Town of Bassendean: Agenda

back to the list of Agendas and Minutes >>>

TOWN OF BASSENDEAN

NOTICE OF AN ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Dear Council Member

An Ordinary Meeting of the Council of the Town of Bassendean will be held on Tuesday, 28 April 2009, in the Council Chamber, 48 Old Perth Road, Bassendean, commencing at 7.00pm.

MR BOB JARVIS

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

24 April 2009

A G E N D A

1.0 DECLARATION OF OPENING/ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS

2.0 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Members of the public who wish to do so may ask questions at this point in the agenda. A further opportunity is also provided later in the meeting.

3.0 ATTENDANCES, APOLOGIES AND APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Leave of Absence

Cr Butler

4.0 DEPUTATIONS

5.0 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

5.1 Ordinary Council Meeting held on 24 March 2009

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 5.1(a)

That the minutes of the Ordinary Council meeting held 24 March 2009, be received.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 5.1(b)

That the minutes of the Ordinary Council meeting held on 24 March 2009, be confirmed as a true record.

6.0 ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE PRESIDING PERSON WITHOUT DISCUSSION

6.1 Presentation of Sport Achievement Awards

The Mayor, Cr Klein, will present the following recipients with Sports Achievement Awards within the junior category this year:

Name	Address	Sports Achievement
Liam Boland	120 Kenny Street Bassendean	Liam represented WA in Football
Freda Otago	5 Steele Street Eden Hill	Freda represented WA in Tae Kwon Do
Paul Otago	5 Steele Street Eden Hill	Paul represented WA in Tae Kwon Do
Francesco Riggio	12 Reid Street Bassendean	Francesco represented Australia in Football
Jacob Burnham	42 Third Avenue Bassendean	Jacob represented WA in AFL Football

7.0 PETITIONS

8.0 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

9.0 BUSINESS DEFERRED FROM PREVIOUS MEETING

10.0 REPORTS

10.1 Standing Committee Meeting held on 21 April 2009

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1(a)

That the minutes of the Standing Committee meeting held on 21 April 2009, be received.

Adoption of Recommendations En Bloc

The following information is provided to Councillors for guidance on the use of En Bloc voting as is permissible under the Town’s Standing Orders. The use of En Bloc voting is widely used by Local Governments as a time management measure and to avoid repetition in debate. Should Councillors wish to proceed with En Bloc voting then the following information and suggested motions are provided by the CEO.

Standing Orders Local Law, Clause 49 states:

A member may move a motion to adopt by one resolution, all the recommendations or a group of recommendations from a committee or several reports, without amendment or qualification after having first identified those recommendations, if any -

(a) which require adoption by absolute or special majority vote,

(b) in respect of which there is a disclosure of interest;

(c) which any member has indicated the member wishes to debate; and

(d) in respect of which any member has indicated the wish to ask a question or to raise a point of clarification,

and, each of those recommendations referred to in paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and (d) shall be considered separately.

Standing Committee Minutes of 21 April 2009

The motions listed in the following Officer Recommendation were passed unanimously at the Standing Committee meeting held on 21 April 2009:

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1(b)

That Council adopts en bloc the following recommendations of the Standing Committee of 21 April 2009, contained in the Ordinary Council Agenda – Items 10.1.1, 10.1.2, 10.1.3, 10.1.7, 10.1.9, 10.1.10, 10.1.11, 10.1.13, 10.1.15, 10.1.18, 10.1.19, 10.1.20, 10.1.21, 10.1.22, 10.1.23, 10.1.24, 10.1.25, 10.1.26, 10.1.27, 10.1.28, 10.1.29 and 10.1.34:

Ordinary Council Item No.	Stand Comm Item No.	Item	Rec Number	Standing Committee Vote
10.1.1	4.1	Leave of Absence – Crs Pule and Butler	SC – 1/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.2	10.1	Plants to Residents Program	SC – 2/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.3	10.2	Breach of Local Planning Scheme, Unauthorised Builders/Storage Yard – Lot 835; No. 35 May Holman Drive, Bassendean	SC – 3/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.7	10.6	Possible Disposal of the Masonic Hall Site to the Western Australian Network of Alcohol and Other Drug Agencies	SC – 8/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.9	10.8	Proposed Amendment No. 1 to Local Planning Scheme No. 10 - Introducing the R Inner City Code to the Town Centre Zone	SC – 10/04/09	Carried Unanimously 8/0
10.1.10	10.9	Review of Seniors and Disability Services Business Unit Staffing Structure	SC – 11/04/09	Carried Unanimously 8/0
10.1.11	10.10	Major Land Transaction - Business Plan, Sale of Properties, Lots 162, 164 & 166 Wilson Street, Bassendean	SC – 12/04/09	Carried Unanimously 8/0
10.1.13	10.12	Regional Community Safety and Crime Prevention Officer	SC – 14/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.15	10.14	Suite of Characters and Messages for Promoting Projects and Events of the Town of Bassendean	SC – 16/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.18	10.17	Review of Strategic Plan for the Future 2009-19	SC – 20/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.19	10.18	Quarterly Reports for Quarter Ended 31 March 2009	SC – 21/04/09	Carried Unanimously 8/0
10.1.20	10.19	Ashfield Stakeholder Advisory Committee Meeting held on 10 December 2008 & 11 March 2009	SC – 22/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.21	10.20	Bassendean Youth Advisory Council Meeting held on 3 March 2009	SC – 23/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.22	10.21	Bassendean Local Studies Collection Management Committee Meeting held on 5 March 2009	SC – 24/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0

10.1.23	10.22	Seniors’ Week Coordinating Committee Meeting held on 12 March 2009	SC – 25/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.24	10.23	Accounts for Payment	SC – 26/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.25	10.24	Financial Statements for the Period Ended 31 March 2008	SC – 27/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.26	10.25	Determinations Made by the Manager Development Services and Reported to Council	SC – 28/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.27	10.26	Implementation of Council Resolutions	SC – 29/04/09	Carried Unanimously 8/0
10.1.28	10.27	Calendar for May 2009	SC – 30/04/09	Carried Unanimously 8/0
10.1.29	10.28	Use of the Common Seal	SC – 31/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.34	12.5	Notice of Motion – Cr Butler: Representative On Bassendean Cultural Advancement Group	SC – 36/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0

Council is now requested to considered the balance of the Standing Committee recommendations independently.

Ordinary Council Item No.	Stand Comm Item No.	Item	Rec Number	Standing Committee Vote
10.1.4	10.3	Summer Movies on the BIC Reserve	SC – 4/04/09	Carried 6/3
10.1.5	10.4	Fast Tracking BIC Reserve Tennis Facilities Project Absolute Majority Required	SC – 5/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.6	10.5	Request for Extension of Lease - 11 Hamilton Street, Bassendean	SC – 6/04/09 SC – 7/04/09	Carried 8/1 Carried 8/1
10.1.8	10.7	Building a Better Planning System – Department of Planning and Infrastructure Additional Information	SC – 9/04/09	Carried Unanimously 8/0
10.1.12	10.11	Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Flags Absolute Majority Required	SC – 13/04/09	Carried 6/3
10.1.14	10.13	Senior and Disabilities Budget Amendment - CACP On-Call Facilities Absolute Majority Required	SC – 15/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.16	10.15	Open Air Market Proposal Absolute Majority Required	SC – 17/04/09 SC – 18/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0 Carried Unanimously 9/0
10.1.17	10.16	Review of Policies Absolute Majority Required	SC – 19/04/09	Carried 7/2
10.1.30	12.1	Notice of Motion – Cr Pule: Gopher, Cyclist and Pedestrian Safety Issues	SC – 32/04/09	Carried 6/3
10.1.31	12.2	Notice of Motion – Cr Piantadosi: Transit Orientated Development	SC – 33/04/09	Carried 6/3
10.1.32	12.3	Notice of Motion – Cr Yates: Protection, Improvement and Fire Risk Reduction of Bush Forever Reserves in the Town of Bassendean Impartiality Interest – Cr Piantadosi	SC – 34/04/09	Carried 8/1
10.1.33	12.4	Notice of Motion – Cr Yates: Provision of Funds for Minor Community Works and Service Requests	SC – 35/04/09	Carried 7/2
14.1	14.1	Management of Access to Alf Faulkner Hall During Building Renovations Confidential Report	SC – 37/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
14.2	14.2	Bookings Management for BIC Reserve Tennis Facilities Confidential Report	SC – 38/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
14.3	14.3	Non Conforming Noise Events at Steel Blue Oval Bassendean 2009/10 Confidential Report	SC – 39/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0
14.4	14.4	Compensation Request by Swan Districts Football Club Confidential Report	SC – 40/04/09	Carried Unanimously 9/0

The following Committee recommendations are submitted to Council for consideration:

10.1.1 SC – 1/04/09 - Leave of Absence – Crs Pule and Butler

Cr Pule requested Leave of Absence for the period 1 May – 10 May 2009 inclusive. Cr Butler requested Leave of Absence for the Ordinary Council Meeting to be held on 28 April 2009

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.1

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Brinkworth, that Leave of Absence be granted to:

1. Cr Pule for the period 1 May – 10 May 2009 inclusive; and

2. Cr Butler for OCM, Tuesday 28 April 2009

10.1.2 SC – 2/04/09 - Plants to Residents Program (Ref: ENVM/PROCED/1*1 – Christine Devereux, Manager Health and Ranger Services)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.2

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that Council:

1. As part of the Green Bassendean Program, resolves to provide plants to residents at a subsidised cost of $0.50 per plant; and

2. Amends the budget accordingly.

Voting requirements: Absolute Majority required

10.1.3 SC – 3/04/09 - Breach of Local Planning Scheme, Unauthorised Builders/Storage Yard – Lot 835; No. 35 May Holman Drive, Bassendean – Owner: D & Z Constructions (Ref: Ref: A80357 – Michael Whitbread, Senior Planning Officer)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.3

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that given that the owner has responded to the Town and employed a planning consultant to remedy the situation, the following course of action be taken that Council advises the owner of Lot 825; 35 May Holman Drive, Bassendean:

1. To submit within 14 days, plans and a competent application to modify the existing unauthorised development that would comply with Local Planning Scheme No. 10 and associated Policies;

2. That any approved works and related conditions being implemented within 28 days from the notification of any development approval to the satisfaction of the Manager Development Services;

3. That failure to comply with item 1 & 2 above within the specified timeframes will result in the initiation of legal action without further notice.

10.1.4 SC – 4/04/09 - Summer Movies on the BIC Reserve (Ref: RECC/EVMNGT/3 – Patrick Quigley, Manager Leisure Services)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.4

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that Council

1. Supports the facilitation of a free entry Summer outdoor movie program on BIC Reserve in 2009/10;

2. Considers the allocation of $15,000, in the draft 2009/10 Council Budget for the Summer Outdoor Movie Program; and

3. Endorses for the Town to call for expressions of interest for a community group or not for profit group to operate the program.

10.1.5 SC – 5/04/09 - Fast Tracking BIC Reserve Tennis Facilities Project (Ref: PARE/DESCONT/3 – Patrick Quigley, Manager Leisure Services)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.5

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Yates, that Council:

Revokes OCM – 9/06/08, Point 3, which reads:

“Undertakes the BIC Reserve tennis facilities project in two stages, subject to $54,000 being contributed by the Club”;

Considers $10,000 ex GST within the 2009/10 Council Budget to for design works for stage two of the BIC Reserve tennis facilities;”;
Considers $165,000 ex GST within the 2009/10 Council Budget to complete stage two of the project, including external funding of $12,000 ex GST from Tennis Australia and $10,000 ex GST from the Bassendean Tennis Club; and
Defers the demolition of the three existing hard courts and sale of the sports lighting on the BIC Reserve until the proposed stage two works are completed.

Section 5.25 (e) of the Local Government Act 1995 states that if a decision has been made to revoke a Council decision, then it must be supported by at least one third of Councillors, inclusive of the mover.

10.1.6 SC - 7/04/09 - SC - 6/04/09 - Request for Extension of Lease - 11 Hamilton Street, Bassendean – Applicant: Ms Lyn Cameron, Chairperson Casa Mia Montessori School (Ref: A2137 – Brian Reed, Manager Development Services)

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.6

That Council:

1. Does not grant the requested five year extension to the lease for 11 Hamilton Street, Bassendean between the Town of Bassendean and the Casa Mia Montessori School; and

2. Is prepared to grant a further one year extension expiring on the 4 January 2011 to the lease for 11 Hamilton Street, Bassendean, between the Town of Bassendean and the Casa Mia Montessori School, to give the school additional time to find new premises.

At the Standing Committee meeting, an addition was made to the Officer Recommendation to include that the matter be reviewed six months prior to the expiry of the extension.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.6(a)

MOVED Cr Yates, Seconded Cr Pule that the following be added to point 2 of the Officer Recommendation.

“and this be reviewed six months prior to the expiry of the extension”.

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.6(b)

MOVED Cr Brinkworth, Seconded Cr Pule, that Council:

1. Does not grant the requested five year extension to the lease for 11 Hamilton Street, Bassendean between the Town of Bassendean and the Casa Mia Montessori School; and

Is prepared to grant a further one year extension expiring on the 4 January 2011 to the lease for 11 Hamilton Street, Bassendean, between the Town of Bassendean and the Casa Mia Montessori School, to give the school additional time to find new premises, and this be reviewed six months prior to the expiry of the extension.

10.1.7 SC – 8/04/09 - Possible Disposal of the Masonic Hall Site to the Western Australian Network of Alcohol and Other Drug Agencies (Ref: A5608 – Brian Reed, Manager Development Services)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.7

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Brinkworth, that WANADA be advised that the proposal to establish an office for WANADA’s use on the Masonic Hall site does not fit in with the objectives for the residential zone, as contained within the Local Planning Scheme No. 10.

10.1.8 SC – 9/04/09 - Building a Better Planning System – Department of Planning and Infrastructure (Ref: DABC/LEGLTN/1 - Brian Reed, Manager Development Services)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.8

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Cox, that:

1. The consultation paper “Building a Better Planning System” from the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, be received; and

2. The Manager Development Services provides comments and recommendations on the discussion paper to the Ordinary Council meeting to be held on 28 April 2009.

Additional Information

Since the Standing Committee meeting, the Manager Development Services and the Senior Planning Officer, attended a meeting arranged through the Eastern Districts Planning Committee on the 20 April 2009 to consider a coordinated response to the discussion paper.

The results of the meeting were circulated and formed the basis of the following comments and recommendations provided for Council’s endorsement:

ALTERNATIVE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.8

That:

1. The consultation paper “Building a Better Planning System” from the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, be received; and

The following comments and recommendations on the specific proposals outlined in the discussion paper be endorsed and forwarded to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure as the Towns response by the 1 May 2009:

1.1 Extend the ‘short–track’ subdivision System

Useful as long as agreed between individual LGAs and WAPC. ‘Non-standard’ WAPC conditions tailored to local conditions should also be agreed and applied. Also, footnotes advising applicants of requirements at clearance necessary.

1.2 Simplify approvals for multi–unit Housing

In principle agreement. However, if performance based approach assessment for split density codes exists it is difficult to see how a deemed to comply standard could be introduced into the Residential Design Codes. Care must be taken that the multi-unit housing code does not interfere with specific design criteria developed in conjunction with local communities which have resulted in greater acceptance of density – communities do not want to end up with lowest common denominator of design.

1.3 Provide greater clarity regarding subdivision engineering conditions

The use of minimum engineering standards for subdivision applications is supported in principle subject to the imposition of IPWE standards. New standards will have to accommodate the differing topographic, geologic and hydrologic conditions in different local governments.

1.4 Monitor and enforce referrals and response times

The monitoring and enforcement of referral of subdivision applications has in principle support. Nevertheless, there should be a ‘stop the clock’ process as well where additional information is required from DPI and/or the applicant.

Also timeframes should be set for other processes such as responses on scheme amendment proposals.

1.5 Reduce and simplify model subdivision conditions

Agreed providing that these conditions are reviewed annually on a basic level and major review done every 3 years.

There should also be scope for individually tailored conditions to reflect Local Planning Scheme provisions. These should be adopted by LGAs annually and a major review done every 3 years.

1.6 Delegate most built strata subdivision applications to local government

Agreed - the secondary certification by the DPI represents unnecessary duplication. Reporting mechanisms must be easy and not result in additional administration workload for LGA’s.

Issue of cash-in-lieu of public open space at the built strata stage needs to be addressed.

1.7 Fast track public housing works on zoned land

Strongly object on the basis that this is seen as anti-competitive. Why should different standards apply to DHW than any other developer that has to comply with Scheme requirements? . Prior to the modification to Public Works Act approvals were quick, however once the WAPC became approval authority there was an extra layer of bureaucracy and consequently a marked slow down in processing times.

Not satisfied that DHW would be capable of applying the standards of Council practice eg where there are performance based density bonuses under the scheme. It has the potential for community backlash as consultation may not occur or standards of consultation be inconsistently applied.

The comment is also made that there are several recent examples in more than one LGA where DHW have applied for ‘Grouped Dwellings’ but the proposal has constituted a ‘Community Home’. How can it be guaranteed that planning standards are applied and what are the penalties if they are not? Any certification process must be audited and accountable.

1.8 Adopt a risk–based approach to development assessment

A risk assessment process is supported in principle in order to expedite applications. However, local government should be indemnified by the State against liability claims that may arise.

The three levels of development assessment, as proposed and described, are very confusing. The first level refers to an “application” and the second to a “proposal”, but only the third level requires a “development permit”.

The following dot point says that a qualified planner would be involved in “making application” in all three categories. However, if an application is not required to comply with “any codes or standards”, why require an application in the first place? Should the first dot point not read “exempt from the requirement for development approval”?

The paper states that local governments may have some discretion to define which development proposals fall into the relevant categories. It is considered that the categories of exempt and self assessable would need to be closely examined to assess whether such a system would be an improvement and to ensure that such a system does not create further issues, particularly in relation to the amenity and the orderly and proper planning of an area.

It would be preferable that emphasis is given to exempting development from the requirement for approval rather than self-assessment. Concerned about self-assessment because (noting experiences elsewhere), there is definitely the potential for non-compliant proposals to be incorrectly self-assessed, and once built it would be impractical, onerous and politically near impossible to require removal of such a development (or to bring it into compliance). A self-assessment checklist provided by a proponent could be a tool to simplify the development approval process, but there should still be a checking mechanism by local government and an actual development approval issued.

Clarification is required at to what constitutes a ‘qualified planner’.

1.9 Adopt a risk–based approach to subdivision assessment

Minor applications are often more time consuming and represent a higher risk of poor outcomes following the approval (ie at the clearance stage).

This is due to the inexperience of `mum and dad’ developers who seek to develop without any real appreciation let alone understanding of the work involved. More information as to clearance requirements may be required as advice notes.

Concerned at the possibility of subdivisions for fewer than five lots receiving insufficient scrutiny. From experience, particularly in fragmented urban fringe areas where “smaller” subdivisions are more common, two- to four-lot subdivisions can cause significant impacts in terms of precedent, disruption to subdivision pattern, preventing continuity of roads or public open space etc.

1.10 Trial subdivision delegation to local Government

Unclear how this relates to 1.1 and 1.9.

Delegation should only occur where agreed to by both the WAPC and LGA. There would be resource issues if this was extended to the smaller authorities.

Would require very clear indication of the scope (if any) for local government t to interpret or depart from WAPC policy.

The subdivision of land, where it is administered by Local Government, has often been a source of systemic corruption as shown in NSW. The current system at least ensures some distance between the decision makers and the local political environment.

1.11 Simplify and streamline structure plan layers and requirements

No objections, but what about Amended and Resumptive Development Schemes? The reason structure planning is becoming so unwieldy is because the implementation mechanism is now limited to structure plan through MST (draft) provisions which are unclear and unwieldy.

More guidance should be given as to options other than a structure plan as a way of implementing redevelopment (particularly in urban infill areas).

1.12 Avoid dual approvals for structure plans

Reference is made to “joint rather than sequential assessment”. Should this read “concurrent” rather than “joint”? Note that more intense scrutiny, site inspections, detailed consideration of engineering and environmental matters are usually required by the local govt than the WAPC. Also, it is possible for DPI/WAPC and local govt staff (and/or Councillors) to have differing views on a particular structure plan. How would these be resolved without “dual approvals” if no consensus can be reached? It is important that with such large subdivisions that require a structure plans that communities are given the opportunity to comment.

1.13 Track and monitor structure plans

How does this sit with the Model Scheme Text (draft) requirements which specify timeframes and notification? Suggest the clauses need major rework. Deemed refusal provision should apply as well as the `stop the clock’ mechanism where structure plans need revision.

1.14 Ensure majority of single houses are planning approval exempt

No objection where an area is only subject to R Codes and not specific Design Guidelines (prepared and adapted as a LPP under the scheme e.g. Ascot Waters) or where concerns such as environmental issues (flood prone land) or heritage listing require planning approval process to be in place.

The comment is made that LGA’s in Eastern District Authorities already exempt single houses from approval wherever possible.

WAPC policy on Special Residential subdivision needs to be revised on this point, as it currently indicates all houses on R5 or R2.5 lots should require planning approval.

1.15 Ensure appropriate information is provided with applications

This aspect of the reform agenda is strongly supported! Basic guidelines could be produced by the WAPC for minimum requirements to assist in set up of ‘gateway’ role (will assist with a consistent approach between local governments). Valuable time and effort is wasted in chasing up additional information. There is also the time taken in re-assessing plans and submissions which acts to delay all other applications.

1.16 Simplify and streamline public works Approvals

Supported, providing that liability issues are resolved and infrastructure is protected.

1.17 Abolish dual approvals for Development

Supported in part only. Consideration should be given to further delegation from the WAPC to local government in cases such as river front properties where a planning consent deals with aspects such as privacy screening, floor levels and flood prone land. A WAPC approval may not take into account these factors.

Dual approvals may still play a role where the each responsible authority is clear on its responsibilities i.e the WAPC should not become involved in local issues and LGAs should not become involved in State issues.

If there is any likelihood of a WAPC/Ministerial approval of a development where a local govt recommends refusal, there needs to be a process to advise the local govt to recommend conditions of approval (notwithstanding that it opposes the development).

1.18 Development Assessment Panels

Delegation to officers to make decisions should be set by the WAPC and not left to individual Council’s – the setting of such benchmarks should be tied to the knowledge and experience of those people authorised to exercise delegation.

Panels of ‘independent experts’ should not just include private consultants (perhaps a secondment role from other experts from LG?)

Panels should only be used where one or more of the following occur:

The LGA chooses to refer a proposal and therefore abrogate responsibility for a decision.
The LGA cannot source staff with expertise
The LGA’s processes are demonstrably failing.

1.19 Development decisions tracked and Reported

Agreed, but may need additional funding in set up and training of expertise to avoid technical offices becoming increasingly involved in administration tasks (thereby reducing time available for assessments etc)

2.1 Rewrite the Model Scheme Text based on Development Assessment Forum principles

Agreed providing that the results are not too prescriptive as this would create a community backlash, particularly where the new standards results in low quality development. The `general’ variance clause of the Model Scheme Text needs to be considered in the context of these changes.

The length of time taken to fulfil all or most of the requirements of the State Planning Framework with respect to new Schemes (and Local Planning Strategies) is significant. It is anticipated that once the roll-out of Local Planning Strategies and MST-based Schemes is complete, Scheme reviews will become easier and more timely. At present, however, the requirements of the State Planning Framework need to be scaled back if Schemes are to be prepared and fully reviewed every five years.

2.2 WAPC to gazette schemes and amendments at final approval

Supported. The WAPC should coordinate both final approval and gazettal which would lift the administrative burden from LG.

2.3 Regulatory gateway process for new planning legislation, including regulatory impact assessment statements

Clarification is required as to whether this includes a Local Planning Scheme? If so, is the strategy considered to constitute the ‘impact statement’? If not the production of a new Local Planning Strategy will become more unwieldy.

2.4 Restrict pre–selling of lots

Despite the “buyer beware” principle, buyers should not be exposed to pre-sale of lots (or homes) in a proposed development which may be refused.

Should also apply to strata lots.

2.5 Integrate State planning and environmental approvals and appeals processes

Should also consider the overlap with legislation relating to the Swan and Canning River and the role of the SRT. Delays due to the SRT are horrendous and the WAPC seem unable to do anything about this. One approval agency having regard for triple bottom line – no veto power at the environmental level.

2.6 Reduce policy complexity

Policies should all be considered at the time of review of LPS and reported against.

There should be a clear distinction made between Regulations and Policies. If ‘policies’ such as the R Codes are to be applied as if they were regulation, then make them regulations.

A thorough review of both WAPC policies and planning bulletins is required, in order to delete obsolete policies/bulletins and ensure consistency between policies.

Supported.

Disagree. This will in part result in a further widening of the gap in equity of wealth distribution between the ‘elite’ suburbs and others, there needs to be consideration given to equitable distribution of affordable housing and not just ‘dumping’ in particular regions – perhaps a minimum requirement for all LG areas?

2.7 Extend the scope of minor amendments under the region schemes

Agreed.

DPI processes need to ensure up to date with P & D Act.

2.8 Model Scheme Text for region Schemes

Supported.

2.9 Underpin planning by supporting preparation of timely and simplified local planning strategies

Agreed but need to be careful they’re not over simplified. Moreover, the State Planning Framework itself, prepared by the WAPC, contains numerous detailed requirements for local planning strategies. If local planning strategies are to be simplified, the State Planning Framework will need to be revised so as to not require so much from local planning strategies.

2.10 Initiation of local planning scheme amendments

See previous comments immediately above regarding the impact of the State Planning Framework on the time taken to review Schemes. There is no concern with a requirement to amend local government Schemes to reflect State strategic policies, except where the State policies require large amounts of investigation to be undertaken. Nor is there any concern with a requirement to amend local government Schemes to be consistent with the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS). However, beyond this, do not support a proponent right of appeal over the refusal to initiate a Scheme Amendment. If a Scheme is consistent with State policies and the MRS, the local government should have the ability to refuse to initiate amendments, as these are probably going to relate to matters of local rather than regional planning significance. These requests can be dealt with again when the Scheme is reviewed.

If there is to be a right of appeal it should exist only where a scheme has not commenced review within the 5 year period as required under the Act.

2.11 Consider reducing amendment consultation timeframes

Supported.

2.12 Provide mechanisms for the statutory implementation of strategic policies

More specific policies and regulations for state and local government policies are supported. Question arise as to how this be resourced and consistency ensured? A large number of LGA’s do not have the resources to review and implement policies to the same degree as larger better resourced organisations.

The question arises of whether the WAPC doing this policy work, however, what review mechanism would be available if there’s a problem or conflict at a local level.

Therefore it is recommended that State strategic policies be carefully worded using the expertise of planners familiar with the implementation of local government Schemes. Several existing State Planning Policies would have benefited from such a method of formulation.

If an increased coherency is proposed are introduced the criteria for state or regional significance need to be very clear, measurable and definite. There would still need to be the opportunity for both public

3.1 Establishment of an industry advisory group on the approvals processes for major resource development projects. Transfer of the Office of Development Approvals Coordination to the Department of State Development.

If introduced the criteria for state or regional significance need to be very clear, measurable and definite.

3.2 Call in powers for major land and housing projects of State and regional significance

Call in powers however, should limited to meet set criteria. There is no objection current criteria “as to matters constituting regional and State significance”,.

3.3 Consider options for the management of major land and housing projects across Western Australia

Generally supported. However, require more detail. Approach must be consistent across the board.

Public consultation and local government recommendations on proposal and these should be given weight in any decision making by the Minister in this situation.

There is concern that too much emphasis may being placed on greenfield development rather than intensification of development within the existing urban fabric. Given highly likely reductions in future energy availability for transport, this bias could be counterproductive.

10.1.9 SC – 10/04/09 - Proposed Amendment No. 1 to Local Planning Scheme No. 10 - Introducing the R Inner City Code to the Town Centre Zone (Ref: LUAP/PLANNG/8 – Brian Reed, Manager Development Services)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.9

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that:

1. Council notes Submission No. 1 on proposed Amendment No. 1 to the Local Planning Scheme No. 10;

2. Council rejects submission No. 2 on proposed Amendment No. 1 to the Local Planning Scheme No. 10;

3. Amendment No. 1 to the Local Planning Scheme No. 10 be adopted without modification.

Voting requirements: Simple Majority

10.1.10 SC – 11/04/09 - Review of Seniors and Disability Services Business Unit Staffing Structure (Ref: GOVN/CCLMEET/1 & CORM/ESTAB/1 – Graeme Haggart, Director Community Development & Philip Baker, Manager Seniors and Disability Services)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.10

MOVED Cr Pule, Seconded Cr Cox, that:

1. Council:

a) Approves the proposed amended Seniors and Disability Services Business Unit structure that includes the establishment of the Assistant Manager position;

b) Approves the transfer of responsibility for the management of Hyde Retirement Village to Seniors and Disability Services Business Unit; and

c) Retains the Volunteer and Community Transport Coordinator position as a full-time position; and

2. The organisation structure changes become effective following the adoption of the 2009/10 Budget.

10.1.11 SC – 12/04/09 - Major Land Transaction - Business Plan, Sale of Properties, Lots 162, 164 & 166 Wilson Street, Bassendean (Ref: A5604-A5606 Mike Costarella)

At the Standing Committee, Point 2 was added to the Officer Recommendation as highlighted in bold below, that a report on the process required to delist the Masonic Lodge from the State Heritage Register, be referred to Council.

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.11

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that:

Council endorses the Business Plan for the Sale of Lots 162,164 and 166 Wilson Street, Bassendean, and advertises it for public comment for a 6 week period ending on the 12 June 2009, and
Council receives a report on the process required to delist the Masonic Lodge from the State Heritage Register.

10.1.12 SC – 13/04/09 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Flags (Ref: Graeme Haggart, Director Community Development)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.12

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that:

1. Council supports the flying of the Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander flags at the front of the Administration building located at 48 Old Perth Road, Bassendean;

2. $4,000 be reallocated from the 2008/09 Operational Budget to the Capital Budget to cover the cost of the project; and

3. An appropriate ceremony to mark the occasion of the raising of the flags be hosted by Council at a time agreed with the local Nyungar community, and that a plaque be prepared to commemorate the event.

Voting Requirement: Absolute Majority Required

10.1.13 SC – 14/04/09 - Regional Community Safety and Crime Prevention Officer (Ref: Graeme Haggart, Director Community Development)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.13

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Brinkworth, that Council:

1. Supports the establishment of a Regional Community Safety Coordinator for a period of 3 years at an operational cost of $30,000 per year commencing in 2009/10 financial year; and

2. Only supports to proceed on recommendation 1 above with similar endorsement and financial commitment by the Shires of Mundaring and Kalamunda and the City of Swan.

10.1.14 SC – 15/04/09 - Senior and Disabilities Budget Amendment - CACP On-Call Facilities (Ref: Phil Baker)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.14

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that:

1. Council endorses the purchase of the On-Call Emergency telephone system for after hours emergency contact;

2. Council amends the 2008/09 Budget and creates a capital account for the purchase of the On-Call Facility for CACP Program totalling $5,000; and

3. The expenditure be authorized in accordance with Section 6.8 of the Local Government Act.

Voting requirements: Absolute Majority Required

10.1.15 SC - 16/04/09 - Suite of Characters and Messages for Promoting Projects and Events of the Town of Bassendean (Ref: INFM/INTPROP/1 - Bob Jarvis, CEO)

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.15

That:

1. Council approves the Suite of Bas ‘n’ Dean messages attached to the Standing Committee Agenda of 21 April 2009, for promotion of projects by the Town;

2. Provision be made in the draft 2009/2010 Budget for signage for capital works, environmental projects, and events using the suite of messages for the appropriate projects.

At the Standing Committee meeting, this item was deferred until the Ordinary Council meeting so that colour copies of the messages to Councillors can be provided (see attached).

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.15

MOVED Cr Yates, Seconded Cr Gangell that this item be deferred until next week’s OCM so that the messages can be provided to Council in colour.

10.1.16 Open Air Market Proposal (Ref: RECC/EVMNGT/3 - Bob Jarvis, Chief Executive Officer; Patrick Quigley, Manager Leisure Services; Brian Reed, Manager Development Services; Ian McDowell, Manager Asset Services & Allan Caddy, Manager Library & Information Services)

SC – 17/04/09

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.16(a)

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that Council supports in principle the establishment of a weekend market in Old Perth Road subject to the following:

A community group or groups providing the logistical support and staffing for set up and break down each market day;
Local retailers being given the opportunity to participate on the day to provide food and complementary activities, and indicating their support for the Market concept;
Council making provision in its budget for start up and ongoing promotion of the markets through signage and advertising.

SC - 18/04/09

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.16(b)

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that Council appoints an Old Perth Road Market Committee with Councillors Gangell and Pule being representatives of the Town, and that community groups be encouraged to register their interest in running the markets as a fundraiser and being represented on the Committee along with invited representatives of the Old Perth Road retailers. Those members will be appointed by Council when nominations are presented at a future Council meeting.

TO BE CARRIED BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY UNDER SECTION 5.10 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1995 TO APPOINT MEMBERS TO A COMMITTEE.

10.1.17 SC – 19/04/09 - Review of Policies (Ref: – Bob Jarvis, Chief Executive Officer, Michael Costarella, Director Corporate Services)

At the Standing Committee meeting, some amendments were made to a number of the policies which are shown in the Committee Recommendation.

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.17

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that Council adopts the following Governance Policies including the following amendments:

Council Delegates;
Council Meeting Schedule;
Council Protocols;
Councillor Allowance Expenses and Resources;
Councillor Professional Development;

An addition to include:

“That Council will determine whether a Councillor be allowed to attend a conference within six months prior to their term of office.”

Councillor Requests;

An addition as shown in the following paragraph (bold type)::

“An initial response to the request will be provided by the CEO (following consultation with the relevant staff) advising the Councillor (and copy to all other Councillors via email) of the appropriate answer or approximate timeframe required to complete the request within 1 working day”.

Gift to Departing Councillors;

An addition as shown in the following paragraph (bold type):

“On retirement a plaque with an inscription is to be presented to each Councillor who completes any term of office at the expiry of that term for which he or she is elected”.

Minutes of Council Meetings;
Notices of Motions;
Publication by Individual Councillors;

The following paragraph be removed.

“All material which is received at the Council Administration Office addressed to the Town of Bassendean, becomes the property of the Town of Bassendean in accordance with the State Records Act and is subject to release under Freedom of Information legislation in the same manner as any Council information”.

Recruiting Community Members in Council Committees; and
Special Meeting following Annual Elections.

NOTE: ABSOLUTE MAJORITY REQUIRED

10.1.18 SC - 20/04/09 - Review of Strategic Plan for the Future 2009-19 (Ref: Mike Costarella , Director Corporate Services)

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.18

That Council receives and notes the contents the draft Strategic Plan for the Future 2009-19 and advertises the draft plan for public comment.

Foot Note:

Local public notice is required to state where a plan for the future of the district has been modified, notification that the modifications to the plan have been adopted by the Council and that the plan as modified is to apply to the district for a the period specified in the plan.

At the Standing Committee, the Director Corporate Services advised that a number of items had yet to be included in the draft, and that it is his intention to present an updated draft to Council at next week’s OCM. Therefore,, the Committee agreed to defer this item.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.18

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule that this item be deferred to next week’s Ordinary Council meeting.

10.1.19 SC – 21/04/09 - Quarterly Reports for Quarter Ended 31 March 2009 (Ref: FINM/AUD/1 – Yvonne Zaffino, Council Support Officer)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.19

MOVED Cr Brinkworth, Seconded Cr Butler, that Council:

1. Receives the Quarterly Reports for the Quarter ended 31 March 2009,

2. Endorses the strategic priority targets set by the CEO for the current quarter; and

3. Removes the projects within the Quarterly Report that have been completed and/or require no further action.

10.1.20 SC – 22/04/09 - Ashfield Stakeholder Advisory Committee Meeting held on 10 December 2008 & 11 March 2009 (Ref: GOVN/CCLMEET/4 - Graeme Haggart, Director Community Development)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.20

MOVED Cr Brinkworth, Seconded Cr Cox, that the report on the Ashfield Stakeholder Advisory Committee meetings held on 10 December 2008 and 11 March 2009, be received.

10.1.21 SC – 23/04/09 - Bassendean Youth Advisory Council Meeting held on 3 March 2009 (Ref: GOVN/CCLMEET/– Yvonne Zaffino, Council Support Officer)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.21

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Brinkworth, that Council notes that due to the lack of a quorum, the Bassendean Youth Advisory Council meeting scheduled for 3 March 2009, was not held.

10.1.22 SC – 24/04/09 - Bassendean Local Studies Collection Management Committee Meeting held on 5 March 2009 (Ref: GOVN/MMETCCL3 – Allan Caddy, Manager Library & Information Services)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION 10.1.22

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that the report on a meeting of the Bassendean Local Studies Collection Management Committee held on 5 March 2009, be received.

10.1.23 SC – 25/04/09 - Seniors’ Week Coordinating Committee Meeting held on 12 March 2009 (Ref: RECC/EVMNGT/7– Patrick Quigley, Manager Leisure Services)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.23

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that Council receives the report on a meeting of the Seniors’ Week Coordinating Committee held on 12 March 2009.

10.1.24 SC – 26/04/09 - Accounts for Payment (Ref: G041 – Michael Costarella, Director Corporate Services)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION - ITEM 10.1.24

MOVED Cr Brinkworth, Seconded Cr Cox, that vouchers:

82711-82740 Municipal Fund – Commonwealth Bank

5869-5871 Trust Fund

4921-5180 Municipal Fund – EFT Vouchers

totalling $1,369,662.12 for payment.

10.1.25 SC – 27/04/09 - Financial Statements for the Period Ended 31 March 2008 (Ref: FINM/AUD/1 – Michael Costarella, Director Corporate Services)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.25

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Brinkworth, that:

1. The Financial Reports for the period ended 31 March 2009, be received;

2. The Investment Report for the period ended 31 March 2009, be received;

3. The Statement of Outstanding Creditors’ accounts in the amount of $314,604.02 for the period to 31 March 2009, be received; and

4. The Statement of Outstanding Debtors’ accounts in the amount of $181,393.61 as at 31 March 2009, be received.

10.1.26 SC – 28/04/09 - Determinations Made by the Manager Development Services and Reported to Council (Ref: LUAP/PROCED/1 - Brian Reed, Manager Development Services)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.26

MOVED Cr Pule, Seconded Cr Gangell, that Council notes the decisions made under delegated authority by the Manager Development Services.

10.1.27 SC – 29/04/09 - Implementation of Council Resolutions

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.27

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that the information on the implementation of Council resolutions be received, and that those recommendations recommended for deletion be deleted from the list.

10.1.28 SC – 30/04/09 - Calendar for May 2009 (Ref: G1128 – Sue Perkins, Executive Assistant)

At the Standing Committee, a minor amendment was made to the Calendar to include Cr Pule rather than Cr Piantadosi as a Council representative on the Cultural Development Advisory Committee.

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION - ITEM 10.1.28

MOVED Cr Brinkworth, Seconded Cr Pule, that the Calendar for May 2009, as amended, be adopted.

10.1.29 SC – 31/04/09 - Use of the Common Seal (Ref: G0416 – Sue Perkins, Executive Assistant)

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.29

MOVED Cr Brinkworth, Seconded Cr Butler, that the report on the use of the Common Seal be received.

10.1.30 SC – 32/04/09 - Notice of Motion – Cr Pule: Gopher, Cyclist and Pedestrian Safety Issues

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.30

MOVED Cr Pule, Seconded Cr Gangell, that Council receives a comprehensive report on the safety issues relating to the safety in passage of gophers, cyclists and pedestrians along cycle paths and all paths at kerbside alignments and radiating towards the Town, on all current rubbish collection days.

The report is to include:

a) Current Safety issues to the Disabled, Seniors, Cyclists and Pedestrians;

b) Risk and Liability issue;

c) Alternate collection and Safety options such as bin pools, education etc;

d) Bin prohibited designated zones; and

e) All other important safety issues relating to traffic management.

10.1.31 SC – 33/04/09 - Notice of Motion – Cr Piantadosi: Transit Orientated Development

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.31

MOVED Cr Piantadosi, Seconded Cr Gangell, that an officer report be prepared outlining options to introduce density changes to the Local Planning Scheme No. 10, particularly around the Town's 3 train stations taking account of the state governments network city policy. The report to be presented to the May 2009 Council meeting to formally introduce the process for a Scheme Amendment.

10.1.32 SC – 34/04/09 - Notice of Motion – Cr Yates: Protection, Improvement and Fire Risk Reduction of Bush Forever Reserves in the Town of Bassendean

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.32

MOVED Cr Yates, Seconded Cr Pule, that the Town of Bassendean includes an appropriate budget commitment in the financial year beginning July 2009, possibly using cash-in-lieu funds, and presents to Council for approval a body of works to extend the protection, improvement, reduction of fire risks and stop any possible dieback spread in the bush forever reserves within the Town of Bassendean, including Jubilee Reserve, Success Hill Reserve and Ashfield Flats.

10.1.33 SC – 35/04/09 - Notice of Motion – Cr Yates: Provision of Funds for Minor Community Works and Service Requests

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.33

MOVED Cr Yates, Seconded Cr Gangell, that a report be prepared in time for the Council's budget deliberations on the merit of making an allocation of funds for community service private works to be allocated at the CEO's discretion, and include guidelines for consideration by Council on the prioritising of those funds.

10.1.34 SC - 36/04/09 - Notice of Motion – Cr Butler: Representative On Bassendean Cultural Advancement Group

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 10.1.34

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that the Notice of Motion from Cr Butler relating to the Bassendean Cultural Advancement Group item be deferred pending the completion of the Officer’s Report on this matter.

10.2 REPORTS OF OFFICERS

10.2.1 Local Government Reform Steering Committee (LGRSC) Guidelines (Ref: GOVN/AMALG/1, Bob Jarvis - Chief Executive Officer

APPLICATION

The purpose of the report is to seek Council’s endorsement with its response to the information required by the LGRSC guidelines.

BACKGROUND

Council is required to submit a response to the guidelines requested by the Minister for Local Government on the reform strategies for Local Government by the 30 April 2009.

The response relates to stage 1 of the process which includes the following:

Individual local governments to complete the attached reform checklist;
Initial exploratory meeting to confirm local government amalgamation grouping is appropriate;
Local governments to determine suitable partners for amalgamation;
Consideration of the reduction in the number of elected members;
Consideration of skill set for the establishment of a project team to coordinate local government’s reform process; and
Local Government to forward completed checklist to the Local Government Reform Steering Committee by 30 April 2009.

Council has held a workshop on 10 February 2009 and the responses reflect the consensus reached at the workshops.

Staff have included a copy of the guidelines and relative responses as an attachment. Documentation that accompanies the response, together with a covering letter from the Mayor, will be available at the meeting.

COMMENT

At the workshop on 10 February 2009, Councillors were generally confident that Bassendean did not need to merge with any other local government, and that the checklist process would confirm that the Town was sustainable. There was a concern that a merger would put at risk the priorities for the suburbs in the Town and the long standing plans for growth, as a merged Bassendean would have a minority representation in a larger Council. Councillors were happy to explore boundary adjustments to address anomalies with neighbouring Councils where the border did not follow major roads or natural boundaries.

The Councillors were of the view that they would consider a review of representation in keeping with the Minister’s wishes and would consider a reduction of Councillors to six and the possibility of them being Councillors for the whole district rather than the current ward system.

At its Ordinary meeting of 26 March 2009, Council appointed its Project Team for the Reform Process with the Mayor, CEO, and Councillors Gangell and Piantadosi as the members. At the same meeting, Council resolved that it would meet with its two bordering Councils, Bayswater and Swan to discuss boundary reform, and chose its EMRC partners as its preferred regional group of Councils, as requested by the Minister.

The Project Team has already met with the City of Swan on 8 April 2009 and had a general discussion about boundary adjustments, with an agreement that where possible major roads and natural boundaries should be used as the borders of local governments.

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

There are a number of statutory provisions for the Structural Reform process, namely Part 2 of the Local Government Act Regulations as well as Schedule 2.1 and 2.2. However this process has been instigated by the Minister in line with his Local Government Reform Strategies and the process is to be completed by the 31 August 2009.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Whilst there is no external additional costs, the amount of staff time allocated to this project will be considerable. To date, Executive Offices and Departmental Mangers have spent some 20 hours to collate and develop this required information for the guidelines response.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – 10.2.1

That:

1. Council endorses the submission (including responses to the guidelines) to the Local Government Reform Steering Committee; and

2. Extends its appreciation to relevant staff for the development of the submission.

Voting requirements: Simple Majority

11.0 PUBLIC QUESTIONS & RIGHT OF REPLY

Members of the public who did not ask questions in Part One of Public Question Time will be heard first.

12.0 MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

12.1 Notice of Motion – Cr Pule: Statue of Rolf Harris

“That Council receives a report on the erection of a statue of Rolf Harris in a prominent position within the Town of Bassendean, including:

1. Referring the matter to the Cultural Development Advisory Committee for further development;

2. Seeking donations from the Business & Bassendean Community and having a listing of donors and applying for grants; and

3. Locating the statue in a prominent place in Bassendean.”

13.0 ANNOUNCEMENTS OF NOTICES OF MOTION FOR THE NEXT MEETING

14.0 CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

14.1 SC – 37/04/09 - Management of Access to Alf Faulkner Hall During Building Renovations (Ref: IVA128 & MARY00019 – Graeme Haggart, Director Community Development & Patrick Quigley, Manager Leisure Services)

As the Officer report discusses information of a commercial nature, this item is to be considered with members of the public excluded under Section 5.23 (2) (e) of the Local Government Act.

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 14.1

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that Council adopts the Officer Recommendation as shown in the Confidential Report to the Standing Committee of 21 April 2009.

Voting Requirements: Absolute Majority Required.

14.2 SC – 38/04/09 - Bookings Management for BIC Reserve Tennis Facilities (Ref: COUP/USAGE/11 – Travis Moore, Recreation Development Officer)

As the Officer report discusses information of a commercial nature, this item is to be considered with members of the public excluded under Section 5.23 (2) (e) of the Local Government Act.

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 14.2

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that Council adopts the Officer Recommendation as shown in the Confidential Report to the Standing Committee of 21 April 2009.

14.3 SC – 39/04/09 - Non Conforming Noise Events at Steel Blue Oval Bassendean 2009/10 (Ref: COUP/USAGE/3 – Patrick Quigley, Manager Leisure Services & Graeme Haggart, Director Community Development)

This matter is to be considered with members of the public excluded from the Chamber under Clause 5.23 (2) (c) and (d) of the Local Government Act 1995, as the officer report discusses details of a proposed contract to be entered into.

At the Standing Committee, a minor amendment was made to the Officer Recommendation to include 1 January 2010 as a possible alternative date for the event scheduled for 31 December 2009.

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 14.3

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Yates, that Council adopts the Officer Recommendation as shown in the Confidential Report to the Standing Committee of 21 April 2009 as amended.

14.4 SC – 40/04/09 - Compensation Request by Swan Districts Football Club (Ref: COUP/USAGE/3 – Patrick Quigley, Manager Leisure Services & Graeme Haggart, Director Community Development)

At the Standing Committee meeting Points 2 and 3 were included in the Officer Recommendation to approve the expenditure in accordance with the Local Government Act and that the budget be amended accordingly.

COMMITTEE/OFFICER RECOMMENDATION – ITEM 14.4

MOVED Cr Gangell, Seconded Cr Pule, that Council adopts the Officer Recommendation as shown in the Confidential Report to the Standing Committee of 21 April 2009 as amended.

14.5 JPET Program Termination (Ref: ‘P’, Greg Neri, Manager Youth Services & Graeme Haggart, Director Community Development)

This matter is to be considered with members of the public excluded from the Chamber under Clause 5.23(2) (a) of the Local Government Act as the officer report discusses a matter affecting an employee or employees.

15.0 CLOSURE

The next Ordinary Council meeting will be held on Tuesday, 26 May 2009.