Submission
Guide
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
ELECTIONS REVIEW – Stage 2
This Guide has been prepared to assist Councils to provide feedback to the LGA on
the Elections Review (Stage 2) topics.
The pro-forma has been designed as a guide only and it is not a requirement that
submissions be prepared in this format. If this format is used, it is not essential to
answer all of the questions.
It should be noted that the attached includes suggestions from the State Electoral
Commissioner’s Report (of an administrative nature) and from the independent authors of
the five Discussion Papers.
It should also be noted that different provisions apply to the City of Adelaide within the terms of
the City of Adelaide Act 1998 (for example, in relation to entitlement to vote).
 The attached Guide is to be read in conjunction with Information Sheets Numbers 1 to 9 and the
associated five Discussion Papers which are available at www.lga.sa.gov.au/goto/electionsreview
The attached sections are consistent with the Information Sheet topics and numbering.
 The Review objectives to consider when preparing submissions are as follows.
o Further develop the Local Government sector and enhance its status and level of autonomy
through improved governance and reforms
o Improve the effectiveness of the system of Local Government elected representation
o Promote participation in Local Government and diversity in representation
o Maximise alignment of strategic decision-making of State and Local Governments.
 An important first step will be to consider the question “What do we want to achieve?” For
example:
o On the topic of “Candidacy”, is the preferred objective to encourage the widest range of
candidates by having as few restrictions as possible, or is it to encourage candidates with
specific skills and experience.
 Consider the linkages and inter-relationships between all topics to ensure the preferred options are
compatible as a total representative and elections package.
o Prompts for checking linkages with other review topics are indicated for each section.
o Note that the overall complexity of the representation and elections framework impacts on
community comprehension, opportunities for a central approach to education and information,
cost to the community, candidacy, and voter participation rates.
 The attached may be downloaded to insert detailed comments, and/or respondents may also attach
further comments on any other representation and/or election matters where relevant.
 As previously advised submissions are due by Friday 17 September 2004. Please forward your
submission to the LGA at:
o Level 1, 16 Hutt Street, Adelaide
o GPO Box 2693
o Email: lgasa@lga.sa.gov.au
o DX 546 Adelaide
o Fax 8232 6336
A copy of all submissions will be provided to the State Government by the LGA.
 For further information of enquiries please contact Ms Jill Hoare, telephone 8224 2063,
jill.hoare@lga.sa.gov.au or Ms Victoria Gailit, phone 8224 2067, email victoria.gailit@lga.sa.gov.au.
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
1
Name of Council_____________________________________________________________________
Contact Person______ ________________________________________________________________
Address:____________________________________________________________________________
Email:___________________________________________________Telephone:__________________
Please indicate with a tick the status of the submission:
 Endorsed by full Council
 Prepared by CEO following consultation with Council Member/s
 Prepared by CEO taking account of Council Policy
 Prepared by CEO
 Other (please describe)____________________________________________________________
TOPIC 1
1.
Frequency of Local Government Elections (Term of Office) and Relationships to State
Elections (Linkages with topics 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7. Refer associated Discussion Paper).
Please note: In Phase 1 of the Review, there was widespread Local Government support for a
move in the future from May elections to Spring elections.
1a.
How long should Council Members terms of office be and what is the rationale for this term?
Term____________________________Comment/Rationale______________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
1b.
Giving due consideration to both the length of the term of office and the preferred period of
time between Local Government and State Government elections, please indicate preferred
option/s – refer to Attachment 4 from the Discussion Paper - Options for the Frequency and
Pattern of Local Government Elections (attached).
Please Note: For all of the terms listed in Attachment 4 an ‘all in all out’ basis is proposed.
Preferred Option(s)_______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Comments/Rationale______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
1c.
The Discussion Paper lists implications associated with the various options. Please include
comments about any of these implications, or measures that might need to be associated
with your preferred options as indicated above?
Comments______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
1d.
Topic 1 Any other comments____________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
2
TOPIC 2
2.
The Representative Structure of Councils (Linkages with topics 1, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, and associated
Discussion Paper).
Consider how best to achieve effective community representation given the role of Councils,
Council Members, and the voting and vote counting systems.
2a.
NSW, VIC & WA have maximum numbers of 15, 12 & 15 respectively - is there any merit in
restricting the number of Council Members per Council (e.g. an upper and/or lower limit)?
– Council/Community decides in Representation Review process
Undecided
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
If yes, what might the numbers or the basis of the prescribed limits be?_________________
Comment/Rationale_______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
2b.
Is there any merit in having more consistent representation arrangements across Local
Government?
Yes
- retain current flexibility and local choice of options
Undecided
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
If yes, please specify what model and how this would be achieved (encouraged or
prescribed)?
Comment/Rationale________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2c.
If a choice of options remains for the election of the Principal Member, should the title of the
Principal Member be "Mayor" regardless of whether they are a elected at large or from
within Council?
Undecided
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
2d.
Should the voting rights for the Principal Member when chairing a Council meeting remain
as they are i.e. if elected at large, casting vote only and if from within Council, deliberative
vote but no casting vote?
Undecided
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
3
2e.
Council Representative Reviews are currently submitted to the Electoral Commissioner to
certify that legal requirements are satisfied but are not subjected to an independent review
of the merit of the proposed process and the proposals arising from the review. Is there
merit in a process for an independent review?
Undecided
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
If yes, which option for introducing more independence into the review process is
preferred? Tick more than one if relevant.
Requirement for Councils to obtain advice from an accredited independent
expert/independent body as part of the review
Boundary Adjustment Facilitation Panel examines proposed process and proposals arising from
the review
Impartial/independent body established by Local Government sector examines proposed
process and proposals arising from the review
Boundary Adjustment Facilitation Panel undertakes the review in consultation with Councils and
their communities
Other (please describe)________________________________________________________
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
2f.
Please provide any comments about how greater elector involvement and influence in the
representative structure review process might be achieved and the effectiveness of the
current process for electors to initiate changes to Council composition and representative
structure.
Comment______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
2g.
Topic 2 Any other comments____________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
4
TOPIC 3
3.
Entitlement to Vote – Property Franchise (Linkages with topic 2 and associated Discussion
Paper). Note: There are specific impacts associated with property franchise in the City of Adelaide.
Issues have been raised about the challenges and costs to the community of seeking out details of
occupiers not generally required for rating purposes and the complexities of correctly recording
group entitlements which impacts on the integrity of the voter roll.
3a.
Various options have been discussed for possible changes to entitlement to be enrolled.
Which, if any of the following options have merit. Please tick more than one if relevant.
 Leave as is.
 As at present, except that property franchise entitlement for occupiers would be restricted to
occupation for a purpose other than residency. Residential tenants would need to ensure that
they are enrolled on the House of Assembly Roll or lodge the prescribed application with the
Council.
 Require registration for all except those on the House of Assembly roll and those already on
the Council roll.
 Leave residential franchise as is, property franchise available to principal ratepayers only.
 Leave residential franchise as is, retain automatic entitlement for principal ratepayers – others
would need to apply.
 Extend the property franchise to enable more than one vote to corporations and groups.
 Retain the residential franchise and abolish the property franchise.
 House of Assembly Roll entitlement as is, abolish the property franchise, and have an open
personal franchise to any South Australian with an interest in the specific Council election (i.e.
A persons lives in Norwood but works at Port Adelaide so they would be eligible to enrol to vote
in the City of Port Adelaide Enfield).
Comment/Rationale_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
3b.
At present voting in more than one capacity is only prohibited in the City of Adelaide. Do
you think there is merit in applying this prohibition to all Local Government Council areas?
(Note: The policy adopted in 1999 was that it was impractical to apply this prohibition to Local
Government outside the capital city because the costs of doing so outweighed the potential for
multiple entitlements to influence election outcomes. In 2003, 13 candidates were elected with a
margin of 10 or less votes.)
Yes
No
Undecided
Comment/Rationale_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
3c.
Topic 3 Any other comments____________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
5
TOPIC 4
4.
Voting Obligation and Voter Turnout (Linkages with topic 1, 2, 3, 6 and 8 and associated
Discussion Paper).
Voting in Local Government elections in SA is voluntary and is conducted on the basis of postal
voting.
4a.
Do you have any comments about voter participation rates and increasing voter turnout?
Comment/Rationale____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
4b.
Which of the following options for increasing voter turnout have merit?
 Retention of voluntary voting with improved measures (eg information and education) to
increase turnout. What measures would you suggest are required?
Comment/Rationale_________________________________________________________
 State wide compulsory voting
 Metropolitan Adelaide to have compulsory voting and voluntary voting elsewhere
 Triggered compulsory voting. What would the trigger be? (For example, turnout below
prescribed level).
Comment/Rationale_____________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
4c.
The Discussion Paper lists implications associated with the above options. Please include
comments about any of these implications, or measures that might need to be associated
with your preferred options as indicated above?
Comments____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
4d.
Topic 4 Any other comments____________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
6
TOPIC 5
5.
Voting and Counting System (Linkages with Information Sheets 2 and 5).
The proportional representation (PR) system for LG elections in South Australia requires voters to
record as a minimum a preference for the number of vacancies to be filled in each election. Note:
Under the PR system, single-vacancy contests (Mayor and single member wards) give the same
result as if conducted under optional preferential (OP).
5a.
Is there merit in changing the current voting (preferential) and vote counting (PR) systems?
Yes
No
Undecided
Comment/Rationale (if yes, please indicate what change is sought)_________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
5b.
Is there merit in modifying the (PR) system (if it is retained) to allow voters to express
preferences only as far as they choose (rather than for the required number of candidates to
fill the vacancies)?
Note: this option is not compatible with PR system objectives.
Yes
No
Undecided
Comment/Rationale_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
5c.
Is changing the closing time for voting in periodic elections to 5 pm on the last business
day preceding the relevant Saturday (usually a Friday) supported?
Note: Currently the closing time is 12.00 noon on the first business day after the relevant Saturday
(usually a Monday).
 Yes
 No
 Undecided
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
5d.
Topic 5 Any other comments____________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
7
TOPIC 6
6.
Candidacy (Linkages with Review topics 3, 4 and 5. Refer associated Discussion Paper.)
Issues have been raised about dual candidacy, encouraging more diverse representation on
Councils, and whether there should be certain restrictions on candidates standing for Local
Government elections (refer associated Discussion Paper for more information).
6a.
Is there a need to address the issue of the loss of expertise associated with unsuccessful
candidates contesting a Mayoral election?
 Yes
 No
 Undecided
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
If yes, how should this be addressed?
 Allow dual candidacy (refer associated Discussion Paper for how this would work).
 Changes to representative structure, for example, Principal Member elected from within Council
 Other, please describe_____________________________________________________
Comment/Rationale____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
6b.
Are any of the following suggestions on candidacy and/or assistance for Council Members
supported? Please tick more than one option if relevant.
 Require all candidates to have attended a basic course about the role of Council Members
 Provide access to more extensive training and development, targeted to potential candidates
and newly elected Council Members
 Limit the number of consecutive terms that a Council Member can serve (please indicate below
what the suggested limit should be)
 Require a small nomination fee (refundable) to be paid by all candidates
 Other, please describe_________________________________________________________
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
6c.
Is there merit in reintroducing a requirement for candidates for Mayor to have a minimum of
12 months experience as a Council Member?
(Please note: some communities in South Australia have chosen to elect a Mayor without any prior
experience as a Council Member).
 Yes
 No
 Undecided
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
8
6d.
Should candidates be required to withdraw their nomination before being eligible to lodge
another nomination (i.e. withdraw from ward x and then lodge for ward y)?
Note: This is not about dual candidacy. The current provisions enable candidates to nominate for
multiple positions and withdraw all but one nomination before the close of nominations.
 Yes
 No
 Neutral
Comment______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
6e.
Is reducing the nomination period from 3 weeks (21 days) to 2 weeks (14 days) supported?
 Yes
 No
 Neutral
Comment______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
6f.
Please provide any comments about the current Council meeting time provisions and the
potential impact of this on attracting candidates?
Comment______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
6g.
Please provide any comments about what more could be done to encourage candidates
from under-represented groups to stand for election.
Comment______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
6h.
Topic 6 Any other comments____________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
9
TOPIC 7
7.
Filling of Casual Vacancies (Linkages with Review topics 1, 2 and 5. Refer associated Discussion
Paper).
7a.
Currently there is no requirement to fill casual vacancies that arise within 5 months of the
next periodic election. Is extending the period before a periodic election within which casual
vacancies are not filled, supported?
 Yes
 No
 Undecided
If yes, please state what timeframe is supported?___________________________________
Comment/Rationale___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
7b.
If a candidate dies between the close of nominations and polling day, preferences are
redistributed to the next available candidate. The death of an elected candidate before the
first Council meeting after a periodic election could be dealt with in the same way rather
than hold a supplementary election. Is this option supported?
 Yes
 No
 Undecided
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
7c.
In circumstances where a supplementary election is required for a Council Member, when a
vacancy occurs soon after a periodic election, is the option of using ballot papers from the
periodic election to fill the vacancy supported?
 Yes
 No
 Neutral
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
If yes, please indicate which method/s, under what circumstances and in what timeframe after
a periodic election are considered appropriate? (Refer associated Discussion Paper).
Comments/Rationale________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
7d.
In circumstances where a sitting member (i.e. a councillor) unsuccessfully contests a
supplementary election for a different office on the Council (for example, a sitting Council
Member contests the vacancy of Mayor) is the option of the sitting member retaining their
position as a councillor rather than being required to vacate their office at the conclusion of
that supplementary election supported?
 Yes
 No
 Undecided
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
10
7e.
Is there merit in investigating possible circumstances (these would need to be prescribed in
the Act) where a Council may be able to make an appointment of a person to fill a casual
vacancy rather than undertake a supplementary election?
 Yes
 No
 Undecided
Comment/Rationale______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
7f.
Topic 7 Any other comments____________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
11
TOPIC 8
8.
Election Campaigning (Linkages with Review topics 2 and 4. Refer associated Discussion Paper.)
Please provide any comment about the following matters, in particular whether any changes to the
current provisions are sought.
8a.
Current prescribed length (150 words) on the candidate profiles that are distributed with ballot
papers.
Comment_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
8b.
Current content restrictions on the candidate profiles that are distributed with ballot papers.
Comment_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
8c.
Potential for misuse of Council resources by sitting members to advantage or promote
sitting members in the lead-up to the elections.
Comment_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
8d.
Cost of effective campaigning.
Comment_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
8e.
Concerns have been expressed about the potential commercial exploitation of electoral roll
data made feasible by electronic formatting and it has been suggested that data in this form
be restricted. Which of the following options are supported? Please tick more than one if
relevant.
 Prohibit Councils from passing on electoral roll information in electronic format to candidates
and any other users
 Allow candidates to access electronic electoral roll information and declare it will not be used
for any other purpose.
 Other. Please describe_________________________________________________________
8f.
Current requirements for campaign donations returns.
Comment_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
8g.
Topic 8 Any other comments____________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
12
TOPIC 9
9.
Council Member Allowances and Benefits (Linkages with Review topic 6)
Information Sheet No 9 raises some issues to consider in relation to Council Member allowances
and benefits and the current process in place for considering these issues. Issues raised for
consideration include the basis/principles on which allowances are provided, uniformity across
Councils and Council Members, linking allowances to performance assessment, other support for
Council Members in undertaking their role, and what mechanism should be used to make
determinations about Council Member allowances (the LGA has previously proposed that the
level/range of allowances to apply to Council Members should be fixed by an independent tribunal).
9a.
Do you have any comment as to whether an independent tribunal should make
determinations of actual amounts or ranges of amounts?
Comment_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
9b.
Do you have any comment in regard to the other issues raised or other relevant matters
relating to Council Member allowances and benefits?
Comment_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
TOPIC 10
10.
Please comment on any other representation or election matters (if relevant and add extra
pages as required).
Comment_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
13
ATTACHMENT 4 – OPTIONS FOR THE FREQUENCY AND PATTERN OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTIONS
Year
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Transitional
adjustment
required
State
Election
2006 Election
+ 3 year terms
2006 Election +
short term (2
years) followed
by 4 year terms
(1)
March
October
October
2007 Election +
4 year terms (1)
(2)
2006 Election +
long term (5
years) followed
by 4 year terms
2006 + short
term (2years)
with 3 year
terms
October
October
October
Extend current
term to 2007
and then 3 year
terms
State And Local
Government
Elections held
on same day
March
October
October
October
October
March
October
October
October
October
March
October
October
October
March
October
October
October
March
October
October
October
October
March
October
Minimal
extension of
current LG
term in 2006
Minimal
extension of
current LG term
in 2006, and
very short LG
term of 2 years
2006-2008.
Long extension
of current LG
term by 18
months, likely
increase in
elections to fill
casual
vacancies
Minimal
extension of
current LG term
in 2006,
followed by
long election
term of 5 years,
followed by4
year terms
Minimal
extension of
current LG term
in 2006,
followed by
short election
term of 2 years,
followed by 3
year terms
Extend current
term to October
2007, making
current term
4.5 years, with
3 year terms
thereafter
March
Could increase
voter turn out
but
administratively
difficult and
could cause
voter
confusion.
(1) Options suggested by the Electoral Commissioner, the returning officer for Local Government, in his Report for the South Australian Local Government Elections May 2003. The options
suggested by the Electoral Commissioner aim to ensure that there is a long term pattern of State/Local Government elections which do not clash.
(2) A variation of this option (2007 elections + 4 year terms) would be to hold the next election in May 2007, followed by a 4 ½ year transitional term to Spring 2011 and then 4 year terms.
DME11337
LGA - August 2004
14