Late Items Agenda of General

Maranoa Regional Council

General Meeting - 23 May 2012

Officer Report

Meeting: General 23 May 2012	Date: 17 April 2012
Item Number: L.1	File Number: D12/10457

Subject Heading: 2011/2012 Operational Plan Quarterly Review

Classification: Open Access

Name of Applicant:

Location:

Author & Officer’s Title: Tanya Mansfield, Manager Risk and Facilities

Executive Summary:

The 2011/12 Operational Plan sets out the most significant projects and initiatives that Council decided to pursue this financial year towards achieving the long term objectives in the Corporate Plan 2009-2013.

Regular monitoring of progress against this Operational Plan is an important element of Council’s governance process and is also a requirement of the Local Government Act 2009.

The attached report on progress to 31^st March 2012 is presented for Council’s consideration. An update on activities identified in the Operational Plan has been undertaken and explanations provided.

Officer’s Recommendation:

That the third quarterly report on the activities to achieve the goals and strategies outlined in the 2011/12 Operational Plan be received.

Body of Report:

The 2011/12 Operational Plan review for the third quarter is presented for Council’s consideration. An update on activities identified in the Operational Plan to address the strategies outlined in the Corporate Plan has been undertaken and explanations provided where appropriate.

Quarterly reports on the implementation of Corporate and Operational Plans must be submitted to Council. The intention of the quarterly report is to describe the activities undertaken in the preceding period in support of the activities in the Operational Plan and to explain the extent to which the activities have advanced a strategy in the Corporate Plan.

It is recommended that the quarterly report on the activities to achieve the goals and strategies outlined in the 2011/12 Operational Plan for the third quarter be adopted in accordance with the Local Government Act.

Consultation (internal/external):

Council Managers and Directors have reviewed and approved sections of the report relevant to their areas of responsibility.

Risk Assessment (Legal, Financial, Political etc.):

Statutory requirement of the Local Government Act 2009.

Policy Implications:

The recommendation supports Council’s strategic priority to provide effective organisational leadership and a framework of policies, plans and strategies that are responsive to the community’s needs and which promote accountable and ethical standards of practice.

Financial Resource Implications:

Activities have been included in Council’s budget 2011/12.

Link to Corporate Plan:

Corporate Plan 2009-2013 — 8.2.3(a) To implement Council’s governance policies and procedures in an evolving organisational environment whilst ensuring legislative relevance, consistency and fairness in application.

Supporting Documentation:

1 View

Operational Plan Quarterly Review

D12/6378

Report authorised by:

Paul Bawden, Chief Executive Officer

Attachment 1

Operational Plan Quarterly Review

Maranoa Regional Council

General Meeting - 23 May 2012

Officer Report

Meeting: General 23 May 2012	Date: 11 May 2012
Item Number: L.2	File Number: D12/13144

Subject Heading: Roma Flood Study and Mitigation Project Final Reports - Stage 1 and 2

Classification: Open Access

Name of Applicant:

Location:

Author & Officer’s Title: Barry Omundson, Director Infrastucture

Executive Summary:

The Roma Flood and Mitigation Project has been undertaken to appreciate the character of recent flooding, identifying and implementing mitigation measures to protect the town. When commenced it was in response to the 2010 and 2011 events, however has now been extended to include the more significant 2012 event. It includes the following stages:

Stage 1 of the Roma Flood Study and Mitigation Project entailed the investigation and modelling of the flood events in Roma. The purpose of this work is to produce digital mapping of the catchment and hydrology to show the extent of flood inundation.

Stage 2 of the project is an assessment of flood mitigation measures and recommends a mix of strategies including a levee embankment, raising of selected homes and a western diversion channel.

Stage 3 is dependent on the outcomes of stage 2 and involves detailed investigation, design and construction of the mitigation measures.

Officer’s Recommendation:

That Council:

1. Receive and endorse in principal the final stage 1 and 2 Roma Flood Study and Mitigation Project Reports, pending consultation;

2. Undertake extensive community consultation on stage 1 and 2 Reports and the outcomes to be presented to Council prior to its final endorsement;

3. Officers ensure preparation of the necessary documentation for Stage 3 of the Project being detailed design and construction of the mitigation measures;

4. The outcomes of the project to date be presented to:

(a) Federal and State Governments to progress the current Business Case to secure funding support to implement stage 3;

(b) Suncorp and other major insurers to illustrate the level of commitment and seek a review of their approach to insurance coverage and premiums.

Body of Report:

Following the flooding event of early 2010 Council engaged Engeny Management Pty Ltd (Engeny) to produce an inception study of that event. This report included preliminary investigations of the flooding and review of insurance reports, recommendations for future works and supporting documentation for funding applications.

The Council applied for funding from the Natural Disaster Resilience Program to complete the stages proposed in the study. In March 2011 advice was received that the submission had been successful - $265,000 was to be funded on a 1/3 each basis by local, state and federal government.

The stages of the program included:

1. Investigation of flood dynamics and hydraulic and hydrology modelling;

2. Development of mitigation strategies through preliminary design of options; and

3. Detailed design, construction and implementation.

Roma Flood Study and Mitigation Project Stage 1

This report documents the outcomes of stage 1 of the project and provides details of data collected and used hydrologic and hydraulic model calibration and modelling results. Acceptable levels of agreement between actual recorded levels and modelled levels were achieved. The models produced provide Council with a tool to analyse the impact of future development and will assist Council in managing future flood risk. The information in the report can also be used for emergency planning, land use planning, emergency response and flood warning.

The initial Stage 1 Report of October 2011 was subject of a ‘Consultation Day’ in December 2011. It has subsequently been updated to include modelling of the 2012 event.

Stage 2 Report

This report incorporates mitigation measures the effectiveness of which is measured against the three events. The 10 mitigation measures assessed in stage 2 were as follows:

1. Warrego Highway Embankment Removal;

2. Western Railway Embankment Removal;

3. Warrego Highway Embankment Removal and Creek Straightening;

4. Ring Dam Removal (Located downstream of Western Railway);

5. Vegetation Clearing of Bungil Creek;

6. Western Diversion Channel;

7. Levee Embankment;

8. Levee Embankment with Eastern Diversion Channel;

9. Levee Embankment with Western Diversion Channel; and

10. House Raising.

The mitigation options above were then assessed against a range of criteria which include:

● Hydraulic performance;

● Environmental and Cultural Heritage Impacts;

● Economic Viability, and

● Social Impacts.

The initial report of February 2012 (prior to the most recent event) identified the preferred measures being a levee embankment, western diversion channel and house raising.

The conclusions arising from the finalisation of stage 2 with the inclusion of the February 2012 event are:

1. That the construction of an approximately 4.9km long levee bank is the most effective mitigation option. It is also required that the Carnarvon Highway adjacent to the proposed levee alignment be raised to the same height as the levee to prevent breakout flows over the Highway;

2. Only a few houses would be protected from over the floor inundation as a result of the inclusion of the Western Diversion Channel (in addition to the levee), and based upon its cost estimated at $2.1M the consultants did not consider this option economically viable. However, the potential benefits that this option may provide to local drainage systems has not been assessed, and noting this option was included in Councils Business Case;

3. Given the significant number of non-raisable houses (slab on ground) in Roma still predicted to be inundated during major flood, house raising is not considered viable on its own. However a number of houses in the lower section of town can be beneficially raised in conjunction with the levee bank option;

4. The combination of levee embankment and selected house raising provides maximum reduction in over-floor inundation. All houses with floor level survey data previously experiencing over-floor inundation are able to be mitigated with this option;

5. The levee bank will result in some redistribution of flood water and increase flood levels on the eastern side of Bungil Creek with an average increase of approximately 600mm between McPhie Street and Basset Road areas and approximately 10mm at the Warrego Highway.

The 2 report notes a limited number of houses and business that may be negatively impacted by the construction of a levee embankment. The report suggests impacts can be managed via alternative mitigation measures including house raising. Stage 3, the detailed design and analysis stage will, more specifically identify and quantify any potential negative effects.

Review and Progress since the Council Report of 7March 2012

A detailed report on the Mitigation Project was submitted to the Council Meeting of 7 March 2012. The resolutions of Council and progress are summarised as follows:

1. Council endorses the flood modelling tools and results developed in Stage 1of the Roma Flood Study and Mitigation Project subject to the modelling being extended to include the 2012 flood event;

As outlined previously the Stage 1 Report has been updated to include the 2012 flood event.

2. That Council generally endorse the preferred mitigation measures and progresses the investigation of the recommendations contained in the interim Stage 2 Report being:

a. Levee embankment;

b. Western Diversion Channel;

c. House raising where appropriate.

The additional work is contained within the updated Stage 2 Report and the refined approach of the mitigation measures has been summarised in the previous section. One other important criteria is that prior to the February 2012 event the levee embankment design was based on a 300mm free board. To provide increased protection this has now been increased to 600mm free board.

3. Endorses the schedule and studies outlined in the report and seeks detailed design of works and funding of the proposed mitigation measures for Roma:

Subsequent to the Report a Business Case for funding has been prepared and submitted (see subsequent section).

4. That Council seeks funding as outlined within this report for an appropriate flood and drainage study of Mitchell that is to include a high level of community consultation;

The Business Case referenced above included funding for the Mitchell study.

5. Documentation be prepared and distributed at the earliest opportunity to support community consultation on the Roma Flood Study and Mitigation Project and the outcomes inform the next stages of the work.

The Consultation Program for Stage 1 and 2 Reports has been progressed with a proposal including external support having been the subject of quotations. This is summarised in the subsequent section of this report.

Request for NDRRA Funding and Business Case

Council has formally requested Category D funding under Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements (NDRRA). NDRRA is a joint Queensland and Australian Government program that provides a number of relief measures to deliver financial assistance to Queensland communities following natural disaster events.

The business case seeks funding for stage 3, the detailed design, and implementation of the mitigation measures. The business case was developed in consultation with the Queensland Reconstruction Authority, who added to the preferred mitigation measures previously endorsed by Council, the concept of house and land swap aspects in the same vein as successfully implemented in the flood devastated town of Grantham.

The document has been presented to the Federal and State Governments (prior to the recent election and also submitted to the new State Government).

Consultation

Following the resolution of Council on 7 March 2012 a consultation program has been developed to include:

1. Exhibition of Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the Study together with supporting documentation;

2. Utilisation of print media, community newsletters, correspondence, website ect.

3. Material directly circulated to most effected residents.

4. Material forwarded to Government Authorities and other organisations (such as DTMR).

5. Open meetings together with more focused workshops/forums.

This program will be finalised following consideration of this Report.

Progressing Stage 3 of the Mitigation Project

Recognising the importance of the Project, Officers have commenced, with the assistance of consultants Engeny Council the preparation of tender documents in order to seek the required detailed design of the mitigation strategies, noting that Engeny do not have the specialisation for the detailed analysis and design.

Insurance

The Council has received recent correspondence from the Suncorp Group the major insurance company in the Region which together with the more recent media coverage raises concerns with the provision of new insurance cover premiums.

There has already been dialogue with the company and it is proposed that this be reinforced on the basis of the outcomes of this report.

Consultation (internal/external):

Engeny Management Pty Ltd

CEO and Directors

Risk Assessment (Legal, Financial, Political etc.):

Without positive forward momentum in terms of actual flood mitigation implementation the community is negatively impacted by the risk of further flooding together with increasing insurance premiums and/or the unavailability of insurance.

Policy Implications:

Policy is expected to be dependent upon any restrictions or parameters placed on Council in terms of its Category D, NDRRA funding request and how that funding may be distributed.

Financial Resource Implications:

Mitigation measures and further flood and drainage studies are dependent upon state and Federal funding.

Link to Corporate Plan:

Corporate Plan 2009-2013 — 8.5.12(b) To ensure preparedness to respond to major incidents and disasters and engage with Local Disaster Management Group in planning activities aimed at minimising the impact of such events on the community.

Supporting Documentation:

Nil

Report authorised by:

Paul Bawden, Chief Executive Officer

Maranoa Regional Council

General Meeting - 23 May 2012

Officer Report

Meeting: General 23 May 2012	Date: 13 May 2012
Item Number: L.3	File Number: D12/13182

Subject Heading: Light Fleet Vehicles Policy and Tender

Classification: Open Access

Name of Applicant:

Location:

Author & Officer’s Title: Barry Omundson, Director Infrastucture

Executive Summary:

Council has an extensive light vehicle portfolio, many of which are several years old and or with over 100,000km’s of service. Safety and environmental parameters and expectations have changed over time and are not satisfactorily reflected in Councils light fleet. Whole-of-life asset management practices have not previously been a definitive consideration in fleet management, necessitating the revision of Policy to ensure least costs and best operational use of Councils light vehicle fleet.

Officer’s Recommendation:

That Council:

1. Adopt the Fleet Management – Light Vehicles Policy;

2. Approve to tender for the replacement of light vehicles in accordance with the Policy and budget provisions.

Body of Report:

Council has a significant plant and light vehicle portfolio. While a comprehensive review of both portfolios is planned for the next financial year in terms of usage, performance, fit for purpose, hire versus buy and the net present value among a range of review parameters, there exists an immediate need to address Councils light vehicle replacement program.

Council in its current budget provided a sum of $4,037,135 for plant and vehicle replacements.

Previously there have been inconsistent applications of the principals of light vehicle fleet replacement, which has resulted in some existing vehicles having in excess of 150,000km of use and a number over 10 years old. Safety standards have increased over the years and having older light vehicles increases the risk to Council. Additionally driving vehicles with higher kilometres lessons the resale value, and increases the whole-of-life costings in terms of maintenance and downtime.

Recognising Councils current limited resource and expertise in modern fleet management consultants GHD were engaged to provide specialist assistance in reviewing Councils existing light vehicle fleet. All light vehicles were assessed based upon an extensive set condition criteria.

Each light vehicle was then assessed in an excel spreadsheet, based upon the condition criteria and given a score for each criteria which computed to a total condition assessment score. The score then provided a priority listing of vehicles to be replaced.

Light Vehicle Replacement Tender

Of Councils light vehicle fleet there are 80 vehicles that require replacement. Tenderers are required to provide fixed price lists (valid for the length of the contract) for the supply of light vehicles under the contract. The period of the contract will be one year with an option to extend for multiple one year terms reserved by Council. Change over vehicles are proposed to be staged in groups of 10 vehicles during the course of the contract.

The timetable for procurement and implementation is as proposed as follows:

Place advertisement in newspapers, internet etc	Saturday, 26^th May, 2012
Issue request for tender	From 10am, Monday 28^th May, 2012
Closing time	2pm Monday, 11^th June 2012
Evaluation of tender responses	12^th June to 19^th June, 2012
Submission to principal	19^th June, 2012
To Council for approval	27^th June, 2012

Policy

The Draft Light Vehicle Policy attached to this report provides direction to Council Officers in terms of effective replacement of light vehicles using whole-of life- cost principals. The proposed change over period for various type of Council vehicles based on lifecycle costing principals will be based on vehicle warranty periods, generally between 60,000km and 100,000km or 3 to 5 years. Case by case assessments would also be carried out by the Plant and Fleet Coordinator to ensure lowest possible whole-of-life costing is achieved.

Vehicle selection will be based upon a number of requirements including:

●Safety;

●Environmental objectives including minimising carbon emissions;

●Minimising whole of life costs, including:

+Vehicle suitability for operational requirements,

+Purchase price,

+Resale,

+Replacement cycle,

+Fuel usage,

+Fit for business purpose, and

+Any taxation implications.

Vehicles will be selected according to either or the assigned position in Council (refer chart below), and the business needs of Council.

Description	Position in Council
Class 1	Councillors and CEO
Class 2	Directors
Class 3	Managers
Class 4a	Overseer/Coordinator Utility
Class 4b	Overseer/Coordinator 4 Wheel Drive
Class 5a	Operational Utility and/or Sedan
Class 5b	Operational 4 Wheel Drive

While no system is without its idiosyncrasies, such selection provides for clarity in terms of position entitlements and over time the removal of cultural barriers arising from previous inconsistent allocation of resources.

Consultation (internal/external):

Ken Fox, Consultant GHD

Paul Bawden, CEO

Peter Weallans, Manager Construction and Maintenance

Martin Saunders, Plant and Fleet Coordinator

Risk Assessment (Legal, Financial, Political etc.):

OH&S and environmental risks for aging fleet.

Policy Implications:

New policy

Financial Resource Implications:

Continuing to hold onto older light fleet increases operating costs and reduces resale opportunities.

Link to Corporate Plan:

Corporate Plan 2009-2013 — 8.5.4(b) To undertake an ongoing review process of Council's plant fleet requirements so as to identify any plant surplus or needs to council operations and possible alternative plant operating options.

Supporting Documentation:

Nil

Maranoa Regional Council

General Meeting - 23 May 2012

Officer Report

Meeting: General 23 May 2012	Date: 18 May 2012
Item Number: L.4	File Number: D12/13939

Subject Heading: Councillor representation on Advisory Committees

Classification: Open Access

Name of Applicant: Not Applicable

Location: Not Applicable

Author & Officer’s Title: Kelly Rogers, Coordinator Executive Services

Executive Summary:

Interim arrangements for Councillor representation on Advisory Committee appointments adopted during the 2008 – 2012 term of Council.

Officer’s Recommendation:

1. That Councillor Representation on Advisory Committees’ adopted during the 2008/12 term continue until finalisation of the new representation model;

2. That in the instance the former Councillor representative/s is no longer an Elected member, interim arrangements be assessed and adopted by Council on a case by case basis.

Body of Report:

During the 2008 – 2012 term of Maranoa Regional Council, Councillor representation on a number of Committees’ was endorsed at General Meetings throughout the term.

Whilst Council undertakes a review of its representation governing model, a number of Advisory Committee meetings may take prior place to finalisation of arrangements. To ensure Councillor participation and representation on these existing committees continues, it is proposed that previously adopted Councillor representation arrangements continue as an interim measure.

In the instance that a previously endorsed Councillor representative is no longer an Elected member, it is proposed that these instances be reviewed by Council on a ‘case by case’ basis.

Consultation (internal/external):

Chief Executive Officer

Risk Assessment (Legal, Financial, Political etc.):

Implementing interim arrangements until Council adopts its formal representation model ensures existing Committees continue to be supported and attended by Councillor representative/s.

Policy Implications:

Nil

Financial Resource Implications:

Link to Corporate Plan:

Corporate Plan 2009-2013 — 8.1.1(b) To structure Council’s governance functions in a manner so as to allow effective and efficient utilisation of elected members time and resources to the benefit of the constituents which Council serves.

Supporting Documentation:

Nil