
Capacity to pay, after all income and expenditure is taken into account	As Dr Henri is an individual artist with no income stream, there is no capacity to pay rental.
Capacity to invest in and maintain the asset, or degree of capital investment undertaken	This is not overly relevant given the proposed lease area is pre-existing office space and would be used as such.
Type of facility	Office space.
Capacity to invest in the community, or level of community investment provided, through disbursement of surplus funds to local community groups, organisations or activities	Not applicable.
Length of tenure sought	The length of tenure of two years is relative to other tenancies on Level 4 Council Centre.
For lease renewals only, the level of compliance with existing lease terms and conditions	There have been no issues identified.

4.7.1. The current proposal clearly satisfies the criteria in the policy.

5. Proposal and Implementation

5.1. It is proposed that the Council grant a lease to Dr Christina Henri for an office space located on level 4 of the Council Centre building for a period of two years at no cost.

5.2. The lease and associated grant value of $3,200 be recorded in the Council’s Annual Report in accordance with the City’s Leases to Non-Profit Organisations Policy.

5.3. The General Manager be authorised to negotiate the terms and conditions of the lease.

6. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1. This proposal aligns with the Hobart: A community vision for our island capital document, especially Pillar 2.2 We celebrate our diversity and include each other in city life and 3.2 We are a creative and cultural capital and 3.4 We support our artists.

6.2. This proposal also supports the Capital City Strategic Plan (2015-2025), Goal 1 - Economic Development, Vibrancy and Culture “City growth vibrancy and culture comes when everyone participates in city life” and Goal 4 - “Our communities are resilient, safe and enjoy health lifestyles”. Strategic Objective 1.5 - Cultural and creative activities build community wellbeing and economic viability. “1.5.1 - Implement the Council’s Creative Hobart Strategy.” Strategic Objective 4.2 - City facilities, infrastructure and open spaces support healthy lifestyles. “4.2.2 - Support effective utilisation of city facilities, infrastructure and open space.”

7. Financial Implications

7.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1. There is no impact on the current year operating result.

7.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

7.2.1. There will be no impact on future years financial result.

7.3. Asset Related Implications

7.3.1. There are no asset related implications.

8. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1. There are no legal, legislative or risk implications from this report.

9. Community and Stakeholder Engagement

9.1. The Manager Legal and Governance has been consulted in the preparation of this report.

10. Delegation

10.1. This report is delegated to Committee.

Kimbra Parker

Manager Inclusive, Resilient and Creative Communities

Tim Short

Director Community Life

Date: 5 June 2019

File Reference: F19/72063

Attachment a: Proposal ⇩

Attachment b: Office Space Plan ⇩

Item No. 6.9

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 270

12/6/2019

REPORT TITLE: Lease - Tasmanian Writers' Centre - Part of Level 4 Council Centre

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Manager Inclusive, Resilient and Creative Communities

Director Community Life

1. Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1. The purpose of this report is for the Council to consider a proposal to continue the leasing of office space on level 4 of the Council Centre building for a further year to the Tasmanian Writers’ Centre (TWC) at nominal rent.

1.2. The TWC is a valuable creative sector organisation with more than 20 years of service to the Tasmanian writing and reading community. The TWC is still under significant financial pressure but is committed to returning the Centre to full operation.

2. Report Summary

2.1. The TWC has been occupying an office space on Level 4 of the Council Centre for the past 12 months at nominal rent as approved by the Council in May 2018. The area proposed for lease is shown as Lot One in Attachment A to this report.

2.2. The organisation has written to the Council seeking ongoing support through the continued provision of an office space for them to operate their organisation from. The letter of request is shown at Attachment B to this report.

2.3. The new Management Committee has worked hard over the last year to determine the cause of the previous funding crisis and to restore the governance of the Centre to stability however they still do not have the capacity to pay rental for the office space.

2.4. As an organisation with more than 20 years of service to the Tasmanian writing and reading community, the TWC is committed to returning the Centre to full operation so that they can continue to initiate and support local literature and literacy initiatives.

2.5. The TWC has a strong and committed Board that are working collaboratively to support the literately community.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. The Tasmanian Writers’ Centre be granted a new twelve (12) month lease at a nominal rent for office space on the fourth floor of the Hobart Council Centre that they currently occupy.

2. The General Manager be authorised to finalise the terms and conditions of the lease with the Tasmanian Writers’ Centre and to execute the agreement on the Council’s behalf.

3. The lease and grant of $9,400 be recorded in the City’s Annual Report in accordance with its policy on ‘Leases to Non-Profit Organisations’.

4. Background

4.1. The TWC was incorporated in 1997 and is a member-based not-for-profit organisation. Over its 21 year history the TWC has provided workshops and seminars, employment opportunities, manuscript assessment services, readings and events.

4.2. The TWC has hosted a variety of residency programs, and has an ongoing exchange program with Prince Edward Island, Canada with visiting writers staying at the Kelly Street Writers’ Cottage in Battery Point.

4.3. In May 2018 TWC announced that it faced closure if sufficient interim funding could not be generated to maintain its operations over the next 18 months.

4.4. It is understood that this was largely due an unanticipated shortfall in government funding from Arts Tasmania. The TWC advised that the quantum of the loss of Arts Tasmania funding was in the order of $100,000 to $120,000. Arts Tasmania did however, provide interim funding, which allowed for the payment of staff and regular operational expenses.

4.5. One of the organisation’s key operating costs is rental. The organisation was previously a tenant of the Salamanca Arts Centre. It is understood that the previous rental paid by TWC to the Salamanca Arts Centre was approximately $11,000 per annum.

4.6. The proposed office space to be leased to the TWC is 47 square metres. The commercial rent for the office space based the most recent valuation is $200 per metre. The grant would be recorded at a value of $9,400 per annum.

Criteria	Comments
Use, or proposed use of the property	The proposed leased area will be used as a general office space and for meetings with members, including after-hours meetings and to set up the Centre’s library of Tasmanian literature and writing resources.
Alignment with the Council Strategic Plan and other relevant Council strategic documents	Aligns well with the Hobart: A community vision for our island capital; the Capital City Strategic Plan; Social Inclusion Strategy and Creative Hobart Strategy.
Level of community benefit – proposed or provided, which could include one or more of the following: · Health and wellbeing · Lifelong learning · Arts and culture · Social inclusion · Heritage and history · Economic · Environment / environment management · Welfare	The office space is to be leased to the TWC to provide accommodation for two to three employees, to hold meetings with members and to set up the Centre’s library of Tasmanian literature and writing resources, including after-hours meetings. The TWC works as an advocacy, outreach and support service for Tasmania’s many aspiring, emerging and established writers. Its programs concentrate on the promotion of Tasmanian writers by engaging with a range of audiences, agents, publishers and projects. The TWC presents high-profile events with a range of partners, supporting a culture of reading and writing in Tasmania. The TWC provides support for writers to tell their stories, connect with readers and build sustainable careers.
Value of land and buildings	The value of the office space according to the most recent market valuation is approximately $200/m2. The value of the proposed lease space at 47m2 would be $9,400 pa.
Potential for alternative use	The space is currently occupied by TWC.
Viability and capability of the organisation	There have been no concerns with TWC utilising this office space over the past year and the committee has advised that they are committed to returning the Centre to full operation.
Capacity to pay, after all income and expenditure is taken into account	As the TWC do still have ongoing committed funding to the necessary level for sustainability, there is no capacity to pay rental.
Capacity to invest in and maintain the asset, or degree of capital investment undertaken	This is not overly relevant given the proposed lease area is pre-existing office space and would be used as such.
Type of facility	Office space.
Capacity to invest in the community, or level of community investment provided, through disbursement of surplus funds to local community groups, organisations or activities	Not applicable.
Length of tenure sought	The length of tenure of one year is relative to other tenancies on Level 4 Council Centre.
For lease renewals only, the level of compliance with existing lease terms and conditions	There have been no issues identified.

4.7.1. The current proposal clearly satisfies the criteria in the policy.

5. Proposal and Implementation

5.1. It is proposed that The Tasmanian Writers’ Centre be granted a new twelve (12) month lease at a nominal rent for office space on the fourth floor of the Hobart Council Centre that they currently occupy.

5.2. The General Manager be authorised to finalise the terms and conditions of the lease with the Tasmanian Writers’ Centre and to execute the agreement on the Council’s behalf.

5.3. The lease and grant of $9,400 be recorded in the City’s Annual Report in accordance with its policy on ‘Leases to Non-Profit Organisations’.

6. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.2. This proposal all supports the Capital City Strategic Plan (2015-2025), Goal 1 - Economic Development, Vibrancy and Culture “City growth vibrancy and culture comes when everyone participates in city life” and Goal 4 - “Our communities are resilient, safe and enjoy health lifestyles”. Strategic Objective 1.5 - Cultural and creative activities build community wellbeing and economic viability. “1.5.1 - Implement the Council’s Creative Hobart Strategy.” Strategic Objective 4.2 - City facilities, infrastructure and open spaces support healthy lifestyles. “4.2.2 - Support effective utilisation of city facilities, infrastructure and open space.”

7. Financial Implications

7.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1. There is no impact on the current year operating result.

7.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

7.2.1. There is no financial cost associated with this matter. Should the Council resolve to grant a lease at a nominal rent, it would represent income foregone.

7.3. Asset Related Implications

7.3.1. There are no asset related implications.

8. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1. There are no legal, legislative or risk implications from this report.

9. Community and Stakeholder Engagement

9.1. The Manager Legal and Governance has been consulted in the preparation of this report.

10. Delegation

10.1. This report is delegated to Committee.

Kimbra Parker

Manager Inclusive, Resilient and Creative Communities

Tim Short

Director Community Life

Date: 5 June 2019

File Reference: F19/72173

Attachment a: Office Space Plan ⇩

Attachment b: Letter of Request ⇩

about people	We value people – our community, our customers and colleagues.
professional	We take pride in our work.
enterprising	We look for ways to create value.
responsive	We’re accessible and focused on service.
inclusive	We respect diversity in people and ideas.
making a difference	We recognise that everything we do shapes Hobart’s future.