Agenda of The Hobart Workshop Committee Meeting

Agenda (Open Portion)

The Hobart Workshop Committee Meeting

Page 1

16/6/2025

The Hobart Workshop Committee Meeting (Open Portion) held Monday, 16 June 2025 at 4.00pm in the Lady Osborne Room.

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

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Councillor W F Harvey (Chairperson)

Deputy Lord Mayor Councillor Dr Z E Sherlock

Councillor J L Kelly

Alderman L A Bloomfield

Councillor R J Posselt

Councillor B Lohberger

Councillor G H Kitsos

NOMINEE MEMBERS

Lord Mayor Councillor A M Reynolds

Alderman M Zucco

Councillor M S C Dutta

Councillor W N S Coats

Apologies:

Leave of Absence: Nil.

1. Acknowledgement of Country

2. Confirmation of Minutes

The minutes of the Open Portion of the Hobart Workshop Committee meeting held on Monday, 19 May 2025, are submitted for confirming as an accurate record.

3. Consideration of Supplementary Items

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

Recommendation

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

4. Indications of Pecuniary and Conflicts of Interest

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

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

5. Transfer of Agenda Items

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

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

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

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

Item No. 6.3

Agenda (Open Portion)

The Hobart Workshop Committee Meeting

Page 1

16/6/2025

Memorandum: Hobart Workshop Committee

Place & Wellbeing Committee

The purpose of this report is to inform the Hobart Workshop Committee of the outcomes of the Place & Wellbeing Committee meeting of 15 April 2025.

The key focus of this first meeting to come together as a new Committee and to introduce the Committee to a number of key current City of Hobart projects in the Place and Welling space.

Members of the Committee each provided a brief individual summary of their interests and background as relevant to the Committee, as well as what they hoped their involvement with the Committee could achieve.

The Committee was keen to learn more about City of Hobart strategies relevant to the Committee and has strong interest in developing a Workplan.

A draft program of agenda items for the future meetings will be shared with the Committee at the 17 June meeting, with this leading to the development of a forward Workplan.

At the request of the Committee, a compendium or diagram showing the interrelationship between relevant City of Hobart Strategies will be made available to the Committee via the Hub.

The following topics were presented to the 15 April meeting:

· An overview of current/in development Sport and Recreation Master Plans.

· An overview of Sport and Recreation facilities and operations.

· Workshop – Hobart Design Guidelines.

· An overview of the City’s Community and Inclusion programs.

In reflecting on the outcomes of the 15 April meeting and taking account of feedback from Committee members, the Co-Chairpersons will apply a revised approach for future meetings.

This will emphasise the meaningful and purposeful engagement and participation by community Committee members, and feature the following structure:

· Only two topics will be discussion at each meeting. 

· These will be short presentations (10 minutes maximum) with a facilitated/led workshop/or participant driven active discussion. 

· The remaining time will be applied informal interaction/mingling, and light bulb/blue sky ideas.

REcommendation

That the Hobart Workshop Committee receive and note the minutes of the Place & Wellbeing Committee of 15 April 2025, marked as attachment A.

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.

Philip Holliday

Manager Place Design, Sport and Recreation

Date: 5 June 2025

File Reference: F25/35602

Attachment a: Place and Wellbeing Committee Notes - 15 April 2025 (Supporting information)

Item No. 7.2

Agenda (Open Portion)

The Hobart Workshop Committee Meeting

Page 1

16/6/2025

REPORT TITLE: Elected Member Legal Costs

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Manager Legal and Corporate Governance

Director Corporate Services

1. Report Summary and Key Issue

1.1. This report represents the conclusion of a sector-wide process to understand the implications of the ‘McCullagh’ decision and what those implications have on Council’s existing reimbursement policy for elected members.

1.2. Following the ‘McCullagh’ decision handed down by the Supreme Court of Tasmania the state’s local government sector has been working through a process to understand the rationale of the Court’s decision and the associated implications for Councils.

1.3. The implications of the decision impact on both the provision of ‘in-kind’ and financial support a council may give to an elected member or officer, when they are acting in a personal capacity, in addition to the Code of Conduct framework, reimbursement for legal advice, or coverage under the relevant insurance policy.

1.4. McCullagh is expressly clear, in the context of the tort of defamation, and the Defamation Act 2005 (Tas) that elected members, and staff, have no legal basis to expect public funds to be used for the purpose of initiating a defamation action. It also makes clear that councils are not ‘litigation funders’ and that doing so is unlawful.

1.5. The reasoning for the Court adopting this position is that defamation is at its core a personal tort where the aggrieved party (as an individual) can be awarded compensation/damages, or the defendant can be ordered to make a personal apology.

1.6. The McCullagh decision can be viewed as covering the field for personal/private matters that may be actionable under tort, or a related statute. However, the case doesn’t ‘cover the field’ on all matters and should be viewed as confined to a determination on the facts of the case, but highly persuasive when considering similar matters. Torts have their origins as civil claims an individual can bring against another individual, or in some cases a corporation. Examples include trespass, nuisance and negligence.

1.7. McCullagh can also be viewed as authority for the proposition that public funds, and resources, cannot be used to support a councillor, or employee, to defend a complaint or legal matter that is at its heart of a personal nature. Even if that matter has its ‘genesis’ on account of the individual’s role with the council. It is this part of the Court’s ruling that has required the most careful consideration.

1.8. As with all legal precedents there are exceptions to the general rules. One such example, under the right set of circumstances, could be where a mayor or elected member has been delegated to act as ‘spokesman,’ within the definition of section 27 of the Local Government Act 1993. Under this scenario a councillor has been authorised under the Act to carry out a specific statutory function, namely, to publicly communicate the agreed position of the council.

1.9. It follows that the councillor is not acting in an individual capacity as they are fulfilling a specific statutory function under a relevant delegation from Council.

1.10. It is noted that councils owe both staff and councillors a legal duty, on a series of matters, when they are carrying out their roles and functions. Under this narrow set of circumstance, it may be open to council to provide support under the relevant policy framework, but decisions would be on a case-by-case basis and informed by legal advice.

1.11. To better understand these issues the Local Government Association of Tasmania (LGAT) engaged Mr Michael O’Farrell SC to provide advice on ‘McCullagh’ in relation to elected member legal expenses, associated insurance coverage and the Code of Conduct process.

1.12. The O’Farrell advice also provided guidance on the interplay between the McCullagh reasoning and what role the Council had (if any) in either reimbursing councillors or expending public money on the provision of legal advice relating to a Code of Conduct complaint.

1.13. LGAT’s view was also sought on the advice and associated recommendations of this report, they were supportive of the City’s view.

1.14. The external advice provided by Mr O’Farrell SC demonstrates that elements of Council’s existing ‘Elected Member Development & Support Policy’ require amendment.

1.15. A revised draft Policy is provided for Council’s feedback. The necessary changes (and associated reasoning) are summarised as follows:

Key Policy Changes

1.15.1. a council is not lawfully permitted to make a policy to provide for the reimbursement of legal expenses incurred by councillors defending code of conduct complaints (including complaints commenced by fellow councillors). Those costs are to be borne by the councillor;

1.15.2. The Council must bear the liability and cost involved in a legal action where an Elected Member who exercises a power or performs a function under the Local Government Act 1993 or another Act (or purports to do so) in good faith; and

1.15.3. The Council cannot provide for the payment of legal fees for advice, or proceedings where an Elected Member may personally take against another person (ie defamation).

1.15.4. The Council, by its own motion, has no power to either approve expenditure, or reimbursement on those matters per the McCullagh decision and O’Farrell advice.

1.15.5. Council cannot rely upon any policy, procedure or own motion as a way of circumventing the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993, or McCullagh in situations where a position (or decision) of the Council is in tension with the Act or the finding of the Supreme Court.

1.15.6. These matters are not unusual in the sense that the Council’s policy suite is entirely subordinate to both the Act and common law. Should a situation arise where a policy sought to be invoked in a matter inconsistent with the Law, the Council decision (if made) would be likely unlawful. It would be open to the CEO, or their delegate to refuse to approve or action or incur the associated expense.

2. Workshop purpose

2.1. For the Committee to note:

2.1.1. the draft Report and provides feedback on the draft Policy; and

2.1.2. the draft Policy will be listed at an ordinary meeting of the Council for ratification.

3. Discussion and Background

3.1. There is now a uniform legal view as to the implications of the Court’s decision and the associated sections of the Act, which by default has determined that parts of the existing Section Q of Council’s relevant policy are invalid.

3.2. Given the above matters, Council is required to amend the relevant provisions of the Policy. The revised section Q is attached to this report as Attachment A.

3.3. Noting that a decision is not being made at the Workshop, feedback is simply being sought on the draft Policy and that the associated report detailing the redefined legal landscape post McCullagh be noted.

4. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

4.1. The proposed amendments to the Elected Member Development & Support Policy are administrative in nature. As detailed in the report, elements of the existing Section Q, particularly as it pertains to Code of Conduct expenses are ultra vires.

4.2. Council has never had a lawful justification to reimburse, or otherwise support a councillor in the context of the Code of Conduct framework, nor in relation to expenses related to personal matters that are unconnected to, or tenuously linked to the statutory roles and functions they are required to undertake.

4.3. The previous policy settings were implemented in good faith on an understanding of the law prior to the McCullagh decision, with Elected Members and officers rightfully acting in reliance of the Policy.

4.4. Such circumstances, while unusual, potentially fall within section 341 of the Local Government Act where a councillor is immune from personal liability if they have acted in good faith.

4.5. Council must comply with the provisions of the Local Government Act, and rulings of the Supreme Court of Tasmania.

4.6. The proposed amendments are the product of legal advice, which should be taken as advice within the definition of section 65 of the Local Government Act.

5. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

5.1. Council is required to have a robust policy suite reflective of the relevant legislative provisions for the local government sector. Amending the defective components of the Policy will ensure this remains the case.

6. Financial and Economic Considerations

6.1. Financial Considerations:

There is no cost implication associated with the updating of the Policy.

There will be no impact on FTE costs or the need for additional resourcing.

	2024-25	2025-26	2026-27	2027-28
	$’000	$’000	$’000	$’000

Revenue
Existing Revenue
Additional Revenue
Total Revenue	0	0	0	0

Expenditure
Operating
Capital
Total Expenditure	0	0	0	0

Net Cost	0	0	0	0

FTE Impact

	2024-25	2025-26	2026-27	2027-28

Change in FTE	na	na	na	na

Detail the change in the level of full-time equivalents within the group should the requested level of additional funding be required.

6.2. City Economy Strategy:

6.2.1. The City Economy Strategy does not apply to the proposed Policy changes.

6.3. Economic Impact:

6.3.1. There is no broader Economic Impact associated with the proposed Policy changes.

6.4. Consultants

6.4.1. The advice from Mr Michael O’Farrell SC was procured via the Local Government Association of Tasmania.

7. Climate and Sustainability Considerations

7.1. Climate and sustainability considerations are not applicable to the proposed Policy changes.

8. Community and Business Engagement and Collaboration

8.1. Community and business engagement and collaboration are not applicable to the proposed Policy changes.

9. Implementation and Communications Plan

9.1. If agreed, the proposed amendments to the Policy will be updated on Council’s website.

Wes Young

Manager Legal and Corporate Governance

Michael Reynolds

Director Corporate Services

Date: 11 June 2025

File Reference: F25/43120

Attachment a: Proposed Section Q - Elected Members Development and Support Policy (Supporting information)

Item No. 8.3

Agenda (Open Portion)

The Hobart Workshop Committee Meeting

Page 1

16/6/2025

memorandum: Lord Mayor
Deputy lord Mayor
Elected members

Domain Masterplan

Meeting: Hobart Workshop Committee

Meeting date: 24 March 2025

Raised by: Lord Mayor Councillor Reynolds

Question:

With relation to the Queens Domain Masterplan 2013-2033, can the relevant Director provide an update on the implementation of Strategy 5.4 (Four Modes of Transport).

Response:

Since the endorsement of the Queens Domain Master Plan 2013-2033, significant investment has been made across the Queens Domain to improve the facilities and access. These include:

· Construction of the Rose Garden Bridge.

· Construction of the Bridge of Remembrance.

· Construction of Legacy Park Community Hub.

· Enhancement of Max’s Infinity Loop.

· Implementation of City To Gardens Way and other principal trail upgrades.

The Queens Domain continues to be a central part of the lives of many Hobartians, and the Queens Domain Master Plan has been critical in guiding its development in a consistent and structured manner.

There are 44 actions identified in section 5.4 (modes of transport) and a summary of progress against each action is as follows. Many actions have either been completed or significantly progressed. Others are in various stages of design. Some are progressively and opportunistically implemented as part of asset renewal, with some of the actions not being progressed either because they are not considered appropriate following broader changes across Greater Hobart (eg.The Northern Access Road, the Northern Suburbs Transit Corridor, Derwent Ferries) or because they are now less of a priority compared to other projects within the Queens Domain and across the City.

Action Number	Action Description	Comment
Cars
1	Close the Lower Domain Road from the Domain Highway through to RTBG [12] to create increased parking and improved safety at the entry to the RTBG. This action may require examination through a trial closure and/or progressive implementation/staging to condition drivers to the changes to the operation of the road.	This section is currently closed off for the Taswater Rising Main project and the impacts are being monitored. There are currently no plans to permanently close off this section of the road as any changes would need to be considered alongside the Northern Access Road and consider safety and accessibility implications.
2	Consider closing the loop of the summit road and terminating the road at the uppermost car park to create a pedestrian safe walking path around the summit with good grade access to the lookout area whilst still retaining close road access to the Wireless institute.	Plans for the Queens Domain Summit have been developed. Consideration will be given in future years for implementation.
3	Establish a clear hierarchy of road treatments elsewhere that indicates to drivers that they are in a park environment and that their driving behaviour should be modified accordingly including through: » introduction of a 40kph speed limit across the whole of the Domain » centre line, edge line and bike lane marking throughout » clear delineation between vehicle and walking/cycling interface (i.e. using bollards or different pavement surfaces or line-marking and road paint.	Upgrades to road surface (including line marking) occur opportunistically as assets require renewal. Reduction to a 40km speed limit has not been undertaken. Additional trails have been established throughout the Domain to allow pedestrian movement away from vehicles.
4	Renaming of the principle road loop to be the Lower Domain Parkway (not Lower Domain Road) and the Upper Domain Parkway (not Upper Domain Road).	Has not been progressed.
5	Improve appearance of road shoulders through formed edge treatments (i.e. flush kerbs), dolerite lining and planting of swale drains, and improved maintenance regimes.	Opportunistically progressed as part of asset renewal.
...and Car Parks
6	Rationalise off-road parking through progressive removal of gravel car parks and progressive replacement with sealed, marked, landscaped and contained parking lots giving particular attention to areas at McVilly Drive, the TCA, Soldiers Memorial Oval and on Upper Domain Road above Allambee Crescent.	The McVilly Drive carpark work is complete. Design work has been completed for the TCA carpark and the project is ready to lodge for DA when funding is available. Soldiers Memorial Carpark works have been completed. The Allambee Crescent carpark remains a gravel surface.
7	Develop a strategy for prioritising paid/unpaid, time bound/unbound parking across the Domain related to adjacent uses and the need for shorter term parking in some areas and for Council recovery of some of its costs in investment in improvements to the Domain.	The paid and time bound parking locations across the Domain have been periodically reviewed and changes made as required. There is now paid parking near the TCA, Upper Domain Road above Allambee Crescent and parking on Lower Domain Road (near Government House). Funds are allocated to the Queens Domain Parking Fund.
8	Identify and designate overflow parking areas for use in peak events.	The Regatta Grounds is used periodically for overflow parking. There are at times parking shortages around the Athletics Centre during large events with some changes to time zone in the area reducing this impact.
9	Dynamically manage’ peak events parking as required including use of designated overflow areas (as above), the use of parking marshals, shuttle bus links to offsite car parks and/or promotion/underwriting of public transport.	There have been very few events on the Domain over the past 12 years which would have justified these actions.
10	Consider opportunities for implementation of water sensitive design practices and initiatives in all parking areas.	Included in designs for the TCA carpark.
Public Transport
11	Improve ferry facilities at Pavilion Point (RTBG) and develop a new ferry terminal at Regatta Point.	Since the development of the QDMP there has been significant work on the development on the best placement of ferry terminals around the City. This work is ongoing.
12	Create and designate bus and taxi lay-by and parking areas at key destinations (Cenotaph, Regatta Grounds, Aquatic Centre, University Campus, Domain Tennis Centre, TAC and DAC).	Bus lay-bys have been installed at the Domain Athletic Centre following the redevelopment of the car park in 2015. The zones tend to be used for buses also utilising DKHAC.
13	Promote the concept of a public transit corridor (light rail line or an express bus lane) on the existing rail line (soon to be made redundant) with transit stops at the RTBG and the regatta Ground.	The City has advocated for the Northern Suburbs Transit Corridor as part of the Hobart City Deal.
Walking
14	Establish a hierarchy of paths that link important nodes and provide comfortable pedestrian access within the Domain.	Significant progress since 2013. 1. Three km of new shared use track built to provide off-road access to summit from the crossroads junction - very highly used (2015). 2. City to Gardens Way- 1km new shared use class 2 path linking SMA to RTBG (2024). 3. Max's infinity Loop - significant upgrade of 2.5km (2019). 4. Upgraded the shared use path linking SMO to TCA - on both the eastern and western side of the DAC (2015).
15	Provide ‘universal access’ where possible (natural topography likely constrains the potential for this to be consistently achieved).	Progress. 1. MTB - refurbishment to top half of figure 8 of summit loop to make accessible to adapted MTB (2024). 2. City to Gardens Way - 1km new shared use path linking SMA to RTBG (2024).
16	Rename the Joggers Loop, the ‘Upper Domain Walk’ to better express its role in the activation of the Domain.	Completed. The Joggers Loop was renamed to Max’s Infinity Loop. Major refurbishment / upgrade of the loop with soft fall for half the width completed in 2019.
17	Maintain and promote the Inner City Cycleway as a regionally important asset.	The City continues to maintain the inner City Cycleway and recognises its importance as a regional asset. The City is looking to enhance data collection on user numbers in the short term.
18	Improve the linkage between the Powder Jetty and the Inner City Cycleway for pedestrians, install seating in an appropriate location (i.e. address conservation policies) and present and tell its story.	Not progressed as is not considered a priority.
19	Explore opportunities to create a pedestrian only foreshore track between Pavilion Point and regatta Point similar to the existing path from Cornelian Bay track.	Path planning not progressed at this time. Significant conservation - environmental rehabilitation has been implemented around the powder magazine jetty and the seagull site adjoining the sea scouts.
20	Complete the Cornelian Bay Walk through to the former RTBG rail platform and on to the intersection with the slip road to the old ANM shed site.	Significant progress. New railway crossing built to enable people to follow coast bush path from boatsheds then cross railway line to the ICC and get to the RTBG. Not possible to completely follow the foreshore. One section near rail crossing is currently subject to a Council resolution from 28 January 2025 arising from a NOM raised by Cr Lohgberger - regarding repairing foreshore erosion.
21	Implement the City to Gardens Way project (Section 5.3).	Significant progress. 1km new shared use path linking SMA to RTBG (2024).
22	Widen and upgrade the path surface to a high order standard and install pedestrian scale lighting along the existing path along the Upper Domain Parkway between the THAC and the Soldiers Memorial Oval.	Design has been completed for Stage 1 of the project to improve the link between the DKHAC and the DTC which will include crossing points. Stage 2 which has not yet been designed will link the TCA South and TCA North car parks.
23	Create a new contoured path from the Soldiers Memorial oval through to the DTC.	Significant progress. Upgraded the shared use path linking SMO to TCA - on both the eastern and western side of the DAC. A significant gap remains from TCA to DTC on western side - but this is part of planned car parking / road / footpath works.
24	Complete footpath along length of Lower Domain Parkway from Domain Highway to Tasman Highway.	Designs in progress for highest priority section.
25	Construct new loop track through Pinetum subject to environmental constraints.	Significant progress. City to Gardens Way - 1km new shared use class 2 path linking SMA to RTBG - half of this runs through the pinetum. Upper pathway also formalised and signposted. A loop is now possible - however the intent of this recommendation was to feature the heritage tree collection - with interpretation as well - which is not complete.
26	Develop new shared path along Upper Carriage Drive to link intersection with Tasman Lookout road.	No longer considered a priority due to alternative links.
27	Complete Soldiers Memorial Avenue.	Completed. The avenue is now listed on the Councils Significant Tree Register and the Tasmanian Heritage Register (2021).
28	Link Soldiers Memorial Avenue to Summit Loop track.	Completed.
29	Retain dog exercise and off-lead areas in current locations.	Dog off lead areas is managed through Dog Management Strategy.
Cycling
30	The principle trails on the Domain to be shared links unless there is a specific physical, safety or experiential need to separate pedestrians from cycle movements.	Completed. All principle trails are shared links.
31	Investigate new contour loop mountain track below Summit Loop.	Completed as part of summit loop. Three km of new shared use track built to provide off-road access to summit from the crossroads junction - very highly used (2015).
32	Investigate new western face mountain bike track.	Completed as part of summit loop. Three km of new shared use track built to provide off-road access to summit from the crossroads junction - very highly used (2015).
33	Promote entry level cycling and skills training for individuals and families on both road bikes and mountain bikes including development of: » a family learn to ride circuit around Summit Loop Road » off-road circuit of paths on designated fire access routes for introductory mountain bike riding (minimum width, surface standard treatment and drainage as required to minimise erosion) » install skills features in appropriate locations throughout the path network.	Significant progress. 1. Three km of new shared use track built to provide off-road access to summit from the crossroads junction - very highly used. 2. Max's Loop upgrade. 3. intro (green easy) - MTB - as per an upgraded shared use path linking SMO to TCA - on both the eastern and western side of the DAC. Skills features - not progressed.
34	Develop a designated on-road cycle path along Upper Domain Parkway.	Not progressed as not considered a priority across the network.
35	Develop an-off road shared trail linking the City to Gardens Way Project, via Soldiers Memorial Avenue to the Soldiers Memorial ovals and on to trails on the Hill.	Completed - as per projects listed above.
36	Develop an off-road bike lane along Carriage Drive.	Not progressed.
37	Adopt the recommendations of the Queens Domain Fire Management Plan for a new fire access track around the northern perimeter of the Domain and adapt the track for entry mountain bike riding.	Completed.
38	Adopt the recommendation of the Greater Hobart Regional Mountain Bike Master Plan for an off-road bike path parallel to the Brooker Highway.	The footpath along the eastern side of the Brooker was resurfaced with gravel in 2024.
39	Extend the Inner City Cycleway through to Davey Street along the existing rail corridor (in the short term extend as far as the John Colvin Stand – see Section 5.7 Regatta Ground).	No longer viable due to northern access road. Alternative cycle routes are being reviewed.
40	Establish bike stations at key facilities (upper and lower entries to the RTBG, regatta Point, THAC, DTC, DAC, TCA, Soldiers Memorial ovals).	Bike stations have been installed at DKHAC and the Cycleway
41	Develop trailhead facilities at principle access points to the Domain and at cycling destinations/starting points.	Significant progress. 1. Legacy Park is the primary one - toilets, shelters, BBQ, playground (2019) 2. Below summit loop TasWater tanks - off road car parking for 10, water fountain, bike racks at TasWater pit.
42	Develop new shared path along Upper Carriage Drive to link intersection with Tasman Lookout road.	Duplicate of action 26. No longer considered a priority due to alternative links.
43	Connect underpass at Cenotaph to new Bathurst Street bridge.	Completed.
44	Create on-road cycle link from Cleary’s Gates to Davies Avenue.	The road was upgraded, lighting installed, and a pedestrian footpath installed (2022). a defined cycle lane is not considered a priority at this stage.

David Reeve

Director Infrastructure and Assets

Date: 2 June 2025

File Reference: F25/25768; 13-1-10

Item No. 8.4

Agenda (Open Portion)

The Hobart Workshop Committee Meeting

Page 1

16/6/2025

memorandum: Lord Mayor
Deputy lord Mayor
Elected members

Council Vehicles

Meeting: Hobart Workshop Committee

Meeting date: 14 April 2025

Raised by: Councillor Elliot

Question:

1. How many vehicles does the Council provide as part of employment contracts?

2. How many vehicles does the Council provide for exclusive use by desk-based employees?

3. How many car parks does the Council provide employees?

4. How do the above figure compare to five and ten years ago?

Response:

The City currently provides a total of 57 vehicles as part of employee work contracts. Of these, 33 are allocated to staff with commuter rights, allowing use of the vehicle during business hours for a variety of operational purposes, including commuting to and from work. Private use beyond commuting is not permitted under this arrangement. These vehicles are primarily utility vehicles, although a small number are passenger vehicles, and they are actively used to support day-to-day operational activities.

The remaining 24 vehicles are assigned to staff with private use rights. These are generally passenger vehicles, with a few utility vehicles included. Employees with private use rights may use the vehicles for personal purposes outside of business hours. During business hours, however, these vehicles are made available to all staff through a pool booking system and are used for a wide range of work-related duties, including site and asset inspections, meetings with residents, and compliance and planning inspections.

There are 47 spaces in the Town Hall basement of that 33 are allocated to employee parking who have vehicles as part of their contract. In addition, there are 7 staff with private vehicles who have allocated carparks at Centre Hobart Car Park.

Over the last 5-10 years the amount of vehicles assigned to employees has varied but generally there has been a reduction for example in 2017 there was 30 vehicles for private use and 34 vehicles for commuter use.

Michael Reynolds

Director Corporate Services

Date: 11 June 2025

File Reference: F25/29304; 13-1-10

People	We care about people – our community, our customers and colleagues.
Teamwork	We collaborate both within the organisation and with external stakeholders drawing on skills and expertise for the benefit of our community.
Focus and Direction	We have clear goals and plans to achieve sustainable social, environmental and economic outcomes for the Hobart community.
Creativity and Innovation	We embrace new approaches and continuously improve to achieve better outcomes for our community.
Accountability	We are transparent, work to high ethical and professional standards and are accountable for delivering outcomes for our community.