Stability Rates concentration Rates compared to adjusted S1 58% 61% 62% 63% 64% underlying revenue [Rate revenue / Adjusted underlying revenue] x100 Rates effort Rates compared to property S2 0.38% 0.41% 0.41% 0.41% 0.42% values [Rate revenue / Capital improved value of rateable properties in the municipality] x100 Efficiency Expenditure level Expenses per property E2 $2,539 $2,692 $2,761 $2,831 $2,902 assessment [Total expenses / Number of property assessments] Revenue level Average residential rate per E1 residential property $1,326 $1,422 $1,472 $1,524 $1,577 assessment [Residential rate revenue / Number of residential property assessments] Workforce turnover Resignations and Forecast turnover E3 terminations compared to 8% 7% 7% 7% 7% projections are lower average staff than actual result due to the inclusion of casuals [Number of permanent staff in the calculations when resignations and 2015-2016 Strategic terminations / Average Resource Plan was number of permanent staff developed. This will be for the financial year] x100 rectified in 2016-2017 Budget to come in line with Indicator definition, which only includes Permanent Staff. If casuals were included in the calculation, 2015 result would be 7.2% which is in line with projected results.
Stability Rates concentration S1 Rates compared to adjusted underlying revenue 58% 61% 62% 63% 64% [Rate revenue / Adjusted underlying revenue] x100 Rates effort S2 Rates compared to property values 0.38% 0.41% 0.41% 0.41% 0.42% [Rate revenue / Capital improved value of rateable properties in the municipality] x100 Efficiency Expenditure level E2 Expenses per property assessment $2,539 $2,692 $2,761 $2,831 $2,902 [Total expenses / Number of property assessments] Revenue level E1 Average residential rate per residential property assessment $1,326 $1,422 $1,472 $1,524 $1,577 [Residential rate revenue / Number of residential property assessments] Workforce turnover Forecast turnover projections are lower than actual result due to the inclusion of casuals in the calculations when 2015-2016 Strategic Resource Plan was developed. This will be rectified in 2016-2017 Budget to come in line with Indicator definition, which only includes Permanent Staff. If casuals were included in the calculation, result would be 7.2% which is in line with projected results. E3 Resignations and terminations compared to average staff 8% 7% 7% 7% 7% [Number of permanent staff resignations and terminations / Average number of permanent staff for the financial year] x100 2015
8d2c344c1fe352d-Part%201%20-%202014-2015%20Annual%20Report%20FINAL.docx