Summary of Ordinary Council Meeting: Thursday 20 July 2023
Published on 21 July 2023
Councillors met in Cooma yesterday afternoon for the July Ordinary Council Meeting.
Councillors Frolich, Hopkins and Mitchell attended by audio-visual link.
There were four speakers in the public forum:
- Janet Stalvies spoke about allegations of wrongdoing by Council’s planning department and specific officers over the course of many years, in dealing with a boundary dispute between her and a neighbour. Councillors took these concerns seriously, and requested a report of the matter to be produced for their review.
- Cheryl Mould and Jim Johnson delivered passionate speeches about Council’s decision to divest from residential aged care, and delivered detailed criticism of not only the decision, but how Council has worked with affected residents, families and communities in communicating and negotiating this matter.
- Andrew Thaler was scheduled to speak about Council’s finances by audio-visual link. Before his time began, Cr Summers voiced her objection to Mr Thaler being allowed to appear due to concerns about his past behaviour. As Cr Summers went to leave the chamber, Mr Thaler swore, prompting his removal from the meeting for violation of the public forum policy.
Matters dealt with by exception:
- 7.2 – [Minutes from] Extraordinary Council Meeting held on 29 June 2023
- 9.1.4 – Easement Request - Council Owned Lot 141 DP 1109187 in Cooma - Related to Subdivision Works Certificate 25.2020.207.1
- 9.1.5 – Community Services Advisory Committee - Changes to Charter and Name
- 9.3.1 – Locality Boundary Adjustment for Kalkite and Hill Top
- 9.3.2 – Road Naming Proposal - Mountainside subdivision stage 1 - Jindabyne
- 9.3.3 – Organisational Performance Report - June 2023
- 9.3.5 – Variation Approval - Jindabyne Shared Trail
- 9.3.8 – Jindabyne Pool Refurbishment
- 9.4.1 – Service NSW Partnership Agreement
- 9.5.2 – Resolution Action Sheet Updates
- 14.2 – Legal Actions and Potential Claims Against SMRC
The following matters were discussed at the meeting:
7.1 [Minutes from] Ordinary Council Meeting held on 15 June 2023
Councillor Beer moved the motion as he is listed as voting against an item at the June Meeting, despite not being present at that meeting. He requested this be corrected.
The motion passed unanimously.
8.1 Development Application 10.2023.144.1 - Additions and Alterations to Existing Building (Delegate Preschool)
That pursuant to section 4.16 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) it is recommended that Council grants consent to DA 10.2023.144.1 for a Alterations and Additions on Lot 7 Sec 8 DP 758346, 34 Bombala Street DELEGATE NSW 2633 subject to conditions of consent attached to this report.
Cr Stewart spoke in support of the proposed alterations and their benefit to the Delegate community. He further commended Council’s representative for their work. There were no other speakers, and the motion passed unanimously.
9.1.1 Divestment of Residential Aged Care Services - Yallambee Lodge
That Council:
A. Acknowledge the withdrawal of Sapphire Coast Community Aged Care from the divestment process;
B. Commence the staged closure of Yallambee Lodge, including public meetings, by transferring the assets, land and operation of Yallambee Lodge to Respect Aged Care to enable investment into the Hudson House;
C. Approve the transfer of the Yallambee Lodge assets and land to Respect Aged Care to enable investment into the Hudson House on the grounds that the assets and land cannot be sold at a future date until renovations and extensions to 90 beds at the Hudson House are completed;
D. Negotiate a payment within the available Yallambee Lodge budget to Respect Aged Care to cover operating costs of Yallambee Lodge;
E. Acknowledge that once Respect Aged Care have completed renovations and extensions to 90 beds at the Hudson Centre, Yallambee Lodge may be closed and sold, but that will be a decision of Respect Aged Care.
F. Advise the federal Department of Health that Council will not proceed with construction of a memory support unit, request that the funding be transferred to Respect Aged Care (with the exception of the fire compliance component) as an investment into constructing memory support facilities at the Hudson House and adjust Council’s 2023/24 DP/OP and budget accordingly.
Councillor Beer moved the staff recommendation, with an addition to part B to require public consultation be undertaken to explain this divestment to the community.
Councillor Summers, the seconder, approved the change. She continued, speaking about the difficulty of this decision and her concern about the potential negative outcomes this process of divestment could have led to. She expressed her relief that not only will aged care be expanding, but that it will be operated by a dedicated provider operating at the scale necessary for sustainability.
She concluded her remarks speaking positively of her own investigations into Respect Aged Care, and that Council cannot afford to keep running Yallambee Lodge. She asked, through the chair, whether there were any other potential operators identified.
Chief Operating Officer Jeff Morgan confirmed that only Respect and Sapphire Coast Community Aged Care (SCCAC) were identified in the Council and Sir William Hudson divestment processes. SCCAC had pulled out of Council’s divestment process due to the unviability of operating Yallambee Lodge and Snowy River Hostel. An unnamed provider had expressed an informal interest in potentially opening an aged care facility in Jindabyne.
Cr Summers continued, stating her belief that this outcome will be better for all involved, and that staff now have a direction forward. She sought to reassure the community, residents and families that the process will be delicate and careful.
Cr Mitchell requested that councillors move into committee, to allow for a more open discussion. This request was approved unanimously.
Once in committee, Mayor Narelle Davis was asked to provide background on the aged care divestment process.
Mayor Davis explained that the decision to divest from residential aged care was made in 2020 under the prior Council. Both facilities were built as hostels providing low-level care. The Federal Government introduced changes to legislation in the early 2000s requiring all aged facilities to provide a higher level of care than these facilities were designed to provide. Then, following the findings of the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety, regulations and requirements were raised to a level that made rural and regional aged care facilities very difficult to run sustainably.
Following the most recent Council election, the Currawarna aged care facility in Bombala was closed suddenly by its operator – illustrating the precarious nature of many regional rural aged care facilities.
Mayor Davis went on to explain that the nature of aged care has changed over the many years since Yallambee Lodge and Snowy River Hostel were constructed. Where residents of these sorts of facilities used to reside in aged care for ten years or more, the length of residency in aged care is now more like six months to two years. This reflects the preference of many to live on in their homes as long as possible, only transferring to aged care in their very final years.
Following the withdrawal of the only operator that expressed an interest in operating Yallambee Lodge and Snowy River Hostel, Council formed a committee with the Federal Government and the operators of Cooma’s other residential aged care facility. The result was a regional solution for aged care in the Snowy Monaro.
She continued, highlighting that many regional aged care facilities have closed since the changes that followed the recommendations of the Royal Commission came into effect. More than 60% of residential aged care facilities in Australia now operate at a loss.
Mayor Davis concluded her remarks, stating that this situation was not the result of Council mismanagement, but an unsustainable situation resulting from the changes to the legislation governing aged care. This recommendation before Council will see the creation of a strong and viable facility that meets all the standards.
Councillors Hanna and Williamson questioned numerous aspects of the proposed arrangement and the motion before Council. Cr Hanna was concerned about the deal itself and the transfer of Council assets to Respect, and Cr Williamson was concerned about the wording of the recommendation.
Cr Williamson then went on to discuss with executives the potential risks the nature of the deal was liable to experience. He then continued to voice his support for divestment of aged care in principal, but was uncomfortable with the size of the deal, and was concerned as to whether sufficient oversight and due diligence had been undertaken.
Cr Stewart voiced his support for the direction divestment was heading, but expressed his desire for more time to work with Respect to consult with and inform the community about what is being proposed in this recommendation. Cr Stewart stated he wished to defer a decision on this matter until this work of consulting and informing could be undertaken, as in the process so far it had been lacking.
Chief Operating Officer Jeff Morgan highlighted the Federal Government’s extensive process of approving Respect Aged Care’s recent takeover of Cooma’s Hudson House. His position was that this process represented a high level of due diligence as to their suitability.
Cr Summers voiced her opposition to deferring in general, given the long lead times on Council decisions. She suggested that there was nothing stopping further consultation and information following approval of the recommendation.
Cr Hopkins agreed with Cr Summers on the need to make progress, and acknowledged that the decision to divest from residential aged care was the right one. Despite this, she expressed concern about the manner in which the process was being handled, the breadth of the recommendations councillors were being asked to approve, the pace at which things were moving, and the vagueness of the information on which these decisions were being made.
She continued, stressing the Financial Sustainability Review strongly stated that divestment must occur. She was however, unsure whether this arrangement represented the best outcome for the community. Cr Hopkins asserted that the dollar value of the deal proposed isn’t known, and that much of the process is being rushed through on the back of unclear figures and timing.
Cr Hopkins concluded stating her belief that more time is needed to make sure all the relevant details are clear, before making a decision. She finished by stating that she supported parts of the recommendation, but not parts C, D, or E.
Cr Beer stressed that it will be years of work for this process to conclude, and that it was imperative that councillors got the ball rolling.
Cr Hanna expressed concerns about what happens if Respect are unable to complete their obligations under this deal, and if that would mean Council would find itself stuck. He stated that he did not believe this was the right deal for the community.
CEO Peter Bascomb stressed that Respect would not agree to take on the operation of Yallambee Lodge without the transfer of assets.
Debate then broke down for a short time.
Mayor Davis stated that the changes to regulation and funding model for aged care means that Yallambee Lodge doesn’t have much monetary value on the open market. She stated that it is Council’s responsibility to older residents to ensure that they have access to the best possible care.
Cr Johnson stated that the problem in the community is that the divestment was being approved before the consultation with them would begin.
Cr Williamson stated he would support Cr Hopkins partial approval of the recommendation.
Cr Higgins asked what the consequences would be if Council only approved part of the recommendation, or deferred a decision entirely.
COO Jeff Morgan stated that the community would tell us not to divest the facilities, but that is not a possible outcome of this process. The delay would not change anything about the outcome. He continued by stating that the deal will allow the expansion of Hudson House, and the continued operation of Yallambee Lodge over the medium term.
He continued by stating that the delay is only going to extend the amount of time Council needs to fund Yallambee Lodge itself, meaning more funds are going to need to be cut from other budget items – to the tune of $2mil a year.
Cr Beer suggested that Respect may not be interested in coming back to the table if Council rejects the deal.
Cr Williamson stressed that no one was suggesting a decision be delayed by a meaningful amount of time. He expressed his wish to engage in meaningful dialogue with Respect’s board. He asked whether instead of giving Respect the Yallambee Lodge assets, Council could offer an equivalent of cash.
CEO and COO both stated that those options had been considered and were outlined in the report to Council.
Cr Hanna stated he couldn’t support the deal, and that a month’s delay would not change his mind. He suggested that Council’s communications had been misleading, telling the community that both facilities would be transferred to new owners, but now they’re to close.
Councillors then voted to move out of committee, and return to the formal debate.
Cr Williamson foreshadowed an alternate motion to approve the motion partially, as suggested by Cr Hopkins.
Cr Mitchell stated his belief that the Snowy Monaro, at its current population, was only capable of supporting one aged care home. He conceded that having only one facility is inherently more risky than having more, but stressed that consultation will only lead to the same conclusion. He finished his remarks by emphasising that he believed that this recommendation represented a particularly good opportunity to consolidate our region’s aged care assets, which is a big plus for these services in our region.
Cr Frolich began reading a long prepared statement, questioning many aspects of the divestment process, the deal entered into with Sapphire Coast Community Aged Care (SCCAC) and whether the conditions of that deal had been met, and she asserted that due diligence hadn’t been performed.
Mayor Davis asked for the CEO to clarify the points made in Cr Frolich’s statement.
The CEO refuted Frolich’s assertion that the closure of the Currawarna aged care facility in Bombala was a decision of Council. He stressed the improvements made to the operation and finances of both Yallambee Lodge and Snowy River Hostel under the arrangement with SCCAC. He stated that over 60% of aged care homes in Australia are operating at a loss, and that this figure is higher still for regional areas.
The COO conceded that the financial bottom line for Council’s aged care facilities was bad in isolation, but that it would have been significantly worse without SCCAC’s contributions. The COO stressed that all of this information had been presented to councillors, along with all the possible options for the future. Managers and staff at both facilities feel that the improvement under SCCAC’s guidance have been significant, and the recent 100% accreditation assessments attest to the significance of their efforts.
A short exchange between Cr Williamson, the CEO, the COO, and Mayor Davis followed. It was confirmed that the payment proposed to be made to Respect for the operation of Yallambee Lodge covers a year of operations. This figure would be paid out of the operating budget for Yallambee Lodge, and the precise amount entirely depends on when the transfer occurs. This is due to the fact that Council will continue to use the funds from this budget to operate the facility until the transfer occurs.
Cr Higgins asserted that this decision wasn’t necessarily about the money, as Council supports many loss-making endeavours for the benefit of the community. She asserted that the due to a lifetime of contributing to our community, our aged care residents deserved a great place to receive the support and care they needed.
She continued, stressing that the increase to care standards and requirements have meant significant increases in the costs of operating aged care facilities. Cr Higgins went on to highlight Respect Aged Care’s track record of providing sustainable, high-level regional aged care.
Cr Higgins stressed that while the transfer of assets means Council will stop losing money on Yallambee Lodge, the loss of the asset also means Council loses the depreciation cost. Her support, she said, hinged on the fact that the community will get a purpose-built and high quality aged care service out of this deal.
She concluded her remarks by stressing that they may not sell Yallambee just because they can, and that this deal represents the best possible solution to provide our older residents with a place to live out their days with a high level of support and care.
A member of the public gallery interjected, criticising Council for going back on its word to expand aged care into Jindabyne and to build a dementia ward for Yallambee Lodge.
Cr Stewart reiterated his wish that the recommendation be amended to require the CEO of Repsect Aged Care to come and make a presentation to the community about this deal, before the next Council Meeting.
Cr Summers sought to clarify for the benefit of the debate that Snowy Monaro Regional Council is on watch by the Office of Local Government (OLG), and that Council has a set of points regarding its financial management that it must meet. She asked whether any delay on this matter would risk controvert the requirements of the OLG.
Cr Stewart objected to this remark, and called a point of order questioning the relevance of Cr Summers’ remarks to the debate at hand.
The CEO stated that Council would be meeting with the OLG on the morning of Friday 21 July to discuss the outcome of the meeting. He further stressed that councillors had all received a letter from the OLG highlighting the importance of Council divesting from residential aged care.
Cr Williamson suggested that as that letter urged Council to make a sensible cash positive deal, this recommendation did not meet their requirements.
The CEO refuted this, stating that as the proposed deal saves Council money over the coming years it is in fact a cash positive deal.
In his right of reply to conclude the debate, Cr Beer reiterated his support for the recommendation as it was, without cutting the key parts suggested by Cr Hopkins and others. Respect Aged Care are the only operator to put forward a program for the future of aged care in the Snowy Monaro. SCCAC pulled out. Cr Beer asks how many other operators have come the region to take on aged care. He stressed that point B of the recommendation is to commence a staged closure, that will likely take years to complete.
He concluded his remarks stating that it was imperative that councillors put this recommendation into motion as soon as possible, and that the consultation can follow their decision.
Before the vote was put, CEO Peter Bascomb stated the CEO of Respect Aged Care would be invited to present to the community about this deal.
The motion passed, with Crs Frolich, Hanna, Hopkins, Johnson and Williamson voting against.
9.1.2 Divestment of Residential Aged Care Services - Snowy River Hostel
That Council:
A. Acknowledge the withdrawal of Sapphire Coast Community Aged Care from the residential aged care divestment process;
B. Implement the orderly closure of Snowy River Hostel;
C. Authorise the CEO to apply for and receive federal government funding to assist with closure costs;
D. Implement resolution 054/08 of the former Snowy River Shire Council and consolidate Snowy River Hostel (Lot 3 DP801367), the adjacent vacant land (Lot 10 DP1130244) and access (Lot 3 DP261695);
E. Proceed with an Expression of Interest and Tender process for the sale of Snowy River Hostel (Lot 3 DP801367), the adjacent vacant land (Lot 10 DP1130244) and access (Lot 3 DP261695) to a provider of either affordable housing, social housing or community services with a further report to come to Council on the preferred purchaser / provider.
F. Should no responses be received to the Expression of Interest process, authorise the CEO to proceed with sale on the open market
Cr Summers moved the motion, stating that while the issues with Snowy River Hostel are different to those with Yallambee Lodge, the resolution is the same – it is common sense.
Cr Higgins, seconding the motion, stated that the recommendation summarises the intent for the future use of the land. She expressed that she was comforted by the orderly closure proposed, and that Council has control over the process.
She concluded by stating that the current residents of Snowy River Hostel will be treated with respect, and that the process will be gentle and put their needs first.
Cr Stewart succinctly stated that he could not support the recommendation, as it concerns the closure of a community facility and the appropriate consultation had not been conducted. Cr Stewart did say that the recommendation was the correct direction, just that the community need to brought along.
Cr Mitchell stressed the need to rationalise the Snowy Monaro’s aged care services, and that it is not Council’s place to look after these services. He conceded that more consultation was needed, but pointed out that the outcome for Snowy River Hostel will be the same regardless. The consultation needs to ask what the future of the site will be.
Cr Beer was against the recommendation, stating his belief that there was nothing preventing Council from holding back a decision on Snowy River Hostel. As there was no deal pending with a third party, Council was free to work further with the community. He highlighted the history of the facility and the selfless work by the community to open and keep Snowy River Hostel running over the years. He was also concerned that there was no mention in the recommendation as to what will happen to the staff at Snowy River Hostel following the closure.
Cr Williamson spoke against the recommendation, expressing his agreement with the other councillors that had so far spoken against the recommendation before them.
Cr Hanna asked whether a tender could be advertised seeking an operator for Snowy River Hostel, before Council makes the decision to close the facility. Chief Operating Officer Jeff Morgan responded, stating that the only person to express an interest had been Sapphire Coast Community Aged Care (SCCAC), and that they had subsequently pulled out of the divestment process. Respect don’t believe the facility is viable.
Cr Stewart suggested that unless the community can come up with a better alternative to the closure proposed by Council, the closure will have no option but to proceed as planned. He stressed that until proper consultation was undertaken, however, that Council couldn’t know whether a better solution was out there.
Cr Hopkins proposed an amendment to address her concerns about broadly pursuing a community purpose operator to take over the site of Snowy River Hostel. She stressed her support for the recommendation in principle, but agreed their needed to be more consultation.
CEO Peter Bascomb highlighted that there will be no direct action by Council to get residents to leave Snowy River Hostel, but Council may have to make that decision at a later date if all residents don’t take the opportunity to leave.
Cr Summers stressed the length of time this divestment process had been underway, and that the recommendation allows for broad community input into the future of the site.
The motion was then put, and lost. Crs Davis, Hopkins, Mitchell and Summers voted for.
An alternate motion was then put, delaying consideration until consultation with the community is undertaken.
This alternate motion passed unanimously.
9.1.3 Leesville Commercial Subdivision Stage 3D Budget Amendment
That Council approve the following budget amendment for Leesville Commercial Subdivision Stage 3D:
a) Revenue budget increase from $1,100,000 to $1,934,318.00
b) Expenditure budget increase from $600,000 to $1,036,288.69.
There was a minor point of clarification by Cr Beer before the motion passed unanimously.
9.2.1 Monthly Funds Management Report - June 2023
That Council
A. Receive the report indicating Council’s cash and investments position as at 30 June 2023; and
B. Receive the certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer.
There was no debate, and the motion passed unanimously.
The agenda for the meeting was altered at this point, rearranging matters related to discussion of the proposed financial audit. These related matters were moved ahead of consideration of the audit itself, as Mayor Davis asserted the discussion and outcome would inform the debate on the audit.
Councillors Frolich, Johnson, Stewart, Williamson voted against the change to the agenda.
10.1 Minutes from June 2023 Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee Meeting
That Council note the minutes from the 5 June 2023 Audit, Risk and Improvement Committee meeting.
Cr Summers in moving the motion spoke highly of ARIC, and highlighted the committee’s concerns about the proposed audit’s cost, focus and breadth – making it of questionable value.
Cr Williamson asked about fraud and corruption training for Council staff, which was mentioned in the minutes as not having been undertaken.
Chief Strategy Officer David Rawlings clarified that it was not an outstanding action, but rather something that Council needed to organise and undertake in the future.
The motion passed unanimously.
9.3.7 Audit Risk and Improvement Committee Annual Report
That Council note the annual report from ARIC.
Cr Beer noted that ARIC had noted resourcing concerns about Council’s Towards Excellence initiative.
The motion passed unanimously.
9.3.4 Undertaking Audit of Council Activities 2016-2023
That Council:
A. Reduce the budget allocation for road renewals by $415,000
B. Allocate $415,000 towards the first stage of undertaking the audit.
C. Note that as no contingencies have been included it is expected that additional budget will be required.
D. Note that the pricing is likely to vary once the appointed company has undertaken their scoping and that additional funding is highly likely to be required to fully complete the scope of works following the review stage.
E. Award the contract for Audit to Company 1 for a sum of $362,695.
Cr Johnson moved the discussion immediately into committee.
She then stated her concerns about the breadth of the proposed audit and the costs this could incur, asking about the possibility to refine the scope of the tender.
Chief Strategy Officer David Rawlings confirmed that councillors must either approve a tender applicant, or refuse them all and provide reasoning as to why. The ability for Council to negotiate with tender applicants is designed to allow for minor changes, not ones of the magnitude proposed.
There was discussion about refining the scope of the proposed audit and undertaking a new tender process, with Cr Johnson wishing to approach the Canberra Region Joint Organisation for assistance with scope – and to see whether they could undertake the audit.
Cr Beer spoke strongly against the audit, and asked which roads would lose funding in order to fund the proposal.
Debate and discussion continued for some time about the appropriate next step, and how to word this in the resolution.
The revised motion was then put:
That Council:
- Not accept any tender as the cost exceeds what is considered reasonable to allocate at this time.
- Request the CRJO to provide advice on the undertaking of an audit of financial systems and significant transactions.
The revised motion passed unanimously.
9.3.6 Bombala Arts and Innovation Centre
That Council
A. Decline to accept the Bushfire Local Economic Recovery Fund Grant for the refurbishment of the Bombala Arts and Innovation Centre (former TAFE)
B. Seek a variation from Stronger Country Communities Fund to utilise the remainder of the SCCF2 fund to make improvements to another suitable council asset in Bombala
C. Seek to divest of building and land 8-12 Wellington Street Bombala as surplus to Council needs and in excess of available maintenance budget.
Cr Stewart expressed his belief that this matter had fallen by the wayside due to a change of staff, and wanted Council to seek an extension on the grant funding until community consultation could be undertaken.
There was discussion concerning the likelihood of an operator for the facility to be found, the suitability of Council to maintain stewardship of a historic building, and whether it would be possible to defer making a decision on the grant funding.
The original motion failed to pass, with the alternate motion put:
That Council seek an extension of the BLERF grant and undertake community consultation to develop a plan for managing the facility to be completed by the first Ordinary Council meeting in 2024.
The alternate motion passed unanimously.
9.5.1 Local Government NSW Annual Conference 2023
That Council
A. Authorise the Mayor to attend the Local Government NSW Annual Conference to be held on 12 – 14 November 2023.
B. Nominate and authorise two Councillors as the remaining voting members.
C. Determine whether Council wishes to submit any strategic motions that impact the broader local government sector.
There was a short discussion about the process around making and voting on submissions at the conference, and how nominated delegates will conduct themselves on behalf of Council.
The motion was put, nominating Councillors Higgins and Summers as the remaining voting members, and passed with Crs Frolich and Hopkins voting against.
11.1 Implementation of the recommendation of the Financial Sustainability Review
That Council receive a quarterly report on the implementation of the recommendations of the Financial Sustainability Review, for consideration at an Ordinary Council meeting, commencing from July 2023.
Cr Hopkins noted the extra workload this decision would impose on staff, but stressed the importance of the task.
The motion passed unanimously.
Matter considered in the confidential session:
14.1 108 Commissioner Street Water Connection
That Council waive the amount of $42,514.46 for outstanding water and sewer billing, interest and legal fees relating to assessment number 40221046, acknowledging that if the required work had been completed two weeks prior by the owner as requested by Council, these charges would not have eventuated.
The motion passed.
The meeting was then concluded.