The Department Of Local Government (DLG) has finaly released its Promoting Better Practice Program, Follow-up Report into Port Stephens Council.
The long awaited report was commenced in February 2011, a confidential draft was produced in July, and the final report was eventually put up on the Council website following its adoption at the December 13 Council Meeting.
The Final Report in full (111 pages) is available to download: HERE. by clicking on the link at the bottom of the page. The original 2005 report is also available on that page.
TRRA is preparing a full response to this extremely critical document, and a Press Release that will be posted here in due course.
If one of your kids got a report card from school like this you would be very disappointed, if your Boss presented you with a job performance review like this you would be very concerned about your future employment prospects. It remains to be seen how seriously the present State Government will be in addressing this matter………..
The Chief Executives Comment and the Executive Summary from the report are reproduced below for your information.
CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S COMMENT
The Division of Local Government has been monitoring Council’s performance over a period of time. As a result of this monitoring, the Division conducted a follow up PBP review to examine Council’s operations. Many of the concerns that have been raised with the Division are highlighted in this report.
The Division’s concerns have arisen from continuing complaints it has received that disclose evidence of significant conflict within the governing body of Council. Particularly, I continue to be concerned about the possible misuse of Council’s code of conduct processes by councillors in order to make politically motivated attacks on other councillors and with Council’s inability to use the code as it is intended, namely to impose appropriate standards of behaviour on all councillors.
Council’s response to the draft PBP report is unacceptable. I note that the recommendations requiring councillors, as the governing body, to take action have been ignored. I view this as a serious matter. It is apparent that the elected body has not considered the review and its findings as it has failed to provide an adequate response to the Division. Additionally, this indicates that councillors do not appear to recognise the need to reflect on their conduct and decision-making practices or the need to change.
I am further concerned about the release of the draft confidential PBP report to the media, particularly as concern was expressed about the release of confidential information in the reviewers’ report. This action undermines public confidence in the Council and implies an inability to act in accordance with legislative requirements and best practice.
I continue to be deeply concerned that the present operations of the Council do not meet the reasonable expectations the community has regarding councillor behaviour and suggest that Council is not dealing with issues in accordance with its charter. This PBP report has highlighted the continuance of processes and conduct that are below the standard expected.
Every councillor must contribute to the corporate effort to achieve Council’s goals and to provide community leadership. Without this, Council staff has no guidance and cannot function effectively in serving the community.
The level of disputation within the elected body is also eroding the public’s confidence in the capacity of the Council to serve its residents and ratepayers, and it also undermines the reputation of the local government sector. I am of the firm belief that the implementation of the recommendations in this report will help councillors work together in the interests of the community.
I expect councillors to not only demonstrate a marked improvement in their conduct but also in their understanding and discharge of their role in the decision making process.
I require that Council, within 28 days of tabling this final report, resubmit the action plan specifically identifying what actions will be taken to implement the recommendations relating to the governing body in this term of Council.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is the second review conducted of Port Stephens Council under the Promoting Better Practice program. A previous review of Council’s operations was undertaken in 2005.
This review focused on Council’s implementation of the recommendations from the 2005 review, as well as a number of specific areas of Council’s operations. These include Council’s planning and development processes and decision making; the application of the code of conduct; asset and financial management; the implementation of the integrated planning and reporting framework; and the relationship between councillors, and between councillors and Council staff.
Council was a Group 1 Council for the implementation of the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework, which required this framework to be implemented by the end of June 2010. While Council was able to meet the time frame set, it will need to continue to work on aspects of its documents to ensure that its activities are aligned with the strategic direction outlined in the Community Strategic Plan.
While not specifically developing a community engagement strategy as part of the implementation of the Integrated Planning and Reporting framework, Council had previously developed an extensive community engagement policy. Council’s community engagement policy provides an effective framework to guide all future community engagement processes. Council is to be commended on its well organised approach to community engagement.
However, the review team is concerned about the councillors’ approach to Council’s strategic decision making. It was concerning that councillors do not appear to be undertaking their role as members of the governing body as effectively as their representative role.
It is the review team’s opinion that much of the governing body’s decision making processes lend themselves to piece-meal decisions that in the long term may mean that Council does not achieve its strategic objectives. Council should monitor decision making so that policies can be reviewed and changed should the community’s or Council’s needs change. This would be the preferable approach, rather than continuing to make ad hoc decisions that are at odds with Council policy direction, which appears to be the current practice.
The review team is also of the view, having been present at the Council for a week and having informal discussions with councillors and staff members, that the Council’s operation is being affected by councillor behaviour. Councillors are meant to be leading by example, making decisions in the best interests of the whole community and resolving differences in a professional and mature way. This leadership conduct is not evident. It is expected that councillors will immediately implement a sustained improvement in their performance.
Despite these difficulties at the elected level, Port Stephens Council has many effective governance systems and processes in place. Council has a staff position that is charged with the responsibility of overseeing corporate governance for the organisation.
Council’s risk management and internal audit functions have identified the critical aspects of Council’s governance framework and have focused these programs’ interventions around these areas. However, there are some important aspects of Council governance that will need to be reviewed and improved, particularly the tendering and procurement, meetings and code of conduct areas.
While Port Stephens Council has made significant improvements in the processing of development applications, Council’s overall strategic direction in relation to planning decisions needs immediate attention. There have been vast improvements in Council’s processing of development applications, which can be attributed to the implementation of some effective strategies. However, the review team is concerned about the councillors’ use of the “call-up” process for calling up development applications for their consideration. Council needs to address this issue.
The review team was also concerned that some councillors are dismissive of Council’s current planning policy framework. The review team accepts that councillors appear to have polarised points of view in relation to planning and development. The challenge for councillors and staff will be to work together to complete the LEP template and review the necessary components of the Development Control Plan to create a framework that will allow sustainable development which considers the social, environmental and economic impact.
Council’s financial position was considered by the review team as at significant high risk due to its low liquidity and recent financial losses. Councils that are considered at a significant high risk are not necessarily in imminent danger of defaulting on their debt service obligations, nor is their financial viability being called into question. Rather, what is being emphasised is that, if the long-term finances of such councils are to be put onto a sustainable footing, substantial or disruptive revenue (or expenditure) adjustments appear inevitable.
The review team is concerned about Council’s reporting on its reserve balances and the reconciliation of its cash position with cash reserves and investments. The proportion of Council’s investment in property is considered significant in relation to its other investments. Council needs to consider the issues associated with investing in property and should review its Investment Policy with these in mind. It is apparent to the review team that the community and consultation area is one where Council undertakes its activities in a responsible and effective manner. It has an effective community engagement strategy and provides support for community involvement in its activities in a number of ways. Council’s social and cultural responsibilities are evident in its Community Strategic Plan and Council has a strong presence in its community. Council also supports the community in managing local facilities and provides financial support for local community organisations. Council reports on its activities in this area in its quarterly reports.
Council’s position in relation to workforce relations practices is sound. Council has a draft Workforce Strategy to support its strategic plan. There is evidence that Council monitors and reviews its practices on a regular basis.
