25 September - Ordinary

Welcome to the Hawkesbury City Council meeting of 25 September 2018. I'll ask the acting general manager, sorry, to go through the procedural matters, please.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. I would like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land, the Darug people. Members of the public attending the meeting are advised that in the event of an emergency, they are asked to proceed in an orderly manner through the nearest exit following the guidance of the warden.

For the benefit of those people who will be addressing Council tonight, I would like to point out that it is expected you will refrain from making any insult, allegation or personal reflection against any person present or not at the meeting during the course of your address to Council. Any answers may be given in response to questions. It is also requested if any person in the Council chambers has a mobile phone, they either turn it off or turn it to discreet.

Thank you.

Apologies from Councillor Zamprogno. Do we have any other apologies?

We'll put in an apology for Councillor Rasmussen.

I would expect he's probably almost here.

He's probably almost here. We'll put one in just in case he doesn't arrive. Okay . Do we have any declarations of interest, please? Oh, yes. Yes, we do have an apology, so better move it. We have a mover and a seconder for the apologies, Councillor Connolly, Councillor Cotter. All those in favour, declare it carried. Declarations of interest, do we have any, please?

Councillor Garrard

Yes, item 238, I have a less than significant non-pecuniary interest.

Councillor Wheeler?

Item 238, less than significant non-pecuniary interest.

And also I have, for item 238, I have a less than significant non-pecuniary interest as well. Any more? Nope.

The minutes from the last meeting, we have two sets of minutes. Firstly, we have the minutes from the meeting of the 11th of September. Would someone like to move those? Councillor Richards, Councillor Connolly.

Are there any errors or omissions or business arising that we need to talk about? Otherwise I'll move the minutes. All those in favour say aye. Those against, declare it carried. The minutes of the extraordinary meeting of 18th of September. We have a mover for that, Councillor Richards, Councillor Connolly. All those in favour say aye. Those against, declare it carried. We don't have any public speakers tonight, so we're just going to go through the business paper in order. And I believe the first matter is the mayoral minute.

Mayoral Minute starts on page 7.

I just wanted to commend this Mayoral Minute to you. Most of you are aware of the list of policies that's in the business paper here. I think there's 105. I've asked Mr Mifsud if he would give us a short introduction on this topic, please.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. Yeah, the policy register is made up of about 105 policies at the moment. The policy register was last reviewed by Council about eight years ago, where a number of policies were archived at that time. In April 2007, there was about 210 policies within Council's policy register, and over the next three years, Council resolved on three different occasions to archive approximately half of those policies, to a point where in June 2010 there was 85 policies remaining. There's now 105, so there's obviously been 20 policies developed in the last eight years. So it's probably an opportune time for Council to review the policies as outlined in the Mayoral Minute.

Thank you, Mr Mifsud. Yes, I want to commend this Mayoral Minute to you. As I was saying, there are about 105 policies in our list. Some of these date back 20 years or more, and some of them are no longer relevant, and others need to be updated. Some of the policies consist of just a few lines, and some of them consist of very thick, heavily researched documents.

Sometimes there's even been a question lately about exactly what is a policy.

If a council has a meeting and at the meeting we pass a resolution, does that resolution automatically become policy? I was speaking to the general manager about that recently and apparently it is not clear because sometimes these matters go to the Land Environment Court and other legal areas, and in some cases they're considered to be policies and other cases they're not. So while that continues, I think we are vulnerable, council's vulnerable in a legal way if we take things to court and our policies aren't up to scratch, if they haven't been formed properly and if they're not up to date, it places the council in a vulnerable position. I think we need to be very precise with our policies so that we move away from that vulnerability.

Also, as you know, the state government has changed the way councils run. A lot of decisions are now being taken by the IHAPs instead of by the council. But the IHAPs do make their decisions on a number of things, but some of the things they decide on are our policies. So we really need to make sure our policies are up to date and accurate if we want to influence what the IHAPs do. If our policies are not accurate and up to date, IHAPs would have the potential to just ignore the council's position because they'd see it as confusing.

We also need to create new policies. We haven't created many for a while, and I'm hoping that we can create these using a template, which is what the first part of the recommendation is about. We can use the template to create new policies and use it to update our existing policies. And by using a template, our policies will all be standardised. They'll be easily aligned and easily cross-referenced. I've invited, or I'm going to invite councillors to meet with me in the near future and discuss some of the policies they might like to see added to Council's policy list. I'm hoping that we can accelerate this process and get the policies all up to date as soon as possible. So I'm asking you to— I'm commending this mayoral minute to you. Any further discussion?

Councillor Reynolds. Yeah, thanks, Mr Mayor

I support the purpose and intent of the mayoral minute. Some time ago, it may even have been last year, I put a motion and Council resolved for an audit of Council's policy regarding the use of the community ... open public spaces, for example, Windsor Mall. And it was just to do with those particular policies, and I think it relates to policy number 53, 94, and possibly and definitely 105. As I said, that was last year, and I was able to speak to some of the staff responsible for carrying out that audit, and they haven't had the time, basically, to do it. Now that's just one or two policies out of all the policies that are here. So— It concerns me that reviewing the whole lot as to regards to staff time, or whether a different method would be applied,

Or whether, for example, a policy would be done away with completely and a new one written according to the template. I'm just wondering how you envisage this could be carried out as quickly as possible. Thanks.

The acting general manager, manager wishes to comment on that?

Thanks, Mr Mayor. Probably what would need to happen is that we would, if the recommendation is adopted by Council, is that we would probably establish some sort of small working group within Council to work our way through all these policies to see what is relevant and what is not, what needs to be updated, and so on, and then report all those things back to Council. We'd obviously first need to develop some sort of template to enable all those policies to fit into, because some of these policies are probably displayed in different ways, so we probably will need a template. So we'd probably develop that first. The timeframe involved probably would need to come back to Council when we put that report back to Council and indicate something about how long we would take to do that.

In any case, any policies that would need to be archived or whatever would need to be reported back to Council anyway.

Any further discussion? Councillor Rasmussen.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Mr Mayor, I support, too, the thrust of what the mayoral minute is seeking , pardon me, is seeking to do. But my concern relates to all of the current policies and plans and projects that we have staff to carry out, particularly those relating to the special rate variations. There's a big plate full of projects and work to be done to do that, and that is an undertaking and a guarantee that we gave the community through many community consultations, that we, if the SRV went through, that we would get on and deliver on those projects and plans. So, Mr Mayor, what I'd like to do is to move an amendment to the Mayoral Minute, and I've given the staff a copy of the amendment, and I'm just not sure whether they've had a chance to— Oh, okay, and thank you for that, Michael.

Those amendments, or that amendment, is being handed out now. Basically what that amendment seeks to do is in two parts. Part A reads, and I'm sorry, I just need to get a drink of water.

It's in two parts, and Part A says along the lines of, we proceed expeditiously with the delivery of our—its current special rate variations, plans and projects as notified extensively to the Hawkesbury community during numerous community consultations and workshops. And other identified high priorities, such as the Hawkesbury Rural Land Strategy Study, Town and Village Revitalisation, the rewrite of the Development Control Plan, and the update of Kurrajong and Kurmond Investigation Area Study, and following the completion of these activities, then Part B, that we undertake a review of Council policies with a view to, as in your Mayoral Minute. Thank you ,

Councillor Rasmussen. Do we have a seconder for that?

Councillor Cotter . You won't. Okay. Councillor Ross Councillor Ross is seconding the amendment.

Councillor Rasmussen, if you'd like to speak to it. Thank you, Mr Mayor. As I said, we have extensive projects and plans on our books that the senior staff are engaged with. We are heading into a budget planning process, so we've got to prepare the budget, or start that process very soon. We have a number of things that we have promised the community that we would carry out, and if we don't deliver on that, I think we will incur the wrath of our community out there, particularly with the special rate variation and other things. But there is a need to get these things moving and actually implement them. And I think the review of policies is certainly important, but I think that is a bit of a back office.

Process that we can do as time and effort and workflow permits. So that, to me, seems to be a lesser priority than getting on with all these things that need to be undertaken, that we promised the community that we would do and deliver on in this term of council.

Thank you, Councillor Rosmus. Do we have any further speakers either for or against the mayoral minute or for or against the amendment? Councillor Connolly.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. I don't know which one I'm speaking, I guess. I don't really mind either. I don't think they're that different, the motion and the amendment. But I just wanted to put on the record what we were discussing. I think it would be good if, and it looks like this process is going to happen whichever way we go here, if perhaps councillors could have a briefing session at some point and help staff determine the priority of this review, rather than just let it happen. And also, whilst I'm happy to vote for it tonight, I wouldn't want to rule out or indicate that we're not going to just— there's probably some policies here that we could simply do away with without needing to do a detailed review.

Now that it's been brought to our attention and all laid out here, I wouldn't want to think that, you know, if— I don't think there's any reason why just because we do this, we can't just have a notice of motion and take some off the list to make this faster. I just wanted to flag that as well.

So indeed, you're speaking in favour of both the amendment and the mayoral— Yeah, yeah. Thanks. Any further speakers? Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. I agree with Councillor Conolly. I think there's a need to prioritise what we're doing, and I suppose, I guess I'm speaking for the amendment in that it makes a clear distinction between some of our big picture current projects and this project. And

I assume that the Mayoral Minute meant for that to happen regardless, and I guess this just states it quite clearly and will therefore avoid any confusion. But I think it is important, some of these policies are not overly exciting or even very useful. Some of them are quite current. For example, the circus policy, we've just reviewed that last year. The debt recovery and hardship policy. Some of them are clearly no longer relevant. And because of our limited staff resources, I think it would be really helpful to have some sort of, firstly, a sorted list when the report comes back to us, so those that are mandatory versus those that are optional. And then perhaps we can attach a priority to what we actually review to make best use of limited resources.

I think we also need to flag missing policies, and some of that will probably happen, as we have done so far through notices of motion. But I think it would be helpful too if the staff could flag what they think are missing policies in some of this, and I think perhaps we're perhaps looking to those staff who've come to this council from other organisations where they're used to having a suite of policies that we're not aware of . At some point, we're going to have to look at how well we enforce these policies as well. So I know we have a policy, for example, on waste generation from council events, which sometimes we don't appear to adhere to, the use of single-use plastics, for example, which we're supposed to have phased out, and yet we turn up and there's still piles of plastic cutlery and water bottles.

The other thing that I think is missing from this, and I don't know if we're waiting on that for the report, I think the Acting General Manager referred to that, that there's no timeline attached to this. And I think that's probably something that we need to see in order to make sure that this moves forward. Given our limited resource allocation, there's also a series of policies that are still pending that haven't made this list. So, for example, I put up a request for an urban tree canopy policy as part of a notice of motion last year. That still hasn't come back to Council. So there needs to be some mechanism for getting those back on the list as well.

Councillor Reynolds. Yes, thanks, Mr Mayor. I think, like Councillor Connolly, I'm probably speaking in favour of both. I think there's a bit of a problem in that to expedite

The work of Part A, that some of the policies need to be referred to for that work to carry out, work to be carried out. For example, development building subdivisions, development flood liable land policy will all be involved in the development control plan. So it's a bit like chicken and egg scenario. So I agree with Councillor Connolly. I think, personally, I think it would be nice to have perhaps a briefing on it with staff. Staff can advise the prioritisation of perhaps some policies need to be reviewed before the work of Part A commences or is finalised, and then we come back to the remaining policies. I can just see that almost like a catch-22 situation there, I think.

Councillor Cotless.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'm speaking against the amendment because I think that, just in general terms, I think as a Council we have to stop. Repeating the number of times we say we're going to do things, it seems to me that all the things that are listed in Part A are things that we already have flagged we're doing. I'm pretty sure we've had a notice of motion on the DCP upgrade. I think at the meeting before last we talked about the Courage on Kermon investigation area. Every time we do something in this council, we don't have to go and that track and say, you know, we have to do other things. I think we just have to get our policies sorted out. And as Mr. Misted said in the introduction, the staff will go through these and make some recommendations about how best that might happen.

So I just want to say that, you know, I think we have to start being a bit more— what's the word?— a bit more succinct with our resolutions. This clearly just says we'll review our policies, and I think that it needs to happen, and it doesn't need to be put as Part A or Part B. So I just think we should just go with the recommendations in the business paper.

Any further discussion? Councillor Ross.

Thank you, Mayor. In seconding the amendment,

I feel very mindful from different perspectives, one of which is that— We

As a council, must make progress in regard to the three R's, roads, roads and rubbish, which is somewhat ordained by the fit for the future requirement, to which we're all having to address ourselves. And this stuff, time is naturally involved in that.

I'm also concerned that, whilst not mentioned here, I think we're also going to be

Requiring resources vis-a-vis the vineyard residential development that has been thrust upon us, and possibly also quite some substantial supportive works, for instance in regard to the Mackenzie's Creek area and what we do about that, because whilst it's not part of that particular project, it is certainly allied to it, and we are going to have to address ourselves to that. And the other thing which concerns me greatly also is that I picked up my emails this afternoon and sat down and read them, and just looking at two of the emails is sufficient to say that, hey, we've got some serious

Demands being placed upon us. from external sources, and these are going to be very taxing of our resources at every level . And as much as I applaud you, Mayor, in drawing this matter to our attention,

I'm not quite convinced that, shall we say, it's an extraordinarily high priority in terms of the other activities that are currently going on and the demands being placed upon us. So whilst I support the amendment, I do like the thought from one of my associates on the floor here that possibly the staff might be good enough to consider the workloads with which we're already inflicted upon them, or the government has, however, and how we might fit this in amongst all of that without creating havoc. So thank you.

Any further discussion? Deputy Mayor.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'm just wondering, I speak in favour of the amendment. Regarding the mechanism for doing this, for the amendment or for the other, is it intended that it's a report to come back to Council, or is it a workshop or a briefing? I just think that needs to be specified because otherwise it's something that could just go on and on, I would imagine, because the — As Councillor Wheeler said, of course, these things need to be categorised into whether they're mandatory or redundant or whatever to enable us to prioritise. But there's also the category of policies which are already in progress of review, which are quite a few. I know we've got our signage policy has been in review for a number of years, and we're waiting on that.

And then there's the category of policies which are actually reviewed through plans that we've implemented. So, for example, tonight we've got the Domestic Violence Action Plan, and within that, one of its actions was to review our policies. So we've done that as part of that plan. So I'm just wondering how those sort of things fit in with timelines and how we do it. So maybe it's best if we have a workshop style of thing to just put aside a day and have this information and go through it that way. Because particularly the ones that are under review, we really need some sort of a timeline on how long those ones, how long they'll be outstanding, and, yeah , how we're going to incorporate that into prioritising.

But there's definitely, you know, there's so many there that are totally redundant, and goodness knows why half of them were ever even introduced. So I think if Councillor Rasmussen wanted to add another point on his point two in there, part B would be another dot point which referred to ones which are currently under review, because I know that's several of them, and that would mean that those ones could be given a timeline. And I'm not sure if in the first section in part A, which I think is a good affirmation of the priority to have resources dealing with the things that we've promised to the community, and there's no reason we can't concurrently do the other things as well. Whether following completion means that we have to do them exclusively, because as Councillor Reynolds brought up , things will feed into the DCP and into the investigation areas and certainly into the land strategy.

So I'm not sure if that wanted to be changed, but really I think that we need to include both a mechanism for how we would do this, either a briefing or a workshop, and to include the policies and their status of those which are currently under review.

Thank you, Councillor Rasmussen. Are you happy to include those things?

Mr Mayor, yes, I am indeed, and I thank Deputy Mayor for that contribution.

So could we clarify for the note takers, do we understand what the changes are?

It was a fourth dot point under point 2 in part B of the amendment, which would read currently under review, and in point 1 where it says preparing a procedure to put hold a briefing or a workshop,

A workshop would probably be better, hold a workshop to develop and review Council policies.

I think we have that. Yep. Councillor Tree.

Thank you. I'm speaking in favour of the Mayoral Minute. I'm not opposed to the amendment on principle, but I'm thinking that we're worried about the chicken or egg scenario, but I'm more worried about the cart before the horse, and I think that if your policies are in good order, then all of the other things, all the operational things that we want to achieve at the end of the day will also be in order. I think that the idea of having a workshop is a good idea, perhaps. Perhaps instead of, perhaps instead of the amendment, but with the Mayoral Minute, we could have an undertaking of the staff to bring forward a little report that tells us where all these policies are up to. So you might have three columns: a column that says this is obsolete or potentially obsolete; these ones are currently being worked on; the second column, and then the third column will need, you know, require further discussion or something similar to that.

So we talk about policy before we talk about, even though all those things in Part A are happening, I'm just thinking that if we go through the policy review firstly, and I'm sure that there are already things happening in that Part A section that are going to be able to happen concurrently anyway .

Just a thought.

Thank you. Councillor Richards.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I will be supporting the original Mayoral Minute and will be against the amendment. I have just had a quick review of the Mayoral Minute, and I can't see where the word, where this is actually asking that this becomes the paramount priority of the next two years. It's just saying that this is something that is important, but it's certainly not categorising it as the number one thing that needs to occur. I believe that the amendment tonight was actually quite unnecessary. Everything that is mentioned in Part A already has a current council resolution pending, or staff have confirmed that that is something that is on the agenda to already happen. So the Mayoral Minute tonight was not supposed to be an all-encompassing introductory Mayoral Minute to set the entire agenda of the council for the next two years.

It was simply discussing one portion of what that agenda will be, and that's the policy. So I believe that the amendment is completely unnecessary. Those things are already happening. So I'll be supporting the Mayoral Minute in its original form.

Thank you. Any further speakers?

Can I just respond to some of the things that were said there. The mayoral minute in point one asks that a procedure be prepared. So the idea was that the staff would come back to us and give us some suggestions on what the procedure would be. Yet tonight we seem to be jumping the gun and telling the staff what we think the procedure should be. And I know the things the councillors said are quite valid, but the idea was that the staff would make recommendations to us and then we'd build on those. Secondly, Part A of the amendment, I don't think it actually accomplishes anything. All those things listed in Part A are happening anyway. This mayoral minute was never designed to say, let's throw everything out and do nothing.

Let's chuck everything out and sit around while the policies are being written. Everything was meant to keep running. The idea was that we look at the policies while we're doing these things. It was more of a tidying up process and also, as I said before, making things clearer so we would be less vulnerable in court and in other places. And of course, to do this would require resources, but I believe it would be resources well spent because it'd be protecting us and protecting the council in future. And some councillors suggested it would be quite difficult. Well, it might be quite difficult, but maybe that's why it hasn't been done, because we've backed off from it in the past when we should have actually tackled it.

So I'm suggesting it won't be easy. And we won't do it overnight, but I welcome the idea of a workshop. That's fine by me. If the amendment does get up tonight, I won't be overly upset because I don't think it actually changes anything in the mayoral minute. It just, part A just says let's keep doing those things listed there, which I'd always meant for us to keep doing anyway.

Okay.

So I'll put the mayoral— sorry, I'll put the amendment. All those in favour of the amendment, please say aye.

Thank you. All those against? The amendment becomes a motion. All those in favour of the amendment now? Amendment now that it becomes a motion, I declare it carried. Thank you.

Next item is the items on block, and we have two items to put through on block. Moved by Councillor Connolly, seconded by the Deputy Mayor. All those in favour, declare it carried.

We now go to item 237

Is it? Western Parkland City Liveability Program.

Move that way, Mr Mayor.

Before you move that, I'd ask Mr Mifsud if one of the staff could give us a quick rundown on what's in this report.

Thank you, Mr Mayor and councillors. Okay , this report is essentially asking that Council submit an application to the Western Parkland City Liveability Program, which is under the banner of the City Deals, Western Sydney City Deals. The total amount of money available is $150 million, of which we're applying for $15 million, and we've got matching funds. Our contribution is $3.75 million. All eight councils under the Western Sydney City Deals will be applying for the grant, and essentially the work we're proposing is public domain works within Windsor, South Windsor and Richmond, which will be aimed at a number of outcomes such as just general building on the history and character of those town centres, improving the overall look, function, pedestrian access, overall liveability, I suppose.

It's going to be essentially based on placemaking both as a goal and as a process, where the community is front and centre of the engagement to see how they're using the spaces, what the opportunities are, what's working, what's not working, and what are the opportunities for improvement. We'll also be working with the money that we've received to deal with the vacant spaces within Windsor and South Windsor, and in the future, obviously, looking at any activation through events. So essentially, the money we've applied for is 15 million. It's over the next three years, and the work will be—we will only start the work once we've had the money guaranteed, which we're hoping will happen at the end of this calendar year.

And the funding source for our money, 3.75, is comprised of Section 94 and capital works budget. Thank you.

Thanks, Ms. Perrin. Councillor Rasmussen, and you want to move the recommendation? Second

Second that,

Mr. Mayor. Deputy Mayor. Councillor Rasmussen, you wish to speak to it? Yeah,

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, this is, I think, a significant project for this city. Fifteen million dollars is a significant amount of money, and as the report says, and if you read it carefully enough, then you'll see that this money is really meant to be prioritised towards revitalisation of our towns and villages, which I think is long overdue. And we just hadn't had the money previously. We may get the money if we get our application in by the 2nd or 3rd of October, whatever it is—I think it's the 3rd—and if we get successful on that, then we can certainly get on with the projects under the revitalisation. And there are significant numbers of projects and things to be done, and that will require quite a significant number of resources, staff, detailed work on what needs to be done, consultation with the community to make sure that we are doing and we're taking our community along with—we're not just handing something out to them.

We're actually working with them and consulting with them and making sure that how the city develops using this money and over time is what they want and encourage us to do. So there is a significant body of work should this 15 million dollars be approved, and I think we need to be mindful of just the amount of work that's— That we are loading on the staff doorsteps. There's a big budget process to be gone through soon, so there's a lot of work to be done. And I think this is one of the better city deals, or better deals that I've seen for this city in my 20-odd years on councils, and I commend it to all councillors.

Thank you, Councillor Rass. Any further speakers? Councillor Connelly.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. I think this is a really good program from the state and federal governments, and to see that sort of investment in our area from those governments is great. I understand this report is just to ask if we're okay in principle with the town centres being our main priority, which I'm happy to vote for. But I just want to ask a question through you, Mr Mayor, to what level of detail will the application go to? Is it a matter of saying we're applying for 15 million for town centre revitalisation, or is it a matter of detailing exactly what we're going to do with the money? Is it all at once, or is it—how does it work?

No, the detail is more focusing on the outcomes that we're seeking for the grant. The detailed planning will actually be post once we've received the money. So there will be a lot of specification work and detailed consultation with the community before we do anything else, and that will come back to Council anyway.

Thank you. Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. This is really quite timely, I think. We see over and over again from the people who live here and work here that we really do need to do something to revitalise our town centres. We've had several placemaking experts come and walk the streets with Councillor Garrow and I, and to the town centres working group, that we've got really good bones, but that we need to act soon and we need to act well before we reach a point where it's much harder to recover from. And so while we look at Windsor and think that Windsor is quite vulnerable because Windsor looks bad and has a lot of empty shops, the advice from the people that have come to us is that Richmond is in fact extremely vulnerable.

And if Richmond begins to fail, it will be very, very difficult for Richmond to recover from that. We also need expert help to mitigate the impacts of the Windsor Bridge replacement project, which shopkeepers and business owners are already very concerned about and telling us that they're increasingly concerned about, and certainly the experience with WestConnex shows that they have a right to be concerned. I think it's a shame that all this funding is predicated on a big fat airport, but this is really a good use of the funding that's available to us. Our town centres are really important not just for our local economy and service provision, but also because they provide lots of a lot of what our identity is as an LGA, and they provide really valuable third places for our communities to engage, to socialise, to celebrate, to play.

And particularly for those people who don't have good first and second places, so homes and workplaces, those third places are increasingly important, but they're also a very, very big part of what makes the Hawkesbury what it is. I think it's really important to note that this isn't a project that's only concerned with the aesthetics of these towns. This funding allows us to address economic, social, heritage, parking and sustainability outcomes as well. We can engage with local business owners, community members, and develop really cohesive models for appropriate small-scale shop-top housing and infill development, work with local artisans and food producers, continue to work with emerging tourism projects.

We've already started this work through the Town Centre's working group and the generous funding from Windsor RSL. So the City Deals funding allows us to do far more than we initially thought possible and to get far more expert input into this process than we would. This takes our town centre revitalisation from being a little in-house project to a much bigger, much longer-term project that will really have some really positive long-term benefits for the Hawkesbury.

Thank you, Councillor Wheeler. Councillor Kotlash.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Just a question. Is the recommendation, is that, are we giving our endorsement of spending this money on Windsor , South Windsor and Richmond? Has that been determined, those three towns?

Yes, my understanding is through the various discussions and the liveability grants that those three towns centres were identified as the priority areas to focus on.

Any further discussion? Councillor Ross.

Through you, Mayor, a question.

Is this grant money tied in terms of particular projects at this end? In other words, we may receive the imprimatur for the bulk of the funding, but is each individual project or activity that we wish to embark upon subject to an overriding consent or approval from either state or federal government?

No. Ultimately, they're just approving the money based on the outcomes that we will be seeking to meet. But at the end of the day, we can— there are specific things that we cannot apply money for. We can't apply it to private land use or projects that Council's already done. But essentially, there are some outcomes that they're seeking. So long as we're meeting their outcomes, then— Then we should be fine in terms of allocating it to certain areas across the LGA. But at the moment we've identified the three town centres as those areas.

Could I inquire, for instance, I think possibly one or two of the other councillors may be interested, are the centres such as Wilberforce, Kurrajong or even McGraths Hill, was that as a result of the City's Commission?

No, no. The areas that Council have identified isn't dictated to by the federal, state government or the City Deals project. It's more projects that we've identified through our own planning in terms of working on those areas for, I suppose, the outcomes that we'll be seeking.

Deputy Mayor, you wanted to speak? Yes

Sorry. Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'd like to echo what Councillor Connolly said in regard to the efforts of the other levels of government. It's been quite a collaborative approach to getting to this stage where the money finally is going to materialise, and of course we've budgeted for our input of 3.75 million for this coming year. So, aside from what Councillor Ross was just saying, not all the money has to go deliberately to that. There are some other smaller projects, I believe, that can also be used from that money so long as they fit into the criteria that forms part of the city deals. And when the city deals projects were submitted, there was over 80 projects across the city, and that one was what we have had the briefings and our community strategic plan led us to put as a priority for those three town centres at this point.

I think that the major thing to come from this is not just the benefit that we get, but the actual rationale on which the city deals process has been carried out is the linkages that we've developed with other councils that have made us part of a region, something that we were very much missed out from for a long time in terms of when people were looking at development of the Western Sydney region. So now we're quite a player in amongst there really, which is really good for various projects. And the idea of this livability sort of rationale arose where it was designed so that right across the region there would be benefits. So, for example, if in one LGA they get a new big parkland area, then the people here can also utilise that.

And if someone gets a big facility, a new stadium or something like that, then they can, you know, we can all use that. And it's really part of developing the whole region, and that's why it's got the state and federal funding being poured into it. And I think it's a great thing that we're a part of it and that we'll get that benefit. And because there's been already the preliminary work done on the town centres working group and already our placemaking study and so on, we're well and truly ready for that to be rolled out as soon as we get some money. So I think that it's a good priority project to be going with, and it's something from which Everyone in our community will benefit if we've got stronger town centres.

Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Any further speakers? No. Well, the recommendation's been put by Councillor Rasmussen, the one on page 16, seconded by the Deputy Mayor. All those in favour say aye. Those against? Declare it carried.

2.38. Before we start item 2.38, several councillors have a conflict of interest, if they could let us know. Councillor Garrow.

Item 2.38, I have a less than significant non-pecuniary interest. I have a close friend that is a recipient of funding.

Thank you. Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks. I'm a life member of the Friends of the Australian Pioneer Village, who manage one of the items likely to receive funding. However, I'll receive no financial or other benefit from this funding.

And I'm a member of Hawkesbury Skills Committee and likewise I'm declaring a less than significant non-pecuniary interest because I acquire no funding from them and I am not on the executive of the committee. I'd like

Mr Kearns is going to give us a brief outline of item 2.38. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. So every year Council, in conjunction with the Office of Environment and Heritage, operates the Local Heritage Assistance Fund. The program focuses on minor improvements and conservation works to heritage-listed properties. Minor works primarily due to the time constraints in terms of getting the works undertaken and acquitted prior to the end of the financial year. Funding is offered on a dollar-for-dollar basis, up to $2,000 of grant funding. This financial year's program focuses on villages and neighbourhood centres in the Hawkesbury LGA. Council called for applications in July of this year, which led to a total of 15 applications being received. Applications were assessed by an internal panel including Council's heritage advisor.

The assessment highlighted that three of the applications either didn't meet the criteria in terms of the submitted application or were actually withdrawn by the applicant, which left 12 applications of varying types, including slab barns, windows, fencing, drainage and conservation works to mortar, for example . Given the full allocation of the budgeted program is not exhausted by the 12 applications, the heritage advisor actually recommended that five projects highlighted in the report were actually considered to be outstanding projects and were worthy of additional funding. So therefore, we've recommended that Council approve the 12 applications, including an additional allocation of funding above the $2,000 for five of the applications.

Thank you, Mr Kearns. Councillor Wheeler.

I'll move the recommendation in the business paper. Second that, Mr Mayor.

Moved by Councillor Wheeler, seconded by the Deputy Mayor, the recommendation on page 22 and 23. Councillor Wheeler, you want to speak to that?

Thanks, Mr Mayor. This is a really good program. I want to thank the Office of Environment and Heritage, who contribute some of the funding to it. I also want to thank the staff and the Heritage Advisory Committee. The staff have worked really, really hard in conjunction with the Heritage Advisory Committee to really increase the interest in this program. In the past, we've struggled to fill the number of applications and to actually spend the money. And now we're at the happy position where we have plenty of applications and enough money to pay for the program. It's also providing a really good opportunity to bring people into Council to meet with Council's heritage advisor, to attend an information session where, as a captive audience, the heritage advisor is able to talk to them about some of the nuts and bolts of maintaining a heritage item and repairing or restoring things like verandas, roofing materials, that sort of thing, and making sure that they're period appropriate.

So it's extremely useful. To both bring these owners together, but also to educate them. It's also really starting to turn around people's notions of a heritage listing. So a lot of people, particularly when they buy a heritage-listed property, believe or are told that it's going to be an encumbrance, that it will be expensive, that there will be constraints on the colour they paint their lounge room or what curtains they put up, and all sorts of ridiculous things, and that often turns people off and causes them to see owning a heritage item as something that's onerous. The heritage advisor now reports that instead of people hiding behind the curtains in their heritage-listed houses, that they're now stopping them on the street to ask questions.

So that's a big turnaround. I think you can see the different projects here, and the focus of this program this year was heritage items outside Windsor and Richmond, which we've funded in the past. So it's a really nice spread of the LGA from Kurrajong all the way out to St Albans, which is really nice, I think, for those areas that don't feel like they get much attention from Council at different times. What we do need to do, I think, with this successful round of funding is to advertise it as widely as possible as a perk of heritage listing to attract people to continue to apply for this funding. It's one of those use it or lose it things with the Office of Environment and Heritage. If we don't spend the money, they're unlikely to give it to us again, and we should never refuse money offered by the State Government, I don't think.

But it also hopefully will encourage people who own heritage items that are not yet listed to come forward and offer those items for listing as Council goes through and updates its heritage listings in the next few years. Instead of being something that's seen as a deterrent, if there's a bit of money on offer, they're not huge sums of money, but they're enough maybe to get you over the line to fix your front fence or do a bit of painting or a bit of repainting, then that's, I think that's a really good way of getting people to come forward.

Thank you, Councillor Wheeler. Any further discussion? No. I'll put the recommendation then. All those in favour say aye. Those against? Declare it carried. Move to item...

2, 4, 1.

Move that, Mr Mayor.

Deputy Mayor, before you do that, Mr Litwin wants to give us a short outline of this report.

Thank you, Mr Mayor. So last year Council adopted, in September last year, the Family and Domestic Violence Action Plan, which was developed following community forums and a round of focus groups. The action plan identifies 22 actions across 16 areas, and when Council adopted the plan, it requested that annual progress in the implementation of those actions be reported to Council. So this report merely provides Council with an update on the status of those 22 actions over the last 12 months. Thank you, Mr Mayor.

That has been moved by the Deputy Mayor. Do we have a seconder? Councillor Rasmussen. Deputy Mayor, you wish to speak?

Yes, just briefly. Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'd just like to thank Mr Litwin and his team for the wonderful work that they've done in this area. Having attended the domestic violence forums that have been held, that have been put on by Megan and Judy organising them, and attending those, Councillor Wheeler and I attended one earlier this year and also last year. And it's a lot of these things that are in the plan, they're actions which are really making a significant difference to people who are in distress. And far from being outside our core business, as sometimes people think these sorts of plans and so on are, this is really valuable work, and it's a valuable service to our community to be able to ensuring that improvements are being made in this area.

And this is a really comprehensive report showing where all of those items within the plan have currently landed at. And I would just really like to applaud the staff for doing that because the feedback from people within the sector, from the agencies, from the police, and everyone is really, really positive that Council has taken a lead in this area and that we have been able to get to this point, which is making tangible differences for people who are requiring improvements in that area. So thank you to the staff.

Thank you. Any further speakers? Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. I want to echo the Deputy Mayor's sentiments. This is a really useful report, and it's very detailed on an issue that's extremely difficult for everyone to deal with. I was the opening speaker at the forum this year. It was well attended, it was well run, and was really, really valuable. I commend it to all of you to attend next year's forum. I note in the report some things that are still troubling, and that I think this council really needs to spend some time and effort going into bat for. There is still no progress on a women's refuge in the LGA, and there is still no crisis accommodation. There is a real need for crisis accommodation for domestic violence for women and children, and also for men, and for affordable housing.

And I know that we've discussed this in the past. I think it needs to be stated at every available opportunity, and I think we need to be front and centre, crying out for this. 67,000 people live in this LGA. It is unconscionable that you would have to travel to Penrith at a time of crisis, particularly if you had children and you had difficulties with transport. It's not good enough that there is nowhere that currently crisis accommodation consists of a tent by the river. That is not good enough in a country with the wealth that Australia has, and this council needs to be firmly on the record calling for a change to that. As a matter of urgency. I'd also like to commend the Reclaim the Night event this year.

It's on the 25th of October. Councillors have traditionally attended and marched at that event. I know Councillor Connolly is a regular attender, and the presence of male councillors is particularly noted and appreciated by members of the community and particularly the Women's Cottage. So I hope to see you all there for that as well. This is, I think this is a report that we not only need to accept and look at and know that we've got it socked away in the policy collection. It's a policy that we need to look at regularly and say, what are we doing about implementing the things that are written down in here? When we've got a gap that we know exists , what are we doing about fixing that gap? So I think this is a policy that we need to dig out and deal with quite often.

Councillor, will you didn't want to add some of those things to the motion about the refuge and the—

Let me eyeball the motion. She says not on the right page.

Thank you. I've

Got — sorry, nearly there. Okay.

So that could be point one, the existing that the Hawkesbury Family Domestic Violence Action Plan, blah blah, be received and noted. Point two, that Council contacts the local member. And the relevant minister at state and federal levels to point out the absence of crisis accommodation and a women's refuge in the Hawkesbury LGA.

Thank you, Councillor. Deputy Mayor, I think you seconded that. Yes ,

That's good addition. Thank you, Councillor Whelan. Thanks, Mr Mayor.

Any further speakers on the matter? On the amended motion?

Nope .

I'll put the recommendation as it now stands. We all clear on what's in it? Okay, I'll put that. All those in favour say aye. Those against declare it carried. Move to item.

Move to item questions from previous meeting. Does anyone have any questions about questions? Councillor Wheeler.

Thanks, Mr Mayor. Just in relation to question one, the letter to Dr Azmir, I just wondered if I could have a progress report on that. This is Dr Azmir's last week at Wilberforce, so if we could have some swift action, that would be nice, otherwise I'll have to get an address for where it can go.

Mr Mifsud. Thanks, Mr Mayor. Yes, I'll just have to take that on notice. I'll need to check whether that's done, if we need to get an address off you.

Anything further on questions?

No. Questions for next meeting, starting with Councillor Ross. Do you have anything?

Councillor Rasmussen? Councillor Garrow.

Yes, just wanting to know if Council had any representatives at yesterday's official opening of the airport at Badgerys Creek.

Thank you. Councillor Reynolds. Councillor Wheeler. Deputy Mayor. Councillor Kotlash. Councillor Connolly. Councillor Tree. Councillor Richards.

Sorry, I have another one. Sorry.

Also wanting to know if there was an emergency meeting held for Councillors on Friday that I was unaware of. There seems to be some community members out there saying that there was an emergency meeting held on Friday.

Emergency meeting of Council. Councillors.

Okay.

That question has to go to the next meeting now, okay. Any further questions? No. Is there any further business? I'd like to invite Councillors and staff to join me in the Mayor's office if you have the chance. Thank you all for tonight. Meeting closed at 7.35.