notice of meeting · that the saroc committee confirms the minutes of the meeting held on 16...

ECM 646698 SAROC Committee Meeting Agenda 25 January 2017

Notice of Meeting

Notice is hereby given that a meeting of the South Australian Regional Organisation of Councils (SAROC) will be held on

Wednesday 25 January 2017 at 8:30am

Boardrooms at Local Government House

148 Frome Street, Adelaide

Matt Pinnegar

Chief Executive Officer

19 January 2017


SAROC Committee Members

Chairperson Position Vacant

Region Representatives and Proxies

Central LG Region

Mayor Peter Mattey (Chairperson) Goyder

Mayor Denis Clark (Deputy Chairperson) Northern Areas

Deputy Member: Mayor Allan Aughey (Deputy Chairperson)

Clare & Gilbert Valleys

Deputy Member: Cr Bim Lange (LGA Board) Barossa

Mr David Stevenson Executive Officer

Eyre Peninsula LGA

Mayor Bruce Green (President) Port Lincoln

Deputy Member: Mayor Sam Telfer (Deputy President)

Tumby Bay

Mr Tony Irvine Executive Officer

Limestone Coast LGA

Mayor Erika Vickery (Presiding Member) Naracoorte Lucindale

Deputy Member: Mayor Richard Sage (Deputy Presiding Member)

Grant

Mr Dominic Testoni Executive Officer

Murraylands & Riverland LGA

Mayor Dave Burgess (President &

LGA Immediate Past President)

Mid Murray

Mayor Peter Hunt (Vice President) Berri Barmera

Mayor Neville Jaensch (Proxy) Coorong

Deputy Member: Mayor Brenton Lewis Murray Bridge

Mr Peter Bond Executive Officer

Southern & Hills LGA

Mayor Bill Spragg (Presiding Member) Adelaide Hills

Mayor Keith Parkes (Deputy Presiding Member)

Alexandrina

Deputy Member: Mayor Glen Rowlands Yankalilla

Mr Graeme Martin Executive Officer

Spencer Gulf Cities

Mayor Sam Johnson (Chairperson) Port Augusta

Deputy Member: Mayor John Rohde (Deputy Chair)

Port Pirie

Ms Anita Crisp Executive Officer

Observer

LGA President Mayor Lorraine Rosenberg Onkaparinga


Agenda

Item Page

1 Welcome and Election of SAROC Chair 5

2 Present & Apologies

2.1 Present

2.2 Apologies: Nil

3 Minutes of Previous Meeting

3.1 Minutes of the meeting held 16 November 2016 7

3.2 Resolutions and Actions from Previous meetings 14

4 Invited Guest Speakers

Scott Loechel, LG Functional Support Group Project Manager, Mayor Kevin Knight, Mayor of Tea Tree Gully and Mr John Moyle, Chief Executive Officer of Tea Tree Gully will give a joint presentation on the State Emergency Management Plan.

5 President’s Report 21

6 Regional Executive Officers’ Meeting

A verbal update if required

7 Reports for Discussion

7.1 Population Policy 23

7.2 Draft Borrow Pit Guidelines 29

7.3 Storm Events – State Power Supplies 39

7.4 Outreach Program 51

7.5 Section 270 Ombudsman Recommendations 54

7.6 Study Adelaide and 485 Visa Holders 58

8 Confidential Reports

Nil

9 Late Reports

Nil


10 Any Other Business

11 Next Meeting

The next meeting will be held on Wednesday 15 March 2017 at 4.00pm at Local Government House, 148 Frome Street, Adelaide.

12 Close

2017 Meeting Dates

15 March 17 May (Regional location tbc)

19 July 27 September

15 November (Regional location tbc)

Local Government Association of South Australia

1. Election of a SAROC Chairperson

Election of Chairperson

From: Lisa Teburea, Executive Director Public Affairs

Key Initiative: K.I 1 Leadership and advocacy

Strategy: 3A Lead by example

Meeting: SAROC Committee Date: 25 January 2017

ECM: 646310

Recommendation

That the SAROC Committee elects a Chairperson to hold office for a period of 12 months commencing 25 January 2017.

Discussion

This item was first listed in the agenda for the 28 September 2016 meeting of SAROC and was postponed pending the outcome of the LGA Board elections.

Rule 110.5 of the LGA Constitution reads:

“The committee (SAROC) must choose a chair for a period of up to 12 months from members who are also Board Members. When the chair is absent from any meeting, an acting chair for the purposes of that meeting must be chosen from the Board Members present”.

Mayor Erika Vickery was previously elected as SAROC Chairperson on 18 March 2015.

Due to the effluxion of time the position is vacant and an election for the position is required at the commencement of the meeting.

The Returning Officer for the election is the LGA Chief Executive Officer. The Chief Executive Officer may appoint a Deputy Returning Officer to conduct the election.

Ms Lisa Teburea, Executive Director Public Affairs will open the meeting in capacity as appointed Deputy Returning Officer.

Nominations for the position of SAROC Chairperson will be then invited by the Deputy Returning Officer. Following which the new Chairperson will commence the meeting.

If more than one nomination is received, an election will need to be held at the meeting. All voting members of the SAROC Committee are entitled to a vote.

Voting Members are:

• the Presiding Member or the Deputy Presiding Member of a Regional LGA;

• LGA Board Members who are also an Elected Representative of a Constituent of a Regional LGA;

SAROC Committee Agenda - 25 January 2017 - of 58


• in the absence of a voting Member (eg Presiding Member, Deputy Presiding Member or LGA Board Member) of a Regional LGA, the Deputy/Proxy Member for the Regional LGA; and

• the Executive Officer of a Regional LGA.

If an election is required, the meeting will need to determine the manner in which this is to be conducted. It is suggested that a secret ballot would be appropriate.



3.1 Minutes of the Meeting held 16 November 2016

Minutes of Previous Meeting

From: Jacqui Kelleher, Manager Executive Services

Meeting SAROC Committee 25 January 2017

ECM: 646491 Attachment: 645118

Recommendation

That the SAROC Committee confirms the minutes of the meeting held on 16 November 2016 as a true and accurate record of the proceedings held.

Discussion

The draft minutes of the SA Regional Organisation of Councils (SAROC) Committee meeting held on 16 November 2016 are attached.


ECM 645118 SAROC Committee Meeting Draft Minutes – 16 November 2016 Page 1 of 6

Draft Minutes of the South Australian Regional Organisation of Councils meeting held on Wednesday 16 November 2016 at 4.00pm at Mid Murray Council Rooms, 49 Adelaide Road, Mannum.

1. Welcome, Present & Apologies

The Chairperson, Mayor Vickery, opened the meeting at 4pm and welcomed members and staff.

1.1 Present

Name Region

Mayor Peter Mattey Central Local Government Region

Mayor Denis Clark Central Local Government Region

Mayor Ray Agnew OAM Central Local Government Region

Mr David Stevenson (Executive Officer) Central Local Government Region

Mayor Bruce Green Eyre Peninsula LGA

Mr Tony Irvine (Executive Officer) Eyre Peninsula LGA

Mayor Erika Vickery Limestone Coast LGA

Mayor Richard Sage (proxy) Limestone Coast LGA

Mr Dominic Testoni (Executive Officer) Limestone Coast LGA

Mayor Dave Burgess (LGA President) Murraylands & Riverland LGA

Mayor Peter Hunt Murraylands & Riverland LGA

Mayor Neville Jaensch Murraylands & Riverland LGA

Mr Peter Bond (Executive Officer) Murraylands & Riverland LGA

Mayor Ann Ferguson OAM Southern & Hills LGA

Mayor Keith Parkes (proxy) Southern & Hills LGA

Mr Graeme Martin (Executive Officer) Southern & Hills LGA

Mayor John Rohde (Proxy) Spencer Gulf Cities

Ms Anita Crisp (Executive Officer) Spencer Gulf Cities

Observers

Mayor Lorraine Rosenberg (LGA President-elect)

Metropolitan LG Group



LGA Secretariat (Observers):

Matt Pinnegar Chief Executive Officer

Lisa Teburea Executive Director, Public Affairs

Kathy Jarrett Executive Director, Corporate & Member Services

David Hitchcock Director, Infrastructure

Sean Holden Senior Policy Advisor

Jacqui Kelleher Manager Executive Services (minutes)

1.2 Apologies

Apologies and absences were noted:

Mayor Allan Aughey (proxy) Central Local Government Region

Mayor Sandra Wauchope (proxy) Central Local Government Region

Mayor Sam Telfer (proxy) Eyre Peninsula LGA

Mayor Leon Stasinowsky (proxy) Murraylands & Riverland LGA

Mayor Bill Spragg Southern & Hills LGA

Mayor Sam Johnson Spencer Gulf Cities

2 Minutes of Previous Meeting

2.1 Minutes of the Meeting held 28 September 2016

Moved Mayor Agnew Seconded Mayor Ferguson that the SAROC Committee confirms the minutes of the meeting held on 28 September 2016 as a true and accurate record of the proceedings held.

CARRIED

2.2 Resolutions and Actions from Previous Meetings

Moved Mayor Hunt Seconded Mayor Clark that the SAROC Committee notes progress with resolutions resulting from the 28 September 2016 meeting and outstanding resolutions from earlier meetings.

CARRIED



3 Invited Guest Speakers

Nil.

4 LGA President’s Report

Moved Mayor Hunt Seconded Mayor Mattey that the SAROC Committee notes the report.

CARRIED

5 Regional Executive Officers’ Meeting

Peter Bond provided a verbal update.

6 Reports for Discussion

6.1 OPAL Wellbeing

Moved Mayor Jaensch Seconded Mayor Agnew that the SAROC Committee:

1. notes the report; and

2. endorses the approach of the LGA President to:

a. advocate for a funding partnership with the State and Federal Governments for funding mechanisms for establishment of a Community Wellbeing program to be embedded in the regional and metropolitan LGA structures; and

b. request the State Government to release the Opal Program “evaluation report” to the LGA for circulation to Regional LGA’s and Constituent Councils.

CARRIED

6.2 Speed Management and Road Safety

Moved Mayor Clark Seconded Dominic Testoni that the SAROC Committee:

1. notes the report;

2. endorses the Limestone Coast LGA as the trial region for the proposed pilot approach to the regional road safety management strategy; and



3. recommends the LGA Board request the LGA President contact the Minister for Road Safety to seek a timely and supportive decision for the establishment of a joint local/state government working group to develop a regional road safety management strategy.

CARRIED

6.3 Road Safety

Moved Dominic Testoni Seconded Mayor Hunt that the SAROC Committee…


2. recommends the LGA Board requests the LGA SA Secretariat to enter discussions with the Motor Accident Commission to consider adopting the Limestone Coast model for Regional Community Road Safety Awareness throughout rural and regional South Australia.

CARRIED

6.4 State Power Supplies

Tony Irvine provided a verbal update.

Moved Mayor Green Seconded Mayor Mattey that the SAROC Committee:


2. recommends the LGA Board request the LGA President to:

a. subject to outcomes of the COAG Energy Council meeting called in relation to the security of the SA power network, write to the Australian Energy Market Operator expressing urgency on requiring explanations for the causes of the recent State Black Out Event;

b. correspond with Electranet requesting the status of their asset replacement program and intentions to increase energy supply capacity on the Eyre Peninsula. In addition, requesting the status of the old line and if or how it will be maintained and used;

c. correspond with SAPOL requesting a report from emergency services organisations, detailing outcomes from event debriefs and what learnings/changes have arisen from the power outage event;



d. request that the State Government supply their future emergency management planning strategies/ actions to mitigate future communication blackout events such as experienced on Eyre Peninsula and other regions of the state as this could result in life threatening situations. (ie no 000 available for emergencies); and

e. correspond with Peter Malinauskas MLC suggesting that State Government resourcing for advertising on what to do in the event of a fire, be broadened to include other emergency situations and that there be an expansion of the Community Education Officer role especially with regards to communication.

CARRIED

6.5 Rubble Royalties

David Stevenson provided a verbal update.

Moved Mayor Ferguson Seconded Mayor Clark that the SAROC Committee notes progress in the campaign to remove rubble royalty payment requirements.

CARRIED

7 Confidential Items

Nil.

8. Late Reports

8.1 Special Local Roads Program

Kathy Jarrett provided a verbal update advising that SLRP and LGR&D have been incorporated into the LGA governance review to ensure the processes are sound and outcomes are meeting needs of the sector. Independent person will be engaged to review these two matters.

9. Any Other Business

9.1 Retiring SAROC members

Outgoing members Mayors Ferguson and Agnew conveyed appreciation to the SAROC members and the Committee acknowledged their services.



Mayor Vickery also acknowledged outgoing LGA President Mayor Burgess for his term of office.

10. Next Meeting

The next meeting of the SAROC Committee will be held on Wednesday 25 January 2017 (to be confirmed) at 4.00pm in the Local Government Association Boardrooms, 148 Frome Street, Adelaide.

11 Close

The meeting was declared closed at 5.00 pm.

Minutes confirmed

…………………………………….

Chairperson signature

Date ………………………………



3.2 Resolutions and Actions from Previous Meetings

Minutes of Previous Meeting

From: Lisa Teburea, Executive Director Public Affairs



Recommendation

That the SAROC Committee notes progress with resolutions resulting from the 16 November 2016 meeting and outstanding resolutions from earlier meetings.

Discussion

The attachment shows progress of resolutions from previous meetings of the SAROC Committee.



16 November 2016

6.1 Opal Wellbeing

Moved Mayor Jaensch Seconded Mayor Agnew that the SAROC Committee:


2. endorses the approach of the LGA President to:

a. advocate for a funding partnership with the State and Federal Governments for funding mechanisms for establishment of a Community Wellbeing program to be embedded in the regional and metropolitan LGA structures; and

b. request the State Government to release the Opal Program “evaluation report” to the LGA for circulation to Regional LGA’s and Constituent Councils.

CARRIED

The LGA President ( Mayor D Burgess) has progressed discussion with the State Government on this matter which was also discussed( and supported) at the 14 December Premiers Local Government Forum.

The OPAL evaluation report has been publicly released

6.2 Speed Management and Road Safety

Moved Mayor Clark Seconded Dominic Testoni that the SAROC Committee:


2. endorses the Limestone Coast LGA as the trial region for the proposed pilot approach to the regional road safety management strategy; and

3. recommends the LGA Board request the LGA President contact the Minister for Road Safety to seek a timely and supportive decision for the establishment of a joint local/state government working group to develop a regional road safety management strategy.

CARRIED

The LGA President is scheduled to meet the Minister on 11/1/17



6.3 Road Safety

Moved Dominic Testoni Seconded Mayor Hunt that the SAROC Committee


2. recommends the LGA Board requests the LGA SA Secretariat to enter discussions with the Motor Accident Commission to consider adopting the Limestone Coast model for Regional Community Road Safety Awareness throughout rural and regional South Australia.

CARRIED

MAC is currently undertaking a review of the Limestone Coast Pilot which expires March 17

This should be near completion end January 2017

Once the review is to hand Mac will consider options available and how various models might benefit

Further consultation will occur with Limestone Coast and the LGA.

6.4 State Power Supplies

Tony Irvine provided a verbal update.

Moved Mayor Green Seconded Mayor Mattey that the SAROC Committee:


2. recommends the LGA Board request the LGA President to:

a. subject to outcomes of the COAG Energy Council meeting called in relation to the security of the SA power network, write to the Australian Energy Market Operator expressing urgency on requiring explanations for the causes of the recent State Black Out Event;

b. correspond with Electranet requesting the status of their asset replacement program and intentions to increase energy supply capacity on the Eyre Peninsula. In addition, requesting the status of the old line and if or how it will be maintained and used;

c. correspond with SAPOL requesting a report from emergency services organisations, detailing outcomes from event debriefs and what learnings/changes have arisen from the power outage event;

d. request that the State Government supply their future emergency management planning strategies/ actions to mitigate future communication blackout events such as

A letter has been written to AEMO seeking assurance that mitigative measures are now in place to restore power outage more expeditiously

A letter has been written to Electranet seeking timeframes for the upgrade of the 123kV transmission line that supplies the Eyre Peninsula

Items (c) & (d) relate to the Burns Review into the response to the storm event. The LGA has made a submission to the review and has sought the inclusion of additional focus areas in the interim report of the review which has been circulated to



experienced on Eyre Peninsula and other regions of the state as this could result in life threatening situations. (ie no 000 available for emergencies); and

e. correspond with Peter Malinauskas MLC suggesting that State Government resourcing for advertising on what to do in the event of a fire, be broadened to include other emergency situations and that there be an expansion of the Community Education Officer role especially with regards to communication.

CARRIED

committee members of the SEMC. LGA CEO is a member.

A letter has been written to the Minister Malinauskas

6.5 Rubble Royalties

David Stevenson provided a verbal update.

Moved Mayor Ferguson Seconded Mayor Clark that the SAROC Committee notes progress in the campaign to remove rubble royalty payment requirements.

CARRIED

Completed

28 September 2016

1. Welcome and Election of a SAROC Chairperson

Mr David Hitchcock, Director Infrastructure welcomed members and staff. As deputy returning officer for the election of South Australian Regional Organisation of Councils Committee, he recommended that the election for a new Chairperson be postponed until the LGA Board elections had been finalised.

Moved Mayor Johnson Seconded Mayor Jaensch that the SAROC Committee:

1. postpones the election of a new SAROC Committee Chairperson until conclusion of the LGA Board elections; and

2 that Mayor Vickery continues as Chairperson until that time.

CARRIED

Subject to conclusion of LGA Board elections – To be undertaken at January 2017 meeting



7.1 LGA Governance Review Update

Ms Kathy Jarrett presented an outline of the LGA Governance Review process to date and conducted a short workshop forum to discuss future roles and objectives of SAROC and how that might apply to any new governance arrangements to be determined. Ms Jarrett introduced consultant Mr Ted Byrt who continued the presentation. Both Ms Jarrett and Mr Byrt answered questions from members.

Moved Mayor Agnew Seconded Mayor Ferguson that the SAROC Committee:


2. notes any further feedback provided during the meeting to be considered as part of the LGA Governance Review.

CARRIED

Completed

7.2 457 Visa Holders

Mr Dominic Testoni raised this issue at the last meeting and now addressed members on his concerns.

Mr Pinnegar gave a verbal update.

Moved Mayor Mattey Seconded Mayor Jaensch that the SAROC Committee recommends the LGA Board request the LGA Secretariat to lobby the South Australian Government to immediately re-assess the introduction of a fee for families on 457 visas.

CARRIED

Completed



7.3 Automated Fire Danger Signs

Moved Mayor Mattey Seconded Mayor Spragg that the SAROC Committee recommends that the LGA Board request the LGA Secretariat to lobby for funding by the State Government (Country Fire Service) for the introduction of automated fire danger rating signs in South Australia.

CARRIED

The Minister of Emergency Services was written to who has declined to support the request and has suggested that councils apply for funds through NDRP. The Secretariat does support this suggestion as it would result in a very ad hoc approach to the installation of the signs. The SG in Victoria has lead the installation of these signs which has resulted in a coordinated and centralised system with built-in redundancy. It is recommended that a similar approach be sought by the LGA in SA.

20 July 2016

7.1 LGA Reviews Update

Ms Kathy Jarrett, Executive Director Corporate & Member Services, addressed the group to seek feedback on the role and structure of the LGA.

Moved Mayor Agnew OAM Seconded Mayor Clark that the SAROC Committee notes the report.

CARRIED

Completed

7.2 Collaboration in Delivery of Road Management Services

There was general discussion.

Moved Mayor Mattey Seconded Mayor Jaensch that the SAROC Committee:


2. endorses a funding application being submitted by the EPLGA to the LGA Research and Development Scheme to facilitate development of suitable local government local road service standards.

CARRIED

Completed



19 May 2016

7.5 Fire Safety Requirements for Buildings

Moved Mr Testoni Seconded Mayor Hunt that the SAROC Committee:


2. recommends the LGA Board request the LGA secretariat to engage with the appropriate agency to seek support for amendments to legislation that will reduce the cost burden to impacted community groups in complying with the regulations under the National Construction Code and Australian Standard 2419.1, any building over 500m2 in floor area.

CARRIED

Completed



5. LGA President’s Report

Report from the LGA President – January 2017

Small bars

The State Government’s refusal to extend small bars outside of the Adelaide CBD is a missed opportunity, both for Adelaide’s suburbs and the State’s regional areas. Following on from our AGM in October - where councils asked the LGA to lobby the Government to deregulate small bar licensing - we’ve now written to the Minister proposing a voluntary pilot of small bars outside of Adelaide’s CBD. We have offered to work with the Government on this pilot, which would measure the impact of small bars in an area, ahead of a formal review, however the Minister has declined this offer.

Building Better Regions Fund

I wrote to Senator Nash, Minister for Local Government and Regional Development this month about the Building Better Regions Fund. The first issue is that large areas within South Australia’s peri-urban councils such as Adelaide Hills and Mt Barker are ineligible to access the fund, while heavily populated and urbanised areas such as Geelong and Ballarat in Victoria and the Gold Coast and Sunshine Coast in Queensland remain eligible. It’s also concerning that metropolitan councils are excluded from applying for the Building Better Regions Fund, and it's currently not clear whether other funding opportunities, such as the City Deals investment program and the $50 million Smart Cities and Suburbs Program, will benefit metropolitan councils in the same way as the National Stronger Regions Fund grants did. South Australian councils already receive an unfair share of federal funding, and we need to ensure we make the most of opportunities to access new funding programs.

Why local government matters in SA

Why Local Government Matters in SA - a new survey commissioned by the LGA and delivered by the Centre for Local Government at the University of Technology Sydney was released last month. Based on an online survey of around 1,000 participants as well as four focus groups, it demonstrates communities want more than “roads, rates and rubbish” – they also expect their councils to plan for the future (81% of respondents), contribute to emergency and disaster management (79%), and help drive economic development (71%). The report also showed focus group respondents were cynical about the benefits of council amalgamations, and concerned about the potential for inequality in distribution of services, and loss of local representation.



Resilience Australia win for i-Responda program

It was tremendous to see the i-Responda program receive formal recognition at the Resilience Australia Awards late last year, where it won a State Award. This program continues to grow, with 60 councils now involved, and 2,500 staff trained to date. Also in the emergency response field, the LGA recently provided a submission to the Government’s Burns Review which was initiated in response to the storms and associated blackouts last September.

NRM Levy Amendment Bill

As an outcome of LGA advocacy the Hon Robert Brokenshire MLC introduced a bill into Parliament in November which would have made the State Government – rather than councils – responsible for collecting the NRM Levy. Disappointingly, this was ruled to be a “money bill” by the President of the Legislative Council, and subsequently withdrawn. The LGA remains opposed to the current arrangements which require councils to collect the levy for the State, and we will continue to advocate for change. We appreciate the support from Robert for councils and communities on this issue.

Congratulations Mayor O’Loughlin

Prospect Mayor David O’Loughlin was elected as the President of the Australian Local Government Association. Mayor O’Loughlin’s appointment in a fantastic opportunity for our sector to raise issues at a Federal level, including the unfair share of funding received by South Australian councils, and the impact freezes to Financial Assistance Grant indexation are having on communities.

Farewell David Hitchcock

Please note that our Director of Infrastructure David Hitchcock announced his retirement late last year, and finished at the LGA on 23 December. David has made a significant contribution to the LGA over the past thirteen years, as well as the sector as a whole over the past four decades. An internal recruitment process is now being run to fill a revised “Director Policy” position. I know David will be missed, and I wish him all the best with his future plans.



7.1 Population Policy

Reports for Discussion

From: Peter Bond, CEO, Murraylands & Riverland Local Government Association

Key Initiative: K.I 1 Leadership and advocacy

Strategy: 1B Contribute to state-wide and local policy


ECM: 646505

Recommendation

That the SAROC Committee:


2. refers the need for continued advocacy for a South Australian population policy to the LGA Board;

3. requests that the LGA Board confirms the position that a population policy should guide:

a. Population growth and decline in and between regions (including the metropolitan region)

b. Impacts of an ageing population c. Labour force and skills d. Migration policy e. Maintaining and enhancing liveability for regional, rural and remote

communities f. Demands on infrastructure provision, particularly transport, community

facilities, essential services and broadband; and

4. requests that the LGA work with other groups such as EDA, CEDA and UDIA to advocate for migration reform and population growth.

Discussion

Background

The 2016 LGA Solutions for SA State Budget Submission stated that “to assist the State’s economic recovery, a stronger and more sustainable South Australia needs a comprehensive policy to guide the growth of our population, particularly in regional areas.”

In the submission the LGA called on the State Government to work with Councils and other stakeholders to develop an SA population policy to guide:

Population growth and decline in and between regions (including the metropolitan region)



Impacts of an ageing population Labour force and skills Migration policy Maintaining and enhancing liveability for regional, rural and remote communities Demands on infrastructure provision, particularly transport, community facilities,

essential services and broadband

A ‘Regional Growth Strategy’ has since been adopted as a priority for 2017 on the Premier’s State/Local Government Forum agenda.

Joint Regional Growth Strategy

The Premier’s Forum agenda includes an initiative on joint development of policies and strategies that would stimulate economic growth in regional areas, in particular:

a regional jobs growth strategy that would contribute to regional population growth;

explore the establishment of a pilot project with a regional council to identify Crown land that could be redesignated and used as a catalyst for economic growth and job creation; and

explore the establishment of a pilot study on an engagement protocol for mining and complex land uses, with industry bodies.

Migration Research

At the 19 May 2016 SAROC meeting it was recommended to the LGA Board that the LGA contributes $8,000 to the South Australian Centre for Economic Studies (SACES) project to research the potential benefits of reforming selected migration policies to address South Australia's needs. The LGA Board confirmed this contribution to the research, which is being co-funded by a range of other peak bodies and South Australian businesses.

A release date for the research is yet to be confirmed. The LGA Secretariat will review and provide comments on a draft report prior to its release.

457 Visas

In March this year the Minister for Education and Child Development, Susan Close MP, announced that from January 2017 new 457 Visa workers earning a household income of more than $77,000 will, for Secondary School students, have to start paying school fees of up to $6,100 from next year. And that from January 2018 it will apply to all 457 current Visa holders.

This is of particular concern to regional Councils as it will prove to be a disincentive for skilled migrants and their families, such as Health Professionals and Teachers, to move to the country and/or stay in the country.

The LGA has written to the Minister for Education and Child Development to express these concerns and request that this policy be reconsidered.

LGA Policy Position (Refer Appendix A)

Local Government supports the establishment of partnerships between all spheres of government and ‘growth’ Councils to address population growth issues.

LGA Regions Work Plan

Increasing the population of South Australia’s regions emerged as a clear issue during the development of the 2015 LGA regions work plan, which was developed in collaboration with



SAROC, Regions SA, PIRSA and RDAs. The key actions from the work plan related to population policy are summarised below.

2.6 The LGA to work with State Government on increasing targets and developing commensurate policies, to increase the South Australian population living in regional centres.

4.2 Encourage the State Government to work with regional communities and Local Government to produce a South Australian Regional Development Policy including the following elements:

a description of current and projected State Government activity in regions;

an analysis of the importance of regions to the State’s economy – now and into the future as well as key economic drivers for each region;

a vision for the future of regional South Australia including population and service delivery targets;

strategies and actions to achieve the regional vision, articulated in regional plans; and

a list of commitments (funding and otherwise) from the State Government to deliver on the policy.

There is considerable evidence to suggest that the demographics in our regions are changing and this is likely to have a significant impact on many of the local businesses and employment opportunities. Many of our Region LGA’s have experienced population decline since 2007, and while well short of an exodus, it will have an impact on the local economy if it continues.

Whilst dealing with the complexities of population dynamics is a difficult area to be involved in, there is little doubt that our region must work together with the LGA and State Government to establish a sustainable population policy for South Australia which addresses water resources and other environmental issues, skills shortages, future infrastructure needs and targets specific areas of population growth and/or decline. This report seeks the support of SAROC to request that the LGA Board confirm its position and continue to advocate for a population policy. LGA advocacy opportunities include:

Influence the final 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide update to better inform the document its targets, policies and actions for example regional projections.

Work with the Committee for Adelaide’s Population and Migration working group. Joint advocacy with other groups such as EDA, CEDA and UDIA to seek immigration

reform for South Australia.

LGA Comment

The report and the recommendation are consistent with LGA policy and the actions currently being undertaken by the LGA Secretariat in relation to population policy.

Financial and Resource Implications

This activity is anticipated in the LGA’s work program and can be delivered within existing LGA resources.



APPENDIX A

Population Policy- LGA Position This briefing paper provides an overview of the LGA’s position on population policy. The LGA has an interest in South Australia’s population as councils have a strong role to play in managing the impacts of population change- whether that is growth or decline.

For over 12 years, the LGA has identified and been promoting the need to work with the state government to develop a population policy. A particular focus of the LGA’s endorsed position on population is to increase the population of regional communities and to address skills shortages.

Throughout 2016, the LGA became more active in its advocacy on this issue to reinforce the sector’s role as a driver of economic development. We have also moved to capitalise on the momentum being created by other industry groups calling for population growth, including the UDIA, Property Council, Australian Hotels Association, Committee for Adelaide, Committee for Economic Development of Australia, and SA-based RDAs.

The LGA’s advocacy on population growth is supported by LGA policy, which has been endorsed by the membership. A summary of key policies and decisions is provided below.

LGA Policy Manual (version 16 adopted by LGA AGM 31 October 2015)

The LGA Policy Manual contains the principles and policies that have been adopted by the LGA membership at Ordinary and Annual General Meetings. The policies contained in the Manual represent the 'sector wide' opinions of Local Government in South Australia.

The policies relating to population that have been adopted by the sector are summarised below.

8.10 POPULATION POLICY

8.10.1 Local and State Governments must work together to establish a sustainable population policy for South Australia which addresses water resources and other environmental issues, skills shortages, future infrastructure needs and targets specific areas of population growth and/or decline.

8.10.2 Local Government will give consideration to the implications of an ageing community in population policy development including the provision of services and facilities.

8.10.3 Local Government supports the establishment of partnerships between the other two spheres of government and ‘growth’ Councils to address population growth issues.

11. Growing Country Communities

Principles:

The State’s goal of increasing regional populations, outside of Greater Adelaide, by 20,000 people or more by 2020 (South Australian Strategic Plan 2011), will be achieved through careful planning in collaboration with Local Government.



11.1 A PARTNERSHIP APPROACH TO GROWING COUNTRY COMMUNITIES

11.1.2 The prosperity of South Australia’s country communities is dependent on Local, State and Federal governments working together to address:

population growth or maintenance; employment generation; investment in infrastructure; development of human capital; health of families and communities; quality of life; sustainable use of natural assets; and A profitable business environment

LGA Regions Work Plan (endorsed by LGA OGM 1 May 2015)

Increasing the population of South Australia’s regions emerged as a clear issue during the development of the 2015 LGA regions work plan, which was developed in collaboration with SAROC, Regions SA, PIRSA and RDAs. The key actions from the work plan related to population policy are summarised below.

2.6 The LGA to work with State Government on increasing targets and developing commensurate policies, to increase the South Australian population living in regional centres.

4.2 Encourage the State Government to work with regional communities and Local Government to produce a South Australian Regional Development Policy including the following elements:

a description of current and projected State Government activity in regions; an analysis of the importance of regions to the State’s economy – now and into the

future as well as key economic drivers for each region; a vision for the future of regional South Australia including population and service

delivery targets; strategies and actions to achieve the regional vision, articulated in regional plans;

and a list of commitments (funding and otherwise) from the State Government to deliver

on the policy.

LGA 2016/17 State Budget Submission (endorsed by LGA Board 17 March 2016)

The LGA’s 2016/17 State Budget Submission ‘Solutions for SA’, asked the state government to fully fund the development of a population policy for South Australia. The submission calls on the State Government to work with councils and other stakeholders to develop an SA population policy to guide:

Population growth and decline in and between regions (including the metropolitan region)

Impacts of an ageing population Labour force and skills Migration policy Maintaining and enhancing livability for regional, rural and remote communities Demands on infrastructure provision, particularly transport, community facilities,

essential services and broadband



Research into Reforming Migration Policies (endorsed by LGA Board 19 May 2016) In May 2016, the LGA Board (via SAROC) supported the LGA contributing to a SACES research project on migration policy. The recommendation from SAROC, which was endorsed by the LGA Board read that SAROC:

‘recommends to the LGA Board that the LGA contributes $8,000 to the SACES project to research the potential benefits of reforming selected migration policies to address South Australia’s needs’.

The SAROC report went into some detail about the population challenges in regional areas and the role of migration as a possible solution. Some of the key points raised in the report are summarized below.

Population growth in SA to the end of the September 2015 was 0.7% whilst nationally it was 1.3%, representing 12,400 of a total increase of 313,200.

With regard to migration policy, research currently being undertaken by the SA Centre for Economic Studies (SACES) indicates that between 1.3 to 1.6 new jobs would be created for every migrant worker moving to regional and rural areas working in industries that are facing significant long term vacancies. This would, of course, also support and grow regional communities.

Migration outcomes and population growth in South Australia are in free fall which continues to have a significantly detrimental impact on South Australian businesses, especially those in regional and rural areas where long term vacancies exist.

If an economic migration program was introduced allowing greater access to semi-skilled occupations and with remuneration set at market salary rates, this would deliver significant economic benefits to regional and rural communities.

457 Visa Holders (endorsed by the LGA Board 28 September 2016)

A report to SAROC from the Limestone Coast LGA raised concerns about a state government policy announcement to charge additional school fees for the dependents of 457 Visa Holders. The report outlined the reliance of many industries in regional areas on 457 visa holders to fill positions and the barrier that addition fees may create. The report also noted the fragility of many regional populations and provided the following key points:

The Regional Australia Institute has published a paper ‘The Missing Migrants’ that shows that 100 small areas have stabilised or grown their population off the back of migration strategies. We also know that backpackers and temporary migrant workforces are crucial to rural industries in many areas.

Jack Archer CEO of the Regional Australia Institute argues that if we really want small towns to overcome population issues, supporting proactive international migration strategies needs to be the top priority.

The LGA Board endorsed the request from SAROC for the LGA to advocate a review of the state government’s school fee policy.



7.2 Draft Borrow Pit Guidelines


From: Tony Irvine, Executive Officer, Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association

Key Initiative: K.I 3 Best practice and continuous improvement

Strategy: 3B Benchmark, innovate and research



Recommendation



2. recommends to the LGA Board that the Guidance: Quarry and borrow pit rehabilitation in South Australia (November 2016) be adopted subject to sign off by all regions.

Discussion

The LGA has been working extensively with the State Government in endeavors to scrap the royalty payment impost. Legal advice was sought to develop the local government argument to remove the royalty payment. Central LGA has also provided important assistance with lead on negotiations with the Cement, Concrete and Aggregates Association for support to scrap the royalty payment.

All parties met on 25 November 2016 and agreed in principle to establish a best practice Local Government Rubble Pit Management guidelines. This work has now been undertaken with view to be in a position to collectively seek approval/support from the Treasurer to remove the impost as part of the 2017-18 state budget process.

This guideline has been prepared by the Department of State Development (DSD) to provide guidance to the Local Government Association of South Australia on leading practice standards for rehabilitation of small quarries and borrow pits in South Australia.

The scope of this guidance does not include intersection of, or quarrying below the groundwater table, and it is suggested that during the planning stage of quarry development the groundwater level be defined so the quarry floor can remain at least 2 metres above groundwater.

This document is primarily aimed at small pits but the rehabilitation strategies provided could be used for larger multi bench quarries to complement a more detailed quarry planning approach.

It is emphasised that this document is a guideline.



The Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association Engineering & Works Committee considered these guidelines at their December 2016 committee meeting and no negative comments have been received to date.

LGA Comment

The LGA Secretariat recommends that the Guidelines be subject to a minimum 6 week consultation process with councils before being formally adopted by the LGA Board.


This activity is not currently anticipated in the LGA’s work program, but can be delivered within existing LGA resources.


Guidance: Quarry and borrow pit rehabilitation in South Australia I November 2016

Guidance: Quarry and borrow pit rehabilitation in South

Australia

November 2016



Contents1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 3

2. Quarry Planning and Progressive Rehabilitation ............................................................................. 3

2.1 General Quarry Planning ........................................................................................................ 3

2.2 Progressive Rehabilitation ...................................................................................................... 3

2.3 Revegetation ........................................................................................................................... 4

3. Quarry Rehabilitation Outcomes and Recommended Strategies ....................................................... 5

3.1 External Visual Amenity .......................................................................................................... 5

3.2 Public Safety and Landform Stability ...................................................................................... 5

3.3 Post Mining Land use .............................................................................................................. 6

3.4 Surface and groundwater ........................................................................................................ 7

4. References ....................................................................................................................................... 8

Revision history Date Comment 14/11/2016 Draft for discussion with LGA



1. Introduction This guideline has been prepared by the Department of State Development (DSD) to provide guidance to the Local Government Association of South Australia on leading practice standards for rehabilitation of small quarries and borrow pits in South Australia. The scope of this guidance does not include intersection of, or quarrying below the groundwater table, and it is suggested that during the planning stage of quarry development the groundwater level be defined so the quarry floor can remain at least 2 metres above groundwater. This document is primarily aimed at small pits but the rehabilitation strategies provided could be used for larger multi bench quarries to complement a more detailed quarry planning approach.

2. Quarry Planning and Progressive Rehabilitation

2.1 General Quarry Planning A well-considered quarry development plan prior to starting work, or when opening up new areas will greatly reduce the effort required to achieve appropriate leading practice environmental and safety outcomes for quarry rehabilitation and closure.

The selection of a site, sequencing of quarrying and rehabilitation, and final land-use should all be carefully planned prior to commencement of work at a quarry or borrow pit. Quarry planning will assist in efficient extraction and progressive rehabilitation and help to reduce costs and minimise the potential environmental impacts once quarrying is finished.

Recommended quarry planning practice:

Determine the intended future-use and final landform of a site at an early stage. This should be in consultation with the landowner and broader community (for a larger quarry).

When siting a quarry existing natural features should be used to conceal the quarry and limit the visual impact.

Plan sequencing of both quarrying and rehabilitation for the life of the quarry. Plan drainage works and the final drainage pattern prior to beginning work. If located

on a floodplain or waterway the layout will need to consider the form and function of the waterway and floodplain, e.g. no loss of flow conveyance or flood storage. Significantly changing the drainage pattern of a site may require permits or licenses from the appropriate State Government department.

2.2 Progressive Rehabilitation Progressive rehabilitation refers to the rehabilitation of completed parts of a quarry while extractive operations continue in other parts of the quarry. As new quarry sections are opened, worked out areas should be progressively rehabilitated to avoid increasing the total disturbed area of a quarry. Overburden and topsoil can be stripped from areas being opened up and placed directly onto worked out areas which are being rehabilitated. This will avoid double handling of materials and prevent degradation of the topsoil. Rehabilitation works may be considerably more efficient if carried out while the necessary machinery is onsite and operating, rather than having machinery transported back to a site at the end of the quarries.


4

Progressive rehabilitation helps to minimise the visual impact of a quarry and control dust, erosion, and the invasion of weeds. It also assists in fostering good landowner and community relations. Recommended progressive rehabilitation practice:

Agree on the final land form and use of a site with the relevant landowner. Rehabilitate in accordance with the intended final use of the land. Final faces of shallow borrow pits should be battered to a 1:3 (vertical: horizontal) or

shallower. Plan and develop the quarry in stages towards terminal areas so that progressive

rehabilitation works can commence as soon as possible (As shown in Figure 1). Once the final landform is established, revegetate areas to stabilise the landform and

to give the vegetation maximum time to establish while the quarry is still in operation.

Figure 1 – Progressive rehabilitation to manage potential impact on visual amenity (Earth Resources, 2015)

2.3 Revegetation Establishing a self-sustaining cover of vegetation is the best way to stabilise disturbed sites in the long term. Revegetation also minimises the visual impact of quarries. Generally, the vegetation type which existed before the disturbance, or a similar vegetation type will regenerate most successfully. Prior to the commencement of a quarrying activity the type of revegetation should be agreed with the landowner, and should be consistent with the proposed final land-use. Some indigenous plant species may not thrive in areas where soil conditions are substantially different after quarrying. If this is the case, and the objective is to re-establish vegetation, which fulfils the function of the original native vegetation, then some species from outside the quarry area, may have to be introduced. Care must be taken to avoid introducing a species, which could become an unacceptable fire hazard, invade surrounding areas of native vegetation or become agricultural weeds. Where agriculture is the planned land-use then the species planted should be those commonly used for pasture or crops known to be successful on soils of similar texture,


5

drainage status, pH and fertility. Suitable legumes should always be considered for their ability to improve soil fertility.

3. Quarry Rehabilitation Outcomes and Recommended Strategies

3.1 External Visual Amenity Outcome: No impact on receptors through reduced visual amenity of landscape. Recommended Strategies:

- When siting a quarry existing natural features should be used to conceal the quarry and limit the visual impact.

- Agree on the final land form and use of a site with the relevant landowner/manager - Plan to mine towards terminal faces to allow commencement of progressive

rehabilitation as soon as possible. When developing final landforms avoid creating long straight ridges and sharp angles, as these will look unnatural. Slope angles, lengths and shapes within the range of natural slopes in the area are more likely to be visually compatible with the surrounding area.

- In a multi-bench quarry create at least a vegetated 45 degree slope to reduce visual impact.

- Ensure vegetation used for rehabilitation or vegetative screens is compatible with surrounding vegetation or is sourced from local native plant stocks.

- Remove all waste from the site.

3.2 Public Safety and Landform Stability Outcomes: No public injuries and/or deaths as a result of the final landform post quarry completion. All landforms are physically stable Recommended Strategies:

- Quarry slope angles for rehabilitated faces or dumps should be less than 20 degrees. - If benches are to be left, at a minimum an abandonment bund and swale should be

located at the top of the quarry. Warning signs can also be established to deter vehicle access. The bund should be established at least 10 metres from the pit edge and should be constructed to a height of 2 metres, base width 5 metres (Western Australia Department Industry and Resources, 1997).

- The top bench should be rehabilitated to at least a 45-degree slope. The second bench should contain a catch bund to stop steep falls down rehabilitated benches.

- In softer material the active quarry face can be formed as the final batter. For example, if an end land use of grazing is desired a 1:3 (vertical: horizontal) batter or 20-degree slope could be formed in the early stages of quarrying. Material can then be won through the pushing of material down this batter. This practice greatly reduces the rehabilitation requirement at closure.

- Sterile rye grass is commonly used as a cover crop to stabilise the final landform.


6

3.3 Post Mining Land use Outcome: All disturbed land is progressively rehabilitated to achieve the agreed post mining land use. Recommended Strategies:

- Agree on the final land form and use of a site with the relevant landowner/manager - Ensure that subsoil and topsoil is stripped ahead of quarrying activities and

stockpiled separately to a height not exceeding 2 metres to ensure productivity of the soil is preserved so it is suitable for rehabilitation works;

- Topsoil and subsoil stockpiles should be located as close as possible to the final location, not be buried, driven on, excessively handled, or contaminated so as to hinder final land-use;

- Re spread topsoil and subsoil uniformly over the area at a suitable depth to support revegetation;

- Do not spread soil when saturated or sticky, as compaction and other damage to the soil structure will occur;

- Deep rip compacted areas along the contour after spreading topsoil; - Ripping after soil spreading will help to 'key' in the soil to the underlying material to

increase soil break-up carry out ripping when the soil is relatively dry; - Apply surface mulches around growing seedlings on steep batters to reduce erosion,

weed establishment and to conserve soil moisture and add nutrients to the soil; - Provided it is consistent with post mining land-use, re-vegetate the area with plant

species that will control erosion, provide vegetative diversity and will, in time, contribute to a stable and compatible ecosystem.

When considering final slopes for post mining land uses the following should be used as a guide (As shown in Figure 2):

- Contour ripping is possible on slopes up to 27 degrees. - Normal agricultural machinery can be used on slopes up to 19 degrees. - Large bulldozers can usually only efficiently push fill material up a slope of up to 22

degrees. - Topsoil will generally not adhere to slopes steeper than 27 degrees. - The maximum slope for mechanically spreading topsoil is approximately 19 degrees. - The maximum slopes considered suitable for the following land-uses are:

- hill grazing 28 degrees - improved pasture 15 degrees - some buildings & roads 12 degrees - rotation cropping 5 degrees - Depending on geology, soils and other site-specific variables, gentler slopes

may be necessary.


7

Figure 2 – Maximum slopes at which particular land uses are possible (Developed by DSD)

3.4 Surface and groundwater

Outcome: No adverse impact to surface water or groundwater caused by mining operations to existing users and water dependant ecosystems. Recommended Strategies:

- No mining within 2 metres of the groundwater table; - All chemicals must be bunded as per EPA requirements; - Use contours which mimic natural drainage patterns

Recommended Strategies to prevent sediment impacting on offsite water quality:

- During working life of the quarry ensure a sediment dam is constructed to allow controlled release of clean water. Upon completion the dam should be incorporated into the natural topography of the site.

- Design the drainage system to address seasonal factors, high rainfall events, the area exposed and nature of the soils.

- Stabilize flow lines in high velocity areas using armoring (such as stone) or appropriate vegetation.

- Reduce all slopes to a gradient of 1:3 (vertical:horizontal) or less, or apply an artificial means of stabilising the slope such as with the use of geotextiles, mulch mats or benching to break up the slope.

- Avoid long slopes, and if long slopes cannot be avoided and have the potential to erode, consider the use of contour banks or reverse incline benches.

- Leave surfaces in a rough or uneven state. Rough surfaces will capture more water and allow rainfall to infiltrate rather than flow away.


8

- Ensure that all temporary culverts, spoon drains etc. are removed and re-instate natural flow lines.

4. References Coppin, N. J & Bradshaw, A. D. (Anthony David) & Mining Journal Books & Mineral Industry Research Organisation (Great Britain) (1982) Quarry reclamation : the establishment of vegetation in quarries and open pit non-metal mines, Mining Journal Books, London. Dutton, A.H.(1993).Handbook on Quarrying.5th Ed. Adelaide: Department of Mines and Energy. Earth Resources, (2015).Code of Practice for Small Quarries.[online] Available at: http://earthresources.vic.gov.au/earth-resources-regulation/licensing-and-approvals/sand-stone-and-clay/guidelines-and-codes-of-practice/code-of-practice-small-quarries [Accessed 26 October 2016]. Minerals Council of Australia (1998).Mine Rehabilitation Handbook. 2nd Ed.[pdf] Dickson: Minerals Council of Australia. Available at: https://miningandblasting.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/mine-rehabilitation-handbook.pdf [Accessed 26 October 2016]. Western Australia Department Industry and Resources (1997).Safety Bund Walls Around Abandoned Open Pit Mines – Guideline. East Perth, (8).



7.3 Storm Events - State Power Supplies


From: Neville Hyatt, Senior Policy Officer, Infrastructure & Emergency Management

Key Initiative: K.I 2 Capacity building and sustainability

Strategy: 1E Build and maintain effective partnerships and stakeholder relations



Recommendation



2. endorses the LGA submission to the Review of the Extreme Weather Event.

Discussion

The storm events of September 2016 impacted the whole of South Australia requiring a multi-agency and council response. Disruption of electricity supply for an extended period of time had the knock on effect of telecommunications loss. The extent of the consequences caused by this disruption had not previously been experienced in South Australia.

SAROC at its meeting of 16 November 2016 recommended a number of actions to the LGA Board as listed below and with commentary regarding actions taken since by the Secretariat.

a) subject to outcomes of the COAG Energy Council meeting called in relation to the security of the SA power network, write to the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) expressing urgency on requiring explanations for the causes of the recent State Black Out Event.

Action taken:

The issue has moved on from providing ‘explanations’ to a second report being published on 12 Dec 2016 identifying a number of key focus areas to ensure reliable power supplies.

The LGA has written a letter to AEMO seeking assurance that a similar power disruption will not occur again.



b) the state government be asked to urgently review the economic and social impacts of blackouts.

Action taken:

A letter has been written to the Premier seeking support for a review of the economic and social impacts of blackouts.

c) correspond with Electranet requesting the status of their asset replacement program and intentions to increase energy supply capacity on the Eyre Peninsula. In addition, requesting the status of the old line and if or how it will be maintained and used.

Action taken:

The Electranet website with information regarding asset replacement was examined and a letter written seeking time frames for the replacement of the 132 kV transmission line servicing the Eyre Peninsula.

d) correspond with SAPOL requesting a report from emergency services organisations, detailing outcomes from event debriefs and what learnings/changes have arisen from the power outage event.

Action taken:

The LGA has made a submission to the Burn's Review of the extreme weather events in September 2016. The terms of reference for the review cover a wide range of emergency management issues with the Review due to be released on 17 February 2017. A preliminary summary of the issues and intended actions has been developed by the State Emergency Management Committee. The LGA has membership on this committee and has been requested to provide comment. At this stage the report is classed as confidential, however key issues identified are reflective of the issues raised in the LGA submission.

e) request that the State Government supply their future emergency management planning strategies/ actions to mitigate future communication blackout events such as experienced on Eyre Peninsula and other regions of the state as this could result in life threatening situations. (ie no 000 available for emergencies)

Action taken:

The Secretariat has not pursued this matter as the Burn's review terms of reference encompass these various aspects of emergency management.

f) correspond with Peter Malinauskas MLC (Minister for Emergency Services) suggesting that State Government resourcing for advertising on what to do in the event of a fire, be broadened to include other emergency situations and that there be an expansion of the Community Education Officer role especially with regards to communication.

Action taken:

A letter has been written to the Minister of Emergency Services requesting consideration be given to broadening emergency messaging to an "all hazards" approach.


Nil.


Review of the Extreme Weather Event South Australia September 2016

LGA submission to the review

December 2016

Note: This is not an endorsed Submission. It will be considered by the LGA Board at its next meeting.


LGA of SA ECM 645566 2016 Extreme Weather Submission Page 2 of 10

Table of Contents 1. Introduction 3

2. Part 1 – Direct impact on council operations 3

2.1. Insured infrastructure and other assets 3

2.2. Uninsured infrastructure and assets – essentially roads 3

2.3. Coastal damage 4

2.4. Clean up costs 5

2.5. Costs associated with loss of power 5

2.6. Damage to jetties and boating facilities 5

3. Part 2 – Impact of power outage on categories listed in the Terms of Reference (ToR) 6

3.1. Critical infrastructure 6

3.2. South Australian Government Radio Network 6

3.3. Transport and traffic management 6

3.4. Hospitals and health 6

3.5. Telstra and other networks 6

3.6. Community preparedness and response 6

3.7. Business continuity planning 7

3.8. Access to food, water, cash, fuel and other essentials 7

4. Part 3 – The impact of various aspects of the weather event 7

4.1. Significant flooding in the highly impacted locations such as Virginia 7

4.2. Damage from destructive winds 7

4.3. Damage to homes, businesses, primary industries, community assets and infrastructure 8

4.4. Adequacy and effectiveness of response and incident management 8

4.4.1. Preparedness of control agencies and support agencies and local councils and communities 8

4.4.2. Public information 8

4.4.3. Incident management arrangements including multi-agency management teams, capability, training and experience 8

4.4.4. Activation of SEC and declaration 9

4.4.5. Access to and sharing of intelligence 9

4.4.6. Damage assessment process 9

4.4.7. Reporting to the SES, SCC, EMC 9

4.4.8. Relief arrangements 9

4.4.9. Waste management 9

4.4.10. Other 9

5. Conclusion 10



1. Introduction

The Local Government Association of SA (LGA) thanks the South Australian Government for the opportunity to make a submission to the Independent Review of the Extreme Weather Event that occurred in September 2016.

The LGA is recognised as the peak representative body for the 68 Councils in South Australia. The Association provides leadership and representation to State and Federal Governments and other key stakeholders.

The LGA believes that the views expressed in this report are generally representative of local government in South Australia.

The storm events of September 2016 impacted the whole of South Australia requiring a multi-agency and council response. Disruption of electricity supply for an extended period of time had the knock on effect of telecommunications loss. The extent of the consequences caused by this disruption had not previously been experienced in South Australia. Heavy rainfall in a number of areas resulted in damage to council roads and infrastructure. Storms caused much coastal damage. Additionally, the Gawler River flooded and severely impacted intensive horticultural production in its lower reaches.

The event raised many communication challenges and reinforced the need for adequate and appropriate communication strategies in emergency response planning.

The LGA has conducted debriefs with numerous councils and has to a large extent based this submission on the feedback given at these sessions.

The submission is presented in three parts- direct impact on council operations, impact of power outage and the impact of various aspects of the weather event.

2. Part 1 – Direct impact on council operations

The LGA through its connections with councils has deduced that there were five key areas of impact from the storm.

2.1. Insured infrastructure and other assets

The LGA Asset Mutual Scheme insures council assets in South Australia. The Scheme proactively manages council insurance arrangements and conducts an annual review for every council to ensure that appropriate cover is maintained.

The Scheme received 32 claims as a result of the September storm. Most related to property damage and totalled approximately $500,000. This quantum of claims will not have a detrimentally significant impact on the Scheme.

2.2. Uninsured infrastructure and assets – essentially roads

Councils manage approximately 75,000km of roads in South Australia, of which approximately 50,000km are unsealed formed roads. Many of these roads are critical transport routes related to primary production in rural areas. They represent "first and last mile" access to agricultural crops and



forestry production. Historically (for councils) these unsealed roads incur the most damage from storm and subsequent flooding events.

Thirteen councils have indicated to the LGA that their road infrastructure has suffered considerable damage, which will likely see a repair cost exceeding $15 million.

Roads are generally regarded as "uninsured" infrastructure. The cost of remediation is deemed an "eligible measure" under the Local Government Disaster Recovery Assistance Arrangements (LGDRA). These arrangements largely reflect the Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements (NDRRA) that are in place between the Federal and State Governments. In South Australia, financial assistance to a council is subject to a threshold test based on a council’s rate revenue at the amount of 2% of rate revenue or $150,000- whichever is greater.

An independent engineering assessment is required to verify the road damage sustained when making an application for financial assistance for the restoration of essential public assets.

A separate category exists for "counter disaster operations" that are in effect response activities that protect or sustain the community during and immediately after a disaster. However, this type of assistance is limited to councils with rate revenue of less than $10,000,000. In effect this means that all metropolitan councils and larger rural councils are excluded from accessing this type of assistance.

The issue of prompt and adequate asset damage assessment, and interpretation and application of the assistance guidelines (LGDRA) has been on-going with councils. The LGA is of the view that the current arrangements require review so that a more seamless approach is achieved.

2.3. Coastal damage

The LGA has been able to determine that at least eleven councils, both rural and metropolitan have suffered substantial damage to their coastal environment from the erosion of sand dunes to major damage to sea walls. Not all coastal councils were impacted as the westerly wind direction caused most damage on westward facing shorelines.

Preliminary estimates indicate a repair bill in excess of $2 million, although this is considered grossly under reported and may be much higher. The State’s local government disaster recovery assistance (LGDRA) does not recognise this type of damage as an eligible measure hence councils cannot access the LGDRA as a funding source for remediation expenditure.

In South Australia the Coast Protection Act 1972 applies to all coasts that are within three nautical miles of the mean low water mark and that which is above and within 100 hundred metres of high water mark. The Act is administered by the Coast Protection Board (CPB). One of the duties of the Board is:



to restore any part of the coast that has been subjected to erosion, damage deterioration, pollution misuse.

Section 32 of the Act specifically allows a council to apply to the Board for the provision of funds to effect storm damage. However the CPB has minimal funds at its disposal and therefore limited capacity to assist councils in this regard. The persistence of severe weather events into the future will require a review of the availability of funds to effect remediation of damage to South Australian coasts. The Coast Protection Board is currently preparing the ‘Coastal Management Blueprint for South Australia’. This Blueprint for Coastal Management in South Australia is being prepared for the Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation. The Strategy will identify investment required to address urgent challenges, and actions over the medium term that will establish a new set of protocols, policies and investments to address the increased risks that are emerging as a result of climate change.

2.4. Clean up costs

Most council have born clean-up costs primarily from storm created building debris being deposited on roads and public lands. Additionally fallen trees and vegetation damage has required a tremendous effort by councils to clear up and remove. As a conservative estimate it is expected to exceed $500,000. This does not include the clean-up associated with the flooding of the Gawler River Floodplain. The LGA is aware of the recent amendments to the Zero Waste Act that will allow access to the Waste to Resources Fund for the purpose of managing waste and environmental harm after a disaster. The LGA therefore supports councils receiving financial assistance from the fund for the purpose of disaster recovery clean-up costs. The LGA is of the view that a clear and transparent process is required to allow equitable and fair access to the Fund.

2.5. Costs associated with loss of power

Loss of power impacted on the operation of community waste water management schemes, which many rural councils operate. Councils have learnt from past experience that adequate contingency planning is required for continuity of operation of these schemes. However, the extended timeframe of the power outage had not been anticipated in many cases and caused difficult management issues for councils.

Indications are that the cost of the loss of power to the sector could be $500,000.

2.6. Damage to jetties and boating facilities

Whilst councils do not necessarily bear the cost of repairing these facilities, their presence in coastal communities is an important economic driver from the perspective of recreational fishing and tourism. Local government recognises and appreciates the funding that has been committed to repairing this infrastructure. However, there is some concern within these



communities that any delays in fixing the jetties will lead to financial loss of local businesses relying on the tourist economy.

3. Part 2 – Impact of power outage on categories listed in the Terms of Reference (ToR)

The comments made in this section are from a local government perspective. The LGA recognises that wider community impacts were experienced.

3.1. Critical infrastructure

Apart from the damage to roads caused by flooding, the biggest impact was on community waste water management schemes with the loss of power.

3.2. South Australian Government Radio Network

Councils do not have access.

3.3. Transport and traffic management

There was a serious impact on the Adelaide City Council which has responsibility in the Adelaide CBD for traffic signals.

3.4. Hospitals and health

The LGA has limited information, but understands that most hospitals had emergency power supplies (particularly so in the country) that operated effectively during the outage.

However, loss of power at various clinics meant that they had to close down. For example, it has been reported to the LGA that all clinics in Port Lincoln were closed during the outage. People who needed medical care were directed to Accident and Emergency at the hospital, which did not have capacity for the number of people presenting. Additionally people who rely on in-home medical care and devices (oxygen etc) had to transfer to the hospital.

3.5. Telstra and other networks

Feedback from country councils and communities has been that they can cope with loss of power (because they experience outages regularly for short durations) but not cannot cope with the extended loss of telecommunications e.g. Alert SA and Triple Zero.

3.6. Community preparedness and response

Anecdotally it appears that the community was not prepared for such a long power outage.

Nor did the community at large comprehend the weather warnings that were being issued and hence adequate planning was not undertaken to mitigate the likely consequences of the event.



3.7. Business continuity planning

Many councils’ business continuity plans had not anticipated such long power outages. This exposed a level of vulnerability and councils are consequently reviewing their contingency plans for critical business functions e.g. waste water management and essential communication for remote and isolated work.

3.8. Access to food, water, cash, fuel and other essentials

The inability to access ATMs or use credit cards for transaction purposes became quite extreme in communities where the power outage extended over days. This was particularly so at Ceduna where there are restrictions on certain social benefits cards.

A valuable lesson learnt by many was that when such weather events are predicted, it is important to make sure you have some cash available to conduct transactions for essential commodities.

Councils have also related how in some communities the emergency services, police and ambulance had to resort to accessing council fuel supplies to enable them to continue to operate (rural councils have learnt the need for emergency backup generators).

4. Part 3 – The impact of various aspects of the weather event

4.1. Significant flooding in the highly impacted locations such as Virginia

The LGA is aware of the impact on Virginia but believes commentary should be left to the councils directly impacted and in particular would defer to the Local Recovery Committee.

The LGA would however emphasize that a number of other councils were significantly impacted by flooding e.g. Port Pirie, Clare and Gilbert Valleys , Barossa, Adelaide Hills and Alexandrina to name but a few.

The Torrens Linear Park was severely affected by high water levels and warnings and closures required considerable coordination between bordering councils.

4.2. Damage from destructive winds

Universally the impact of high winds on councils is the damage to trees on both private and public land and the ensuing clean-up. The time to complete this has varied greatly depending on the severity of the storm in the area and ranges from days to weeks.



4.3. Damage to homes, businesses, primary industries, community assets and infrastructure

Refer to the comments provided in Part 1.

4.4. Adequacy and effectiveness of response and incident management

4.4.1. Preparedness of control agencies and support agencies and local councils and communities

Strategic preparations by the SES did not appear commensurate with the predicted scale of the event (this has been a view expressed to the LGA by councils).

The LGA has reviewed warnings issued by the BoM in view of the feedback it has received about them. There is a feeling within the community that the scale of the storm was not adequately conveyed, especially the severity of the wind. Nor was there recognition of the probable impacts.

Interpretation of the weather warnings by councils was probably also less than desirable.

Information flow to councils from the SES should have occurred sooner or conversely councils should have made a greater effort to liaise with the control agency.

4.4.2. Public information

Alert SA was widely used by councils and functioned effectively when power supplies were available.

As mentioned above there has been a view expressed within local government that the public or community did not fully comprehend the warning messages they were receiving, nor did they understand what was expected of them.

The language used in warnings needs to be targeted to specific stakeholders and consider the language limitations of ethnically diverse communities.

Initially councils were also slow to respond – again this is about understanding of the message.

4.4.3. Incident management arrangements including multi-agency management teams, capability, training and experience

There were limited resources for such a long duration event and lack of understanding of the roles of multi-agency teams.

Additionally there were inconsistencies of agency implementation and application of AIIMS.



4.4.4. Activation of SEC and declaration

The LGA was included and participated effectively and appreciated the inclusion and support received during the event.

4.4.5. Access to and sharing of intelligence

More liaison and preparation between council and the control agency to share information/intelligence is required.

Council intelligence and data was not utilised to its full potential - intelligence at the local level does not equate to state knowledge.

4.4.6. Damage assessment process

Local government is of the view that there is still a gap in the way damage assessment is performed. There appears to be a conflict between the detailed collection process focussed on individual properties and inhabitants opposed to a very rapid assessment that gives a “helicopter” view of the impacts of an event.

Councils that have used the LGA’s emergency assessment reporting system (EARS) feel that there is considerable potential for the system to be integrated with the state system so that local information is quickly and accurately conveyed to incident management teams.

4.4.7. Reporting to the SES, SCC, EMC

The LGA is not in a position to be able to make comment.

4.4.8. Relief arrangements

The establishment of relief centres and the parameters for their establishment has been questioned by councils. The LGA has received feedback form rural areas that they appear only to be established in the larger regional centres.

It is suggested that the basis for these decisions needs to be clearer and well communicated.

4.4.9. Waste management

There is a view within local government that management of disaster waste requires a more coordinated approach. As alluded to previously in this submission, the LGA is of the view that if Waste to Resources Fund is to be used for disaster remediation costs then there needs to be a clear and transparent process to effect the distribution of the funds.

4.4.10. Other

The supply and distribution of sand bags was an issue in many communities.



Better messaging and identification of where they can be accessed and clearer details about arrangements for the supply of sand are required.

There also needs to be greater consistency between councils about how this issue is managed.

5. Conclusion

Councils play a fundamental enabling role in emergency management because of their strong relationship with their local community networks and knowledge of locally available resources

Many of these responsibilities are inherent in the normal business of local government that delivers a range of essential services related to the PPRR continuum.

Greater collaboration between the State (control agency) and councils will ensure better utilisation of local government resources and lead to greater community resilience.

Eyre Peninsula Report is attached as an addendum (ECM 644738)



7.4 Outreach Program


From: Tony Irvine, Executive Officer, Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association


Strategy: 2C Equip councils for the future


ECM: 646496

Recommendation



2. recommends to the LGA of SA Board that the Outreach Program is guaranteed funding for three year funding cycles.

Discussion

In March 2013 the Local Government Association of SA (LGA) allocated funding over two years to allow a 0.4 FTE commitment from the Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association (EPLGA) Executive Officer to undertake the “Outreach Services” pilot.

The Executive Officer on behalf of the EPLGA had done the following:

Familiarised himself with the various programs and support services provided by the LGA and its entities;

Identified issues that councils may be facing and undertook an assessment of the support that the LGA could provide to assist in resolution of the problem, in the early stages;

Connected councils with services that they sought from the LGA, including providing feedback to the LGA about adjustments/refinements;

Participated in the development of an annual engagement program that was consistent with the priorities of the councils in a region and the LGA;

Facilitated the delivery of the annual works/ project program aligned to the LGA’s strategic directions, including regional training etc.;

Reported half yearly during the pilot;

Met with the CEO of the LGA and representatives as reasonably required in relation to the pilot; and

Prepared a case study to be used at the end of the pilot to assist the LGA in future delivery of services to the regions.



Such was the success of the pilot it was rolled out to all regions with annual funding being sought from the Local Government Research and Development Scheme ($50k per regional pa).

Since the programs establishment we have witnessed an acceleration of implementation, training, compliance etc. in the following areas just to name a few:-

Asset Management and planning Long Term Financial Planning Budgeting and Planning Business partnership programs Individual councils visits – mentoring, one on one assistance etc. Training delivery and forward planning Human Resource Management Procurement Economic Development Strategic Planning & regional planning Planning Reform Service delivery and bench marking Financial Sustainability bench marking Regional collaboration (internal & external) Governance and regional structure modelling Research collaboration Risk management Environmental matters – climate change planning etc. Taskforces to manage specific issues. Supporting regional working groups etc.

It is obvious the main beneficiaries in the regions are the smaller councils who lack the expertise or capacity in many compliance areas as mentioned above.

The regional Executive Officers are divided on what would be the best funding model going forward with the following being debated:-

1. That the regional Executive Officers become LGA employed staff contracted to the regions to deliver the Outreach Services for the LGA & Region as part of an overall role to service the regional needs too. Some feel the regions may lose their independence under this model.

2. That the $50,000 annual funding be allocated on a three year agreement to deliver mutually agreed LGA/ regional services/ projects to the regions (three years as a minimum to give surety of funding).

3. That all funding allocated to the regions become one funding allocation to reduce red tape of reporting against each funding allocation (E.g. Regional Capacity & Outreach) and be included in the LGA recurrent budget. Meaning the regional LGAs’ subscriptions would be paid as part of the one overall LGA subscription and allocated back to the regions alighted to regional operational & work plans & LGA strategic directions.



LGA Comment

It is recommended that consideration of this matter be deferred pending the recommended outcomes of the LGA Governance Review.

The review may result in changes to the role of regional LGAs and this would influence the most appropriate funding structure. The outcomes and effectiveness of the Outreach Program over the past 3 years form part of the considerations of the Governance Review.

The funding commitment sought is $900,000 over three years from the LGA’s allocation of the Local Government Research and Development Scheme (LGR&DS) funds. This is in addition to the Regional Capacity Building allocation that has been allocated or budgeted from the LGR&DS for the 2016/17 and 2017/18 financial years at approximately $39-40,000 per region (total cost of $272,979 in 2016/17.

During this period of review, it is strongly recommended that funding arrangements such as the Outreach Program continue to be considered on an annual basis.


This activity will require a commitment of $900,000 from the LGA’s allocation of the Local Government Research and Development Scheme over three years.



7.5 Section 270 Ombudsman Recommendations


From: Tony Irvine, Executive Officer, Eyre Peninsula Local Government Association and Graeme Martin, Executive Officer, Southern & Hills Local Government Association


Strategy: 1C Lead reform


ECM: 646495

Recommendation



2. notes that reports on this matter submitted separately by Eyre Peninsula LGA and Southern and Hills LGA have been combined into one report;

3. strongly urges all regional LGAs and individual councils to respond to the Ombudsman’s audit report by 31 March 2017; and

4. encourages the LGA secretariat to assist those regions who adopt the regional approach to managing internal reviews of decisions, by providing training for individuals/ panel members etc.

Discussion

Tony Irvine comments (Eyre Peninsula LGA)

After the Ombudsman made a recent visit to the Eyre Peninsula region, there was debate on his Local Government Section 270 audit report regarding the management of internal reviews. It was interesting to learn of his recommendation for councils to work through their regional LGAs to develop panels of regional reviewers to assist their member councils.

The Ombudsman strongly emphasised that he does not intend this recommendation to be a burdensome or complex problem for regional LGAs or member councils. He is simply putting forward the idea that regional councils can sometimes struggle with a lack of ‘in-house’ expertise to assist with issues such as internal review matters and that having access to expertise from other councils from the local area might help to make things easier.

The processes for achieving this might range from simply identifying a central person in the particular regional LGA who could co-ordinate requests for assistance and source an appropriate person from another council as needed, through to actually establishing a panel of names of people who a council could approach on an ‘as needs’ basis. Or, on the other hand, there may be no interest in taking any further action, as the status quo is deemed to be adequate.



It is the opinion of the author of this report that there needs to be some structure/ processes put in place to assist the region in achieving the best possible outcomes from such reviews. For example the LGA in 2009 established an independent Governance Panel. Complaints to the Panel may be made under Part 2 of the Code of Conduct. Could this approach provide a model for a panel to carry out internal reviews in regional councils?

Under the processes for the Governance Panel, a complaint is initially considered by the Chairperson who then decides which Panel member or members would be best suited to investigate and assess each individual complaint. Referrals to the Panel are made by councils, in accordance with a council's complaint handling procedure under the Members' Code of Conduct. The Panel does not receive complaints directly from the public nor will it investigate allegations of misconduct under Part 3 of the Code of Conduct or fraud or corruption. The Governance Panel has an advisory role only and prepares a report and recommendations in response to the complaint, for the council's consideration.

The point of all this is, in making a response to the Ombudsman by 31 March 2017, the Ombudsman is looking for Regional LGAs , individual councils and the LGA’s views on the idea of a regional approach to sourcing appropriate expertise for s270 internal reviews.

Should Regional LGAs establish a regional approach then there will be a need to establish some processes around managing the issues. Some may think that the status quo is adequate and that councils/LGA is unlikely to pursue the idea further.

Should regions accept and adopt the Ombudsman’s recommendation then there will be a need for assistance from the LGA Secretariat in establishing the regional panels/ processes etc. to ensure best practice is achieved.

Graeme Martin comments (Southern and Hills LGA)

The Ombudsman has released a “Right of Review – An Audit of Local Government Internal Review of Councils Decisions Procedures” report in November 2016.

This report documents the Ombudsman’s findings and recommendations relevant to the operation of the internal review of decisions provisions in the Local Government Act 1999.

Local government councils in South Australia are required by the Act to provide a process for the internal review of council decisions. The section 270 internal review of decision process is an important mechanism for the resolution of disputes and complaints about decisions made by councils.

The report made seven (7) key recommendations. They are directed at achieving change in the use of the section 270 procedures across councils, and aim to:

address administrative deficiencies guide councils to implement changes that can improve their administrative processes improve the delivery of services improve the standard of public administration in South Australian councils.

One of the recommendations deals with the issue of the Independent conduct of an internal review of a Council decision:

Conclusion

Many South Australian councils have developed internal review practices that seek to manage situations where an original decision-maker (often the CEO) may have a conflict of



interest. Whilst internal senior delegation of responsibility is a preferred option, many councils are willing to involve independent reviewers where possible and when available.

Recommendation 5

That all councils, through the auspices of regional Local Government Associations, consider and report to the Ombudsman by 31 March 2017 on the option of developing regional panels of independent reviewers who can assist councils with complex review

Currently Councils utilise a range of options to review decisions. These include:

The CEO The original decision-maker A senior officer of the council not part of the original decision Lawyers engaged by the council The Local Government Governance Panel A neighbouring council CEO or senior manager An independent person with a knowledge of local government governance issues but

not currently serving

Regional organisations have been requested to provide preliminary comment and feedback.

It appears some smaller, less resourced councils would favour the development of an independent regional panel to manage the process. Equally there were questions posed as to what constitutes a “complex review” and who would be remunerating the panel and at what rate?

The LGA CEO Matt Pinnegar and LGA Director of Legislation Andrea Malone met with the Ombudsman prior to Christmas. The feedback from this meeting was that the Ombudsman was at pains to say that he does not intend this recommendation to be a burdensome or complex problem for regional LGAs or member councils. He is simply putting forward the idea that regional councils can sometimes struggle with a lack of ‘in-house’ expertise to assist with issues such as internal review matters and that having access to expertise from other councils from the local area might help to make things easier. The processes for achieving this might range from simply identifying a central person in the particular regional LGA who could co-ordinate requests for assistance and source an appropriate person from another council as needed, through to actually establishing a panel of names of people who a council could approach on an ‘as needs’ basis. Or, on the other hand, there may be no interest in taking any further action, as the status quo is deemed to be adequate.

The Ombudsman is requesting a response to the recommendation by March 31, 2017.

LGA Comment

The internal review of a council decision does not require the establishment of an investigatory panel such as the Local Government Governance Panel, which has more complicated procedures than are necessary for a panel envisaged to assist with internal review.

The Ombudsman’s recommendation is suggesting that regional councils could source independent reviewers from other regional councils, in order to take the pressure off council officers in the reviewing council. The recommendation suggests that those council officers who are willing and able to perform the internal review function for other councils could put



forward their names and contact details and form a ‘panel’ of people from which councils could source an independent reviewer on a needs basis. This does not require a chairperson or procedure for accessing the panel. It simply requires a council seeking a reviewer to contact one of the people on the panel to ask them for assistance on a matter.

An internal review of a council decision is dependent on the particular facts in every case. The expertise required for carrying out an internal review includes:

the ability to determine the relevant facts of the matter; the ability to apply the relevant legal framework to the relevant facts; and the ability to exercise judgment to determine whether, in the circumstances, the best

possible decision was initially made or whether a better decision should be substituted.

The LGA would be able to assist members of independent review panels with training and development in the skills required to carry out the internal review function.


This activity is not currently anticipated in the LGA’s work program, but can be delivered within existing LGA resources, provided that it is limited to the training and development support.



7.6 Study Adelaide and 485 Visa Holders


From: Sean Holden, Senior Policy Adviser


Strategy: 2E Assist local government drive economic development


ECM: 646581

Recommendation



2. invites Study Adelaide CEO, Karyn Kent to present to a future SAROC meeting about Study Adelaide and 485 Visa Holders

Discussion

The 485 Visa holders are overseas University graduates across who have studied in Adelaide that affords an opportunity for councils and businesses to attract professionals into their workforce profile that they might not ordinarily be able to attract.

Study Adelaide markets Adelaide, and by extension regional South Australia, as an international study destination and has developed an Employer Portal to help boost South Australia’s export potential and importantly show how easy it is to employ an international student without sponsorship thanks to the (subclass 485) post-study work rights visa.

This presents a great opportunity for local governments both metropolitan and non-metropolitan, industry associations and businesses that are preparing to export internationally, but also in the ‘Wines by Geoff Hardy’ case study http://employerportal.com.au/category/case-studies/ a great example of how you don’t have to be actively targeting an export market for significant growth to organically happen (1% to 41%).

Members are encouraged to have a look at the website https://studyadelaide.com that gives greater background and the key rationale for the project.

Karyn Kent the Chief Executive of Study Adelaide would appreciate the opportunity to present to SAROC for 30 mins to help members better understand the program, field questions and glean feedback.


Nil. This activity is not currently anticipated in the LGA’s work program, but can be delivered within existing LGA resources.


notice of meeting · that the saroc committee confirms the minutes of the meeting held on 16...

Documents