Pre-Feasibility Studies of Priority Subprojects and Reform Plan Pradeshiya Sabha Walapane Province CP GOSL List Reference No 81

GOVERNMENT OF SOCIALIST DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA

Ministry of Local Government and Provincial Councils

TA 7659 SRI: Local Government Enhancement Sector Project (Pura Neguma)

Pre-Feasibility Studies of Priority Subprojects and Reform Plan Pradeshiya Sabha Walapane Province CP GOSL List Reference No 81

Submitted to ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK

Submitted By: GreenTech Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Colombo, Sri Lanka ABBREVIATIONS

ADB : Asian Development Bank ACLG : Assistant Commissioner of Local Government CEA : Central Environment Authority CEB : Ceylon Electricity Board CLG : Commissioner of Local Government CWSSP : Community Water Supply and Sanitation Project DCS : Department of Census and Statistics DPR : Detailed Project Report DSC : Design Supervision Consultant EIA : Environmental Impact Assessment EMP : Environmental Management Plan FOP : Financial Operating Plan GN : Grama Niladhari GoSL : Government of Sri Lanka HH : House Hold IEC : Information Education and Communication IEE : Initial Environmental Examination IR : Involuntary Resettlement LA : Local Authorities LGESP : Local Government Enhancement Sector Project. LPCD : Liters per capita per day LRC : Land Reform Commission M : Million MLD : Million Litre per Day MLG&PC : Ministry of Local Government and Provincial Councils NWSDB : National Water Supply and Drainage Board NSWMSC : National Solid Waste Management Support Centre O&M : Operation and Maintenance PAP : Project Affected Persons PC : Provincial Council PD : Project Director PFR : Pre-Feasibility Report PMU : Project Management Unit PS : Pradeshiya Sabha PVC : Poly Vinyl Chloride RAP : Resettlement Action Plans RF : Resettlement Framework RP : Resettlement Plan SLR : Sri Lankan Rupee SPCU : Sub Project Coordination Unit SWM : Solid Waste Management TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction and Background ...... 1 2. Situation Analysis...... 2 2.1. Services...... 2 2.2. Staffing ...... 5 2.3. Financial Performance...... 5 2.3.1. Recurrent Income ...... 5 2.3.2. Recurrent Expenditure...... 5 2.3.3. Status ...... 5 2.3.4. Capital Account:...... 6 2.3.5. Overall Status ...... 6 3. Gap Analysis...... 6 3.1. Water Supply and Sanitation...... 7 3.2. Sewerage and Drains ...... 7 3.3. Roads and Bridges ...... 7 3.4. Solid Waste Management...... 7 3.5. Other Infrastructure Facilities ...... 8 4. Long-term and Short-term Infrastructure Needs Based on Gap Analysis ...... 8 5. Infrastructure Priorities under the Project (Identified in the Initial Consultation) ...... 8 5.1. Priorities under the Initial Consultation...... 9 5.1.1. Water Supply Sector...... 9 5.1.2. Roads and Drainage Network ...... 9 5.1.3. Solid Waste Management...... 9 5.2. Estimated Total Cost of the Needs...... 10 6. Prioritization after the Government’s Guidance on Developing a Township under the Project ...... 10 7. Pre-Feasibility of Subprojects: Ragala Small Town Development ...... 11 7.1. Sub Project Construction of Multipurpose Building (Library, Auditorium, Pola and Day Care Centre) ...... 11 7.1.1. Background and Problem to be Addressed...... 11 7.1.2. Brief Description of the Subproject...... 11 7.1.3. Project Justification...... 12 7.1.4. Beneficiaries ...... 12 7.1.5. Total Estimated Cost of the Subproject...... 14 7.1.6. Project Operating Cost Estimates ...... 14 7.2. PFR of the Solid Waste Management Subproject ...... 14 7.2.1. Introduction...... 14 7.2.2. Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) and Dumpsite ...... 15 7.2.3. Objective...... 16 7.2.4. Needs Assessment...... 16 7.2.5. Technology and Management...... 16 7.2.6. Recommendations...... 16 7.2.7. Cost Estimate for the Proposed Solid Waste Management Facility ...... 16 7.2.8. Operation and Maintenance...... 17 8. Financial Assessment ...... 18 8.1. Assumptions ...... 18 8.2. Financial Operating Plan...... 19 9. Reform Plan...... 21 Annex 1...... 28 Involuntary Resettlement Checklist for the Identified Subprojects ...... 28 Annex 2...... 30 1. Pre-Feasibility Reports of Earlier Identified Subprojects...... 30 1.1. PFR of the Ragala Pola Construction Subproject...... 30 1.1.1. Background and Problem to be Addressed...... 30 1.1.2. Brief Description of the Project...... 30 1.1.3. Existing Situation and Proposed Improvements...... 31 1.1.4. Cost Estimate for Proposed Improvement...... 32 1.1.5. Maintenance Arrangements...... 32 Annex 3...... 33 Involuntary Resettlement Checklist of Earlier Identified Subprojects and Prioritization...... 33 Annex 4...... 35 Summary of Consultation and Participation – Earlier Priorities...... 35 Annex 4.1...... 37 Attendance Sheet of the Stakeholder Meeting ...... 37 Annex 4.2...... 40 Presentation for the Stakeholders and Key Informants...... 40 Annex 4.3...... 42 Summary of the Key Informants Discussion...... 42 Annex 4.4...... 43 Presentation Made at Orientation...... 43 Annex 4.5...... 44 Summary of Public Consultation ...... 44 Annex 4.6...... 45 Leaflet on Subproject Selection (English Version)...... 45 Annex 4.7...... 46 Photographs of the Consultation and Participation...... 46 1. Introduction and Background

This report presents analysis up to Stages I and II 1of the TA consulting services assignment and includes outcomes of consultation up to Stage I. Stage II consultations were held on the last week of December 2011. The thrust of the consultation was to focus on possible consideration of Subprojects, aspects the PS need to review in the report, nature of comments/ concurrence required and the content of Council Resolution.

Between January 2012 to May 2012, a series of consultations were organized by MLG&PC and Minister for economic development with the district and elected provincial representatives and local authorities on some of the economic priorities of the town and accordingly some of the priorities were reoriented towards growth/ development related activities focused in one of the Townships of the local authority.

This assessment follows the criteria and processes as set out in the loan agreement with GoSL, a solid waste management plan prepared for the town as a pre requisite and the latest priorities post Ministerial consultations. The Annex 2 presents some of the initial development priorities of the local authority.

The LA will resolve a Council Resolution would include a) Agreement on priorities; b) Commitment to the Reform; c) Acceptance to the financial forecast and O&M commitments and d) Request for technical assistance for Design and Supervision; the report is based on assessment of existing situation, needs, financial capacities and implementable priorities.

Table 1: Basic Facts A. General Name of Pradeshiya Sabha - Walapane Year of Formation - 1974 Province - CP District - Nuwara Eliya Area sq. km 313.5 Elevation above MSL m 1,280 No of GN Divisions - 125 Nearest Town - Nuwara Eliya Distance to Main Town km 37 Distance to Colombo km 205 B. Demography Male - 64,097 Female - 62,074 Total - 126,171 Sex Ratio Female/1,000 Male 968 Total Households - 33,125

Land Use and Economy of the PS

Table 2 presents land use pattern in the PS. Agricultural employment in the PS is 7,707 of which half the agricultural work is in paddy cultivation. Vegetable cultivation is also

1Scope of Stage I: Initial assessment of issues and development of consultation framework with the council; Scope of Stage II: Assessment of needs based on initial information collected and assessment views of stakeholders on priorities and options for service delivery

1 widespread and most of the families are engaged in this activity and most others in agricultural employment are involved in cultivation of fruit crops, and tea plantations.

Paddy is cultivated in both seasons with a total output of 15,360 metric tons. Total output of vegetables is around 250 metric a ton Output of tea is about 65,090 tons and almost the entire output is meant for local markets in the country.

Table 2: Land Use Pattern Type of Use Extent (Acres) Share (%) Paddy 7,707 14.3 Other crops 10,087 18.71 Abandoned paddy 12,484 23.18 Tea - - Rubber - - Coconut - - Marshy lands 11,804 21.91 Forest reserves 11,804 21.90 Total 53,886 100.0 Source: Walapane PS Survey

Total paid employment in the PS is about 30,573 or about 70% of the labour force. Agricultural employment is the main occupation among the employed accounting for 36% of the employed labour. About 10.5% of are employed in the public sector, 4.3% in the private sector and another 18.8% is self-employed.

Nearly 11% of the families in the PS are Samurdhi recipients2 indicating that the PS has a higher share of Samurdhi recipients than the national average. The high rate of Samurdhi recipients is an indication of the poverty level of the PS.

2. Situation Analysis

2.1. Services

A. Water Supply: According to information available with the PS, households obtain drinking water from different sources. The number of households served with piped borne water is 450. Other common sources of water supply to the balance households are from five tube wells and from about ten rivers or streams.

B. Sanitation: According to PS data, 29,883 households have their own toilet facilities, which account for almost 90% of total households in the PS. The PS has also built seven public toilets. There are 39 households without any toilet facilities.

C. Roads: Overall length is 327 km and most of the roads are in very poor condition and need rehabilitation. Within the PS area, there are motor able roads of about 222 km. Out of this total extent, ‘B’ grade roads account for 72 kilometres and the balance km are ‘C’ grade roads .There is a network 105 km of class E roads.

D. Solid Waste Management: The PS does not provide comprehensive solid waste collection (SWM) service to the entire community.

2 Family classification method has been adopted in selection and it is participatory approval with a range of criteria which explains the poverty as such as housing and ownership1

2 Collection: At present, the PS carries out Nildandahinna collection of street refuse and house refuse in Walapane town Ragala, Padiyapelella Udupussellawa on a daily basis.

The PS provides roadside bins for the deposit of refuse by the public.

Area Frequency of Collection Walapane 1 Ragala 1 Nildandahinna. 1 Padiyapelella 1 Udapussellawa 1

Primary Waste Collection Points Permanent Special Concrete Bins Non- Collection Area Barrels Permanent System Like Bell Total Closed Open Places Collection System Ragala - -  - 1 - Udapussellawa - -  - 1 - Nildandahinna. --  - 1 - Padiyapelella Walapane - -  - 1 -

Quantity of the Solid Waste per Day/Per Week Collected Gross Amount of SW Collected from the Three Towns Amount that has to be collected (tons/day) 5 tons Amount that is being collected (tons/day) 5 tons

Major Waste Generation Points No Source of Waste Collection from the Three Towns Amount Tonnes/Day 1 Ragala Taxpayers area 5 2 Udapussellawa Taxpayers area 5 Note: Market waste, commercial waste and industrial waste

Transfer: is carried out using a tractor-trailer that belongs to the PS. Daily collection is about 2 tons and more than 50% of the street refuse consists of vegetable waste.

Transport Capacity Equipment No No of Trips Per Day (kg) Special Dump trucks 2 - - Four wheel tractor with trailer 1 1 ton 1 Two wheel tractor with trailer N/A - 3. Hand carts 1 - - Others N/A - 1

Method of Disposal

The current practice of disposing refuse is to dump them on the dumping site belonging to the PS. The site is located near a Nildandahinna. Padiyapelella. The PS has so far not obtained approval from the Central Environment Authority for disposal.

3 Brief Description of Final Disposal Site:

i. Location : Nildandahinna. Padiyapelella ii. Ownership : PS iii. Situation (surroundings) : Forest iv. Approvals from CEA : No approval for current activities,

Structure of Waste Management Unit; Head of Unit, Number of PHIs and Supervisors

A Technical Officer and a Public Health inspector are mobilized in order to control and administer the solid waste collection and management aspects.

Labour Force Approved number of labourers 5 No of labourers working at present 5

Operational Cost of SWM Average Annual Cost Type of Cost (SLRs) Waste collection Salaries and payments 5,500,000.00 Equipment/maintenance Budget allocation on SWM 13%

Summary and Current Status

Currently the LA does not receive any financial assistance for the implementation of a SWM project. The service levels are not up to the desired levels, and most households cannot use space in their premises for disposal or composting. This warrants a centralized disposal facility.

Waste Collection Program Number of Day Collection Area Collection Time Trip/Day Sunday - - - Walapane town Ragala , Nildandahinna, Monday 1 6.00 am – 3.00 pm Padiyapelella Udapussellawa Walapane town Ragala, Nildandahinna, Tuesday 1 6.00 am – 3.00 pm Padiyapelella Udapussellawa Walapane town Nildandahinna. Ragala, Wednesday 1 6.00 am – 3.00 pm Padiyapelella Udapussellawa Walapane town Ragala, Nildandahinna. Thursday 1 6.00 am – 3.00 pm Padiyapelella Udapussellawa Walapane town Ragala, Nildandahinna. Friday 1 6.00 am – 3.00 pm Padiyapelella Udapussellawa Walapane town Ragala, Padiyapelella Saturday 1 6.00 am – 3.00 pm Udapussellawa Nildandahinna.

Problems Suggested Solutions Shortage of labour Recruit adequate Labour Frequent breakdown of machinery Spare tractor to be purchased PHI’s are not properly engaged In SWM PHI should be engaged in this activity

4 E. Medical Services: The health and medical facilities in the PS are also limited with only one ayurvedic dispensary and 21 health centres. In addition, an ayurvedic hospital, one district hospital and two government dispensaries are located in the PS. There is no maternity centre, or a base hospital in the PS.

F. Education: There is a national school in the PS with a staff of 82 and a student population of nearly 1,735. In addition, there are fourteen other schools up to GCE Ordinary Level and the number of students attending these accounts for about 7,437 with a student population of 505 students. there are also 455 primary schools with a student population of 5,455, there are 34 preschools four private tuition centres, 50 Sunday schools and one vocational centre in the PS.

G. Office Facilities: The PS is housed in a two storey building with a floor area of 12,000 sq. ft. Its vehicle fleet includes one pickup truck, four tractors, one three wheeler, one water bowsers and four tractor-trailers. Office equipment available at the PS includes three computer units, one photocopying machine, a fax machine and six telephones.

2.2. Staffing

Permanent staff of PS consist of one secretary, nine management assistants, two development assistants, one environmental officer, two programme assistants, two revenue inspectors, two dispensers, four KKS, two library assistant, four watcher, 25 road labourers, fourteen health labourers, three drivers, two health administrators, six water labourers, two pump operators, approved carder is 90 and the present staff strength 85.

2.3. Financial Performance

2.3.1. Recurrent Income

The total revenue for the PS in 2010 was SLRs. 34.13 million. Around 58% of income is in the form of Grants.

Own Sources: Walapane PS income is made up from mainly two sources, which are rents, and Warrant Cost. However, the amount collected from both sources is not significant. As shown in Table, the combined income of the two sources was about 14% in 2010 and these together account for nearly 33% of its own revenue, i.e., without government grants.

Grants and Transfers: Grants from the Central government have also been rising and in 2010, the PS received SLRs. 19.9 million compared with SLRs. 13.18 million in 2006. The share of grants in total revenue has declined from 54% in 2006 to 58% in 2010.

2.3.2. Recurrent Expenditure

Annual recurrent expenditure in 2010 was SLRs. 25.85 million. This is an increase from SLRs. 18.25 million in 2006. This increase has been largely contributed by the increase in the expenditure on wages and salaries. In 2006, wages and salaries accounted for SLRs. 17.0 million, and in 2010, this amount increased to SLRs. 24.7 million.

2.3.3. Status

The final accounts of Walapane PS for 2010 presents a negative surplus amounting to SLRs. 4.35 million in the recurrent budget.

5 2.3.4. Capital Account:

The amount received by the PS as capital grants fluctuated during the last five years. It received SLRs. 39.5 million in 2008 as the maximum and 7.85 million in 2010 as the minimum.

2.3.5. Overall Status

The LA showed overall deficit during last five years. However, its operating surplus were positive in 2006, 2007 and in 2010. The overall deficits were due to capital expenditure and limited capital grants.

Table 3: Details of Annual Budgets of Walapane PS - 2006 to 2010 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Recurrent Revenue

Acreage&Tax 1,199,604.70 720,784.67 1,469,966.85 1,585,966.21 632,927.54 Rents 2,406,093.11 3,330,856.74 2,777,252.28 1,655,434.89 2,980,069.93 Licenses 840,674.00 1,079,382.00 1,143,716.00 1,090,420.00 1,377,016.74 FeesFromServices 687,830.00 249,210.75 274,354.15 235,542.81 1,461,255.62 WarrantCost 2,383,134.00 1,636,101.22 3,296,188.92 59,620.27 1,676,056.42 OtherIncome 3,570,019.69 1,832,235.83 9,017,195.87 2,933,397.78 6,071,724.45 OtherAids 13,180,610.13 14,949,142.27 19,792,678.47 19,010,000.00 19,929,286.32 Total 24,267,965.63 23,797,713.48 37,771,352.54 26,570,381.96 34,128,337.02

Recurrent Expenditure

Salaries AndWages 17,001,315.77 19,632,536.96 26,242,112.76 23,214,435.52 24,659,606.58 Traveling 248,448.05 283,559.51 425,564.70 444,925.32 720,013.61 Supplies 1,619,223.25 1,486,556.36 2,127,923.62 1,868,241.81 1,981,127.98 Repairs&Maintenance 304,603.00 268,727.34 1,110,475.92 788,588.81 534,618.08 Transport 774,697.85 940,977.35 1,075,212.92 1,402,259.83 1,322,808.39 BonusAndWelfare 363,000.57 78,755.70 267,589.85 48,599.70 42,173.78 AidsAndContribution 133,484.55 677,974.00 117,514.00 78,855.50 140,449.77 Pensions 504,228.44 277,521.60 8,425,004.95 278,380.79 309,970.58 Total 20,949,001.48 23,646,608.82 39,791,398.72 28,124,287.28 29,710,768.77

St/ Deficit 3,318,964.15 151,104.66 (2,020,046.18) (1,553,905.32) 4,417,568.25

Capital Income CapitalGrants/Income 19,583,362.71 - 39,490,373.26 14,129,929.93 7,826,393.64 CapitalAssetsSales - 10,916,327.93 - 836,399.00 21,000.00 Total 19,583,362.71 10,916,327.93 39,490,373.26 14,966,328.93 7,847,393.64

Capital Expenditure Expenditure For 24,843,591.30 11,854,420.06 46,713,305.87 16,200,647.93 16,615,844.35 Machinery Land & Land ----- Improvement Net St/ Deficit (1,941,264.44) (786,987.47) (9,242,978.79) (2,788,224.32) (4,350,882.46)

3. Gap Analysis

The Gap analysis is based on available information related to existing situation and the long list of priorities.

6 3.1. Water Supply and Sanitation

Table 4: Population Projections and the Cost of Production Projection of Population Total Demand Cost/MLD Total Cost. million Year in PS H/H MLD (M) SLRs 2011 33,125 19.88 33.33 662.50 2016 34,815 20.89 33.33 696.29

Assumptions

1. Water demand 400 litres per HH (80 litres per head* 5 members) 2. Safety Factor 1.53 3. Cost of production SLRs. 20,000 per HH

There is a shortage of safe drinking water for the majority of the households due to lack of safe piped borne water supply schemes. As the water is the lifeline of the community in the PS, piped borne water supply schemes become the highest priority project of the PS. The shortage of water bowsers also hinders the distribution of water to the community. Shortage of community wells is also a major drawback for areas where such facilities are not provided. Hence, the PS has not identified any water supply projects as their priorities.

3.2. Sewerage and Drains

Drains are only available at some roads. There are no drains in the other areas of the road network in the PS. It is not possible to provide road drains in every road due to nature of the terrain. Assuming that the PS can construct drains for 5 km length of roads per year, the fund requirement for medium term drainage is estimates at SLRs. 21 million4.

There is a request for rehabilitation of Drainage system at Ragala Main Street and bus stand area in the PS. The tentative cost estimate is 10.5 million.

3.3. Roads and Bridges

PS has an internal road network of 327 km but PS does not have a capacity to upgrade many roads within the next five years due to lack of machinery with the PS. The PS may be able asphalt about 5 km per year. The estimated cost for 5 km roads per year and for next five years is SLRs. 250 million5. Further, there are several bridges and culverts to be repaired/ constructed.

From these long-term needs, PS has not identified any roads for rehabilitation, as a priority need.

3.4. Solid Waste Management

Primary Collection:

i. It is estimated that, household solid waste management requires the purchase of collecting bins at a cost of SLRs. 200,000 ii. Transfer: Will required a tipper worth SLRs. 6.0 million with a capacity of 3 cubes (8.5 cum)

3 Design Manual on Small Community Water Supplies- Prepared under the WHO/UNDP Project on institutional Support to the NWSDB – Jan 1982 4 The cost of earth drains on either side per kilometre road length Rs 0.84 million. 5 Cost per Km of Asphalt will be SLRs. 10 Million per km

7 iii. Treatment and Disposal: Construction of storage composting facility at a cost of SLRs. 1.0 million. The total cost of the project is SLRs. 7.2 million.

The LA in consultation with the public, identified the construction of storage composting facility at a cost of SLRs. 13.5 million as a priority to be funded under LGESP

3.5. Other Infrastructure Facilities

Currently other infrastructure facilities such as ayurvedic clinic centres, maternity centres and economic centres are inadequate. However, these are identified as low priority needs. However, the LA will be able to invest around 50 million within the next 5 years with the assistance of the GoSL or Provincial Council. PS has identified Ragala pola improvement as a priority to be funded under the LEGSP. The tentative cost estimate is 15.0 m

4. Long-term and Short-term Infrastructure Needs Based on Gap Analysis

Sector 5 Year Plan (2016) Long Term (2026) Population (households) 34,815 38,457 Costs SLRs. in million SWM 25.8 Water Supply & Sanitation 696 1,369 Roads & Drains 250 491 Others (pola etc) 50 Total 1,021.8 1,860

5. Infrastructure Priorities under the Project (Identified in the Initial Consultation)

With the improvement in the road network in the district, there has been an increase in economic growth in this PS. Therefore, the Walapane PS accords priority to provide basic infrastructure facilities to support the economic growth and improve living conditions.

Accordingly, The PS has identified several infrastructure gaps and needs, through two stages of consultations. Based on the outcomes of the consultations, the LA has identified and short-listed a list of subprojects to be carried out under the LGESP.

Environmental Infrastructure  Sewerage and Drains o Rehabilitation of Drainage system at Ragala Main Street and bus stand  SWM o Improvements to the Solid waste Management Centre

Growth Infrastructure  Road o Construction of Drainage System & Pavements

Economic Infrastructure  Improvements to the Weekly fair

Social and Other Infrastructure  Construction of a Multi - purpose building (Library, Auditorium, Day care)

8 5.1. Priorities under the Initial Consultation

5.1.1. Water Supply Sector

Based on water supply needs, the PS has not identified any water supply projects due to limitation of funds.

5.1.2. Roads and Drainage Network

Even though the roads are in bad condition, the PS will meet the expenses of rehabilitating these roads through other funds such as Gamaneguma and Maganeguma. Under the LGESP funding, the LA has prioritized Drainage system at Ragala Main Street and bus stand area. Tentative estimated cost of this proposal is SLRs. 10.5 million

5.1.3. Solid Waste Management

Table 5: Solid Waste Management a Collection i Sorting at (household level/separate bin/sort after collection) N.A Compactors, ii Method of collection (Tipper, tractor, two wheel tractor, carts) Tractors, and Hand cart Transport Plan With Map iii Frequency of collection (daily, once in two days, weekly) Daily iv Coverage area (sq km) and GND division 5 v Expected collection 5 Requirement for this process and cost Activity Supply of collection bins 20,000.00 Procurement of tipper – 3Cubic meters capacity 2,800,000.00 Construction of a sorting centre about 20m X10m 1,000,000.00 Total 3,800,000.00 b Proposed Treatment a If composting i Extent of proposed land (attach copy of survey plan) 2A, 0R. 35.4 P ii Land ownership (attach a copy of deed) PS iii Location of the site (show on a map) Attached Current usage of the land (standing structures, livelihood Solid waste iv activities) disposal

v Any approval required Yes b Any proposal for landfills? No i Extent of proposed land N/A ii Land ownership (attached a copy of deed) N/A iii Location of the site (show on a map) N/A v Any approval required N/A c Any other treatment/method of disposal proposed? c Any Capacity Building/Training Required a Components of training No b Estimated cost N/A

9 5.2. Estimated Total Cost of the Needs

Estimated Sector Subproject Proposed Cost million SLRs SWM SWM 25.8 Growth Ragala, pola improvement 25.0 Total 50.8

6. Prioritization after the Government’s Guidance on Developing a Township under the Project

Based on the consultation and participation process, subproject selection criteria, priority order of the public and the financial capacity of the LA to carry out the operation and maintenance of the asset to be created by the funding, the following subprojects are recommended for funding.

Estimated Cost Subproject Proposed million SLRs SWM 25.8 Ragala, pola improvement 25.0 Total 50.8

In addition to the priorities based on Consultation and Participation process selection, the GoSL through a Ministerial level consultation focused on a few town development activities for possible inclusion under the project. As a result, Ragala Town within the PS was selected for development under the LGESP and the following subprojects were proposed.

The overall budget under LGESP per town is SLR 50 million. From this perspective, the following projects were identified. The selection was based on:

a. Eligibility of the sub sector under the sub project selection criteria as agreed with ADB b. Compliance to safeguard- projects should have minimal land acquisition as the cost will have to be borne by the LA and should have no adverse environmental impact and c. Financial sustainability in terms of O&M.

As a policy the project does not encourage activities that are commercial in nature such as shopping areas/ complexes.

10 Original Allocated Basis for Sub Project Decisions Cost Cost Remarks Recommendation SLRs million Improvements Not GF of the to the Weekly Recommended MPB fair Construction of Drainage Not Funding issue 20 System & Recommended Pavements Improvements to the Solid waste Recommended 6 6 Management Centre Construction of a Multi - purpose Needs are library Mobilize building Recommended and auditorium for 57.5 44 additional (Library, council activities. funds Auditorium, Day care) Sub Total 83.5 50

7. Pre-Feasibility of Subprojects: Ragala Small Town Development

7.1. Sub Project Construction of Multipurpose Building (Library, Auditorium, Pola and Day Care Centre)

7.1.1. Background and Problem to be Addressed

Walapane PS is formed in 1974. It was functioning as a village council earlier. The PS is 205 km from Colombo. There are 125 GN divisions in the PS. The extent of the PS is 313.5 sq km. The elevation of the PS is 1,280 MSL. The annual rainfall is 2,500 mm to 3,500 mm. The total population of the PS is 126,171. Walapane PS is an agricultural hinterland. The major income of the Community is from agricultural products such as paddy, vegetables and cash crops. The total extend of the proposed multipurpose building site is 90 perches and only 40 purchase is belonging to PS. Other 50 purchase belongs to Maturate Plantation. Ps has already made arrangements to acquire the required land form the Maturate Plantation. The some earth works have to be done prior to construction of the proposed multipurpose building.

7.1.2. Brief Description of the Subproject

PS proposed to construct a multipurpose building comprising two storeys. The ground floor consists of a Day care centre a pola and toilets block for male and female. The floor area of the ground floor is 5,000 sq. ft. The upper floor is allocated for the Library and for the Auditorium .The area of the upper floor also 5,000 sq. ft.

11 Figure 1: Existing Library Figure 2: Existing Facilities

7.1.3. Project Justification

At Ragala there is no day care centre. Providing day care centre at the multi storey building is a blessing in disguise to the young parents. There are about 10,900 children between ages 0 - 5 years. There is no auditorium at the PS area to conduct awareness programmes and social activities. The present Library building in the PS is not adequate and it is housed in a small building without much facilities. There are providing an auditorium and a Library in the multi-storeyed building. It is a necessity of the era. Because the school children in the area are benefited by providing adequate library facilities for their reference work .Having an auditorium is an advantage for the community because they can hold the seminars and the social event without going out of the PS area. They can also save money and time by having the facility. PS also can generate additional funds by hiring the facility to required people by charging a reasonable fare

7.1.4. Beneficiaries

50 children are directly benefited by the Day care centre. In future more children will be benefited by the facility. By having a pola in the ground floor majority of the vendors will be benefited initially .About 1,000 consumer will be benefited by the new development because they do their shopping even during the inclement weather condition. The school children about 12,776 and the adults who have the reading habits will be benefited

The 33,125 households in the PS will be benefited by having an auditorium in the Multi- storey building, because they can hold their social events at a reasonable cost.

12 Figure 3: Location Map of Proposed Multipurpose Building at Walapane

Figure 4: Layout Plan of Day Care Centre and Pola with Toilet Facilities at Ground Floor of Proposed Multipurpose Building

13 Figure 5: Layout Plan of Library and Auditorium with Toilet Facilities at 1st Floor of Proposed Multipurpose Building

Table 6: Attributes of the Proposed Construction of Multipurpose Building. Ground Floor Total floor area. 5,000 sq. ft Day Care centre and pola with toilet facilities. Multi Storey Building Upper Floor Floor area 5,000 sq. ft. Library and Auditorium with toilet facilities.

7.1.5. Total Estimated Cost of the Subproject

Table 7: Tentative Cost Estimate of the Subproject No Title of Works Amount (SLRs.). Construction of multistorey building with a total floor area 1 46,000,000.00 10,000 sq. ft and earth works for initial ground preparation 10 % Contingencies 4,600,000.00 Total 50,600,000.00

7.1.6. Project Operating Cost Estimates

The total annual cost of operation and maintenance of the multipurpose building subproject is estimated to be 3% of the capital cost which works out to SLRs. 1.5 million.

7.2. PFR of the Solid Waste Management Subproject

7.2.1. Introduction

Walapane Pradeshiya Sabha (WPS) is spread over 303.6 km2 in the hill country of Sri Lanka. WPS collects waste from 5 towns, grouped into 3 clusters: 1) Ragala and Udapussellawa, 2) Walapane and Nildandahinna and 3) Padiyapelella. Ragala and Udapussellawa cluster generates about 2 tons per day and this is open dumped at the Liddersdale dumpsite. Nildandahinna and Walapane waste generation is about 1 ton per day and it is transported to the solid waste management unit at Nildandahinna. Padiyapelella waste generation is about 300-400 kg daily and it is dumped in an open dump at

14 Kahatadanda. Nine workers, three large tractors and one small tractor are deployed for waste collection.

7.2.2. Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) and Dumpsite

The solid waste management unit is located in Nildandahinna. It is funded by the Central Provincial Council (CPC) and designed by the CPC and WPS. Walapane town and Nildandahinna town waste is supposedly managed in this SWMU. Waste from the largest town, Ragala and the second largest, Udapussellawa, is taken to an open dump on a 5-acre land called “Liddersdale”, about 4 km away from Ragala town. Solid waste from a remote town called Padiyapelella is presently dumped in an open dump on steeply sloping land called “Kahatadanda”, on the Belihuloya river bank. This site is not suitable for disposal of waste, but suitable land is scarce, considering the widely prevalent sloping terrain. The dump site is about 25 km away from the Nildandahinna SWMU; it is possible to construct a transfer station at Padiyapelella and transport the waste to Nildandahinna SWMU.

Figure 6: Location Map of Nildandahinna Solid Waste Dumping Site

Figure 7: SW Dumping Site Figure 8: SW Dumping Site

The present solid waste management process for Ragala and Padiyapelella in WPS requires additional inputs such as infrastructure development and improvement of the processing

15 system. In the formulation of the sub-project of the “Local Government Enhancement Sector Project/ Pura Neguma project”, the study team is focusing on gathering information with the following objective.

7.2.3. Objective

To conduct needs assessment study and identify technological and management issues and gaps for improving the solid waste management of the WPS.

7.2.4. Needs Assessment

After a field visit and discussions with the Chairman of the WPS and the staff, the following needs were identified in order to enhance the conditions of the solid waste management process.

1. The access road from the main road to the project site in Ragala as well as internal roads are not maintained and in a bad condition. They should be repaired. 2. It is important to develop the infrastructure facilities, such as a site office, workers rest room with sanitary facilities, composting facility, security room, electricity, water supply and a proper fence. 3. In order to dispose of non-recyclables and residual materials instead of burning them, a residual landfill should be designed. 4. A leachate collection and treatment system should be designed and constructed. 5. It is imperative to recruit and train staff for managing and maintaining the facility in sanitary conditions, to meet the environmental standards required by the CEA. 6. A transfer station should be designed and constructed for Padiyapelella.

7.2.5. Technology and Management

There is no proper processing for the solid waste in Ragala and Padiyapelella. Open dumping and burning should be stopped immediately. Until a proper system established, instead of burning, a daily soil cover should be applied. A proper management structure for the facility should be introduced.

7.2.6. Recommendations

It is essential to develop the access road and provide all the above-mentioned infrastructure facilities, to dispose of the wastes safely and make an income for the WPS. New staff should be recruited for the SWMU and trained to handle the wastes in a hygienic manner. The centre should obtain approval each year according to an agreed format for reporting the status of the waste processing facility. A feasibility study should be undertaken to ensure sustainability of the facility. It is prudent to establish a solid waste management committee with the appropriate representation of all stakeholders, including different organizations of women in the WPS. These improvements will ensure a sustainable system of managing the solid wastes to ensure a healthy environment for the citizens and visitors to WPS and future generations, enhancing the services rendered by the Walapane PS.

7.2.7. Cost Estimate for the Proposed Solid Waste Management Facility

Rate Amount Item Description Qty Unit (SLRs.) (SLRs.) 1.0 Road Construction 1.1 Site clearing and preparation - - - 300,000.00 1.2 Construction of the 3m wide and 3 km long - Item - 10,800,000.00

16 Rate Amount Item Description Qty Unit (SLRs.) (SLRs.) road with 5" thick cement concrete in 1:3:6 (1 1/2") 1.3 Construction of the drain along the road - Item - 3,000,000.00 2.0 Water Supply Getting water supply to the site from the water source which situated about 130m away from the site. Costs includes a pump, pipes and fittings, overhead tank, - Item - 450,000.00 electrical connection to the pump, structure for the overhead tank, a small pump room and the internal piping system. 3.0 Fence and Gate Construction of the Fence around the site 360 m 1,500.00 540,000.00 with concrete posts and barbed wires. 4.0 Composting facility 4.1 Composting Shed - Item - 2,500,000.00 4.2 Screening and storage - Item - 1,700,000.00 4.3 Office Room - Item - 800,000.00 4.4 Security Room - Item - 175,000.00 4.5 Leachate Treatment facility - Item - 300,000.00 4.6 Storm Water Drainage - Item - 500,000.00 4.7 Workers Rest Facility - Item - 900,000.00 5.0 Landfill Facility - Item - 700,000.00 Health and safety equipments for 6.0 labors for the initial stage 6.1 First aid box 1 Nos - 2,500.00 6.2 gloves Item -- 4,000.00 6.3 Masks Item -- 4,000.00 6.4 boots Item -- 15,000.00

Tools and equipments including a 7.0 --- 65,000.00 weighing scale 8.0 Machineries Sieving machine 1 Nos - 350,000.00 Shredder Machine 1 Nos - 350,000.00 Sub total --- 23,455,500.00 Contingencies - - - 2,345,550.00 Total cost --- 25,801,050.00 - 7.2.8. Operation and Maintenance

The PS will be entirely responsible for the O&M. The annual operational and maintenance cost of the facility is estimated to 3% of the capital cost which works out to SLRs. 0.8 million.

17 8. Financial Assessment

8.1. Assumptions

Head Trend % Assumptions Expenditure & Income Own Revenue 28% 10% Increase per annum from 2010 Revenue Grant 71% 75% of personal Expenditure Personnel Expenditure 15% 10% Increase per annum from 2010 Other Expenditure 9% 10% Increase per annum from 2010 O & M Expenditure 60% 10% Increase per annum from 2010

Inflation Rate 7% Interest Rate 5% Percentage increase assumed at revision of taxes (at 5 year interval) 5% O&M Cost of the Projects 3% of the capital cost

The Financial Plan has not incorporated increases due to the proposed re-engineering commitments to be a part of it, but expects to work towards proposals within the existing legislative frameworks.

18 8.2. Financial Operating Plan

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 OwnSource 11,087,356 8,848,571 17,978,674 7,560,382 14,199,051 15,618,956 18,039,894 19,843,883 21,828,272 24,011,099 RevenueGrants 13,180,610 14,949,142 19,792,678 19,010,000 19,929,286 21,344,577 23,479,034 25,826,938 28,409,632 31,250,595 TOTAL REVENUE (A) 24,267,966 23,797,713 37,771,353 26,570,382 34,128,337 36,963,533 41,518,928 45,670,821 50,237,903 55,261,694

RECURRENT EXPENDITURE PersonnelExpenditure 18,250,477 20,950,348 35,477,786 24,065,197 25,872,214 28,459,436 31,305,379 34,435,917 37,879,509 41,667,460 OtherExpenditure 2,393,921 2,427,534 3,203,137 3,270,502 3,303,936 3,634,330 3,997,763 4,397,539 4,837,293 5,321,023 Establishment 20,644,398 23,377,881 38,680,923 27,335,698 29,176,151 32,093,766 35,303,142 38,833,457 42,716,802 46,988,482 Repairs&Maintenance 304,603 268,727 1,110,476 788,589 534,618 588,080 646,888 711,577 782,734 861,008 Existing interest Payments ------O&M of Proposed Project 1,500,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURE (B) 20,949,001 23,646,609 39,791,399 28,124,287 29,710,769 32,681,846 35,950,030 39,545,033 43,499,537 49,349,490

OPERATING SURPLUS (A-B) 3,318,964 151,105 (2,020,046) (1,553,905) 4,417,568 4,281,687 5,568,898 6,125,788 6,738,367 5,912,204 TE / TR = (B / A) 86.3% 99.4% 105.3% 105.8% 87.1% 88.4% 86.6% 86.6% 86.6% 89.3%

CAPITAL ITEMS ------

CAPITAL REVENUE (a)Grant 19,583,363 10,916,328 39,490,373 14,966,329 7,847,394 -- Grants for LGEP Subprojects 12,500,000 37,500,000 TOTAL 19,583,363 10,916,328 39,490,373 14,966,329 7,847,394 - - 12,500,000 37,500,000 -

CAPITAL EXPENDITURE Project Expenditure - 12,500,000 37,500,000 (b)Others 24,843,591 11,854,420 46,713,306 16,200,648 16,615,844 - --- TOTAL ( D ) 24,843,591 11,854,420 46,713,306 16,200,648 16,615,844 - - 12,500,000 37,500,000 -

CAPITAL SURPLUS ( C-D ) (5,260,229) (938,092) (7,222,933) (1,234,319) (8,768,451) - - - - - Opening balance of cash ( E ) - (1,941,264) (2,728,252) (11,971,231) (14,759,455) (19,110,337) (14,828,651) (9,259,752) (3,133,964) 3,604,402 NET SURPLUS F = ( ( A-B ) + ( C-D)) (1,941,264) (786,987) (9,242,979) (2,788,224) (4,350,882) 4,281,687 5,568,898 6,125,788 6,738,367 5,912,204 ( Operating Surplus+ Capital Surplus) CLOSING BALANCE (G) = (E+F) (1,941,264) (2,728,252) (11,971,231) (14,759,455) (19,110,337) (14,828,651) (9,259,752) (3,133,964) 3,604,402 9,516,606

19 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 OwnSource 26,412,209 30,506,101 33,556,711 36,912,382 40,603,620 44,663,983 51,586,900 56,745,590 62,420,149 68,662,164 RevenueGrants 34,375,654 37,813,220 41,594,542 45,753,996 50,329,396 55,362,335 60,898,569 66,988,426 73,687,268 81,055,995 TOTAL REVENUE (A) 60,787,863 68,319,321 75,151,253 82,666,378 90,933,016 100,026,318 112,485,468 123,734,015 136,107,417 149,718,159

RECURRENT EXPENDITURE PersonnelExpenditure 45,834,206 50,417,626 55,459,389 61,005,328 67,105,861 73,816,447 81,198,092 89,317,901 98,249,691 108,074,660 OtherExpenditure 5,853,125 6,438,437 7,082,281 7,790,509 8,569,560 9,426,516 10,369,168 11,406,084 12,546,693 13,801,362 Establishment 51,687,331 56,856,064 62,541,670 68,795,837 75,675,421 83,242,963 91,567,259 100,723,985 110,796,384 121,876,022 Repairs&Maintenance 947,109 1,041,819 1,146,001 1,260,601 1,386,662 1,525,328 1,677,861 1,845,647 2,030,211 2,233,232 Existing interest Payments O&M of Proposed Project 1,605,000 1,717,350 1,837,565 1,966,194 2,103,828 2,251,096 2,408,672 2,577,279 2,757,689 2,950,727 TOTAL EXPENDITURE (B) 54,239,439 59,615,233 65,525,236 72,022,633 79,165,910 87,019,386 95,653,792 105,146,911 115,584,284 127,059,981

OPERATING SURPLUS (A-B) 6,548,424 8,704,088 9,626,017 10,643,746 11,767,106 13,006,931 16,831,676 18,587,104 20,523,133 22,658,177 TE / TR = (B / A) 89.2% 87.3% 87.2% 87.1% 87.1% 87.0% 85.0% 85.0% 84.9% 84.9%

CAPITAL ITEMS ------

CAPITAL REVENUE (a) Grant ------Grants for LGEP Subprojects TOTAL ------

CAPITAL EXPENDITURE Project Expenditure (b) Others ------TOTAL ( D ) ------

CAPITAL SURPLUS ( C-D ) ------Opening balance of cash ( E ) 9,516,606 16,065,030 24,769,118 34,395,135 45,038,880 56,805,986 69,812,918 86,644,594 105,231,698 125,754,831 NETSURPLUSF=((A-B)+(C-D)) 6,548,424 8,704,088 9,626,017 10,643,746 11,767,106 13,006,931 16,831,676 18,587,104 20,523,133 22,658,177 ( Operating Surplus+ Capital Surplus) CLOSING BALANCE (G) = (E+F) 16,065,030 24,769,118 34,395,135 45,038,880 56,805,986 69,812,918 86,644,594 105,231,698 125,754,831 148,413,009

20 21

9. Reform Plan

One of the objectives of the LGESP is to enhance the technical, managerial and financial capacities of the Local Authorities and this Component has been designed to overcome the capacity constraints in provision of infrastructure and managing growth and service delivery. This reform plan focuses on addressing the issues in the Walapane PS in achieving the above objective.

The Reform Plan identifies the actions to be taken to improve the service delivery, finances and governance. Select indicators have been identified for the monitoring of the effective implementation of the reform plan. The Reform Plan was prepared by the LA with guidance from the consultants and the same was approved by the Council through a Council resolution.

The key reforms contemplated are linked to the subproject and include larger reforms especially in improving water services and overall revenue enhancements.

i. Implementation of SWM Plan ii. Attempt to improve water supply O&M iii. Revenue enhancements and iv. Participate in the proposed re-engineering processes.

21 Activities (Indicators) Minimum Actions Baseline Target Year Remarks Requirements 2011 (i) Improving Service Delivery: Solid waste management 1 IEC program implementation for source Commitment of funding Organize consultation No programs All Dec segregation and promotion of recycling for commencement of meetings at community communities 2012 activities levels. in township areas covered  3 Install a waste recycling and recovery Initiation of solid waste Proposed compost plant at Site for Compost Dec Will address waste facility (identification of suitable site) management/ landfill site compost plant plant fully 2013 segregation as part of improvement Design and Construction of identified and operational by IEC and proposed compost plant at landfill acquired 2013 door-to-door collection Improvements of existing arrangement. system 5 Acre- for (See Item 6) Liddersdale 2 acre for Kahatadanda 4 Promotion of household or community Decision will be made after Will report progress level composting (tons/day of waste the IEC activities. based on annual RAP composted) monitoring. 5 Door-to-door collection in township Commence door-to-door No door-to- Launch Jan Closely linked to IEC areas (% population covered) collection in high density door Program in 2013 Annual report on areas. collection. high density activity facility areas performance with the 150 Families Budget (Core settlement at Ragala Town) 6 Project proposal  Design and construction No compost Compost Subproject is proposed of compost facility facility plant fully for support under the  Operation of the facility operational by Dec project.  Land availability – New 2013 ( 10 2012 land identified and tons per acquired already week) Dec 2013 Water Supply and Sanitation 1 Expansion/development of the water  No sub project supply system network proposed, but will attempt from own sources 7 Development of public sanitation No sub project

22 Activities (Indicators) Minimum Actions Baseline Target Year Remarks Requirements 2011 facilities that take account of the needs proposed, but will of women, children, and disabled attempt from own sources Roads and bridges 1 Improvement of roads system The development plan has Road Road 2014 Efforts will be made to included a list of roads to be inventory in inventory receive funding from developed /improved. preparation prepared other sources. Initiate design of works and List of roads complete implementation to be rehabilitated within next 5 years prepared Local authority facilities 1 Improvement of public market facilities Design and Construction of Existing Pola Pola is in bad condition with minimum Facilities Social services 1 Improvement of health, library, Design and construct Poor library New Sub project proposed computer services etc multipurpose building facility and no multipurpose or improvements auditorium building in contemplated facility operation (ii) Streamlining tax, licensing, and approval system: Revenue Management 1 Development of fiscal database of  Request to PMU for No databases Completion of April Define schedule in assessment, licenses and trade support databases 2013 consultation with PMU. establishments, and introduction of  Nominate a nodal officer Dec computerized billing system for this activity. 2013 Revenue enhancement in the medium-term 1 A series of measures to increase the Putting in place i. Council Resolution for Council Jan revenue from assessment tax (e.g. measures for medium- introduction of assessment Resolution for 2013 expand or declare built areas, increase term revenue tax introduction of assessment rate, and/or valuation of enhancement assessment property by the Valuation Department) tax (collected assessment tax) ii. Approval of request by Approval of Feb ACLG/ CLG request by 2013 ACLG/ CLG 23 Activities (Indicators) Minimum Actions Baseline Target Year Remarks Requirements 2011 iii . Compile data base Compile data April base 2013 iv. Send request to Send request May Valuation department for to Valuation 2013 start of work department v. Carry on a land survey Carry on a Jul under S. 139 (1) to identify land survey 2013 all lands that should be under assessment tax vi. Notify built up areas as Notify built up Jul per S. 134 (1) and obtain areas 2013 valuation vii. Determine the Determine the Jul assessment rate assessment 2013 rate Revenue enhancement i. Mobilize revenue Mobilize Jul collectors revenue 2013 collectors ii. Ensure 90% collection in Increase the Jan Presentation of next 3 years own source 2014 Demand Collection revenue by Balance Statement as 10% annually part of Annual Budget Target 90% Dec Valuation Department Collection 2018 needs to be informed in advance. See commitment above on improving database.

2 Measures to increase revenue from other sources (rentals, licenses, court fines, etc) Business Tax Introduce Business Tax and Business tax Business tax 2015 bring all unregistered not used revenue of business premises under the But Business SLRs. tax net in the area in next 5 tax included in 2,000,000 years. Trade licenses 3 Annuallyrevisetherentand Annual rent of Issue notice 2013 See commitment achieve 50% over 5 years SLRs. of annual above on improving

24 Activities (Indicators) Minimum Actions Baseline Target Year Remarks Requirements 2011 (particular focus on pola 2.98million revision database. markets to be improved) Achieve 10% annual increase

4 Preparation of financial projections for Demonstration that the Ensure assets are maintained Total Revenue will By 2012 See measures to both revenue and expenditure for the total revenues will and generate sufficient expenditures exceed improve basic taxes next 5 years cover the total revenues. exceed expenditures.. and rents. expenditures in the revenue in Attachment forecast medium-term last five years Assumptions Process reengineering 1 Review of the tax, licensing and Clear commitment to Commitment to implement March Council Resolution approval procedures and simplifying simplify the procedures the process reengineering 2013 passed. the procedures measures- council resolution Await guidance from and nomination of nodal PMU on schedule of officer program implementation (iii) Effective Management of Infrastructure/Facilities: O&M Plan 1 O&M plan to effectively manage the O&M plan that List facility operation actions No O&M 3% of total 2014 Synchronized with the assets of local authority (% allocated demonstrates a and O&M plan including Plan expenditure infrastructure for O&M out of total expenditure) mechanism to ensure cost estimate Ad-hoc allocated for improvements to be adequate budget budget O&M made under the allocation for O&M of Annual budget allocation for allocation project. infrastructure and O&M facilities, including those proposed by the local authority 2 Establishment of a separate unit to Outline of an Establish separate units for No separate Units By the Technical support operate the system (e.g. water supply) institutional composting units established comme sought under the arrangement for O&M and ncemen project. operational t of operatio See item, below n (2014)

Staff capacity 1 Development of staff recruitment and capacity building plan Subject to approval of

25 Activities (Indicators) Minimum Actions Baseline Target Year Remarks Requirements 2011 finance for the project Prepare staffing requirements Mar 2013 Council resolution on staffing Council May needs resolution on 2013 staffing needs Send request to CLG for Send request June approval to CLG for 2013 approval CLG Approval CLG Approval July 2013 Other approvals required Other Aug CLG’s approval to from Province approvals 2013 Minister of Local required from Government Province (provincial council) and Finally approval from Governor of Provincial council Issue of advertisement for Issue of Sep positions advertisement 2013 for positions Interviews Interviews Nov 2013 Appointments Appointments Jan 2014 Orientation and Training Orientation Mar and Training 2014 (iv) Improving systems and management Accounting 1 Establishment of automated accounts Nominate Staff for Not Completion June Support from Project coordination automated 2013 2 Completion of audit of accounts by Preparation of final Commitment to complete Final Submission of Annual Subject to availability June of subsequent year account for 2010 finalization of accounts and accounts not final account of staff for Audit by audit prepared by by March of Auditor General’s June of subsequent Department subsequent year Final account for 2010 year already prepared in XX 2011. Inclusive and participatory planning 26 Activities (Indicators) Minimum Actions Baseline Target Year Remarks Requirements 2011 1 Preparation of development plan and Demonstration of No Development Dec Subject to Amendment medium term development plan participatory planning Council resolution development plan 2016 to the Pradehisya through participatory process processes through plan prepared Sabhas Act. minutes of meetings, committee representation etc. Administration 1 Enhancement of citizens’ (including Appoint a women’s No women’s A Dec Annual reporting on women) participation in local authority representative in all the representative representative 2012 participation, committees (finance, environment) (% committees of the s in all especially of women in of members) Pradeshiya Sabhas committees planning meetings. Office Computerization 1 Commitment to computerizing office  Send a request to MLGPC No Dec Define schedule in functions, including separating for support computerizati 2012 consultation with PMU. consumer services and basic office  nominate nodal officer on function. Complete Dec activity 2014 2 Establishment of a zonal office in high Examine possibility based on Communicate decision dense settlement. growth. as part of annual RAP monitoring. .

27 Annex 1

Involuntary Resettlement Checklist for the Identified Subprojects

Name of the LA Walapane PS

Subproject Multipurpose Building (Library, Auditorium, Pola and Day Care Centre) Not Probable Involuntary Resettlement Effects Yes No Remarks Known Involuntary Acquisition of Land 1. Will there be land acquisition?

2. Is the site for land acquisition known? 3. Is the ownership status and current usage of land to be acquired known? 4. Will easement be utilized within an existing Right of Way (ROW)? 5. Will there be loss of shelter and residential land due to land acquisition? 6. Will there be loss of agricultural and other productive assets due to land acquisition? 7. Will there be losses of crops, trees, and fixed assets due to land acquisition? 8. Will there be loss of businesses or enterprises due to land acquisition? 9. Will there be loss of income sources and means of livelihoods due to land acquisition? Involuntary restrictions on land use or on access to legally designated parks and protected areas 10. Will people lose access to natural resources, communal facilities and services? 11. If land use is changed, will it have an adverse impact on social and economic activities? 12. Will access to land and resources owned communally or by the state be restricted? Information on Displaced Persons: Any estimate of the likely number of persons that will be displaced by the Project? [X] No [ ] Yes

If yes, approximately how many?

Are any of them poor, female-heads of households, or vulnerable to poverty risks? [ ] No [ ] Yes

Are any displaced persons from indigenous or ethnic minority groups? [X] No [ ] Yes

Prepared By Eng. Karunaratne Checked By Eng. Weerasinghe

Location Ragala Date and Time 19/06/2012 09.00 am

Signature

28 Name of the LA Walapane PS

Subproject Solid Waste Management Subproject Not Probable Involuntary Resettlement Effects Yes No Remarks Known Involuntary Acquisition of Land 1. Will there be land acquisition?

If yes, approximately how many? ______

Are any of them poor, female-heads of households, or vulnerable to poverty risks? [ ] No [ ] Yes

Are any displaced persons from indigenous or ethnic minority groups? [X] No [ ] Yes

Prepared By Eng. Karunaratne Checked By Eng. Weerasinghe

Location Ragala Date and Time 19/06/2012 09.00 am

Signature

29 Annex 2

1. Pre-Feasibility Reports of Earlier Identified Subprojects

1.1. PFR of the Ragala Pola Construction Subproject

1.1.1. Background and Problem to be Addressed

With prevailing economic growth of the region, the Walapane area also is experiencing a significant economical growth. Hence it has become an obligation of the PS to provide proper facilities to the public to support their socio economic activities. As an agricultural based area, the ‘Pola’ play vital role in the economic growth of this area. The local farmers, vendors and the vendors from surrounding town gather at the pola on a pola day for their trade activities.

Figure 9: Existing Situation Figure 10: Proposed Land

Ragala is an emerging town within the Walapane PS, which can be considered a primary town of the PS area. Currently, there are no pola sites functioning in the Ragala Area. The farmers travel to other areas to market their products, which causes them extra expenses and their profit margin is limited. Further, the public of the Ragala town and surrounding villages also go to Polas in far away towns to buy their consumables, vegetables and other food items.

1.1.2. Brief Description of the Project

The PS has allocated a land in the heart of the town, very close to the Ragala bus stand for construction of a pola. The Proposed land is located in a hilly terrain, in a higher elevation from the road and bus stand. As the requirement of the public for a pola with storing facilities and staying facilities for the vendors, was realized, PS in consultation with the public prioritized the construction of the pola as a priority need to be funded under the LGESP. Accordingly the land available also is limited; the LA proposes to construct a pola building in two stories

30 Figure 11: Arial View of the Pola Location

1.1.3. Existing Situation and Proposed Improvements

A bare land adjacent to the Ragala Bus stand was identified by the LA for the construction of pola. Currently there are no activities in the land. Total area of the proposed land is 0.75 acres.

Figure 12: Panoramic View of the Site

The proposed building will be in two stories with 30 stalls in the ground floor and another 30 stalls in the first floor. The ground floor will be laid in two deferent elevations. Towards the bus stand side, in the same elevation if the bus stand, a row of pola stalls (6 stalls) will be constructed. The rest of the ground floor will be in the high ground which is 4 m higher in elevation than the bus stand area. There will be fourteen stalls in the ground floor and in the first floor, there will be twenty stalls.

31 Figure 13: Access Road to the Ragala Pola

Other utility facilities such as water supply, toilets, electricity also will be provided. An access road is to be constructed in a width of 3 m and to a length of 25 m. The land is owned by the LA. Hence no acquisition required.

1.1.4. Cost Estimate for Proposed Improvement

Item Estimated Cost in million A Ground Floor – Bus stand side 6.30 B Ground Floor 9.36 C First Floor 6.00 Access Road 0.125 Toilet and other utility facilities 0.60 Subtotal 22.39 Contingencies 2.24 Total Estimated Cost 24.62

1.1.5. Maintenance Arrangements

The Walapane PS is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the facility. Annual cost of the O&M is estimated to be 3% of the capital cost which works out SLRs. 700,000 per annum. This includes the cost of manpower, electricity, water and routine maintenance.

32 Annex 3

Involuntary Resettlement Checklist of Earlier Identified Subprojects and Prioritization

Name of the LA Walapane PS

Subproject Ragala Pola Construction Subproject Not Probable Involuntary Resettlement Effects Yes No Remarks Known Involuntary Acquisition of Land 1. Will there be land acquisition?

If yes, approximately how many? ______

Are any of them poor, female-heads of households, or vulnerable to poverty risks? [ ] No [ ] Yes

Are any displaced persons from indigenous or ethnic minority groups? [X] No [ ] Yes

Prepared By Eng.Shyamal Checked By Dr. Razaak

Location Ragala Date and Time 28/9/2011

Signature

33 Table 8: Pre - Ministerial Consultation Priorities Proposal 1 Proposal 2 Proposal 3 Name of the Subproject Solid Waste Management Drainage System Ragala Pola Compliance With GG Environmental Infrastructure – Water, Sanitation, Drains and Yes Yes Solid Waste Management Sector Social Infrastructure- Community facility, Primary Health Care Growth Infrastructure- Roads and Bridges Economic Infrastructure- Rural Markets / Pola Yes Commitment to reform actions Yes Yes Yes Financial capacity towards O&M of the facility/ infrastructure Yes – See FoP attached Yes – See FoP attached Yes – See FoP attached Terms of the created Grant Economic returns greater than 12% or returns greater than Yes – Detailed EIRR will be Yes – Detailed EIRR will be Yes – Detailed EIRR will be opportunity cost of capital calculated during FR stage calculated during FR stage calculated during FR stage Approved project costs with resources committed for activities such as resettlement if any Compliance With RF Displace 200 or more persons No No No IR Categorization Being physically displaced from housing No No No Losing 10% or more of their productive assets (income Criteria No No No generating). Compliance With EARF Environmental Category A Impact Category B Category Category C Yes Yes Yes No – Ownership is with Compliance With Subproject Selection Criteria Yes Yes RDA/ PRDA Technical Feasibility Priority Order 1

34 Annex 4

Summary of Consultation and Participation – Earlier Priorities

Consultation and Participation Sources of Project Cycle Target Group Consultation Tools Indicators Responsibility Topics Verification Planning Stage Beneficiaries including . Focus group . Overview of the proposed project . A series of FGD was See Annex LA officials and women, youth, and discussions and interventions – See Annex 4.2 conducted on 23rd Aug 4.1 List of Consultant marginalized social (Power point presentation) . The participants indicated consultations groups . Definition of issues and constraints the following and Elected . Council level in access to services and resources . Number of meetings with participants. representatives / meetings and . List of needs and initial prioritization stakeholders 04 leaders of Local presentations . Reform Plan . 09 women of the total 35 Authorities (LAs) participants. Civil Society . Key informant Organizations- interviews with Women’s society/ leaders (See Annex youth` associations , 4.3) Others as identified Local registered . Focus group NGO’s discussions Traders association . Focus group discussions Academic institutions . Focus group discussions Elected . Class room . Orientation/training of local . chairman participated at See Annex CLG, PMU. representatives / discussions for authorities’ leaders in participatory launch workshop held on 4.4 Summary Need more leaders of Local orientation and approaches, decision making and 8th August 2011 of orientation orientation on Authorities (LAs) training M&E M&E Sub-project Beneficiaries including . Focus group . Overview of service requirements . A stakeholder meeting at Note on Local Authority identification women, youth, and discussions . Sub-project selection criteria the PS office and Views (assisted by stage marginalized social . Open house . Reason for prioritizing the sub- discussions in random received and PMU, SPCU groups such as RDS, meetings project locations (near to the incorporated DSC) WRDS . improvements / benefits proposed sites) were into the sub- Elected . Key informant envisaged conducted. projects representatives / interviews . User contribution requirements Following matters were identified. leaders of LAs . Information . Implementation schedules and discussed See Annex leaflets about arrangements 1. As an agricultural 4.5 sub-project and . Willingness to pay assessments based area, need benefits See . Possibility of community to improve Annex 4.6 participation in O&M marketing facilities . Open house such as Polas. 35 Consultation and Participation Sources of Project Cycle Target Group Consultation Tools Indicators Responsibility Topics Verification meetings 2. Need to improve Civil Society . Information Solid waste Organizations- leaflets about management Women’s society/ sub-project and 3. Number of rural youth associations , benefits roads need to be Others as identified . Open house improved with meetings culverts. Traders association . Information 4. Storm water leaflets about disposal Ragala sub-project and Town to be benefits improved. . Open house meetings Academic institutions . Information leaflets about sub-project and benefits . Open house meetings . User Group . Focus group discussions . O&M issues, structure of Consultations held at the . See report LA and arrangement and agreements. sites Section 6 Consultants 1. At the Ragala Town, for priority the public expressed ratings and the drainage list problem. Further the unauthorized temporary construction blocking the drains to be removed and the encroachers accepted to remove. 2. Vendors at Ragala Pola expressed their willingness to pay increased rent given better facilities provided. 36 Annex 4.1

Attendance Sheet of the Stakeholder Meeting

37 38 39 Annex 4.2

Presentation for the Stakeholders and Key Informants

40 41 Annex 4.3

Summary of the Key Informants Discussion

The interviews with the key informants were held as combined meetings and individual interviews.

List of Informants

Name Position/Institution I.S. Anjalina Member - PS A.G. C. J. Somarathna S. Radhanmaharaaj Public Communicator M.W.M. M.K. Wijesinghe Member - PS Madava Sutharsana Samarakoon Member - PS C. L. Nissanka Member - PS K.M.G.G. Koswatha Zonal Education Office J.M. Jayarathna Banda Police Officer

Summary of Discussions

The project was briefed to the informants and their views were sought. Common views of the informants are listed below.

1. Informants are happy with the grant funds for the infrastructure development 2. All the rods in the LA to be rehabilitated. The roads which were partially completed by other funding to be completed. 3. Solid Waste Management to be improved 4. Infrastructure to develop the economic activities is a prime need of the area (facilities such as economic centre, polas etc)

The Specific Suggestions Given By the Informants

Informant Suggestions Solid waste management is to be improved as I.S. Anjalina there are two in independent system required as Ragala and Kahatadanda are located far away During the rainy season, the Ragala Town goes under flood as the drainage system is not properly A.G. C. J. Somarathna done and the existing system is blocked due to unauthorized constructions. Ragala pola is located at the Bus stand and it is the heart of the city. Improvement of this pola with S. Radhanmaharaaj modern Buildings will give a improved standard of the town Water Supply is also another pressing need of the M.W.M. M.K. Wijesinghe public Improvement of roads will enhance the economic K.M.G.G. Koswatha growth of the area as it will increase the accessibility to the markets

42 Annex 4.4

Presentation Made at Orientation

43 Annex 4.5

Summary of Public Consultation

Suggestions from the Stakeholders Actions Taken Solid waste management is to be improved as there are two in independent system LA also agreed the same as a priority need required as Ragala and Kahatadanda are and a subproject is proposed located far away During the rainy season, the Ragala Town It was agreed that is an important problem to goes under flood as the drainage system is be addressed immediately. Hence a not properly done and the existing system is subproject was proposed blocked due to unauthorized constructions. Ragala Pola is located at the Bus stand and it is the heart of the city. Improvement of this LA also agreed the same as a priority need Pola with modern Buildings will give a and a subproject is proposed improved standard of the town LA agreed the same. Anyhow due to fund Water Supply is also another pressing need limitations, the LA will seek other sources to of the public provide water Improvement of roads will enhance the Chairperson expressed all the roads will be economic growth of the area as it will done under different funds such as increase the accessibility to the markets Maganeguma and Gamaneguma.

44 Annex 4.6

Leaflet on Subproject Selection (English Version)

Asian Development Bank Funded Local Government Enhancement Sector Project (Pura Neguma)

Selection Guidelines for the Subprojects

1. Eligible Sectors a. Environmental Infrastructure – Water, Sanitation, Drains and Solid Waste Management b. Social Infrastructure- Community facility, Primary Health Care c. Growth Infrastructure- Roads and Bridges d. Economic Infrastructure- Rural Markets / Pola

2. Please select sustainable subprojects

3. Subproject with less negative environmental and social impacts

4. Try to avoid subprojects which involves resettlement

5. Terms of Grant a. Commitment to reform actions. Priority action should be to improve waste management services and in streamlining taxation systems. b. Demonstrate financial capacity towards O&M of the facility/ infrastructure created c. Economic returns greater than 12% or returns greater than opportunity cost of capital d. Approved project costs with resources committed for activities such as resettlement if any.

6. Water, Sanitation, Drains and Solid Waste Management a. LA must have a SWM action plan in order to obtain fund b. Select Water & Sanitation subprojects based on number of beneficiary, availability of sustainable source and the capital cost – ensure the capacity of the LA to operate and maintain c. Discourage building construction subprojects d. Select roads and bridges based on the priority (usage, condition etc) – Selected roads to be rehabilitated entirely. No pieces and small portions. e. Pola – Can select Weekly pola not commercial complex nor super markets f. Discourage procurement of machineries (if selected, provide proper justification) g. Ensure ownership of all the asset to be created and ownership of the proposed lands is with the PS

45 Annex 4.7

Photographs of the Consultation and Participation

Figure 14: Stakeholder Meeting At PS Figure 15: KII

Figure 16: Public Participation at the Site Visit