and communities of interest. The new provisions will require the VEC to conduct representation reviews to arrive at new structures for those councils that do not have uniform multi-member wards or have a mix of multi-member and single member wards. 3 Mayors serve a one year term, with an option for a second year (noting the exceptions of the Cities of Melbourne and Geelong). Unchanged. A new provision will enable the elected council to vote out a mayor mid-term if 75% of councillors agree. The MAV’s submission opposed the proposal to elect mayors for two-year terms. The exposure draft proposes to retain the provisions in the LGA 1989 (councils have discretion to elect a mayor for either a one or two year term). There is a new provision that will enable the elected council to vote out a mayor mid-term if 75% of councillors agree. This proposition was not raised in the Discussion Paper or in the Directions Paper and has not been discussed by the sector (nor identified as an issue). This provision introduces the prospect of removing a mayor during their term of office and has the potential to be destablising for a mayor and for a council (even if a motion to remove a mayor is defeated). It is proposed that this proposal be opposed. If the power to remove a mayor is to be retained, the requirement to enable a motion to be placed before the council should be the same as the requirement for a successful vote i.e. “a majority of at least three-quarters of all of the Councillors in office”. The: retention of the election of a mayor for a one or two year term at the discretion of the council is supported. provision to enable a council to vote a mayor out of office during their term is opposed. If the power to remove a mayor is to be retained, the requirement to enable a motion to be placed before the council should be the same as the requirement for a successful vote i.e. “a majority of at least of all of the Councillors in office”.
4 All mayors except City of Melbourne are elected by and from the councillors Retained. The MAV’s submission supported retention of the current provisions for the election of mayors by their fellow councillors and that any consideration of direct election of a mayor be subject to an in-depth consideration of the proposal including extensive consultation with the sector and the wider community. This provision is supported. 5 Deputy Mayor role optional for councils. Mandatory for councils to appoint a Deputy Mayor. The MAV’s submission was that the position of deputy mayor should not be mandated and councils should continue to have the discretion to decide whether or not to appoint a deputy mayor. The new provisions also provide that the deputy mayor must perform the role of the mayor and may exercise any of the powers of the mayor if: The mayor is unable to attend a council meeting or part thereof Is incapable of performing the duties of the office of mayor for any reason including illness The office of mayor is vacant. Given that the provisions provide a role for the deputy mayor in certain circumstances, it would be preferable for this to be consistent across the sector. And further given the extent to which councils across the sector have chosen to elect deputy mayors, it is proposed that this proposal be supported. This provision is supported. 6 Councils are not required to have a CEO Remuneration Policy. All councils will have a CEO Employment and Remuneration Policy which is consistent with principles in the Public Sector MAV’s submission was: The proposed provision is supported subject to the removal of the reference to the PSC’s Policy on
The exposure draft has moved away from the proposals in the Directions Paper and has retained the provisions in the LGA 1989. There is no explanation of why. 24 Comparable performance reporting transparently captured through the Know Your Council website. Retained. This matter was not raised in the Directions Paper. It is proposed to reiterate previous advocacy to streamline council reporting requirements. This provision is supported in principle subject to the State Government reviewing and streamlining local government reporting requirements. Part 5 - Rates and Charges # Existing Local Government Act 1989 New Local Government Draft Bill 2018 Commentary including MAV’s position on the Directions Paper MAV Position 25 Rating of land is exempted when used for charitable purposes, religious purposes and veterans. Rating exemptions essentially retained but more clearly defined. As part of the Act review, the LGV commissioned a paper on rating. MAV’s position was that: While a comprehensive and detailed review of the current rating provisions is supported, it is considered premature to comment on proposed directions 122 and 123 pending the preparation and release of the rating paper. Further consultation needs to take place with the sector informed by the rating paper As a matter of policy it is considered that rate exempt land used for commercial purposes should be rateable and that councils should be provided a specific power to rate any premises operating electronic gaming machines The sector has not had the opportunity to review and discuss the rating paper. This once in a generation MAV wishes to express its disappointment with the missed opportunity to fully engage the sector in the review of the rating provisions. It is requested that further consultation be undertaken with the sector on the rating provisions, including rate exempt land used for commercial purposes and operating electronic gaming machines as well as land used for solar farms, desalination plants etc..
advanced in the Directions Paper for reducing the maximum municipal charge to 10%. MAV’s submission was that the proposed direction not be supported in the absence of compelling reasons to reduce the maximum charge from 20% to 10%. It is proposed to maintain this position. 30 The Fair Go Rates system caps rates at CPI, with an opportunity for councils to seek a variation. Retained. Proposed direction 74 was to “Bring all provisions (and all other elements) of the Fair Go Rates System into the new Act consistent with the legislative hierarchy in Chapter 10”. MAV indicated in its submission that the principle of consolidating legislation applying to local government in one place is strongly supported. It indicated that the Fair Go Rates System was in direct conflict with the notion of broad enabling powers and greater autonomy for local government. MAV’s position was that the proposed direction was opposed on the basis that the continued operation of the Fair Go Rates System is strongly opposed. It is proposed to maintain this position. MAV State Council adopted the following motion: “That MAV advocates for the creation of a “growth rate category” to form part of a review into the Victorian Government’s Fair Go Rates System framework. This category would consider factors that impact upon the service delivery capacity of councils through rate capping in the deliberations of the ESC when councils seek a rate rise exemption or when the Minister sets rates each year.” The sector remains strongly opposed to the Fair Go Rates System. Reconsideration of the arrangements applying to growth councils is sought together with a review and streamlining of the application process for a variation to the cap.
It is proposed to advocate this together with a request to reconsider the onerous process involved in applying for a variation. 31 Environmental upgrade agreements enable financing mechanisms to help businesses access funding for building works to improve energy efficiency, reduce waste and cut water use. Environmental upgrade provisions strengthened in the new Act to make clear benefits extend to the owners of residential land. This matter was not raised in the Directions Paper. The expansion of environmental upgrade agreements to include residential land is supported in principle. The new provisions provide for the Minister administering the Energy Efficiency Target Act 2007, after consultation with the Minister for Local Government, to publish guidelines specifying the types of works to be funded by an environmental upgrade agreement. This provision is supported subject to further consultation with the sector on the content of guidelines. Part 6 - Council Operations # Existing Local Government Act 1989 New Local Government Draft Bill 2018 Commentary including MAV’s position on the Directions Paper MAV Position 32 No specific service performance principles or requirements. The Draft Bill introduces service performance principles in recognition that councils deliver over $7B in services each year. The Draft Bill requires councils to take account of these principles, which will mandate equitable, responsive, accessible, value added service delivery for the local community. The inclusion of service performance principles were not a specific recommendation in the Directions Paper. Proposed direction 104 was to remove the current best value principles. The new service performance principles are not dissimilar to the best value principles. There is no objection to the inclusion of service performance principles in the new Act. It should be noted that one of the principles is for a council to seek to continuously improve service delivery to the municipal community. The current financial constraints on councils may, in fact, lead to the removal or reduction of some services. No objection is offered to the inclusion of service performance principles while recognizing that financial imperatives may necessitate the removal or reduction in some services by councils.