Workshop 4b Financial Plan: 19 November 2024

Panel members undertook a weight-decision making criteria for annual budget submission for discretionary spending. Panel members used the Engage Frankston platform to participate in the activities.

Items in Workshop 4b Tuesday 19 November 2024:

• Financial Plan: a subject matter expert provided an overview on financial plans, budget challenges, the current process and an understanding of what Council needed from the panel; help with the development of criteria to assess discretionary spending.

• Allocation of points activity: Panel members were tasked with allocating a total of 100 points across 8 decision making criteria, with a maximum of 50 points for one criteria. A whole group discussion was had, allowing panel members to ask questions and provide their perspectives on the criteria before each panel member allocated their points individually.

• Sharing perspectives: Panel members provided insight into their rationale for their allocation of points.

• Feedback: Panel members had the opportunity to provide feedback on the session, what they liked about the session and what could improve the next session.

Financial Plan Deliberation

In workshop 4b, after a presentation from the subject matter expert, panel members were tasked with allocating a total of 100 points across 8 spending criteria, with a maximum of 50 points for one criteria. There was an initial whole group discussion which allowed panel members to ask questions and provide their perspectives on the criteria before each panel member allocated their points individually.

A total of 24 panel members participated in this activity. Figure 11 below shows the ranking of criteria from highest to lowest point allocation. Panel members highlight the prioritisation of projects with strong strategic alignment, long term benefits and alignment with community need, as these criteria received the highest levels of point allocation. This reflects a clear preference for initiatives that align with Frankston City’s Vision 040 and strategic plans while addressing broader community goals.

Inclusivity and accessibility, evaluation and reporting were criteria which received a lower allocation of points - seen by panel members to bear less prioritisation when allocating funds. Overall, the fairly even distribution of points across all criteria demonstrates a balanced approach, with panel members noting all criteria need to be considered to some level.

Rationale for allocation of points

After panel members allocated their 100 points, there was a whole group discussion to allow people to provide their reasons for how they prioritised the budget submission criteria, panel members also had the opportunity to add their reasons into the Engage Frankston portal.

The panel members allocated their points based on a mix of principles emphasising alignment with the community vision, equitable resource distribution, and long-term planning. Some recognised the value of pre-existing plans like the Urban Forest and biodiversity strategies, and the work the community and Council have put into those plans.

Strategic alignment was a recurring theme, as members emphasised the importance of ensuring council actions reflect the community's vision. Clear planning, evaluation, and risk mitigation were also deemed critical for effective project execution, ensuring transparency and measurable outcomes. A focus on the "greatest good for the greatest number" underpinned some decisions, reflecting a humanitarian approach to resource allocation.

Long-term impacts, beyond immediate electoral cycles, were a priority for members. They expressed concerns about kneejerk decisions and overdevelopment that ignores community needs, advocating instead for thoughtful, community-centric planning. Connectedness to public spaces and activities, along with council transparency in budgeting and project outcomes, were also mentioned as critical factors in decision-making.

Verbatim quotes:

“Clear plan and objectives is really important. If we're not aware of the benefits, ongoing cost, have great capex spend and realistic timeline.”

“Removing kneejerk decisions from council and focusing on long term planning that focuses on the community is the key to long term success.”

“There is no point planning for anything or allocating funds if they are not meeting community needs - connectedness to spaces & activities.”

Workshop Presentation

Criteria for assessing annual budget submissions

Every year, Council receives submissions from community members and stakeholders for initiatives to be funded under our annual budget.

Council has drafted new criteria for how these submissions should be reviewed and prioritised, to assist Councillors to make decisions as to what should receive funding.

In this activity we're asking you to review the criteria below and rank how important each criteria is in assessing submissions.

Share your reasons for how you prioritised the criteria

Why did you choose to allocate points in this way?

'Upvote' if you agree with someone else's reasons.

Panel members liked several aspects of the workshop. They noted that the workshop was well prepared, with a variety of speakers providing insightful and enthusiastic input on the topics. The preparation and the speakers’ competence were praised as valuable, with many participants feeling the discussions were productive and respectful. This engagement was seen as an opportunity to rebuild trust and faith in the council through open and collaborative dialogue.

The smaller group format was particularly well received, as it fostered better interaction, quicker discussions, and encouraged brainstorming around aspirations. The varied pace and structure of the workshop were also commended for maintaining interest and flow.

Verbatim quotes:

“I really liked being able to be in a room with a few others to encourage discussions around the aspirations and be able to "brainstorm" ideas.”

“Very competent and insightful input from the various speakers to each aspiration.”

“Liked the format with group support. Great overall information and support on topics.”

Ahead of the last workshop the following feedback was received. The tools used during the session, such as the point allocation slider, were challenging to navigate on mobile devices, especially when multiple choices required scrolling. One panel member reported feeling rushed to decide. Providing more user-friendly tools and keeping QR codes displayed for easier logins would improve accessibility.

Sharing presentations or workshop materials in advance would give participants time to absorb content beforehand, leading to more informed and meaningful discussions.

Verbatim quotes:

“Tool is a bit sensitive on the phone - slider.”

“Releasing the presentations before the evening so that people get a chance to absorb the content before the night.”

The QR code to access the activity was added to the chat during workshop 4 to assist panel members to access the activity. Panel members were also supported through one-on-one support in break out rooms to complete the activity.

Ahead of workshop 5, panel members were provided with an overview of the session and access to the Engage Frankston project page to review the activity and infrastructure projects that would be considered during the session.