Start of recording ¶
00:01:00 Councillor Glasgow: Thank you. Mayor Wellington: Okay, Councillors. Councillor Wilkie: We're at a wedding. We're reading open again. Welcome back. We're at item two on the agenda, which is the development and application for operational works, an advertising device at unit 1-100 Reedy Street, Noosaville. It's being referred here for further consideration. Councillors, we have questions. Councillor Jackson: I have questions as I refer this to this meeting. Yes. I wonder if you could just start with explaining the reason why this particular application has come to Council. What's the background and why is it here?
00:02:00 Speaker 5: Council approved the building and on that building it did show compliance signs, which all were fine. It's been built. Our compliance officers go out, as they do for all the sites, look at it, notice by eye that the sign appeared larger than a 4x1 and used a measuring device to get an idea of that size that confirmed, yes, it's definitely a 4. Contacted the applicant who didn't contest that, yes, it's larger and we have plans. We will apply, and that's what we're assessing now, their application in response to our compliance officers assessing the built form.
00:03:00 Councillor Jackson: So basically there was an application which was approved and they didn't comply with the original size of the signs. Speaker 3: Yes, they put in an application which showed compliance signs, but they didn't build accordingly. Councillor Jackson: They didn't build accordingly, yes. So I just want to explore the context that we're operating in at the moment. The draft new Noosa plan does not include signage regulation, and as I'm aware that this is because it's intended to have a local law cover this instead. And so I'll probably ask Kerry about this, if you could explain what the process and timeframe is going to be for the development of this local law. Speaker 1: So with the draft local law, there is a draft that's being prepared by officers, and that is intended to be reported to council next round in order to review that and decide on
00:04:00 a draft that we would go out to community consultation with. Once we go through community consultation, we need to consider those submissions and make amendments if we thought that was appropriate based on submissions. It needs to go out to the state and do a state check as well, and then the intent is to have it take effect at the same time as the new planning scheme. So when is the draft likely to go out into community consultation? So after May's meeting. Councillor Jackson: After May's meeting. Speaker 1: Yeah. Councillor Jackson: And I guess there's another contextual thing of interest. Speaker 1: Sorry, council, we do have to go to the state before public consultation. Councillor Jackson: State first, and then to the meeting. So it may not get to the May meeting. No, no. Speaker 3: It goes to the May meeting. Then it goes to the state. Councillor Jackson: Then public consultation.
00:05:00 Okay. So it might be a little later. It depends. Speaker 1: That's right. Councillor Jackson: The other contextual matter is, I understand council is currently carrying out an audit, and I'm aware of this. Can you tell us about the timeframe of the audit of signage around the Shire and when it is likely that the industrial areas are going to be audited? Speaker 1: So currently we have audited Tewantin, Noosa Junction, Hastings Street, and we're currently in the Noosaville area around the Noosaville Shopping Centre, Mary Street and Thomas Street. So we're in that area. When we finish that area, we intend to move to the Hinterland areas and then come back to the industrial area. So by the time the audit's not predicted to be finished until next June, so it takes some time. So I'd expect early next year, mid next year, we would be auditing the industrial area.
00:06:00 Councillor Jackson: So you're thinking that the audit of the industrial area is likely to happen after the new Noosa plan and the local law are in place? Speaker 1: Yes. Councillor Jackson: And is the audit that is taking place at the moment and on an ongoing basis always asking people to comply, businesses to comply to the existing local law? Yes, it is. Speaker 1: As we go around and measure the signage and provide information to people, we're pointing out where people don't comply with the current signage requirements and asking them to comply. Where? Where we, officers, think there may be changes in the signage requirements, we are bringing that to people's attention as well. What do you mean by that? So officers are proposing some changes to the signage requirements for Noosa, but of course that's for Council to decide and we're flagging that there's a review happening and we are
00:07:00 considering some changes. Councillor Jackson: So just to understand that. So you may not be requiring everyone to comply to the existing local law? Speaker 1: No, we are requiring everyone to comply with the existing. Councillor Jackson: But then they're told that may change. They're alerted to that. Speaker 1: They're alerted to that, that's right. Councillor Jackson: But if they have to spend money to change their sign size, they still have to do it. Speaker 1: That's right. And with the audit and the compliance, some signage has been there for quite some time. Some people are asking for six months or a year even to address their signage and make it comply. Because some of their signage is quite new and it's costly, so we're giving people an opportunity to address that. Councillor Jackson: So another question linked with this would be, given that the draft of the local law will soon be coming out in June or something like that, is there any intent to establish some sort of moratorium between a point of the draft coming out and the draft coming
00:08:00 out and the point at which it becomes the actual local law? And that's because I'm thinking there will be other applications and development approvals during that period, which could be very close to a new local law where things are changing. Yeah. Speaker 1: Where there are significant changes in the signage requirement that's proposed, we are considering whether that may be appropriate. And that will form part of the report to Council in May. Okay, thank you. Yeah, thanks. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Wynton. Mayor Wellington: I'll move the recommendation. Councillor Wilkie: Seconded by Councillor Brasco, moved by Councillor Wellington. Mayor Wellington: In part B, it says the proposed advertising devices is not designated, so remove that S from the place, Kylie. Thanks. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Do you want to put an I in significance?
00:09:00 Oh, that's signpost, sorry. I'm wrong. Sorry. Oh. That's not... Mayor Wellington: Okay, Councillor Wynton. Look, fundamentally, the applicant has not adhered to the approved conditions of the development. The plans were approved in February 2018, and those plans included two signs of four square metres each. If the applicant was unhappy with those conditions, that would have been the time to challenge them at that time, not now. Instead, what we have is plans... relating to signage that were accepted. The applicant has subsequently breached those approved submitted plans, and now we have the matter before us. I note that the subsequent to a successful legal challenge by a neighbouring business, and due to the wording of our planning scheme at the time. For a brief moment there, signs larger than four square metres were allowed. However, following legal advice at the time,
00:10:00 Council amended the wording in its planning scheme to better prescribe the four square metre rule that was the intention of the scheme prior to that legal challenge. It would be somewhat absurd after going through all that process for Council now to fail to support its own scheme amendments after we've gone through the rigorous process of having to change our planning scheme, which is not a simple matter. On this issue, I think consistency and precedent are significant. As soon as Council fails to support its own planning scheme on any matter, including something as simple as signage such as this, we leave a gap, a yawning gap, for other businesses or other applicants etc. to exploit. And we also establish a failure by Council to be consistent with regard to supporting its own scheme, and that can play out in future challenges to both the scheme and Council's decision-making process. That's why consistency is always important. And finally, if we're not consistent here,
00:11:00 we undermine the excellent work that Council staff have been doing in the signage audit around the Shire. And I remind Councillors that that audit process has resulted in very little pushback or blowback, very few complaints. The staff are involved. Jamie has done a fantastic job dealing with businesses and residents and property owners in the Shire. And on the whole, they have agreed to be compliant because they understand that what we're trying to create here is not just an ideal visual amenity, but also a level playing field for all businesses. So on the basis of consistency, I think it's really important that we support the staff recommendation here, and my motion suggests that. Councillor Jurisevic: Councillor Jurisdict. Can I ask a question? With regard to the actual, if you take out the red surround and just use the lettering, does the lettering Act Trial TM actually constitute four square metres,
00:12:00 or is it larger than four square metres? Speaker 5: I haven't applied an area to the word, to the letters. Councillor Jurisevic: Have we actually applied the measurement to the letters? Speaker 1: No, we've applied the measurement to the device. To the entire sign. Which is the entire sign. Councillor Jurisevic: That's right. We're both all good. Councillor Jurisdict. This is where our signage laws challenges me, because I think, look, I understand that it doesn't comply with the plans, and I agree that the original plans were four metres by one metre, and that in this case, the applicant hasn't adhered to their original plan, and we cannot approve this. But when you look at that building, the size and scale of it, and the large area, and of course another building could be built in front of it, I mean, one of those signs is going to be obscured from the main street, and only going to be viewed from a particular area, and only going to be viewed from a particular angle. And the window sign,
00:13:00 calling the window sign a window sign challenges me, because to me it's an advertising device, and I think there's a differentiation between advertising devices and signage. But under the way the rules are written at the moment, it constitutes a window sign, and I can see that we can't necessarily approve any of this. But having said that, I think that this actually is in keeping with what we're trying to achieve, with regard to signage. It's minimal, it's proportional, and it's inoffensive. I mean, had the building been painted bright red, and the words ACT 12 were there on their own, and the letters ACT 12 were there on their own, could we have done anything about it? Or conversely, if the building was white, and the letters were read against a white background, they may constitute in the size. But because we take the surround, as well as the letters, we get a far larger sign space sign area than would otherwise be there,
00:14:00 because there's a corporate colour involved in the background. So look, whilst I can't, I support the staff recommendation here with regard to this not complying with the original development I see, and that this gives us some food for thought with regard to the signage rules going forward, and the local laws that we're looking at implementing and putting up for public comment. And I'll welcome public comment with regard to elements of the signage laws when and if they are, or when they are put up for public comment. Councillor Jess. Councillor Jackson: I'd like to speak. I'd like to support both what Councillor Wellington and Councillor Jurisevic have just said. First of all, I do think that if Council approves an application, there is an expectation that people will adhere to that. And of course, even in our, in our process of seeking an audit and compliance, we are ensuring that everyone is treated the same way.
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 So I think that unfortunately in this case where there is a set of rules that we have in place, everyone needs to have the same, adhere to the same rules. At the same time, I've gone out and had a look at the actual location and the building itself is set back from the street. The sign doesn't appear all that large to me from it, because you're not even right next to it. You're looking further back into a building set back. The window sign is so minimal, you barely notice it's there from the street. So like Councillor Jurisevic, I think in the future, when we're looking at future requirements, these things should be taken into consideration. Size of building, these are the size of sign and the locality of building. But of course, that is not the case for this particular application. I appreciate the concept that perhaps
00:16:00 there will be consideration of some sort of moratorium once the local law is on its way to being turned into an actual requirement, because there may be some changes and I'll look forward to seeing that in May and then getting feedback from people after that. But yes, I support the proposed motion. Thank you. Councillor Pardon: Councillor Pardon? Yeah. I support the motion for all the reasons Councillor Jackson said and Councillor Jurisevic. Going forward, I guess in a lot of ways, I'm the councillor who suggested we might have a look at the industrial precinct as a separate precinct because of the sheer size and scale of buildings up there. And in discussions that we've had recently and going forward, with what we might do under local law, in fact, we might allow largest area signs
00:17:00 on some of these large buildings in the industrial estate. And the reasons why we might is what Councillor Jurisevic alluded to, size and scale. And that's where I always battle with planning. One size fits all. Well, no, it doesn't. It never has and never will be. Whether it's the size of block of land, areas, whether it's hills, slopes, whatever, or building size, et cetera, shop size, et cetera, one size never fits all. But that's going forward. So I'll support this at this point in time, but I'll flag in the future that I'll be looking for options for that industrial estate where they might allow larger signs. Also, with regards to window signs, I've already had a say recently in a meeting with councillors, I have a view on window signs.
00:18:00 There might be a view through the windows of the window signs. And I guess it relates back to whether a person owns a big industrial shed up there or whether a person leases a shop or he might own his own shop. Would you impose that on a homeowner, that type of thing? Well, I think not, because you might run into trouble if you start prescribing for houses. But we seem to be happy to prescribe for businesses, minority groups, if you like, and I don't really like it. So for all those reasons in the future, I'll be looking at our local law and how we might progress. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Pardon. Councillor Stockwell. I think it's interesting. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think number one on this one came to mind was we shouldn't reward seeking forgiveness, not permission.
00:19:00 And this is quite different a case to people who may have unknowingly breached the requirements of a development application. And such, the fact that it is a new business and sought to get retrospective approval for not complying with conditions is one that doesn't endear itself to me. I think when we do these things and what councils have been talking about, where there may be room to look at the proposed local law, we always have to look about the predominant purpose of our signage by-law is to protect the streetscape and the Noosa image as being low key, less congested. And we know when it goes too far, the court-ordered storage first sign goes far too far. You know when you drive along that street, you get what we're trying to avoid. So if we have one sign to say,
00:20:00 well, that's what we don't want, we've got it there. We know this one isn't as garish, isn't as come look at me, isn't all multicoloured, but the sake is it's twice as much as it is currently provided for. And I think the refusal is the only way ahead. Councillor Wilkie: Councillors, as with the last item, all the key points of the arguments have been very capably covered. But it's agreed that minimising commercial signage is one of the approaches this council has taken to setting it apart from other local government areas. And in this case, they submitted plans showing compliance signs did not reflect what was built on the building once it was completed. There was consideration given to signs larger than four square metres on surrounding buildings. And they were approved after a court process. And there was an identified weakness
00:21:00 in the Noosa planning scheme as a result. So we, as a council, responded to that with some amendments, which we all approved. And were brought into effect in 2017. And this is the first opportunity, to my knowledge, where we've been asked to support those planning scheme amendments. So to not do so would seem counterproductive and not understandable from my perspective. So, of course, I support the motion. Councillor Wellington, would you wish to close? I'll put the motion. Those in favour? Motion carried? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I would move that the next item be held over to the last item on the agenda. Councillor Wilkie: That's a second. Good call. Thank you. Councillor, well, item three, which is confidential, will move to the end of the agenda, which takes us to item four, which is... Oh, sorry. We've got a mover and a seconder. All in favour?
00:22:00 Against? Carried? And we'll go to item four, The NURSA North Shore ferry service review and lease extension we welcome Michael, Dennis and Clint. Those referred here due to significance of issues and Councillor Pardon. Councillor Pardon: Yeah, I wish to declare a conflict of interest in this matter as I'm subsidized for the crossing of that ferry and so, and I ask that I be excused from the meeting. Councillor Wilkie: Thank You Councillor Pardon. This item is on page 13 of the Services and Organisation Committee Meeting Agenda. Councillors, you have questions for staff. Councillor Jackson. Councillor Jackson: I have a question. I was interested to see that there's a recommendation for a five-year extension, which is part of
00:23:00 the lease currently, and a suggestion that it be delayed by those five years to review whether digital payment might be included as part of the way people can pay. Recently, I happened to be in Brisbane at a market, and somebody had one of those ectonic cost machines that was based on mobile network, not on internet, just a little machine, really easy, stick in your credit card, you know, punch in your number, and it worked as a payment. So, I'm not sure I understand why it's recommended that for five years this not be reviewed. Speaker 4: In reality, we need to look at those requirements in the lead up to going out to tender, and to allow potentially a new operator to take over the ferry operation and potentially
00:24:00 commission new ferries, in reality, we're probably looking at going out to tender midway through this five-year period, so it will logically form part of the next tender package and our exploration of what operators can provide as far as the service goes, and I think. In reality, we'll be out to tender midway through this five-year period to allow for the potential for a new operator to be the successful tenderer, and then commission new ferries and the long lead-in time that's required to allow for a new operator, if that makes sense. Councillor Jackson: Yeah, no, okay, I understand that a bit better now. Yeah. Mm-hmm. Speaker 4: So, Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Is there something, anything in the current lease arrangement that's required for a new
00:25:00 Speaker 4: It stipulates the requirement for paper tickets to be issued, but not method of payment. Paper tickets. And it talks about keeping ticket books for audit purposes and so forth, which is how it's operated. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So that does lock you into 18th, no, sorry, 20th century technology, okay? Councillor Jurisevic: 19th century technology. Councillor Wilkie: My understanding is you're recommending a trial, a period where this new technology can be trialled and then any cost implications factored into a new tenure. Is that correct? Speaker 7: Well, through you, Mr Chair. Look, I think what needs to happen with this is that we give ourselves time to look at the full cost and the implications of the technology. Prior to us going out to tender, so in essence, that's exactly what we're talking about.
00:26:00 We want to make sure there's business continuity, there's service that can continue to be provided to people crossing the ferry, and that needs some time to implement. So I would suggest through a trial. Councillor Wilkie: So if, like, we all are hoping to move towards this more mobile technology eventually, but if Council was to mandate that as part of this process now, it would be very problematic and perhaps inequitable for the ferry operator. Speaker 7: Yes, it could be. And the implications are unknown at this point. And contractually, there could be some issues in terms of the current arrangement as well. So that's why we're taking more of that stepped approach. Mayor Wellington: Councillor Warren. Councillor Warren. Councillor Warren. Can you make it clear that the extension of the current lease requires the original
00:27:00 conditions of the lease to continue, therefore, there is no opportunity for Council to impose changes to those conditions unless they happen to be negotiated appropriately with the operators. Is that correct? Speaker 7: That's correct. We also have to keep in mind that when this was tendered some years ago, those conditions were set as part of the tender. So you'd be looking at our procurement advice is that you would be looking to variations to the contract, which at the time, somebody was also putting in for it. That was not foreseen. And that can create some contractual issues. Mayor Wellington: I'm going to move that this matter be deferred for a decision to the ordinary meeting on Thursday night. Seconded. Councillor Wilkie: Seconded. Councillor Stockwell?
00:28:00 Can I ask a further question? Of course you can, Joe. Councillor Jurisevic: With regard to the extension, because the original lease was a 10-year term and a 5-year extension, is it possible to apply anything less than a 5-year extension? There is. Speaker 4: The clause reads up to 5 years. Councillor Jurisevic: Up to 5 years. So what we could do is actually implement a shorter extension period, which would give us time to investigate the opportunities here for 21st century ticketing and online booking provisions, potentially, and then have a tender perhaps in 2 years' time rather than 5 years' time. Speaker 4: Well, as I was saying to Councillor Jackson, I would anticipate that we need to be ready to go out. We need to go out to tender in 2 to 2 1⁄2 years' time to allow for a new operator to gear up to commission new ferries. Councillor Jurisevic: But typically we wouldn't take a 2 1⁄2 year time for a tender to go out. A tender would normally be, what, six months before a tender's due? Speaker 4: Well, it's just that lead time to commission new ferries for a new operator.
00:29:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Oh, okay. You're envisaging that there may be new, actually new hardware incorporated. Speaker 4: You've just got to allow for it, I think, in the future. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. So to give that ample provision as well. Sorry, that wasn't anything that I understood from the report that actually knew ferries could be a part of it. Speaker 7: To be clear, we're not envisaging anything, but we're saying it is a possibility. Councillor Jurisevic: It's always a possibility to tender. Okay. Thank you. That's all right. Councillor Jackson: So in line with Councillor Jurisdict's question, in that case, is it also possible to therefore have a shorter renewal of the lease and begin that tender process much earlier? Speaker 4: Yes, it is. Speaker 6: I think there's two, for me, there's two distinct issues here. One's the contract and service delivery across the river, which staff here and ourselves are trying to, going through the normal process. The other issue is getting into the 21st century with technology, which we all think, well,
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 that has to happen. I think the... For me, it's... It's fairly simple as it, and we put that in the recommendation, we explore the technology with a view to working with the operator who we've had a longstanding relationship with over 15, 20 years. Make sure the risks of that technology introduction are mitigated, and there's a number of risks there, of course. There's technology risk in terms of connectivity, change management risk for their staff, all those type of things. The last thing we want is someone on the ferry with 20, 30 cars behind them, and their tap doesn't work because connectivity is being lost. So you're back to square one, aren't we? Rather than giving over is loose change. So we need to have, okay, what's the contingency plans for payments? So you've got to have multiple different, probably multiple payment types. Those types of things we've got to explore.
00:31:00 Probably then, as Clint mentioned, if there is then potential soft introduction, then we want to have that. We work with the operator to do that. We test and trial, and then, as Dennis mentioned, then gradually we move into that new contract of a new tender, and then we, if everything goes well and it works, you go, well, sorry guys. As Ingrid mentioned, we're potentially going to a full digital solution, which I think is the way forward. In probably 10 years' time, that'll be, digital payments will be the norm rather than cash. 10 years ago, isn't it? Speaker 3: It's a good question. The extension can be up to five years. Is that an option? Are there options in one of those timeframes? Speaker 4: Good question. The request has come in four or five years. The clause is fairly brief, and it just says by mutual agreement. Okay. Speaker 3: So both parties will have to agree for three or two or five years. Yeah. All right. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I stop on? Yeah. I think we're talking about deferral motion. I think there is a range of other issues that councillors may wish to do.
00:32:00 Yeah. Oh, that's right. Mayor Wellington: You've moved. I haven't spoken to it yet. No. So I was going to speak to it. If you have a question. No. Councillor Glasgow: No. I have a question. Yes. Can the Mayor please explain deferral motion? Yes. Mayor Wellington: I'll speak to the motion. Look, Michael correctly noted two issues. One is the lease issue, and the other is exploring new technology for payment systems. But there's another aspect to all of this that no one's spoken of, and we can't go to any great detail on. And that is that the Tiwakaloola Working Group is looking at impacts on Teewah Beach of visitation, et cetera, and potentially whether or not there should be any capping on those numbers, particularly day permits, et cetera. Now, no decision has yet been made by that group. However, decisions made by the Tiwakaloola Working Group in terms of whether or not they should be added to the lease deal, whether in terms of what they might recommend to the State Government, either directly or during the review of the Great Sandie Management
00:33:00 Plan, may impact upon the number of vehicles that access the ferry, may also potentially impact upon the way in which services such as permits and ferry tickets are paid for. We also have consideration of the possibility of yearly concession payments so that rather than residents and property owners on North Shore paying every time they get on the ferry, they just pay an annual fee and don't have to bother with all that palaver. There's a whole lot of factors playing in here. I think we just need a little bit more time, that's all, to discuss with staff and amongst each other all the possibilities that might be in play so that on Thursday night we can make a more important decision. That's all. I'm not trying to stymie debate, I'm trying to encourage it. Councillor Jackson: Could I ask, through the Chair of Councillor Wellington, how you envision all of us at this table being better informed? What process will take place to get us better informed about all of this?
00:34:00 Mayor Wellington: Well, I'm going to, if this motion succeeds, I'll be requesting that we have a discussion, just a round table discussion with staff before the ordinary meeting so that we can talk a bit more freely about the some of the discussions going on at the working group, et cetera. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Maybe that could happen at 1.15 on Wednesday. Councillor Jurisevic: Absolutely. Jurisdict. In that regard, I've got a question for staff. With this five-year extension, I mean, has the operator taken into consideration that there may be an impact on numbers going across the ferry over that five-year, somewhere within that five-year period? Speaker 4: The report mentions at a couple of places there that there is an existing provision in the lease that we're dealing with that guarantees a floor. A rise and fall or a minimum. Or standard vehicles. Okay. So the current permit regime was in the air at the time that this lease was being considered.
00:35:00 And so that provision is in there in relation to the current permit regime. Councillor Jurisevic: But as long as it wouldn't mean we've left them hanging in any way, shape, or form. That's right. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. It's closed, Councillor Langdon. Mayor Wellington: I just want to make it absolutely clear that whilst I mention some of the issues that the Tiwakaloola Working Group are looking at, the group has not made any decisions whatsoever. It may well be that they simply endorse the current status quo, or maybe that they make recommendations different from the status quo. That's all. Thanks. Councillor Wilkie: I'll put the motion in those in favour. Against, the motion is carried. Councillor Parker, thank you. Okay, move on now to item five. Councillor Jurisevic: Oh, Councillor Parker can come back in the room. Thank you. Oh, yeah. Let me have the General Committee count. Councillor Wilkie: The court's direct to the General Committee. Item five, the Draft Events Policy for North Shire.
00:36:00 We'll wait for Councillor Parker. Councillor Jackson: I'm happy to move the Draft Events Policy. Councillor Jurisevic: Oh, you beat me to it. Councillor Wilkie: Moved by Councillor Jackson. Seconded. Seconded by Councillor Jurisevic. Councillor Jackson is to speak. I'll give the motion. Councillor Jackson: Yes, I will. I would like to compliment Dennis and your team on how well this has been prepared. It's a good overarching policy, not getting too much into the specifics because that has to be done more in guidelines. I'm particularly keen to see that council will be setting, or has the ability to set limits on the number and nature of events in order to control impacts on residents and local businesses. I'm also pleased to see applications that would have the effect of increasing acceptable number of events in any precinct would require Council approval, and that new and additional
00:37:00 road closures would generally be avoided, particularly in high-use areas where alternate routes are not available. I think these are the key things that have been voiced by our residents, and we want to make sure that we're responding to that. Also I think that the concept that in principle of giving preference to locally owned businesses and not-for-profit organizations is a good one. That does not mean that they are the only ones that get a chance. Of course there'll be other opportunities, but it's a good concept as a principle. So I look forward to the community feedback that will come back after this goes out to the public. Thanks. Mayor Paterson. Councillor Wilkie: Mayor Paterson. I think the last question I have is just to speak to the motion. Just a question. It's approved on Thursday night. How long do you envisage the consultation period to be? Speaker 4: I would suggest at least a month, up to six weeks.
00:38:00 Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Joe. I did have a question, but I misread the line that a user pays approach will be applied to ensure there is no road pass subsidy of permit administration for the public. The intent there is that the impact of the event, the event organiser will have to pay for the length of time or length of time it takes to administer the permit to apply that. So bigger events will pay a larger fee based on the amount of time it takes to ensure that they're complying with the space that they take up, the road closures and all of those sort of things. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Look, I agree with... I said I'll speak to it now. I agree with the comments by Councillor Jackson, except for one major significant inclusion in there, and that is the adherence to environmental and waste policies of Council going forward. I think that's probably another significant achievement of this events policy, and I look
00:39:00 forward to seeing the devil in the detail of those. Tourism Noosa, of course, is leading the charge with regard to plastic-free events, and a number of commercial businesses are operating well under plastic-free policies. So it can be incorporated. It can be done, both at commercial operators' level as a business and or events. So I'd be glad to see that fully implemented for all events across the Shire going forward. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Pardon and Councillor... Mayor Wellington: I've got a question. That's all I want to say. Yeah, you go. Councillor Wilkie: You go. Mayor Wellington: It's all good. Just for the sake of the record, Chats, could you just explain, obviously, this gives high-level ideals about our processes. It's an approach to events, but it needs to be supported by greater detail that could be contained in a guideline format. Could you please explain how long it will take and when we might develop those guidelines for events? That's a good question.
00:40:00 Speaker 4: I would think in the second half of this year that we should be able to... Mayor Wellington: So by the end of the coming year, we expect to have guidelines in place which will carry the details. Yeah. But that will also be supported, I understand it, by... Yeah. ...precinct plans such as the main beach events policy which we have. And the Noosaville foreshore plan talks to events as well. And there is the intention to potentially develop other precinct plans that would also play into this. Yes. Yeah. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor? Councillor Pardon: Yeah. With regards to precinct plans and events, Red Hot Summer, Tewantin, what a night. What an event. Fantastic. So long as he doesn't start singing Johnny Farnham songs again. It's part of the policy, event policy, et cetera. And I note that Tewantin, we talk about Noosaville, and yeah, the policy was mainly developed for the coastal fringe, if you like,
00:41:00 because of various issues we had with our community. And great job from Dennis and Clint up there to put this together. And I agree with the comments of councillors with regards to some of the issues we've had. And we had to do a policy, I believe, because over time, you know, how many events we were going to have, how many road closures, et cetera, et cetera. So I just think if we package this up and it comes back from the community, I think the community in general will support this draft going out. I don't think, I couldn't see there'd be a lot of hassles with it. And it's a terrific outcome. But once again, the hinterland, which is Tewantin's part of the hinterland, and the events that come back out there, I think it's good to have more input from the hinterland
00:42:00 with regards to the placemaking, et cetera, over time. The coasts were crowding out. So I think the Gay Bush is going to be good. Beautiful. Thank you. Okay. Councillor Stossel. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do want to support the policy. I think it's really important to acknowledge the desired outcomes. Why do we need a policy? And I think what we have heard in the course of this term is some increasing community concerns around the impacts of events. And so the third dot point in desired outcomes is that achieve broad community acceptance with residents' complaints minimised. It makes it clear that the purpose of this policy is trying to address community concerns. But then the dot point above tells you why events are important. Because when I look through all those different plans and strategies, they all had a different purpose or a different outcome they sought from events. So there are goals and initiatives within the social strategy, the cultural plan,
00:43:00 the sport and recreation plan, and the local economic plan. I think sometimes most of the debate is around the perception that events are just about making money. They're not. They're making it a fun place to live, a healthy place to live. A place where your cultural horizons can be expanded. But for me, I suppose, I'm with Councillor Jurisevic, the number one dot point about setting benchmarks for quality and environmental outcomes. Now, this is something that I was on many years ago. As the last chair under the Noosa Biosphere Limited of the Environment Sector Board, we invested our last lot of money to help Tourism Noosa develop some sustainable event guidelines. And councils may recall earlier in this term, I tried to suggest we take a more proactive stance. And it's really encouraging to see those broad elements included into this document. So what does it include? It talks about we're going to ask events to phase out
00:44:00 single-use plastics in the next couple of years. That's a big tick. We're already, I know there's another biosphere down in Victoria who's already being lobbied to bring in our plastic-free Noosa provisions down there because he's, my cousin, spent a year up here and realised how good we do it. But that's really good. But it also, it's another one that I reckon we might get some comment on. And that's saying that fireworks happen at the traditional time of year, Christmas and New Year, and every event doesn't have to have fireworks to be in keeping. We want to look after our dogs and we want to look after this place as a place where you don't come for glitz and glamour, you come to enjoy what Noosa's got to offer. The other one that's in there and is sustainable transport. And I think this policy will lead the way. And we did have those, the red hot autumn of their careers, was it on Saturday? Councillor Pardon: It's red hot summer. Summer for any dog. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And they introduced, because of the weather, a whole lot of park and ride.
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 And I think that's really important that as we go on, I think all major events must count on the fact that, particularly in high-use precincts, that you'll be responsible for providing sustainable transport options. We won't be surprised trying to build great big multi-storey car parks for that once or twice a year when there's a big peak load. So, to me, they're really encouraging aspects of this policy and I look forward to the feedback from the community. Mayor Wellington: Kath O'Loughlin. Yeah, I want to begin by thanking the staff for their effort in developing this, but also thanking councillors who were very active in their participation in the development of this events policy. It was a great collegiate effort and I think we're all, at this point in time at least, quite happy with the outcome. I do want to acknowledge that Noosa is a hotspot for events because Noosa carries a certain cachet and that adds to the status of events and that's why we get so many applications for events. So, therefore, it's very important to have a policy so that staff understand what councillors' position is
00:46:00 in terms of priorities relating to event approvals. Thank you. But there's also, as Councillor Stockwell alluded to, been a growing concern in our resident community about the number of events, number of road closes, etc. On various occasions, including to the Tourism Stakeholder Reference Group, I've had the opportunity to actually present the facts and the facts do not support the arguments, for example, that there is an event every weekend or there are lots of road closes, etc. In fact, what the facts show is that virtually half of our events happen in the hinterland, not down in the coastal area. However, this is an opportunity, at least, to get more information out there about the way we approach events and I notice even on social media there's been many an argument suggesting that Council only supports events because we make a lot of money from it. We do not. We do not make a send out of events. Fundamentally, we're working our way towards cost recovery on events.
00:47:00 We are not there yet. But we also, as this policy knows, we don't want our ratepayers to be subsidising events. So, ultimately, we do want to get to that full cost recovery position but that is not a profit-making position on behalf of Council. Nevertheless, I think this is a great start. We've got a lot more work to do and, again, I want to congratulate staff for the effort getting us to this point. Councillor Glasgow: Councillor Glassman. Yeah, you're right. We don't make any money in the events at all. The application fees are, I won't swear, but little to nothing. But, you know, we do have, and you wrote in there, I can't remember the point in there, the social strategy and the goodwill within the community for these events is tremendous. And no one goes to more events in the damn town than me at the moment. So, I feel that, and it's good we've got the spectrum from A to Z that's really, really, it's got a really vibrant sort of culture throughout our community about what we are doing. And we have drawn a line in our sand
00:48:00 with road closures and so forth. And it's exciting to read that policy. And I think it's really, we've done a really good job with it, guys. And I look forward to going to many more fun events through the Shire. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I've got a question. Councillor Jurisevic: I've got a question. Councillor Wilkie: Joe first and then Brian. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, sorry. Just with regard to a comment made by the Mayor there with regard to sustainable tourism, half the events are in the hinterland or half the events with road closures are in the hinterland? Mayor Wellington: Well, in fact, if you include road closures, well, a bit of both, actually. Speaker 5: I'll show you the figures later. Mayor Wellington: I said I do remember the figures, but I thought the half would refer to road closures. There are road closures for a number of events in Cooroy and Pomona and Tewantin, et cetera. So, a lot of the road closures do happen outside of the coast. I thought that's what the 50% referred to, but there are also a great many events in the hinterland. They may not be as high profile as the ones on the coast, but there's plenty of them. Acknowledged. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh, yes. I've got a question to anyone who wants to answer it, and it's definitely not because I've got to mention it. In J, it talks about tourism events, corporate events,
00:49:00 and events for for-profit organisations contribute to broader local environmental outcomes. And it talks about council may seek to establish new initiatives where tourism, corporate and property events contribute towards local environmental management issues. So, in that, is it intended that actually that there may be, because as Councillor Wellington has pointed out, that people come to Noosa because they like the hero shot of our natural environment, that we may be actually looking at conditions that could require some contribution from event holders towards that? Councillor Pardon: No, that was put into you, Brian. Yes. Speaker 4: It just reminded me Dennis that there was a little typo in there and I'm just wondering how we deal with that. I changed my mind on that typo Ingrid. Yes. So can you remind me? We were in corporate event definition on page seven. Yeah. Page seven. And it includes means an event staged by a business, corporation or not for profit.
00:50:00 And we thought perhaps I meant for profit but that's actually capturing sort of corporate events put on by not for profit such as Junk and Spy, Tourism Moosa and the like. So it is intended that it's not for profit in that location. Councillor Jackson: No problem. Ingrid, do you want to close? I don't think I need to. I welcome everyone's feedback. Thank you. All right. I'll put the motion as a favour. Councillor Wilkie: Gage's motion is carried. Thank you. We now move on to item six which is Boring Point Campground Management Services Contract Tender. Thank you, Gage. It's a report direct to the General Committee and the General Committee agenda. Page eight. Questions for staff, councillors? Councillor Jackson: Yeah, I have a question. Under finance, which is on page eleven, it refers to resulting in a
00:51:00 $19,000 additional cost to council net operating position. I'm just wondering what that is? Speaker 7: Well, it... Through you, Mr Chair. Well, it's just as a result of the submission that they've put through. We've actually transferred quite a bit of cost up in the new agreement over to the new provider through this tender. I think what we're saying there as well, Councillor Jackson, is that... Councillor Jackson: Can I just clarify, it says additional cost to council, but is it really a lesser cost?
00:52:00 Speaker 7: No, no, no. So how it works is at the moment we have a profit of about $100,000 or just over. So it's a reduction on the net profit or result to us. So it takes it down to about $81,000 thereabouts. Councillor Jackson: Because of this change? Speaker 7: Yeah, it's just that their cost base is slightly different. And I mean, you get some variation in that from tender to tender. It just depends on who you get. How much money do they want to get in return? Yeah, who puts in and... Councillor Jackson: Oh, I see. So it's not that it's costing us more, it's just that we get less return. Speaker 7: We'll get less return. Councillor Jackson: Yeah. Okay. Speaker 7: Net cost. Speaker 3: Yeah. Councillor Jackson: Huh? Net. Net. Yeah. And the other one I have on page 12 about risks, it talks about business continuity.
00:53:00 The management agreement is required to continue business operations without the need of the employment of council staff, brackets, which is not recommended. I'm actually not clear what that means. Speaker 6: What that means, Ingrid, is that we could not go out to management contract for the holiday park. We could actually employ council staff or more than one staff to actually be on site and undertake all of the normal management arrangements on the site. So however, we're not recommending that that's the approach we take. We continue with the outsourcing Councillor Jackson: of the management. Oh, that's fine. Yeah, I didn't quite understand that sentence. Yeah, thank you. I have another one. It's proposed, page 12, opportunities. It's proposed the council review the operating model of the business activity within the next three years. Proposed review would identify the most efficient management agreement contract delivery model to drive service delivery improvements for patrons in addition to maximizing revenue opportunities
00:54:00 for council. I'm wondering why this review of operating model wasn't done before the tender. Speaker 6: Through you, Mr. Chair. I can answer that one. This, in turn to the revenue diversification project, which has been a little bit stalled, which is with me, due to the fact we've had other emerging issues, i.e. TAFEs and the like, that have come onto my plate and short-term accommodation studies and so on. As part of that diversification project, I want to look at the total management model of the holiday parks. So do we continue as is? Do we potentially look at a full outsource model? So we ask the market, potentially, do we bundle up all of the holiday parks and we go out to the larger operators and say, how much will you potentially pay council to take it off our hands? Well, in terms of a fully outsourced lease arrangement, where currently it's a bit of a hybrid model where we lease out the management right, but we
00:55:00 still receive the revenue. From fees, we still pay a lot of the operating costs, where there are different models where you can just, the risk transfers to the commercial market, and they just pay us effectively to lease the land. And then they determine the revenues and the pricing in a fully commercial market. So that's something I want to explore, but that's going to take time, because you need to do a lot of modelling. It's not just for one. Yeah, potentially for the whole package. And even as we know, there's the potential to explore. There's the potential to explore the John's Landing site and package that in as well. So that's why I didn't want to look at that now, because I just haven't had time. Speaker 3: Okay. Thank you. So you might have a line up for the 10-month time period? Speaker 6: Yes. And the other one with the management agreements, we're hoping to align those so they all end around the same time, so we can do that further analysis. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic and Councillor Glasgow? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, I know the incumbent managers didn't reapply for tender here. Were there any issues
00:56:00 there? No. No, there wasn't. They're just moving on? They're winding down. That's right. Just wanted to clarify that. And the new contract managers have a number of other existing operations. Can you tell me where else they ... what other parks they manage? Speaker 7: Yeah, through you, Mr Chair. They have a park down in the Moreton Bay Regional Park. Okay. They just don't have ... I think the North Queensland one's Mission Beach, I think. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. And Moreton's relatively close. Yeah. So they're based in South East Queensland? Or as I said, with two operations, where are they based? I think they're Brisbane based. Speaker 7: Okay. I ought to take that on notice, but I'm quite sure they're Brisbane based. Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: Just wanted to check how local they were. Thank you. Councillor Glasgow: Yeah, mine was more on to Michael about Ingrid's point.
00:57:00 And just about how we're becoming quite a pioneering of parks at the moment. Are we ever getting anything kind of streamlined effect in it for cost savings? We've got Boyne Point. We've got North Shore. We've got possibly John's Landing. We don't know what's going on in the future. There's a lot of conversation about streamlining these and working together. I mean, with Boyne, it would be a lot more efficient, wouldn't it? Speaker 6: Yeah. Potentially, that's what we're going to look at as part of the revenue project. We'll look at what operating models can we potentially employ to get those efficiencies and those savings, and that potentially extra revenue, which offsets the general rate, of course. So that's, yeah. That all needs to be looked at. But it takes time. Councillor Glasgow: And this is not locking us into anything. We can sort of diversify a bit in the future with that, working with all three or four parks together. Speaker 7: Well, essentially, well, we can. I mean, we talked about the end dates and whatever.
00:58:00 Generally, we've operated these holiday parks with separate managers in there. What we're saying is, is that in the future, there might be opportunities to look at, management team look at all, but there may be opportunities to have separable portions where if you had a very good submission from an individual company, we're not, we're just not prepared to write any of that off at this point. We're just opening it up. But I think, as Michael said before, this is all, this process is all about streamlining. Yeah, yeah. And providing a good quality service and maximising returns back to the rate layer. That's it. Councillor Wilkie: Thanks. Sorry, Brian. No, I was going to move it. I had a question around the $19,000. We also mentioned that in return, Council gets a more professional management structure out there, which potentially more professional marketing, which means eventually more greater occupancy when it returns to Council, combined with less staff time administrating.
00:59:00 That's right. How soon do you expect Council to see the returns for that drop in revenue, and is it linked to any KPIs? Speaker 7: Well, it's prefaced on a couple of things. One is the fact that we talk about that there's good opportunities for building the revenue base, the occupancy, so the more they do that, the more that everyone's a winner. So for us as well, we do a monthly or two-monthly meeting, and that's coming to this contract as well. So what happens with that is that the park managers provide a report on all the issues. So out of the booking system or whatever else, and a whole range of other issues. So we're able to go over and keep a fairly close track on that, working with the managers to improve performance. We already do that with Noosa River Holiday Park.
60 minutes in ¶
01:00:00 And so what's happening here is we're transitioning more into a contract management style of management as opposed to being in the business. So as Michael said before, it's kind of a hybrid at the moment. We've transferred costs operationally. We've transferred costs over, such as fire safety, electrical, switchboard checking, and all of those things. Councillor Wilkie: So it will cost the council more initially? Speaker 7: No, that cost is going over. So I would expect to see some return on this fairly much straight away, because we're not getting involved in the backroom purchase orders and all of the backroom management. Councillor Wilkie: But the bottom line affects us adversely in the 19 grand initially. Yeah. But do you expect the long run? Yes. Speaker 7: Hopefully shorter than the long run, but yeah, I would hope we'd see some improvement. Councillor Jurisevic: Sorry, one more question. Just can you bring up page 13 of the, it's a minor point, just on the table that's been presented, I noticed that 18 Proprietary Limited, their score by weighting hasn't, they've only got score and not score by weighting in that table.
01:01:00 Just a minor point, is that something missing in that element of the report? Speaker 6: There's a column missing, or it appears to be a column missing, is that correct? Speaker 7: Yeah, I don't believe there is, I can check it for you, but that's what's come from the date by the way. Councillor Jurisevic: So I just wondered why there's a score by weighting for everybody else, and there isn't one for them, there's a score right now, I see what you're saying. But still, the 87.5 should be taken as a 15% of that overall, so you're saying they're not at 15% though, for that first 87.5, they'd have to be at 100 to get 15%, wouldn't they, to get a score of 15?
01:02:00 Speaker 6: Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: So 87.5 isn't 100, Dennis? Speaker 6: Yeah, I think the column's been cut off. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, the column's been cut off in there, could we just get a revised, fully incorporated table for the ordering meeting, please? Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Stockwell? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, I'm happy to move the recommendation. Second. Councillor Wilkie: Move Councillor Stockwell, second Councillor Pardon. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do so because this particular campground is my favourite. I go there two, three, sometimes more times a year. It's properly the best. It's my favourite campground. And I actually, I think it's important. We do move ahead, but I also think it's important that we, as in the report, each of our campgrounds do have a different character. And this one plays a role just as much for tourists as it does for our locals who can go up there and do a spot of sailing and fishing. And so it's good that we're moving ahead and that these people will have experience.
01:03:00 I'd also like to take the opportunity because I've seen, I think, four or five sets of managers go through that park. And I'd like to put on record to thank the incumbents. It's because they're personable. They're always willing to help. They are, you know, of the ones we've had there, they're as good as any have been. And I know they're looking forward to moving into a new house they built in Tewantin just before they got the contract and enjoying life rather than seven days a week in a caravan park. So, yep, that's all I've got to say. Councillor Pardon: Councillor? Yeah, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, in supporting the report before us or the motion before us now. Thanks. Staff for their work, obviously. And with regards to these campgrounds, et cetera, and the business, I guess, I guess I'm always big on promoting these type of businesses. I've always said as they're shutting them down, down south, Noosa should look at every opportunity to be opening them up.
01:04:00 And that's because, you know, that $900,000 that we get for our campgrounds combined net, there's about one and three quarter percent rate rise that we'd have to put on to cover that revenue if we didn't have our campgrounds and these businesses to help our ratepayers. So, any improvements we can do, and I know we'd be looking at reviews, costs, et cetera. Are we, are our costs similar, I guess, to other campgrounds? In reviews going forward, and always looking at maximising our shot, and I was pleased to hear staff, and it doesn't surprise me, Michael with his business hat on, and Clint, looking at the big picture, whether we combine them and go out there, and we'd only do that if there's, obviously, if there's more return on investment, otherwise, why would you?
01:05:00 So, I look forward to the future and what they might bring back over time. And, look, I understand, if you look at the North Shore ground and some of the, well, I suppose, the holdups we've had with regards to the redevelopment, et cetera, if we look at the big picture, and Michael said it quite clearly with regards to TAFEs and various issues that come to staff, it's hard to continue to keep doing all the micro things and the macro things going forward. So, I think they've done a really good job, given left field and other demands that have come upon them. So, I understand, in a time and sense, if they get this three years up, and it gives them time to have a look at the big picture as well. So, it's good. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Joe? Yeah, I'll start with a question.
01:06:00 These, the operators of this were the ones that also assisted us with the Cooroy RV Park, and the first operators up there, were they? Speaker 6: From memory, yes. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm sorry, the incumbents, but yes, they are. Yes, they are. Yeah, so, I've joined Councillor Stockwell in thanking these guys. In some ways, I'm disappointed. They have got a great reputation. Again, they did assist us with establishing the Cooroy RV Park and getting that underway, and stepped in when we were challenged by getting operators for up there. So, I wish them all the best with their future endeavours, and look forward to seeing the new operators undertake whatever changes they're going to implement. But the significance of, you know, this park shouldn't be lost, Cooroy Point is a significant tourist operation, and a significant tourist destination for, as many of us are learning with some of the challenges of the planning scheme going forward, and being reminded by Cooroy Point residents, but I said, I wish the new operator as well.
01:07:00 Councillor Wilkie: Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? It's closed by now. Put the motion in those in favour. Again, the motion is carried. Thank you. We now move to item 7, which is the Commercial High Use Permit Application, the Ride Green Propriety Limited, the Neon Ride Scooters, page 14. General Committee, a report direct to General Committee. Councillor's question. Councillor, why don't you go first? Mayor Wellington: Yeah, I've got a few questions. Did Neon Ride make any representation in the Noosa Council before running their two-go trial? Councillor Wilkie: How's it go? Is it going to the toilet? Sorry, Councillor. Mayor Wellington: Sorry, I'll repeat that. Did Neon Ride make any representation in the Noosa Council for any permit before running what they referred to as a two-day trial here? Speaker 7: Through you, Mr Chair, they may have had discussions with council officers, certainly not with me, about operating in the Shire, but they certainly didn't have a permit.
01:08:00 Mayor Wellington: Did they operate from council-controlled land during that two-day trial? Yes, they did. Speaker 7: Okay. Mayor Wellington: The second question I have relates to, just for the sake of those who may be watching this recording. In terms of creating a local law to accommodate scooters, for example, if we need to establish zones, the creation of a local law is not a simple matter. It involves a statutory process, which includes community consultation. Can you explain how long it normally takes? Can you explain how long it normally takes to go through that process of creating new local laws, please? Speaker 7: Through you, Mr Chair. Councillor Wellington, I have to take that on notice, because that would go through our local laws area. Speaker 3: I could give you an answer. Minimum six months. Minimum six months to create a new local law. Minimum six months to create a new local law. Putting it through a council meeting. Public advertising.
01:09:00 Yes. Minimum six months. That's it. Mayor Wellington: Okay. Thank you. In terms of the permit fees, you've said in the report that councils are considering different permit fee options. It's been reported that Brisbane is imposing a $5,000 permit fee for three months on each operator, plus $570 per scooter per year. Can you confirm that? Speaker 7: Through you, Mr Chair, I did see that. I haven't confirmed that with Brisbane City Council, but I did see the article on that. Mayor Wellington: And am I correct in what I've read in the press, as far as you're aware, that the permit fee Speaker 7: I'm aware that the tender process is underway. It's live. I'm not aware of criticism about the process, but I certainly have spoken to the officers down there to confirm that it's underway.
01:10:00 Mayor Wellington: Just to follow up from that, my understanding is that other scooter hire services are criticising the process because they feel excluded from it, but anyway. Okay, thanks. Councillor Jackson: I also have a question. On page 16 there's a reference to council having the ability to establish zones where shared mobility devices are excluded, so an exclusion zone. This would have to be amending a subordinate local law. And I'm just wondering if that kind of exclusion zone were put in place, would that also apply then to privately owned scooters and through scooters hired from, like, resorts and other businesses? Speaker 7: Through you, Mr Chair, my understanding is that would be the case. It would be for the actual device to prevent it from traversing areas. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. Okay, thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Council Jurisdict.
01:11:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Do you have any activity across the Shire as opposed to just in one locality, i.e. surf school is at main beach sort of activity with regard to operation on public land? Speaker 7: As far as I'm aware, no. As far as I'm aware, they're all fixed. Councillor Jurisevic: They're all fixed within their locations. They have fixed locations, yeah. That's all right. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Glasgow and Councillor Jackson. Councillor Glasgow: A little bit of a question for Brett and this to me, why wasn't it ever transport driven? It's come from them. It's just about land use, isn't it? I can answer that. You go. Speaker 7: Three minutes to chat. Look, it's because it came to us as a permitting issue. Transport are taking the lead. They're having discussions. I've attached attachment two there. They're having discussions currently with the Department of Transport and Main Roads
01:12:00 about shared mobility devices and electric scooters as a segment. So, yes, they are taking the lead. It just happens with this one that it came across as a permit application. But what we're saying in here is that council continues those discussions and that transport continues. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Jackson? Councillor Jurisevic: One question. If this was set up as a commercial a commercial operation on Fifth возду 민 ie out of say one of the resorts. Or numerous resorts and all the rest of it. What would they scooters be permitted to pack in council bike parking. Speaker 7: Andrew Salазary to chair. That would be. All yeah. So difficult one to answer. What?
01:13:00 This reports about. Councillor Jurisevic: I suppose local laws would be the people I'd ask as to what is permitted to park in each of the relevant, like what's considered a bicycle. Because typically with these type of devices, they tend to park at the point of destination and be left outside. Is that as I understand it? Speaker 7: That's right. So you're correct. You're getting into a kind of local law territory there. I'd prefer not to dip my toe into that. Speaker 3: I'm sorry to answer your question. Certainly the scooters that originate from a private property like that. And it's very similar to the private bike companies that operate that. You know, if it's a personal use. Or, you know, e-bikes or bikes that people rent from the accommodation provider. They can come out and use those and tie them up to the bike rack if they wanted it. I just don't know how scooters go with bike racks.
01:14:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Well, I was just trying to think. I think from a practical perspective, they may be able to be corralled, if you like, at their point of destination. I guess like bikes, they would have to find a safe, it'd be up to the person riding it to find a safe position to leave the device in. Speaker 3: They'd use that analogy of the bike. They'd go back to where they came from and they'd finish. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, yeah, yes. But that's the return aspect. But a journey may be two-way. It may go to a destination. It may go to a destination for a period and then be taken back. But I guess the way that these are set up in the public realm is that because it's a fee per time period or per kilometre or whatever, it tends to get left at a destination once complete.
75 minutes in ¶
01:15:00 Speaker 7: Yeah, I think the other point to think about as well is the private model is quite different in that you're probably not going to get people landing them on the footpath, given that they're responsible for their return. It's quite a difference in the two models. Yeah, yeah. Councillor Glasgow: Councillor Glasgow, the whole idea about the scooter share is having the share element, which is where you go and you share it and someone else rides it back. So that's hands-worth share. But just a bit of a process question, this being a high-use-per-application, this is in no way determining a yes or a no to the actual service down the line, is it? Because it has, over the weekend, I have noticed, and I was involved in, there was a couple of scooters, electric scooters left in and around the classic Malibu store, the Hastings Street, in and around these kind of private pieces of land around town. If they put runs on the board with this, let's just say quite a trial of their private, there's no reason why they can't come back to us in time for another permit to come through and say,
01:16:00 look, we've rolled out a private use permit. It's been quite years, I don't know if anyone noticed it, but they've been quite years in and around that flat mobility area of Noosaville, Hastings Street, Yacht Club kind of area, and they were out and about quite well. So there's no reason why that couldn't work as a trial and in the future. Well, I think... Get some runs on the boards and come to you again with... Speaker 7: Yeah, look, through you, Mr Chair, I think there's a couple of issues here. One is, is that we're talking about private uptake. We expect there will be private uptake. And part of that is operating from resorts and people from all demographic age groups jumping on a scooter, as they would do with a bike or skateboard or anything else. What we're saying here is, though, that council permitting the activity won't happen yet.
01:17:00 Until the transport team undertake their discussions with DTMR. DTMR? Yeah, we are monitoring other Brisbane City Council, as other councils are, and things like that. We'll take a proper evidence-based approach to it before we even consider it. So, I mean, look, to be clear, down the track, they may be permitted, but it's not somewhere we're at at the moment. And I think we cover often. And then the options analysis, there's a couple of different options there, and the risks and opportunities of... Councillor Wilkie: And given how stringent, or how the great value that this community places on its public spaces, open public spaces, and the rigour and thought that's put around giving public space over to any sort of commercial activity, as demonstrated on Yosemite Beach, if down the track this council wanted to consider giving some public space,
01:18:00 and then we land over to a commercial activity such as Scooter High, would that have to go to a tender process? Yes, it would. Speaker 7: Or competitors in the same field? Speaker 3: Yes, it would. Speaker 7: Yeah, I think... Rather than just award it to one. To be open and transparent, absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. Councillor Jackson: Councillor Wilkie, I'd like to move the motion, but with some extra wording. Of course. Carly, at the end of B, if you could please add... At the end of... No, I can do it now. And community consultation carried out before any final approval of the strategy by council. So, yeah. Mayor Wellington: Can I have a question? Councillor Jackson: Yeah. Mayor Wellington: What strategy? Councillor Jackson: It refers to an appropriate evidence-based management strategy,
01:19:00 has been developed in response to manage those issues. Councillor Jurisevic: That's what I was just trying to read, to find out where the strategy was. Councillor Jackson: So, do we want to call it the management strategy by council? Just to be clear. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, okay. So, follow this on. Councillor Wilkie: It refers to the management strategy. Yeah. Sorry. I'm happy to second that. Okay. Councillor... Mayor Wellington: Do you want to talk to the management strategy? Clint, there's no... Councillor Wilkie: What do you mean by management strategy? Councillor Jurisevic: Jeez, there's a good question. Speaker 7: Something that transport will... No. Well, look, I think what we're... That's fine with me. The management strategy, evidence-based, is really trying to capture all of that that Councillor Jackson's talking to there.
01:20:00 We're talking to the community because it's not one of those uses that you just introduce without having done so, that's fine. Mayor Wellington: So, can I ask, might it be better that we refer to it as a management approach? Strategy suggests a formal document, whereas approach is a little looser. Would that work for you better and would it work for the move? Speaker 3: I think you're going to have to have a document that sets that out. Yeah. I think it's going to be a strategy, a formal document you're going to need in place to guide decision-making in the future. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: One would think... Can I add on? In our... In one of our sort of hierarchy of nomenclature, strategy tends to be of a higher order than this. This would be more a plan, wouldn't it, in terms of... We tend to keep our strategies quite... Or an issues paper. Issues paper. Councillor Jackson: Well, no, an issues paper isn't a policy. It needs to have a policy element. Councillor Jurisevic: One would think that... And I'll address this to the CEO, I guess. One would think that a strategy for use on public land would come out of the parameters
01:21:00 of a tender. Councillor Jackson: No. Councillor Jurisevic: No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. Speaker 3: The question of strategy plan, it's really going to have to have a document that's going to say how we're going to manage these things. Councillor Jackson: It's a small S. Mayor Wellington: Can I just check, I'm still not happy with the strategy, so just bear with me for a second. A management approach can include a strategy, it can include a policy, it can include anything. It includes, it is more encompassing, if you like. Councillor Jackson: Not necessarily, unfortunately, because it could be the opposite. Councillor Wilkie: Can I ask a question, was the word management strategy deliberately chosen there? Speaker 7: Well, Councillor, it's about being strategic.
01:22:00 Speaker 6: Look, I think generally from a land tenure perspective, the management strategies are the terminology that's used by the state in terms of those. I think that's weird. Could I add another point to that? Speaker 7: I guess what we're talking about here is a guiding document to inform, because the permit decisions happen downstream of a strategy or a policy or whatever else. So if council decides that it wants to pursue this, then we would take that on board to get into that permitting scenario. So we wouldn't... That's different. Councillor Jackson: That's later. Strategy is higher, right? Yeah. We have to start. We have to start higher on before we move down. That's what you're saying. Yeah, I'm agreeing with you. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay. One would suggest it could become, it could be an element of the transport strategy going forward. It may well. As opposed to a separate strategy. That's what I thought. That's how I would see it. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. Whatever document is developed, do you see any problem with it going out to public comment?
01:23:00 No. Okay, great. I have some suggestions. Do you want to speak to the motion? Councillor Jackson: Yes, I do. I'd like to say I'm in favor of option two, because it seeks to develop a strategy on the basis of evidence and risk assessment. And I hope that would give opportunity to consider the pros and cons of shared devices, mobility devices, and also the viability of using it for transport. And particularly to look at the mobility of it. And I also support refusing the current requests and future requests for the time being. Noosa's motto is different by nature. And our residents are often calling for minimizing signage clutter, minimizing big events, and a peaceful existence free of helicopters and low-lying airplanes.
01:24:00 The council went. To a lot of trouble. The council went to a lot of trouble to get community feedback on the Noosaville foreshore land use master plan, with over 90% of survey respondents in favor of the foreshore remaining a peaceful, relaxing, public, open space for people to enjoy the river. I think this tells us quite a bit about what our community values. And unlike electric bicycles, which go on the road. With other vehicles, these electric scooters go on the footpath where people are walking. When I was in Brisbane recently, walking along the river there, the scooters were zooming around everywhere. And they are left everywhere. And that is pretty cluttered looking. We are have an aging population soon. We'll almost have one third people over 65.
01:25:00 And as people get older, their agility is not all that good. And that is good for dodging electric scooters. So, while scooters are no doubt fun to ride and use, I believe that electric scooters may have a high impact on the amenity and well-being of residents and visitors. For this reason, it's very important that not only do we develop a strategy based on research and facts, but also that we go to public consultation to gain feedback from our community. Councillor Wilkie: Just a question following on from council. Councillor Jackson has one of my comments there. Given the speeds that the scooters travel at, is it likely that they will have the potential to have a high impact directly on residents? Speaker 7: I'd say it could happen. Councillor Wellington? Mayor Wellington: Interestingly, the calls for scooters in Noosa that I'm receiving are mostly coming from ride operators, not from residents.
01:26:00 I've received, I just looked, 18 mails that were a product of a project that I was working on. I've received an email of an online petition that Neon Ride in particular set up, and thus I think all councillors may have received those emails when people signed up to the petition. Oh, standard letter? Yeah, which is just a form letter. And I'm not sure that any of those signatories actually were residents of Noosa, because one can't tell. But apart from that, I've had, you know, no request directly from residents for Noosa to establish these scooters. But I've had an awful lot of approaches. I've had a lot of approaches from operators, not just Neon Ride in line, but other operators as well. In fact, I'm getting one a week these days. So, obviously, Noosa has that cachet, and it might be beneficial to a business to be able to establish their business here. Even if it's not profit making, it still provides them with some degree of cachet in terms of their business operations to be able to say they operate in Noosa.
01:27:00 And there are indeed businesses currently operating in Noosa. For that reason. Look, the expert advice that Noosa had received, and I think all councillors were present at a workshop not long ago to find out more about e-scooters, was that the e-scooters currently on the market would not be able to achieve the gradient to go up Noosa Drive from Hastings Street to Noosa Junction. So there are some issues in terms of what is a major route that one would expect that people would want to ride between Noosa Junction and Hastings Street. If these machines can't actually traverse it. Noosa is quite different to the Brisbane CBD in terms of demographic and population density. And so it's not a simple matter that the sort of system that can operate in a big city can necessarily operate in a regional, low density area like Noosa. And I would like to point out that there is at least one long standing local business who has at least verbally said they are prepared to offer a service in Noosa that is of high quality.
01:28:00 That meets Noosa Council's needs and will be organised to meet Noosa Council's needs rather than simply rolling out a generic type hire service as Lime and Neon are inclined to do. Where they're simply, you know, left as has been pointed out willy nilly to be picked up by whoever. This indeed long standing local business person has suggested that they would be willing to do it from certain bases in the Shire. So that the bikes would have to be returned to those bases. So that's something we can pursue in the interim. But I, likewise, I was in Brisbane two weeks ago and I did my own little survey. In fact, along the foreshore of the river there of bike riders, 70%, I counted over 100 riders, 70% did not wear helmets. Only 30% were riding helmets. And of the bikes, the scooters, I should say, that were left lying around, about half of them had helmets attached and half didn't.
01:29:00 So there's a big lag between the laws, the legislation and the behaviour change required to accommodate this. What is really a disruptive service like many other new age disruptive services that are seeking to exploit a lack of legislation. So, you know, there are dangers. I quote from a Queensland ambulance service paramedic, Madeleine Shield, who says that crews are increasingly being called to scooter incidents. It's a regular occurrence. They go to electric scooter crashes or people coming off those scooters. And there's lists of all sorts of horrid results, particularly people not wearing helmets and ending up with serious brain injuries. The issues around public liability and insurance risk are something we absolutely have to get our head around before we head down this path. Now, I'm not suggesting for a minute that we shouldn't be considering scooter operations in Noosa. But as Councillor Jackson has really pointed out.
90 minutes in ¶
01:30:00 If we do go down this path, we have to do it in our own fashion that suits the Noosa look and feel and suits our residents. So we do need to take our time over this. There is no rush. And I'm certainly not getting pressure from residents that we need to leap on board these electric scooters right away. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Watson. Councillor Pardon, Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Pardon: Yeah, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, I like the Mayor's Noosa, you know, cachet. You know, the attractive, iconic place. The place where we all set up. The good thing about that, I suppose. Well, it's mainly about the cash. But I don't have a problem with people chasing cash. And I really don't have a problem with young entrepreneurs with flair coming to Noosa. And I guess sitting on that Noosa name, brand, etc. In fact, I applaud them because they're smart and that's why they're out there.
01:31:00 It's interesting. At the meeting we've had recently with regards to the scoot issue, so private enterprise, apparently we can buy them and get them across to China for about 300 bucks. And so the TMR said they're legal. So we're going to obviously, I've seen one burning around. That's all I've seen. But I don't hang down the bottom where Jess, young Jess does a lot, sees a lot more. Do you hang around the bottom? The bottom end of the Shire? I've got to finish that stuff. I haven't noticed. Well, I wouldn't have bothered but for the mayor's comment. I'll be clear. Is there enough, Jess? I'll be clear. I'll get into trouble with calling Hastings Street. Cora. Cora. Yes, sir. Sorry, Chair. So, yeah, the Hastings Street end of the Shire, I'll say, where the movers and shakers hang out. But in Tewantin, I have spotted one.
01:32:00 It was interesting the pace it actually went. It was quite phenomenal. And they say they do about 27K. And as was pointed out by Councillor Jackson, our demographic here. And whilst I, at nearly 70, step very lightly and can dodge and weave still, there's many of our population around that age that cannot move that quick. So with a vehicle on a footpath or even not on a footpath, travelling at high speed, I can see some problems. And I guess I'm not surprised there's been some accidents. And so whilst I applaud people for trying to front run things, lead if you like, and look at various ways in electronic transport on public land. And I've suggested quite openly to some people, if you want to go down these type of paths,
01:33:00 there's commercial operations you can partner with, et cetera, and commercial sites right across this Shire and industrial states, et cetera. But it's not for me to point these things out. It's for the people, the clever people, to work it out for themselves. But having said that, I really don't know long term how long term these things are going And I guess it comes back to our strategy of looking at our, at the big picture of our traffic and transport strategy, but also going forward in the upcoming budget with regards to getting our pathways off road, etc. Those type of pathways and linkages across our Shire, so that as the modern world kicks We have these particular paths that can carry these vehicles and sort of try and separate, if you like, between people walking, recreating and people who are going fairly fast on electric vehicles, whatever form they are. But I support this.
01:34:00 Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, so I think what we're dealing with here is an application for a high-use commercial activity within our parkland. And as Councillor Jackson pointed out, that issue was well and truly ventilated in the Noosaville Foreshore Management Plan and we got very clear feedback that our population values its parkland for the purpose it was designed for. And this doesn't fit. However, I'm also aware how adroitly staff... Councillor Stroud. I'm not going to beat around the bush. I don't think we are prevaricating. I think what we're doing is taking a sensible approach.
01:35:00 But then there was the other. We might be seen to be a killjoy. I'm not allowing something. It won't be long before we have our first fatal accident is what we see coming out of Brisbane if this industry isn't regulated properly. So we're not being a killjoy. The last one is the most important risk that we should address, and that is that Council's actions may be interpreted, or they suggest will be interpreted, as not supporting alternative transport options and not doing enough to dissuade reliance on the private car. Now, Councillors, I wouldn't be so glib to say by 2030 50% of scooters will be electric. But what I would say is by 2025, I would be disappointed if this Council hasn't got a two-way e-lanes running between the Noosa Yacht and Rowing Club to the Noosa Heads Widesaving Club. That's the real challenge for this Council.
01:36:00 If we're going to dissuade cars, we need to create the routes and the network to support the alternative transport options. Which will be small scale, which will be electric, and which should be divorced from people strolling along the river. And I think that is a challenge, perhaps not for this term of Council, but definitely for the next. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Joe, thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Councillor Stockwell. Many things Councillor Stockwell might be a bit short on substance with regards to his electric scooter comment there. Look, there are many challenges of this. And one does wonder why the commercial use of community land is the first locality. The first locality that this sort of disruptive technology has drawn itself to. Not trying to establish in with commercial partners and commercial operators and using, you know, networks that already exist to function from. Provide recharging stations and the like. I mean, I'm hearing that these devices are being picked up by a network of people that are actually driving to pick up the scooter.
01:37:00 To take it home, to charge it, to then bring it back and make it feasible to operate again. So there's challenges going forward in the operating plans. But there's nothing to stop these type of devices being used from commercial land. There's no stop private devices. So the challenges with regard to speeds, helmets and all of that could potentially arise without us approving this. But like Councillor Wellington, I witnessed a couple of these while in Brisbane recently. And whilst they took off quite nicely and sedately and all seemed quite fair and reasonable. One had a helmet, the other one didn't. So there's no way of ensuring even that the riders that get on these devices are undertaking good safe practices to ensure their own personal safety. I support the staff recommendation here. I don't think a commercial high use permit is necessarily the appropriate way to start with something like this.
01:38:00 I mean, it's disruptive technology. Trying to take a foothold on something that is probably seen as a cheap source of sourcing an outlet to operate from. As opposed to establishing their own commercial outlet such as our cycle riders, our cycle hirers do. Or to look at the opportunities. And I think those opportunities really do exist. Particularly if you're a member of Tourism Noosa and could partner with every one of the accommodation providers in Noosa. Through that sort of a networking arrangement. I mean, that would give you access to hundreds, literally hundreds of outlets that people are already established at. As opposed to, I can see the appeal of, oh look, the scooter's there. I can grab it while I'm here and not have to go anywhere to do it. The incidents of accidents that we're hearing, the speeds that are being achieved and all of that. And the challenges that other councils have faced with this.
01:39:00 This disruptive technology landing on their doorstep unannounced. It gives me credence to think that the approach here is the most prudent. And anyway, to give one operator preference over another without going through a full and open tender process is not one I would support anyway. Councillor Glasgow: Councillor Jeffs. Oh, I can see where this conversation's going. Really forthcoming. Six one. Forthcoming councils here. Look, I'd reiterate for our planning scheme why we are different by nature. And I do very much agree with, you know, there has been a lot of bad publicity around coming upon the scooters and what's going on in the future. And what's happening currently with them. A high use permit right now, I agree, is not the best way to get this off the ground at the moment. I understand that they've had a vocation in. I really do believe this needs to be driven from the transport side.
01:40:00 If they did their diligence and did all their research and getting this coming from their side of the organisation, it would probably fly a little bit more. But we are different by nature. And we, you know, we're looking at a lot of adversities here now. But we can make this work. You know, they're working at the moment with their private trials they run on the weekend. People are on and off them. You know, every two or three people on the scooters, one car off the road. You know, we're having thousands of cars going up and down our streets every weekend. So it's a thought to be thought about for the future. And can it work in Noosa? Because we are different by nature. And maybe it might work in Council of Stockwell. I don't know where it's going to get the money for this great big road, the yacht club to Hastings Street. But, you know, why not? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No new roads. Councillor Glasgow: You know, we might see them in years to come. So I really support this, what's happening at the moment at trial, what they're doing there probably. And I think it's innovative. And hopefully they come out with some good statistics. And in whatever years to come or months to come, we can tackle this again.
01:41:00 But I do support the fact that this can't happen on a high use permit right at this moment. But I don't obviously support the fact that we cannot not look at them. Because I think we're different by nature. And this is something that can happen in the future. And we just have to keep our minds and ears open. And just kind of be accepting that we could have this happening in the future. And we want to look at that right now. So. Councillor Wilkie: Well, look, as with every other item on this agenda today, I think the councillors have absolutely nailed the decisions and heading in the right direction. Made very good eloquent arguments. Thank you, staff, for a very good report. All the risks clearly identified. All the legal issues clearly identified. Take a precautionary approach. Take a precautionary approach is the wise one. In terms of giving over public land to a commercial activity. And also given the amount of interest from a variety of private commercial scooter operators in using Noosa's public land. I think issuing a commercial permit to one of the state would be very unwise.
01:42:00 Notwithstanding the premium we place on public open space. As has already been said, the this company is free to operate from a public open space. Within existing commercial leases. The back to base model, which requires the scooters to return back to the base of the operation at the end of their hire period, rather than leaving them over public land, is the wise one. And if we do wish to consider having electric scooters on public land, a full investigation is merited. Of course, I support the motion that's before us. Can we scoot through to the public land? Yes. No. Please. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Please. You thought my allusion to Bob Bill Shorten was bad. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Jackson was to close. No. Okay. We'll put the motion. Those in favour? Against? The motion is carried. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
01:43:00 Next up we have the budget review three for the 2018 financial year. Welcome, Trent Graff. On page 31. I've got a lot of questions. On the general committee agenda. And we did miss you. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Any questions for Trent, Councillor? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. Councillor Pardon: Just, just to check. On page 39. With regards to, in the light of this council, I don't even want to say the copper and lowering device, because I don't know what that's going to do here. Speaker 4: Is it electric? Councillor Pardon: It's solar powered.
01:44:00 There was a, yes, it was an emergent works as well. Well, and anyway, but I couldn't see, that led to a safety, we bought a safety device to go around, so people didn't fall in. I just, is it somewhere else? Speaker 6: No, the safety device was purchased last year, but they actually had problems trying to get the coffin over the safety device. Oh, that's right. Councillor Pardon: So they need a lowering device. So this will come later. Speaker 6: Yes. Yeah, I'm getting mixed up. Councillor Pardon: Okay, thanks, mate. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I thought it was preparation for next year's election. Councillor Pardon: Yes, Jess. Councillor Glasgow: Question? Yeah, yeah. Just, I believe that in our, in all our figures and tables and stuff we've got in there, we've basically got enough money coming in through our managers to do whatever they want. Is that where you're getting into it these days? No, not answers.
105 minutes in ¶
01:45:00 Not whatever. That's an answer. Much of what? That was a no. Terrible not answer. We're in a good space for this. This, I don't know what you call it, definition of, you know, having managers performing to the way we want to perform with really financially stable through the numbers that we've got here. Speaker 2: This financial, this financial year to date, we have, we've found sufficient savings and additional revenue to cover all the emergent needs that have come up to fund those, to fund those additional operating activities. It's still my turn service. It's still my turn service. That's a yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We can never do everything. Speaker 3: We never have enough money to do everything. Councillor Jurisevic: Councillor Jones. I might argue that statement, but when, when I see Capital Works for parks and playgrounds being adjusted in BR3 down 910,000 from an initial budget of 1.735 to greater than half the budget reduction, initial budget reduction and pathways and boardwalks, we're talking about transport strategy reduced by three quarters of a million dollars.
01:46:00 My question would be, what, aren't we doing, why are we, you know, what, what, what's not happening in parks and playgrounds and pathways and boardwalks? Speaker 6: The playground timing of the playground pretty much accounts for all of that. Is that all, is that all associated with the BR3 playground? Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's over a couple of years. One project, and on that one, Joe, we're still waiting to hear back, we've made an application for grant funding from the State, but we still haven't heard back, and once we get the results for that, we'll sort of report to the Council. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The, the boardwalks was actually cost savings, wasn't it, on the budget? Yep. Yeah, on the budget. Speaker 2: So, I don't think I saw that camera. Councillor, on page 33, there is a, there's a capital table where we've broken up the types of movement, the capital works, and you'll see that there's a mix of emergent works, there's some savings and increases, but there is a mix of delaying out the 19-20 and bringing forward from, um.
01:47:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, 910,000 later, 19-20, well that's, so it is, it is specifically just the Cooroy Playground project there, looking out at that, so that was a concern to see such a large value, to see half the budget disappear, that's all, and to clarify what it was for. Pathways and boardwalks though, $880,000, so considering we've had savings, with regard to the, um, the main boardwalk project, where, where else are we, uh, we, we losing, uh, on pathways and boardwalks? Is that just, is that just more savings there, or is that, is that actually a reduction in services? Speaker 2: There's, um, there's a couple of items in the pathways and boardwalks, there's, there's obviously savings for both Main Beach and Park Road boardwalks, um, which takes us nearly to $600,000, um, as well as that timing of works pushing out, pushing out to the 19-20 year, so, um, I think you'll find that. $180,000 to be timing issues. That's right, so it's timing to, uh, mainly those Bridge and Beach boardwalks, along with the toilet blocks.
01:48:00 Speaker 3: Oh, there we go. That's where it's going. Yeah, mate. I've got a bite. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Further questions? So we can't move the, um, we have Councillor Jackson and second Councillor Blastow. Are you used to speaking with Councillor Jackson? Councillor Jackson: I'll just briefly say that I would really like to compliment and thank, um, Trent and Michael for extremely informative and detailed information here with, um, flowing through from the submissions, the recommendations, and then attachments that show the actual impact on the budgets into the future. So I think this is a very detailed and very open, informative document that's available to the public as well as to councillors, and that's good. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. I think it's a good review. I think that it's a positive one. The one that I thought was most positive, and I think it'll be something we can look
01:49:00 at going into next year, was we had quite a difficult task in the waste management budget this year when all the increased costs for recycling were factored in, and trying to keep down the actual waste levies to their ratepayers. But in this one, we note that the sales of recovered plastic bottles from the introduction of the container refund scheme is, um, looking at revenue. Budget of $180,000. I'll look forward to spending that next year. Councillor Wilkie: Now the councillors wish to comment. Councillor Jurisevic: I feel like my container deposit's alone. Councillor Wilkie: The councillor Jackson wishes to close. Okay. All in favour? Changed. Motion carried. Moving to the final item. The financial. I beg your pardon. The final item in the open session. Financial report. March 2019. Questions for Trent and Michael.
01:50:00 Councillor Glasgow: I've got one for the CEO there. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. It's moved. Councillor Glasgow. You can still ask questions as we go on. I'll second it. We've got a couple of questions. Questions, Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: The environmental health costs for vector control. $48,000 below year-to-date budget. I'm assuming that's because of all the dry weather, and we haven't had to actually make a budget. I'm assuming that's because of the mosey sprays over a period of time. And I'm also assuming that as a result of that, if that's correct, that we'll be soon catching up with that with all the recent wet weather. Speaker 6: I'd say because I live in Tewantin. Councillor Pardon: That was our last Friday. And just to add, Mr Chair, there was one of the reasons why we missed a helicopter drop on the north shore due to cyclone Omar coming down the coast, so you can't fly out and then proceed by your GIS system, or GPS system, and drop your tablets accurately
01:51:00 with 100-kilometre-hour winds blowing, so they missed an opportunity there, which caused an outbreak of mosquitoes, and they last about three weeks, those guys, those little black ones, so this caused a lot of angst in the community, but Omar sort of done us in there. Speaker 6: The chopper was up a couple of weeks ago, which was after the end of the month, so we should see those spots. We did. Councillor Jurisevic: I think the spray programmed very soon, very shortly, yes. Speaker 6: The challenge they have as well is Sunshine Coast use the same contractors, so it's coordinating with them to make sure that everyone gets their fair share. Councillor Jurisevic: And my second question is to the CEO with regard to staff training, underspend the 50k year-to-date. Noting that a further 50k is committed to supplies for future training, but what's the remaining year-to-completion budget for training? Speaker 3: The fourth programme is for the future. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you, Mr. CEO. Nice to see you. Good to see we've finally achieved full implementation of staff trading in a year.
01:52:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It being 1.21 on the record for history. I'll take that as one out of five. Councillor Pardon: Yeah, just a question. Yeah, so going forward, you continually return at 2.6 higher than the Bloomberg average. And so going forward, you think we can continue to do that? What's your long-term view economically or what are they telling you? What's your crystal ball telling you? Our opportunities to return on investment, I guess. I'm staying up that way. Speaker 6: Longer term deposits are actually coming back because they're factoring in a bit of risk. So we're doing well at the moment, but I think it'll come back a touch. Yeah, OK. No, it's good. Very good. Good return on investment.
01:53:00 Councillor Jurisevic: One other. Waste management contract serves at $2.75 below year-to-date budget. That's a significant expenditure reduction for a year with that. Is that the large contract? Where are we making our savings there? Speaker 6: It's more of a timing issue regarding some of the landfill costs. OK. They're about to start a fairly comprehensive crushing, concrete crushing program. I saw that elsewhere. And they've actually brought some funds in BR3 to deal with that as well. So they're going to go a big crush and then they can, but obviously there's a timing issue because they have a fairly substantial concrete crushing budget, which makes up a fair bit of that. Councillor Jurisevic: OK. As I said, I just wondered if that related to that previous item. There was something about concrete crushing in there. Councillor Pardon: OK. And, Chair, just a question with regards to the Sunshine Beach shops at the page 55, you've got two vacancies currently being negotiated. We ticked off one recently, or is this two more? That's the one that we just ticked off.
01:54:00 Speaker 6: So there's still one. Still one that we're negotiating. Is it a major one? That's the big shop. Big shop, yeah. That's still vacant, yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. OK. So have we got any closer to what we are? Speaker 6: We are. We are in negotiations. Negotiations. Good. Councillor Jurisevic: That's what I wanted. Good to hear. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? No. I'll put the motion as a favour. Against? Carried? Thank you, Trent. Thank you. Thanks, Greg. Mayor Wellington: I move that we move to a confidential session in order to do a record item number. Councillor Wilkie: Second. Second.
120 minutes in ¶
02:09:00 You're welcome. We'll get the video going. Oh, yeah, of course. Will you open the door? Councillor Jackson: Oh, yeah. Councillor Wilkie: So what do we do? We can do what you need. All you need to do is move the recommendation. Speaker 3: And if you want to report or argue about the detail, you have to close it here. Okay. Do that. Are we going to hear from you? Councillor Wilkie: Yes. Oh, I don't know if we are. I'll be back on. It looks like we are. All right. Well, I'll move the recommendation.
02:10:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I just will briefly use just to thank the community member that brought this block of land to my attention and its values which led to the investigation by staff. So it's great that community are on the lookout for what might be. Good areas to go into our conservation estate. Councillor Pardon: Yeah, I'll just endorse those comments Mr Chair. We had a talk to staff about this particular block and for me it was a no-brainer. Councillor Wilkie: I'll put the motion as a favour. Against? Motion is carried. That is the end of the meeting. Thank you councillors for your attention.