HCC Coat of Arms.jpg
City of hobart

 

 

 

 

AGENDA

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

 

Open Portion

 

Tuesday, 21 June 2022

 

at 4:30 pm

Council Chamber, Town Hall


 

 

 

 

THE MISSION

Working together to make Hobart a better place for the community. 

THE VALUES

The Council is:

 

People

We care about people – our community, our customers and colleagues.

Teamwork

We collaborate both within the organisation and with external stakeholders drawing on skills and expertise for the benefit of our community. 

Focus and Direction

We have clear goals and plans to achieve sustainable social, environmental and economic outcomes for the Hobart community. 

Creativity and Innovation

We embrace new approaches and continuously improve to achieve better outcomes for our community. 

Accountability

We are transparent, work to high ethical and professional standards and are accountable for delivering outcomes for our community. 

 

 


 

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 3

 

21/6/2022

 

 

ORDER OF BUSINESS

 

Business listed on the agenda is to be conducted in the order in which it is set out, unless the committee by simple majority determines otherwise.

 

APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE

1.        Co-Option of a Committee Member in the event of a vacancy  4

2.        Confirmation of Minutes. 4

3.        Consideration of Supplementary Items. 4

4.        Indications of Pecuniary and Conflicts of Interest. 5

5.        Transfer of Agenda Items. 5

6.        Reports. 6

6.1     Budget Estimates 2022-23. 6

6.2     Governance Framework. 121

6.3     Amendments to Officer Council Delegations. 165

6.4     Response to Notice of Motion - UTAS Move to the City. 203

6.5     Resolutions from Public Meeting in Response to Save UTas Petition. 233

7.        Committee Action Status Report. 262

7.1     Committee Status Report - OPEN. 262

8.        Responses to Questions Without Notice. 272

8.1     Committee Decisions - Introduction to Council 273

9.        Questions Without Notice. 275

10.     Closed Portion Of The Meeting.. 276

 


 

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 4

 

21/6/2022

 

 

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting (Open Portion) held Tuesday, 21 June 2022 at 4:30 pm in the Council Chamber, Town Hall.

 

This meeting of the Finance and Governance Committee is held in accordance with a Notice issued by the Premier on 31 March 2022 under section 18 of the COVID-19 Disease Emergency (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020.

 

The title Chief Executive Officer is a term of reference for the General Manager as appointed by Council pursuant s.61 of the Local Government Act 1993 (Tas).

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Alderman M Zucco (Chairman)

Deputy Lord Mayor Councillor H Burnet

Alderman Dr P T Sexton

Alderman D C Thomas

Councillor W Coats

 

NON-MEMBERS

Lord Mayor Councillor A M Reynolds

Alderman J R Briscoe

Councillor W Harvey

Alderman S Behrakis

Councillor M Dutta

Councillor J Fox

Councillor Dr Z Sherlock

Apologies:

 

 

Leave of Absence: Nil.

 

1.       Co-Option of a Committee Member in the event of a vacancy

 

2.       Confirmation of Minutes

 

The minutes of the Open Portion of the Finance and Governance Committee meeting held on Tuesday, 24 May 2022 and the Special Finance and Governance Committee meeting held on Tuesday, 14 June 2022, are submitted for confirming as an accurate record.

 

 

3.       Consideration of Supplementary Items

Ref: Part 2, Regulation 8(6) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

Recommendation

 

That the Committee resolve to deal with any supplementary items not appearing on the agenda, as reported by the Chief Executive Officer.

 

 

4.       Indications of Pecuniary and Conflicts of Interest

Ref: Part 2, Regulation 8(7) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

 

Members of the Committee are requested to indicate where they may have any pecuniary or conflict of interest in respect to any matter appearing on the agenda, or any supplementary item to the agenda, which the Committee has resolved to deal with.

 

5.       Transfer of Agenda Items

Regulation 15 of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

 

A Committee may close a part of a meeting to the public where a matter to be discussed falls within 15(2) of the above regulations.

 

In the event that the Committee transfer an item to the closed portion, the reasons for doing so should be stated.

 

Are there any items which should be transferred from this agenda to the closed portion of the agenda, or from the closed to the open portion of the agenda?

 


Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 6

 

21/6/2022

 

 

6.       Reports

 

6.1    Budget Estimates 2022-23

          File Ref: F22/50232

Report of the Manager Rates, Procurement and Finance Operations, Chief Financial Officer and the Acting Director City Enablers of 16 June 2022 and attachments.

Delegation:     Council


Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 21

 

21/6/2022

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Budget Estimates 2022-23

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Manager Rates, Procurement and Finance Operations

Chief Financial Officer

Acting Director City Enablers

 

1.         Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1.     The purpose of this report is to present the City’s draft 2022-23 Budget Estimates, Draft Annual Plan and Rates Resolution and the 2023-32 Long Term Financial Management Plan for consideration. It is proposed that the Estimates be formally adopted at the Council meeting on 27 June 2022.

2.         Report Summary

2.1.     The City of Hobart’s (CoH) draft Budget for 2022-23 has been developed in unique circumstances.  Hobart continues to recover from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic whilst the organisation progresses it’s transformation for it to be positioned to embrace future challenges and opportunities.

2.2.     The Budget includes funding for initiatives that will underpin the continued transformation and is effectively a reset establishing a financial basis from which the organisation can develop, build capacity for it to be community focussed, innovative and responsive.

2.3.     The City’s Estimates for 2022-23 have been shaped in recognition of the continued and lasting impacts of COVID-19 on the community and proposes a budget that includes a responsible rate increase.

2.4.     The restructuring of the organisation during 2021-22 provides a basis from which capital works can be delivered in a consistent and effective way.  Whilst contractor and supply chain challenges persist, the budget provides funding for a capital works program totalling $72.05M.  This includes projects in receipt of grant funding totalling $11.575M.

2.5.     The City’s draft Annual Plan for the financial year 2022-23 has been drafted and a copy is attached to this report.

2.6.     A key challenge for this budget has been impacts beyond the control of Council:

·     Municipal Revaluation

·     Increase of the State Fire Service Contribution

·     Imposition of a new Resource Recovery Levy

2.7.     This report proposes the introduction of a differential rating model and limiting rate increases to help mitigate disparity in the distribution of rate collections resulting from the municipal revaluation.  The changes have been reflected in an amended version of the City of Hobart Rates and Charges Policy.

2.8.     A comprehensive review of the CoH Rating, Valuation and Revenue Strategy will be undertaken during the 2022-23 year to review how rates are levied and applied. The review will give consideration to quarantining the additional revenue derived from the rate base growth and applying this to growth initiatives in the municipal area.

2.9.     The City’s Risk and Audit Panel met on 15 June 2022 and a summary of the Panel’s advice to Council in respect of this suite of documentation is included in this report.

2.10.   It is proposed that the 2022-23 draft Budget Estimates, 2022-23 Draft Annual Plan, Long Term Financial Management Plan 2023-32 and the City’s Rates Resolution 2022-23 be formally adopted at the Council meeting on 27 June 2022.

3.         Recommendations

That:

1.      The expenses, revenues, capital expenditure, and plant and equipment expenditure detailed in the document ‘City of Hobart Budget Estimates 2022-23 Financial Year’, marked as Attachment A to this report, be approved.

2.      New borrowings of $1.5 million to be approved.

3.      The Council delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the power to enter into loan agreements to source the above borrowings on the most favourable terms.

4.      The City of Hobart Rates Resolution 2022-23, marked as Attachment C to this report, be adopted as follows:

(i)  Pursuant to s.90 of the Local Government Act 1993, a General Rate of 10.50471 cents in the dollar of Assessed Annual Value (AAV) be made. 

(ii) Pursuant to s.88A of the Local Government Act 1993 the Council by absolute majority sets a maximum percentage increase cap on the general rate (as previously made) at 2.6% where that increase has occurred as a result of municipal revaluation undertaken in accordance with s.20 of the Valuation of Land Act 2001.

(iii) Pursuant to s.88A(1)(b) and s.107 of the Local Government Act 1993 the Council by absolute majority declares that the maximum percentage increase cap on the general rate referred to at 4(i) above is varied to 1.6% for all land which is used or predominately used for commercial purposes.

(iv) Pursuant to s.88A(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1993 the Council by absolute majority fixes the condition that to qualify for the maximum percentage increase cap (as previously made and varied above) the rateable land must not be subject to a supplementary valuation used by the Valuer-General during the period from 1 July 2022 to 30 June 2023.

(v) Pursuant to s.93A of the Local Government Act 1993 and the provisions of the Fire Service Act 1979 (as amended) the Council makes the following rates for land within the municipal area:

a)  A permanent brigade district fire rate of 1.04486 cents in the dollar of AAV subject to a minimum amount of $44 in respect of all rateable land within the permanent brigade rating district.

b)  A Fern Tree volunteer brigade district fire rate of 0.28 cents in the dollar of AAV subject to a minimum amount of $44 in respect of all rateable land within the Fern Tree volunteer brigade rating district.

c)  A general land fire rate of 0.25 cents in the dollar of AAV subject to a minimum amount of $44 in respect of all rateable land within the municipal area which is not within the permanent brigade rating district or the Fern Tree volunteer brigade rating district. 

(vi) Pursuant to s.107 of the Local Government Act 1993 Council declares by absolute majority that the permanent brigade district fire rate is varied within the permanent brigade rating district according to the use or predominant use of land, as follows:

a)  for land used for commercial purposes, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 1.30 cents in the dollar of AAV.

b)  for land used for industrial purposes, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 0.99 cents in the dollar of AAV.

c)  for land used for primary production purposes, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 0.94 cents in the dollar of AAV.

d)  for land used for public enterprise purposes, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 1.46 cents in the dollar of AAV.

e)  for land used for residential purposes, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 0.89 cents in the dollar of AAV.

f)   for land used for sporting or recreation facilities, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 0.54 cents in the dollar of AAV.

g)  for non-use of the land, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 0.82 cents in the dollar of AAV.

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

a)  A Service charge of $260 to apply to residential properties; and

b)  A Service charge of $520 to apply to non-residential properties.

(viii)  A Waste Management Service Charge of $65 be made for kerbside food organics garden organics waste collection for all rateable land within the municipal area to which Council supplies or makes available a food organics garden organics waste collection service fortnightly utilising a food organics garden organics waste collection bin.

(ix) Pursuant to s.94 of the Local Government Act 1993, a Waste Management Service Charge for food organics garden organics collection be made in the sum of $150.00 for all rateable land within the municipal area to which Council supplies or makes available a food organics garden organics waste collection service weekly utilising a food organics garden organics collection bin

(x) Pursuant to s.94 of the Local Government Act 1993, a service charge be made for waste management services to offset a levy payable by the Council to the State Government under the Waste and Resource Recovery Act 2022 (a Waste Management Levy Offset Service Charge) and varied according to the use or predominant use of land as follows:

a)  A Service charge of $10 to apply to residential properties; and

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

5.      The penalty on unpaid rates be 3 per cent of the amount. 

6.      The interest rate on unpaid rates be 8.13 per cent per annum, charged monthly.

7.      Unspent 2021-22 capital funding be carried-forward into 2022-23, with any necessary adjustments to be made in the September 2022 quarter financial report to the Council.

8.      The 2022-23 Annual Plan, marked as Attachment D to this report, be adopted.

9.      The Long Term Financial Management plan 2023-32, marked as Attachment B to this report, be adopted.

10.    The following delegations be approved:

(i)      Pursuant to Section 22 of the Local Government Act 1993, the Council delegate to the Chief Executive Officer, being the General Manager as appointed by Council pursuant to section 61 of the Local Government Act 1993 (Tas) the power to expend monies on the Council’s behalf identified as Delegation Classification 1 items in the Council’s Annual Plan 2022-23; and, the Council authorise the Chief Executive Officer to delegate, pursuant Section 64 of the Local Government Act 1993, to such employees of the Council as she considers appropriate, the power to expend monies on the 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 the Council’s behalf identified as Delegation Classification 2 items in the Council’s Annual Plan 2022-23.

11.    The Council note that a mid-year review of the 2022-23 Budget Estimates and Long Term Financial Management Plan 2022-32 will be undertaken.

12.    The Council note that a review of the mechanism adopted to determine future rate increases will be undertaken during the 2022‑23 financial year.

13.    The Council adopt the amended City of Hobart Rates and Charges policy, marked as Attachment E to this report.

14.    The Chief Executive Officer be authorised to finalise the City of Hobart Rates and Charges Policy and arrange for it to be made available to the public in a paper format from the Council’s Customer Service Centre and in an electronic format from Council’s website.

15.    The Council note the observations of the Risk and Audit Panel as detailed in this report.

 

4.         Background

4.1.     The City of Hobart’s (CoH) draft Budget for 2022-23 has been developed in unique circumstances.  Hobart continues to recover from the impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic whilst the Organisation progresses it’s transformation for it to be positioned to embrace future challenges and opportunities.

4.2.     The Budget includes funding for initiatives that will underpin the continued transformation and is effectively a reset establishing a financial basis from which the organisation can develop, build capacity for it to be community focussed, innovative and responsive.

4.3.     This report presents the City’s 2022-23 draft Estimates, Annual Plan and Rates Resolution together with the Long Term Financial Management Plan 2022-32.

4.4.     The City’s Estimates for 2022-23 have been shaped in recognition of the continued and lasting impacts of COVID-19 on the community and proposes a budget that includes a responsible rate increase to ensure the Council continues to offer service delivery that meets the community’s expectations

4.5.     The restructuring of the organisation during 2021-22 provides a basis from which capital works can be delivered in a consistent and effective way.  Whilst contractor and supply chain challenges persist, the budget provides funding for a capital works program totalling $72.05M. 

4.5.1.     This includes projects in receipt of grant funding totalling $11.575M. 

4.5.2.     The infrastructure provided as a result of this program will have a significant uplift of services provided and continue to see Hobart established as a modern global City.

4.6.     A comprehensive review of the CoH Rating, Valuation and Revenue Strategy will be undertaken during the 2022-23 year to review how rates are levied and applied. The review will give consideration to quarantining the additional revenue derived from the rate base growth and applying this to growth initiatives in the municipal area.

4.7.     A key challenge for this budget has been impacts beyond the control of Council:

·     Municipal Revaluation

·     Increase of the State Fire Service Contribution

·     Imposition of a new Resource Recovery Levy

4.7.1.     The Valuer General completed the revaluation of all properties in the City of Hobart and provided the updated information 1 June 2022.  The change to valuations is unprecedented.  Changes (particularly to the residential sector) have necessitated the introduction of a differential rating system and limiting rate increases to ensure equity of the distribution of the rate burden.  It is important to note that this change does not result in a financial windfall for the Council, the amount of funding needed for the Council to operate (i.e. its annual budget) is fixed, property valuations determine how these funds are collected.

4.7.2.     Given the proposed changes to the rates, the City of Hobart Rates and Charges Policy has been amended to reflect these changes – refer Attachment E.

4.7.3.     The fire levy will increase by $0.831 million (6.6%) to $13.383 million in 2022-23. Pursuant to the Fire Service Act 1979, local government acts as a collection agent for this State Government levy, which is paid directly to the State Fire Commission.  Council earns a 4% collection fee which is included in revenue.

4.7.4.     For 2022-23 the State Government has introduced a state-wide landfill levy pursuant to the Waste and Resource Recovery Act 2022 on waste disposed to landfill both as a disincentive to landfilling and as a mechanism to fund strategic investment into Tasmania’s waste and resource recovery sectors.  The Council is required to collect this levy and pass it onto the State Government.  For 2022-23 the amount to be collected is $0.5 million.

4.8.     The budget process for 2022-23 has included workshops/briefings with Elected Members and Committee/Council meetings on 10 May, 26 May, and 7 June 2022 to discuss matters impacting the 2022-23 Estimates and the capital works program.

Risk and Audit Panel Observations

4.9.     The Risk and Audit Panel (RAP) met on 15 June 2022 to review the documents.

4.10.   The Panel resolved the following:

4.10.1.  That the budgeted operating results over 10 years, while predicating surpluses and displaying a strong recovery from recent years, are likely to be below those which will deliver sound long term financial sustainability.

 

4.10.2.  That the capacity of the Council to meet its long term sustainability obligations, particularly in respect of new infrastructure, is a critical strategic risk which includes the ability of Council to fund future asset renewals.

4.10.3.  That the Panel strongly supports the current reviews of both the Long Term Financial Management Plan and the overarching rating strategy being undertaken during 2022-23.

4.10.4.  There are reviews underway to address the strategic priorities and risks associated with a growing city.  The risk of insufficient capacity to invest in infrastructure that supports a growing city's needs is critical to the consideration of future Long Term Financial Management Plans and Budget Estimates.

4.10.5.  The average residential ratepayer rate increase required to fund Council operations of 2.27 per cent, net of growth and the State Fire Levy.

4.10.6.  The proposal to introduce a system of varied rates is strongly supported as a means of providing flexibility and equity in the rating system moving forward.

4.10.7.  The use of budget workshops with Councillors to develop the Estimates framework is an important part of the process.

4.10.8.  That the Panel is, at this point, unable to form a view on the extent to which the draft Budget Estimates and Long Term Financial Management Plan are consistent and broadly align with Council’s Strategic Plan and Strategic Asset Management Plans, however this is scheduled to be considered at the Panel’s December meeting.

Estimates Preparation

4.11.   The Estimates documents comprise:

·     This report;

·     A separate document – ‘City of Hobart Budget Estimates 2022-23 Financial Year’, is attached – refer Attachment A. This contains discussion of all elements comprising the Estimates and is required pursuant to Section 82 of the Local Government Act 1993;

·     The Annual Plan for the 2022-23 Financial Year, attached – refer Attachment D. This 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 (to be presented to the Finance and Governance Committee on 21 June 2022);

·     The Long Term Financial Management Plan 2023-32 (LTFMP), is attached – refer Attachment B. This is required pursuant to Section 70 of the Local Government Act 1993 and is to be consistent with the Council’s Strategic Plan; and

·     The Draft Rates Resolution for 2022-23, is attached – refer Attachment C. This document is required pursuant to Part 9 of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

Estimates Overview

4.12.   Key aspects of the 2022-23 budget include:

·     An operating budget of $153.8 million for the delivery of services to the community;

·     A capital works program of $72.05 million that will focus on upgrading, renewing and maintaining the City’s assets. The City continues to apply for a range of grants and to date has been successful in securing $11.575 million of grant monies to further the capital works program which is included in the above program total;

·     New borrowings of $1.5 million.

Operating Result

4.13.   An underlying surplus is forecast of $0.53 million in 2022-23. It is noted this amount falls short of the recommended operating surplus ratio or local government recommended by the Auditor General, of 2 per cent of operating revenue.

4.14.   Some key factors impacting the Council’s forecast underlying operating result of $0.53 million are:

4.14.1.  An increase in the rate base during 2021-22 as a result of the development happening across the city sees rate base growth of 1.12 per cent in 2022-23.

4.14.2.  The rate base increase translates into a modest increase for the average rate payer of 2.27% or $43 per annum before the State Government fire and landfill levies, however, because of the municipal property revaluation the impact on individual ratepayers will vary. 

4.14.3.  Estimates forecast total rates income of $101.1 million, an increase of $4.9 million from the 2021-22 forecast.

4.14.4.  Parking fees and charges for car parks and on-street parking totalling $19.9 million are forecast.

 

4.14.5.  A return to 100 per cent distributions from the Council’s ownership share in TasWater, totalling $2.172 million plus a further $0.4 million as a catch up distribution for missed dividends.

4.14.6.  Property rental income is forecast to increase by $0.43 million in 2022-23 to $3.176 million compared to the 2021-22 forecast of $2.739 million.

Partially offset by:

4.14.7.  Increases in depreciation expense following the upwards revaluation of Council’s roads and bridges, pathways and cycleways, and land improvements assets at 30 June 2021 and 30 June 2022.

4.14.8.  Increase in labour costs as a result of the March 2022 quarter CPI payable under Council’s Enterprise Agreement.

Cash Flows

4.15.   The Council’s cash balance is forecast to decrease by $24 million from the forecast $45 million at 30 June 2022 to $21.0 million at 30 June 2023. With 2022-23 the last year that funds are planned to be borrowed to fund capital works, this balance allows the Council to move forward funding its operations, its capital works program and loan principal repayments each year from internal funds.

4.15.1.  As debt is retired and more cash becomes available, future forecasts will show this being applied to increased capital works programs.

4.16.   Cash provided by operating activities is forecast to be $35.0 million in 2022-23.

Financing

4.17.   New borrowings of $1.5 million will be undertaken in 2022-23 and existing debt principal repayments of $11.42 million will be made.

4.18.   As a result of a successful application to the State Government local government 3 year interest free loan scheme, where the City nominated infrastructure projects estimated to cost $20.0 million, the City borrowed $20 million to fund these projects.

4.19.   While borrowings have been minimised for 2022-23 at this time, the level of borrowings will be the subject of a mid-year budget review once the financial outlook is clearer.

4.20.   Council’s borrowing portfolio ‘peaked’ at $65.1 million in 2020-21 and remains within LTFMP benchmarks.

Capital Expenditure - New Assets/Upgrades and Asset Renewal

4.21.   The Estimates include the proposed 2022-23 capital works program for Council consideration.

4.22.   The 2022-23 budget provides capital works funding from the Council’s own funds of $41.4 million, comprising:

·   Asset renewal of $22.0 million

·   New assets/upgrades of $13.6 million

·   Plant and equipment funding of $5.8 million

4.23.   In addition, the budget provides for $11.6 million of grant funded capital works, comprising:

·   Asset renewals $0.9 million

·   New/upgrade works of $10.7 million

4.24.   As part of the budget approval process it is proposed that any unspent capital budgets from 2021-22 be carried forward into 2022-23.

4.25.   Further detail on the individual projects in the capital works program for 2022-23 are included in the Estimates.

Long Term Financial Management Plan

4.26.   The 2022-23 Estimates have been prepared in accordance with the updated LTFMP (refer Attachment B).

4.27.   The LTFMP has been prepared on the basis of assumptions about the financial situation going forward. These include rates income increases of $4.9 million compared to the 2021-22 forecast, a capital works program averaging $45 million per annum including grant funded works and the majority of revenue sources returning to pre-COVID levels.

4.28.   This modelling sees the Council return to a modest underlying operating surplus in 2022-23 however not achieving the benchmark of 2 per cent of revenue.

4.29.   The forecasts remain somewhat dependent on the Council’s and the community’s ongoing recovery from COVID-19 as well as the work to be undertaken on a structural review of the Council’s business model.

4.30.   It is therefore proposed that a review of the LTFMP be undertaken as part of the mid-year budget review.

 

 

Annual Plan 2022-23

4.31.   The Annual Plan is required pursuant to Section 71 of the Local Government Act 1993 (refer Attachment D). The Annual Plan sets out the Strategic Directions, major actions and initiatives that will guide the priorities of the organisation over the coming 12 months. The Plan continues to deliver on the strategies and commitments in the Capital City Strategic Plan and the City’s community vision, while driving the organisational transformation program which will review and focus on the public value created through the City’s services, policies and programs.

4.32.   The City’s 2022-23 Annual Plan includes an ambitious capital works program that delivers and enhances community facilities and infrastructure. It also includes planning for the future of Hobart to ensure long-term, transformative growth through the development of the Central Hobart and North Hobart Precinct Structural Plans and a refreshed best practice Community Engagement Framework.

4.33.   The effectiveness of the strategic priorities, major actions and initiatives in the City’s Annual Plan will be monitored through progress reports to the Council and through the City of Hobart Annual Report. 

5.         Proposal and Implementation

5.1.     It is proposed that the 2022-23 draft Estimates be formally considered at the scheduled meeting of the Finance and Governance Committee to be held on 21 June 2022, and listed on the Council meeting agenda for 27 June 2022 for formal adoption by absolute majority.

5.2.     Subject to any amendments that may arise at the Finance and Governance Committee, the following are the draft resolutions that would be presented to the Council on 27 June:

5.3.     The expenses, revenues, capital expenditure, and plant and equipment expenditure detailed in the document ‘City of Hobart Budget Estimates 2022-23’ be approved.

5.4.     New borrowings of up to $1.5 million be approved.

5.5.     The Council delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the power to enter into loan agreements to source the above borrowings on the most favourable terms.

5.6.     Any unspent capital budgets from 2021-22 be carried forward into 2022‑23.

5.7.     The Council adopt the Rates Resolution for 2022-23, which includes:

5.7.1.     Pursuant to s.90 of the Local Government Act 1993, a General Rate of 10.50471 cents in the dollar of Assessed Annual Value (AAV) be made. 

5.7.2.     Pursuant to s.88A of the Local Government Act 1993 the Council by absolute majority sets a maximum percentage increase cap on the general rate (as previously made) at 2.6% where that increase has occurred as a result of municipal revaluation undertaken in accordance with s.20 of the Valuation of Land Act 2001.

5.7.3.     Pursuant to s.88A(1)(b) and s.107 of the Local Government Act 1993 the Council by absolute majority declares that the maximum percentage increase cap on the general rate referred to at 4(i) above is varied to 1.6% for all land which is used or predominately used for commercial purposes.

5.7.4.     Pursuant to s.88A(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1993 the Council by absolute majority fixes the condition that to qualify for the maximum percentage increase cap (as previously made and varied above) the rateable land must not be subject to a supplementary valuation used by the Valuer-General during the period from 1 July 2022 to 30 June 2023.

5.7.5.     Pursuant to s.93A of the Local Government Act 1993 and the provisions of the Fire Service Act 1979 (as amended) the Council makes the following rates for land within the municipal area:

5.7.5.1.      A permanent brigade district fire rate of 1.04486 cents in the dollar of AAV subject to a minimum amount of $44 in respect of all rateable land within the permanent brigade rating district.

5.7.5.2.      A Fern Tree volunteer brigade district fire rate of 0.28 cents in the dollar of AAV subject to a minimum amount of $44 in respect of all rateable land within the Fern Tree volunteer brigade rating district.

5.7.5.3.      A general land fire rate of 0.25 cents in the dollar of AAV subject to a minimum amount of $44 in respect of all rateable land within the municipal area which is not within the permanent brigade rating district or the Fern Tree volunteer brigade rating district. 

5.7.5.4.      Pursuant to s.107 of the Local Government Act 1993 Council declares by absolute majority that the permanent brigade district fire rate is varied within the permanent brigade rating district according to the use or predominant use of land, as follows:

5.7.5.5.      for land used for commercial purposes, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 1.30 cents in the dollar of AAV.

5.7.5.6.      for land used for industrial purposes, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 0.99 cents in the dollar of AAV.

5.7.5.7.      for land used for primary production purposes, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 0.94 cents in the dollar of AAV.

5.7.5.8.      for land used for public enterprise purposes, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 1.46 cents in the dollar of AAV.

5.7.5.9.      for land used for residential purposes, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 0.89 cents in the dollar of AAV.

5.7.5.10.    for land used for sporting or recreation facilities, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 0.54 cents in the dollar of AAV.

5.7.5.11.    for non-use of the land, vary the permanent brigade district fire rate to 0.82 cents in the dollar of AAV.

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

5.7.6.1.      A Service charge of $260 to apply to residential properties; and

5.7.6.2.      A Service charge of $520 to apply to non-residential properties.

5.7.7.     A Waste Management Service Charge of $65 be made for kerbside food organics garden organics waste collection for all rateable land within the municipal area to which Council supplies or makes available a food organics garden organics waste collection service fortnightly utilising a food organics garden organics waste collection bin.

5.7.8.     Pursuant to s.94 of the Local Government Act 1993, a Waste Management Service Charge for food organics garden organics collection be made in the sum of $150.00 for all rateable land within the municipal area to which Council supplies or makes available a food organics garden organics waste collection service weekly utilising a food organics garden organics collection bin

5.7.9.     Pursuant to s.94 of the Local Government Act 1993, a service charge be made for waste management services to offset a levy payable by the Council to the State Government under the Waste and Resource Recovery Act 2022 (a Waste Management Levy Offset Service Charge) and varied according to the use or predominant use of land as follows:

5.7.9.1.      A Service charge of $10 to apply to residential properties; and

5.7.9.2.      A Service charge of $20 to apply to non-residential properties.

5.7.10.  The penalty on unpaid rates be 3 per cent of the amount. 

5.7.11.  The interest rate on unpaid rates be 8.13 per cent per annum, charged monthly. Section 128 of the Local Government Act 1993 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 per cent. For 2022‑23 this calculation results in a maximum rate of 8.13 per cent and this is the rate being recommended.

5.7.12.  The 2022-23 Annual Plan be adopted.

5.7.13.  The Long Term Financial Management Plan 2023-32 be adopted.

5.7.14.  The following delegations be approved:

5.7.14.1.    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 she considers appropriate, the power to expend monies on the Council’s behalf identified as Delegation Classification 1 items in the Council’s Annual Plan.

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

5.7.15.  The Council note that a mid-year review of the 2022-23 Budget Estimates and Long Term Financial Management Plan 2023-32 will be undertaken.

5.7.16.  The Council note that a review of the mechanism adopted to determine the rate increase for the average rate payer with consideration of removing the rate base growth subsidisation from this determination.

5.7.17.  The Council adopt the attached City of Hobart Rates and Charges Policy, as amended, and make copies available to the public in a paper format from the Customer Service Centre and in an electronic format prominently from the Council’s website.

5.7.18.  The Council note the observations of the Risk and Audit Panel as detailed in this report.

6.         Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1.     Pillar 8 – Governance is applicable in considering this report, particularly outcome 8.5.

Quality services are delivered efficiently, effectively and safely:

Optimise service delivery to ensure organisational sustainability and best value for the community.

Maintain a rating system that supports fairness, capacity to pay and effectiveness.

Monitor and maintain the City’s long-term financial sustainability.

Implement best practice management of the City’s assets.

Proactively seek additional funding opportunities.

7.         Financial Implications

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

7.2.     The Estimates must be adopted by the Council before 31 August 2022 by absolute majority.

7.3.     As noted above, the 2022-23 Estimates have been prepared in accordance with the Long Term Financial Management Plan 2023-32 (refer Attachment B).

8.         Marketing and Media

8.1.     A comprehensive Communication Plan will be developed to accompany the estimates this year.  The plan will highlight the way in which rates are used to deliver services and meet Community need.

8.1.1.     The Plan will also provide comprehensive detail on the impacts of the recent revaluation.

8.1.2.     Finally, the Plan will identify the State Council charges collected by the Council and over which the Council has no discretion.

9.         Delegation

9.1.     Approval of the Estimates is delegated to the Council.

9.2.     The rating resolution requires approval by absolute majority of 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

Manager Rates, Procurement and Finance Operations

Fiona Dixon

Chief Financial Officer

Glenn Doyle

Acting Director City Enablers

 

 

Date:                            16 June 2022

File Reference:          F22/50232

 

 

Attachment a:             Draft Budget Estimates 2022-23

Attachment b:             Draft Long Term Financial Management Plan 2022-32

Attachment c:            Draft Rates Resolution 2022-23

Attachment d:            Draft Annual Plan 2022-23

Attachment e:             City of Hobart Rates and Charges Policy (Under separate cover)    


Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting - 21/6/2022

Page 51

ATTACHMENT a

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting - 21/6/2022

Page 85

ATTACHMENT b

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting - 21/6/2022

Page 92

ATTACHMENT c

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Item No. 6.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting - 21/6/2022

Page 98

ATTACHMENT d

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Item No. 6.2

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 121

 

21/6/2022

 

 

6.2    Governance Framework

          File Ref: F22/53819; 15/162-0013

Memorandum of the Chief Executive Officer of 16 June 2022 and attachment.

Delegation:     Council


Item No. 6.2

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 123

 

21/6/2022

 

 

 

 

Memorandum: Finance and Governance Committee

 

Governance Framework

 

The purpose of this report is to seek approval from Council of the draft Governance Framework.

 

It is an approved Strategic Priority to review the City’s Governance Framework to ensure that it reflects how the Council wishes to work together into the future to provide a contemporary external governance model to ensure the City is leading from the front and engaging with key stakeholders in an impactful way that delivers on Hobart’s aspirations

 

A draft Governance Framework has been prepared which aims to draw together a range of the Council’s practices, policies and procedures into a centralised framework.  The document is important for the successful operation of the council so as to enhance trust and confidence in the decisions made together.

 

The framework is broken into four sections:

1.   Strategy and Leadership

2.   Structure and Relationships

3.   Compliance and Accountability

4.   Evaluation and Improvement.

In some cases the document has been drafted to reflect current practices, however in some respects it has been written with a desired future state in mind.  It is considered that these changes are important to achieve the aim of having a contemporary operating model.

 

Particular attention is drawn to the following sections of the draft framework:

·    The concept of a caretaker policy;

·    A structured arrangement for briefing sessions for elected members;

·    Changes to the administrative arrangements for supporting elected members to ensure that an appropriate level of support is provided;

·    Communication with elected members;

·    Documenting a media protocol for the Council and elected members;

·    Clarification around the City’s social media channels.

Feedback was sought from elected members on the draft Governance Framework at a workshop on 10 May 2022.  Amendments to the draft were made based on that feedback to accommodate the inclusion of a ‘statement of expectations’, changes to the media section of the document and the inclusion of a ‘protocol’ regarding the attendance at events by elected members.

 

It is recommended that the draft Governance Framework be adopted by Council.

 

REcommendation

That:

1.      The draft Governance Framework included as Attachment A to this report, be adopted.

 

 

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.

 

Kelly Grigsby

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Date:                            16 June 2022

File Reference:          F22/53819; 15/162-0013

 

 

Attachment a:             Good Governance at City of Hobart   


Item No. 6.2

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting - 21/6/2022

Page 164

ATTACHMENT a

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Item No. 6.3

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 165

 

21/6/2022

 

 

 

6.3    Amendments to Officer Council Delegations

          File Ref: F22/52861; s32-013-07

Memorandum of the Director City Futures and the Director City Life of 16 June 2022 and attachment.

Delegation:     Council


Item No. 6.3

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 166

 

21/6/2022

 

 

 

 

 

Memorandum: Finance and Governance Committee

 

Amendments to Officer Council Delegations

 

Approval is sought to amend Council Delegations for City Officers namely for the Chief Executive Officer, Director City Life, Director City Futures, Manager Urban Futures, Manager Development Appraisal and the Senior Statutory Planner.

Due to staff realignment as a result of the new Organisational restructure, adjustments to previously approved Council Delegations at the Council meeting held on 28 March 2022 are required, and are set out in Attachment A to this memorandum.

This is a matter for the Council to determine, and if approved the Council’s Delegations Register will be updated accordingly.

REcommendation

That the Council approve the amendments to the Council Delegations for the Chief Executive Officer, Director City Life, Director City Futures, Manager Urban Futures, Manager Development Appraisal and the Senior Statutory Planner as shown in Attachment A to this report.

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.

 

Katy Cooper

Director City Futures

Neil Noye

Director City Life

 

Date:                            16 June 2022

File Reference:          F22/52861; s32-013-07

 

 

Attachment a:             Amended Council Delegations 8 June 2022   


Item No. 6.3

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting - 21/6/2022

Page 202

ATTACHMENT a

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Item No. 6.4

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 203

 

21/6/2022

 

 

6.4    Response to Notice of Motion - UTAS Move to the City

          File Ref: F22/52334

Memorandum of the Chief Executive Officer of 6 June 2022 and attachments.

Delegation:     Council


Item No. 6.4

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 232

 

21/6/2022

 

 

 

 

Memorandum: Finance and Governance Committee

 

Response to Notice of Motion - UTAS Move to the City

 

Introduction
The purpose of this report is to respond to Alderman Briscoe’s Notice of Motion around UTAS’ move into the city.

 

Background
At its 15 March 2022 meeting the Council resolved as follows:

          1.      A report be provided that addresses the following:

(i)      The consultation, the steps and decisions and reports that both the UTAS and the City Council have undertaken to date from 2015.

(ii)     Effect on amenity or otherwise on the residents of Sandy Bay and other inner city suburbs.

(iii)    Effect on the CBD businesses.

(iv)    Effect on traffic flow and parking in the CBD and in Sandy Bay and other inner city suburbs.

(v)     The short and long term ramifications to the budget of the City.

(vi)    The capital expenditure on infrastructure by the City Council that is required and over what period.

2.      Council write to UTAS seeking that the UTAS immediately initiate and undertake a community engagement process similar to the Council’s community engagement framework and policy regarding the UTAS move into the CBD and the conversion of the current Sandy Bay campus.

3.      The recent petition seeking a public meeting is dealt with as a matter of urgency.


This report will provide the Council with an update on all aspects of the resolution.

 

1(i) Consultation, steps and decisions and reports undertaken by UTAS and the City to date from 2015

 

Overview

A review of all Council consultation, decisions and reports by the City of Hobart and the University of Tasmania (UTAS) from 2008 demonstrates that over the last 14 years, three successive terms of different councils have supported the proposed city move.  It has been the documented position of the City of Hobart since 2009, if not earlier, that the City of Hobart and UTAS have ‘common interests in promoting Hobart as an attractive place to study, live and work.’ (MoU between the City of Hobart and University of Tasmania, January 2009).

 

The City of Hobart has an established and formally documented relationship with UTAS as a tertiary education provider in Hobart.  A formal relationship and shared desire to work towards Hobart being a ‘Univercity’ is evidenced through several Memoranda of Understandings (MoUs), legal deeds, joint international delegations to other university cities and regular engagement between the City of Hobart and UTAS.

 

While earlier consultation, steps, decisions and reports beginning in 2010 focused on a vision for UTAS to have a home in the heart of Hobart – both for education and economic development purposes, it was circa 2018/19 when a proposed masterplan for the redevelopment of the Sandy Bay campus was flagged as part of UTAS’ Southern Transformation program.

 

Hobart 2010, Public Spaces and Public Life – A city with people in mind has provided the basis of a strong city shaping vision for Hobart and is a key strategic reference for development of the inner city area.  It has played a fundamental role in underpinning the revitalisation of the inner city and the economy within it.  The Inner City Action Plan (ICAP) endorsed by Council in 2011 has provided the overarching strategic basis for which the city is being shaped, including the development of the Draft Central Hobart Precinct Plan (Structure Plan).

 

The City’s relationship with UTAS is formally documented in a number of key strategic documents, including, the 2019-29 City of Hobart Strategic Plan which states:

1.2.5          Engage with the development sector, government and other stakeholders, such as Macquarie Point Development Corporation and the University of Tasmania, to ensure project outcomes integrate with Hobart’s identity and the community vision.

7.4.4          Work with the University of Tasmania on its transition to a city-centric model and, in particular, its impact on the public realm.

 

Similarly in Hobart: a community vision for our island capital states at 7.5.2 that the City of Hobart ‘will work together across regions, communities, the private sector and all levels of government toward long-term planning and infrastructure outcomes.’

 

Council decisions

Whilst the Notice of Motion called for ‘the consultation, the steps and decisions and reports that both the UTAS and the City Council have undertaken to date from 2015’ for the sake of completeness, updates prior to this time have been included for the information of the Council.

 

2009
May 2009 – City of Hobart signs MoU with UTAS

In May 2009, the Council unanimously resolved to endorse a City of Hobart and UTAS Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to promote Hobart as a centre of educational excellence offering world class educational opportunities and facilities.  Based on the information provided to the Council, the MoU identified three key initiatives to be pursued as priorities for the first year including economic development, professional development and infrastructure development.  It was noted that the MoU was ‘important as it recognises the close relationship between the University and Tasmania’s capital city as well as recognising the positive contribution the University makes to the social, cultural and economic development to the community.’

 

2010
May 2010 – City of Hobart enters into Rates Deed with UTAS

In May 2010, the Council entered into a Deed with UTAS to settle outstanding rates owned by UTAS to the Council.  Since amendments to the Local Government Act 1993 (‘the Act’) took effect on 1 July 2004, the University and the Council have been in dispute as to whether the amendments had the effect of rendering the University liable to pay general rates for the University’s property known as 2 Churchill Avenue, Sandy Bay or whether the University was exempt from such liability further to section 87(1)(d) of the Act.  The Deed clarified the rates exempt properties from those that were rateable. 

 

2011

May 2011 – Notice of Motion – Menzies Institute Tasmania

A Notice of Motion (attachment A) from Alderman Thomas was considered at the Council meeting held on 2 May 2011 in relation to Federal Government budget cuts to the Menzies Research Institute of Tasmania.  The Notice of Motion noted that the Council was currently considering the Gehl Report and its recommendations for improving the vitality and sustainability of central Hobart and that the report and the Council’s current strategic plan lay appropriate emphasis on economic security, employment and resultant increased community facilities (funded in large part by vibrant economic activities).  The Council unanimously resolved that the Lord Mayor write immediately to the Prime Minister and the Federal Treasurer requesting that the Menzies Research Institute life-saving research and development programme not be affected by the federal budget funding cuts in the area of medical and scientific research and development as a result of the forthcoming federal budget.

 

September 2011 – Notice of Motion to support UTAS ARC Linkage Grant

On 26 September 2011, Alderman Harvey submitted a Notice of Motion (Attachment B) in relation to an Australian Research Council Linkage Grant – UTAS Application – Council Support.  The Council unanimously resolved as follows:

 

1.      That officers prepare an urgent report into allocating funding of $10,000 per year for three years as an equal contribution with the State Government and MONA to help fund a research project by UTAS on ‘The Economic, Social and Cultural Impact and Potential of MONA in Tasmania: Towards a Bilbao Effect.’

2.      The funding contribution towards the project be considered as a partnership between the HCC, State Government and MONA in support of a UTAS application for an Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage grant that will potentially leverage $250-$300,000 from the Federal Government.

3.      A further report be provided in relation to opportunities for further significant actions to be undertaken between the Council and UTAS.

 

 

 

December 2011 – Council endorses Gehl Report and ICAP

In response to a report in the Inner City Action Plan (attachment C), on 12 December 2011, the Council resolved unanimously inter alia that;

1.      The Council endorse the projects outlined in the Inner City Action Plan, as attached to item 2 of the Special Open Strategic Governance Committee agenda of 12 December 2011, as the basis for future planning within the inner city.

2.      The initial priority projects include:-

          AP01 – Upgrading Liverpool Street & Collins Street, Between Murray Street and Elizabeth Street;

          AP02 – Redesigning the Bus Mall – Collins Street to Macquarie Street;

          AP07 – Improved Access from the City across Brooker Avenue to the Queen’s Domain;

          AP12 – Identify & Record All Retail and Service Businesses in the City;

          AP13 – Review & Recommend Opportunities to Promote City Living; and

          AP15 – Activating Public Places

3.      The Council note the potential impacts on its operating result.

4.      A marketing and promotion campaign be developed and referred to the Marketing and Events Committee.

5.      The Hobart 2010, Public Spaces and Public Life – A city with people in mind (Attachment B), be endorsed, in-principle, as a key strategic reference for the future development of the inner city area.

 

2012
March 2012 – Council endorsed Melville Street Car Park and UTAS Student Housing Proposal

At the closed Council meeting held on 26 March 2012, the Council unanimously considered an item in relation to the Melville Street Car Park and the University of Tasmania’s student housing proposal.  To summarise the report, the Council recognised the opportunity presented by UTAS to significantly increase student housing accommodation in association with its expansion of its city campus.  Discussions took taken place with UTAS around the provision of student accommodation in the inner city to support the reinvigoration and expansion of the university campus into the CBD and to further the outcomes envisaged within the Inner City Action Plan recently endorsed by the Council in 2011.  At the time, UTAS had secured funding under the National Rental Assistance Scheme for the provision of a number of apartments in southern Tasmania.

 

In considering this matter, the issue of increasing residential housing in the inner city had been raised by Council on a number of occasions and the proposal was considered to be consistent with AP06 and APO7 in Council’s Inner City Action Plan, namely, ‘Develop and Enhance – Campbell Street Educational Precinct’ and ‘Improved access from the city across Brooker Avenue to the Domain.’  The proposal was also considered entirely consistent with the strategic planning outcomes around, ‘creating opportunities to grow the research sector through partnerships with the University of Tasmania and other educational/research providers,’ and ‘promoting Hobart as a centre for education at all levels by focussing on the needs of students and encouraging growth in educational facilities and support services.’  In addition, AP13.08 in Council’s Inner City Action Plan, Review and Recommend Opportunities to Promote City Living, states that Council should undertake discussions with the education providers in the city to determine the likely demand for student housing over the next decade.


May 2012 – Council endorses review of Economic Development Strategy

At its 14 May 2012 meeting, the Council unanimously endorsed a mid-term review of the Council’s Economic Development Strategy 2009-2014 (Attachment D) which contained a number of actions specific to UTAS, including the following:

‘Work actively to engage the University – as one of the largest businesses in the City – in discussions about future investment plans and how they can engage most effectively with other developments planned in the City.’

The endorsed MoU between the City of Hobart and UTAS includes the following actions:

‘UTAS to assist in the development of Council’s Inner City Development Plan’ and ‘Collaborate on implementation of the UTAS Master Plan as it relates to the Hobart CBD.’

 

2013
January 2013 – Council negotiates sale of Melville Street Car Park

In January 2013, the Council publically advised (attachment E) that it had negotiated the sale of the Melville Street Car Park to the University of Tasmania for student accommodation, commercial development and car parking.  In announcing the sale, Lord Mayor Thomas advised that, ‘since the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding with UTAS, the Council has developed a closer working relationship around the needs of education.  Our goal has always been to assist the UTAS further grow educational facilities within the city and achieve one of our own goals of increasing the residential population on the inner city.’  ‘The sale of the Melville Street land helps the Council achieve some of the key ideals in our Inner City Action Plan in activating the inner city making for better support for business and a more vibrant and active city.’

 

May 2013 – Council supports the UTAS Academy of Creative Industries and Performing Arts relocation to Campbell Street

At the closed Council meeting held on 27 May 2013, the Council unanimously resolved that in recognition of the significant and continued contribution that the University of Tasmania has made to the City, the Council support the development of the Academy of Creative Industries and Performing Arts and agree to sell the land at Wapping Parcel 4, 19-27 Campbell Street, Hobart.

 

October 2013 – Council endorses Economic Development Strategy to increase UTAS presence in the city

On 14 October 2013, the Council unanimously endorsed the City of Hobart’s Economic Development Strategy 2013-2018 (attachment F).  As part of a mid-term review process, a workshop was held with Elected Members in September 2012, where a key theme to emerge around targeted tourism was to, ‘work with UTAS to sell Hobart as a study location.’

 

The new Strategy identified five key objectives for the period of 2103-2018 including to ‘seek to broaden the economic base and minimise impacts through promotion and assist with developments, activities, service and events’ in a range of areas including higher education.  In addition, the Strategy acknowledged that ‘UTAS was on a pathway of increasing its presence in the inner city through developments such as IMAS, the Medical Sciences precinct, the Domain precinct and student accommodation in Melville Street.   There is investment; increased visitation; but also the education of our community itself is an important outcome for the City and the Council will strive to support the ongoing and increased presence of UTAS in the city.’

 

2014
September 2014 – Council endorsed traffic management plan for IMAS

At its 22 September 2014 meeting, the Council unanimously resolved as follows in relation to traffic management in the vicinity of IMAS following a request from UTAS:

 

1.      The Council endorse in-principle the revised traffic management arrangements for Castray Esplanade, Battery Point directly adjacent to the IMAS building as shown in Attachment D to item 3 of the Special Infrastructure Services Committee agenda of 22 September 2014, subject to final approval from the Department of State Growth.

2.      The University of Tasmania be advised of the Council’s decision, noting the Council’s commitment to continuing to work with the University to achieve the objectives outlined in their correspondence of 15 September 2014.

3.      The General Manager be authorised to negotiate the best solution expeditiously.

 

December 2014 – Council endorses renewal of MoU between the City of Hobart and UTAS
At its 15 December 2014 meeting, in considering a six monthly progress report – Economic Development Strategy - Proposed Memorandum of Understanding with the University of Tasmania (attachment G) the Council unanimously resolved as follows:

 

1.      That the General Manager be authorised to draft a new Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Hobart and University of Tasmania with the draft to be submitted to the Council for final approval.

 

The report acknowledged the importance of UTAS to the prosperity of the city, both in terms of the development of infrastructure assets (IMAS $45M investment, Medical Sciences Precinct $148M, student apartments $70M, Academy of Creative Industries and Performing Arts $80M) and intellectual assets (highly skilled people).  The City of Hobart has ‘worked hard to facilitate such developments where possible.  For example, on November 28th 2014 a funding bid was submitted for the Battery

Point Foreshore Access way which will provide students and other users a safe and scenic route between the city and Sandy Bay.’

 

The report noted that ‘although the partnership between UTAS and the City of Hobart is strong, it must be noted that the relationship is not currently governed and structured by an MoU (the existing MoU has expired), The redevelopment and renewal of such a mechanism would be considered beneficial to this relationship.’

 

2015
April 2015 – Trade Mission to China report to Council

The Council considered a report on 13 April 2015 which was reporting back on a State Government delegation which visited China in March 2015.  The delegation included the Lord Mayor, Deputy Lord Mayor, General Manager and Group Manager Executive and Economic Development and UTAS’ Vice Chancellor and Pro Vice Chancellor of Global Engagement.

 

July 2015 – Economic Development Strategy Mid-Term Review

At its 13 July 2015 meeting, the Council considered a report in relation to the third mid-term review of the Economic Development Strategy (attachment H).  It was noted in the report that, ‘the City of Hobart recognised the importance of UTAS to the prosperity of the city..’ and that ‘representatives from the Economic Development Unit have also been involved in key events and meetings aimed at feeding into and understanding future plans for developing the expansion of the broader international education sector (including UTAS and other providers).  The report further noted that, ‘Since the last 6 month report to Council, the City of Hobart collaborated with UTAS, State Government and local business in completing an important trade mission to China.  This included a visit to the University of Science and Technology (Xi’an) at which both the Deputy Lord Mayor and the Vice Chancellor of UTAS officially address students and officials.’

 

September 2015 – Council approves second MoU between the City of Hobart and UTAS
A second Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Hobart and UTAS, considered by the Council on 7 September 2015 was unanimously supported (attachment I).  The Council resolved as follows:

 

1.      The draft Memorandum of Understanding 2015-2018 between the City of Hobart and University of Tasmania be approved, subject to the following amendments:

(i)      The working related to Battery Point accessway referenced in the ‘Connectivity’ section of the draft Memorandum of Understanding, be substituted with movement in and around Battery Point and its foreshore.

(ii)     An additional clause being included under ‘Internship and Student Engagement’ seeking a strengthening of the integration and co-ordination of activities related to international students.

2.      Subject to approval by the University Council, the Memorandum of Understanding be signed by both parties at a media event hosted by the Council on 9 October 2015.

         

September 2015 – Council approves funding for UTAS for Antarctic Cities Project
At its 21 September 2015 meeting, the Council considered a report in relation to the Antarctic Cities Project – UTAS Funding Request (attachment J) and unanimously resolved as follows:

 

1.      That the Council provide up to $40,000 total cash and in-kind funding, per annum, to the Antarctic Cities project for the financial years 2016/17, 2017/18 and 2018/19, to be funded in each year from the Economic Development function, subject to the successful funding bid buy the Antarctic Cities project to the Antarctic Research Council.

 

The report notes that the Antarctic Cities project is led primarily by UTAS and Western Sydney University and a number of other institutions in Hobart, Christchurch and Punta Arenas.  The Antarctic Cities Project Final Report (attachment K) was presented to the Council at its 11 October 2021 meeting, with the Council unanimously resolved inter alia to note the report.

 

2016
March 2016 – Brooker Avenue Bridge public access rights negotiated with UTAS

At its 7 March 2016 meeting, in relation to an item titled ICAP AP07 – Brooker Avenue Shared Bridge (attachment L), the Council unanimously resolved as follows:

1.      The Brooker Avenue Shared Bridge be developed, generally in accordance with plans marked as Attachment A to item 6 of the Open City Infrastructure Committee agenda of 24 February 2016, at an estimated value of $4 million to be funded from an allocation provided in the Public Infrastructure Fund in the 2016/2017 Annual Plan.

2.      Landlord consent be given pursuant to Section 52 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993, for the Brooker Avenue Shared Bridge to be lodged as a planning application.

3.      The Council initiate formal negotiations with:

(i)      The State Government to enable the Council to acquire land for the purposes of future road widening over part of 19 Bathurst Street, in accordance with Attachment B to item 6 of the Open City Infrastructure Committee agenda of 24 February 2016; and

(ii)     The University of Tasmania for public access rights over the new footpaths and bridge structure proposed to be located on the Domain House Campus site.

4.      A further report be provided to the City Infrastructure Committee outlining progress on the negotiations with the State Government and the University of Tasmania, prior to finalising any tender for the construction of the bridge.

5.      A media release be issued in relation to the matter.

 

October 2016 – Council approves delegation to Univercities Conference in Budapest and study tour to Freiburg and Cambridge
On 24 October 2016, the Council unanimously resolved to send a delegation to the UniverCities Conference in Budapest and a subsequent study tour to Freiburg and Cambridge (attachment M). 

The Council resolved as follows:

1.      The Council approve the City of Hobart’s participation in the UniverCities Conference in Budapest from 20-22 November 2016 and a subsequent study tour to Freiburg and Cambridge.

2.      Alderman Briscoe, subject to confirmation of his availability, and Alderman Burnet be nominated to attend the conference as the Council’s representatives.

3.      The Council also approve the participation of the General Manager and/or his nominee.

4.      The estimated cost of $14,000 per Alderman be attributed across both the Economic Development – Sister Cities and City Government budget functions within the 2016/17 Annual Plan.

(i)      Those Aldermen attending the conference may elect to utilise professional development allocations provided under the Council policy titled Aldermanic Development and Support, should they wish to do so.

 

The Council report noted that the invitation, from the Vice Chancellor, to participate in the UniverCities Conference was suggested ‘because of UTAS’ clear intent to move more of its campus into the inner city’ and that ‘the Vice Chancellor is clearly wishing to engage the Council in a discussion about what it means to have UTAS based in the inner city and how Hobart can best position itself to take the full benefit of being a University City’.

 

2017
February 2017 – Univercities reports provided to Council

On 6 February 2017, the Council received officer and Elected Member reports on the outcomes of the UniverCities Conference (attachment N). 

The Council unanimously resolved as follows:

1.      The Council participate in regular meetings with the University Council and pursue an amendment to the existing memorandum of understanding with the University of Tasmania that seeks to strengthen the strategic relationship between the parties and focus on:

          a)      Joint research initiatives, including the socio-economic impacts of the University’s move into the City and the movement of people in and around the City;

          b)      Public realm improvements, and;

          c)      City activation.

2.      The development of the new vision for the City of Hobart involve extensive consultation with the University of Tasmania as well as other key stakeholders and acknowledge the importance of higher education in the City.

3.      When contemplating a possible City Deal for the Greater Hobart region, the following be taken into consideration:

(i)      The City Deal be well thought through and recognise what it is hoping to achieve; identify the issues it is seeking to address; is well resourced with appropriate, qualified staff; has a strong leadership structure and appropriate communication and PR support, and involve regional cooperation as well as commitment from the State and Australian Governments.

4.      The Council pursue a submission to the Smart Cities and Suburbs Program to gather data to assist the community with travel to work information, address congestion and improve the wider movement of people in the City.

5.      A further report be provided to investigate extending an invitation to Gehl Architects to visit the City for the purposes of reviewing the urban transformation work the City has done to date and to provide a public lecture.

6.      On receipt of details of European Union’s ‘Twin Cities Urban Sustainability’ project that a further report be prepared for the Council that considers the cost benefit of the project and identifies potential partner cities, including Freiburg, with whom the Council may partner.

7.      A visual presentation of the city design learnings from Bristol and Freiburg be provided to the Council, in conjunction with the University of Tasmania.

          (a)     The Governor of Tasmania, or her delegate, be invited to attend the presentation.

8.      The General Manager be delegated the authority to reimburse appropriate officer travel expenses incurred in attending the UniverCities Conference and Study Tour.

 

February 2017 – Lord Mayor writes to UTAS Vice Chancellor
Following the Council decision of 6 February 207, the Lord Mayor at the time, Alderman Sue Hickey wrote to the Vice Chancellor on 7 March 2017 (attachment O), to ‘assure you that the Council is completely committed to and shares UTAS’s aspirations to move into the inner city.’ 

 

April 2017 – UTAS invites Council representatives to Going Global Conference, London

In April 2017, Vice Chancellor Rathjen invited Elected Members to attend the Going Global 2017 Conference in London.  This conference offered an open forum to explore how universities support city-regional economies and social and civic engagement, connect the world’s cities to global knowledge and talent and address global challenges; the delegation also visited exemplar university cities prior to attending the conference to experience first-hand the social, cultural and economic aspects of university-led revitalisation.

 

In response to this letter of invitation, the Council considered a report on the Going Global 2017 Conference (attachment P) and unanimously resolved on 3 March 2017 as follows:

1.      The City of Hobart participate in the ‘Going Global Conference’ in London from 22-24 May 2017, and a study tour to visit exemplar university cities in the United Kingdom and Europe prior to attending the conference.

2.      Nominations to attend received from the Lord Mayor (subject to her availability), Aldermen Cocker, Thomas and Denison be noted and further Aldermanic nominations be invited at the Council meeting.

3.      The Council approve the participation of the General Manager and / or his nominee (s).

4.      The estimated cost of $13,733 per Alderman be attributed to the general Aldermanic conferences allocation in the City Government Function and the Economic Development Function of the 2016/17 Annual Plan.

 

 

April 2017 – Council receives report on EU World Cities Project Katowice, Poland

At its 3 April 2017 meeting, the Council considered a report on the European Union World Cities Project – Katowice, Poland (attachment Q) and unanimously resolved as follows:

 

1.      The Council nominate one Alderman, two Council Officers and two other representatives, one from the University of Tasmania and one from the private sector to form a delegation of five (5) from Hobart, to attend the European Union’s World Cities 2017 Australian initiative.  The Council officer nominations, within the delegation being determined by the General Manager.

(i)      The Council note the withdrawal of Alderman Thomas’ nomination and the interest of Aldermen Ruzicka, Denison, Sexton, Burnet and Harvey in attending, with the final selection to be determined once the details of the project are known.

(ii)     Aldermanic representation will be dependent on what the project involves, allowing nominated Aldermen to opt in or opt out of the project.

2.      A media release be prepared announcing the success of the Council in its selection to participate in the Europeans Union’s World Cities 2017 Australian initiative.

3.      Other Aldermen who wish to attend can nominate and apply to use finds allocated as per their Aldermanic Professional Development if deemed appropriate, and agreed to by the European Union organising committee.

 

April 2017 – Council fund digital screen at UTAS student housing complex

At its 24 April 2017 meeting, in relation to an item titled, Digital Urban Screen – Elizabeth Street Forecourt of the University of Tasmania Residential Complex (attachment R), the Council resolved as follows:

 

1.      The Council approve the purchase of a large LED screen for installation in the Elizabeth Street forecourt of the University of Tasmanian Student Housing complex, at an estimated cost of $83,000, to be funded from the existing Property Plant and Equipment allocation for Public Art within the 2016-17 Annual Plan.

2.      The purchase be subject to receipt of planning approval for the screen to be installed in the proposed location.

3.      The Council write to the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Tasmania and request a contribution to the capital cost of the digital urban screen.

 

It is noted that the Council covered the costs of screen with UTAS covering ongoing costs (power and internet).

 

September 2017 – Council considers report on EU World Cities Project

Following the resolution made on 3 April 2017, the Council considered another report on the European World Cities Project – Katowice Poland at its 18 September 2017 meeting (attachment S) which advised that given the technical and operational level at which the exchange is aimed it was proposed that the City’s delegation consist of two officers nominated by the General Manager.  The report goes on to state that a reciprocal meeting involving City of Katowice and Silesia University to place from 9 to 13 October 2017 with 4 Hobart representatives attending a series of meetings in Katowice and the Cities and Regions Conference in Brussels.  The General Manager delegated attendance at the meetings to two Council officers with the balance of the delegation, in line with project requirements, to comprise representatives from the University and the private sector.  The Council resolved unanimously as follows in relation to that report:

 

1.      The Council note that the European World Cities Project with the City of Katowice in Poland is now focussed on the operational and technical levels.

2.      Alderman Briscoe (subject to availability) be nominated to attend the Cities and Regions Conference in Brussels from 9 to 13 October 2017, with the cost of attendance to be attributed to the City Government Function under conference attendance.

3.      A report be provided, for information, on the progress of the project following the meetings with the City of Katowice, Poland and Cities and Regions Conference from 9-13 October 2017.

 

July 2017 – Notice of Motion seeking City Deal support for UTAS STEM Proposal

On 3 July 2017, a Notice of Motion from Alderman Cocker was submitted to Council on the City Deal to support UTAS’ STEM proposal (attachment T), the Council unanimously resolved as follows:

1.      That an urgent report be provided that provides support for UTAS’ STEM proposal as the basis of a City Deal for Hobart.

 

August 2017 – Council endorses UTAS STEM Precinct to be priority project for Hobart

In response to the above Notice of Motion, in considering a report on the matter (attachment U), the Council resolved as follows at its 7 August 2017 meeting;

1.      The Council resolve that the UTAS STEM Precinct be the priority project for Hobart and the centrepiece of a City Deal and at all appropriate opportunities this position be advocated.

2.      The Lord Mayor write on behalf of the City of Hobart to the following people impressing upon them the position highlighted in part 1 of this resolution.

                   (i)      Prime Minister - Malcolm Turnbull.

                   (ii)     Angus Taylor MP Assistant Minister for Cities and Digital Transformation.

                   (iii)    Members of Parliament in the seats of Denison, Franklin and Lyons.

                   (iv)    The Premier of Tasmania – Will Hodgman

                   (v)     The Leader of the Opposition – Rebecca White

                   (vi)    The Leader of the Greens – Cassy O’Connor

3.      Council endorse the holding of a community forum, in partnership with UTAS, at City Hall whereby the importance of the UTAS STEM Precinct project be discussed with the community.

4.      Council authorise the Lord Mayor and General Manager to undertake the necessary actions to bring the forum to fruition in partnership with UTAS.

5.      Council develop and execute a media campaign with partners communicating the position highlighted in part 1 of this resolution.

 

A copy of the Lord Mayor’s correspondence is attached (attachment V).

 

October 2017 – Council receives report on Going Global Conference and Study Tour

The Council received a report from officers in relation to the Going Global Conference and associated study tour (including visits to L’Aquila, Freiburg and Cambridge) at its 2 October 2017 meeting (attachment W). 

 

The report noted that the visit to Freiburg on 19 and 20 May 2017 was the second visit that Council representatives had undertaken at the invitation of the Vice Chancellor of UTAS.  It was noted that UTAS points to Freiburg as an exemplar in the way that it has developed the university and city relationship so that the university is much more integral to daily city life.  The delegation examined the opportunity for cities to grow in partnership with their university.  The last leg of the study tour was a meeting with the city deal office of Cambridgeshire Council with a key learning from this meeting demonstrating that a city deal can be used as a tool for future planning and to help solve the key issues facing the future.  In response to this report, the Council unanimously resolved inter alia as follows:

 

1.      The Council note the learnings from the visit to Freiburg and Cambridge and apply these in ongoing discussions with UTAS as well as the State Government with regard to a city deal for Hobart.

 

December 2017 – Council receives report on Yaizu Delegation

At its 4 December 2017 meeting, the Council considered as report in relation to Yaizu 40 Year anniversary delegation August 2017 (attachment X) and unanimously resolved, inter alia that:

 

1.      Council officers work with the Department of State Growth, UTAS and industry to explore and develop new economic opportunities arising from the Yaizu-Hobart relationship.

 

December 2017 – Council report on EU World Cities tour to Katowice and Brussels

At its 18 December 2017 meeting, the Council received a report on the European Union World Cities Project visit to Katowice and the Cities and Regions Conference in Brussels (attachment Y) which was undertaken by Alderman Briscoe, the Director Conservatorium of Music at UTAS, two Council officers and a member of the private sector.  The report notes that the main purpose of the visit was to gain an understanding of the city’s qualities, challenges and attributes and identify what opportunities there may be for further collaboration.  Based on the learnings, the report proposed two areas of immediate collaboration between Hobart and Katowice; the first through a partnership between UTAS’ Hedberg digital, creativity and performing arts centre and a similar institution in Katowice and the second around challenges and initiatives on climate change.  In response to this report, the Council resolved unanimously into as follows:

 

1.      The Hobart City Council explore with the City of Katowice the opportunity for a joint presentation on the challenges and initiatives for our respective cities on climate change to the UN Climate Change Conference COP24 to be hosted by Katowice in December 2018.

2.      That the City of Hobart encourage the University of Tasmania Hedberg to explore opportunities in collaborating with a suitable cultural and or educational institution in Katowice with the aim of furthering both cities creative and cultural learnings

3.      Alderman Briscoe’s verbal report in relation to the progress of the European Union World Cities Project following meetings with the City of Katowice, Poland and his attendance at the Cities and Regional Conference in Brussels from 9 to 13 October 2017, be noted accordingly.

 

2018

February 2018 – Council endorses STEM Project inclusion in City Deal

On 5 February 2018, in response to a report on the Hobart City Deal Heads of Agreement (attachment Z), the Council unanimously resolved as follows:

 

1.      The Heads of Agreement for a Hobart City Deal marked as Attachment A to Item 6.4 on the Open Governance Committee meeting agenda of 30 January 2018 be noted.

2.      The General Manager be authorised to:

(i) participate in officer discussions on the formation of a City Deal for Hobart, including the scoping of a Greater Hobart Act; and

(ii) provide regular reports to the Council on these matters, including the implications on Council resources and priorities.

3.      The Acting Lord Mayor write to the Prime Minister acknowledging that the City of Hobart is interested in participating in a Hobart City Deal, and strongly supports the Stem Project being the subject of the Deal, and further to this the Council may make a contribution to the government’s final offer upon receipt of details of the Deal, including proposed timeframes for delivery.

(i)      A copy of the letter also be forwarded to the federal MHA’s for Denison and Franklin as well as all Tasmanian Federal Senators.


A copy of the Lord Mayor’s correspondence is attached (attachment AA).

 

June 2018 – Compensation for sale of land at 19-27 Collins Street

The Council sold a parcel of land situated at 19-27 Collins Street Hobart and known as Wapping Parcel 4 to UTAS for the purpose of its Academy of Creative Industries and Performing Arts (ACIPA).  In order to facilitate this development, Parliament enacted the Theatre Royal Precinct Redevelopment Act 2016 (“the Act”) which, inter alia, vested three small parcels (totalling 16.9m2) of Council land in the Crown.  The Act provided for compensation to be paid to the Council which ultimately occurred.

 

 

2019
April 2019 – Council briefed on Southern Campus

On 8 April 2019, the Acting General Manager advised Elected Members via memorandum of the University of Tasmania’s decision to pursue the development of a southern campus in Hobart’s city centre and Sandy Bay redevelopment (attachment AB).  A briefing on this matter was provided to Elected Members by Vice-Chancellor Rufus Black on 9 April.

 

June 2019 – UTAS proposes Governance Forum to Council

In June 2019, the Council received correspondence from the Vice-Chancellor, Professor Rufus Black proposing the establishment of a governance forum.  In his correspondence, Professor Black, noted that the University of Tasmania’s Council recently took the historic decision to develop a campus in inner Hobart over the next 10 to 15 years.  The correspondence articulates the University’s intention to act as a steward for the current Sandy Bay campus land for many years and this land is likely to be developed for a range of uses including residential, educational and community purposes.

 

Professor Black goes on to say that they are aware of important related initiatives such as the City Precincts Plan, how an increased density of people in the city might support the delivery of better infrastructure and public transport and that there is a need to develop a campus which works for both the University and the community.  In order to achieve best outcomes for greater Hobart and its residents the governance forum was proposed to consist of the Vice-Chancellor (UTAS), Chief Operating Officer (UTAS), the Director Corporate Affairs (UTAS), Executive Director Southern Transformation (UTAS), Lord Mayor (City of Hobart), General Manager (City of Hobart) and two elected representatives (ideally with responsibility in key fields as planning and finance).  The correspondence noted that UTAS were interested to explore with the City of Hobart how to coordinate with the State Government to ensure critical issues such as planning, public transport and he provision of State services are dealt with in an integrated way. 

 

In the letter it was suggested that the first order of business would be to agree the basis of a 10-year infrastructure compact, into which the University would pay the equivalent of the general rate on its inner-city properties to provide infrastructure related to the delivery of this shared vision for the city.

 

June 2019 – Council endorses City of Hobart and UTAS Governance Forum
The Vice-Chancellor’s correspondence was included in a report (attachment AC) on the proposed governance forum which Council considered at its 17 June 2019 meeting whereat it unanimously resolved as follows:

1.      The Council note the correspondence from the UTAS’ Vice Chancellor, Professor Rufus Black.

2.      The Lord Mayor and General Manager be appointed to the City of Hobart and UTAS Governance Forum.

3.      The Chairmen of the City Planning Committee and the Finance and Governance Committee be appointed as members of the City of Hobart and UTAS Governance Forum.

4.      The Council write to the Vice Chancellor requesting consideration for the Chairman of the Economic Development and Communications Committee also being appointed to the City of Hobart and UTAS Governance Forum.

5.      Alderman Denison be appointed proxy representative for any Council nominee unable to attend.

 

To date there have been 9 meetings of the governance forum.  Documentation relating to meetings of the governance forum is not currently publically available and is also the subject of an application for assessed disclosure pursuant to the Right to Information Act 2009 and therefore is unable to be provided until the assessment under that Act has concluded.

 

December 2019 – Council signs 10 Year Heads of Agreement (HoA) with UTAS
In response to a report considered at the closed Council meeting of 2 December 2019, a joint City of Hobart and UTAS release was made publically available in relation to a 10-year Heads of Agreement (attachment AD).

 

The 10-year Heads of Agreement, delivered through a senior working group, including Lord Mayor Reynolds, Deputy Lord Mayor Burnet, Alderman Zucco and the University’s Vice Chancellor Professor Black.

 

To summarise the agreement, it covers the following points:

·    Council will assess any application for exemption by the University under s87(1)(d) of the Local Government Act 1993 and, subject to the exemption applying, will grant the exemption

·    The University will make ex gratia payments in respect of Rateable Land and Student Accommodation Land and the quantum of the payments will increase by CPI annually (the rates equivalency payment)

·    Should the University purchase any additional land which is exempt, it will also attract the rates equivalency payment

·    In addition to the rates equivalency payment, the University has agreed to pay development contributions in situations where Council intends to undertake works near land owned by the University and those works will directly benefit the University

·    The parties will meet annually in March to discuss:

o The frequency of instalments of the rates equivalency payments

o The application or distribution of the rates equivalency payments

o The identification of works Council intends to undertake to improve and enhance public areas adjacent to or in close proximity to land owned by the University

In the public statement, Professor Black stated that, ‘the University was committed to ensuring that its move to the city – which would take place over the next 10 to 15 years – would be profoundly positive in the way Hobart develops’ and ‘we approach our campus transformation ever-mindful that these are complex and important considerations and we will take the time needed to create a vision befitting Hobart, which we deeply value as a distinctive and very special place.’

2020
Lord Mayor writes to Vice Chancellor seeking support for International Students

At its 27 April 2020 meeting, in relation to a notice of motion from the Lord Mayor, Alderman Thomas and Councillors Sherlock and Dutta, around support for international students (attachment AE), the Council resolved inter alia that:

1.      The Lord Mayor write to the University of Tasmania and other registered training organisations providing international student education in Hobart, encouraging them to provide further assistant to students.

A copy of the correspondence is attached along with the response from the Vice Chancellor (attachment AF).

 

2021

September 2021 – Council endorses CEO to provide submission to UTAS Sandy Bay Masterplan

Elected Members participated in 3 workshops in relation to the UTAS’ Sandy Bay Masterplan, unanimously resolving at their closed 20 September 2019 meeting to authorise the Chief Executive Officer to provide a submission on the masterplan.  Following consideration of confidential concept plans, the Council’s submission was made publicly available on the City of Hobart’s website. (attached AG)

 

The Council at its 25 October 2021 meeting, in relation to the Central Hobart Precincts Plan, resolved as follows:

1.      The Council endorse the release of the Central Hobart Precincts Plan Discussion Paper marked as Attachment A to item 8.2 of the Open City Planning Committee meeting of 18 October 2021, for consultation with the community and all stakeholders being residents, landowners and the commercial and corporate sector and community groups such as TasCOSS.

2.      The work be undertaken in accordance to the Councils Community Engagement Policy.

2022

January 2022 – Council report on UTAS Rates Equivalency

At its closed Council meeting held on 31 January 2022, the Council considered a report in relation to University of Tasmania Rates Equivalency.  As a result of this decision, the Council released further information publicly on its website in relation to the rates Equivalency Agreement between the City of Hobart and UTAS.

 

February 2022 – Council receives petition from Save UTAS Campus Inc

On 28 February 2022, the Chief Executive Officer tabled a petition from Professor Pam Sharpe opposing the relocation of UTAS from Sandy Bay into the City and calling on the Council to convene a public meeting and that any support from the Council be suspended until the public meeting is held.  The Council unanimously resolved as follows:

1.      That the petition be received and referred to the appropriate Committee and/or actioned by the administration.

 

 

March 2022 – Notice of Motion on UTAS move to the city

At its 15 March 2022 meeting, the Council resolved as follows in relation to a notice of motion by Alderman Briscoe:

          Given the level of public concern that has been raised with elected members

of the Hobart City Council, and given that the final decision will be made by the

Tasmanian Planning Commission:

That:

1.      A report be provided that addresses the following;

(i) The consultation, the steps and decisions and reports that both the

UTas and the City Council have taken to date from 2015.

(ii) Effect on amenity or otherwise on the residents of Sandy Bay and other inner city suburbs.

(iii) Effect on the CBD businesses.

(iv) Effect on traffic flow and parking in the CBD and in Sandy Bay and other inner city suburbs.

(v) The short and long term ramifications to the budget of the City.

(vi) The capital expenditure on infrastructure by the City Council that is

required and over what period.

2.      Council write to UTAS seeling that the UTAS immediately initiate and undertake a Community engagement process similar to the Council’s Community engagement framework and policy regarding the UTAS move into the CBD and the conversion of the current Sandy Bay campus.

3.      The recent petition seeking a public meeting is dealt with as a matter of urgency.


This report responds to all aspects of the above resolution.  The Lord Mayor wrote to the Vice-Chancellor on 15 March and 19 May 2022 around the use of Council’s community engagement processes (attached AH)

 

         

In response to 1(ii), (iii), (iv), (v) and (vi) of this Notice of Motion (NoM) report on the impacts of the proposed redevelopment of the UTAS Sandy Bay site it should be noted that a formal assessment process for a Planning Scheme Amendment (PSA) is under way under the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (the Act). As part of the assessment a request for information has been issued under the Act in response to the PSA request from UTAS, seeking further information on a wide range of matters, including many which relate to the issues raised in the NoM.

The content of this NoM report has been prepared by council staff with support from an independent consultant and is based on the current state of information from a variety of sources.

 

Further information required to be provided through the PSA process may well differ substantially from the current state of information provided in this NoM report. This report does not pre-empt, prejudice or override any assessment that the Council as planning authority may make specifically in relation to the PSA under the Act.

 

There are significant public resources available for review regarding the UTAS relocation to the CBD a list of the reports that have been reviewed in preparation of this report are included below for information.

 

1.   University of Tasmania Strategic Plan

2.   QILT Student Experience Survey

3.   Travel behaviour surveys

4.   Preliminary Traffic Impact Assessment for Central Hobart, May 2018 GHD & RED Consultants

5.   Urban Design Framework, 2020

6.   Reimagine Sandy Bay Report 1 Engagement Summary

7.   Reimagine Sandy Bay Report 2 A Shared Vision

8.   Reimagine Sandy Bay Report 3 Engagement 1 & 2 Summary

9.   Reimagine Sandy Bay Report 4 Engagement 3 Summary

10. Reimagine Sandy Bay Report 5 Engagement 4 Summary

1(ii) Effect on amenity or otherwise on the residents of Sandy Bay and other inner-city suburbs.

The redevelopment of the UTAS Sandy Bay site does raise the potential for impacts on the amenity of Sandy Bay in particular, and less so for other inner-city suburbs more remote from this site.

 

These potential impacts include:

a.   Noise from the different uses envisaged when compared to its current and previous use, through such considerations as different on-site activities, the intensity of use and traffic generated.

b.   Character, if the proposed redevelopment is substantially different in built form in terms of height, bulk, scale to the current on-site development, particularly given the mostly detached housing character of much of Sandy Bay.

c.   Intrusion of activities, including vehicle traffic and parking, into residential areas surrounding the UTAS site.

d.   Addition or removal of facilities that are of value to the surrounding area, such as parks, shopping, housing choice and community facilities.

For each of these potential impacts, the actual extent of their effect, either positive or negative, on surrounding areas depends significantly on the actual nature of the redevelopment, and a comparison of such impacts with the traditional use of the site from university purposes. In making such an assessment, it will also be relevant to consider that there are already major non-residential facilities such as schools in the locality, and these bring similar impacts. It is also relevant to understand that the proposed move of the university from this site is envisaged to be undertaken over a 10 year period, and its redevelopment would occur over a longer period, so that any such impacts will not be immediate.

 

To date, the information provided publicly about the proposal is more conceptual in nature and does not allow for a detailed assessment of these aspects. The process of considering the Planning Scheme Amendment application that has been made, will involve a detailed assessment, and the request for information made by the City in response to that application raises many aspects of direct relevance to these potential impacts.

 

Therefore, the full and proper assessment of these would only be possible when the PSA process progresses to a stage where sufficient information is available to undertake that assessment. In such assessment, it is also possible to consider the imposition of conditions or requirements that would manage these impacts.

However, in the meantime, the following commentary is provided to assist in the understanding of these potential impacts.

 

Noise impacts

Current and traditional on site activities at UTAS Sandy Bay are of substantial scale and diversity, with historical peaks of up to 10,000 students enrolled at this campus. Typically, student attendance on site covers both day and evening, while there has also been student housing on site and a range of ancillary facilities like shopping and cafes, recreation ovals and green spaces. It should be noted that there has been significant change in these impacts during the COVID pandemic.

 

The proposed redevelopment includes new uses, such as a variety of housing types, commercial floor space and the like, while retaining the eastern ovals and green spaces.

 

To date there hasn’t been a direct comparison of the on site population proposed compared to the traditional university use.  Such impacts could be seen as positive or negative (e.g. more intense uses, differing times of activity and intensity of that create more offsite impacts use) but might also be managed such that they have a benign or even positive effect on the surrounding areas (e.g. through more internally focussed activities, building and place designs that buffer surrounding areas from these impacts).

 

These are matters that will need to be considered comprehensively through the PSA process.

 

Character impacts

Large parts of the surrounding area are dominated by detached housing, of low scale and valued character. However, there are also already existing non-residential uses such as large schools which in making such an assessment, it will also be relevant to consider that there are already major non-residential facilities such as schools in the locality, which contrast with this character in both intensity of use, and scale and bulk of buildings.

 

There is also a significant contrast between the character of detached housing areas in Sandy Bay and the existing UTAS campus, which features many large scale buildings and large car parking areas.

 

In considering the proposed redevelopment, it will be important to consider the proposed location, scale and height of new development, and how the redevelopment deals with the “edges” of the site and their compatibility with the surrounding areas. These matters have been identified in engagement undertaken by UTAS to date. As has been noted by UTAS, the size of the site does provide the opportunity to deliver a contained, highly walkable new community incorporating housing, community and economic activity, which would provide the opportunity to manage character impacts.

 

Some aspects that are known about the proposed redevelopment, such as the retention of the major ovals on the lower parts of the site, will also have a role in mitigating any such impacts.

 

Character considerations will be an important aspect that will require a full assessment through the PSA process, including consideration as to whether they potentially could be managed by appropriate controls on redevelopment through that process.

 

Intrusion of activities

There may be a risk of impacts on the surrounding areas if this occurs, and it is noted that parking and traffic in surrounding streets has been an issue with the current use and means of controlling this through the street system are already in place.

 

Part of the UTAS proposal is to include a range of measures designed to reduce car dependence of the redevelopment and establish better links to the city and other areas through means other than the car. Such proposals obviously require involvement of State government entities also.

 

These matters also require assessment against similar impacts of the traditional use of the site.

 

Therefore, while there is the potential for these considerations to impact negatively on surrounding areas, this will again require a full assessment through the PSA process, having regard to the matters raised above.

 

Addition or removal of facilities

The UTAS Sandy Bay site currently provides a number of facilities of value to the surrounding areas, including shopping, banking, cafes and recreation facilities.

If these facilities are not continued with redevelopment, this would impact on the amenity of the surrounding areas, as they currently contribute to convenience and liveability of those areas.

 

It should be noted the recent Hill Street supermarket, café, bottle shop and medical centre development is servicing the population in surrounding residences as well as surrounding primary and secondary education facilities population and thus it is likely that the bulk of these facilities will continue to trade.

 

The PSA material provided to date indicate the intention to provide for increased social infrastructure through childcare centres, school, health services, library, performing arts facilities and a community house. Therefore, there is the potential for these to contribute to the amenity of the surrounding areas.

 

The intention to provide for a wider range of housing on site is also likely to contribute to improved amenity and convenience of the area provided the impacts discussed above are properly managed, as experience elsewhere indicates that this allows residents to remain in their local communities as their housing needs changes throughout their life.

 

Again, these matters will require a full assessment through the PSA process.

 

1 (iii) Effect on CBD businesses.

There are two parts to consider in this respect:

·    Whether the proposed non-residential components of the redevelopment would adversely affect the intended role of the CBD

·    The effects of the move of UTAS into the CBD on those businesses 

On the first aspect, UTAS has provided materials addressing this through the PSA process, which indicates as follows:

·    The scale of office development would be minor when compared to the existing commercial sector in Hobart CBD. Modelling indicates it would represent only 10-15% of future demand for office space. The Sandy Bay site would likely attract micro and small business. It would not be an attractive destination to attract major corporate offices or government departments.

·    The retail components would be complementary to the existing activity centre network and would not adversely affect the role of Sandy Bay Town Centre as the main neighbourhood centre serving the Sandy Bay region.

·    The incorporation of a full-line supermarket in Precinct 2 would help to address a significant under provision of supermarket floorspace in the area, while the inclusion of small amounts of retailing within Precinct 1 and Precinct 5 would respond to local site conditions and opportunities.

·    The proposed market hall would operate as a visitor destination, providing a complementary offer rather than competing for regular shopping trips that are normally directed to supermarkets.

·    The proposed eco-tourism resort is not expected to be a direct competitor with existing commercial accommodation in Hobart CBD due to its significantly different market offering. Serviced apartments are likely to be an attractive offering to users of the sports facilities and are not likely to compete with other, better located accommodation providers in the CBD that meet the mainstream tourism needs.

These are all matters that require full assessment through the PSA process. However, it is quite possible that these matters can be managed through that process, to minimise any risk of undesirable impacts on the CBD and the Sandy Bay retail centre, for example, by the imposition of floor space limits etc.

 

In relation to the second aspect, again while no full and proper assessment of this aspect has been undertaken, it is fair to say that experience from elsewhere indicates that the move of universities “downtown” generally have a positive effect on business as they introduce an additional student population that uses the services provided by businesses there, and also create more vitality in the CBD through the presence of this population, and that students tend to remain present beyond business hours thereby adding to the night time economy.

 

It will be necessary to assess these aspects through the PSA process when full information is available.

 

Council has requested a summary from UTAS (including estimated timeline) by planned site of student numbers, staffing numbers, potential parking requirements and mobility requirements. This information was received on 25 May 2022 and is attached (attachment AI).

Social and Economic Analysis

The University has provided on request a paper outlining the socio-economic benefits of the proposed moved to the CBD from Sandy Bay campus. This report provided via email on Thursday, 5 May 2022 provides a narrative for the potential socio-economic impacts particularly to the student and potential student cohort within the community as separated from the wider socio-economic impact to CBD businesses. (attachment AJ)

 

The City of Hobart engaged HillPDA to identify the potential economic and demographic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on Tasmania and Hobart Local Government Area (Hobart LGA). This analysis was used to update previous population, dwelling, employment, and floorspace projections for Central Hobart prepared by HillPDA under pre-pandemic conditions. This was commissioned as part of the Central Hobart Precincts Structural Plan and released at the same time as the CHPSP Discussion paper in November 2021. (attachment AK)

 

The projections from this report will be utilised to support the finalisation of the Central Hobart Precinct Structure Plan and cannot be reviewed in isolation for the UTAS development.

 

1(iv) Effect on traffic flow and parking in the CBD and other inner-city suburbs.

Reports have been provided by relevant experts for UTAS through the PSA process including a Transport Impact Assessment and Sustainable Transport Strategy prepared. The former assesses directly the likely impact of the proposed redevelopment on parking and traffic both on site and in the locality, including the CBD; while the latter identifies targets for use of more sustainable transport modes and strategies to achieve these.

 

The Strategic Planning report that also accompanied the PSA indicates that a strategic assessment of the masterplan’s land use and transport assessment was undertaken against the Southern Tasmania Regional Land Use Strategy 2010-2025 based upon the findings of these two reports. It considers that the proposal achieves compliance with this Regional Strategy by:

·    Providing a spatial expansion of existing transport corridors to higher order activity centres.

·    Contributing to higher density residential and mixed-use developments 400-800m within integrated transit corridors (i.e., Churchill Ave or Sandy Bay Rd).

·    Alternative parking rates have been argued for through the Sustainable Transport Strategy.

·    Encouragement of active or public transport has been outlined in the masterplan via bus connections, a mobility hub and identifying an integrated, pedestrian-focused movement network.

At a broad strategic level, there is the opportunity for the move to be positive for overall traffic, provided it is not undertaken on a “business as usual” approach where nearly all trips are by car, and the move downtown of a major facility such as a university does open up the prospect of more shared trips (where more than one purpose is achieved with a single trip).

 

There are a wide range of interacting variables that need to be understood and assessed through the PSA process to establish whether these purported outcomes are supported by the evidence.

 

Detailed mobility analysis of the 64 CBD blocks has been commissioned as part of the Central Hobart Precincts Structural Plan project and this has informed the draft structural plan that will be shared as part of the next phase of stakeholder consultation in July 2022.

 

In response to questions posed by Elected Members during the recent DA process for 83 Melville Street regarding the commitment to providing parking in the city the university committed to ‘working closely with the City of Hobart and Tasmania’s Department of State Growth – including around Park and Ride facilities – to ensure all our parking initiatives help, and don’t hinder, their planned improvements.’

https://www.utas.edu.au/news/2022/5/9/1256-parking-plans-how-the-city-move-will-ease-congestion/

 

1(v) The short and long term ramifications to the budget of the City.

Short to Medium Term

 

The Rates Equivalency Agreement between the City of Hobart and UTAS provides that UTAS will pay in the circa of $3.8 million to the City of Hobart for the 10-year life of the Agreement (excluding annual CPI increase and future developer contributions). This figure is an approximate equivalent of the General rates that UTAS would have paid on buildings that they are now using and developing in the City of Hobart.

 

Should the University purchase any additional land which is charitable rates exempt it will also attract the rates equivalency payment. 

 

It is prudent to remind the Council that under the Privacy Act 1988 Council cannot provide specific information about a ratepayer or rates paid on particular properties to a third party. This includes information on who is paying rates for a property and amounts as it relates to private ratepayer information.

 

Long Term

There may be financial benefits for the long term budget of the city but this is highly speculative depending on the extent of redevelopment at Sandy Bay. Until the full planning scheme amendment proposal has been submitted to Council as a planning authority and is assessed we are not able to determine the long term financial impact of the changes to the Sandy Bay site.

 

It should also be noted that even if the planning scheme amendment was successfully progressed the subsequent processes for development approval and building approval applications must still be progressed.   The development opportunities as a result of an approved PSA are significant and would have wider economic implications.

 

However, given the current uncertainties a conclusive position on the City’s overall financial situation from this move cannot be reached.

 

 

1(vi) The capital expenditure on infrastructure by the City Council that is required and over what period.

Under the Rates equivalency agreement, UTAS has also agreed to pay development contributions in situations where Council intends to undertake works near land owned by the University and those works will directly benefit the University.

 

Council have identified the first tranche of this work as the mid-town enhancement project and this contribution will be effected as part of the capital expenditure budget in the 2022-2023 financial year.

 

As with all major developments in the council area, there is an opportunity for the council to work collaboratively with developers to negotiate the appropriate infrastructure needs for each of the development applications.

 

Infrastructure needs are identified based on the individual developments.

 

If the costs for infrastructure exceed the costs that the Council would normally be responsible for, the development may provide an opportunity for reduction in cost incurred to the Council as we have done with other developments across the city.

 

An example where this has recently been negotiated is with the Tasman Hotel redevelopment of Parliament Square, including infrastructure upgrades with developer Citta Property Group. The negotiated upgrades provided a high quality outcome to an enhancement of the public realm.

 

SGS Economics and Planning were commissioned by the City to provide advice on financing options for public infrastructure needs as part of the CHPP. The future built form and use of the Central Precincts will drive demand for public infrastructure. The regulatory context in Tasmania is such, that development contributions are not used extensively. The key available mechanism is through Part 5 Agreements under the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (LUPAA). (attachment AL)

 

Other potential funding opportunities

The redevelopment of the Sandy Bay site may include the opportunities to leverage commonwealth, state philanthropic and other private funding contributions for the purpose of providing increased public amenity and usage such as the example demonstrated in The Hedberg redevelopment undertaken in a partnership between UTAS, State and Commonwealth governments.

 

April 2022 – Council notes petition from Save UTAS Campus Inc

At its 11 April 2022 meeting, in response to the petition from Save UTAS Campus Inc (attachment AM), the Council unanimously resolved as follows:

1.      The Council note the petition submitted by Save UTas Campus Inc and received by the Council on 28 February 2022, which requests the following action by the Council:

          ‘We the undersigned electors of the City of Hobart request that:

(i)      Hobart City Council shall forthwith suspend all support in relation to the relocation proposal until completion of a comprehensive review of the relocation proposal in a form that enables community comment.

(ii)     Pursuant to S.59 of the LG Act, the Hobart City Council shall hold a public meeting regarding the relocation proposal.”

2.      Noting that the number of signatories to the petition meet the criteria required under s 59(2) of the Local Government Act 1993, the Council resolve to hold a public meeting no later than Wednesday 11 May 2022 at approximately 7.00pm at the Town Hall or City Hall.

3.      The Chief Executive Officer take all necessary steps to facilitate the public meeting in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993 and also in regard to logistics.

4.      In resolving to conduct the public meeting, the Council note its statutory obligations as the local government planning authority.

5.      The petitioner, Save UTas Campus Inc be advised of the Council’s decision.

 

In relation to part 1(i) of the Save UTAS Campus Inc petition above, the City cannot ‘suspend all support’ with a stakeholder and public authority in the municipal area.

 

May 2022 – Public Meeting at City Hall
A public meeting was held on 11 May 2022. Section 60A(5) of the Local Government Act 1993 states that the minutes of the next ordinary meeting of the council following the public meeting are to record:

          a)      A summary of any submission received under this section; and

          b)      Any decision made at a public meeting held under this section.

 

May 2022 – Council report on Public Meeting motions and decisions

The summary of submissions and decisions made at the 11 May 2022 public meeting were presented to the Council on 16 May 2022 (attachment AN), whereat the Council resolved unanimously as follows:

1.      The motions and decision at the public meeting held on Wednesday 11 of May 2022 and included as Attachment A to this report, be immediately acted upon with an urgent report prepared for Council via the appropriate committee within a month.

2.      The report being prepared in response to the Notice of Motion adopted by Council at its meeting of 15 March 2022 be dealt with separately.

 

 

REcommendation

That:

1.      The Council note the information regarding the history and effect of UTAS’ move into the city provided in this report in response to the Notice of Motion adopted by Council on 15 March 2022.

2.      The Council note that it has written to the UTAS on two occasions, 15 March and 19 May 2022 requesting that UTAS undertake a community engagement process similar to the Council’s community engagement framework and policy in realtion to its move into the CBD and the conversation of the current Sandy Bay campus.

3.      The Council note that the petition seeking a public meeting was dealt with, with a public meeting being held on 11 May 2022 and the outcome of that public meeting being the subject of another report on this agenda.

 

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.

 

Kelly Grigsby

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Date:                            6 June 2022

File Reference:          F22/52334

 

 

Attachment a:             Notice of Motion - Alderman Thomas - Menzies Institute (Supporting information)  

Attachment b:             Notice of Motion - Alderman Harvey - ARC Linkage Grant (Supporting information)  

Attachment c:            Report - Inner City Action Plan (Supporting information)  

Attachment d:            Report - Economic Development Strategy - Mid term Review (May 2012) (Supporting information)  

Attachment e:             Media Release - Melville Street Car Park Sale (Supporting information)  

Attachment f:             Report - Economic Development Strategy - Mid term review (October 2013) (Supporting information)  

Attachment g:            Report - Economic Development Strategy Progress Report (Supporting information)  

Attachment h:            Report - Economic Development Strategy - Third mid-term (July 2015) (Supporting information)  

Attachment i:              Report - City of Hobart and UTAS Second MOU-2015-2018 (Supporting information)  

Attachment j:             Report - Antarctic Cities Project - Funding Request (Supporting information)  

Attachment k:             Report - Antarctic Cities Project - Final Report (Supporting information)  

Attachment l:             Report - Brooker Avenue Public Access - Inner City Action Plan (AP07) (Supporting information)  

Attachment m:            Report - University Cities Conference - Budapest (Supporting information)  

Attachment n:            Report - Univercities Conference & Study Tour - Attendance Reports (Supporting information)  

Attachment o:            Letter - Lord Mayor to Vice Chancellor ((March 2017) (Supporting information)  

Attachment p:             Report - Going Global Conference (Supporting information)  

Attachment q:            Report - European Union Work Cities Project (April 2017) (Supporting information)  

Attachment r:            Report - Digital Urban Screen - Elizabeth Street (Supporting information)  

Attachment s:             Report - European Union World Cities Project (September 2017) (Supporting information)  

Attachment t:             Notice of Motion - Alderman Cocker - UTAS STEM Proposal (Supporting information)  

Attachment u:            Report - Response to STEM Notice of Motion (Supporting information)  

Attachment v:             Letter - Lord Mayor to Prime Minister (August 2017) (Supporting information)  

Attachment w:            Report - Going Global Conference and Study Tour - Attendance Report (Supporting information)  

Attachment x:             Report - Yaizu 40 Year Anniversary Delegation (Supporting information)  

Attachment y:             Report - European Union World Cities Project (December 2017) (Supporting information)  

Attachment z:             Report - Hobart City Deal - Heads of Agreement (Supporting information)  

Attachment aa:          Letter - Lord Mayor to Prime Minister (February 2018) (Supporting information)  

Attachment ab:          Memorandum - University of Tasmania Southern Campus Announcement (Supporting information)  

Attachment ac:          Report - City of Hobart and UTAS Governance Forum (Supporting information)  

Attachment ad:          Media Release - Rates Equivalency Agreement (Supporting information)  

Attachment ae:          Notice of Motion - Councillors Sherlock and Dutta, Alderman Thomas and Lord Mayor - International Students (Supporting information)  

Attachment af:          Letter - Lord Mayor to Vice Chancellor (April 2020) (Supporting information)  

Attachment ag:          Submission - UTAS Sandy Bay Masterplan (Supporting information)  

Attachment ah:          Letter - Lord Mayor to Vice Chancellor (15 March and 19 May 2022) (Supporting information)  

Attachment ai:            Letter - UTas response to City of Hobart request for information (March 2022) (Supporting information)  

Attachment aj:           UTAS Report - Potential Socio-Economic Impacts (Supporting information)  

Attachment ak:          Central Hobart Precinct Plan - Economic, Demographic and Employment Study COVID-19 Update (Supporting information)  

Attachment al:          Central Hobart Precincts Plan - Development Contributions for Shared Infrastructure (Supporting information)  

Attachment am:         Report - Response to Save UTAS Campus Inc Petition (Supporting information)  

Attachment an:          Report - Submissions and Decisions from Public Meeting (Supporting information)    


Item No. 6.5

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 233

 

21/6/2022

 

 

6.5    Resolutions from Public Meeting in Response to Save UTas Petition

          File Ref: F22/52335; 16/119-0009

Memorandum of the Chief Executive Officer of 6 June 2022 and attachments.

Delegation:     Council


Item No. 6.5

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 235

 

21/6/2022

 

 

 

 

Memorandum: Finance and Governance Committee

 

Resolutions from Public Meeting in Response to Save UTas Petition

 

The Council conducted a public meeting at the City Hall on 11 May 2022 in response to a petition submitted by Save UTas Campus Inc.  At the public meeting a number of resolutions were passed and these were considered by the Council at its meeting of 16 May 2022, in accordance with the Council’s statutory obligations.

 

At that meeting, the Council resolved that:

 

1.   The motions and decisions made at the public meeting held on Wednesday 11 of May 2022 and included as Attachment A to this report, be immediately acted upon with an urgent report prepared for Council via the appropriate committee within a month.

 

2.   The report being prepared in response to the Notice of Motion adopted by Council at its meeting of 15 March 2022 be dealt with separately.

 

As such, a table is included in Attachment A to this report which sets-out each resolution passed at the public meeting along with officers’ response to those motions identifying recommended action to be taken in respect of each resolution.

 

During the public meeting a number of questions were also raised by people who spoke to the meeting.  These questions were captured and are set-out in Attachment B to this report along with a response to each question.  It is not considered that any action need be taken in responding to these questions, but given that they were asked during the public meeting it was important that they be addressed on the public record and any incorrect information corrected.

 

 

REcommendation

That:

1.      The Council note the officer response contained in Attachment A to this report to each of the resolutions passed at the public meeting held on Wednesday 11 May 2022.

2.      The Council refer resolution 1.1 to the University of Tasmania to consider:

This public meeting calls upon the University of Tasmania to suspend all action in relation to its proposed relocation from its Sandy Bay campus until the proposal has been subject to a public inquiry as to its merits.

3.      The Council note the responses provided by officers in relation to the remainder of the resolutions contained in Attachment A to this report and resolve to take no further action in that regard.

4.      The answers to the questions raised at the public meeting and included in Attachment B to this report be noted by the Council and included on the City’s website.

 

 

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.

 

Kelly Grigsby

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Date:                            6 June 2022

File Reference:          F22/52335; 16/119-0009

 

 

Attachment a:             Public Meeting Resolutions Responses

Attachment b:             Responses to Questions raised at Public Meeting   


Item No. 6.5

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting - 21/6/2022

Page 237

ATTACHMENT a

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Item No. 6.5

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting - 21/6/2022

Page 261

ATTACHMENT b

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

 


Item No. 7.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 262

 

21/6/2022

 

 

7.       Committee Action Status Report

 

7.1      Committee Status Report - OPEN

A report indicating the status of current decisions is attached for the information of Elected Members.

REcommendation

That the information be received and noted.

Delegation:      Committee

 

 

Attachment a:             Committee Status Report - OPEN    


Item No. 7.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting - 21/6/2022

Page 271

ATTACHMENT a

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

 


Item No. 8.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 272

 

21/6/2022

 

 

8.       Responses to Questions Without Notice

Regulation 29(3) Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.
File Ref: 13-1-10

 

The Chief Executive Officer reports:-

 

“In accordance with the procedures approved in respect to Questions Without Notice, the following responses to questions taken on notice are provided to the Committee for information.

 

The Committee is reminded that in accordance with Regulation 29(3) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015, the Chairman is not to allow discussion or debate on either the question or the response.”

 

8.1    Committee Decisions - Introduction to Council

          File Ref: F22/21515; 13-1-10

Memorandum of the Manager Legal and Governance of 3 June 2022.

 

 

That the information be received and noted.

 

 

Delegation:      Committee

 


Item No. 8.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 274

 

21/6/2022

 

 

 

memorandum:      Lord Mayor
Deputy lord Mayor
Elected members

 

Committee Decisions - Introduction to Council

 

Meeting: City Planning Committee

 

Meeting date: 7 March 2022

 

Raised by: Councillor Coats

 

Question:

 

Can the Acting Director advise what is the protocol for an item to be introduced at a Council meeting when a decision has not been recommended by the Committee?

 

Response:

 

Section B (8) of the Meetings: Procedures and Guidelines Policy states that

“The Chairperson should move without amendment the recommendations of their Council committee at the Council meeting, or in the event that they do not wish to do so, should invite someone else to move the Council committee’s recommendation.”

There are no guidelines in relation to a Chairperson’s obligations on moving an item at a Council meeting in the event of a matter going to Council without recommendation from that Committee.

 

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.

 

Paul Jackson

Manager Legal and Governance

 

 

Date:                            3 June 2022

File Reference:          F22/21515; 13-1-10

 

 

 


 

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 275

 

21/6/2022

 

 

9.       Questions Without Notice

Section 29 of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

File Ref: 13-1-10

 

An Elected Member may ask a question without notice of the Chairman, another Elected Member, the Chief Executive Officer or the Chief Executive Officer’s representative, in line with the following procedures:

1.         The Chairman will refuse to accept a question without notice if it does not relate to the Terms of Reference of the Council committee at which it is asked.

2.         In putting a question without notice, an Elected Member must not:

(i)    offer an argument or opinion; or

(ii)   draw any inferences or make any imputations – except so far as may be necessary to explain the question.

3.         The Chairman must not permit any debate of a question without notice or its answer.

4.         The Chairman, Elected Members, Chief Executive Officer or Chief Executive Officer’s representative who is asked a question may decline to answer the question, if in the opinion of the respondent it is considered inappropriate due to its being unclear, insulting or improper.

5.         The Chairman may require a question to be put in writing.

6.         Where a question without notice is asked and answered at a meeting, both the question and the response will be recorded in the minutes of that meeting.

7.         Where a response is not able to be provided at the meeting, the question will be taken on notice and

(i)    the minutes of the meeting at which the question is asked will record the question and the fact that it has been taken on notice.

(ii)   a written response will be provided to all Elected Members, at the appropriate time.

(iii)  upon the answer to the question being circulated to Elected Members, both the question and the answer will be listed on the agenda for the next available ordinary meeting of the committee at which it was asked, where it will be listed for noting purposes only.

 


 

Agenda (Open Portion)

Finance and Governance Committee Meeting

Page 276

 

21/6/2022

 

 

10.     Closed Portion Of The Meeting

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Committee resolve by majority that the meeting be closed to the public pursuant to regulation 15(1) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 because the items included on the closed agenda contain the following matters:  

 

·         Lease of land

·         Fee waiver request

·         Information of a confidential nature

 

The following items are listed for discussion:-

 

Item No. 1          Minutes of the last meeting of the Closed Portion of the Committee Meeting

Item No. 2          Consideration of supplementary items to the agenda

Item No. 3          Indications of pecuniary and conflicts of interest

Item No. 4          Reports

Item No. 4.1       Giblin Street Quarry Site - Expressions of Interest to Sell or Lease Land

LG(MP)R 15(2)(f)

Item No. 4.2       The Brunswick Hotel - Fee Waiver Request

LG(MP)R 15(2)(g) and  (j)

Item No. 4.3       TasWater Corporate Plan - 2023-2027

LG(MP)R 15(2)(g)

Item No. 5          Committee Action Status Report

Item No. 5.1       Committee Actions - Status Report - CLOSED

LG(MP)R 15(2)(b), (c)(i), (f) and  (g)

Item No. 6          Questions Without Notice