WHEATBELT NORTH REGIONAL ROAD GROUP Representing Avon, Kellerberrin, Moora and North East Sub Groups
POLICY & PROCEDURE MANUAL
Document RRG/WBN/001/005
This Manual is owned and controlled by the Wheatbelt North Regional Road Group. All copies are un-controlled. Main Roads WA Wheatbelt North Region as Secretariat to the Wheatbelt North RRG is the custodian.
All comments and requests for changes are to be forwarded in writing to the Regional Manager, Main Roads WA Wheatbelt North Region, PO Box 333 Northam WA 6401
To phone, please call 9622 4777
001/001 First Approved, RRG Meeting Minutes 20/11/06 / 001/005 Issued 25 FEBRUARY 2013
Table of Contents
1. REPRESENTATION & ELECTION OF OFFICE BEARERS 2
1.1 Regional Road Group Representation 2
1.2 Chairperson 2
1.3 Deputy Chairperson 2
1.4 Sub-Groups 2
1.5 Attendance at Regional Road Group Meetings 3
1.6 Elected Members’ Voting Rights & Obligations 3
1.7 Technical Committee (Working Group) 3
2. LOCAL ROAD PROJECT FUNDING 4
2.1 Funding Distribution Model & User Manual 4
2.2 Traffic Count Data 4
2.3 Distribution of Road Project Fundings…………………………………………4
2.4 Minimum & Maximum Local Road Project Funding Allocations to Councils within Sub Groups 5
2.4.1 Minimum Allocation – Sub Groups and Councils 6
2.4.2 Maximum Allocation – Sub groups and Councils 7
2.5 Timetable for Funding Submissions…………………………………………….7
2.6 Notification of Status of Road Projects……...……………………………….....7
3. ROADS OF REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE 8
3.1 Criteria for Roads of Regional Significance 8
3.2 Roads of Regional Significance Categories 8
3.3 Road Type Description 8
3.4 Variation to Roads of Regional Significance 9
4. MISCELLANEOUS POLICY 9
4.1 State Black Spot Program 9
4.1.1 Assessment of Funding Submissions 9
4.1.2 Funding Allocation 9
4.1.3 Timetable for Funding Submissions 9
4.2 RRG Letterhead 9
4.3 Road Standards 9
4.4 Road Safety Audits 10
4.5 Chairperson's Travel Account……………………………………………...….10
4.6 Amendments to the Policy and Procedures Manual………………………….10
5. REVISIONS 11
APPENDIX 1 – MINIMUM ALLOCATIONS FOR LOCAL ROAD PROJECT FUNDING SUB GROUP COUNCILS 12
APPENDIX 2 – ROADS 2025 CRITERIA CHECKLIST FOR ROADS OF REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE 13
SIGNIFICANT ROADS DEFINITIONS 13
APPENDIX 3 – LIST OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT ROADS OF REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE 15
APPENDIX 4 – PROCESS FOR VARIATION TO ROADS OF REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE 16
1. REPRESENTATION & ELECTION OF OFFICE BEARERS
1.1 Regional Road Group Representation
The Wheatbelt North Regional Road Group (RRG) comprises four (4) elected local government councillors, or members, with one (1) elected member from each of the four affiliated sub groups, being Avon, Kellerberrin, North East and Moora.
1. REFER RRG 20 MARCH 2006 MEETING MINUTES, ITEM 10.1
2. ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENT-CONFORMANCE TO STATE AGREEMENT REFER RRG 23 JULY 2007 MEETING MINUTES, ITEM 10.1
1.2 Chairperson
The Chairperson of the WBN RRG is elected from the four (4) sub group elected members by a majority vote. The Chairperson serves a two (2) year term with biennial elections held following Local Government elections. (LG election October 2007)
The sub group from which the Chairperson is elected shall appoint another elected representative to be their replacement delegate.
The Chairperson holds a casting vote only.
1. REFER RRG MINUTES 26 JUNE 2006 MEETING, ITEM 10.1
1.3 Deputy Chairperson
The Deputy Chairperson of the WBN RRG is elected from the four (4) sub group elected members by a majority vote. The Deputy Chairperson serves a two (2) year term with biennial elections held following Local Government elections.
1. REFER RRG MINUTES 26 JUNE 2006 MEETING, ITEM 10.1
1.4 Sub-Groups
Four sub groups have been established to assist in the operations of the WBN RRG. Membership is detailed in Table 1 below.
TABLE 1 – RRG SUB-GROUPS
Sub-Group / Member Local AuthoritiesAVON (4)
/ Northam / ToodyayGoomalling / York
NORTH EAST (8) / Yilgarn / Koorda
Nungarin / Trayning
Mt Marshall
Westonia / Mukinbudin
Wyalkatchem
KELLERBERRIN (5) / Kellerberrin / Tammin
Cunderdin / Dowerin
Merredin
MOORA (7) / Moora / Dandaragan
Chittering
Wongan-Ballidu
Victoria Plains / Dalwallinu
Gingin
Sub groups are required to elect on a biennial basis (once every two years) and following local government elections their representative to the RRG Technical Committee. Please refer to 1.7 below.
Sub groups are required to elect on a biennial basis and following local government elections their Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson from elected local government delegates.
Sub groups are required to elect on a biennial basis and following local government elections their one (1) elected local government delegate to the RRG. Please refer to 1.1 above.
Sub Group minutes are to support the outcomes of all elections.
1.5 Attendance at RRG Meetings
Attendance at RRG Meetings by council representatives (other than elected members) as observers (without voting rights) is encouraged.
Representation from other interested parties is also to be encouraged.
1.6 RRG Elected Members’ Voting Rights & Obligations
The voting rights of RRG elected local government members may not be transferred to non elected persons.
Elected members must vote on all motions at RRG Meetings with no provision for abstaining.
1.7 RRG Technical Committee (Working Group)
The WBN RRG Technical Group comprises four (4) local government representatives with experience in local government administration and or with technical backgrounds with one (1) representative from each of the Avon, North East, Kellerberrin and Moora sub-groups. Non voting members are the Regional Manager and the Programme Co-ordinator, Main Roads WA Wheatbelt North Region. The Programme Co-ordinator acts as Secretariat for the WBN RRG and provides administrative support to the committee.
The role of the Technical Committee is as follows:
(i) Provide administrative and technical advice to the RRG and sub groups.
All technical committee recommendations must be reviewed by all sub-groups prior to formal referral to the RRG for approvals.
2. LOCAL ROAD PROJECT FUNDING
2.1 Multi Criteria Assessment Model (MCA) and User Manual
Local government submissions for local roads project funding must be in accordance with the RRG’s MCA model and associated User Manual, Document RRG/WBN/002, as first approved and incorporated at the RRG Meeting held 20 November 2006.
REFER RRG MINUTES
The RRG has adopted the following principles in developing the MCA model:
(i) To be effective in distributing funds to roads of regional significance which have a high priority need within the region
(ii) To develop a simple process for local governments to prepare submissions and clearly understand the evaluation methodology
(iii) To reward projects of high priority regional needs based on the appropriate road standard for the road usage, and to recognise the importance of incorporating in improvement and preservation works road treatment safety devices
(iv) To ensure local roads of regional significance are maintained at an acceptable services level to meet user and safety needs
(v) To improve the level of statistical traffic information and work rates to assist the accuracy of the road project evaluation process
(vi) To establish guidelines for acceptable road standards and levels of service for certain road types and traffic usage for input into the MCA process
2.2 Traffic Count Data
All traffic data supporting MCA road project submissions for local road project funding must comply with the requirements of the WBN RRG’s MCA User Manual. Submissions that include non-compliant traffic data will not be accepted.
Main Roads WA is authorised by the WBN RRG to carry out independent traffic counts to verify traffic count data.
2.3 Distribution and Allocation of Local Road Project Funding
WBN RRG annual total local roads project funding is distributed by the RRG to the four member sub groups based on each sub group’s current asset preservation value (APV) of its local roads, and as a ratio to the total APV of the RRG. Funding is then allocated by each sub group to projects submitted from each sub group’s respective councils, but in priority order based on project scores determined by the MCA model adopted for use by the RRG. With due consideration for conditions associated with minimum and maximum allocations for each sub group (please refer to 2.4) all projects are fully funded to the limits of the sub group’s annual local road project allocation. If a prioritised project cannot be fully funded from the remaining balance of the pool funding, the funding available is offered to the relevant local authority. The balance of funds available if less than the minimum allocation set for the sub group will be ‘topped’ up to the level of the minimum allocation. This will only apply if the particular council has not already won road project funding. Should a local authority not wish to accept the balance of funds, the funds are applied to the next highest ranked project and the process repeated until all funds are fully allocated.
From time to time additional state government funds will become available to the RRG after the initial distribution of funding and prioritised projects have been approved. These funds are also allocated in accordance with the above principles but subject to the following considerations. Sub groups should first allocate any additional funding to off-set any shortfall in state funds to the last prioritised road project, provided the project’s state funding shortfall was provided by the local authority over and above its required one third project funding. Any additional funds then remaining should be allocated to new MCA based project submissions or allocated to the next priority project submissions where possible that were not initially funded.
1. REFER RRG MINUTES 11 FEBRUARY 2008 MEETING, ITEM 6.5
Funds that become surplus to a project are as a first option to be used where possible to extend the works but subject to sub group approval, and as a second option any surplus funds are to be treated in the same manner as with any additional funding where there is a shortfall in a project’s state funding and the funding was provided by the local authority.
1. REFER RRG MINUTES 11 FEBRUARY 2008 MEETING, ITEM 6.5
Where a council has a number of RRG approved road projects, if one project has an overrun of expenditure and another a surplus of unspent funds at the completion of the project, council should make representation to their sub group for RRG approval to transfer the surplus funds to the project with the funding shortfall. Certificates of completion must show final project expenditures for each project prior to obtaining RRG approval.
1. REFER RRG MINUTES 11 FEBRUARY 2008 MEETING, ITEM 6.6
Please Note:
When allocating RRG road project funds to the four sub groups, the use of the latest available APV figures for all WBN RRG councils is to be applied.
1. REFER RRG MINUTES 20 MARCH 2006 MEETING, ITEM 10.2
2.4 Minimum & Maximum Local Road Project Funding Allocations to Sub Group Councils
The four sub groups are able to determine their minimum and maximum funding allocations that best reflect each sub group’s total road project funding pool. It is not compulsory for a sub group to have a minimum or a maximum funding allocation.
A sub group may amend its maximum funding allocation. All requests for amendments must be in writing to the RRG secretariat and stating the reasons for the amendment.
A sub group may vary its selected method of determining its minimum funding allocation. All requests for amendments must be in writing to the RRG secretariat and stating the reasons for the amendment.
2.4.1 Minimum Allocation – Sub Groups and Councils
If a council does not win road project funding due to its project submission/s not scoring sufficient enough points as awarded by the MCA model, a MINIMUM allocation of funds is provided to that council and allocated to the project with the highest score. Four options are provided for each sub group to determine its preferred applicable minimum funding allocation. The four options are:
· A fixed percentage of the sub group’s funding applicable to all member councils
· A fixed dollar amount, and applicable to all member councils
· No minimum funding allocation to apply
· Based on a set formula using APVs as described below
If a sub group elects to use the set formula treatment to determine a council’s minimum funding allocation within its sub group, the minimum funding allocation for an individual local government is based on the asset preservation value of the local government’s local roads relative to the overall total of asset preservation values of all local roads within the sub group.
The set formula minimum allocation is therefore determined by the following equation:
minimum Allocation ($) = M $ (sub group) x / APV – APVL / + M $APVH – APVL
Where / APV / = / Asset preservation value of local roads for the local authority in question;
APVL / = / Lowest regional asset preservation value of local roads for an individual local authority within the sub group;
APVH / = / Highest regional asset preservation value of local roads for an individual local authority within the sub group.
M $ / = / Minimum allocation as decided by the sub group
Road asset preservation values (APV) are calculated by Main Roads using road replacement costs sourced from the WA Local Government Grants Commission (WALGGC).
The options and RRG approved range of MINIMUM funding applicable to each sub group is provided in the following table:
.
Option Sub Group
Avon North East Moora Kellerberrin
1. Fixed % 10% 5% 5% 5%
2. Fixed $ No No No No
3. No Minimum No No No No
4. Set Formula-min $ No No No No
4. Set Formula-max $ No No No No
Sub groups adopting the set formula have their member councils listed at Appendix 1.
The minimum allocations shown above are referenced to the following sub group meetings:
Avon SG – minutes 20 October 2006 SG meeting 5%
Avon SG – minutes 6 February 2012 SG meeting to 10% for 2013-14. Ratified at WBN RRG meeting 27 February 2012
North East SG – minutes of 12 March 2006 SG meeting 5%
Kellerberrin SG – minutes of 13 July 2006 meeting 5%
Moora SG – minutes 31 October 2006 SG meeting 5%
Where the value of pool funding sought by a local authority is less than the relevant minimum allocation, the minimum allocation is reduced to the funding value in question.
The minimum allocation or ‘top up’ of funds to the minimum allocation will be allocated to a local authority’s un-successful project with the highest MCA score.