Agenda item

In accordance with Chapter 3, Rules 57 and 59, of the Governance Rules developed by Council in accordance with section 60 of the Local Government Act 2020.

In accordance with Chapter 3, Rules 57 and 59, of the Governance Rules developed by Council in accordance with section 60 of the Local Government Act 2020.

 

QUESTIONS TO COUNCIL

In accordance with Governance Rule 59.10, Wendy Wright read their Question to Council.

QUESTION 1

Wendy Wright of Wandin North asked;

Solar Savers program (led by Eastern Alliance for Greenhouse Action ): Budget documents indicate this will continue.

Presumably this decision followed a full cost benefit analysis that considered eg cost, value for money, # of YR residents receiving benefits, how the program itself is performing?

I have been unable to find any financial information about this program.

(Noting the EAGA produces an Annual Report that is very high level and lacks this level of detail).

Please provide details

 

Director Built Environment and Infrastructure, Hjalmar Philipp

Throughout the development of the draft budget Council Officers review programs and services to evaluate community impact and value.

Council has participated in the Solar Savers program since 2019. The program supports residents - particularly those who may face financial barriers to accessing solar energy - by providing trusted advice, access to rebates, and vetted solar providers.

Since joining the program, 114 Yarra Ranges households have successfully installed solar systems through Solar Savers. These installations have resulted in an estimated total saving of approx. $635,000 on electricity bills for local residents.

Council contributes an annual participation fee of $16,500 and the program is available to all Yarra Ranges residents. An evaluation to date indicates a return of $6.50 for every $1 invested. Council is also scheduled to undertake a further evaluation of the program throughout 2025 in preparation for future budgets.

Testimonials from participants highlight the program’s value in terms of trust, ease of use, and quality of service. Outcomes delivered from the program have also contributed to Council green house emissions reduction targets.

 

QUESTION 2

In accordance with Governance Rule 59.10, Wendy Wright read their Question to Council.

Wendy Wright of Wandin North asked;

Business paper Item 10.3 proposing to add EMOs to 3000+ properties, including a proposal to apply these immediately – before community consultation - via an interim order. This seems to be a reaction to the McCrae landslip, the cause of which is not yet determined.

What is the impact of an interim overlay on planning permits approved and/or in progress? How many of the impacted properties are already partially affected by an EMO?

 

Director Built Environment and Infrastructure, Hjalmar Philipp

Following the June 2021 storms and widespread tree loss across Yarra Ranges, Council began reviewing the existing Erosion Management Overlay (EMO) to address increased landslip risk. The first stage began in 2022/2023 and was approved in 2024 via Amendment C217, predating the McCrae landslide, which further highlights the importance of the update.

The proposed EMO will help property buyers understand landslip risks upfront, rather than during the planning process.  It ensures developments in landslip prone areas are properly sited, designed and built to protect current and future residents.

If an interim overlay is introduced, new applications will be assessed under the updated controls. Existing permits issued before the change will remain valid. 

Currently,10,262 properties will retain the EMO, with varying adjustments.  An additional 1,185 properties will be removed from the overlay under the updated mapping.

If Council support progressing Amendment C225 then we would seek permission from the Minister for Planning to place the amendment on public exhibition.  Once received, and if the Amendment is supported by the Minister, then an interactive map will be launched to enable property owners to check individual addresses and accurately compare the current control with the proposed updated overlay. 

 

QUESTION 3

In accordance with Governance Rule 59.10, Sebastian Quezadaread their Question to Council.

Sebastian Quezada of Kilsyth asked;

Council states that the new flag protocol will see the Australian flag put last in emails and other forms of communications.

I have been made aware that this ordering is inconsistent with:

National flag protocol as outlined in the Australian Flags Booklet and Council’s own Section 5.1, which correctly states that the Australian National Flag “must always be flown in a position superior to that of any other flag or ensign.”

Question: what lead to the current Council position despite the above?

 

Director Corporate Services, Vincenzo Lombardi

Thank you for your questions, Sebastian.

The National flag protocol as outlined in the Australian Flags Booklet relates to the physical flying of flags.

This publication doesn’t provide any advice relating to the ordering or display of digital or print flags. Especially, in collaboration with Council’s Acknowledgment of Country Statement.

The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet have confirmed that there is no specific advice, legislation or policy for the ordering of print and digital flags. In the absence of such advice, they have recommended replicating the order of precedence as described in the Australian Flags Booklet.

However, this recommendation doesn’t take into consideration Council’s Acknowledgment of Country Statement or Council’s ongoing efforts to support reconciliation.

In the review of the Flags Policy, specific advice was sought from the Yarra Ranges Indigenous Advisory Committee. This advice has been taken into consideration in updating the Flag Policy.  Thank You

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

QUESTION 4

In accordance with Governance Rule 59.10, Sebastian Quezadaread their Question to Council.

Sebastian Quezada of Kilsyth asked;

In relation to this year's budget I have been previously corrected that Council is operating at a deficit, instead of a surplus as outlined in the budget document. If so, why does Council choose to fund more programs than it can afford instead of peeling from the bottom? Appropriate community consultation will quickly reveal there are programs that do not count with broad support and could be ditched to stay within Council's means and could translate into lower overall charges and rates. Why do we fund more than we can afford.

 

Director Corporate Services, Vincenzo Lombardi

Thank you for your question, Sebastian.

Council continues to assess the levels of services delivered and maintenance undertaken across the Shire on an annual basis. This approach has been taken to maintain levels of service and maintenance to infrastructure for the upcoming 2025-2026 year despite the financially constrained environment Council is facing. Operational efficiencies will continue to be explored and where necessary leveraged to ensure service levels and maintenance to infrastructure are not impacted.

 

QUESTION 5

Karen Kestigian of Kallista asked;

Could the Officers advise how many kilometres/metres of road sealing were delivered including any pending completion under the "Roads for the Community" funding initiative and how many kilometres of unsealed roads are outstanding and require funding, please?

 

Director Built Environment and Infrastructure, Hjalmar Philipp

Thank you for your question, Karen.

Under the Roads for Community Initiative, Council will have sealed 31.75 km of unsealed roads since 2019 plus an additional 5.5km from Special Charge Scheme Landowner Petitions.  That leaves approximately 670km of unsealed roads throughout the municipality that require funding.

 

 

QUESTION 6

Karen Kestigian of Kallista asked;

Currently there are two "Special Charge Schemes" for the sealing of roads. There is confusion within the community where Council provides funding and residents contribute a capped contribution at $20,000 as opposed to the Special Charge Scheme where residents petition for the sealing and contribute 80%. Perhaps each scheme should have a unique name and explanation to clearly differentiate the understanding of the funding source.

 

Director Built Environment and Infrastructure, Hjalmar Philipp

Thank you for your question, Karen.

Council has an allocation of funds for road sealing as part of its annual capital works program. 

This allocation is used to contribute to the cost of road sealing projects in two ways:

Firstly, a proactive road sealing program which involves a landowner contribution generally up to an amount of $20,000 (depending on each road) and the remainder of the project cost contributed by Council.

Secondly, a petition-based program which involves 80% landowner contribution and 20% Council contribution.

Both cases are landowner contributions under the Special Charges Scheme Policy.  Historically, we have not experienced community confusion or feedback regarding the naming of the two programs. However, we will take on board your feedback in relation to unique naming conventions for the programs into the future.

Noting, all projects are subject to landowner support under the Special Charge Scheme Policy and the availability of Council funding.

 

 

 

QUESTION 7

Anonymous asked;

Under Freedom of information. How many cars does old Warburton Road (between Wesburn and Warburton) have where the Warburton mountain bike track [is] have? And how many between 7am and 6pm?

 

Director Built Environment and Infrastructure, Hjalmar Philipp

Thank you for your question.

Traffic volume data collected between during August and September 2024 for Old Warburton Road indicates the following:

• Weekday average daily traffic volume: 214 vehicles per day
• Weekend average daily traffic volume: 240 vehicles per day

During the daytime period of 7am to 6pm, volumes were as follows:

• Weekdays: Approximately 170 vehicles
• Weekends: Approximately 210 vehicles

 

 

QUESTION 8

Ray Lister of Kallista asked;

Since 1981 I have been a rate payer in Kallista.

The only return I’ve received is irregular grading of my road, which usually results in no long-term benefits due to the next weather event.

I’d like an audit of my rates paid since 1981 against the services I’ve received.

I ask this with the possibility in mind of Council charging me for road and drainage upgrades in the future as I intend to offset those charges against unused rate monies.

 

Director Corporate Services, Vincenzo Lombardi

Thank you for your question, Ray.

Council is responsible for maintaining and delivering services and infrastructure for the entire community. Rates are collected to fund the overall services and infrastructure provided by Yarra Ranges Council and not tied to individual usage.

While some specific services and facilities may have additional charges, paying rates is not dependent on personal use. This system ensures that we can continue to provide essential services and maintain infrastructure for the benefit of our large and diverse community now and in the future.

For completeness, Council isn't able to provide an individualised audit of Council services that one individual or rate payer has accessed over the last 44 years.

 

QUESTION 9

Ray Lister of Kallista asked;

I note the meeting of 10 June has an item relating to those who make submissions to Council eg on the draft budget where Councillors are to vote on thanking people for those submissions.
As the YRC calls submissions to the draft budget and the community takes time to write and submit a submission …why is it not simple courtesy to respond? Why is valuable council meeting time being taken up with this motion?

 

 

Director Corporate Services, Vincenzo Lombardi

Thank you for your question, Ray.

During the 2025/26 draft budget submission process, 49 community members took the time to provide a written submission.

I can confirm that all submitters have received an acknowledgment from Council officers.

The consideration of the Council’s 2025/26 budget is included in tonight’s Council agenda under item 10.1. Once the Council has considered this item, it is best practice to write back to each individual submitter. Including this step in the officers’ recommendation promotes transparency and accountability to the community.

 

 

 

 

 

QUESTION 10

Anonymous asked;

What paid memberships does Council belong to and how much does Council spend on these memberships each year, for example MAV?

 

Director Corporate Services, Vincenzo Lombardi

Thank you for your question.

Council currently holds the following paid memberships, with the approximate 2024-2025 annual fees.

·         Municipal Association of Victoria - $77,000

·         Eastern Alliance for Greenhouse Action - $28,000

·         Eastern Transport Coalition and Affordable Housing Alliance - $33,000

·         Local Government Professionals - $4,900

Council also has two multiple council partnerships that could be classified broadly as memberships with the Eastern Region Group of Councils - $35,000 and Outer Melbourne Councils - $31,500

These memberships enable Council to access shared resources, collaborate with other councils and advocate effectively on behalf of our community.

 

 

 

 

SUBMISSIONS TO COUNCIL

There were no Submissions received for this meeting.