Agenda of Council Meeting - Monday, 14 October 2024

Item No. 10

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 22

14/10/2024

REPORT TITLE: Response to Petition - Waterworks Road Pedestrian Safety Improvements and Add a footpath in Romilly Street

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Manager City Mobility

Director City Futures

1. Report Summary

1.1. This report has been written to assist the Council in considering a response to the two petitions below:

1.1.1. A petition tabled at the Council meeting on 29 January 2024, calling for the Council to add a footpath to Romilly Street in South Hobart. (See Attachment A)

1.1.2. A petition tabled at the Council meeting on 24 June 2024, calling for the Council to upgrade the footpaths and roadway along Waterworks Road to improve safety. (See Attachment B)

1.2. The findings of this report concludes that there are opportunities to improve the safety, convenience and connection for pedestrians on Waterworks Road and Romilly Street by the inclusion of compliant footpaths, key crossing connections and speed management improvements.

1.3. Designs of a footpath on Romilly Street including the construction of a retaining wall and handrail has been explored previously in 2009. This work did not progress to construction due to the significant associated cost.

1.4. This report recommends that a feasibility study considering option design assessment and analysis, community engagement, safety considerations and a construction cost estimate be prepared. The findings will inform a mobility plan that considers pedestrian connectivity for Waterworks Road between Romilly Street and Lynton Avenue and Romilly Street.

1.5. A key priority action in the Hobart Transport Strategy 2024 endorsed by the Council is to continue to develop Local Area Mobility Plans (LAMP) to plan for and support the provision of improved active travel (walking and bike riding) facilities that will support more people to move around key destinations in their local area using these modes. The feasibility study could inform a future LAMP for Dynnyrne, Ridgeway and South Hobart.

2. Key Issues

2.1. A petition containing 144 signatories, particularly raising the key issues of the absence of footpath and requesting the Council to consider a footpath connection on Romilly Street to the entrance of the Pipeline Track and the Romilly Street Bridge.

2.1.1. Pedestrians currently use the road space and are having to negotiate with vehicular traffic to access the bridge or the Pipeline Track. This exposes pedestrians to a risk of a conflict with a vehicle.

2.1.2. The petition report outlines a concept on a map of the location of footpath connection with proposed pedestrian crossing points and highlights that the footpath would improve safety for pedestrians, runners, parents with prams, kids on bikes.

2.2. The topography and existing conditions on Romilly Street are such that constructing a footpath to a suitable urban standard would require the need to construct a retaining wall to support the path. The short section of path, while providing a benefit to local residents, is likely to incur significant costs.

2.3. A petition with 141 signatories, raising community concerns of pedestrian safety on Waterworks Road with particular in respect to non-compliant footpaths from Romilly Street to Lynton Avenue, lack of safe crossing points including at key intersections and excessive vehicle speeds.

2.4. City officers have met with petitioners, who raised the following issues for pedestrians on Waterworks Road:

2.4.1. There are non-compliant footpaths and lack of crossing opportunities for pedestrians on Waterworks Road between Romilly Street and Lynton Avenue.

2.4.2. Parked vehicles act as a mechanism for traffic calming, however, when the parked cars are absent from certain locations vehicles speeds are higher and become a concern to residents.

2.4.3. The narrow footpaths pose a risk, as pedestrians often have to share the road with passing traffic when encountering multiple pedestrians from the opposite directions.

2.4.4. There are a series of junctions on Waterworks Road that are wide and lack pedestrian kerb ramps which makes it difficult for people in prams or mobility devices to cross.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. The Council note the concerns raised in the petitions titled “Add a footpath to Romilly Street in South Hobart” and “Waterworks Road Pedestrian Safety Improvements”.

2. The Council approves the preparation of a feasibility study including an assessment of design options, community engagement of options with local residents, and a detailed cost estimate of options for Waterworks Road (between Romilly Street and Lynton Avenue) and Romilly Street (Waterworks Road to 26 Romilly Street).

3. The Council notes that funding will be sought, in line with Council priorities, for the recommended solution identified through the feasibility study.

4. The lead petitioners be advised of the outcomes of this report.

4. Background

4.1. In the past, the City has received numerous complaints from representatives of the South Hobart local community concerning the lack of a footpath connection on Romilly Street making difficult the pedestrian access to the Pipeline Track and the Waterworks Road precinct via the Romilly Street bridge.

4.1.1. In 2015 / 2016, the City considered the risk to pedestrian safety at Romilly Street and the assessment at that time indicated that the likely risk of a conflict between a pedestrian and a vehicle were low. This conclusion was informed by a number of factors including the low speed environment due to the narrow road topography and geometry, and the low traffic volumes.

4.1.2. In 2016, a design for a footpath was initiated by the City’s engineers which consisted of the construction of retaining walls up to 2.5m high along the rivulet bank edge, concrete footpaths and reinforced edge beam and steel handrail. The project did not proceed, likely due to the very high cost of the design.

4.2. Waterworks Road serves an important transport function from Ridgeway to Romilly Street and provides vehicular, pedestrian and cycling access to residential properties and to recreational areas such as the Waterworks Reserve.

4.3. It is important to note that in the past, there has been a significant amount of work undertaken by Council staff including multiple community engagements with the Ridgeway, Romilly Street and Waterworks Road communities to attempt to resolve concerns around pedestrian safety and speed management on Waterworks Road.

4.4. In the period from 2005 to 2012 series of reports to elected members, community engagements, and statutory processes were prepared and undertaken relating to a concept for the installation of speed cushions on Waterworks Road that was developed in response to a petition from the Waterworks Road community.

4.5. This process was very contentious and difficult for all parties. Approval for the installation of the speed cushion scheme was initially granted by the Transport Commission, but was at a later date withdrawn following a series of legal challenges on the matter made by some members of the community.

4.6. Council continued to address the traffic calming issues on Waterworks Road. On 16 April 2012, the Council considered a further report on issues relating to traffic calming on Waterworks Road, and resolved that:

"Council officers enter into a community engagement process with residents affected by the former Waterworks Road traffic calming scheme, and the results of the engagement process be reported to the Council, including the proposed adoption of a 40kph speed limit as a matter of urgency; improvements to footpaths; installation of two slow points; investigation of a bus service to the area in consultation with Metro; and other suggestions from the community following the consultation process."

4.7. City officers undertook a further engagement process with the community seeking feedback on a number of options including:

Option 1 – Retaining the existing situation;

Option 2 – Seeking to reduce the speed limit to 40km/h;

Option 3 – Providing a continuous footpath link (with designated crossing points);

Option 4 – Further investigation of a speed hump scheme;

Option 5 – Construction of a full continuous footpath along the northern side of Waterworks Road.

4.8. In summary, there were 343 letters sent to local residents and a total of 98 forms were received showing strong level of support for Option 3 to provide a continuous footpath link (with designated crossing points).

4.9. On the 24 October 2012, Council resolved:

That:

1. Subject to the approval of the Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources, and following consultation with frontage properties, a series of four road narrowings with associated pedestrian crossing infrastructure, be constructed on Waterworks Road between Romilly Street and the Waterworks Reserve in the 2012/13 financial year.

2. The series of four road narrowings and associated infrastructure, forming a continual pedestrian link along this section of Waterworks Road, be constructed at an estimated cost of $130,000, with funding provided from the current Roads to Recovery Programme.

(i) In the event that this funding is not obtained, the project be funded from Council reserves.

3. Council officers prepare a second design, considering treatments suggested during the consultation, for treating the section of Waterworks Road between Lynton Avenue and Romilly Street.

4. The current 50 km/h speed limit in Waterworks Road be reviewed six months after the completion of the works.

5. Those residents involved in the consultation be so advised.

4.10. The works were completed in the first half of 2014, resulting in the construction of slow points (narrowing the road down to one lane) and a continuous footpath link connecting Romilly Street to the Waterworks Reserve along Waterworks Road. The 50 km/h speed limit was retained.

4.11. The second design (for that part of Waterworks Road between Romilly Street and Lynton Avenue as identified in part three of the resolution) was not progressed beyond a basic concept stage.

5. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1. The section of Romilly Street where the new footpath is proposed is identified on the Council’s ‘Municipal Map’ as a “Green Road”. A ‘Green Road’ is an insufficiently constructed public street.

5.2. The status of the section of Romilly Street is as follows:

5.2.1. It is an existing public highway, which means that the public have the right to pass over the paved road surface and the Council maintains the road carriageway surface.

5.2.2. It is the responsibility of the adjoining landowners to maintain and construct footpaths on the road reserve.

6. Discussion

Romilly Street Footpath Provision Discussion

6.1. Romilly Street is a residential street that functions to transport traffic, pedestrians and cyclists between Waterworks Road and Davey Street. The street also provides access to residential properties and to the Pipeline Track.

6.2. There are a number of constraints with the concept attached as part of the “Add a footpath in Romilly Street” petition outlined below:

6.2.1. The provision of a footpath on Romilly Street connecting to the bridge would require the construction of a suitable structural retaining wall and pedestrian barriers to ensure safety and stability of the new structure. This option is likely to incur a significant cost (see Section 4.1.2). See photo 1 and Photo 2 below.

6.2.2. The proposed new infrastructure location borders land titles 30 and 32 Romilly Street. The project may require land adjustments with the property owners.

6.2.3. At the location of the proposed wombat crossing, the sight distance requirements (outlined in the Nationally used publication Austroads Guides) for a formal pedestrian crossing cannot be achieved particularly at the entrance to the pipeline track due to the embankment obstructing visibility of approaching traffic. (see Photo 3 below).

6.2.4. The narrow width of Romilly Street at the approaches to the bridge would compromise the ability to provide a suitable standard pedestrian crossing.

Photo 1 - Steep embankment on Rivulet bank edge on Romilly Street looking southwest towards Bridge

Photo 2 – Steep embankment on Romilly Street approaching Bridge looking southwest

Photo 3 – View from Pipeline Track entrance – Looking southwest towards Bridge.

6.3. In relation to safety of pedestrians on Romilly Street, in the 24 years (January 2000 to present) to which access is available to crash data recorded by Tasmania Police, only three incidents were recorded on the Romilly Street section between Waterworks Road and the point where the current constructed footpaths end to the east of the Pipeline Track.

- There have been no crashes reported involving any pedestrian or cyclist.

- There were two reported crashes that resulted in property damage only, with one of these crashes involving a vehicle driving into a parked car.

- There was one crash involving a motorcyclist (that did not involve any other vehicle) that resulted in a minor injury.

6.4. The most recent traffic survey undertaken on Romilly Street was in 2009 at 14 Romilly Street. The recorded data indicated an average daily traffic volume on a weekday of 594 vehicles movements (with 38 vehicle movements during the morning peak hour and 65 vehicle movements in the afternoon peak hour). The 85^th percentile vehicle speed (the speed in which 85% of vehicles travelling on the road at travelling slower than) was recorded as 50.8 km/h and the average speed recorded as 41.3 km/h. A further traffic count has been scheduled to collect up to date data closer to the site where the concerns have been raised.

6.5. Due to the topography constraints on Romilly Street, the construction of a standard footpath would require cutting into the large embankment and constructing a retaining wall on the Pipeline Track side of the road, or if the path were to be constructed on the Rivulet bank edge, the construction of a high retaining wall, footpath and hand rail would be required (this option has been explored in the past see Section 4.1.2). Both options are expected to incur significant costs. Other solutions could be explored such as a shared treatments and traffic management measures.

Waterworks Road Provision of Pedestrian Path Connection Discussion

6.6. In relation to safety of pedestrians on Waterworks Road, in the 24 years (January 2000 to present) to which access is available to crash data recorded by Tasmania Police, eleven incidents were recorded on Waterworks Road between Romilly Street and Lynton Avenue.

- There were no incidents involving a pedestrian or a cyclist;

- There were nine crashes that resulted in property damage only;

- There were two crashes that involved minor injuries.

6.7. A traffic and speed survey undertaken on Waterworks Road from 8 November 2023 to 15 November 2023, outside 27 Waterworks Road. The recorded data indicated an average daily traffic on a weekday of 760 vehicles movements, the 85^th percentile vehicle speed (the speed at which 85% of vehicles travelling on the road are travelling slower than) of 48 km/h and an average vehicle speed of 41.6 km/h.

6.8. A manual pedestrian survey was undertaken on Waterworks Road near the Lynton Avenue intersection on the 3^rd, 4^th and 5^th of September 2024. Over these three days, an average of 73 pedestrian movements were recorded during the morning peak hour and an average of 35 pedestrian movements were recorded during the afternoon “school” peak hour.

6.9. The daily pedestrian movement data confirms that Waterworks Road is frequently used by pedestrians (including school children) to walk to school, work, residential properties, and the recreational facilities in the area.

6.10. There are opportunities to improve pedestrian accessibility on Waterworks Road by extending the slow point treatment used in upper Waterworks Road to the section between Romilly Street and Lynton Avenue, including providing additional crossing points, and kerb ramps at junctions.

6.11. The petition proposals have a clear alignment with the 2024 Hobart Transport Strategy Key Priority Action to continue to develop Local Area Mobility Plans to plan for and support the provision of improved active travel (walking and bike riding) facilities that will support more people to move around key destinations in their local area using these modes.

6.12. City officers recommend that a feasibility study be prepared for both Romilly Street and Waterworks Road (between Romilly Street and Lynton Avenue) that considers an assessment of design options, consultation with local residents and cost estimate. Noting, the limited resources within the City Mobility team to undertake this work, it is recommended that the city commences the design process this financial year with engagement to commence next financial year.

6.13. The study and engagement will identify the preferred option and appropriate scheme for the streets. The scheme will be prioritised with other projects developed from the Local Area Mobility Plan (LAMP), School Active Travel Plan (SATP) and associated projects to be delivered as part of the Hobart Transport Strategy 2024.

7. Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital

7.1. Improvement to pedestrian connectivity and comfort aligns with Hobart’s Community Vision, particularly the following pillars:

7.1.1. A Sense of Place

7.1.2. Inclusion, Participation and Belonging

7.1.3. Movement and Connectivity

7.1.4. Governance and Civic Involvement

7.2. This action-oriented vision clearly outlines the City's aspirations for Hobart's future transportation network, aiming to serve the city and its residents effectively. The overarching themes of the Transport Strategy align with this vision.

8. Capital City Strategic Plan

8.1. Pillar five of the ‘Capital City Strategic Plan 2023’ focuses on Movement and connectivity. The following strategies, contained in Outcome 5.1 “An accessible and connected city environment helps maintain Hobart’s pace of life”, and Outcome 5.2 “Hobart has effective and environmentally sustainable transport systems” are considered relevant to this matter:

5.1.1 - Improve connectivity throughout Hobart’s inner city and suburbs.

5.1.4 - Collaborate with stakeholders and business on the efficient, sustainable and innovative movement of people, information and goods.

5.1.5 - Consider social, environmental and economic elements in transport and technology decision-making.

5.1.6 - Investigate transport and technology possibilities that meet the needs of daily life, are accessible, and reinforce values of sustainability and connection.

5.1.8 – Consider children and family needs in city mobility planning.

5.2.1 - Prioritise zero emissions and energy efficient transport and technology initiatives that improve city life.

5.2.2 - Prioritise and promote opportunities for safe, accessible and integrated active transport.

5.2.6 - Identify and implement infrastructure improvements to enhance access and road safety and reduce air and noise pollution.

5.2.7 - Develop, upgrade and maintain the City’s network of roads, bridges, cycleways, footpaths and walkways to ensure they are safe, accessible and sustainable.

8.2. The feasibility study for the improvement of pedestrian facilities on Waterworks Road and Romilly Street aligns directly with four overarching themes of the Hobart Transport Strategy 2024:

· Choice in How We Move

· Encouraging and Enabling Behaviour Change

· Safe and Healthy Streets

· Climate Ready Transport

9. Regional, State and National Plans and Policies

9.1. The recommendation is directly aligned to the objectives of existing Tasmanian Government plans and strategies, in particular:

9.1.1. Tasmanian Walking and Cycling for Active Transport Strategy (2010).

9.1.2. Tasmanian Urban Passenger Transport Framework (2010).

9.1.3. Tasmanian Road Safety Strategy (2016).

9.1.4. Greater Hobart Cycling Plan (2021).

9.1.5. 30-Year Greater Hobart Plan (2022).

9.1.6. Draft Keeping Hobart Moving Plan (2023).

9.1.7. Towards Zero - Tasmanian Road Safety Strategy 2017-2026 (2017)

10. Financial Viability

10.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

10.1.1. There are currently no funds available for the development of the feasibility report.

10.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

10.2.1. The feasibility study will identify a range of infrastructure projects and associated need for capital funding in future years. The City Transport unit will develop funding requests and actively seek out grant opportunities to support the implementation of these actions.

10.3. Asset Related Implications

10.3.1. The financial implications for assets will be addressed during the implementation of specific relevant projects identified in the feasibility study in future years.

11. Sustainability Considerations

11.1. Transportation currently accounts for half of Hobart's community emissions. The newly endorsed Transport Strategy presents a crucial opportunity to address the urgent climate and biodiversity crisis.

11.2. "Climate Ready Transport" is a central theme of the Transport Strategy. Proposed actions under this theme will promote increased use of active and public transportation, two essential components of the proposed feasibility study.

12. Community Engagement

12.1. The feasibility study for both Waterworks Road and Romilly Street will include community engagement on identified options for pedestrian improvements.

13. Collaboration

13.1. City officers have sought input from both internal and external stakeholders regarding the issues raised. The actions outlined in the feasibility study will necessitate collaboration across Council departments as well as with key external stakeholders.

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.

Daniel Verdouw

Manager City Mobility

Neil Noye

Director City Futures

Date: 8 October 2024

File Reference: F24/76898; R0794

Attachment a: Petition - Romilly Street (Supporting information)

Attachment b: Petition - Waterworks Road Footpath Infrastructure (Supporting information)

Item No. 11

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 27

14/10/2024

REPORT TITLE: City of Hobart Advocacy Priorities 2024-2025

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Acting Head of Intergovernmental Relations & Partnerships

1. Report Summary

1.1. This report seeks Council’s endorsement of the City’s 2024-2025 Advocacy Priorities (Attachment B).

1.2. The priorities for 2024-2025 are:

- kunanyi/Mount Wellington

- Delivering Transport Choice for Hobart

- Housing and Urban Development

- New Town Sports Precinct

- Hobart Phoenix Basketball Association

2. Key Issues

2.1. Advocacy is about consistently working with other tiers of government to secure investment for the City across a range of services and infrastructure for our fast-growing community.

2.2. In the current climate, the Council needs to be more strategic about its priorities and the way in which we support and advocate for them. It is also essential that we determine our priorities in a way that meets community need and expectation, and is evidence based. The 2024-2025 Advocacy Priorities provides the framework for doing this.

2.3. The key features of effective advocacy involves:

· Representing our community’s aspirations;

· Having clear and consistent messaging;

· Attracting and securing investment to implement priority projects and initiatives;

· Creating stronger ties with government;

· Strengthening our reputation as a leader in local government, an advocate for our community.

2.4. The City’s advocacy is based on a multi-faceted approach which is largely built around good working relationships, conversations and collaborations with other levels of government, as per the endorsed Intergovernmental Relations & Advocacy Framework 2023-2027 (‘the Framework’). The priorities are not just simply an advocacy document.

2.5. The 2024-2025 Advocacy Priorities updates the 2023-2024 Advocacy Priorities, in line with the Framework, which was endorsed by Council in July 2023 (Attachment A).

2.6. The Framework was developed to guide the Council in its advocacy to ensure that an agile and adaptive approach is adopted by Officers. The Framework provided the outline of the Council’s advocacy priorities through until 2027 and Officers were asked to work within that Framework when advocating to the State and/or Federal Governments.

2.7. The 2024-2025 priorities is a comprehensive outline of the City’s priorities, and also includes a brief explanation of the issue the City is seeking to address, why it is a priority, and a clear and succinct explanation of the solution being proposed including the role and contribution of the City.

2.8. Importantly, the priorities are reflective of the current strategic context for advocacy, including key facts from the State of the City reporting; major issues or opportunities facing Hobart and Greater Hobart; and current State and Federal Government policy priorities.

3. Recommendation

That the Council endorse the 2024-2025 City of Hobart Advocacy Priorities marked as Attachment B to this report.

4. Background

4.1. The 2024-2025 Advocacy Priorities have been developed in accordance with the Framework, which was endorsed by Council in July 2023.

4.1.1. The priorities were developed and refined through several workshops which were held with Elected Members.

4.1.2. The first being on Monday 3 June 2024, where the City’s approach to advocacy following the 2024 State Election was discussed and Elected Members provided their feedback.

4.1.3. The next discussion around advocacy priorities was held on Monday 8 July 2024 as part of the Elected Member Strategic Planning Day.

4.1.4. The Council advocacy approach needs to provide a balance that identifies and promotes funding priorities in the short to medium terms, however, it must also include longer-term funding commitments that have been identified. While these longer term commitments are generally more speculative than the short to medium term commitments, it is important that they are included in the Council’s advocacy approach to ensure that are understood by the State and Federal Governments well in advance of when the funding would be required.

4.1.5. An updated advocacy priorities document was produced by Officers in anticipation of the 2025 Federal Election, with the main objective of the meeting to present a clear and concise set of priorities in a well-presented document.

4.1.6. The Lord Mayor and CEO made an advocacy visit to Canberra in August as part of the Council’s advocacy approach, which was the first visit that the City has undertaken in some years, with future visits to be planned as part of our regular advocacy approach.

4.1.7. In recent months, Officers have also been holding regular conversations with our Federal and State Government representatives about the City’s advocacy priorities, to ensure that there is a high level of understanding and support. These conversations are, and will continue as part of our regular engagement with both levels of government.

5. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1. N/A

6. Discussion

6.1. On 17 July 2023, Council endorsed the Framework.

6.1.1. The Framework aims to draw on the strengths, successes and lessons from the Original Framework, while also ensuring that the City’s approach to intergovernmental relations and advocacy remains current.

6.1.2. Additionally, the revised Framework emphasises the critical importance of collaboration to the success of the City’s approach to advocacy. This includes collaboration between governments on shared objectives and successful policy and funding outcomes, as well as key partner organisations on shared advocacy priorities.

7. Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital

7.1. The 2024-2025 Advocacy Priorities supports Pillar 8: Governance & Civic Involvement.

8. Capital City Strategic Plan

8.1. The Advocacy Priorities have been developed to support the delivery of the outcomes and strategies in the Capital City Strategic Plan 2023; particularly where these require collaboration with or action from other levels of government.

8.2. The key strategic outcome and strategy supported by the priorities are:

Outcome 8.1: Hobart is a city that is well governed that recognises the community as an active partner that informs decisions

Strategy 8.1.2: Ensure the needs of the community are well represented through effective advocacy and strong collaborative partnerships with key stakeholders and all levels of government.

9. Regional, State and National Plans and Policies

9.1. N/A

10. Financial Viability

10.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

10.1.1. There were no costs associated with the development of the document, as it was prepared internally.

10.1.2. Funding for external printing was provided within the 2024/25 operating budget for the Office of the CEO.

10.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

10.2.1. Future funding will be sourced within existing budgets.

10.3. Asset Related Implications

10.3.1. N/A

11. Sustainability Considerations

11.1.1. N/A

12. Community Engagement

12.1. N/A

13. Communications Strategy

13.1. The City will continue to undertake targeted communications with key decision-makers in the State and Commonwealth governments on the specific details of its 2024-25 advocacy priorities. This includes ongoing meetings and conversations.

13.2. In addition, a detailed communications plan will be developed in the lead up to the Federal election to ensure Hobart has a voice and is advocating strongly on behalf of the community.

13.3. A copy of the 2024-2025 Advocacy Priorities will also be made available on the City’s website.

14. Innovation and Continuous Improvement

14.1. N/A

15. Collaboration

15.1. The advocacy priorities will be pursued alongside and in coordination through our collaborations with various stakeholders and interested parties, including through the Greater Hobart Strategic Partnership, the Greater Hobart Committee and other identified partnerships and ongoing stakeholder engagement.

Laura Eaton

Acting Head of Intergovernmental Relations & Partnerships

Date: 7 October 2024

File Reference: F24/83456

Attachment a: Intergovernmental Relations & Advocacy Framework 2023-2027 (Supporting information)

Attachment b: 2024-2025 Advocacy Priorities (Supporting information)

Item No. 12

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 37

14/10/2024

REPORT TITLE: 2024-25 New Fees And Charges For Information Requests and New Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Manager Legal and Corporate Governance

Director City Enablers

1. Report Summary

1.1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval to introduce a series of new fees into the City’s Fees and Charges 2024-25 booklet relating to requests for information, marked as Attachment A to this report.

1.2. The new Fees and Charges, and information generally is to occur in accordance with the proposed new ‘Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures’ document, marked as Attachment B to this report.

1.3. For completeness, it’s noted that the Ombudsman has reviewed the draft Policy (noting that they cannot give formal advice due to their regulatory role), but have provided ‘feedback,’ which has been incorporated into the Policy. They are broadly supportive of the draft Policy and what it aims to achieve.

1.4. This matter was previously considered by the Council at its 19 August 2024 meeting whereat, it resolved to defer the item to an Elected Member Workshop to discuss further. This workshop was held on Monday 23 September 2024 where a briefing paper was provided to Elected Members, and subsequently this item is before the Council again for determination.

1.4.1. Subject to the Council endorsing the new Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures document, this will replace the current Open Data Policy, marked as Attachment C to this report.

2. Key Issues

2.1. Officers wish to flag a series of reforms in addition to these new fees that will seek to further increase transparency and reduce the associated administrative burden (and cost impost) associated with Right to Information Requests (RTIs).

2.2. Officers are presently unable to routinely complete an RTI assessment within the statutory requirement of 20 working days on account of the unprecedented number of applications, which follows an unprecedented level of requests during 2023.

2.3. The existing number of applications and associated workflows significantly exceed that experienced by other councils several times over, (the entire sector only received 153 applications for 2022-23, discussed in detail below).

Rationale for Amending Fees/Charges Schedule

2.4. These new fees relate to requests for information from members of the public previously requested through a Right to Information request.

2.5. Parallel to amending the fees schedule, to provide for increased ‘over-the-counter’ disclosure, the City intends to also formalise a process where certain types of information is provided free of charge. An example would be where an individual is seeking information regarding themself, as provided for under the Personal Information Protection Act. There will be an inflection point where officer discretion will be required on processing ‘simple’ personal information requests free of charge and those requiring significant officer time to search/research, which will be processed on a cost recovery basis.

2.6. Having reviewed all RTI applications received during 2022-23 year officers have come to a view that many of the RTI applications could be better (and more speedily) addressed outside of the RTI framework, whereby an applicant simply pays a fee calculated on the average cost of the service and the information is then provided. Or alternatively, the information should have been provided free of charge as a proactive disclosure.

2.7. Under this proposal a cost code would be created where the associated new fee can simply be paid over the phone for simple requests that require the provision of an existing and/or clearly identified document(s). Work is already underway on a ‘payment gateway’ to streamline the processing of RTI fees, which will also help to expedite processing.

2.8. Alternatively, officers can provide an indicative assessment of the likely fee for requests that require significant research/collation – this would ordinarily be only used in exceptional circumstances where significant research was required. Under either approach the public can still request a fee waiver, in accordance with the existing Hardship Policy.

2.9. Documents created in the preceding 12 months would be provided free of charge, (with the exception of those already provided for under the existing Fees and Charges Policy). Many documents are publicly available at the time the relevant Council decision was made and it makes no sense to consider them within the RTI framework. Council has no legal or ethical basis upon which to withhold or redact the materials on account of them having been prepared for a publicly facing purpose (such as a council meeting).

2.10. New ‘over the counter’ disclosures would also be governed by the existing Customer Service Charter, which requires a substantive response within 10 days (for simple requests), cutting the existing RTI timeline (20 days) in half, primarily on account of removing the requirement for complex assessments and redaction of what are public documents, (which should be provided as a matter of course consistent with best governance principles).

Examples of Onerous RTI Applications (Existing Approach)

2.11. An extreme example is whereby an applicant, such as a personal injury lawyer requests CCTV footage of a public place. Currently, officers are required to spend a significant time collating and then viewing the footage (often taking several hours) as part of processing an RTI application.

2.12. At present, there is a standing fee in place in the Fees and Charges booklet for CCTV footage retrieval, however it is unclear as to why RTI requests still are being referred for action as an RTI.

2.13. Incident reports are another problematic area where lawyers regularly request ‘all’ incident reports on a specific issue, i.e. footpaths, for the previous 10 years (this is a real-world example). This requires officers to search multiple current and legacy archive systems, potentially consult any third parties named in the reports (a statutory requirement under RTI) and finalise the process within 20 days, for the sum of $46.75.

Existing RTI Framework and Resourcing

2.14. Every year the City of Hobart receives a significant number of requests for information under Right to Information (RTI). During 2022-23 the City received 36 RTI requests, which were in the main processed by a single officer. Officers negotiated a further four requests to be considered outside of RTI. By way of comparison the entire local government sector received 152 applications and the Department of Premier and Cabinet only received 11 applications (figures taken from the Justice Department’s 2021-22 Annual Report). It’s also noted that for the week ending 26 July 2024 Council had received six new applications.

2.15. Enhancing the existing Fees and Charges Schedule would allow a significant number of potential RTI applications to be excised from the process and be handled as a simple over-the-counter service. Many requests are uncontroversial, and the information should be provided as part of a best-practice approach to corporate governance.

2.16. If approved, officers will implement a program for staff training, as over-the-counter requests would be handled via each internal Network, with support/advice from the Legal and Governance Group, which would occur in concert with proposed training specific to the RTI framework.

2.17. Should the Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures document be approved, it will be made available on the City’s website along with a brief overview of how to request a proactive disclosure.

2.18. Under the existing RTI framework Council can only charge the statutory fee of $46.75, noting that it costs Council approximately $80 just to raise the associated invoice, with no consideration of officer time to process the substantive request. To be clear, financial considerations are not the primary driver for this report, but they are considered for completeness.

2.19. At present, RTI requests are generated online and sent into the Council via email, and then the City’s Information Management Team use a matrix and redirect requests to the appropriate RTI officer to action within the relevant Network.

2.20. It is now proposed that the Legal and Governance Group would assess all RTI requests after the initial assessment has been carried out by the relevant Network.

2.20.1. The Manager of Legal and Corporate Governance would further assess all RTI requests, that’s if it is processed as an RTI, or if in fact it could be handled under the City’s Fees and Charges.

Anticipated Streamlining of RTI Collation and Assessments.

2.21. City officers are working to streamline the process for the generation of invoices for RTIs (along with e-services generally),

2.22. Software solutions that can assist staff with the initial identification and collation of relevant information for an RTI application is also being considered.

2.23. Absent from these proposed reforms, Council will continue to struggle to achieve statutory compliance in respect of RTI applications and may need to consider additional resourcing.

2.24. Officers are of the view that the proposed reforms represent a sensible compromise, where users only pay for the actual cost of the service, while simultaneously providing for increased proactive disclosures outside of the RTI and freeing up resources to process matters that are best handled within the RTI framework. These reforms still provide a discretion to waive any fee in addition to being bound by the Customer Service Charter (10 days), which also provides an avenue for review.

2.25. Nothing in this proposal prevents an applicant from electing to submit an RTI if they are dissatisfied with the Council’s over-the-counter service and associated disclosures.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. The Council approve the new fees and charges for the supply of information requests in its 2024-25 Fees and Charges, as set out in Attachment A to this report.

(i) If approved, the City’s 2024-25 Fees and Charges booklet be updated accordingly.

2. The Council approve the new ‘Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures’ document, as marked as Attachment B to this report, and agree to rescind the Open Data Policy, as marked as Attachment C to this report.

4. Background

Right to Information Act 2009 (Tas)

4.1. The City of Hobart receives a large amount of RTI applications every year, and the underlying principle of the Right to Information Act 2009 (Tas) is that all information is eligible for disclosure unless it is otherwise exempt from disclosure under one of the narrow grounds prescribed.

4.2. The City has 20 working days from the acceptance of the application to collate the information and to provide the applicant with a notice of assessment. Acceptance is taken at the moment either by payment of the associated fee or granting of a waiver is made.

4.3. This is problematic as there is presently no automated process to inform the assessing officers that payment has been received. On some occasions several working days can pass between receipt of payment and notification to assessing officers.

4.4. In most circumstances the first few days of the statutory timeframe are spent allocating the application to the relevant officer for the collation of relevant information and confirming the fee has been paid.

4.5. Officers propose to provide a further report on how to streamline the processing of RTI payments, noting the existing system is ad hoc at best with crucial time on the statutory clock lost due to delays in being notified that payment has been made.

4.6. As described under point 4.2 above, under the terms of the Act, the City is obliged to complete an assessment of an application for assessed disclosure within twenty (20) working days. Failure to do so could result in:

4.6.1. A complaint to the Ombudsman leading to increased administration;

4.6.2. Potential for the Ombudsman’s Office to table a complaint in parliament against the Council; and

4.6.3. Reputational damage from the above or from the applicant lodging a complaint.

4.7. Of equal importance the proposed reforms will ‘shift the needle’ from the existing situation where officers across the organisation default to directing requests for information into the RTI framework, toward a culture supportive of proactive disclosure where the majority of (uncontroversial) requests can be handled via the payment of a fee (or provided free of charge) and the provision of relevant information in a straightforward manner, with minimal redactions or withholding of documentation. This may require additional resourcing and training.

4.8. Should Council adopt the proposal, additional training will need to be provided to officers to help facilitate the new proactive disclosures as individual networks would be ultimately responsible for managing their own proactive disclosures – with the support of the Legal and Governance Group.

5. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1. Pursuant to section 205 of the Local Government Act 1993 (Tas), Council has the following powers:

(1) In addition to any other power to impose fees and charges but subject to subsection (2), a council may impose fees and charges in respect of any one or all of the following matters:

(a) the use of any property or facility owned, controlled, managed or maintained by the council;

(b) services supplied at a person's request;

(c) carrying out work at a person's request;

(d) providing information or materials, or providing copies of, or extracts from, records of the council;

(e) any application to the council;

(f) any licence, permit, registration or authorisation granted by the council;

(g) any other prescribed matter.

(2) A council may not impose a fee or charge in respect of a matter if –

(a) a fee or charge is prescribed in respect of that matter; or

(b) this or any other Act provides that a fee or charge is not payable in respect of that matter.

(3) any fee or charge under subsection (1) need not be fixed by reference to the cost to the council.

5.2. Pursuant to section 206 of the Local Government Act 1993 (Tas), council is to keep a list of all fees and charged and make the list available for public inspection during ordinary hours of business.

6. Discussion

6.1. The City is on track to receive around 90 RTI requests this financial year, a number that is considerably higher than requests received at any other council or much of the state service, for instance, the Department of Justice received 19 requests in 2022-23.

6.2. It is proposed that the City’s Fees and Charges booklet for 2024-25 be amended to include a series of new specific fees to cover new general information requests from the public, as set out in Attachment A to this report.

6.2.1 The proposed fees are set on considerations of what other councils charge for a similar service, in addition to calculating the average amount of officer time required as detailed in the attached proposed schedule.

6.2.2 If approved, the City’s fees and charges booklet will be updated accordingly.

6.3. Currently, there is a section in the fees and charges booklet that covers payment for ‘general information requests’, such as copies or plans/documentation, permit information and property searches to name a few.

6.4. It is proposed that the new Fees and Charges, and information generally is to occur in accordance with the proposed new ‘Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures’, marked as Attachment B to this report.

7. Capital City Strategic Plan

7.1. This proposal is consistent with Pillar 8, Outcome 8.5 in the ‘City of Hobart Capital City Strategic Plan 2019-29’, namely:

8.5 - Quality services are delivered efficiently, effectively and safely.

7.2. The proposal also reflects the following Pillar 8.5 strategy within the ‘City of Hobart Capital City Strategic Plan 2019 – 2029’, namely:

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

8. Financial Viability

8.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

6.2.3 It is difficult to determine the income that will be generated by the Council from these new fees for the 2024-25 FY, as it is dependent upon the number of varied requests for information received from the community.

6.2.4 It is envisaged that there could be approximately 70 instances of members of the public requesting information that would have normally fallen under the RTI process per year, based on the number of RTI applications for 2022-23.

6.2.5 The proposed new fees and charges have been created in accordance with the City of Hobart’s Pricing Policy and Guidelines and GST treatment has been applied by the City’s Financial Operations Accountant.

6.2.6 It is noted that the proposed new Fees and Charges covers work that takes an hour or less, and then a lower fee per hour for the second hour of work onward. The first hour fee is higher as this includes a one-off administration fee, which includes the generation of an invoice. Where proposed research is to likely involve several hours of officer time, a quote of the indicative cost can be provided. It’s anticipated that this will only occur in exceptional circumstances.

8.2. Asset Related Implications

6.2.7 Not applicable.

9. Communications Strategy

9.1. Should the recommendation in this report be approved, then the City’s Fees and Charges booklet will be updated.

9.2. The Fees and Charges Booklet is made available to view by the public from the City of Hobart’s website every year.

9.3. Should the Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures document be approved, it will be made available on the City’s website.

9.4. Should the Council adopt the proposal for a centralised assessment approach to RTIs and the release of general information requests, additional training will need to be provided to officers to help facilitate the new proactive disclosures as individual divisions would be ultimately responsible for managing their own proactive disclosures.

Wes Young

Manager Legal and Corporate Governance

Michael Reynolds

Director City Enablers

Date: 2 October 2024

File Reference: F24/85642; 22/16

Attachment a: Proposed fees and charges for information requests (Supporting information)

Attachment b: Draft City of Hobart Information Disclosure Policy and Procedures document (Supporting information)

Attachment c: Rescinded Open Data Policy (Supporting information)

Item No. 13

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 53

14/10/2024

REPORT TITLE: Grants and Sponsorship Review Recommendations

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Funding Program Review Coordinator

Manager Policy Lab

Acting Head of Intergovernmental Relations & Partnerships

Acting Director Connected City

1. Report Summary

1.1. This report seeks Council’s endorsement of the grants, sponsorships and partnerships review recommendations and approval to develop a new funding policy.

1.2. The funding review engagement with KPMG has identified the community values the grants, sponsorship and partnership programs and the strategic benefits this investment contributes to the City.

2. Key Issues

2.1. The engagement undertaken with KPMG to review the City of Hobart’s current funding model for its grants, sponsorships and partnerships is now complete.

2.1.1. The review sought to:

· Design a fit-for-purpose more contemporary governance model, that reflects the needs of our community and the priorities of the Council.

· Improve the efficiency of our approach to inform and empower applicants while ensuring the programs align with Council and community objectives.

2.2. The final report is tabled for Council to note and endorse the recommendations (Attachment A).

2.3. The key recommendations of the review include:

2.3.1. Update current Council polices and related documentation to define a holistic funding program administered by a centralised grants coordination team as an internal service.

2.3.2. Establish an evaluation framework to measure the strategic alignment and impact of funding.

2.3.3. Rebalance resourcing to allow for better relationship management to support strategic outcomes.

2.4. Officers are supportive of the recommendations within the report.

2.5. The first step to implement the recommendations is to develop an updated funding policy defining the governance framework for offering, awarding, and evaluating funding.

2.6. In light of the timing, officers are seeking to extend the City Partnership grant agreements for one year to ensure continued support while the recommendations are being implemented.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. The Council note and endorse the recommendations contained with the report titled City of Hobart - Funding Program Review, marked as Attachment A to this report.

2. The Council approve the development of a funding policy based on the recommendations within the review report.

3. The Council extend the City Partnerships grant agreements for 12 months to support the events scheduled between 1 July 2024 and 30 June 2025. This includes:

Event	Organisation	Grant value
Festa Italia	Australian Italian Club Inc	$10,818
Estia Greek Festival	Greek Orthodox Church and Benevolent Society of St George	$10,818
The Royal Hobart Regatta	Royal Hobart Regatta	$32,454
The Sandy Bay Regatta	Sandy Bay Regatta Association Inc	$32,454
Hobart Anzac Day Commemorations	RSL Tasmania	$32,454
City of Hobart Eisteddfod	City of Hobart Eisteddfod Society Inc	$10,818
Tasmanian Theatre Awards	The Theatre Council of Tasmania Inc	$10,818
	Total	$140,634

4. The total grant provision for each organisation be recorded in the ‘Grants, Assistance and Benefits provided’ section of the City of Hobart’s 2024-25 Annual Report.

4. Background

4.1. In July 2023, the Council endorsed progressing to Stage 2 of the review of all City of Hobart grants, partnerships, sponsorships and in-kind arrangements.

4.2. The existing program was established in 2016 and:

· Established rounds for grant applications.

· Introduced Quick Response Grants available all year around and approved by the Director.

· For round-based grants, established assessment panels with internal and external assessors.

· Created a dedicated grant officer role, centralised budget and installed SmartyGrants system to manage the program.

4.3. In addition, an Inbound Requests for Sponsorship Policy was established on direction from Council. On 23 January 2017, Council determined inter alia, that:

4.3.1. The Council develop a policy and criteria to enable consistency around the consideration of future requests (for sponsorships).

4.4. The introduction of a sponsorship policy was designed to complement the grant program by providing a mechanism for those events that are more mature in their life cycle, larger and are high-profile. These events often request larger funding allocations, and the grants program does not have the budget nor the resourcing to manage these more complex relationships.

4.5. The sponsorship policy has assisted the Council effectively determine which commercial sponsorships the City of Hobart will support and ensure that these align with the City’s community vision and strategic goals.

4.6. There is additional funding provided by Council beyond the community grant and the sponsorship programs, including annual maintenance grants for sporting venues as well as small-scale funding support negotiated via various teams for events such as GovHack and floral shows.

4.7. All of these funding activities have been considered as part of the review.

4.8. The Policy Lab team have led the review as the officers responsible for the most mature aspect of the review – the administration of the community grants program.

4.9. KPMG were engaged to undertake an independent review. This engagement was confirmed via an RFQ valued at $50,000 (ex GST). The KPMG final report is included at Attachment A. The scope of the review outlined on page 6 included:

4.9.1. Determine the goals and objectives for a new grants, partnerships and sponsorships policy and model.

4.9.2. Provide a recommended model for the City of Hobart’s grants, partnerships and sponsorships or other recommended funding models (including a workshop with Elected Members and the Executive Leadership Team)

4.9.3. Develop an implementation plan for the preferred future state mode.

4.10. The review seeks to:

4.10.1. Design a fit-for-purpose more contemporary governance model, that reflects the needs of our community and the priorities of the Council.

4.10.2. Improve the efficiency of our approach to inform and empower applicants while ensuring the programs align with Council and community objectives.

4.11. Work with KPMG was completed from January to June 2024, this included:

4.11.1. Internal workshops

4.11.2. Surveys of internal and external stakeholders

4.11.3. Desktop research

4.11.4. One-on-one meetings with key internal stakeholders.

5. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1. The Local Government Act 1993 allows Council to provide grants and other pecuniary benefits (Section 77 and Section 22 (2c)).

5.2. The Council has policies in place to meet these requirements, specifically the Grants and Benefits Disclosure Policy and Grants Program Policy.

5.3. The review has found the governance framework for the Community Grants Program to be mature (see 6.3 of this report) and suggests expanding this model to ensure all funding is administered at the same level.

5.4. The report has recommended updating current Council policies and related procedural documentation to reflect the review’s findings.

6. Discussion

6.1. The review has identified several strengths and weaknesses with the current arrangements. These are summarised on page 11 of the report (Attachment A) and specific points are as follows:

6.2. Consistent governance

6.2.1. There is a variety of processes used to award funding, as demonstrated via the current state (page 12 of the report).

6.2.2. The review has found the centralised program has clear and transparent processes. The depth and quality of documents support the program is well advanced (page 27 of the report).

6.2.3. The governance structure provides equitable and transparent decision-making. It has also allowed the program to quickly respond to community needs in times of crisis by developing new programs and awarding grants in significantly shorter timelines. It has proven to be an effective model.

6.2.4. The review found that the sponsorship program is not as mature. Apart from the Inbound Sponsorship Request Policy there is little in the way of documentation to articulate the governance approach for this funding. The review has heard that the opacity of funding under sponsorships and some of the legacy partnerships is a key issue.

6.2.5. Additionally, the current policy framework applies to specific programs, rather than an overarching, holistic policy, resulting in the absence of a comprehensive whole of organisation process for allocating funding.

6.2.6. This does not mean that the funding awarded by Council through these streams lacks validity; however, the review acknowledges that the Council should maintain consistency and accountability.

6.2.7. These issues are addressed in the recommendations to:

· Maintain and extend the centralised grants team to offer an internal service across Council.

· Update current policies and related procedural documents to apply to grants and sponsorships awarded by Council.

6.3. Clarify definitions

6.3.1. The review has reinforced a known issue that has driven the need for the review – the need to provide clarity between what is a grant, a sponsorship and a partnership.

6.3.2. The programs have grown organically. While each has its purpose they have not been considered as a whole program which has led to some blurred lines between each offering. This has led to confusion from both the community seeking funding (page 44-46 of the report) and from the City’s officers (page 43).

6.3.3. The review recommends updating the governance documentation to provide clearer definitions of these funding categories and how they are operationalised by Council under a single policy. By providing clarity for what they are and how they are treated, the program will:

· Ensure accountability from bodies that receives funds.

· Provide fit for purpose funding that is responsive and proportional.

· Provide equity, transparency and consistency.

6.4. Funding timing

6.4.1. The review found that the timing of funding decisions within the year is problematic.

6.4.2. Currently, the program timelines are tied to confirmation of the annual budget. This means that applications do not open before July each year, with funding decisions often made in October. This is problematic for the events industry who often have summer events. It also means that the City often does not have enough time to promote or leverage its investment. As such, the review recommends that steps are taken to bring forward this process.

6.4.3. Council once allowed the larger grants in the Community Grants Program (namely the Event Partnership, Major Cultural Organisation, Community Christmas Carols and Urban Sustainability grants) to open in June each year. Since 2020, it has not been possible to open a round before the budget is made available in July. The delay in opening this round has been managed however it has come at a cost with added pressure on the grants coordination team and delays to outcomes for time critical activity.

6.4.4. Other cities have adopted different practices so their programs have more timely outcomes for their stakeholders:

· Grant rounds open for applications early in the calendar year, so the funding is allocated at the start of the financial year (i.e. City of Sydney and City of Perth).

· This requires certainty that funding will be available, preferably committed at least six months before the start of the financial year.

· Grant funding allocation is approved via a standalone Council decision prior to the budget approval (i.e. City of Perth).

6.4.5. Adopting multi-year funding opportunities for larger and high impact funding will greatly assist in the effectiveness of funding provided by the Council, as explained below.

6.5. Normalise multi-year funding

6.5.1. With the exception of the maintenance grants for sports grounds, all funding provided by Council is now awarded on an annual basis.

6.5.2. Consequentially, applicants are required to reapply each year, while officers spend significant resources assessing, negotiating, and awarding funding sponsorships without leveraging the full value of the funds provided.

6.5.3. Multi-year funding arrangements are very common across all levels of government. Such agreements often include mutually beneficial commitments that require the benefit of time to achieve the identified outcomes.

6.5.4. The report has highlighted adopting this practice better serves the community (external survey comments on page 48).

6.5.5. Where appropriate, and once the Council critically assess the ongoing merit of funding arrangements to ensure they are highly aligned to the strategy, the review recommends offering some multi-year funding streams.

6.6. Stronger strategic alignment

6.6.1. The review is the first holistic consideration of the purpose of the funding we provide. Because of this, the recommendations speak to strengthening the strategic alignment of funding by reviewing the merit of each funding stream against our strategy and mandating appropriate and proportional levels of reporting on both activity and outcomes supported by the funding.

6.6.2. This point is an underlying theme throughout the review. Without explicit definition and alignment, it is hard to evaluate the outcomes of the funding and the value it provides to the community and Council.

6.6.3. The review includes a high-level analysis of strategic alignment measured by demand and consistency with the Capital City Strategic Plan. While this provides some insight, there is a need to develop explicit success measures for each funding stream to evaluate its impact in future.

6.6.4. To better understand whether the funding is successful in delivering our strategic objectives, the review recommends that there is greater consistency in the approach to acquittals across the funding streams.

6.6.5. As part of the proposed future state, we propose to establish an annual evaluation report to Council that analyses the impact that the funding programs are having and to inform future program decisions.

6.7. Rebalancing resources

6.7.1. A dedicated grants coordination function was established in 2018 to manage the competitive program. This role works with the teams who own the strategic outcomes of the funding (commonly referred to as ‘grant owners’).

6.7.2. Funding outside of the competitive program is not in the centralised grants team’s remit. This leads to variable quality controls, record keeping and inconsistencies.

6.7.3. The total resourcing commitment for the funding arrangements included in the review is 3.8FTE across 20 roles (page 14 of the report), with 1.65 FTE allocated to the administration of the centralised program.

6.7.4. The review has found the centralised grants team is stretched thin to deliver the current mix of grants, sponsorships and partnerships. This is driven by a number of factors:

· The multiplicity of the grants on offer

· Their frequency

· Their timing over the year

· As well as, the lack of clarity and proportionality between funding opportunities and programs.

6.7.5. By implementing the review’s recommendations, the administrative burden on processing applications is expected to be reduced. This will allow the grants team to rebalance its capacity to dedicate more time to closing out funding relationships and evaluate the program’s impact.

6.7.6. To enable the City to fully embrace the funding opportunities, particularly partnerships, the review recommends grant owners identify dedicated officers by including the responsibility in relevant position descriptions. This needs to be identified in the design of funding opportunities and will vary based on the level of funding provided. For example, the Creative City unit has recently updated an existing role to manage relationships with the events receiving funding support.

6.8. In-kind arrangements

6.8.1. The Council provides a range of in-kind support. In a funding context, in-kind support is included in agreements for any venues, equipment or services.

6.8.2. The defined funding programs with in-kind arrangements include:

· In-kind Venue and Event Resource Quick Response Grant – up to $1,000 with an annual funding allocation of $11,500.

· City Partnership Grants – cash and in-kind support grants to a maximum value.

· Sponsorships – negotiated on a case by case basis.

6.8.3. Other funding opportunities are offered as cash only. It is common for these recipients to use Council services and assets as a member of the general public.

6.8.4. It is common for other jurisdictions to offer a combination of cash and in-kind support.

6.8.5. Cash only funding has been very effective, particularly during COVID-19. It has enabled the recipients to work independently as is the intent of grant funding.

6.8.6. Any funding recipient must still make the appropriate bookings, obtain relevant permits and comply with the relevant terms and conditions.

6.8.7. In-kind support needs to be quantified for reporting purposes. The value is recorded as the costs in the Fees and Charges as this represents the costs to access the asset or service. The published Fees and Charges factors in staff time and other resourcing commitments.

6.8.8. The review and further environmental scans have validated that in-kind grants are common and often offered as a combined cash and in-kind arrangement.

6.8.9. However, the review has identified the need to:

· Simplify application and acquittal forms to be proportional and scalable, especially for Quick Response Grants (which includes the In-kind Venue and Event Resource Quick Response Grant)

· Adopt a partnership model that amongst other aspects allows for mutually reinforcing activities whereby in-kind support will form part of the contractual arrangements.

6.8.10. Council has made systematic improvements by adopting a centralised booking system which now includes most venues, permits and equipment. With the new system in place, there is the option to revert the only wholly in-kind grant, In-kind Venue and Event Resource Quick Response Grant to a fee waiver managed through the booking system. This has potential to improve efficiency for Council and for applicants.

6.9. Report recommendations

6.9.1. The report identifies 19 recommendations across the six themes.

6.9.2. The six themes are as follows:

· Service Delivery & Design

· Governance & Risk

· People & Culture

· Processes

· Technology

· Performance & Data

6.9.3. Each recommendation is accompanied by a rationale on pages 53 to 58 of Attachment A.

6.9.4. A summary of the recommendation is on page 18 of Attachment A.

6.9.5. Officers are supportive of all the recommendations.

6.9.6. KPMG propose these recommendations be implemented in three stages (page 60 of Attachment A).

6.9.7. It is recommended that Council to note and endorse the recommendations.

6.9.7.1. This is identified as the first step in the implementation guidance.

6.9.8. Following this endorsement, officers will then seek to develop an updated policy to support the recommendations.

6.9.9. It is envisaged, that the updated policy will be brought to Council towards the end of 2024.

6.10. City Partnerships

6.10.1. The City Partnerships program was developed in 2017-18 to support longstanding annual civic and cultural events with multi-year funding to ensure their long-term viability and planning and to enable them to continue to add to the vibrancy of Hobart.

6.10.2. Through the adoption of this program, the City of Hobart has formalised longstanding relationships it has held with the following community organisations and events under a single funding program:

Event	Organisation	Grant value
Festa Italia	Australian Italian Club Inc	$10,818
Estia Greek Festival	Greek Orthodox Church and Benevolent Society of St George	$10,818
The Royal Hobart Regatta	Royal Hobart Regatta	$32,454
The Sandy Bay Regatta	Sandy Bay Regatta Association Inc	$32,454
Hobart Anzac Day Commemorations	RSL Tasmania	$32,454
City of Hobart Eisteddfod	City of Hobart Eisteddfod Society Inc	$10,818
Tasmanian Theatre Awards	The Theatre Council of Tasmania Inc	$10,818
	Total	$140,634

6.10.3. The funding review includes the future of the City Partnership Grant program.

6.10.4. The City Partnership Grant agreements have been extended annually until such time the grant review is complete.

6.10.5. As with other funding activity, this program needs to be reassessed on the alignment to the City’s strategy and ensure it reflects a partnership (refer to recommendations on page 53 of Attachment A).

6.10.6. We are seeking Council endorsement and support to extend the funding arrangements for the City Partnerships by one year to ensure continued support while we implement the recommendations.

6.10.7. It is proposed that the City Partnership grant agreements be extended by one year from 1 July 2024 until 30 June 2025.

6.10.8. Council officers will liaise with the City Partnership organisations to explain the rationale for the extension of their agreement to ensure they have continued support from the City. It is anticipated that the relevant City Partners will be supportive of this recommendation.

7. Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital

7.1. The activities that are generated by the City providing funding to the community aligns with Pillar 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 of Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital.

7.2. The funding review itself strongly aligns with Pillar 8 of Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital especially:

7.2.1. We work with each other to understand communities’ needs and achieve great outcomes for Hobart. We have coherent relationships, where we each understand what to expect and what is expected of us.

8. Capital City Strategic Plan

8.1. The funding review aligns with the City of Hobart Capital City Strategic Plan 2023,

8.1.1. Pillar 1: Sense of Place:

8.1.1.1. 1.1.2 Create opportunities for people to connect to place and Country, supporting community activities, spiritual and cultural customs and practices.

8.1.2. Pillar 2: Community Inclusion, Participation and Belonging

8.1.2.1. 2.2.1 Support people from all backgrounds and life experiences to participate in Hobart life.

8.1.3. Pillar 3: Creativity and Culture

8.1.3.1. 3.3.4 Support creative and cultural programs and activities by providing grants, sponsorships and partnerships funding and other support.

8.1.3.2. 3.4.1 Support the activation of City-owned spaces for creative, cultural, community and commercial initiatives.

8.1.4. Pillar 4: City Economies

8.1.4.1. 4.2.2 Actively support and engage with local businesses, business groups and networks, industry associations, key institutions and other stakeholders in the Hobart economy.

8.1.5. Pillar 6: Natural Environment

8.1.5.1. 6.3.1 Implement significant waste reduction actions and programs to ensure the City’s objective of zero waste to landfill by 2030 is achieved.

8.1.6. Pillar 8: Governance and Civic Involvement

8.1.6.1. 8.2.3 Increase the efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery across the organisation and improve services, project management and asset planning.

8.1.6.2. 8.2.4 Achieve improved customer service and experiences by enabling a customer-focused approach to service delivery.

8.1.6.3. 8.2.7 Ensure risks and legal processes are identified and managed effectively to achieve organisational priorities and strategic objectives and legislative requirements.

8.2. The alignment of funding activities against the strategic plan are referenced on pages 22 and 23 of the report (Attachment A).

9. Regional, State and National Plans and Policies

9.1. The review acknowledges there is a wide ranging of funding available to the community and the important role the City of Hobart plays in supporting the community.

9.2. The report recommends the City actively review and refine it’s offering to ensure they complement the broader funding environment (page 54 of Attachment A).

10. Financial Viability

10.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

10.1.1. KPMG were engaged at a cost of $50,000 to undertake the review. This was accounted for in 2023-24 financial year.

10.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

10.2.1. The allocation for this program is to be considered as part of the annual budget process.

10.3. Asset Related Implications

10.3.1. There is no direct impact on assets, however it is not that a number of funded activities seek to use City of Hobart equipment, venues and spaces.

11. Sustainability Considerations

11.1. Current programs are required to align with the objectives of the City of Hobart Waste Management Strategy 2015-30.

11.2. With the recent adoption of the 2040 Climate Ready Hobart Strategy, future funding policies and programs will support implementation of this strategy and will encourage funding recipients to respond to the strategies goals and priorities.

12. Community Engagement

12.1. The funding review has been supported by a Community Engagement plan which is summarised in the report (on pages 43-46 of Attachment A).

12.2. Further engagement with the broader community will be undertaken once an updated policy has been approved.

13. Communications Strategy

13.1. Officers will continue to provide support and communicate approved funding opportunities for 2024-25.

13.2. As per the review recommendations, officers will develop a broader communication strategy to communicate the reforms to key stakeholders (page 53 and 60 of Attachment A).

14. Innovation and Continuous Improvement

14.1. This review has sought to identify a contemporary fit for purpose funding model.

14.2. By adopting the recommendations in this report, particularly the establishment of an evaluation framework, we anticipate a more robust and measurable funding structure.

14.3. Implementing an evaluation framework for the funding allocation will enable the City to strategically assess and continuously improve the impact of the funding we provide.

15. Collaboration

15.1. Funding programs require collaboration between funders and the community, focusing on how to best allocate resources to meet strategic priorities.

15.2. The review has sought to identify how we can improve our practice to achieve stronger outcomes.

15.3. This was achieved with support from key stakeholders involved in receiving support from the City of Hobart and internal officers.

15.3.1. This review has engaged teams across the organisation who see strategic value in offering and awarding funding, including City Economy, Community Programs, Creative City, Development Appraisal and Sports and Recreation, as well as Strategic Communications and Marketing.

15.4. Officers will support the development of a new policy and the updating of the funding program.

Toban Harris

Funding Program Review Coordinator

David McIver

Manager Policy Lab

Laura Eaton

Acting Head of Intergovernmental Relations & Partnerships

Felicity Edwards

Acting Director Connected City

Date: 7 October 2024

File Reference: F24/74920; 15-12

Attachment a: KPMG Report - City of Hobart - Funding Program Review (Supporting information)

Item No. 14

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 65

14/10/2024

REPORT TITLE: 2024-25 Sponsorship Program

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Funding Program Review Coordinator

Program Leader Creative City (Arts & Cultural Programs)

Manager Policy Lab

Acting Director Connected City

1. Report Summary

1.1. The report seeks Council approval of the recommended sponsorship in the 2024-25 Sponsorship Program.

1.2. The program aligns with the Inbound Requests for Sponsorship policy to ensure that each sponsorship delivers a range of economic, promotional, community and visitation benefits.

2. Key Issues

2.1. The City of Hobart Sponsorship Program supports large scale commercial events, festivals or activities (including sporting) that have the potential for significant promotional leverage and significant economic benefit, improving visitation and providing enrichment to the community.

2.2. The Sponsorship round opened on Wednesday 3 July 2024 and closed on Tuesday 13 August 2024.

2.2.1. A total of three applications were received with an overall ask of $310,146.61 (combined cash and in-kind requests).

2.2.2. The available funds are a total of $165,000 (combined cash and in-kind requests).

2.3. The assessment panel met on Thursday 5 September 2024 to allocate available funds.

2.3.1. Prior to this meeting, the panel members completed online assessments through the SmartyGrants program to individually assess each application against the set criteria.

2.3.2. The panel recommend the Council funds both of the eligible applications as detailed in Table 1 under Section 6 of this report.

2.4. The Creative City team will work with each applicant to develop tangible benefits that demonstrated the City of Hobart’s return on commercial investment.

2.5. The future of this program is being considered as part of the funding review currently underway.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. The Council approve the provision of event sponsorship grants to the value of $165,000 as part of the 2024-25 Sponsorship Program:

(i) Australian Wooden Boat Festival - $60,000 cash and $65,000 in-kind value ($125,000 total) for the delivery of the Australian Wooden Boat Festival 2025.

(ii) Tennis Australia - $6,527 cash and up to $33,473 in-kind ($40,000 total) for the delivery of 2025 Hobart International.

2. The Council delegate the authority to the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and enter into the sponsorship agreement on the Council’s behalf.

3. The total value of support be recorded in the ‘Grants, Assistance and Benefits provided’ section of the City of Hobart’s Annual Report 2024-25.

4. The funding for the approved sponsorships be attributed to the Smart Economy – Sponsorship Budget Function provided for in the City of Hobart’s 2024-25 budget.

4. Background

4.1. Each year the City of Hobart Sponsorship Program offers support to eligible events, festivals, and activities by the way of financial and in-kind sponsorship in exchange for mutually beneficial outcomes that profile both the activity and the City of Hobart more broadly.

4.2. For the purpose of the program the definition of an event sponsorship is:

A large-scale commercial event, festival or activity (including sporting) that is high profile and, as a result, has the potential for significant promotional leverage (i.e. interstate media/branding opportunities) and significant economic benefit, improving visitation and providing enrichment to the community. As a result, most sponsorship applications will be initiated from well-established proven events.

4.3. A copy of the current guidelines is included at Attachment A noting the assessment process and criteria.

4.4. The program is run through SmartyGrants, the same system through which the City’s grants are administered. The EOI, application and assessment process are captured within SmartyGrants offering transparent documentation and decision making.

5. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1. All applicants were required to demonstrate their capability and provide evidence in their applications that they can comply with relevant legislative requirements for delivering the funded activities.

5.2. Any risks either actual or perceived, including benefits to the City will be managed through the development of a legally binding sponsorship agreement.

5.3. Officers from the Creative City team will oversee the implementation of the agreement.

5.4. In accordance with current guidelines funding will be front loaded with 70% of the cash allocation paid upon executing the sponsorship agreement. The remaining 30% of the cash allocation will be paid upon receipt of a satisfactory acquittal report.

5.5. An acquittal report outlining use of funds, outcomes of the event and the reach of promotions and local business engagement will be required to acquit funding within 90 days of completion of the event.

5.6. Public Liability and Professional Indemnity cover will be required by event organisers.

6. Discussion

6.1. Following the adoption of the Inbound Requests for Sponsorship Policy in 2019, an annual Sponsorship Program has awarded sponsorship through a competitive process.

6.2. The Sponsorship Program round opened on Wednesday 3 July 2024 and closed on Tuesday 13 August 2024.

6.3. A total of three applications for commercial sponsorship were received, with a collective value of $310,147.

6.3.1. One application was deemed ineligible as it sought more than the 30% of the total cash budget of the event as specified in the guidelines (page 3 of Attachment A).

6.4. An assessment panel comprising of City officers and external subject matter experts assessed each stream against the assessment criteria set out in the relevant grant guidelines.

The assessment panel consisted of:

· Jane Castle - Acting Manager Creative City

· Abby McKibben – Manager, Communications and Marketing, City of Hobart

· Travis Tiddy - Artistic Director, Arts Management and Cultural Strategist

· Annette Downs - Theatre Consultant

6.5. Individual assessments were carried out on a points-scored basis against all criteria.

6.6. Panel members then met to discuss applications and agree to a final set of recommendations.

6.7. It is recommended that the Council funds both of the eligible applications as outlined in Table 1.

6.7.1. The two eligible applications recommended for sponsorship scored highly against the set criteria and demonstrated to have excellent brand and profile-raising opportunities for the City of Hobart.

6.7.2. A summary of the applications recommended for approval is included at Attachment B.

6.8. Table 1 - Sponsorship Program recommendations

Applicant	Event/ Festival	Dates	Requested total funding amount (ex GST)	Recommended total funding amount (ex GST)
Australian Wooden Boat Festival	Australian Wooden Boat Festival 2025	7 to 10 February 2025	Cash $ 65,000	Cash $ 65,000
			In-kind $ 60,000	In-kind $ 60,000
			Total $125,000	Total $125,000
Tennis Australia	2025 Hobart International	4 to 11January 2025	Cash $ 50,000	Cash $ 6,527
			In-kind $ 33,473	In-kind $ 33,473
			Total $ 83,473	Total $ 40,000

6.9. It is noted that this is one of the few programs that awards in-kind and cash funding.

6.9.1. In-kind support is awarded as events of this scale are known to use significant City assets, venues and spaces.

6.9.2. Where there are direct costs, incurred through items such as advertising fees, e.g. for road closures, subcontracted works, e.g. banner installation, and provision of materials that are unable to be reused, the in-kind value will be applied with the direct costs passed on to applicant.

6.10. The benefits to the City will be subject to final negotiation with each recipient and can include:

6.10.1. The City of Hobart logo to be included in the sponsorship, or equivalent section of event’s website, marketing materials in the same location as other sponsors’ logos appear, in accordance with the City of Hobart Grant and Partnership Acknowledgement Guidelines.

6.10.2. Images and other digital media, related to the events, are provided to the Council to assist in the promotion of the events.

6.10.3. Acknowledgement during public speeches and presentations.

6.10.4. Permission for any of the Elected Members of the Council to speak at any media events or presentations in connection with the events.

6.10.5. Invitation to all media events and launches the events, including those where Council branding is to be displayed.

6.10.6. Potential tickets and invitations to private functions attached to the events.

6.10.7. Development of activations engaging the Hobart community in the lead up or during the events.

6.11. The negotiated benefits to Council will be identified in the sponsorship agreement.

6.12. The Creative City team will actively support these relationships to ensure the City can leverage the brand and community benefits of this invest.

6.13. Each event will be required to submit a post event report acquitting the funding. The sponsorship agreement specifies the report include as a minimum:

6.13.1. event research including the provision of information relating to attendance, demographics, promotional benefits and economic analysis of the event; and

6.13.2. a media/market analysis that includes, but is not limited to, a report on the number of instances where the Council’s logo, name, product, names or symbols was used, where they were used and the duration of the use, during the event.

6.14. Funding review

6.14.1. This program is included in the scope of the current funding review.

6.14.2. All sponsorship arrangements are presently awarded on an annual basis.

6.14.3. Once Council considers this recommendation, there is only one market-led sponsorship not under contract for 2024-25.

6.14.3.1. The sponsorship request from DarkLab to support the 2025 Dark Mofo festival is anticipated in early 2025.

6.14.4. The review recommends making improvements to how Council awards sponsorship by:

· Critically assessing the ongoing merit of funding arrangements to ensure they are highly aligned to the strategy.

· Updating the governance documentation to provide clearer definitions of these funding categories and how they are operationalised by Council under a single policy

· Better evaluating the outcomes of the funding and the value it provides to the community and Council.

6.14.5. The recent Council resolution to review the future funding support of both Business Events Tasmania and PinPoint Group’s Taste of Summer support falls within this scope of work.

6.14.6. An updated funding policy replacing the Inbound Requests for Sponsorship Policy will be presented for endorsement towards the end of 2024.

6.14.7. The outcome of the funding review will change how Council governs, awards and budgets for sponsorships in 2025-26.

7. Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital

7.1. The Sponsorship Program supports the Hobart: A Community Vision for our Island Capital document, namely in its community vision, strategic plan and community inclusion and equity framework.

8. Capital City Strategic Plan

8.1. The Sponsorship Program aligns with the City of Hobart Capital City Strategic Plan 2023, namely:

8.1.1. Pillar 1: Sense of Place

8.1.1.1. 1.1.2 Create opportunities for people to connect to place and Country, supporting community activities, spiritual and cultural customs and practices.

8.1.2. Pillar 3: Creativity and culture

8.1.2.1. 3.1.1 Support Hobart’s continued evolution as a creative and culturally engaging capital city, with a focus on community, accessibility and creative potential.

8.1.2.2. 3.3.1 Provide affordable, inclusive and accessible opportunities for community members to engage in arts and culture.

8.1.2.3. 3.3.4 Support creative and cultural programs and activities by providing grants, sponsorships and partnerships funding and other support.

8.1.2.4. 3.4.1 Support the activation of City-owned spaces for creative, cultural, community and commercial initiatives.

8.1.2.5. 3.4.2 Activate public spaces and venues, to benefit the community and business sector through changes to infrastructure, public art, performances, events, festivals and markets.

8.1.3. Pillar 4: City Economies

8.1.3.1. 4.1.1 Attract investment that supports businesses and communities to flourish in ways consistent with the community vision.

8.1.3.2. 4.2.1 Support ways of welcoming people of all backgrounds to participate in Hobart’s economy and professional communities.

8.1.3.3. 4.2.2 Actively support and engage with local businesses, business groups and networks, industry associations, key institutions and other stakeholders in the Hobart economy.

8.1.3.4. 4.4.2 Develop strategic relationships in major Hobart industries such as education, tourism, hospitality, health, community services, science, research and the public and creative sectors.

8.1.3.5. 4.4.6 Continue to play a significant role in the visitor and tourism economy, and as the gateway city to Tasmania.

8.1.4. Pillar 6: Natural Environment

8.1.4.1. 6.3.1 Implement significant waste reduction actions and programs to ensure the City’s objective of zero waste to landfill by 2030 is achieved.

9. Regional, State and National Plans and Policies

9.1. Aligns to the Tasmania Government Events Strategy 2023-2027.

9.2. Tasmania’s 2030 Visitor Economy Strategy provides a collective longer-term vision through to 2030. The strategy is a plan for growth and a plan to manage growth sustainability, ensuring that the visitor economy continues to have a positive impact on our environment, economy, and way of life.

10. Financial Viability

10.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

10.1.1. This sponsorship program was funded in the 2024-25 budget process.

10.1.2. A funding allocation of $165,000 was committed in the City of Hobart 2024-25 budget for the Sponsorship Program round.

10.1.3. Each allocation is for a single event that occurs within the financial year.

10.1.4. To manage the risk, split payments are made with the final payment expected before the end of the current financial year.

10.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

10.2.1. The allocation for this program is considered in the annual budget process.

10.2.2. The Funding Review is pending and will influence future budget allocations.

10.3. Asset Related Implications

10.3.1. As per booking requirements, a condition assessment will be undertaken of all City of Hobart assets as per the sponsorship agreement prior to and at the completion of event. It is anticipated that this process will identify any assets that require repair or disposal.

11. Sustainability Considerations

11.1. Events or activities that the City of Hobart support are required to align with the objectives of the City of Hobart Waste Management Strategy 2015-30. In particular, participants and contractors must outline their commitment to sustainable events, certified compostable food packaging and reducing waste to landfill.

11.2. As part of the sponsorship agreements, the events will comply with existing waste management requirements and the Single Use Plastics By-law.

12. Community Engagement

12.1. The annual sponsorship round was advertised by calling for EOIs via the City of Hobart website as well as the provision of media and social media. There was also direct communication to previous applicants and major event producers informing them of the Sponsorship Program round opening.

13. Communications Strategy

13.1. All events that have applied for Sponsorship Program will have in-depth communications plans and sponsorship agreements that will set out specific requirements to acknowledge City of Hobart Sponsorship in all print, online and social media.

13.1.1. These will include logos on event promotional materials, recognition within the event, promotion through social media, websites, advertising and digital promotion.

13.2. The Communications & Marketing team at the City of Hobart will also look to develop and execute their own plan to ensure the City of Hobart is receiving appropriate levels of recognition for the financial support we are providing each of the funded events and festivals.

13.3. Sponsorship benefits will be discussed with each applicant to provide appropriate acknowledgment of the City of Hobart. These will be finalised once the Council has determined the level of support that the City will provide.

14. Innovation and Continuous Improvement

14.1. An acquittal report will be required to trigger the final payment of 30%. A component of this report will be an assessment by the operators of future improvements for the event.

14.2. As outlined in the funding review report also tabled at the October 2024 Council meeting, the outcome of the funding review will change how Council governs, awards and budgets for sponsorships in 2025-26.

15. Collaboration

15.1. Sponsorship by its nature is a commercial engagement with defined benefits. It is important that these benefits are realised. The City of Hobart will continue to work with event organisers to ensure a safe, compliant, and engaging event is developed in line with the sponsorship agreement and required legislation.

Toban Harris

Funding Program Review Coordinator

Jane Castle

Program Leader Creative City (Arts & Cultural Programs)

David McIver

Manager Policy Lab

Felicity Edwards

Acting Director Connected City

Date: 9 October 2024

File Reference: F24/83645; 24/32

Attachment a: Sponsorship Program Guideline 2024-25 (Supporting information)

Attachment b: Assessment Summary - FY25 - Sponsorship Program (Supporting information)

Item No. 15

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 76

14/10/2024

REPORT TITLE: City of Hobart Grants Program - Event Partnership and Major Cultural Organisation Grants Recommendations

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Manager Policy Lab

Acting Head of Intergovernmental Relations & Partnerships

1. Report Summary

1.1. The annual round of the City of Hobart grants program includes the Major Cultural Organisation and the Event Partnership grant streams.

1.2. Under the City’s Grants Program Policy, Council is responsible for approving the Major Cultural Organisations and the Event Partnership Grants.

1.3. The round has been run in accordance with the Grant Program Policy and the guidelines for each grant stream.

1.4. The round opened on 3 July 2024 and closed on 13 August 2024.

1.5. Assessment panels comprising City officers and external subject matter experts assessed each stream against the assessment criteria set out in the relevant grant guidelines.

The assessment panel consisted of:

· Jane Castle - Acting Manager Creative City

· Abby McKibben – Manager, Communications and Marketing, City of Hobart

· Travis Tiddy - Artistic Director, Arts Management and Cultural Strategist

· Annette Downs - Theatre Consultant

1.6. The assessment panels’ recommendations are provided to Council for approval.

2. Key Issues

Major Cultural Organisations

2.1. Five (5) organisations submitted applications for the Major Cultural Organisation Grant in the Creative Hobart grant stream and of these, four (4) were deemed eligible. Three (3) applications are recommended for funding for a total value of $100,000 in a funding pool of $100,000.

2.2. The assessment panel recommend the following applications for funding. These are ranked in order 1 to 3 against the assessment criteria and are as follows:

MCO235	Theatre Royal	$35,000
MCO232	Tasmanian Museum & Art Gallery	$35,000
MCO231	Tasmanian Symphony Orchestra	$30,000

2.3. Two (2) applicants are recommended for full funding and one (1) for part funding.

2.4. One applicant is not recommended for funding as follows:

App No.	Applicant	Recommended
MCO2405	National trust of Australia (Tasmania)	$0

Event Partnerships

2.5. A total of nine (9) eligible applications were received in the Event Partnership grant stream and of these, seven (7) are recommended for funding for a total of $324,250 consuming the full funding allocation of $324,250.

2.6. The assessment panel recommend the following applications for funding. These are ranked in order 1 to 10 against the assessment criteria and are as follows:

App No.	Applicant	Recommended
EP2405	Beaker Street Ltd	$82,537
EP2414	Theatre Royal	$49,913
EP2406	Festival of Voices	$70,000
EP2413	Trail Ventures	$56,800
EP2416	Atlas Events	$25,000
EP2403	Australian Institute of Architects - Tasmanian Chapter	$20,000
EP2402	Chinese Community Association of Tasmania Inc	$20,000

2.7. One (1) applicant has been recommended for full funding (Theatre Royal) and the remaining six (6) for part funding.

2.8. Two (2) applicants are not recommended for funding as follows:

	App No.	Applicant	Recommended
	EP2411	Cruising Yacht Club of Australia	$0
	EP2415	Deepavali Tasmania Inc	$0
*3. Recommendation* *That:* *1. The Council approve the following grants as listed to a total value of $424,250 under the 2024-25 Community Grants Program:* *Major Cultural organisations:* *(i) MCO2401 Theatre Royal $35,000* *(ii) MCO232 Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery $35,000* *(iii) MCO235 Tasmanian Symphony Orchestra $30,000* *Event Partnerships:* *(iv) EP2405 Beaker Street Ltd. $82,537* *(v) EP2414 Theatre Royal $49.913* *(vi) EP2406 Festival of Voices $70,000* *(vii) EP2413 Trail Ventures $56,800* *(viii) EP2416 Atlas Events $25,000* *(ix) EP2403 Australian Institute of Architects $20,000* *(x) EP2402 Chinese Community Association* *of Tasmania Inc. $20,000* *2. The funding for the approved grants be attributed to the Community Grants Budget Function provided in the City of Hobart’s 2024-25 Annual Plan.* *3. The total grant provision be recorded in the ‘Grants, Assistance and Benefits provided’ section of the City of Hobart’s 2024-25 Annual Report.*

4. Background

4.1. The City of Hobart Grants Program contains two grant categories awarding more than $20,000 per grant:

· Creative Hobart Major Cultural Organisations

· Event Partnerships

4.2. As per the Grants Policy for grant amounts over $20,000 the assessment panel recommendations are referred to Council for determination.

4.3. City of Hobart Grants are assessed according to the criteria for each grant as outlined in the guidelines and in accordance with the Grants Program Policy.

4.4. The grant round was promoted through City of Hobart social media channels and previous applicants were contacted via email.

4.5. Grant information is made available on the City of Hobart website, which provides online access to the grant application form, guidelines, and copies of relevant City of Hobart strategies that applicants should respond to.

4.6. The application period closed on 13 August 2024.

5. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1. All applicants were required to demonstrate their capability and provide evidence that they can comply with relevant legislative requirements for delivering the funded activities.

6. Discussion

Creative Hobart Major Cultural Organisation Grant

6.1. The Creative Hobart Major Cultural Organisation grant stream allows applicants to apply for any amount over $10,000.

6.2. There is $100,000 available for this grant round for the 2024-25 financial year.

6.3. This program is designed to support public program costs for large cultural organisations that operate within the city.

6.4. The Major Cultural Organisation grant guidelines are included at Attachment A.

6.5. Five (5) applications were received and four (4) were deemed eligible. These were from:

· Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery

· Tasmanian Symphony Orchestra

· Theatre Royal

· National Trust of Australia (Tasmania)

6.6. An application from Salamanca Arts Centre was deemed ineligible because it did not meet the criteria for these grants.

6.6.1. To be eligible for the Major Cultural Organisation grants, applicants must be able to demonstrate an annual income of $1.5 million.

6.6.2. Salamanca Arts were unable to meet this criterion and were therefore deemed ineligible.

6.6.3. A meeting has been scheduled between the Salamanca Arts Centre and the CEO to discuss this application.

6.7. The Major Cultural Organisations applications requested a total amount of $143,925 which is in excess of the available funds.

6.8. An assessment panel comprising of City officers and external subject matter experts assessed each stream against the assessment criteria set out in the relevant grant guidelines.

6.9. Individual assessments were carried out on a points-scored basis against all criteria.

6.10. Panel members then met to discuss applications and agree to a final set of recommendations.

6.11. Three (3) applications are recommended for full funding to the total value of $100,000, noting that applications recommended for support rated in the top three positions (between 96 per cent and 83 per cent) against the selection criteria.

6.12. A summary of each application and the assessment outcome are included in Attachment B.

6.13. The panel’s assessment against the criteria placed the National Trust of Australia (Tasmania) application in fourth position with a rating of 50 per cent, well below the other applications.

6.13.1. The assessment panel unanimously agreed that the application did not represent creative outcomes and did not align with the objectives of the Creative Hobart Strategy which was clearly reflected in the overall scores.

6.13.2. It is noted that Major Cultural Organisations Grant applicants can still apply for other funding through the City of Hobart Grants Program.

6.14. Each event will be required to submit a post event report acquitting the funding. The Major Cultural Organisations agreement specifies the report include as a minimum:

6.14.1. Explanation of changes to the project, achievements, lessons learnt, numbers of participants and feedback on experience, and

6.14.2. A budget breakdown, evidence of promotional material, event photographs and online content.

Event Partnership Grants

6.15. This Event Partnership stream is designed to support organisations to deliver events in Hobart that have creative, community and economic outcomes and that also align with relevant objectives of the City of Hobart Capital City Strategic Plan 2023.

6.16. Applicants can apply for any amount from $20,000 for a single event and there is $324,250 available for this grant for 2024-25 financial year.

6.17. The Event Partnership grant guidelines are included at Attachment C.

6.18. There were nine (9) eligible applications received requesting a total amount of $550,963 which is in excess of the available funding pool.

6.19. An assessment panel comprising of City officers and external subject matter experts assessed each stream against the assessment criteria set out in the relevant grant guidelines.

6.20. Individual assessments were carried out on a points-scored basis against all criteria.

6.21. Panel members then met to discuss applications and agree to a final set of recommendations.

6.22. A total of seven (7) applications are recommended for funding, one (1) for full funding and six (6) for part funding.

6.23. A summary of each application and the assessment outcome are included in Attachment D.

6.24. The panels assessment against the criteria determined that the final two applicants, Cruising Yacht Club of Australia and Deepavali Tasmania Inc. are not recommended for funding. Refer to Attachment D for further information.

6.24.1. It is noted that Event Partnership Grant applicants can still apply for other funding through the City of Hobart Grants Program if they meet the eligibility criteria.

6.25. Applications recommended for funding are those that scored the highest points overall. All applications recommended for funding rated above 64% against the selection criteria,

6.26. The assessment criteria seeks to provide an objective assessment methodology and when objectively assessed, those applications not recommended for funding were not competitive against the criteria.

6.27. The assessment panel recognised applications that were capable of delivering high quality professional events and has recommended support for events that have the ability to attract diverse audiences into the city.

6.28. Each event will be required to submit a post event report acquitting the funding. The Event Partnership agreement specifies the report include as a minimum:

6.28.1. Explanation of changes to the project, achievements, lessons learnt, numbers of participants and feedback on experience, and

6.28.2. A budget breakdown, evidence of promotional material, event photographs and online content.

Funding review

6.29. These grant programs are included in the scope of the current funding review.

6.30. The review recommends making improvements to how Council awards significant funding, by

· Critically assessing the ongoing merit of funding arrangements to ensure they are highly aligned to the strategy.

· Updating the governance documentation to provide clearer definitions of these funding categories and how they are operationalised by Council under a single policy.

· Better evaluating the outcomes of the funding and the value it provides to the community and Council.

6.31. An updated funding policy replacing the Grants Program Policy will be presented for endorsement towards the end of 2024.

6.32. The outcome of the funding review will change how Council governs, awards and budgets for grants from 2025-26.

7. Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital

7.1. The grants support the Hobart: A Community Vision for our Island Capital document, namely in its community vision, strategic plan and community inclusion and equity framework

8. Capital City Strategic Plan

8.1. The grants align with the City of Hobart Capital City Strategic Plan 2023, namely:

8.1.1. Pillar 1: Sense of Place

8.1.1.1. 1.1.2 Create opportunities for people to connect to place and Country, supporting community activities, spiritual and cultural customs and practices.

8.1.2. Pillar 3: Creativity and culture

8.1.2.1. 3.1.1 Support Hobart’s continued evolution as a creative and culturally engaging capital city, with a focus on community, accessibility and creative potential.

8.1.2.2. 3.3.1 Provide affordable, inclusive and accessible opportunities for community members to engage in arts and culture.

8.1.2.3. 3.3.4 Support creative and cultural programs and activities by providing grants, sponsorships and partnerships funding and other support.

8.1.2.4. 3.4.1 Support the activation of City-owned spaces for creative, cultural, community and commercial initiatives.

8.1.2.5. 3.4.2 Activate public spaces and venues, to benefit the community and business sector through changes to infrastructure, public art, performances, events, festivals and markets.

8.1.3. Pillar 4: City Economies

8.1.3.1. 4.1.1 Attract investment that supports businesses and communities to flourish in ways consistent with the community vision.

8.1.3.2. 4.2.1 Support ways of welcoming people of all backgrounds to participate in Hobart’s economy and professional communities.

8.1.3.3. 4.2.2 Actively support and engage with local businesses, business groups and networks, industry associations, key institutions and other stakeholders in the Hobart economy.

8.1.3.4. 4.4.2 Develop strategic relationships in major Hobart industries such as education, tourism, hospitality, health, community services, science, research and the public and creative sectors.

8.1.3.5. 4.4.6 Continue to play a significant role in the visitor and tourism economy, and as the gateway city to Tasmania.

8.1.4. Pillar 6: Natural Environment

8.1.4.1. 6.3.1 Implement significant waste reduction actions and programs to ensure the City’s objective of zero waste to landfill by 2030 is achieved.

9. Financial Viability

9.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

9.1.1. Of the total $100,000 allocated in the Creative Hobart Major Cultural Organisation Grant in the Grants and Assistance Budget, it is recommended that:

(i) the amount of $100,000 is awarded in line with the recommendation of the assessment panel for this grant, and

9.1.2. Of the available budget of $324,250 in the Event Partnership Grant in the Grants and Assistance Budget, it is recommended that:

(i) the amount of $324,250 is awarded in line with the recommendation of the assessment panel for this grant.

9.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

9.2.1. There are no impacts on future year’s financial results. All applicants who receive a funding offer will be notified that an invoice or Recipient Created Tax Invoice (RCTI) must be submitted for payment before the end of the financial year and before the activity commences.

9.3. Asset Related Implications

9.3.1. Not applicable.

10. Sustainability Considerations

10.1. The projects recommended through the City of Hobart Grants Program are required to, wherever possible, support the objectives of the City of Hobart Waste Management Strategy 2015-30. In particular, applicants must outline their commitment to sustainable events, certified compostable food packaging and reducing waste to landfill.

11. Communications Strategy

11.1. When considering the Major Cultural Organisation and Event Partnership Grants, all applications were acknowledged upon receipt and all applicants will be advised of the Council’s decision following Council endorsement of the recommendations, and invited to contact staff for feedback on their applications if they wish to do so.

11.2. Each successful applicant will be required to formally accept the City of Hobart’s assistance by signing an agreement within 30 days. The agreement requires them to:

· Agree to the conditions of the funding by the dates set.

· Provide any documentation necessary for compliance under the Goods and Services Tax (GST).

· Detail the ways in which they will acknowledge the City of Hobart’s support.

· Inform the City of Hobart of any material variations to the activity.

· Provide an acquittal within 90 days after the completion of their project.

11.3. Applicants who are offered partial funding have declared they were willing to accept partial funding in their application. These applicants will be asked to confirm they will accept the offer of partial funding and to advise the City of any variations to their proposed activity before the grant agreement is finalised.

11.4. All awarded grants will be listed in the City of Hobart’s Annual Report in accordance with the Council’s policy in respect to grants and benefits disclosure.

11.5. Results of the Council Resolution will be under embargo until Grant recipients have been notified.

11.6. Each successful applicant will be provided with the Grant and Partnership Acknowledgment Guidelines and as part of the condition of funding are required to ensure recognition of the City’s support.

David McIver

Manager Policy Lab

Laura Eaton

Acting Head of Intergovernmental Relations & Partnerships

Date: 3 October 2024

File Reference: F24/80309

Attachment a: Guidelines - FY25 - Creative Hobart - MCO (Supporting information)

Attachment b: Assessment Summary - FY25 - MCO (Supporting information)

Attachment c: Guidelines - FY25 - Event - Event Partnership (Supporting information)

Attachment d: Assessment Summary - FY25 - Event Partnerships (Supporting information)

Item No. 16

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 82

14/10/2024

REPORT TITLE: Fee Waivers - Community Based Homelessness & Social Support Groups

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Inclusive City Program Leader

Manager Community Programs

Acting Director Connected City

1. Report Summary

1.1. This report seeks a continuation of the waiver of venue hire fees for Mathers and Criterion House, for five community-led social support groups which provide support to community members in extreme need or who may be experiencing homelessness or housing stress.

1.2. The report also seeks a waiver of venue hire fees for one additional community-led social support group, ‘Love Hobart’ which provides meals, social support, and recreational activities for highly at-risk young people at Criterion House one night per week.

1.3. Fee waivers have been provided since 2018 and the support was identified as an action within the City of Hobart Affordable Housing & Homelessness Commitment 2021 – 2023 and has been included as a proposed action within the draft City for All Implementation Framework.

2. Key Issues

2.1. For the past six years the City has supported community-led social support groups that provide food, health, wellbeing, and social support to community members in need, by waiving hire fees at Mathers and Criterion House, located at 108 -110 Bathurst Street.

2.2. The initial focus of this support was for people experiencing housing stress and homelessness. Whilst people without a secure home are still seeking this support, it is noted that over the past two years the need has expanded to providing support to people seeking relief from cost-of-living pressures.

2.3. On 17 July 2023 the Council resolved to waive the hire fees of Mathers and Criterion House for the following organisations and activities:

· Food Not Bombs – hot meals, meets one day per week.

· Dining with Friends – hot meals, meets one day per month.

· Circle of Love and Care – packaged food, meets two days per week.

· Pets in the Park – veterinary care, meets one day per month.

· Hobart Hamlet Association – supported housing for people with mental ill health, meets four times per year.

· Mutual Aid Community Kitchen – food and essentials, meets one day per week.

2.4. The value of the City’s support for each group is based on the ‘Venue Hire – Community/Not for Profit’ hourly hire fee, as detailed within the City’s Fees & Charges, which for 2024 -2025 is $28.40 (incl. GST) per hour.

2.5. The total request of fee waivers this year is $24,651.20 (incl. GST), which is less than the 2023-2024 financial year request, which was $28,458 (Incl. GST).

2.5.1. While there has been a small increase in the hourly hire rate at Mathers House, one of the groups which operates on a weekly basis has halved their operating hours, which has reduced the overall total.

2.5.2. The above total request includes fee waivers for Love Hobart.

Proposal to include Love Hobart in the fee waiver program

2.6. This reports proposes to provide support to Love Hobart. This community outreach program has been delivered by volunteers at Criterion House since 2015 with numbers of young people regularly accessing this activity increasing over the last couple of years.

2.7. The program operates for two hours every Friday night providing support to up to 30 young people per night.

2.8. Love Hobart has been successful in engaging positively with young people who are often coming into contact with the youth justice system, or other youth and family support agencies.

2.9. As well as a meal, the program provides recreational and social opportunities for highly at-risk young people within a well supervised, safe, and supportive environment at Criterion House.

2.10. This program is fully funded through donations from community volunteers which cover the operational costs of this program including the provision of food and recreational equipment.

2.11. While Love Hobart is a faith-based organisation, the Friday night youth program is not used to preach or promote the beliefs of the volunteers and focuses on the health and wellbeing of the young people attending.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. The Council waive a total of $24,651.20 (incl. GST) in community hire fees made up of the following specific amounts, for the use of Mathers or Criterion House for the following community led social support services, for the 2024-2025 financial year:

a) Food Not Bombs $8,860.80

b) Dining with Friends $1,533.60

c) Circle of Love and Care $2,953.60

d) Pets in the Park $681.60

e) Hobart Hamlet Association $227.20

f) Mutual Aid Kitchen $8,860.80

g) Love Hobart $1,533.60

2. The value of the support to each organisation be recorded in the ‘Grants, Assistance and Benefits Provided’ section of the City of Hobart Annual Report.

4. Background

4.1. The programs identified in this report provide a range of cooked meals, pre-packaged food, social support, and opportunities for interaction on a weekly or monthly basis from Mathers and Criterion House to a diverse range of community members in extreme need.

4.2. Much of the food that is cooked or distributed by the programs operating at Mathers and Criterion House is donated to the services by local businesses.

4.3. The community benefit arising from the City’s support for these social support programs is significant noting there are direct and indirect health, social and wellbeing outcomes for some of our community’s most vulnerable people, as well as for the volunteers delivering the services.

4.4. Positive individual and community outcomes include:

· Increased physical health and wellbeing.

· Increased social connection and reduced social isolation.

· Increased mental health and wellbeing.

· Increased contact with other service providers that can assist with related issues.

· Increased confidence and ability to communicate.

4.5. As well as the financial support provided through the waiving of hire fees, City of Hobart staff engage in ongoing communication with the service providers. This helps to ensure that the services are running smoothly and are promoted to and supporting the community.

4.6. As part of the annual review of the services that the City supports, each group provides a simple activity report including impacts on participants. This consolidated report can be found at Attachment A.

5. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1. All groups benefiting from the City’s fee waiver support complete the standard hire agreement for Mathers and Criterion Houses and comply with all requirements of the agreement.

6. Discussion

6.1. All of the groups identified within this report that provide social support services at Mathers or Criterion House provide community members with food and/or valuable and positive social connection as well as an opportunity to find out about and connect with other support services.

6.2. Without the support of the City of Hobart, these groups would have to pay for the hire of the venue from volunteer’s funds or donations from the community.

6.3. This would have an impact on the support and services that they would be able to provide directly to the community, possibly reducing the services they offer, or causing them to cease operating.

7. Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital

7.1. The proposal to waive the hire fees for the identified community groups aligns with the following focus areas within Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital.

1.1.1 Hobart is home. We invite everyone into this feeling.

2.2.7 We recognise and face inequalities, poverty, and disadvantage in our communities.

2.2.8 We support each other to have our needs met and flourish. We all have opportunities to access and contribute to Hobart life.

2.2.10 We are all sincerely valued. We respect each other. We all have the chance to belong.

2.3.1 Enhanced by its human scale, Hobart thrives on connectedness—to each other, our places and spaces, our services and activities. We create opportunities for new connections to develop.

2.5.1 We have a holistic view of health that involves all aspects of our lives. Mental, physical, emotional, spiritual, cultural and social health are at the core of our decision making.

8. Capital City Strategic Plan

8.1. This proposal supports the following objectives within the City of Hobart Capital City Strategic Plan 2023.

2.2.1 Support people from all backgrounds and life experiences to participate in Hobart life.

2.3.1 Provide diverse activities and programs that reduce social isolation and build social cohesion and improve health and wellbeing.

2.4.2 Ensure that Hobart is a safe and liveable city by enhancing community wellbeing and public safety and security.

9. Regional, State and National Plans and Policies

9.1. This proposal aligns with the following United Nations Sustainable Development Goals:

Goal 1: No Poverty.

Goal 2: Zero Hunger.

Goal 3: Good Health and Wellbeing.

Goal 10: Reduce Inequality.

10. Financial Viability

10.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

10.1.1. The impact on the 2024 - 2025 financial year operating budget will be $24,651.20 (incl. GST) in foregone revenue.

10.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

10.2.1. The recommendations of this report have no impact on future years’ operating budgets.

10.3. Asset Related Implications

10.3.1. There are no asset related implications arising from this report.

11. Sustainability Considerations

11.1. It is noted that some of the groups utilise donated food supplies from Hobart restaurants and businesses that would ordinarily be disposed of.

12. Collaboration

12.1. Officers have engaged with the groups and organisations delivering these programs throughout the year and in preparing this report.

12.1.1. The staff working at the Mathers House facility provide ongoing support to each of the groups/organisations.

12.2. The groups and organisations are promoted through the City’s Hobart Helps card directory of services that are distributed through homelessness services and is available on the City’s website. https://www.hobartcity.com.au/Community/Action-on-homelessness/Hobart-Helps-Card

Mark Joseph

Inclusive City Program Leader

Kimbra Parker

Manager Community Programs

Felicity Edwards

Acting Director Connected City

Date: 3 October 2024

File Reference: F24/82348

Attachment a: Fee Waiver information Mathers/Criterion Houses (Supporting information)

Item No. 17

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 90

14/10/2024

REPORT TITLE: Governance Review - Establishment of Council Committee

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Chief Executive Officer

1. Report Summary

1.1. The purpose of this report is for the Council to consider changes to its governance arrangements which involve the establishment of a new Council Committee to replace and enhance the current Elected Members workshops.

2. Recommendation

That:

1. Council establish a Council Committee called ‘The Hobart Workshop’, pursuant to section 23 of the Local Government Act 1993 in accordance with the Terms of Reference at Attachment A, to be held twice monthly, commencing at 4.00pm and concluding no later than 8.00pm on Mondays.

2. Council delegates to The Hobart Workshop, the following functions and powers:

(a) Subject to clause 4, the Council delegates all of its functions and powers under the Local Government Act 1993 (Tas) and all other Acts, other than the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (Tas), to The Hobart Workshop.

3. Unless otherwise resolved by the Council, the Council does not delegate to The Hobart Workshop any of the following functions and powers:

(a) Those listed in section 22(3) of the Local Government Act 1993 (Tas), being:

· The borrowing of money or other financial accommodation.

· The determination of the categories of expenses payable to councillors and any member of any committee;

· The establishment of council committees, special committees, controlling authorities, single authorities or joint authorities;

· The revision of the budget or financial statements of the Council;

· The revision of the strategic plan and the annual plan of the Council;

· The appointment of the General Manager;

· The sale, donation, exchange or other disposal of land or public land;

· The decision to exercise any power under section 21(1);

· The making of by-laws;

· The making of rates and charges under Part 9; and

· Any other prescribed power; and

(b) Adoption or revision of the Council’s:

· Long-term Financial Management Plan;

· Financial Management Strategy;

· Long-term Strategic Asset Management Plan;

· Asset Management Policy;

· Asset Management Strategy; and

· Regional and Municipal Strategies and Plans.

4. Subject to sub-paragraph (a), the Council delegates all of its functions and powers as the planning authority under the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (Tas) to The Hobart Workshop, other than its power of delegation. The Committee has full power to make planning decisions on behalf of the Council.

(a) The Council’s delegation of its functions and powers as the planning authority to The Hobart Workshop is conditional upon a matter being deferred to the Committee pursuant to:

(i) The Terms of Reference of the Planning Authority Committee; or

(ii) A decision of the Council.

5. Council appoints the following seven Elected Members [names to be determined] to be an Appointed Member of The Hobart Workshop:

6. Council confirms that an Appointed Member will temporarily cease to be an Appointed Member of The Hobart Workshop in the circumstances provided for by clause 4.5 of the Terms of Reference.

7. Council appoints the following members to be the Chairperson of The Hobart Workshop and authorises alterations to these appointments to be made by the Chief Executive Officer where the unavailability of an appointed Elected Member prevents them from completing their appointed role of Chairperson:

· [Name to be determined] as the Chairperson for January 2025.

· [Name to be determined] as the Chairperson for February 2025.

· [Name to be determined] as the Chairperson for March 2025.

· [Name to be determined] as the Chairperson for April 2025.

· [Name to be determined] as the Chairperson for May 2025.

· [Name to be determined] as the Chairperson for June 2025.

· [Name to be determined] as the Chairperson for July 2025.

· [Name to be determined] as the Chairperson for August 2025.

· [Name to be determined] as the Chairperson for September 2025.

· [Name to be determined] as the Chairperson for October 2025.

· [Name to be determined] as the Chairperson for November 2025.

· [Name to be determined] as the Chairperson for December 2025.

8. Council delegates to The Hobart Workshop its functions and powers under section 23(2) of the Local Government Act 1993.

9. Council delegates to the Chief Executive Officer its functions and powers under section 23(2) of the Local Government Act 1993 (Tas) to appoint members of The Hobart Workshop in accordance with clauses 4.6 and 5.3 of the Terms of Reference.

10. Council authorises the Chief Executive Officer to delegate the functions and powers delegated in accordance with Clause 9 to an employee of the Council.

11. The Chief Executive Officer record these delegations in writing, signed by the Chief Executive Officer, in accordance with section 23AA(2)(b) of the Acts Interpretations Act 1931 (Tas).

12. The ‘Meetings: Procedures and Guidelines’ policy and the ‘City of Hobart Governance Framework’ be updated as required to reflect this decision.

3. Background

3.1. At its 16 September 2024 meeting, the Council considered a report in relation to a number of proposed governance changes, including the establishment of a new Planning Authority Committee, modifications to the Portfolio Committee structure as well as a new Council Committee to replace and enhance the current Elected Member workshops.

3.2. The Council endorsed the changes to the Planning Authority Committee and the Portfolio Committees, however, a decision on the Council Committee (referred to as the Future Hobart Committee) was deferred for further Elected Member workshopping to be carried out.

3.3. A workshop on this matter was held on 23 September 2024.

4. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

4.1. The new Council Committee will be established pursuant to section 23 of the Local Government Act 1993.

5. Discussion

5.1. Earlier this year the Council completed a review of its governance arrangements to consider the effectiveness of the current arrangements as well as any improvements to enhance the current arrangements.

5.2. The review has identified that workshops are an important forum for Elected Members to be able to consider and provide input on matters before they are presented to a Council meeting for determination. They are also a forum for receiving deputations and presentations from groups and organisations. However, there is a concern that because they are currently conducted in a closed environment the workshops lack transparency and don’t provide an ability for public engagement.

5.3. To address issues of transparency and public engagement it is proposed to establish a broader strategically focused Council Committee which would incorporate Elected Member workshops.

5.4. The Council Committee would adopt a principle of openness by default and meetings would therefore be open for members of the public to attend, however, they would not be streamed and therefore do not have to be held in the Council Chamber.

5.5. The Council Committee would adopt a principle of openness by default and meetings would therefore be open for members of the public to attend, however, they would not be streamed and therefore do not have to be held in the Council Chamber.

5.6. It is proposed that Committee meetings would be periodically held in different meeting rooms across the City, to enable more localised participation and/or awareness of the business and/or activities of the Council.

5.7. The name of the Council Committee has been the subject of some considerable discussion amongst both Elected Members and Staff, and given that the proposed Committee represents an enhancement of the Council’s current workshops, it is recommended that the Committee be called ‘The Hobart Workshop’.

5.8. The Council Committee’s Terms of Reference would enable the committee to make decisions on lower-order policy and strategy matters (such as leases, review of policies, committee recommendations and the like) as well as development applications deferred from the Planning Committee.

5.9. The Terms of Reference would also relax the speaking restrictions proscribed by the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 and allow Elected Members to participate in Committee meetings more flexibly under the direction of the Chairperson.

5.10. It is proposed that the role of Chairperson will be rotated through the Elected Members to provide opportunities for professional development and equity in roles and responsibilities.

5.11. The Terms of Reference, however, do not permit decisions to be made by the Committee on any matters included on the agenda for workshopping, or for higher-order matters such as Annual Plan and Budget, Annual Report, Regional and Municipal Strategies and Plans and the like. This will need to be governed by the CEO, who has responsibility for the preparation of the agendas for Council and committee meeting.

5.12. The Council Committee meeting agenda would include the following elements:

· Commencement of meeting and apologies

· Planning Authority – Matters deferred from Planning Committee

· Deputations

· Reports and matters arising from committees

· Reports from Executive

· Office of the CEO

· Strategic and Regulatory Services

· Infrastructure and Assets Services

· Community and Economic Development Services

· Corporate Services

· Matters for workshopping

· General Business

· Matters for Closed

· Meeting Close

5.13. A standardised suite of KPI-based reporting will be developed to be provide to committee meetings to provide greater line of sight for Elected Members on what is going on across the organisation.

5.14. The Terms of Reference would adopt the same principles outlined for the Planning Authority Committee, which was endorsed by the Council at its 16 September 2024. This means that:

5.14.1. Seven Elected Members are appointed by the Council as members of the Committee, who will be ‘Appointed Members’.

5.14.2. An Elected Member who is not an Appointed Member, will be a ‘Nominee Member’, who may be appointed to be a member of the Committee for a meeting by the Chief Executive Officer (or their delegate).

5.14.3. The quorum for the Committee is four Members.

5.14.4. Where one or more Nominee Members are appointed for a meeting, then the quorum at the meeting is to be the majority of the members of the Committee at the time of the meeting.

5.14.5. To reduce the risk of the Chairperson needing to adjourn a meeting of the Committee due to lack of quorum, if an Appointed Member does not attend a meeting without a leave of absence, and there is a Nominee Member present at the meeting able to be appointed, then the absent Appointed Member would cease to be a member for that meeting and the Nominee Member would be appointed in their place, for that meeting only.

5.14.6. It is necessary that the absent Appointed Member is deemed to cease to be a member in that circumstance as otherwise the appointment of a Nominee Member would only increase the membership of the Committee without addressing the desire to achieve a quorum.

5.14.7. An Appointed Member ceases to be a member for a meeting if they are not present at a meeting immediately prior to its scheduled commencement time or an Appointed Member leaves a meeting and the required quorum is no longer present

5.14.8. Any Nominee Members who are present at a meeting immediately prior to the commencement of a meeting of the Committee meeting may be appointed as a member of the Committee by the Chief Executive Officer (or their delegate).

5.15. Importantly whether they are an Appointed Member or a Nominee member, Elected Members will be considered to be a part of the committee with an expectation of full participation. The structuring of the Committee around Appointed and Nominee Members is to achieve flexibility in the quorum requirements of the Local Government Act 1993.

6. Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital

6.1. The revised governance arrangements strongly align with Pillar 8 of Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital in that ‘we govern with transparency and accountability, encouraging and welcoming active civic involvement.’

7. Capital City Strategic Plan

7.1. Outcomes 8.1 and 8.2 of the Capital City Strategic Plan 2023 are relevant to the revised governance arrangements stating that:

Hobart is a city that is well governed that recognises the community as an active partner that informs decisions.

Hobart is a city that delivers public value and excellence by being a financially responsible, high performing and accountable organisation that is responsive to the needs of the community.

8. Financial Viability

8.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

8.1.1. There will be some initial cost associated with the establishment of the new Governance arrangements, however, this will be able to be accommodated within existing operational budgets.

8.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

8.2.1. Not applicable.

8.3. Asset Related Implications

8.3.1. Not applicable.

9. Community Engagement

9.1. The proposed Council Committee would adopt a principle of openness and meetings would be open for members of the public to attend.

Michael Stretton

Chief Executive Officer

Date: 9 October 2024

File Reference: F24/89650

Attachment a: Draft Terms of Reference - The Hobart Workshop (Supporting information)

Item No. 18

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 95

14/10/2024

REPORT TITLE: 2024-25 Annual Plan Progress Report for the period ending 30 September 2024

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Senior Advisor - Strategic Planning

Manager Policy Lab

Acting Head of Intergovernmental Relations & Partnerships

1. Report Summary

1.1. The purpose of this report is to present the progress report for the City of Hobart’s 2024-25 Annual Plan for the period ended 30 September 2024. (Refer Attachment A).

2. Key Issues

2.1. The Annual Plan is developed as part of the annual budget and sets out the major actions and initiatives for the 2024-25 financial year. Actions in the Annual Plan must be aligned with the City’s Strategic Plan.

2.1.1. Reports on the progress of the Annual Plan are provided each quarter to the Council for noting.

2.2. The 2024-25 Annual Plan has 28 major actions and initiatives listed. Implementation for the period 1 July to 30 September 2024 has seen 82 per cent (or 23) of major actions and initiatives in progress or on track, and, 8 per cent (or 5) are in progress but have met with some delay.

2.3. There have often been timing issues in providing the annual plan progress reports to Council meaning that the update was not relevant or timely. The Chief Executive Officer has committed to provide the progress reports to the Council meeting in the month following period end and this was the case with the final report on the 2023-24 annual plan and this first quarterly report (this report) for the 2024-25 annual plan.

2.3.1. The Annual Plan progress report provides a point in time status on the actions in the annual plan i.e. the end of the relevant quarter.

2.3.2. At the Council meeting of 22 May 2023, the Council resolved inter alia that:

2. Annual Plan Progress Reports be the subject of a Council Workshop.

2.3.3. Annual Plan progress reports have been provided to Council workshops following this resolution but there are often timing issues due to how the meeting and workshop schedule falls. With the improved turnaround time for the progress report and a busy workshop schedule it is recommended that the Council consider the value of this report going to a workshop and rescinding the decision of 22 May 2023.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. Council notes the 2024-25 Annual Plan Progress Report for the period ending 30 September 2024, marked as Attachment A to this report.

2. Council, by absolute majority, rescind the decision of 22 May 2023, that Annual Plan progress reports be the subject of a Council Workshop.

3. Council notes that future Annual Plan Progress Reports will be provided in the month following the end of the period.

4. Background

4.1. The Annual Plan is required pursuant to Section 71 of the Local Government Act 1993. It is adopted by Council with the budget estimates and other budget papers. The Annual Plan sets out the major actions and initiatives that will guide the priorities of the organisation over the coming 12 months and must include a summary of the budget estimates.

4.1.1. The 2024-25 Annual Plan includes actions that bring focus to the key needs of the community while balancing the Council’s commitment to support the future of Hobart.

5. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1. The Annual Plan is prepared in accordance with section 71 of the Local Government Act 1993 and must be summarised in the Annual Report (section 72(1)(a) of the Act).

5.2. One of the recommendations in this report is to rescind the decision of Council of 22 May 2023 that annual plan progress reports be the subject of a council workshop.

5.2.1. In accordance with section 18(1)(a) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015 the Council may only overturn a decision passed at a previous meeting held since the last ordinary election by an absolute majority.

6. Discussion

6.1. The progress report provided at Attachment A, reports on the progress of the Annual Plan major actions and initiative for the period 1 July to 30 September 2024.

6.1.1. The 2024-25 Annual Plan has 28 major actions and initiatives listed. Implementation for the period 1 July to 30 September 2024 has seen 82 per cent (or 23) of major actions and initiatives in progress or on track, and 18 per cent (or 5) are in progress but have met with some delay.

7. Capital City Strategic Plan

7.1. The Annual Plan progress report provides a summary of the progress of the major actions and initiatives in the Annual Plan and aligns with various strategies in the Capital City Strategic Plan 2023 including best practice, transparency and accountability to the community.

8. Financial Viability

8.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

8.1.1. The major actions and initiatives in the Annual Plan have been costed and funded in the 2024-25 budget estimates.

8.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

8.2.1. Not applicable.

8.3. Asset Related Implications

8.3.1. Not applicable.

Paula Gudgeon

Senior Advisor - Strategic Planning

David McIver

Manager Policy Lab

Laura Eaton

Acting Head of Intergovernmental Relations & Partnerships

Date: 9 October 2024

File Reference: F24/84337

Attachment a: 2024-25 Annual Plan Progress Report period ending 30 September 2024 (Supporting information)

Item No. 19

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 101

14/10/2024

REPORT TITLE: Annual Complaints and Compliments Report 2023-24

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Customer Service Team Leader

Acting Manager City Welcome

Acting Director Connected City

1. Report Summary

1.1. The purpose of this report is to provide the statistics in relation to registered complaints and compliments for the 2023-24 financial year (FY) formally received by the City of Hobart (the City).

1.2. Section 339F (5) of the Local Government Act 1993 requires the General Manager to provide the Council with a report at least once a year on the number and nature of complaints received against the Customer Service Charter.

1.3. During the 2023-24 FY, the City received 140 Complaints and 141 compliments.

1.4. This report provides an overview of the types of complaints and compliments and a comparison to the 2022-23 FY.

2. Key Issues

2.1. At its meeting of 30 October 2023, the Council noted that “…current projects underway to improve customer interface and experience will necessitate a full review of the Charter which is expected to take place after mid-2024 and will be reported back to Council.”

2.1.1. The project is in development, but has been put on hold due to the implementation of Plan Build.

2.1.2. An increase in the reported amount of formal complaints and compliments noted may be due to a process improvement of capturing the City’s complaints and compliments.

2.1.3. A full review of the Charter will occur once the project of system improvements has been finalised.

2.2. This report identifies current Council divisions receiving highest percentages of complaints and compliments however does not detail the responsible service areas.

2.2.1. Due to a minor realignment during the 2023-24 financial year resulting in key forward-facing services moving divisions, it is not accurate to compare and contrast the allocation of complaints or compliments with those divisions with the 2022-23 financial year.

3. Recommendation

That in accordance with Section 339F (5) of the Local Government Act 1993, the Council notes this report provided in respect of the complaints and compliments received during the 2023-24 financial year.

4. Background

4.1. Section 339F (5) of the Local Government Act 1993 requires the General Manager to provide the Council with a report at least once a year on the number and nature of complaints received against the Customer Service Charter.

4.2. During the 2023-24 FY, the City received 140 complaints and 141 compliments. Of the 140 formal complaints received, 18 were unsubstantiated, as it was ascertained that the complaint received did not involve an employee of the City or there was contradictory evidence to the nature of the complaint.

4.3. Comparatively, the number recorded for the previous financial year (2022-23 FY) was 61 complaints and 98 compliments.

4.3.1. The increase in the reported amount of formal complaints may be due to a process improvement of capturing the City’s complaints and compliments.

Complaints

4.4. Complaints are categorised in terms of:

· Unreasonable delay in response or inaction

· Employee behaviour, and

· General Council process or handling of a service.

4.5. The complaints process involves investigation by the respective manager or technical delegate with feedback or a resolution provided to the complainant.

4.6. Complaints against the Charter are received via the City’s Customer Service team who oversee the complaints to ensure they are reviewed, and that the complainant receives a response and appropriate action in accordance with the City’s Complaints Management Policy.

4.7. Relevant complaints received during 2023-24 FY were categorised as per the below table, with a comparison to the complaints received during the 2022-23 FY.

Complaint Category	2023-24 FY	2022-23 FY
Unreasonable delay or lack of response	6%	7%
Employee behaviour	43%	59%
General Council process or handling of a service	51%	34%

4.8. Of the complaints categorised as Employee behaviour (43% of complaints), the City Life division received the highest number of complaints, followed by Connected City division.

4.8.1. Complaints of this nature are reported to relevant management, who take appropriate and considered action. One of the steps taken has been awareness raising with staff around customer scrutiny and the need to ensure behaviour and presentation are consistently of a high standard.

4.9. Of the complaints categorised as General Council process or handling of a service (51% of complaints), the City Life division received the highest number of complaints, followed by the Connected City division.

4.9.1. There was increase in complaints addressing continuous missed bin collections and the maintenance of parks.

4.10. 58% of complaints were closed in ten (10) days or less, in accordance with the City’s Complaints Management Policy, whilst the remaining 42% took longer to investigate and resolve. All formal complaints have been resolved for the 2023-24 FY

4.11. Graphics mapping the complaint data can be found at Attachment A.

Compliments

4.12. The number of compliments recorded for the 2023-24 period was 141.

4.12.1. Approximately 40% of the compliments related to the actions of the Connected City Division, with the next highest division being City Life at 33%.

4.12.2. The Connected City Division compliments comprised of 39 compliments for exceptional customer service and 12 for service delivery.

4.12.3. The City Life Division compliments comprised of 20 for exceptional customer service and 20 compliments for service delivery.

4.12.4. The City Welcome unit, in the Connected City Division, received the most compliments with 42 and the Business unit of Open Space parks and Waterways with the second most at 17.

4.12.4.1. The compliments for City Welcome were mainly around exceptional Customer Service and a majority of these were from the Tasmanian Information and Travel Centre.

5. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1. Section 339F (5) of the Local Government Act 1993 requires the General Manager to provide the Council with a report at least once a year on the number and nature of complaints received against the Customer Service Charter.

6. Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital

6.1. Identity Statement 7 – How we engage in Civic Life

7.1 We are active on issues that are important to us.

7.3 Government is a big force in city life and we want it to reflect and reinforce what we value about Hobart

7. Capital City Strategic Plan

7.1. Pillar 8 – Governance and Civic Involvement

8.1 Hobart is a city that is well governed that recognises the community as an active partner that informs decisions.

8.1.1 Build community trust through the implementation of effective civic leadership, ethical conduct and responsible governance processes that ensure accountability, transparency and compliance with all legislated and statutory requirements.

8.1.4 Ensure communications are clear, consistent, timely and accessible for all.

8.2 Hobart is a city that delivers public value and excellence by being a financially responsible, high performing and accountable organisation that is responsive to the needs of the community.

8.2.4 Achieve improved customer service and experiences by enabling a customer-focused approach to service delivery.

8.2.9 Make effective use of research, evaluation and data to inform the City’s work.

8. Financial Viability

8.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

8.1.1. There is no financial impact of this report.

8.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

8.2.1. There is no financial impact of this report.

8.3. Asset Related Implications

8.3.1. N/A

9. Innovation and Continuous Improvement

9.1. The City is undertaking a project to review data capturing systems and processes along with refining existing reporting frameworks. The project aims to produce an outcome that results in improved customer interface and experience with the City.

9.2. As part of this project, it is proposed that the categorisation of compliments will be developed to align with the complaints categories of response times, employee behaviour and general Council process or handling of a service.

10. Collaboration

10.1. This report has been prepared with input from the City ICT and Data unit.

10.2. The process of acknowledging, responding to and addressing customer complaints and compliments, as they relate to employee behaviour, service delivery or communications, is an organisational wide effort.

Kat Oates

Customer Service Team Leader

Robert Matson

Acting Manager City Welcome

Felicity Edwards

Acting Director Connected City

Date: 2 October 2024

File Reference: F24/69639

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 108

14/10/2024

Motions of which notice has been given

IN ACCORDANCE WITH REGULATION 16(5) OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT (MEETING PROCEDURES) REGULATIONS 2015

21. Red-Light Enforcement

File Ref: F24/88792

Councillors Posselt and Lohberger

Motion

“That:

1. The City of Hobart write to the Transport Minister, Department of State Growth and Tasmania Police requesting regular enforcement action of red-light compliance on the intersections listed below:

a. Macquarie/Elizabeth

b. Macquarie/Murray

c. Davey/Campbell

d. Davey/Elizabeth

e. Davey/Murray

f. Risdon/New Town

2. The City note that combined speed and red-light cameras yield a high success rate and have been used successfully in other states of Australia.”

Rationale:

“In a review of the Pedestrian only signal phasing (scramble crossings), it was noted that Tasmanian’s have an unusually high rate of “redlight running” when compared to mainland counterparts. Anecdotal evidence abounds that suggests an increasing frequency of drivers disobeying red signals at intersections all around Hobart.

This is particularly concerning in areas with high pedestrian density and/or vulnerable road users. Cr Posselt wrote to the Transport Minister, Eric Abetz on 7^th May requesting enforcement action in the form of a speed/redlight camera at the intersection of Macquarie and Elizabeth Street. A response was received on 27^th June noting that red light running was not a primary contributor to fatal or serious injuries in Tasmania. In the five years between 2017 and 2022, failure to obey signals was a causal factor in just 2.2% of all fatal or serious injury crashes. We contend that given the dispersed nature of the Tasmanian population and the very limited number of traffic signal controlled intersections, that 2.2% is in-fact an over representation. What is more, City liveability and pedestrian comfort are not considered when we only review crash statistics. What is the psychological effect when time and again pedestrians witness vehicles progressing through busy intersections at speed as the green walking man signal appears for them to cross the road?

It limits the users trust in the signal system we have, and this is worsened by the number of pedestrians killed or injured in the Hobart CBD while crossing on a green walking man in recent years. It means that parents won’t trust their children will be able to move independently throughout the city. Equally it means that people with elderly relatives may not be confident with them moving independently through the city either. It results in a less comfortable CBD, where fewer people want to come and where some visitors preference intracity car use over walking.

This is borne out in evidence from Near Data that shows many cruise ship passengers do not cross the couplets of Macquarie and Davey streets to spend time and money in Hobart’s CBD because they view the traffic volumes and driver behaviour as too hostile to negotiate.

This rationale shows that drivers breaking the law are having an negative impact on life in the City of Hobart, decreasing trade, decreasing amenity and decreasing the subjective impression of safety. It is important to note that in the response to the written to Minister Abetz, State Growth was unable to provide/determine the number of red-light runners at Elizabeth Street and Macquarie street due to a lack of data despite the integrated signal control system known as SCATS collecting this data.

Other states have addressed this problem with use of combined red light speed cameras, such as NSW that has implemented this technology at 237 intersections around the state. You can read more about their camera program at the links below.

www.nsw.gov.au/driving-boating-and-transport/roads-safety-and-rules/safe-driving/speed-limits-and-cameras/red-light-speed-cameras

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/system/files/media/documents/2023/automated_enforcement_strategy.pdf”

Administration Response to Notice of Motion

Discussion

1. The ‘Hobart Transport Strategy 2024’, while focusing more on those matters that are part of the responsibilities under the direct control of the City of Hobart, outlines the City of Hobarts support for the Tasmanian Governments ‘Towards Zero – Tasmanian Road Safety Strategy 2017-2026’.

2. In particular, the ‘Hobart Transport Strategy 2024’ supports the Safe System Approach used in the ‘Towards Zero’ strategy, and its underpinning elements, one of which is “Safe Road Users – encouraging safe behaviour through education, enforcement and regulation’.

3. Increased effective enforcement of road rules in the City of Hobart municipal area would be expected to improve compliance with the road rules and reduce the over risk and consequence of crashes.

4. It needs to be acknowledged however that enforcement by individual Tasmania Police officers is a resource intensive activity, and in busy CBD locations, would be problematic in terms of being able to safely and efficiently pull over vehicles and effectively process the infringements.

5. It should also be acknowledged that in terms of enforcing compliance with traffic signals in the Hobart CBD, a significant majority of road users breaching the road rules would be pedestrians who do not always commence their crossing movements while the ‘green’ pedestrian lantern is operating, and do not always cross within the designated crossing locations.

6. A key direction of the States ‘Towards Zero’ strategy is to ‘Increase enforcement through technology to reduce speed related serious casualty crashes’, and in recent years the State has actioned this through the reintroduction of a number of mobile detection and enforcement trailers and devices that they deploy across the state.

7. These devices would currently be being deployed in locations where in the view of the State Government they would be most effective in reducing the rate of serious and fatal crashes in the state, given the overriding goal of the ‘Towards Zero’ strategy that has driven their purchase is to reduce the number of serios and fatal crashes in the state to less than 200 incidents per year.

8. In recent months officers of the City Mobility Unit have been in discussion with officers from the State Government and understand that the state will be releasing a consultation in October 2024 regarding a planned Speed Management Strategy that they are seeking to develop.

9. The current Tasmanian Government ‘Towards Zero – Tasmanian Road Safety Strategy 2017-2026’, is also expected to be reviewed and updated as we approach the 2026 end date of the current strategy.

10. Council officers will be engaging with representatives of the State Government on the development of these strategies, to ensure that the City of Hobart directions as outlined in the council endorsed ‘Hobart Transport Strategy 2024’ are considered and addressed in the development of those strategies.

11. Should Council resolve in accordance with the proposed motion, officers will ensure that that motion is actioned by direct correspondence and will include the matters outlined in the motion in any submissions made by the City of Hobart to the State Government on their proposed Speed Management Strategy, and their anticipated renewal of the Tasmanian Road Safety Strategy.

12. It should be noted that the identification and selection of individual junctions for enforcement action, while understandable, would best be determined by the Tasmania Police and Department of State Growth, given their greater level of knowledge about the behaviours and constraints of individual sites. While the City of Hobart may suggest sites that we ask to be priorities, if the Tasmania Police and Department of State Growth are of the view that there are other intersections in the City of Hobart that can be more effectively enforced given constraints on resourcing, we would generally support those decisions.

Strategic, Legislative and Policy Implications
Capital City Strategic Plan
Pillar:	PILLAR 5 - MOVEMENT AND CONNECTIVITY We are a city where everyone has effective, safe, healthy and environmentally friendly ways to move and connect, with people, information and goods, and to and through spaces and the natural environment. We are able to maintain a pace of life that allows us to fulfil our needs, such as work, study, business, socialising, recreation, accessing services, shopping, entertainment and spending time with loved ones.
Outcome:	OUTCOME 5.1 An accessible and connected city environment helps maintain Hobart’s pace of life. OUTCOME 5.2 Hobart has effective and environmentally sustainable transport systems. OUTCOME 5.3 Technology serves Hobart communities and visitors and enhances quality of life.
Strategy:	5.1.3 Partner with Greater Hobart Councils and state and federal government to explore regional initiatives to improve transport networks. 5.1.4 Collaborate with stakeholders and business on accessible, efficient, sustainable and innovative movement of people, information and goods. 5.1.6 Investigate transport and technology possibilities that meet the needs of daily life, are accessible, and reinforce values of sustainability and connection. 5.1.8 Consider children and family needs in city mobility planning. 5.2.6 Identify and implement infrastructure improvements to enhance access and road safety and reduce air and noise pollution. 5.2.7 Develop, upgrade and maintain the City’s network of roads, bridges, cycleways, footpaths and walkways to ensure they are safe, accessible and sustainable. 5.3.1 Use technology, including in assets and new civil infrastructure, to respond to challenges and enhance quality of life, in line with the community vision. 5.3.2 Embrace opportunities to use innovative technologies to support and manage transport networks and help us achieve the vision of being a vibrant and sustainable city. 5.3.3 Respond to the current trends and future opportunities of the smart cities concept and associated technologies. 5.3.6 Test the benefits of emerging technologies, providing insights for strategic, operational and legislative change.
Legislation and Policy
Legislation:	Not applicable
Policy:	Not applicable

Financial Implications

1. The preparation of correspondence to, and any subsequent discussions with, the Transport Minister, Department of State Growth and Tasmania Police would have no direct financial impact on the City of Hobart.

Attachment a: Correspondence with Minister Abetz Road Safety Week

Item No. 22

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 114

14/10/2024

22. Advocacy for UTAS Sandy Bay Campus

File Ref: F24/88813

Councillors Lohberger and Coats

Motion

“That the Council:

1. Note that the University of Tasmania is (outside of the State Government) the biggest economic actor in the City of Hobart, and that a thriving and successful University is critical to the success of the City, both economically and socially.

2. Note the Elector Poll result from October 2022 in which the constituents of the City of Hobart voted 74% that they do {Not} support the University of Tasmania’s proposal to relocate the Sandy Bay campus into Hobart’s central business district.

3. Note that the School of Law has announced it will not relocate from Sandy Bay, while acknowledging that the existing facilities and campus are ageing and require rejuvenation and investment.

4. Note that there is a strong desire from students and staff for the STEM faculties to remain at the Sandy Bay campus, and that the University announced in May it would reassess if STEM was to move into the City, while acknowledging that the existing facilities and campus are ageing and require rejuvenation and investment.

5. Note that the Sandy Bay campus has been deprived of funding, is ageing and requires rejuvenation and investment.

6. Note that the City of Hobart takes no position on UTAS moving into the city and respects the autonomy of UTAS for its decision making; however, like all organisations seeks to encourage the University to act in the best interests of the community.

7. Note that under the Local Government Act 1993, section 28(2)c, councillors are; “to facilitate and encourage the planning and development of the municipal area in the best interests of the community;”

8. Note that the University of Tasmania Sandy Bay site is a unique and unmatched community asset gifted for educational purposes and that it needs to be planned and developed in the best interests of the community.

9. Agrees to include these points as position statements and advocacy talking points in any formal advocacy process and/or document produced by the City of Hobart.

10. Agrees to publicly call for UTAS to adequately invest in and support the Sandy Bay Campus.”

Rationale:

“This motion does not seek to take a position on the UTAS move into the city and given the debate that has already occurred does not seek to redebate that point.

Instead, this motion simply points out that circumstances have changed since the elector poll in 2022 and that there are now parts of the University that have committed to either staying at Sandy Bay or reassessing if they will move away from Sandy Bay.

The law school is the best example of this with the Dean of the Law School professor Gino Del Pont announcing in April that the law school would be staying in Sandy Bay.

Given that the local government act stipulates that Councillors, collectively, have a responsibility to facilitate and encourage the planning and development of the municipal area in the best interests of the community, it is incumbent on councillors to encourage that the Sandy Bay campus be appropriately planned and developed.

The City of Hobart is an influential voice in any advocacy work surrounding the development of Hobart and, being a capital city, regularly meets with Federal and State Ministers, development and regulatory bodies as well as influential stakeholder groups.

We should be unafraid of encouraging development in the best interest of the community and in this instance take an active stance in encouraging a successful tenure for those elements of the University that are to be conducted from the Sandy Bay Campus.

It is entirely consistent with the goals of the City of Hobart to use our voice and advocate on behalf of the Sandy Bay campus to ensure it is as successful as possible for the elements of the University based there and to encourage investment and development of the Sandy Bay Campus for the betterment of the city.

A thriving and successful University is critical to a thriving and successful City of Hobart, and we need to be upfront in helping to advocate for, and support, the university in investing in and rejuvenating the Sandy Bay campus, especially now we know that there will be components staying there permanently.

We know that the University is struggling financially, and so when the council is meeting with state or federal decision makers and funding bodies, we need to be clear that investment to support a thriving sandy bay campus is needed to support this critical institution for our city and is something the city supports notwithstanding having no position on the city move.

We also need to call on the University to ensure that they adequately invest in and support the Sandy Bay campus so it doesn’t fall further into poor condition.

Administration Response to Notice of Motion

Discussion

1. Over the past year or so, work has commenced on preparing a Neighbourhood Plan for Mount Nelson and Sandy Bay. This plan is aimed at guiding the sustainable growth and development of this area over the course of a 20-year planning horizon, to 2044.

2. The first step of the project was undertaken in 2023 and involved an extensive engagement program to consult key stakeholders and the community regarding various issues and opportunities outlined in a Discussion Paper.

3. Council was then advised at the 29 April 2024 meeting on the outcomes of the engagement process and that the next step involved with progressing the plan would be preparing a Directions paper.

4. This paper will examine a range of different scenarios to guide the future redevelopment of the UTAS Sandy Bay campus including the substantial retention of an educational use on the site.

5. Another key component of the Directions Paper will be a detailed report analysing the capacity of both the Sandy Bay and Lower Sandy Bay Activity (Shopping) Centres to accommodate medium density development in the form of a Built Form Framework and Guidelines.

6. Additionally, in response to community feedback regarding heritage protection, Council has engaged heritage consultants to investigate the current gaps in the statutory historic heritage listings in the study area and examine options for their ongoing future management.

7. It is expected that the Directions Paper will be presented to Council in early 2025 and will subsequently be placed on public exhibition to seek feedback from the community and key stakeholders.

8. This paper will then inform the recommendations to be included in the draft Neighbourhood Plan that will be developed in the later part of 2025.

9. Any advocacy that the Council may undertake in relation to funding for the Sandy Bay campus for example would be more effective were it to align with the endorsed Neighbourhood Plan and any corresponding investment by UTAS in the campus.

Strategic, Legislative and Policy Implications
Capital City Strategic Plan
Pillar:	7.1.7. Pillar 7. Built Environment
Outcome:	Outcome: 7.1 Hobart has a diverse supply of housing and affordable homes. Outcome: 7.2 Development enhances Hobart's unique identity, human scale and built heritage. Outcome: 7.3 Infrastructure and services are planned, managed and maintained to provide for community wellbeing. Outcome: 7.4 Community involvement and an understanding of future needs help guide changes to Hobart's built environment
Strategy:	Hobart: A community Vision for our Island Capital
Legislation and Policy
Legislation:	Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993
Policy:	The State Government's 30-Year Greater Hobart Plan 2022 and 30-Year Greater Hobart Plan: Strategy for Growth and Change 2022. The Southern Tasmanian Regional Land Use Strategy.

Financial Implications

1. Funding for Neighbourhood Plan has been allocated within the 24/25 budget for the City Futures Divisional.

2. The Neighbourhood Plan will outline a strategic approach to implementing its recommendations that may require funding in future years.

3. The financial implications for Council assets will be addressed in the implementation plan phase of the project for consideration in future years.