AGENDA

OPEN PORTION OF THE Council Meeting

Monday, 20 February 2023

AT 5.00 pm

 




 

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 5

 

20/2/2023

 

 

ORDER OF BUSINESS

 

APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE

1.        Acknowledgement of Country. 6

2.        Confirmation of Minutes. 6

3.        Transfer of Agenda Items. 7

4.        Communication from the Chairman. 7

5.        Notification of Council WorKshops. 7

6.        Public Question Time. 8

7.        Petitions. 8

8.        Consideration of Supplementary Items. 8

9.        Indications of Pecuniary and Conflicts Of Interest. 8

Officer Reports. 9

10.     Elected Member Model Code of Conduct Review.. 9

11.     Response to Petition - Keep Council Local 18

12.     Response to Petition - Name Change Macquarie Street 24

13.     Procurement - Quotation Exemption Report 31

14.     Parking Discount Scheme Options. 44

15.     Notice of Motion Response - UTAS Community Consultation. 52

16.     Relocation of Vehicles from Bidencopes Lane to Centrepoint Carpark. 56

17.     Financial Report as at 31st December 2022. 64

18.     City of Hobart Submission to Wellington Park Visitor Recreation Draft Strategy  73

19.     Request to Install Memorial Plaque - Iranian Community - Women, Life, Freedom Campaign. 78

Report of the Chief Executive Officer

20.     Annual General Meeting Motions. 91

Motions of which notice has been given

21.     Culture and Workforce - Strategic Plan. 93

22.     Change rooms, toilets and showers. 96

23.     'Whole of House' Short Stay Accommodation Permits. 101

24.     Inclusive and Welcoming City. 104

25.     QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE. 112

26.     Closed Portion Of The Meeting.. 113

 


 

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 8

 

20/2/2023

 

 

A meeting of the Open Portion of the Council will be held in the Council Chamber, Town Hall on Monday, 20 February 2023 at 5.00 pm.

 

Kelly Grigsby

Chief Executive Officer

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).

This meeting of the Council is held in accordance with a Notice issued by the Premier

on 31 March 2022 under section 18 of the COVID-19 Disease Emergency

(Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020.

ELECTED MEMBERS:

Lord Mayor A M Reynolds

Deputy Lord Mayor H Burnet

Alderman M Zucco

Councillor W F Harvey

Alderman S Behrakis

Councillor M S C Dutta

Councillor Dr Z E Sherlock

Councillor J L Kelly

Councillor L M Elliot

Alderman L A Bloomfield

Councillor R J Posselt

Councillor B Lohberger

APOLOGIES:

 

 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE: Nil.

 

1.       Acknowledgement of Country

 

2.       Confirmation of Minutes

 

The Chairman reports that she has perused the minutes of the meeting of the Open Portion of the:

·         Council meeting held on Monday, 23 January 2023,

·         Finance and Governance Committee meeting held on Tuesday, 23 August 2022,

·         City Infrastructure Committee meeting held on Wednesday, 31 August 2022,

·         Economic Development and Communications Committee held on Thursday 1 September 2022,

·         Community, Culture and Events Committee meeting held on Thursday, 1 September 2022,

·         Parks and Recreation Committee meeting held on Thursday, 13 October 2022,

and finds them to be a true record and recommends that they be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

 

3.       Transfer of Agenda Items

 

Are there any items, which the meeting believes, should be transferred from this agenda to the closed agenda or from the closed agenda to the open agenda, in accordance with the procedures allowed under Section 15 of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015?

 

4.       Communication from the Chairman

 

5.       Notification of Council WorKshops

 

In accordance with the requirements of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015, the General Manager reports that the following workshops have been conducted since the last ordinary meeting of the Council.

 

Date:              Monday, 30 January 2023

Purpose:        E-Scooter Trial Results, Minister Briefing Local Government Reform, Tasmania’s Proposed Arts, Entertainment & Sports Precinct, Macquarie Point

 

Attendance:

The Lord Mayor Councillor A M Reynolds, the Deputy Lord Mayor Councillor H Burnet, Councillor W F Harvey, Alderman S Behrakis, Councillors M Dutta, J Kelly, L Elliot, R Posselt and B Lohberger.

 

Apologies: Councillor Dr Z Sherlock

 

 

 

Date:              Tuesday, 14 February 2023

Purpose:        Central Hobart Precinct Plan, Local Government Reform

 

Attendance:

The Deputy Lord Mayor Councillor H Burnet, Councillors W F Harvey, M Dutta, Dr Z Sherlock, J Kelly, Alderman L Bloomfield, and Councillor R Posselt.

 

Apologies:

The Lord Mayor Councillor A M Reynolds and Councillor B Lohberger

 

6.       Public Question Time

Regulation 31 Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.
File Ref: 16/119-001

 

5.1    Public Questions

 

 

5.2    Responses to Public Questions Taken On Notice

 

“In accordance with the procedures approved in respect to Public Questions Time, the following responses to questions taken on notice are provided to the Council for information.

 

The Council is reminded that in accordance with Regulation 31(4) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015, the Chairperson is not to allow discussion or debate on either the question or the response.”

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That the following responses to public questions taken on notice, be received and noted.

 

7.       Petitions

 

 

 

 

8.       Consideration of Supplementary Items

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

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council resolve to deal with any supplementary items not appearing on the agenda, as reported by the Chief Executive Officer in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.

 

 

9.       Indications of Pecuniary and Conflicts Of Interest

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

 

Elected Members 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 Council has resolved to deal with.

 


Item No. 10

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 9

 

20/2/2023

 

 

Officer Reports

 

10.      Elected Member Model Code of Conduct Review

            File Ref: F23/6101; 16/119

Report of the Chief Executive Officer of 14 February 2023 and attachment.

Delegation:                 Council


Item No. 10

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 11

 

20/2/2023

 

 

 

 

Memorandum: Council

 

Elected Member Model Code of Conduct Review

 

In accordance with section 28T(7) of the Local Government Act 1993 (“the Act”), the Council must review its code of conduct within three months of an ordinary election. Accordingly, this matter is presented to the Council for consideration.

 

The Council has previously adopted the model code of conduct without variation and a copy of this is Attachment A to this report.

 

Under the Act councils are required to adopt a single, state-wide Model Code of Conduct developed in consultation with the local government sector and approved by the Minister for Local Government. Councils may adopt the Model Code of Conduct with or without variation. However, any variation must be consistent with the Model Code of Conduct.

 

The Local Government Amendment (Code of Conduct) Bill 2022 is currently before Parliament which amends the current process.  The draft second reading speech states that:

First, this Bill removes the requirement for councils to individually adopt and regularly review their Code of Conduct. This means that the Code of Conduct issued by the Minister automatically applies to all Tasmanian councillors, without any variations at the local council level. The Government is introducing this measure to ensure a consistent, effective and efficient process for addressing councillor misconduct. The current Model Code of Conduct will be reviewed following the amendment of the Act.

 

It is expected that this legislation will be considered by Parliament early in 2023 which may result in the Model Code of Conduct being amended and being mandated as applying to all councils in Tasmania.  It is therefore proposed to adopt the current Model Code of Conduct as included in Attachment A.

 

REcommendation

That the Council adopt the model code of conduct included as Attachment A to this report.

 

 

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

 

Kelly Grigsby

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Date:                            14 February 2023

File Reference:          F23/6101; 16/119

 

 

Attachment a:             Elected Member Code of Conduct   


Item No. 10

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting - 20/2/2023

Page 17

ATTACHMENT a

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Item No. 11

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 18

 

20/2/2023

 

 

11.      Response to Petition - Keep Council Local

            File Ref: F23/6112

Report of the Manager Policy Lab and the Head of Intergovernmental Relations and Partnerships of 14 February 2023.

Delegation:                 Council


Item No. 11

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 23

 

20/2/2023

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Response to Petition - Keep Council Local

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Manager Policy Lab

Head of Intergovernmental Relations and Partnerships

 

1.         Report Summary

1.1.     This report responds to a petition received by the Council on 26 September 2022 to ‘Keep Council Local’.

The petition requests that representative not-for-profit voluntary groups be contacted annually and asked to submit a list of what the City can do for them, with items assessed as feasible being recommended to Council for inclusion in the budget process.

1.2.     The City of Hobart Community Engagement Framework is currently being reviewed and is exploring models of contemporary engagement including participatory budgeting.

1.3.     The Community Engagement Framework will be developed in consultation with community and stakeholders and presented to Council for endorsement in the first half of 2023.

2.         Key Issues

2.1.     The current Community Engagement Policy and Framework recognises that community members and stakeholders should be informed and have input into decisions that may affect them.

2.2.     The City seeks to take account of the views, needs, issues and aspirations expressed by the community and balances these and other influences to make informed decisions.

2.3.     Engagement with the community on the budget has previously been undertaken (2016-17 and 2017-18) with varying levels of participation.

2.4.     Participatory budgeting is used in many jurisdictions around the world with various methods and levels of engagement used.

2.5.     The review of the Community Engagement Framework is currently being undertaken. The new Framework will explore contemporary engagement methods which may include community participation in the budget process. The review of the Framework will include community consultation and will take place in the first half of 2023.


 

3.         Recommendation

That:

1.      Council notes that the current review of the City’s Community Engagement Framework is exploring models of contemporary engagement, including participatory budgeting.

2.      Council notes that the Community Engagement Framework will be developed in consultation with community and stakeholders and presented to Council for endorsement in the first half of 2023.

3.      The petitioner be advised of the Councils decision.

4.         Background

4.1.     At Council’s meeting of 26 September 2022, a petition containing 225 signatures was tabled. The petition called for the City to investigate options of:

·     contacting, each year, those not-for-profit voluntary groups that represent the interests of our electors, ratepayers, and residents; groups like residents’ associations, sporting clubs, cultural groups, etc;

·     asking each of them to submit a list of what the City can do for them;

·     having these items evaluated regarding feasibility, community-value, costs, timeline, possible grants, etc; and

·     recommending to Council those items that could be included in the budget process.

4.2.     Section 20(2) of the Local Government Act 1993 provides that in performing its functions Council is to consult, involve and be accountable to the community.

4.2.1.     The current Community Engagement Policy and Framework recognises that community members and stakeholders should be informed and have input into decisions which may affect them.

4.2.2.     Effective engagement helps to develop a positive relationship with the community and contributes to better decision-making. The City seeks to take account of the views, needs, issues and aspirations expressed by the community and to balance these with other influences such as budgetary constraints to make informed decisions.

4.3.     Previous engagement with the community on the budget has mainly centred on the Bang the Table budget allocator tool. Community engagement using the budget allocator was undertaken in the 2016-17 and 2017-18 with varying levels of participation by community members.

4.3.1.     Results from the engagement did not provide any clear rationale to alter the operating budget based on the consultation.

4.4.     A Council Workshop was held with elected members on 5 December 2022 providing an overview of the Community Engagement Framework Review.

The IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation was presented at the Workshop which included examples of participatory budgeting and deliberative engagement models.

Feedback and ideas were sought from elected members at the Workshop to inform a revised community engagement framework and policy.

5.         Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1.     Section 20(2) of the Local Government Act 1993 provides that in performing its functions Council is to consult, involve and be accountable to the community.

5.2.     Section 82 of the Local Government Act 1993 requires the General Manager or CEO to prepare estimates of the Council’s revenue and expenditure for each financial year, and details what the estimates must contain. The estimates must be adopted by the Council before 31 August annually, by absolute majority and a summary included in the Annual Plan.

6.         Discussion

6.1.     Direct community engagement in budget allocation is often referred to as participatory budgeting and is used in many jurisdictions around the world.

6.1.1.     Participatory budgeting has many approaches but the purpose tends to be to deepen democracy; to improve governance and build relationships and to improve financial efficiency and optimise resources and service delivery.

6.1.2.     Example of methods used are community panels (Canada Bay NSW), citizen jury (City of Melbourne), virtual public meeting (City of Adelaide) and budget allocator/simulator online tools (City of Bayswater WA and Wellington City Council NZ). These methods provided differing levels of engagement on the IAP2 spectrum.

6.2.     Engaging with the community more effectively overall and participation in decision-making are priorities for the City which are being addressed as part of the Organisation Transformation Program.

6.2.1.     A review of the Strategic Engagement Services function was undertaken in late 2022 and an implementation plan developed. One of the actions is to review of the Community Engagement Framework.

6.2.2.     Exploring contemporary and innovative ways of engaging with the community are being explored as part of the review of the Community Engagement Framework.

6.2.3.     The review of the Framework will be presented to Council for endorsement in the first half of 2023.

6.2.4.     If participatory budgeting is endorsed by Council as part of the new Community Engagement Framework, any changes to the budgeting process may come into effect in the 2024-25 budget process.

7.         Hobart: A Community Vision for Our Island Capital

7.1.     This report aligns with Pillar 8: Governance and Civic Involvement, in particular section 8.5 “We communicate and engage”.

7.1.1.     The community vision calls for governance structures that listen and act on public suggestions and know the community and how to engage, adapting communication styles to suit various stakeholders and generate general understanding.

8.         Capital City Strategic Plan

8.1.     This report aligns with Pillar 8 in the Capital City Strategic Plan.

Outcome 8.4 – People are involved in civic life, and the City’s communication and engagement with communities are proactive and inclusive.

Strategy 8.4.2 – Engage with the community through a variety of engagement and communications methods, prioritising access and inclusiveness.

Strategy 8.4.3 – Embrace opportunities to incorporate participatory community engagement practices.

9.         Financial Viability

9.1.     Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

9.1.1.     Not applicable

9.2.     Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

9.2.1.     Funding requirements will be dependent on whether, and the scope to which, participatory budgeting is adopted.

10.      Community Engagement

10.1.   The review of the revised Community Engagement Framework will include engagement with the community.

 

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.

 

David McIver

Manager Policy Lab

Kat Panjari

Head of Intergovernmental Relations and Partnerships

 

Date:                            14 February 2023

File Reference:          F23/6112

 

 

  


Item No. 12

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 24

 

20/2/2023

 

 

12.      Response to Petition - Name Change Macquarie Street

            File Ref: F22/100102

Report of the Manager City Infrastructure and the Director City Enablers of 15 February 2023.

Delegation:                 Council


Item No. 12

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 30

 

20/2/2023

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Response to Petition - Name Change Macquarie Street

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Manager City Infrastructure

Director City Enablers

 

1.         Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1.     The purpose of this report is to respond to a petition received by Council on 26 September 2022 requesting that Macquarie Street be renamed to either kunanyi Street or something else more appropriate.

2.         Report Summary

2.1.     This report summarises the background to the Petition, a history of NSW Governor Lachlan Macquarie, the process to change street names through the Tasmanian Governments Tasmanian Naming Place Guidelines and the recommendations from Council officers.

3.         Recommendation

That:

1.    The renaming of Macquarie Street is not pursued any further as it does not comply with the principles detailed in the State Government’s Tasmania Place Naming Guidelines.

2.    The petitioners be notified of the Council decision.

4.         Background

4.1.     The City of Hobart received a petition signed by 279 people asking for Macquarie Street to be renamed kunanyi Street or a suitable alternative.

4.2.     The petition states that:

4.2.1.     Lachlan Macquarie was responsible for the death of many Aboriginal people.

4.2.2.     Lachlan Macquarie was the governor of NSW from 1810 – 1821. In 1816 Lachlan Macquarie ordered soldiers to kill or capture any Aboriginal people they encountered during a military operation aimed at creating terror. At least 14 men, women and children were brutally killed. Source: Nov 10 2017, ABC new report Fact Check.

4.2.3.     Macquarie St is one of the longest streets in Hobart. Our idea is to change it to kunanyi St.

 

4.3.     Council considered this petition on 26 September 2022 and resolved:

That the petition be received and noted and referred to the appropriate committee.

5.         Lachlan Macquarie – Brief History

5.1.     Macquarie Street is named after the previous Governor of New South Wales, Lachlan Macquarie.

5.2.     As a background - Macquarie joined the British army as a boy and served in North America, Europe, and the West Indies between 1776 and 1784 and in India during 1788–1803 and 1805–07. He was appointed governor of New South Wales in 1809 and took office early the next year, replacing the New South Wales Corps that had overthrown the previous governor, William Bligh.

5.3.     He began a program of public works construction and town planning in New South Wales. By 1822 he had sponsored more than 200 works, many of them designed by the Emancipist architect Francis Greenway.

5.4.     Macquarie introduced the colony’s own currency in 1813 and helped establish its first bank in 1817. He encouraged expansion of settlement and exploration, most notably the crossing of the Blue Mountains in 1813.

5.5.     In terms of Macquarie’s relationship with the traditional owners of Australia, N. D. McLachlan from the Australian National University (in the Australian Dictionary of Biography) reports that:

“Macquarie's policy concerning the Aboriginals was an expression of the same humanitarian conscience. He organized the Native Institution (a school for Aboriginal children), a village at Elizabeth Bay for the Sydney tribe, an Aboriginal farm at George's Head and a sort of annual durbar for them at Parramatta. Orders of merit and even an old general's uniform were bestowed on deserving chiefs. The results of this naive policy were not very encouraging and in 1816, when the natives showed signs of ungrateful hostility, he organized a military drive to chasten them. But no other governor since Phillip had shown them so much sympathy.”

6.         April 1816 Conflict

6.1.     The following is an excerpt from the ABC News “Fact Check” dated 10 November 2017, which is the publication referred to in the petition.

6.1.1.     In April 1816, Macquarie ordered soldiers under his command to kill or capture any Aboriginal people they encountered during a military operation aimed at creating a sense of "terror".

6.1.2.     At least 14 men, women and children were brutally killed, some shot, others driven over a cliff.

6.1.3.     Although Macquarie's orders included an instruction to punish the guilty with as little injury to the innocent as possible, archival evidence shows he knew innocent people could be killed.

6.1.4.     In addition, Macquarie explicitly instructed his soldiers to offer those Aboriginal groups encountered an opportunity to surrender, and to open fire only after meeting "resistance".

6.1.5.     These instructions appear to have been ignored. Historical records suggest the soldiers offered no opportunity to surrender, opening fire on a group of people ambushed at night and who were fleeing in terror.

6.1.6.     Macquarie appears to have glossed over this failure in the weeks following the massacre, telling his superior back in England that his men acted "perfectly in Conformity to the instructions I had furnished them", and claiming the soldiers had indeed encountered resistance before opening fire.

6.1.7.     Macquarie was ultimately responsible for his men. By today's standards, his actions — and lack of action in not bringing soldiers who disobeyed his instructions to account — would, as a minimum, likely be regarded as a war crime involving a disproportionate response that led to a significant loss of life.

6.2.     The article however goes on to say that it is not “cut and dried” whether Macquarie’s actions could be considered a war crime.

7.         Process for Renaming of a Road

7.1.     The Hobart City Council is the naming authority under the Place Names Act 2020 for naming, and as such renaming, roads within the municipality.

7.2.     A process is outlined in the Tasmanian Place Naming Guidelines that requires consultation to be undertaken and a majority of the community and affected residents to be in favour of the change. There would also need to be a new name approved and submitted by Council to replace which will also require a consultation process.

7.3.     Council is the authority for property addressing and any change would require the readdressing of all properties affected by the change, which would be in in excess of 500 Macquarie Street properties, residences and businesses.

7.4.     Below are excerpts from the Tasmanian Place Naming Guidelines that are relevant.  These Guidelines outline the process for undertaking this renaming if it where to go ahead.


 

7.5.     Requirements for consultation

7.5.1.     Place names have an important role within the community with many names, including road names, having a direct effect on individuals. It is essential that the community is adequately consulted as part of the process in the development of a place name proposal and opportunity is provided to ensure that the proposed name is acceptable to the community as well as conforming to these guidelines. Public participation in the place naming process lends strength and provides a level of ownership to a naming proposal, which will assist in the approval process.

7.5.2.     The level of consultation required is largely dependent upon the type of feature proposed to be named or altered, the significance of the feature to the community and any direct impacts of the proposal to an individual.

7.5.3.     For altering a road name, it is critical that extensive community consultation is undertaken, including ensuring affected residents are made aware of the proposal. This can be done by public notices, advertising in local government publications or letters to residents.

7.6.     Altering a name

7.6.1.     Place names are intended to be enduring and the changing of an established name merely to correct or re-establish historical usage is not to be considered a reason to change a name unless it is deemed to be in the public interest or for safety reasons. Consideration needs to be given to the effects upon the wider community, including emergency services, of the consequences of altering a name.

7.6.2.     Any proposals to alter a name must demonstrate a compelling reason for doing so and must provide evidence of strong community consultation and support for such a change. For features that impact upon residents, such as road names, the majority of affected residents must be supportive of the change.

7.7.     Aboriginal place names

7.7.1.     The Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy applies to naming Tasmanian features and places in accordance with the Place Names Act 2020 and does not apply to built infrastructure such as roads, highways, bridges and communication towers.


 

7.8.     Road and street naming authorities

7.8.1.     Road and street naming is the responsibility of the relevant road authority. For the application of the provisions of the Place Names Act 2020 the key road naming authorities are intended to be:  Local government for all Council maintained roads, as well as state maintained roads and highways, private roads and public thoroughfares within the area.

7.9.     Altering a road or street name

7.9.1.     A road or street name is intended to be enduring and should not be altered unless there are sound reasons to do so. These include, but are not limited to:

7.9.1.1.      redesign of the road

7.9.1.2.      changed traffic flow

7.9.1.3.      addressing issues or changes

7.9.1.4.      misspelling of a name

7.9.1.5.      avoidance of duplication

7.9.1.6.      non-conformity to these guidelines.

7.9.2.     Any proposal to alter a road name must provide evidence that affected residents have been consulted. The Council, together with the relevant road authority if appropriate, is to undertake this consultation.

8.         Proposal and Implementation

8.1.     It is recommended that Council not proceed with renaming Macquarie Street for the following reason:

8.1.1.     Changing the name of Macquarie Street does not meet the requirements for altering a road name within the State Government’s Tasmania Place Naming Guidelines.

8.2.     If Council were to investigate the renaming of Macquarie Street further, the following would need to occur:

8.2.1.     Consultation with residents and landowners of Macquarie Street as well as relevant stakeholders.

8.2.2.     A new name would also need to be proposed within that consultation.


 

9.         Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

9.1.     Section 8.1.1 of the Strategic Plan states Council will:

Practise integrity, accountability, strong ethics and transparency in the City’s governance, policymaking and operations.

10.      Financial Implications

10.1.   Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

10.1.1.  No funding has been set aside for this activity. Additional funding would need to be found if Council resolved to investigate renaming Macquarie Street.

11.      Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

11.1.   Renaming Macquarie Street would create a significant precedent and is likely to result in requests for other streets to be renamed.

11.2.   There is a risk that the Council would be criticised if it resolves to change the name of Macquarie Street.

 

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.

 

Geoff Lang

Geoff Lang

Manager City Infrastructure

Michael Reynolds Signature

Michael Reynolds

Director City Enablers

 

Date:                            15 February 2023

File Reference:          F22/100102

 

 

  


Item No. 13

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 31

 

20/2/2023

 

 

13.      Procurement - Quotation Exemption Report

            File Ref: F23/11104

Report of the Manager Rates, Procurement and Risk and the Director City Enablers of 6 February 2023 and attachment.

Delegation:                 Council


Item No. 13

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 35

 

20/2/2023

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Procurement - Quotation Exemption Report

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Manager Rates, Procurement and Risk

Director City Enablers

 

1.         Report Summary

1.1.     The purpose of this report is to provide a listing of exemptions from the requirement to seek three written quotations granted for the period 1 July to 31 December 2022 for the information of Elected Members.

1.2.     The community benefit is providing transparency and delivering best value for money through strategic procurement decision-making. 

2.         Key Issues

2.1.     It is a legislative requirement that Council establishes and maintains procedures for reporting by the Chief Executive Officer to Council in relation to the purchase of goods, services or works where a public tender or quotation process is not used. 

2.2.     At its meeting on 19 March 2018, the Council resolved that a report of exemptions granted from the requirement to seek three written quotes be presented quarterly as at 31 March, 30 June, 30 September and 31 December each year.

2.3.     A report is attached for the period 1 July to 31 December 2022.  A report for the September quarter was not provided in November 2022 due to the local government election.

2.4.     It is proposed that the Committee note the exemption from the requirement to seek three written quotes granted for the period 1 July to 31 December 2022.

3.         Recommendation

That:

1.      The report titled ‘Procurement – Quotation Exemption Report’ be received and noted.

2.      The Council note the exemptions granted from the requirement to seek three written quotations for the period 1 July to 31 December 2022.

 


 

4.         Background

4.1.     At its meeting on 19 March 2018, the Council resolved inter alia that:

4.1.1.     A report of exemptions granted from the requirement to seek 3 written quotes be presented to the Finance and Governance Committee as at 31 March, 30 June, 30 September and 31 December each year.

4.2.     A report outlining the quotation exemption from the requirement to seek three written quotes granted during the period 1 July to 31 December 2022 is attached – refer Attachment A.

4.3.     As outlined in the City’s Code for Tenders and Contracts (the Code) where a Council Contract does not exist the City will seek a minimum of three written quotes for procurements between $50,000 and $249,999.

4.4.     There may be occasions where, for a number of reasons, quotation(s) cannot be obtained / sought from the market or where doing so would have no additional benefit to the City or the market.

4.5.     Therefore, exemptions from the requirement to seek written quotes can be sought from the Divisional Director but only if an acceptable reason exists as outlined in the Code, as follows:

(a)     where, in response to a prior notice, invitation to participate or invitation to quote:

-    no quotations were submitted; or

-    no quotations were submitted that conform to the essential requirements in the documentation;

(b)     where the goods, services or works can be supplied only by a particular supplier and no reasonable alternative or substitute goods, services or works exist e.g. a sole supplier situation exists;

(c)     for additional deliveries of goods, services or works by the original supplier that are intended either as replacement parts, extensions or continuing services;

(d) where there is an emergency and insufficient time to seek quotes for goods, services or works required in that emergency;

(e) for purchases made under exceptional circumstances, deemed reasonable by the responsible Director;

(f)      where a quotation was received within the last 3 months for the same goods, services or works (e.g. a recent value for money comparison was made);

(g)     for purchases made under exceptionally advantageous conditions that only arise in the very short term, such as from unusual disposals, liquidation, bankruptcy or receivership and not for routine purchases from regular suppliers; or

(h)     for a joint purchase of goods or services purchased with funds contributed by multiple entities, where Council is one of those entities and does not have express control of the purchasing decision.

4.6.     For the period 1 July to 31 December 2022 there were ten exemptions granted, where expenditure was between $50,000 and $249,999 and therefore three written quotations were required to be sought in line with the Code.

4.7.     One exemption was granted on the grounds that no quotations were received following an invitation, four exemptions were granted on the grounds that the goods or services could only be supplied by one particular supplier, three exemptions were granted on the grounds that the services were additional services by the original supplier intended as extensions or continuing services and two exemptions were granted on both sole supplier and continuing services grounds. 

5.         Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1.     Regulation 28 of the Local Government (General) Regulations 2015 states that the Council’s Code for Tenders and Contracts must (j) establish and maintain procedures for reporting by the general manager to the council in relation to the purchase of goods or services in circumstances where a public tender or quotation process is not used.

6.         Discussion

6.1.     It is proposed that the Committee note the exemption granted from the requirement to seek three written quotes for the period 1 July to 31 December 2022.

6.2.     As outlined in the Code, quotation exemptions for a value under $50,000, that is where 1 or 2 written quotations are required to be sought but an exemption from that requirement has been granted by the relevant Divisional Director, have been reported to the Chief Executive Officer.

6.3.     All approvals for the exemptions from the requirement to Tender are sought and reported through the formal Council approval processes.

7.         Capital City Strategic Plan

7.1.     The City’s Code for Tenders and Contracts is referenced in this report as it provides a framework for best practice procurement and sets out how the City will meet its legislative obligations in respect to procurement, tendering and contracting. 

7.2.     This report is consistent with strategy 8.5.4 in the City of Hobart Capital City Strategic Plan 2019-29, being to deliver best value for money through strategic procurement decision-making.

8.         Financial Viability

8.1.     Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

8.1.1.     All expenditure noted in the attached listing of quotation exemptions granted was funded from the 2022-23 budget estimates.

 

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

 

Lara MacDonell

Manager Rates, Procurement and Risk

Michael Reynolds

Director City Enablers

 

Date:                            6 February 2023

File Reference:          F23/11104

 

 

Attachment a:             Report - Quotation Exemptions Granted (3 Quote) 1 July to 31 December 2022   


Item No. 13

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting - 20/2/2023

Page 43

ATTACHMENT a

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Item No. 14

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 44

 

20/2/2023

 

 

14.      Parking Discount Scheme Options

            File Ref: F22/102447

Report of the Director Connected City of 15 February 2023.

Delegation:                 Council


Item No. 14

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 51

 

20/2/2023

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Parking Discount Scheme Options

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Director Connected City

 

1.         Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1.     The purpose of this report is to provide a response to a request for information received from Council’s previous Finance and Governance Committee with strategic advice related to a ‘Shop and Save’ parking scheme.

2.         Report Summary

2.1.     Council has requested a report be forthcoming in relation to Retailer Validation Scheme (RVS), otherwise termed a “Shop & Save” scheme, similar to that used in Victoria Gardens (viewable at https://www.vicgardenssc.com.au/directions/parking) in Kew, Victoria.

2.2.     In the Victoria Gardens model, the retailer ultimately pays for the consumer’s parking, reimbursing the car park operator on receipt of a valid voucher. Only certain large retailers in the centre participate in the scheme.

2.3.     Victoria Gardens has a single, contained off-street parking area attached to a single shopping centre, making it more straightforward to integrate between retailer sales and parking payments.

2.4.     It would be extremely difficult to create, administer, and safeguard from fraud a parking model where retailers could print some kind of validation at their sales desk and then have this integrate with the City of Hobart’s multiple payment methods (EasyPark, credit card, cash, daily and annual passes, across on-street and off-street bays).

2.5.     The legal ramifications of adopting such a scheme given the Competitive Neutrality obligations of the City must also be taken into account, as other market players are unable to subsidise parking.

2.6.     The administrative and technical overhead, and direct costs to both the City and retailers of setting up, managing, administering and auditing such a scheme are likely to be significant.

2.7.     It is suggested that targeted discount parking campaigns may meet the key outcomes the Victoria Gardens model (increased visitor numbers) without a large degree of complexity. These schemes are more amenable to the City’s Competitive Neutrality requirements, since clearly defined “special offers” can be established for limited times, which competing companies are able to match if desired.

 

3.         Recommendation

That:

1.      Council notes the report prepared in relation to shop and save parking incentives.

2.      Council consider its preferred approach to parking discounts as an incentive to stimulate retail activity through the Parking Strategy currently under development.

4.         Background

4.1.     A notice of motion required that a report be forthcoming on a “shop and save” parking discount system comparable to Victoria Gardens or similar programs for both on and off-street metered parking where paid parking is provided.

4.2.     Council has requested the report consider a Retailer Validation Scheme (RVS), otherwise termed a “Shop & Save” scheme, similar to that used in Victoria Gardens (viewable at https://www.vicgardenssc.com.au/directions/parking) in Kew, Victoria.

4.3.     In the Victoria Gardens model, the retailer ultimately pays for the consumer’s parking, reimbursing the car park operator on receipt of a valid voucher. Only certain large retailers in the centre participate in the scheme.

4.4.     Victoria Gardens has a single, contained off-street parking area attached to a single shopping centre, for which the Shop and Save model was designed, so there is far a simpler integration between retailer sales and parking payments.

4.5.     It would be difficult to create, administer, and safeguard from fraud a parking model where retailers could print some kind of validation at their sales desk and then have this integrate with the City of Hobart’s multiple payment methods (EasyPark, credit card, cash, daily and annual passes, across on-street and off-street bays).

4.6.     An analysis of the detail indicates that the following parking rates are used at Victoria Gardens and City of Hobart off-street sites:

4.7.     Short-term, high turnover parking at Victoria Gardens is prioritised through cheaper parking for short duration visits to the shopping centre with long duration stays heavily penalised. However, in the case of the City of Hobart a balance between the competing needs of all CBD participants, such as hospital patients, business patrons, employees, etc., is used to deliver a more straight-line approach towards parking pricing. 

4.8.     The following is the price comparison by time:


 

4.9.     The use of an RVS is utilised by only 5 of the 57 retailers at Victoria Gardens.  A discussion with management indicates that the scheme operates via retailers conducting in-store validation of presented tickets with subsequent accounting treatment leading to Victoria Gardens invoicing retailers for cost recovery of parking revenue foregone.

4.10.   Use of the RVS is focused so that accommodation is made for Coles and Kmart patrons typically shopping for between 1-2 hours, Fitness First patrons normally exercising for between 1-2 hours, and IKEA and Hoyts patrons normally staying for around 3-4 hours.  All other retailers are typically short-duration high turnover businesses.

4.11.   The 5 individual retailers pay the value of the discounts they apply to Victoria Gardens due to realisation that their typical patron shopping behaviours do not match the pricing schedule at the car park.  Accordingly, the businesses themselves seek to absorb patron parking cost as a benefit of patronage and economic activity in their businesses.  They see parking as a cost of doing business.

4.12.   There are several caveats attached to the RVS which further restrict patron usability, shown below as published by Victoria Gardens:

4.13.   For the City of Hobart, the adoption of a RVS is likely to be a costly exercise and would be very difficult to audit against fraudulent use.

4.14.   Further complications include questions as to whether the scheme applies to both on and off-street parking, which retailers are included in the scheme (all-in or opt-in?), how to reconfigure existing parking equipment to support the scheme, and how to go about contractual renegotiation with parking service providers.

4.15.   City of Hobart parking rates in off-street parking facilities already accommodate retail focus by providing for 1-hour free parking. 


 

5.         Proposal and Implementation

5.1.     The City of Hobart ran several campaigns during Covid to encourage shoppers into central Hobart. At the time it was not possible to capture the economic value of these programs to retailers. The Connected City division has recently purchased a licence to the SpendMap database, which along with other analysis tools will be used to ascertain the relationship between parking and business revenue, so that an evidence-based approach may be used to determine the best long-term parking model to benefit retailers who feel parking policies affect their business operations.

5.2.     There were some in-kind benefits to the City as the scheme attracted a small number of extra people to use the EasyPark app, which not only gives a better parking experience, leading to fewer follow-up complaints, but is moreover simpler and more efficient to administer than meters, credit cards and cash.

5.3.     It is proposed that a program of similar schemes could be run at times to be negotiated between City Economy, Parking, retailers and other stakeholders and is likely to achieve many of the objectives of the “shop and save” program.

5.4.     The schemes could be rolled out in any location where paid, marked bays exist in Hobart.

5.5.     The functionality of such schemes is that when a driver pays with the EasyPark app, they receive a discount on their parking. This discount could be for any amount. In 2020 the amount was 50% discount, but this could be increased to 100% discount or to any other percentage.

5.6.     The benefits of an area wide discount scheme not tied to specific purchasing behaviour are:

5.6.1.     The City can control the location and duration of discounts;

5.6.2.     The City is operating a “special”, in the way any other market participant can operate, by reducing prices temporarily to attract new business;

5.6.3.     The schemes can be linked to the EasyPark system, to bring new users to the app;

5.6.4.     The schemes are completely transparent, apply to every driver and are unable to be “gamed” or defrauded;

5.6.5.     The City can associate parking discounts with other activities, such as festivals, events, holidays etc.;

5.6.6.     There is very little administrative overhead to the City.

5.7.     However, regardless of the nature of a discount parking scheme, any scheme that subsidises car drivers will reduce revenue to the City and ratepayer services may suffer as a result.

6.         Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1.     The report aligns with Pillar 5 in the Capital City Strategic Plan 2019-29, particularly 5.2.11 Provide commuter and smart parking solutions.

6.2.     Retail parking incentives will be further considered in the scope of the Parking Strategy under development through the City Mobility team.

7.         Financial Implications

7.1.     Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1.     There is no provision in the budget for this scheme. An RVS scheme or any other parking discount scheme will have an impact on parking revenue, which flows into many of the City’s services.

7.1.2.     As well as reducing revenue, a retailer validation scheme will be costly to design, implement, and administer. These costs have not been quantified at this stage.

7.2.     Asset Related Implications

7.2.1.     Current parking infrastructure would need to be enhanced to allow an RVS scheme to be implemented. New equipment, or an app-based system, would also need to be purchased and installed in participating businesses to allow the validation of ticket/vouchers through their stores.

8.         Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1.     There are legal and legislative considerations related to the implementation of this scheme relating to the requirements under the Local Government (Highways) Act 1982 – requiring drivers to make payment upon arrival at a parking space.

8.2.     There are risks associated to business involvement in the scheme including fraud and costs to administer the scheme.

8.3.     The City is required to operate under competitive neutrality rules to ensure it does not operate using ratepayer subsidies to artificially lower the costs of operating in a commercial market such as parking. An RVS would need careful legal scrutiny to enable it to operate without breaching competitive neutrality requirements. 

9.         Environmental Considerations

9.1.     Any scheme designed to attract greater numbers of cars to an area risks increasing greenhouse gas emissions across the region.

10.      Social and Customer Considerations

10.1.   All ratepayers, shoppers, competitors, and retailers are potential participants in an RVS. Any reduction to the cost of parking may bring benefits to some participants but would likely reduce revenues and budgets for other participants.

11.      Marketing and Media

11.1.   Due to the complexity of an RVS, a comprehensive marketing campaign, signage, and well-publicised rollout would be required to limit confusion about the scheme.

12.      Community and Stakeholder Engagement

12.1.   Due to the impact of car parking on every street and to all ratepayers, local businesses, competitors, and other road users, an RVS scheme will require a period of stakeholder engagement across a large section of the Hobart community.

 

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.

 

Jacqui Allen

Director Connected City

 

 

Date:                            15 February 2023

File Reference:          F22/102447

 

 

  


Item No. 15

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 52

 

20/2/2023

 

 

15.      Notice of Motion Response - UTAS Community Consultation

            File Ref: F23/11109

Report of the Head of Intergovernmental Relations and Partnerships of 6 February 2023.

Delegation:                 Council


Item No. 15

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 55

 

20/2/2023

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Notice of Motion Response - UTAS Community Consultation

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Head of Intergovernmental Relations and Partnerships

 

Report Summary

1.1.     The purpose of this report is to respond to Clause 5 of the Motion titled UTAS Community Consultation, adopted by the Council at its meeting of 12 December 2022:

5.    That Council officers prepare a report for Council that describes how and why the UTAS commitment in the Hobart City Deal changed, from relocating STEM faculties to relocating the entire campus, after the Deal had been signed and announced in February 2019.

2.         Key Issues

2.1.     The Hobart City Deal (HCD) was signed in 2019 as a shared 10-year vision between the Australian and Tasmanian Governments and the Clarence, Glenorchy, Hobart and Kingborough Councils (The HCD Partners). It consists of seven Key Focus Areas, one of which is “Smart, liveable and investment ready City”

2.2.     Organisations such as the University of Tasmania (UTAS), the Australian Antarctic Division, the Macquarie Point Development Corporation, Enterprize Tasmania and TasPorts that operate or deliver projects in the Greater Hobart region, but that are not partners in the Hobart City Deal, can influence the outcomes in these Key Focus Areas.

2.3.     Where these external organisations and their activities have the potential to have a significant impact on any of the desired outcomes in a Key Focus Area in Greater Hobart, they were referenced in Hobart City Deal documentation.

2.4.     Where these external activities have changed and evolved over the life of the Hobart City Deal, descriptions or terminology in relation to these projects have accordingly been changed or updated as various City Deal documents have been released.

2.5.     When the Hobart City Deal was first developed in 2018 to 2019, UTAS was focussed on enhancing STEM facilities in the Hobart CBD. This planned UTAS activity was noted in the “Smart, liveable and investment ready City” (“Smart City”) section of the City Deal, released in February 2019, due to its likely significant impact on outcomes in this Key Focus Area.


 

2.6.     Following the release of the Hobart City Deal in February 2019, the University’s plans subsequently evolved to incorporate the relocation of its Southern Campus. This change was reflected in the language used in the Hobart City Deal Implementation Plan, when it was released in October 2019.

2.7.     The relocation of the UTAS Southern Campus was referred to in the Hobart City Deal Implementation Plan to engage with the Reference Group that informed the development of the Central Hobart Precinct Plan, to progress the ongoing development of Hobart as a smart, liveable and investment ready city as a Key Result Area.

3.         Recommendation

That the Council note the advice that:

1.     UTAS is not a partner in the Hobart City Deal, however, as with many other organisations in Greater Hobart, their planning and activities can have an impact on the Key Focus Areas of the Hobart City Deal.

2.     The change in the description of the UTAS Southern Transformation Project between February 2019 and the release of the City Deal Implementation Plan in October 2019 was made to reflect the evolving nature of this externally driven project progressed by UTAS as a non-partner to the City Deal and outside the Hobart City Deal.

4.         Background

4.1.     The Hobart City Deal is a broad framework underpinned by a long-term, evolving program of infrastructure projects and activities. It consists of seven key focus areas that are thematic objectives designed to guide public investment across Greater Hobart:

1.    Hobart Airport: Building a direct international gateway

2.    Gateway to the Antarctic and Southern Ocean

3.    Implementing the Greater Hobart Transport Vision

4.    Driving urban renewal and delivering affordable housing

5.    Activating the Northern Suburbs Transit Corridor

6.    Smart, liveable and investment ready City

7.    Strategic collaboration and governance

5.         Discussion

5.1.     Reference to externally driven significant projects in relation to the City Deal’s Key Focus Areas does not represent an endorsement, or otherwise, of the project by City Deal partners.

 

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.

 

Kat Panjari

Head of Intergovernmental Relations and Partnerships

 

 

Date:                            6 February 2023

File Reference:          F23/11109

 

 

  


Item No. 16

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 56

 

20/2/2023

 

 

16.      Relocation of Vehicles from Bidencopes Lane to Centrepoint Carpark

            File Ref: F23/4385; R1006; 7709477

Report of the Cultural Programs Coordinator, the Director Connected City and the Director City Futures of 15 February 2023 and attachment.

Delegation:                 Council


Item No. 16

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 62

 

20/2/2023

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Relocation of Vehicles from Bidencopes Lane to Centrepoint Carpark

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Cultural Programs Coordinator

Director Connected City

Director City Futures

 

1.1.     This report has been prepared for the Council to consider a proposal to relocate 8 cars from Bidencopes Lane into Centrepoint Carpark.

1.2.     This would create much needed public open space in the city which could be used for seating, events, planting etc.

1.3.     Bidencopes Lane is currently Tasmania’s largest outdoor art gallery which is used daily by artists and has become a destination for residents and visitors.

1.4.     Council officers have had informal talks with Centrepoint Shopping Centre management, who are in favour of the proposal.

1.5.     Officers from both City Futures (Creative Hobart team) and Connected City (Smart and Sustainable Hobart / Parking teams) have collaborated on this initiative and the relevant officers, managers, and directors are in agreement.

1.6.     Council would enter into an agreement to lease with the owner of the relevant part of Bidencopes Lane and grant a licence to Centrepoint Shopping Centre management for the relocation of the affected car spaces.

2.         Key Issues

2.1.     The City currently manages Bidencopes Lane as an evolving street art space.

2.2.     This report recommends relocating 8 cars from the laneway to the Centrepoint carpark, which would create a new, much needed public space in central Hobart.

2.3.     Centrepoint carpark currently averages less than 100% occupancy, so this proposal does not represent a real loss of income to the Council, nor a loss of parking amenity for shoppers.


 

 

3.         Recommendation

That :

1.      The Council enter into a lease with the owner of that part of Bidencopes Lane shown on Attachment A for a period of up to ten (10) years with two options for a further ten (10) years each at a nominal rent.

2.      As part of the agreement, the Council grant a licence to Centrepoint for the use of 8 car spaces on ramp one of the Centrepoint Carpark.

3.      The Chief Executive Officer be delegated the authority to negotiate and agree to the terms of the agreements.

4.         Background

4.1.     Since the Council-supported Vibrance festival in 2018, Bidencopes Lane has been transformed from being perceived as unsafe and a site of anti-social behaviour to Tasmania’s largest outdoor gallery.

4.1.1.     In addition to over 30 artworks, it contains a Permission Wall, which is used daily by emerging artists and is the site of regular paint jams which refresh the artworks and cover any unwanted tagging and graffiti.

4.2.     Bidencopes Lane forms part of the Common Property owned by Strata Corporation No 56194, Hobart Centrepoint, Hobart. The owners of the Strata Corporation are the Council who essentially own the Centrepoint Carpark, and Centrepoint (Tasmania) Pty Ltd (‘Centrepoint Corporation’) who essentially own the Centrepoint Shopping Centre.

4.3.     The City has approached Centrepoint Corporation with a proposal to further activate Bidencopes Lane and make it a site of greater community participation and economic activity.

4.3.1.     Centrepoint Corporation is very positively inclined towards this proposal, seeing the opportunity to enhance activation and reduce anti-social behaviour on and around its property.

4.4.     The proposal would create much needed public open space in this precinct and could be an opportunity for businesses to open onto the space, for the placement flexible street furniture and a program of activation.

4.5.     During Vibrance in 2018, when cars were removed, Bidencopes Lane was used for a market visited by more than 800 people, an open air cinema and as a site for live music and food (Attachment A).

4.6.     In relation to the intended use of eight (8) spaces within the Centrepoint Car Park for Long Term Permit Parking of this type, it should be noted that current occupancy of the City-managed car park facility averages 86% and rarely achieves 100% with the exception of specific high value shopping days such as those around Christmas.

4.6.1.     Further, there is ample capacity to cater for this arrangement within the facility and in adjacent on-street parking areas and off-street facilities.

4.6.2.     There are generally significantly more than eight spaces unused at any one time in the facility.

5.         Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

5.1.     There are numerous examples of Council either leasing or leasing-out parking spaces, and there are thought to be no legal or risk considerations associated with this proposal.

6.         Discussion

6.1.     The proposal can be implemented by way of a lease agreement prepared by Council’s legal team.

6.2.     Access to Centrepoint Car Park by the eight shopkeepers who currently utilise Bidencopes Lane for parking can be facilitated through the City’s parking system.

6.3.     Removing cars from this section of Bidencopes Lane will create much needed public space in this part of the city.

6.3.1.     This could be used for seating or planting or as an event space for performance and public art.

6.3.2.     Increased occupation in Bidencopes Lane makes it safer and less prone to antisocial behaviour.

6.3.3.     Over the past 6 years the community have been very positive about the conversion of this space from laneway to a large scale out door gallery.

7.         Hobart: A Community Vision for Our Island Capital

7.1.     This proposal aligns with the City of Hobart’s A Community Vision for our Island Capital:

7.1.1.     Pillar 3 - 3.5.1 Vibrant civic spaces and infrastructure make daily life a creative act.

7.1.2.     Pillar 3 - 3.5.3 We use our public and empty spaces to host and fund regular events and activities.

8.         Capital City Strategic Plan

8.1.1.     Goal 1 of the Strategic Plan is titled: Economic Development, Vibrancy and Culture. It claims: “City growth, vibrancy and culture comes when everyone participates in city life.”

8.1.2.     One of the 5 strategic objectives under Goal 1 is that “Cultural and creative activities build community wellbeing and economic viability.”

8.1.3.     The proposal in this report is well aligned with this and other goals and intentions of the Capital City Strategic Plan.

9.         Financial Viability

9.1.     Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

9.1.1.     If the City were to lease out these eight spaces at market rates, the estimated revenue would be approximately $28,800 per annum (inclusive of GST).

9.1.2.     However, the intention is that the City would receive approximately this amount from Centrepoint Unit Trust, while simultaneously paying Centrepoint Unit Trust the same amount for the lease of its eight (8) spaces in Bidencopes Lane.

9.1.3.     Therefore the effective financial impact to Council is zero, notwithstanding that GST and other taxes may be required to be paid.

9.2.     Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

9.2.1.1.      In future years the implications would be similar to the present year.

9.3.     Asset Related Implications

9.3.1.     There are no asset related implications to the proposal.

10.      Sustainability Considerations

10.1.   There are no environmental considerations within this proposal.

11.      Community Engagement

11.1.   Engagement has been previously undertaken with building owners and tenants of all the properties adjacent to Bidencopes Lane in the development of the street art precinct.

11.1.1.  This would again be undertaken following Council endorsement of the relocation of carparks to Centrepoint Carpark.

11.2.   There has been significant engagement with Hobart’s street art community about Bidencopes Lane over the past 7 years.

11.2.1.  This has resulted in innovations to the precinct including the introduction of a Permission Wall and hosting regular paint jams.

11.3.   Centrepoint have been consulted about of the removal of cars from Bidencopes Lane and are supportive of the initiative.

12.      Communications Strategy

12.1.   While there is no marketing campaign planned at this stage, the proposal has the potential to create future good news stories for the City. There is limited public space in Hobart’s CBD and the creation of an attractive and quirky space away from traffic, in a laneway presently cluttered with parked cars is likely to be extremely well-received by the community. No adverse media coverage is expected as a result of the proposal.

13.      Innovation and Continuous Improvement

13.1.   Bidencopes Lane was an unsafe area in central Hobart which now contains over 40 artworks, a permission wall, regular events and is the subject of a walking map which guide visitors and residents to this location.

13.2.   Removing cars from the lane will be the next step in creating an accessible and evolving creative space where people can spend time rather than just being a car filled thoroughfare.

14.      Collaboration

14.1.   The Manager Smart and Sustainable Hobart, who is the manager responsible for parking in the Centrepoint Car Park, is supportive of the project and has determined that it will bring no adverse implications upon the City’s parking budget.

14.2.   Consultation has been undertaken with the manager of Centrepoint, who is very supportive of this proposal.

14.3.   Engagement has also occurred with Vibrance who currently manage the art program in Bidencopes Lane by removing offensive tags and conducting regular paint jams.

14.4.   Past extensive community consultation has revealed a significant community desire for public space in the CBD, including numerous directives within the Community Vision document, such as: “3.5.1 We find creative uses for our civic and heritage spaces, and these spaces support our creativity”, “3.5.3 We use our public and empty spaces to host and fund regular events and activities.”, “7.2.5 Public spaces are included in developments, in support of our human needs and wellbeing and the cohesion of our city.”

14.5.   No structure is proposed to be built on this land, and no DA is required to implement the proposal. The land in question is owned by the Centrepoint Unit Trust and is presently leased to its own tenants for parking.

 

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.

 

Jane Castle

Cultural Programs Coordinator

Jacqui Allen

Director Connected City

Katy Cooper

Director City Futures

 

 

Date:                            15 February 2023

File Reference:          F23/4385; R1006; 7709477

 

 

Attachment a:             Bidencopes Lane market   


Item No. 16

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting - 20/2/2023

Page 63

ATTACHMENT a

 

PDF Creator


Item No. 17

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 64

 

20/2/2023

 

 

17.      Financial Report as at 31st December 2022

            File Ref: F23/12939

Report of the Chief Financial Officer and the Director City Enablers of 15 February 2023 and attachments.

Delegation:                 Council


Item No. 17

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 70

 

20/2/2023

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Financial Report as at 31st December 2022

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Chief Financial Officer

Director City Enablers

 

1.         Report Summary

1.1.     As at 31 December 2022, the City was $3.3 million underspent when compared to the year-to-date Budget for operating activities.

1.2.     The forecast end of financial year position is a $1 million surplus.

1.3.     As at 31 December 2022, the City had spent $16.6 million, or 19 per cent of the full year Budget for capital activities. When adjusting for commitments of $11 million, this results in a total of $27.6 million, or 31.6 per cent of the full year Budget.

2.         Key Issues

2.1.     Operating Activities

3.         Year-to-date variations

3.1.     The receipt of additional Revenue of $959 000 above budget.  This is primarily the result of:

3.2.     $350 000 in Fines due to increased activity;

3.3.     $387 000 in Grants for the Australian Government funded Sparking Conversations Igniting Action grant; and

3.4.     $471 000 in Interest from investments.

3.5.     These are offset by reductions in Other Fees and Charges of $279 000 and Rents of $173 000.

3.6.     Savings of $2.3 million across Expenditure categories.  This is predominately due to:

3.7.     $909 000 in Labour costs due to vacant positions,

3.8.     $1 million in Material and Services including payments for contractor services relating to cleaning services and mowing of nature strips; and

3.9.     $381 000 in Other Expenses due to the timing of grant payments.

4.         Mid-year variation requests

4.1.     Based on the mid-year review, proposed amendments to the existing operational budget are proposed as follows:

Note:

1.  The Sparking Conversations Igniting Action grant will operate over the 2023-24 and 2024-25 financial years.

4.2.     Ongoing reviews of the operating activities of the City will continue and further request for updates to the budget will be progressed at the appropriate time, if required.

5.         Capital Activities

5.1.     As at 31 December 2022, there was a significant underspend against the total capital budget. However, there is an additional $11 million of commitments within the finance system.

5.2.     Further analysis since 31 December 2022, indicates that approximately $51 million will be spent in 2022-23.

5.3.     Updated capital advice will be provided in the March quarterly report.

6.         Loans and Investments

6.1.     As at 31 December 2022, the City had a total of eight loans with an outstanding balance of $55.1 million.  Attachment 1 provides a list of each of the loans.

6.2.     As at 31 December 2022, the City had a total of 14 current term deposit investments.  The total invested is $42 million, which will generate interest of $684 000 at maturity.  Attachment 2 provides a list of each investment.

6.3.     As at 31 December 2022, the City had $27.3 million in cash in addition to the investments.  This total included $1.6 million in the Heritage Account.


 

7.         Financial Sustainability Indicators

7.1.     As at 31 December 2022, the forecast for the financial sustainability indicators remains consistent with the targets approved as part of the 2022-23 Budget Estimates.

8.         Debt-write off

8.1.     As at 31 December 2021, debts written-off by the Chief Executive Officer under delegation totalled $4 866.44.

8.2.     This total comprised of six individual debts, one totalling $1 738.69, one totalling $1 464 and the remaining four being less than $1 000 each.

8.3.     Under section 76(2) of the Local Government Act 1993, all reasonable attempts were made to recover the debts.

9.         Recommendation

That:

1.      The Financial Report for the period ending 31 December 2022 be noted; and

2.      The proposed Mid-Year Variation Request updates to the City’s 2022-23 Budget Estimates be approved.


 

 

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.

 

Michelle Wickham

Chief Financial Officer

Michael Reynolds

Director City Enablers

 

Date:                            15 February 2023

File Reference:          F23/12939

 

 

Attachment a:             Loans

Attachment b:             Investments   


Item No. 17

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting - 20/2/2023

Page 71

ATTACHMENT a

 

PDF Creator


Item No. 17

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting - 20/2/2023

Page 72

ATTACHMENT b

 

PDF Creator


Item No. 18

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 73

 

20/2/2023

 

 

18.      City of Hobart Submission to Wellington Park Visitor Recreation Draft Strategy

            File Ref: F23/13198

Report of the Director City Life and the Director Connected City of 15 February 2023 and attachment.

Delegation:                 Council


Item No. 18

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 75

 

20/2/2023

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  City of Hobart Submission to Wellington Park Visitor Recreation Draft Strategy

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Director City Life

Director Connected City

 

1.         Report Summary

1.1.     The Wellington Park Management Trust has released a draft visitor recreation strategy for public comment. 

1.1.1.     The strategy outlines a number of actions the Trust intends to take in the short and medium term to realise its strategic goal to build an integrated and connected visitor experience of Wellington Park for all, while preserving or protecting its natural Aboriginal and cultural heritage values.

1.2.     The City of Hobart is a member of the Trust as well as a significant landowner within Wellington Park. In this capacity, the City has drafted a submission to inform the Trust’s final strategy.

2.         Key Issues

2.1.     The submission highlights the following key issues:

2.1.1.     Data and evidence collection: the draft strategy highlights the importance of robust data and evidence to inform decision making. The City of Hobart’s submission supports this and calls out the opportunity for the Trust and the City of Hobart to work together to strengthen data collection and analysis.

2.1.2.     A spatial masterplan: the submission notes that an integrated approach is required and suggests that a spatial masterplan that encompasses the key visitor areas across the park be developed. This would help ensure that individual projects or developments at a particular site are considered in terms of user experience an flow on implications for the park as a whole.

2.1.3.     Community engagement: given the immense significance Wellington Park has for the community, the submission suggests that the Trust make the development and implementation of a community engagement strategy a higher priority. This will help ensure greater community buy-in to the success of the strategy.

2.2.     The submission also calls out the need for significant collaboration and partnership. As a partner in the Trust and a significant landowner in the park, the City of Hobart seeks to collaborate closely with the Trust in the finalisation of the strategy and in its implementation.

 

3.         Recommendation

That Council note the City of Hobart’s submission to the Wellington Park Visitor Recreation.

 

 

4.         Background

4.1.     The Wellington Park Management Trust released its draft visitor recreation strategy for public comment in December 2022.

4.2.     The City of Hobart has committed to providing a submission by the end of February 2023.

 

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.

 

Neil Noye

Director City Life

Jacqui Allen

Director Connected City

 

Date:                            15 February 2023

File Reference:          F23/13198

 

 

Attachment a:             Draft Submission   


Item No. 18

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting - 20/2/2023

Page 77

ATTACHMENT a

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Item No. 19

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 78

 

20/2/2023

 

 

19.      Request to Install Memorial Plaque - Iranian Community - Women, Life, Freedom Campaign

            File Ref: F23/12989

Report of the Director Connected City and the Director City Life of 15 February 2023 and attachments.

Delegation:                 Council


Item No. 19

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 82

 

20/2/2023

 

 

REPORT TITLE:                  Request to Install Memorial Plaque - Iranian Community - Women, Life, Freedom Campaign

REPORT PROVIDED BY:  Director Connected City

Director City Life

 

1.         Report Summary

1.1.     The purpose of this report is to seek approval for the installation of a memorial plaque associated with a tree planting in support of Council’s International Women’s Day event (location to be confirmed) on 8 March 2023.

1.2.     The request is in response to a request from members of the Hobart Iranian Community to have a commemorative ceremony to mark International Women’s Day 8th March 2023 and the human rights campaign ‘Women, Life, Freedom’.

2.         Key Issues

2.1.     A request has been received from the Iranian Community Tasmania to install a memorial plaque and associated tree planting in Central Hobart (refer Attachment A) as part of the human rights campaign ‘Women, Life, Freedom’.

2.2.     This campaign was set in motion following the death of Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old woman, in the custody of the Iranian Morality Police and the outcome of more than four decades of dictatorship and violations of women’s and human rights in Iran.

2.3.     The planting ceremony and unveiling of the plaque will take place as part of the City’s acknowledgement of International Women’s Day, to be held on 8th March 2023.

2.4.     Several locations are being investigated to determine suitable locations that meet both the wishes of the Iranian Community Tasmania and the park management imperatives of the various locations.

2.5.     The installation of plaques is governed by the ‘Donation of Park Furniture and Equipment, Memorial Plaques and Tree Plantings in Parks, Bushland and Reserves’ Policy (F17/165062).

2.5.1.     This policy details that:

Plaques be only installed to commemorate historically important national or state events, or people who have made a significant contribution to the social, political and cultural life of Hobart subject to the approval of the Parks and Recreation Committee.

2.6.     This activity aligns strongly with the City’s Multicultural, Equality and Human Rights commitments and is part of a global movement for Women, it is considered that this event is of appropriate significance to warrant a commemorative plaque.

3.         Recommendation

That:

1.      Approval be granted for the installation of a plaque and associated tree planting (Cypress tree: Pencil Pine) at a location approved by the Director City Life in consultation with the Iranian Community Tasmania.

2.      All costs for production and installation of the plaque to be met by City of Hobart as part of its International Women’s Day and Multicultural Commitments.

3.      The wording and location of the plaque will be to the satisfaction of the Director Connected City and Director City Life.

4.         Background

4.1.     A request has been received from the Iranian Community Tasmania to install a memorial plaque and associated tree planting in Central Hobart shown at Attachment A.

4.2.     The request is from members of the Tasmanian Iranian Community and the planting ceremony and unveiling of the plaque will take place as part of the City’s activities to acknowledge International Women’s Day, to be held on 8th March 2023.

4.3.     The request meets the criteria of the City’s Policy ‘Donation of Park Furniture and Equipment, Memorial Plaques and Tree Planting in Parks, Bushland and Reserves’, specifically:

4.3.1.     Clause 3(1)(ii) states:

Plaques be only installed to commemorate historically important national or state events, or people who have made a significant contribution to the social, political and cultural life of Hobart subject to the approval of the Parks and Recreation Committee.

The request is deemed to meet this criteria.

Clause 3(1)(v) states:

The application for a plaque be supported by a minimum of three third parties, one of which must be a local community group.


 

4.3.2   Letter of support have been received from the Huon Refugee Support Group, Grassroots Action Network Tasmania and the Iranian Community of Tasmania and are shown at Attachments B, C and D.

5.         Discussion

5.1.     If approved, the wording and location for the plaque would be decided in consultation with the Director City Life and Director Connected City.

5.2.     The location of the proposed tree planting is still to be finalised with several locations being investigated.  A final decision will be made in consultation with the Tasmanian Iranian Community.  Given the timing of the event it is proposed to delegate the decision of the location to the Director City Life to ensure the location will not affect any management plans, park values or needs of park users.

5.3.     City of Hobart will provide the commemorative plaque and plinth for its mounting.

5.4.     City of Hobart will provide a tree of an appropriate size and species for the event and will provide ongoing maintenance of the tree post planting. City of Hobart will be responsible for costs associated with creation of the plaque. It is expect that the cost for tree, planting and plaque will amount to approximately $1,400. 

6.         Hobart: A Community Vision For Our Island Capital

6.1.     Section 2.3.3: We are connected to our histories, honouring and learning from our past and keeping future generations at the heart of our thinking.

6.2.     Section 3.5.2: We incorporate culture, recognition of our history and story-telling into our public spaces and significant private developments, inspiring spontaneous and planned creativity and performance

7.         Regional, State and National Plans and Policies

7.1.     The proposed installation of a plaque is within guidelines of the Council policy titled ‘Donation of Park Furniture and Equipment, Memorial Plaques and Tree Planting in Parks, Bushland and Reserves’ (refer Attachment E).

7.2.     The location of the plaque will not affect any management plans, park values or needs of park users.

8.         Financial Viability

8.1.     Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

8.1.1.     All costs of the plaque and installation will be met by City of Hobart through existing budget allocations.  The expected costs for this project are in the order of approximately $1,400

8.2.     Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

8.2.1.     Ongoing maintenance costs will be negligible.

8.3.     Asset Related Implications

8.3.1.     The plaque will be in place for a minimum of 10 years

9.         Community Engagement

9.1.     There will be opportunities leading up to and post the event to note the City of Hobarts support in the event, and the significance of International Women’s day.

 

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.

 

Jacqui Allen

Director Connected City

Neil Noye

Director City Life

 

Date:                            15 February 2023

File Reference:          F23/12989

 

 

Attachment a:             Request from Iranian Community Tasmania

Attachment b:             Letter of Support - Huon Refugee Support Group

Attachment c:            Letter Of Support – Grassroots Action Network Of Tasmania

Attachment d:            Letter Of Support – Tasmanian Iranian Community

Attachment e:             Donation of Park Furniture and Equipment, Memorial Plaques and Tree Plantings in Parks, Bushland and Reserves Policy   


Item No. 19

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting - 20/2/2023

Page 83

ATTACHMENT a

 

PDF Creator


Item No. 19

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting - 20/2/2023

Page 84

ATTACHMENT b

 

PDF Creator


Item No. 19

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting - 20/2/2023

Page 85

ATTACHMENT c

 

PDF Creator


Item No. 19

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting - 20/2/2023

Page 86

ATTACHMENT d

 

PDF Creator


Item No. 19

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting - 20/2/2023

Page 90

ATTACHMENT e

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

 


Item No. 20

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 91

 

20/2/2023

 

 

Report of the Chief Executive Officer

 

20.      Annual General Meeting Motions

            File Ref: F23/11319

Report of the Chief Executive Officer of 6 February 2023.

Delegation:                 Council


Item No. 20

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 92

 

20/2/2023

 

 

 

 

Memorandum: Council

 

Annual General Meeting Motions

 

The City’s Annual General Meeting was held on Monday 28 November 2022.

 

Section 72B(6) of the Local Government Act 1993 (the Act) requires that motions passed at an Annual General Meeting be considered at a meeting of the Council.

 

 

In accordance with this requirement, the following motions which were unanimously adopted at the meeting, are provided for the Council’s consideration:

 

a)   The minutes of the Annual General Meeting held on Monday, 22 November 2021, be confirmed as an accurate record.

 

b)   That the City of Hobart Annual Report for 2021-22 be adopted.

 

REcommendation

That in accordance with Section 72B of the Local Government Act 1993, the Council note the following two motions adopted unanimously at the City of Hobart Annual General Meeting of 28 November 2022:

 

a)  The minutes of the Annual General Meeting held on Monday, 22 November 2021, be confirmed as an accurate record.

 

b)  That the City of Hobart Annual Report for 2021-22 be adopted.

 

 

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

 

Kelly Grigsby

Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Date:                            6 February 2023

File Reference:          F23/11319

 

 

       


 

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 106

 

20/02/2023

 

 

 

Motions of which notice has been given

 

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

 

21.      Culture and Workforce - Strategic Plan

            File Ref: F23/14171; 13-1-9

Councillor Elliot

Motion

“That the Council:

 

1.   note that the successful execution of the Council’s strategy is contingent on the City of Hobart being supported by a healthy organisational culture and a skilled, resilient and appropriately structured and resourced workforce that feels valued, heard, understood, informed and supported and

 

2.   include in its updated Strategic Plan an outcome(s) and strategies that relate to the Council’s desired organisational culture and workforce.”

 

Rationale:

 

“The achievement of organisational goals is inextricably linked to an organisation’s culture and workforce. Like other organisations, we have a vision we are working towards, a strategy to get there, work to be undertaken, and an organisational culture and workforce with its own strengths and weaknesses.

 

A staff survey undertaken in July 2021 highlighted a range of areas related to culture and our workforce that require attention. Areas for improvement include how the organisational deals with bullying, gender and mental health issues, and how it manages vacancies, retention, understaffing and loss of expertise. The survey also highlighted the need to ensure that staff feel heard, valued and supported and to improve the organisational culture and staff morale more broadly, particularly in relation to leadership culture and relationships.

 

The Council is currently undertaking a review of its Strategic Plan. At present, the Strategic Plan does not capture outcomes to work towards that relate to improving the City’s organisational culture and/or ensuring it has a workforce that is structure, resourced and appropriately supported to deliver on the organisational strategy. This motion intends to fill that important gap and elevate the importance of our culture and workforce through inclusion in a pivotal Council publication.

 

 

It is intended that the organisational culture and workforce related outcomes and strategies for inclusion in the Strategic Plan will be provided to the Council through the CEO as part of the process currently underway to update the Strategic Plan.

 

Administration Response to Notice of Motion

 

Discussion

 

As the CEO, it’s critically important for me to hear from staff from across the organisation about what’s working well, what we need to improve and ideas for the future. Therefore, an extensive engagement process with Elected Members, staff and key agencies and stakeholders commenced in June 2021 to help inform the preparation of an organisational transformation program that realigns the organisation to best deliver the Hobart: A Community Vision for Our Island Capital, aspirations ensuring a key focus on areas required to deliver the strategic directions to deliver public value.

 

The City's organisational structure facilitates the delivery of projects, programs and services to the community. As outlined above, the structure of the City of Hobart was reviewed in 2021 following input from staff across the organisation. An organisation transformation program was developed following the review. The new structure is delivering on strategic goals, fostering a strong culture where high-performing leaders work strategically and staff work collaboratively, to set the course for the City of Hobart becoming an employer of choice.

 

The City’s Executive Leadership Team (ELT) and staff are committed to delivering the best outcomes for our community and as a Capital City Council and Tasmania more broadly. As a Capital City, and the engine room of Tasmania, the Council has an important role to play in evidence-based planning and research underpinned by comprehensive community engagement to influence state and national policy to ensure the needs of our businesses and community are met now and into the future. Our structure helps us deliver on that role. Our organisation's structure allows us to embrace opportunities for growth to leverage all that Hobart has to offer. We are working hard as an organisation to set the foundations for the city we all love for many generations to come.

 

Council’s Executive Leadership recognises that culture plays a critical role in facilitating the alignment of organisational design and positions the organisation to deliver positively on strategic goals as we continue to work alongside staff from across the organisation to ensure we are creating and nurturing high performing leaders.

 

 

 

 

 

A whole of Organisation Cultural Program supported by a Leadership Program for 80 of the CoH Leadership Group will be undertaken to strengthen a respectful and positive culture that will support delivery of our Capital City Strategic Plan. At its heart the Culture Program will use the Human Synergistic evidence-based tools (OCI and OEI) to identify our actual culture and our preferred culture and then with organisational input we debrief, assess and build culture and people plans to move us toward our ideal culture to support CoH deliver on our strategic priorities and the growing community needs of the future with confidence and resilience, enabling our organisation to adapt quickly to challenges to ensure we are meeting community expectations that deliver public value.

 

 

Strategic, Legislative and Policy Implications

Capital City Strategic Plan

Pillar:

8 – Governance and Civic Involvement

Outcome:

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

Strategy:

8.5.2  - Promote a safe, healthy and value-led workplace culture.

8.5.3 - Match workforce capability and fitness to operational requirements, such as through comprehensive workforce planning, professional development and succession planning.

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

 

 

 

 

 


 

22.      Change rooms, toilets and showers

            File Ref: F23/14202; 13-1-9

Councillor Elliot

Motion

“That the Council:

 

1.   acknowledge that all community members should be able to feel safe and comfortable using the City’s change rooms, and toilet and shower facilities and

2.   adopt a policy position that as the City develops new and/or renovates existing change rooms, and toilet and shower facilities, that:

a)   where communal shared spaces are offered, that it will seek to provide at least three segregated communal shared spaces; namely a space for females/women, a space for males/men, and a space that is for people of all sexes and genders, noting that this is in addition to (not replacement of) any other spaces where there is a requirement or other need (such as accessible facilities for people with a disability and facilities for parenting and family groups) and

b)   it will seek to increase the supply of separate, individual change room, toilet and shower facilities which are solely used by an individual or a group known to each other (such as a family group) which can be accessed directly without passing through a segregated communal shared space.”

 

Rationale:

 

“Full and active participation in our community, including involvement in sport and recreation activities, necessitates access to public change rooms, toilets and showers where our community can feel safe and comfortable.

 

Changes to Tasmanian anti-discrimination and gender related legislation have made it legal for people to use facilities that align with their gender identify, opposed to their biological sex. The Council does and must continue to comply with this legislation.

 

Due to changes in the legislative and social environment, and society more broadly – including the rapid growth of gender-diverse populations, particularly with younger people https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0202330, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/10/science/transgender-teenagers-national-survey.html  – risks, tensions, wants and needs around the access to and use of public change room, toilet and shower facilities will occur and likely and escalate. Council should be proactive in responding to the needs of our community.

 

At present, the change room, toilet and shower facilities the City provides are typically (with some exceptions) segregated by gender, with separate spaces for men and women, and separate facilities for people with a disability and parenting spaces.

This motion seeks to expand the choice in change room, toilet and shower facilities provided by the City by adding the option of a third space with is open to people of all sexes and genders and increasing the amount of individual facilities available. This motion does not seek to abolish the provision of spaces which are separated by gender. It also does not intend to replace spaces that have another purpose, such as parenting facilities, family facilities and facilities for people with a disability.

 

At present, there are multiple situations where our community members can feel unsafe and/or uncomfortable using our facilities.

 

For example, to feel safe and comfortable many women want access to facilities where they can have assurance that the users of that space will be the same biological sex as them (excluding young children, for obvious reasons). Tasmanian law no longer provides women with this assurance.

 

UK based organisation, Sex Matters, surveyed over 7000 people in 2022, with 97% of respondents saying that they value single-sex spaces and services. 98% of the women who responded said they wanted for themselves and for the girls in their family to be to be able to change, shower and use the toilet in privacy, away from members of the opposite sex. https://sex-matters.org/posts/single-sex-services/why-do-single-sex-services-matter/

 

The reasons many women feel unsafe or uncomfortable sharing change rooms, toilets and showers with people of the opposite sex are vary and valid. Importantly, it is not for Council to judge the validity of these reasons but to understand that they are the views and experiences of a large portion of the community it has been elected to represent.

 

Some of the reasons women may feel unsafe or uncomfortable include:

1.   having experienced trauma such as rape, sexual abuse, assaults by a male perpetrator, with research showing that:

a)   9.4% of women have experienced violence by a stranger since the age of 15 https://www.ourwatch.org.au/quick-facts/) and

b)   18% of women have experienced sexual violence since the age of 15 (https://www.ourwatch.org.au/quick-facts/) and

c)   more than one in three Australians experienced violence by a male perpetrator since the age of 15 (36% or 6.7 million), compared to one in ten by a female perpetrator (11% or 2 million) (https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/crime-and-justice/personal-safety-australia/latest-release

2.   having experienced harassment, exhibitionism and voyeurism by a man, in a time where half of women and a quarter of men had experienced sexual harassment https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/crime-and-justice/personal-safety-australia/2016


3.   feeling self-conscious, uncomfortable or traumatised by having to change in front of people the opposite sex (https://www.foxsports.com.au/more-sports/horrendous-outrage-as-swimmer-left-in-tears-over-transgender-locker-room/news-story/df574f1e87482560168bc9e4d41c5712)

4.   feeling intimidated or threatened from a safety perspective when being in vulnerable spaces with biological men given:

a)   their inherent physical dominance over females (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3761733/) and

 

b)   the proven patterns of male criminality, particularly in relation to violent crimes https://findanexpert.unimelb.edu.au/news/16315-men-are-more-likely-to-commit-violent-crimes.-why-is-this-so-and-how-do-we-change-it%3F which are retained for trans women (including for violent crime), with male-to-females having a significantly increased risk for crime compared to female but not compared to males https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885 and

c)   that around 97% of Australia’s sexual assault offenders are men (https://www.abs.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/97-cent-sexual-assault-offenders-are-male) and that

d)   that coming out of Canada, the finding that over 80% of gender diverse offenders in their prison system with sexual offence histories were trans-women, with the highest proportion of their victims being children or female (https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2022/scc-csc/PS84-210-2022-eng.pdf).

 

5.   people who cannot be seen out of certain attire by men because of their culture and/or religious beliefs.

 

Similarly, gender-diverse people can feel unsafe and uncomfortable and face violence, abuse and harassment if they are perceived as using the ‘wrong’ facility (https://search.informit.org/doi/abs/10.3316/informit.378342500024203).

 

A paper by the Western Australia Equal Opportunity Commission states that 97 percent of gender-diverse people who said they would feel comfortable using an all gender bathroom also said they would prefer to do so over typical gendered facilities (https://www.wa.gov.au/system/files/2023-02/Changing%20rooms%20for%20gender%20diversity%20issues%20paper%2002.23.pdf)

 

Sadly, the rates of depression, anxiety and suicide are significantly higher for gender-diverse people compared to the general population (https://www.orygen.org.au/About/News-And-Events/2022/Mental-health-and-suicide-risk-in-trans-and-gender) and toilets are viewed as being among the least safe spaces for gender diverse people (https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/16/10089)

Furthermore, people should not feel forced to use facilities which are intended for individual use by people with a disability or family groups because they feel unsafe or uncomfortable using a communal space.

 

The motion does not (and cannot) resolve the many and deep tensions around the provision and removal of single-sex change rooms, toilets and showers.

 

This motion does not intend to restrict or deter gender-diverse people from using the facility of their choosing. It does seek to provide a third option which has the potential to increase the likelihood that more of our community members feel safe and comfortable in their chosen space.

 

This motion is intended to provide a logical response to a complex issue, within the City’s legislative constraints and considering the Council’s jurisdiction and authority.

 

Administration Response to Notice of Motion

Discussion

1.    Creating an equitable and inclusive community is a core part of the City’s work.  Priorities are delivered through a variety of projects, initiatives and partnerships. This work is outlined in a range of strategies and plans across the organisation.  One key policy endorsed by Council in 2021 is Hobart: A city for all the City of Hobart's Community Inclusion and Equity Framework. It outlines the City's role in creating a city for all and provides a framework for action.

 

2.   To become a city for all, we must work towards inclusion and equity for all who live, work or play in Hobart. We know that there is systemic exclusion, discrimination and inequity in our city and understand that this demands systemic and structural solutions. We work closely with those who face additional barriers to participation, including Aboriginal people, children and young people, people experiencing homelessness, LGBTIQ+ communities, multicultural communities, older people and people with disability.

3.   The City of Hobart is a proud supporter of LGBTIQ+ communities and is guided by the Council-endorsed LGBTIQ+ Commitment 2021-2023.

4.   The DKHAC has always been fully compliant with the Tasmania’s Anti- Discrimination Act in relation to access to change rooms. Advice from the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner, states that a transgender person should be able to use the change room of whichever gender they identify with (regardless of their stage of transition).

 

5.   It is noted that even if three segregated communal shared spaces; namely a space for females/women, a space for males/men, and a space that is for people of all sexes and genders were made available, transgender community members can still access the change room that matches the gender they identify with. They cannot be directed to use any particular change-rooms.

 

Strategic, Legislative and Policy Implications

Capital City Strategic Plan

Pillar:

2 – Community inclusion, participation and belonging.

Outcome:

2.2 Hobart is a place where diversity is celebrated and everyone can belong, and where people have opportunities to learn about one another and participate in city life.

2.4 Hobart communities are safe and resilient, ensuring people can support one another and flourish in times of hardship.

Strategy:

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

2.2.3 Provide and support activities and programs that celebrate diversity to reduce social isolation and build social cohesion

2.4.6 Deliver and support initiatives, activities and programs that build community resilience, wellbeing and safety.

Legislation and Policy

Legislation:

Anti-Discrimination Act 1998

Policy:

Hobart: A city for all


 

23.      'Whole of House' Short Stay Accommodation Permits

            File Ref: F23/14210; 13-1-9

Alderman Zucco

Motion

“That a report be prepared as soon as practicable that considers a range of options to ensure that whole of house/apartment residential properties that are advertised as full time short stay accommodation have permitted use rights.

 

The report consider a mechanism to be implemented that ensures the above short stay accommodation providers have the required permits in place and monitored by the Council regularly.

 

The report also considers options that all full time residential converted properties to short stay are registered on a yearly bases similarly to the hospitality industry with inspections in accordance to the health act again similarly to the hospitality industry.

 

The report further consider options to also regulate and monitor other participants in the industry that use their residence that are not full house/apartments or full time providers that may use their personal residence for short stay accommodation similarly to a home business registrations.”

 

Rationale:

 

“A number of operators in the industry have brought to my attention that there are a vast number of whole of house/apartments listed on short stay sites that do not have the appropriate permits and approvals and operating under an “exempt” option on these sites.

 

I am fully aware of the process to register on short stay provider sites but a number of operators are using the "exempt" options to overcome the permit number option. The other point is who is monitoring the industry to ensure all operators are permitted.

 

That considering there are those who have pursued appropriate permits it’s imperative that the Council regulates and monitors the industry with an intent to shut down those that are operating without permits.

 

As per generally the council would not allow a hospitality business to operate without the appropriate approvals and registration. So on that basis it is time the Council pursued a far more regulated short stay industry to ensure the industry is operating within their permitted use.

 

A registration similar to the hospitality industry would play a role in the monitoring of the industry and the fees would provide the council funding to ensure that the industry is monitored appropriately.

 

There are a vast number of Councils now introducing registrations regulations and also their use for rating the property with one example attached. 

 

 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-07/warrnambool-introduces-short-stay-accommodation-provider-fee/101938376.

 

Administration Response to Notice of Motion

 

Discussion

 

1.   The Short Stay Accommodation Act 2019 came into effect on 4 June 2019 and places obligations on the owners or occupiers of premises to provide a statement confirming that the short stay accommodation:

 

·    has the required planning permit and identifies the relevant planning permit number;

·    does not require a planning permit ; or

·    has existing use rights established under section 12 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993.

 

2.   The Act requires booking platform providers to collect and display the information on their booking platforms and to report the information to the Director of Building Control on a quarterly basis, within 30 days of the end of the quarter.

 

3.   The information provided by the booking platform providers is made available to local government and can be used to assist with ensuring compliance with planning and building requirements.

 

4.   As at the end of June 2022, the following information was provided:

 

Not Primary Residence

Primary Residence

Total

Permit Required

Permit not required

Total

Permit Required

Permit not required

Total

 

88

361

449

692

86

778

1227

 

See https://cbos.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/697579/Short-Stay-Accommodation-Act-2019-Report-11-Quarter-2-2022.pdf for further details. 

 

5.   Council has limited resources in responding to non-compliant activities and matters are investigated in accordance with resourcing limitations and assigned priority level. In accordance with the Council’s Compliance and Investigation Policy adopted by Council in 2022, officers prioritise investigation into reported non-compliant activities that involve higher or more significant risk to the community and environment.  Officers implement a pro-active monitoring regime were non-compliant activities create significant risk to the health, safety and wellbeing of the community.   A more rigorous and proactive investigation to all short stay accommodation will require a significant increase in resourcing levels. 

 

6.   Council can only act in accordance with the powers granted to it under legislation.  There is no legislative provisions which provide the scope for Council to require registration of short stay accommodation with Council, scope to periodically inspect or the ability to impose a fee.  While other jurisdictions have imposed measures, they operate under a different legislative regime.  For similar measures to be available in Tasmania, legislative reform is required.

 

Strategic, Legislative and Policy Implications

Capital City Strategic Plan

Pillar:

7 – Built Environment

Outcome:

7.1 Hobart has a diverse supply of housing and affordable homes.

Strategy:

7.1.6 Monitor and respond to the impacts of visitor accommodation

Legislation and Policy

Legislation:

Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993, Building Act 2016, Short Stay Accommodation Act 2019

Policy:

City of Hobart Compliance Investigation Procedure Policy

 

Financial Implications

 

1.   Any mechanisms which may be recommended or adopted will have resource requirements and consequential financial implications.  

 


 

24.      Inclusive and Welcoming City

            File Ref: F23/15195; 16/119

Councillor Sherlock and Councillor Posselt

Motion

“That:

1.   Council reaffirms the City’s commitment to inclusion and equal access through the Community Inclusion and Equity Framework AND that the LGBTIQ+ commitment is reviewed and refreshed as a priority this year AND that a LGBTIQ+ reference group is established.

 

2.   The City provide all elected members equality, inclusion and gender diversity training through a formal workshop. Specifically their obligations as they relate to the Council’s Social Inclusion Policy and the Anti-Discrimination Act 1998 (Tas).

 

3.   Council recognise that gender identity is enshrined in the Anti-Discrimination Act 1998 and therefore under law, anyone who identifies as a woman should be treated as a woman, anyone who identifies as a man should be treated as a man and non-binary people are non-binary people.

 

4.   The CEO write to the Director of Local Government requesting an investigation into any Councillor who’s conduct as it relates to the LGBTIQ+ community may breach the Code of Conduct and relevant State Legislation, including but not limited to the Local Government Act 1993 and the Anti-Discrimination Act 1998 (Tas) (example conduct in Attachment A).”

 

Rationale:

 

“The City’s Community Inclusion and equity framework, LGBTIQ+ commitment states:

 

In alignment with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Council recognises the fundamental right of every individual to participate socially, culturally, economically, physically, spiritually and politically in society. The Council acknowledges that each member of the community has their own set of strengths, skills and resources and that the contribution of these is of benefit to the whole community. The Council recognises that not everyone’s experience of our community is the same. We acknowledge the systemic barriers within the built, social and information environment that prevent people from thriving and contributing to society. Barriers include lack of employment opportunities, poverty, low literacy and numeracy, ill health, intimate and family violence, inadequate support services, stigma and discrimination and lack of housing affordability. These are challenges which the Council is committed to addressing through advocacy, partnership and direct action. Council commits to building social inclusion and actively reducing discrimination on the ground of any attribute listed under section 16 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1998. The Council commits to social inclusion and compliance with relevant anti-discrimination legislation in all aspects of council operations including strategic planning, service delivery, communications and design and delivery of public spaces

In 2008, the City of Hobart formally apologised to Tasmania’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex and Queer + (LGBTIQ+) communities for the discriminatory and hurtful behaviour it had undertaken in preventing the campaigning of gay law reform at the Salamanca Market in 1988.

 

Today, the City of Hobart is a proud supporter of LGBTIQ+ communities, as signified by the Hobart City Council’s decision to fly the Rainbow Flag over the Hobart Council Centre until marriage equality was realised in 2017. However, we recognise that despite social progress, in areas such as marriage equality, LGBTIQ+ people continue to experience harassment, discrimination and violence because of their sexuality and/or gender identity. These experiences can contribute to psychological distress, homelessness, and challenges with alcohol and other drugs that are disproportionately experienced by LGBTIQ+ people

 

The City celebrates the contributions that LGBTIQ+ individuals and communities make to our municipality and the commitment aims to demonstrate how we continue to support these communities to be proud, visible and responsive to the challenges they face.

 

Furthermore, under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1998 (Tas) (“the Act”), it is discrimination when a person is treated worse than other people or disadvantaged because they have a particular characteristic, such as their age, race, sex, or disability. Sexual orientation, Gender, Gender identity and Intersex variations of sex characteristics are in the Act. This would include the organisation of and participation in protests that target minority groups based on those characteristics.

 

Lastly, section 28(1) of the Local Government Act 1993 A councillor, in the capacity of an individual councillor, has the following functions:

(a) to represent the community;

(b) to act in the best interests of the community;

The City of Hobart is a welcoming city, our city is a diverse city where everyone should feel welcomed to participate society regardless of their identity, race, religion or sexuality.”

 

Administration Response to Notice of Motion

Discussion

 

1.    The City of Hobart’s Community Inclusion and Equity Framework, Hobart: a city for all, outlines the City's role in creating a city for all and provides a framework for action. 

 

2.   To become a city for all, we must work towards inclusion and equity for all who live, work or play in Hobart. We know that there is systemic exclusion, discrimination and inequity in our city and understand that this demands systemic and structural solutions. We work closely with those who face additional barriers to participation, including Aboriginal people, children and young people, people experiencing homelessness, LGBTIQ+ communities, multicultural communities, older people and people with disability.

3.   The City of Hobart is a proud supporter of LGBTIQ+ communities and is guided by the council-endorsed LGBTIQ+ Commitment 2021-2023.

 

4.   Training for elected members can be arranged and should the Council so resolve, the CEO is able to write to the Director of Local Government as contemplated by the motion.

 

Strategic, Legislative and Policy Implications

Capital City Strategic Plan

Pillar:

2 – Community inclusion, participation and belonging.

Outcome:

2.2 Hobart is a place where diversity is celebrated and everyone can belong, and where people have opportunities to learn about one another and participate in city life.

2.4 Hobart communities are safe and resilient, ensuring people can support one another and flourish in times of hardship.

 

Strategy:

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

2.2.3 Provide and support activities and programs that celebrate diversity to reduce social isolation and build social cohesion

2.4.6 Deliver and support initiatives, activities and programs that build community resilience, wellbeing and safety.

Legislation and Policy

Legislation:

Anti-Discrimination Act 1998

Policy:

Hobart: A city for all

 

Financial Implications

 

1.   Costs would be incurred through the provision of training to elected members, however this would be within current budget parameters.

 

 

Attachment a: Example Conduct   


Item No. 24

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting - 20/2/2023

Page 107

ATTACHMENT a

 



PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

 

 

 

 

 


 

Agenda (Open Portion)

Council Meeting

Page 112

 

20/2/2023

 

 

25.     QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

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

File Ref: 13-1-10

 

1.      A councillor at a meeting may ask a question without notice –

(a)  of the chairperson; or

(b)  through the chairperson, of –

(i)    another councillor; or

(ii)   the chief executive officer.

2.      In putting a question without notice at a meeting, a councillor must not –

(a)  offer an argument or opinion; or

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

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

4.      The chairperson, councillor or chief executive officer who is asked a question without notice at a meeting may decline to answer the question.

5.      The chairperson of a meeting may refuse to accept a question without notice if it does not relate to the activities of the council.

6.      Questions without notice, and any answers to those questions, are not required to be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

7.      The chairperson of a meeting may require a councillor to put a question without notice in writing.


 

26.     Closed Portion Of The Meeting

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

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

 

·         Information of a confidential nature

·         Commercial information likely to prejudice the person who supplied it.

·         Contracts and tenders

·         Proposals for an interest of Council land

 

The following items are listed for discussion:-

 

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

Item No. 2          Communication from the Chairman

Item No. 3          Leave of Absence

Item No. 4          Consideration of supplementary Items to the agenda

Item No. 5          Indications of pecuniary and conflicts of interest

Item No. 6          Draft Central Hobart Precincts Structure Plan

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

Item No. 7          Giblin Street Quarry Site - Expressions of Interest to Sell or Lease Land

LG(MP)R 15(2)(c)(i), (d) and  (f)

Item No. 8          E-Scooter Trial Findings

LG(MP)R 15(2)(c)(iii)

Item No. 9          City of Hobart Elected Member Commitments

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

Item No. 10        Questions Without Notice