December 10 - 16, 2017: Issue 341

LGNSW Conference 2017: Overview

The new LGNSW President Cr Linda Scott - photo courtesy LGNSW Twitter
The first LGNSW Conference since most councils were amalgamated by the NSW State Government was held this week and signals a shift towards Labor party politics if the election of the new President Cr Linda Scott (City of Sydney Council - Labor), Treasurer Cr Marjorie Spooner O’Neill (Waverly Council - Labor) and Vice President (Metro/Urban) Cr Angelo Tsirekas, Mayor of Canada Bay who formerly stood as Labor Candidate for Drummoyne (2011) and Reid (2016) are any indication. 

Anger that councils  were forcibly amalgamated may be viewed as still persisting in the Record of Decisions through Items 85 and 82:

85 Inner West Council Binding referendum on amalgamations 

That NSW Local Government’s policy on amalgamations includes the requirement that where an amalgamation with one or more councils is proposed there be a binding referendum in each council area asking voters if they want their council to be amalgamated or not. In order for an amalgamation to go ahead, each council area would need to achieve a majority vote in favour of the amalgamation. 

Carried

82 Lane Cove Council Lack of consultation by State Government with local government 

That Local Government NSW lobbies the Minister for Local Government for improved consultation with the local government sector, so that prior to the introduction into Parliament of any legislation affecting the sector, that the State Government consults and engages with LGNSW. 

Carried

This reflects the recently defeated Bill passed by the Upper House on the same idea (Local Government Amendment (Amalgamation Referendums) Bill 2017); to allow individuals to vote on amalgamations and for their voices to count, although clearly this would need to be conducted along old council boundary lines to be democratic when smaller councils are remerged with larger councils with larger populations, if taken now. 

Perhaps those still wanting their chosen council back may take heart in the statement released this week by the SOCC President:

Our aim in the next twelve months is to build our organisation and continue to show amalgamations do not work, support those seeking de-amalgamation and take action on all the other threats to local democracy coming from this Government.

BT Halstead, Save Our Councils Coalition President   - 8th  December, 2017

A regeneration in objecting to what were once council areas of jurisdiction appears in the Record of Decisions through Item 4:

4. Board Mandatory Independent Hearing and Assessment Panels 

That Local Government NSW calls on the NSW Parliament to revoke legislation that mandates Independent Hearing and Assessment Panels (IHAPs) for all councils in Sydney and Wollongong.

Amendment 

i. That Local Government NSW campaigns with NSW councils against the State Government takeover of planning powers through IHAP legislation. 

ii. That Local Government NSW calls on the NSW Parliament to revoke legislation that mandates Independent Hearing and Assessment Panels (IHAPs) for all councils in Sydney and Wollongong. 

Amendment carried – became Motion 

Motion carried

This was backed up by related Items:

6 Canterbury-Bankstown Council Impact of urban growth strategies on open space 

That Local Government NSW calls upon the State Government to consider the impact of urban growth strategies on open space in local communities, particularly to consider unique and innovative ways to increase open space in priority growth areas to improve the liveability of the precincts as the population increases. Carried 

7 Central Coast Council Proposed Public Conservation Zone 

That Local Government NSW requests the NSW Department of Planning and Environment to amend the Standard Instrument (SI) Principal Local Environmental Plan (LEP) to include, within the Land Use Table a new zone, Zone E5 Public Conservation.

Carried

8 City of Sydney State Significant Development 

That Local Government NSW: a) adopts a policy to oppose the current conception of State Significant Development (SSD) provisions in the NSW Planning legislation that allow for the large-scale resumption of land owned and managed by councils; and b) advocates to the NSW Government that the NSW Planning legislation be reformed to change the requirements for the NSW Government to declare areas as State Significant to ensure: (i) there is a clear justification of public benefit; and (ii) that if the land is owned by a council, a clear timeframe is outlined to hand the land back to the council. 

Carried

18 Bellingen Shire Council RMS handover arrangements 

That Local Government NSW advocates to the State Government for an immediate change in policy position in relation to the handover of NSW Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) assets to local government so that the determination is made by the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART), taking into account the council’s long term financial position and communities’ capacity to pay so that no increased financial burden is placed upon the community in question and to provide transparency and accountability that does not exist in the current process. 

Carried

What didn't appear among the Items recorded is the current NSW Department of Environment and Planning Draft SEPP announcement that Urban Bushland is to be renamed 'Public Bushland' and transferred out from under councils to a Ministerial Direction. Fortunately the date for submissions on this Draft SEPP has been extended until January 31st, 2018. 

Urban Bushland includes all land that is zoned non-rural, and owned or managed by a council or a public authority, or reserved for acquisition for open space or environmental conservation by a council or a public authority, and that has vegetation which meets a clear definition of bushland.

From • Draft Environment SEPP (PDF: 6.215 MB):
State Environmental Planning Policy No 19 – Bushland in Urban Areas (SEPP 19)
  • The majority of the provisions of SEPP 19 will be transferred to SEPP (Environment). These provisions will be updated and some will be transferred to a Ministerial Direction.
  • Update council names to reflect recent council amalgamations and boundary changes.
  • Extend its land application to cover local government areas that are currently partly outside the application of SEPP 19 including parts of Hawkesbury and Central Coast local government areas.
  • Transfer plan making provisions in SEPP 19 to a Ministerial Direction.
  • A new circular on Urban Bushland is being finalised for consultation. It has been developed to provide further information and detail regarding the application of SEPP 19. This circular will replace planning Circulars No. B13 and No. 114. 
Creating a new Ministerial Direction – Urban Bushland
SEPP 19 contains provisions for the preparation of local environmental plans in clause 10. The clause ensures that when a council is drafting local environmental plan provisions for any land to which SEPP 19 applies, other than rural land, it considers the general and specific aims of the SEPP, and gives priority to retaining bushland unless significant environmental, economic, or social benefits arise which outweigh the value of the bushland. This should be transferred to a new Ministerial Direction as it is the appropriate mechanism to guide plan making. No current direction adequately covers urban bushland in the same way. Urban bushland exists across many different zones, therefore Ministerial Direction 2.1 – Environmental Protection Zones, is not appropriate to address public urban bushland of the type protected by SEPP 19.

The new Ministerial Direction is intended to function largely the same way as clause 10 of SEPP 19. As currently, the direction will apply when a planning authority is preparing a planning proposal for land to which the Urban Bushland provisions of SEPP (Environment) apply.

What many communities may wish their councils to respond to regarding the above is clearly stated in a report released by LGNSW this week which cites 75% of NSW residents believe local government is the best sphere of government to make decisions about their local areas.

The research, undertaken by Micromex Research and Consulting in May this year and released at the Local Government NSW Annual Conference in Sydney, also found 82% were happy with their local council, with responses ranging from “somewhat satisfied” to “very satisfied”.

The most common reason for satisfaction given was councils’ knowledge and understanding of the local community.

LGNSW Chief Executive Donna Rygate said the overall image of councils had improved significantly over five years, with 61% now rating their council’s image as good to excellent , and only 16% describing council image as poor or below.

Respondents nominated council competency, trust, acting in the best interest of local communities, financial management and value for money as the reasons for their response. They also had strong opinions on the most important issues facing communities and local government over the next decade.

“Respondents from larger council areas nominated roads as the most important issue, followed by the effects of perceived overdevelopment and the need to ensure infrastructure growth matches population increases,” Ms Rygate said.

“Residents from small and medium-sized local government areas were concerns with their local economy and support for business and employment, as well as roads.”

Minister Barilaro was apparently jeered and heckled when trying to do the big sell on 2 billion dollars to be allocated for stadiums, a sentiment many NSW residents are echoing by signing a Petition started by one Peter FitzSimons, which has generated 140,072 supporters within 7 days.

Minister for Local Government (and Environment) Gabrielle Upton focused on broadcasting council meetings and making that mandatory - which has its good points as body language and tone of voice (and undertones in whispers when watching State Politics are very telling) - but still....haven't we anything more important to focus on? Aren't many politicians whether at a local, state of federal level suffering from a little over-exposure as we head into year-end celebrations and a much needed exhale and step away from 'all that'?

The announcement:

SUPPORTING AND STRENGTHENING LOCAL GOVERNMENT 
Wednesday, December 6th, 2017
Local Government Minister Gabrielle Upton has reaffirmed the NSW Government’s commitment to strengthening integrity, sustainability and performance of local councils across the state. Ms Upton told hundreds of councillors at the Local Government NSW Annual Conference in Sydney that the Government would continue to introduce measures to strengthen integrity and performance. 

“The NSW Government is committed to supporting councillors to uphold the highest standards of governance, integrity and professionalism required of elected representatives,” Ms Upton said. 

The NSW Government is releasing a draft Model Code of Meeting Practice for consultation with the sector. For the first time there will be a uniform set of meeting rules for councils across the state to help ensure more accessible, orderly, effective and efficient meetings. 

The draft code is focused on improving transparency and public involvement in council meetings and the decision making process. It is promoting the use of technology to reach more ratepayers by proposing the mandatory webcasting of ordinary meetings by all councils in NSW. 

“The reality is that many of us are time poor and with our work and family responsibilities it is simply not practical to expect all ratepayers who wish to attend council meetings to be able to attend,” Ms Upton said.

“I am also pleased to release the draft guidelines for induction and professional development training that will lead to improved councillor performance and stronger councils.” 

Councils will be required to deliver induction training within six months after an election and an ongoing professional development program over the term to help councillors acquire and maintain the knowledge and skills necessary to perform their roles. 

Some of the measures the Government has already put in place to strengthen integrity include:  
•  Requiring candidates to disclose if they are a property developer
•  Banning people from public office if they have been convicted of certain offences
•  Forcing councillors to hand over any financial benefit derived from a pecuniary interest
•  Releasing a new draft Model Code of Conduct.

“The Government has introduced these measures so the community can have confidence in the people who represent them. Integrity is at the very heart of a councillor’s service,” Ms Upton said. 

The draft Model Code of Meeting Practice and the draft Councillor Induction and Professional Development Guidelines are on public exhibition until 16 March. The documents can be viewed on the Office of Local Government website at www.olg.nsw.gov.au
__________________

LGNSW 2017 Conference Record of Decisions (PDF, 314KB)

State Environmental Planning Controls(Draft Environment SEPP):Urban Bushland

The Berejiklian government has just announced changes that propose to repeal and replace the following State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) with a single Environment SEPP:

• State Environmental Planning Policy No. 19—Bushland in Urban Areas - [Manly, Warringah, Pittwater; pages 23 to 32]
• State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Drinking Water Catchment) 2011
• State Environmental Planning Policy No. 50—Canal Estate Development
• Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No. 2—Georges River Catchment
• Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20—Hawkesbury-Nepean River (No.2-1997) [*Pittwater and Warringah]
• Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005
• Willandra Lakes Regional Environmental Plan No. 1—World Heritage Property.

Aimed at reducing 'red tape' and 'streamlining' NSW's planning system, some changes are commended such as protecting Sydney Harbour's natural assets by prohibiting new canal estates.

However other changes will enable development in sensitive areas that are currently protected.

Designed to marry up with other planning instruments, such as the controversial Biodiversity Act 2016, the changes also give greater effect to Ministerial Directions.

The changes also propose to revise the term ‘bushland zoned or reserved for public open space purposes’ to ‘public bushland’. This includes all land that is zoned non-rural, and owned or managed by a council or a public authority, or reserved for acquisition for open space or environmental conservation by a council or a public authority, and that has vegetation which meets a clear definition of bushland.

From • Draft Environment SEPP (PDF: 6.215 MB):
State Environmental Planning Policy No 19 – Bushland in Urban Areas (SEPP 19)
  • The majority of the provisions of SEPP 19 will be transferred to SEPP (Environment). These provisions will be updated and some will be transferred to a Ministerial Direction.
  • Update council names to reflect recent council amalgamations and boundary changes.
  • Extend its land application to cover local government areas that are currently partly outside the application of SEPP 19 including parts of Hawkesbury and Central Coast local government areas.
  • Transfer plan making provisions in SEPP 19 to a Ministerial Direction.
  • A new circular on Urban Bushland is being finalised for consultation. It has been developed to provide further information and detail regarding the application of SEPP 19. This circular will replace planning Circulars No. B13 and No. 114. 
Creating a new Ministerial Direction – Urban Bushland
SEPP 19 contains provisions for the preparation of local environmental plans in clause 10. The clause ensures that when a council is drafting local environmental plan provisions for any land to which SEPP 19 applies, other than rural land, it considers the general and specific aims of the SEPP, and gives priority to retaining bushland unless significant environmental, economic, or social benefits arise which outweigh the value of the bushland. This should be transferred to a new Ministerial Direction as it is the appropriate mechanism to guide plan making. No current direction adequately covers urban bushland in the same way. Urban bushland exists across many different zones, therefore Ministerial Direction 2.1 – Environmental Protection Zones, is not appropriate to address public urban bushland of the type protected by SEPP 19.

The new Ministerial Direction is intended to function largely the same way as clause 10 of SEPP 19. As currently, the direction will apply when a planning authority is preparing a planning proposal for land to which the Urban Bushland provisions of SEPP (Environment) apply.

Critically the current SEPP (no 19) SEPP 19 extends 'beyond the protection of environmental values of bushland by identifying 'the need to protect the aesthetic and community values as well as the recreational, educational and scientific values of this resource'.

The proposed SEPP also enables the Roads and Maritime Services, to undertake the subdivision of foreshore lands in order ‘to lawfully reclaim Sydney Harbour land’ and redefine the ‘heads of consideration for consent authorities when assessing Development Applications on Foreshore lands.

The changes also include amending the aim of the Harbour Regional Environmental Plan that ensures Sydney is a ‘working harbour’ to enable a range of recreational, transport, tourism and commercial uses. Greater flexibility to 'mooring pens' is also proposed, which are currently prohibited.

Other changes include transferring heritage provisions to the relevant local environmental plan, thereby reducing the protection of heritage assets.

In addition, concerns have been flagged that moving the prohibition of extractive industries in parts of the Hawkesbury Nepean Catchment to the SEPP for Mining, Petroleum and Extractive Industries - and moving the Sydney Opera House provisions in the Harbour Regional Environmental Plan to SEPP (State Significant Precincts) effectively reduces the current protections.

_______________________
*page 26:
Provisions to be updated and moved to Ministerial Directions
Provisions within the Hawkesbury Nepean Regional Environmental Plan related to local plan making will be updated and are to be moved to a new Ministerial Direction.

The following current provisions contain plan making guidance suited to a Ministerial Direction:
• Clause 3 ‘Aim of This Plan’
• Part 2 ‘General Planning Considerations, Specific Planning Policies and Recommended Strategies’
• Clause 6(3) ‘Water Quality’
• Clause 6(10) (a) ‘Urban Development’ - rezoning or subdivision of land
• Clause 6(11) ‘Recreation and Tourism’.

Other aspects of Clause 6, such as water quality, total catchment management, biodiversity and environmentally sensitive
areas will be transferred to the proposed new SEPP.

Have your say on the Explanation of Intended Effect for the proposed Environment SEPP until 31 January 2018 (NB changed date for submissions/feedback)
 
• Or write to:

Director, Planning Frameworks
Department of Planning and Environment 
GPO Box 39 
Sydney NSW 2001

Definitions. 1.1 “Bushland” – land on which there is vegetation which is either a remainder of the natural vegetation of the land, or, if altered, is still representative of the structure and floristics of the natural vegetation. 1.2 “Urban” – pertaining to or occurring or situated in a city or town.

State Environmental Planning Policy No 19—Bushland in Urban Areas

Current version for 22 February 2014 to date (accessed 9 December 2017 at 10:01)

Aims, objectives etc

(1)  The general aim of this Policy is to protect and preserve bushland within the urban areas referred to in Schedule 1 because of:

(a)  its value to the community as part of the natural heritage,

(b)  its aesthetic value, and

(c)  its value as a recreational, educational and scientific resource.

(2)  The specific aims of this policy are:

(a)  to protect the remnants of plant communities which were once characteristic of land now within an urban area,

(b)  to retain bushland in parcels of a size and configuration which will enable the existing plant and animal communities to survive in the long term,

(c)  to protect rare and endangered flora and fauna species,

(d)  to protect habitats for native flora and fauna,

(e)  to protect wildlife corridors and vegetation links with other nearby bushland,

(f)  to protect bushland as a natural stabiliser of the soil surface,

(g)  to protect bushland for its scenic values, and to retain the unique visual identity of the landscape,

(h)  to protect significant geological features,

(i)  to protect existing landforms, such as natural drainage lines, watercourses and foreshores,

(j)  to protect archaeological relics,

(k)  to protect the recreational potential of bushland,

(l)  to protect the educational potential of bushland,

(m)  to maintain bushland in locations which are readily accessible to the community, and

(n)  to promote the management of bushland in a manner which protects and enhances the quality of the bushland and facilitates public enjoyment of the bushland compatible with its conservation.

Bushland is defined as ‘land on which there is vegetation which is either a remainder of the natural vegetation of the land or, if altered, is still representative of the structure and floristics of the natural vegetation.