Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Mayor Wellington: Nice timing, very good. No skin left on those two. Speaker 2: We've got the video going councillors too, which is good. Mayor Wellington: Okay, we'll call the meeting to order. Thank you very much everyone for your attendance tonight. We begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land that we're gathered on, the Gubbi Gubbi or Kabi Kabi people. We pay our respects to their Elders past, present and emerging. We have one apology tonight, which is Councillor Frank Pardon. We'll come to that in a moment, in a mayoral minute. But first, the confirmation of minutes are required. So, first of all, the minutes of the ordinary meeting held on the 15th of August. Moved by Councillor Wilkie, seconded by Councillor Glasgow. All those in favour? Thank you, that's carried. And now the minutes of the special meeting held on the 12th of September. Thank you, moved by Councillor Jackson, seconded by Councillor Wilkie. All those in favour? Thank you, that's carried. All those in favour? Thank you, that's carried. We move on now to mayoral minutes.
00:01:00 Folks, I'm going to move a mayoral minute that isn't included in the agenda. You have all received a copy of it by email and on the desk. And this is to note a leave of absence by Councillor Frank Pardon. The mayoral minute reads that in accordance with section 162 of the Local Government Act, Council provide leave of absence for Councillor Pardon for Council's ordinary meeting on the 19th of September 2019. That, of course, is tonight's meeting. And the purpose of this mayoral minute is because Councillor Pardon was not able to attend last month's meeting as a result of the death of his father. And tonight he's out there rescuing the Teewah community fighting fires in Cooloola Great. So, I think it's appropriate that we allow Councillor Pardon to be absent for two meetings in a row. I take it no one else wants to speak to that. I'll put the motion. All those in favour? Thank you, that's carried.
00:02:00 We have another mayoral minute. And that is the one that's distributed in the agenda. I won't read it in its entirety. It's about expressing gratitude to the participants of last week's fire episode. I do want to point out, however, that the member for Noosa, Sandy Bolton, wrote to me today and asked that I pass on her gratitude. To the Noosa Council team for their efforts before and after the fires. And I'm not going to speak at length on this because it's really contained within my mayoral minute and the report. It was something of an extraordinary event. I do want to point out that further to the report, I've included Tourism Noosa as a special mention in the report. I neglected to include them before. And that's because they were very active in terms of setting up the evacuation centres and finding bedding, etc. And they do deserve special notice.
00:03:00 So, of course, our sympathies go to the unfortunate resident who lost her house. And, of course, our sympathies go to all of the residents who have suffered some degree of trauma as a result of this situation. And the businesses in Peregian, of course, who lost significant business during the event. This event was so extreme that a senior CUFAS officer on the Friday said to me, he saw it as a once-in-a-lifetime event. He doesn't expect to ever experience anything like it again. And we can only hope that's true. Feel free to speak to the motion, anyone who wishes to. Councillor Jackson. Councillor Jackson: Yeah. Look, I appreciate you putting this minute because myself, I was thinking of calling for a vote of thanks. That's fantastic. There's no question that all the people who work to stop the bushfires and to assist residents deserve a great big thank you from all of us. I've toured the Peregian area both by car and by walking. And I just cannot believe the scorched earth that is located there where the bush used to be.
00:04:00 And I was absolutely amazed looking at that that the houses mostly were saved except unfortunately for one. It's just phenomenal the work that was done and that the houses were protected. I'm also extremely heartened by everything I've heard about the community support that was given to all the people that had to be evacuated and all the people that have been affected. And, you know, the community support continues. There's some volunteer community groups that are now facilitating donations to the Rural Fire Service. And this, you know, is something that we need to continue as a community because this is just the beginning. It's not summer yet. It's not the beginning. So there's going to be other issues. And we've got to work together on this. So I'm just really wondering. I'm just wanting to thank all the people that have done so much. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: Anyone else wish to speak to the motion?
00:05:00 Councillor Jurisevic. Councillor Jurisevic: I'd like to reiterate the comments in your mayoral amendment. Thank you, Mayor, for taking the time to acknowledge all those that did contribute. It is a timely reminder, of course, to have fire management plans in place. And even those people that are in an urban area that probably have never thought about the propensity of fire in their proximity. Should re-evaluate the situation. I think it's timely that everybody thinks about, uses this as a learning opportunity, seeing as we were so fortunate not to suffer any great degree of damage within the region and look towards their own fire management plans. Myself and my own family, we went back onto bushland and we've taken the opportunity to now sit down and have a discussion and start to put plans in place. There was a couple of things that I wanted to say. There was some additional literature that I've requested for council to stock at the front door as well with regard to fire management plans.
00:06:00 So I urge all the community to look at this as an opportunity to learn from and to make sure that everybody has a fire management, but also an evacuation plan for any disaster in place for any possible future event that may come our way. Mayor Wellington: Thank you. Councillor Stockwell. Wilkie. Can I ask you something? Stop it. Stop it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think there is a lot we can be thankful for. I think we can be thankful for the fact that the local disaster committee and the many years of preparation that goes into being ready for an emergency like we saw on that Monday night is something that we should all be very thankful for. And all the participating agencies. Sometimes government is held in disregard in terms of not talking to each other, but around disaster and the local district. Committee, the local and the district committee. We saw the result of years of collaboration, of years of training, and we can be thankful
00:07:00 that we had a significant emergency, but not necessarily a great disaster, which could have happened. I think the other really key point that comes out in the mayoral minute is that we've seen results in social surveys and saying we're connected. That we are a healthy community. A healthy and strong community that is well linked, but surveys aren't the true test. We had a true test and our community stood up and the linkages worked. We see that from an industry group who everyone thinks just does marketing was core to making that night a little bit more comfortable for the thousands of people who were forced to flee their homes in the face of significant danger. We can see that it wasn't just the Red Cross. But I think the thing, the indicator that to me said the most about our community was I've been on the district disaster committee and I've listened to a lot of emergencies over
00:08:00 the radio and I've never once before heard the radio have to say, stop bringing us food. You're helping too much. And that is the sort of community we're living in, the people who are committed to looking each after each other and looking after the environment and we can be very thankful for that. No doubt. Many, many people on that night who put their own lives on the line. Many, many, many, many lives in danger to protect property, but also on that woodland drive where they stopped it moving further north and could have wiped out a large section of the Noosa National Park. So thank you all. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor, for moving this mineral minute and councillors for their comments. I wholeheartedly agree. And others have said that the test of the community is not that the community be challenged or face difficulties, but perhaps the real test is how we deal with it. And I think the other thing that I can say is that this is a community that responds to a challenge. And this is a natural disaster, on a scale that's not been faced before here. And I'm just one of many.
00:09:00 It feels very grateful and proud to be part of a community that's responded in such a way. Personally, I'm extremely grateful for the response experienced and witnessed. Thank you, Mayor. Councillor Blasko. Councillor Glasgow: I want to just say briefly, as you know, this is a tremendous thing that we've passed Last year at Mayoral Minute, and just accolades to everyone that was involved, all of us councillors, all the council that we did. I was at the J in the morning, and like you said, it was so fun, and we were telling IGA and Coles, and we were just like, whoa, too much food, too much food, too many people cooking. So it was just such a great community spirit to see. So, not so good to see it over the circumstances, but like I said, it's a really good thing you've done here, Mayor, and I applaud it. Mayor Wellington: Thank you. Just to conclude, as Chair of the LVMG, I want to acknowledge the fantastic work done by all the people who volunteer their effort for the LVMG. In particular, I'd like to acknowledge Carl Billingham, his ordeal by fire, as the new local disaster coordinator.
00:10:00 Carl did a fantastic job, as did Mark, who shadowed him. And I do want to acknowledge that the efforts of staff in terms of setting up the evacuation centres, etc., was exemplary. And of course, staff are still working in the recovery phase. And we'll continue to work in the recovery phase. So, with my Meryl hat on, I just want to congratulate all the staff involved. Thank you. Okay, I'll put the motion. All those in favour? Thank you. That's carried. We move on to petitions. Any of you folks have petitions? I have two. No? The first petition is a petition to Noosa Council to supply additional parking for the area close to the Noosa Leisure Centre and Library. It says, whereas the Noosa Council have spent substantial funds for excellent facilities for the Leisure Centre and Library, there are times now where parking adjacent to these areas is not possible due to insufficient allocated space, where the undersigned request Noosa Council make provision for additional parking. There are 70 signatures. I'll move that that be accepted and dealt with as appropriate.
00:11:00 I'll second it. Seconded, Councillor Jurisevic. All those in favour? Thank you. And the next one, again, with the LVMG. There are 70 signatures. It seems to be the magic number this month. It comes from the Noosa Pickleball Club, and it reads, This petition is a formal request to the whole Noosa Council to enter into an agreement with the Noosa Pickleball Club, permitting the Quamby Place Community Tennis Court to be repurposed into four pickleball courts under the administration of the Noosa Pickleball Club Inc. I move that that be accepted and dealt with as appropriate. I'll second that. Seconded, Councillor Jurisevic. Councillor Glasgow. All those in favour? Thank you. That's carried. There are no presentations or deputations. A presentation. There is a presentation? Absolutely. Oh, you're going to do that now rather than at the end. Okay. You go first. Speaker 2: So, Councillor, presentations. One of the things you might recall, a meeting or two ago, we were advised that we'd won a national award for local government in terms of the Euro ringtail project, and Councillor very kindly at that time passed a motion of thank you.
00:12:00 Thanks to the staff and those involved. I just want to show you that last week I actually got the award I passed on, one of the, I didn't go to the national conference, but one of the CEOs from Queensland picked it up on our behalf and passed it on to me last week, so I'm happy to present this to the Mayor, as far as I can recall, it's one of the first times we've won a national award at that local government level. So, for being a good guy. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: And he made me do it. But I wasn't going to table this, but I am, the CEO insisted that I do, so the City's Power Partnership Ambassador Award to myself, and I, as I said at the time, I think this is to be shared with all my councillors, thank you very much, we're all on the same track in this regard, so there we go, cheers.
00:13:00 Okay, committee recommendations, we've got the Audit and Risk Committee recommendations. Number one is the Queensland Audit Office Briefing Note, number two is the Draft Financial Statements for the 18-19 year, number three is Risk Management, Public Interest Disclosures, Crime and Corruption, Commission and Fraud Update, number four is the Internal Audit Update, number five is the 2019 Community Satisfaction Survey Results, the recommendation is that the Audit and Risk Committee recommendations be adopted, moved Councillor Jurisevic, seconded Councillor Glasgow, put the motion, all those in favour? Thank you, that's carried. There are no Planning and Environment Committee recommendations or Services and Organisation Committee recommendations, those committees were deferred as a result of the fire incident, and all the reports from those committees went straight to the General Committee, so we go to the General Committee recommendations. Number one is the Update to Infrastructure Charges Resolution, number two is the Minor
00:14:00 Change to Development for Operating and Housing. I'll move as per the General Committee recommendations. I'll second. Seconded, Councillor Jurisevic. Care to speak to it, Councillor Stockwell? Anyone care to speak? Councillor Jackson: Yes, I have a question. Mayor Wellington: Okay, sure. Councillor Jackson: And I think it'll be of Kim Rawlings. Thanks, Patrick. Oh, Patrick is here. Oh, it could be of Patrick, then. The applicant sent a number of questions, or I don't know what they were. The applicant sent a number of points to councillors since the last meeting, pointing out discrepancies between what he believed were correct facts and what was provided in the staff reports or in answers.
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 And there's 10 of them, so I think that's quite a lot of them. But there's one that has left me feeling I'd like to hear the answer to here, and that is ... Could you be on your feet to ... Oh, I have to stand up. I forgot. And that is that ... I'm sorry. But he writes, it was incorrectly stated that the applicant delayed the matter, and that, in fact, he then goes on to show that there were other reasons why the matter has been going for a period of time since July last year, including quite a lot of months where council, he was awaiting for. So I wonder if you could just talk about that process, because having read the response that perhaps ... It seems to me that it's a normal process and nobody's to blame, but if you could just talk to that please. Speaker 1: Sure, yeah, through the Chair, as provided to Council, there has been, the original application
00:16:00 was made back in 2018 when the issue started. There has been some to-ing and fro-ing around that application, which is a fairly normal process. Officers provide Council with a bit of a chronology of the process and Councillors can see that original advice was sent to the applicant in July 2018, a response was received in August 2018. There was then the initial show cause notice around the non-compliance. In September, we had a response then in October with a subsequent fee paid. There was then an on-site meeting in November 2018 and then a process started around referral to state agencies.
00:17:00 There was some delay over the Christmas period and with staff absences for a couple of months that potentially could have been shortened slightly, but in essence the process followed a fairly normal process from then in terms of interactions and requirements between Council and the applicant. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: Anyone else wish to speak or ask a question? Councillor Jackson: I will actually speak. Mayor Wellington: Certainly. Councillor Jackson: Mr Mayor, thank you. I'm just going to say that the Pelican Jetty is the only place on the river that offers diesel refuelling. They also offer other fuels. And that the boats that come to get the diesel, such as Coast Guide, Coast Guard, Coast Guard, Police Boats and Fisheries Boats, can be up to 8 metres wide. Some of them are 4.5 metres, some of them might be 6 or 7. So it strikes me that quibbling over whether there's a 2.6 metre setback or not is not really
00:18:00 making much difference to the use of the river because these large boats once in a while, not all the time, come and park there to get their diesel fuel. I'm just going to say that that's a good point. I do not believe that this merits the applicant having to spend $150,000 to shorten the jetty because of the cost being having to bring back the fuel pipes and the bowsers because this is a very dangerous construction and has to be done extremely carefully. As a result, well and I guess also there have been quite a lot of points made by the applicant where there seems to be dispute over what's been correctly or not correctly given to councillors for advice, which leaves me feeling uncomfortable with making a pre-emptive decision.
00:19:00 But because I feel that this is something that is minor and not really so big given the size of boats that come, I do not support the recommendation to refuse the applicant. And I'll be voting against the refusal. Mayor Wellington: Anyone else wish to speak? I'll just briefly point out, as was pointed out at the General Committee, that the 2.6 metre setback was a recommendation of the applicant. Unfortunately, the 2.6 metre setback was not adhered to when the jetty was constructed. I'll also point out that this matter is a matter of the public's discretion. The applicant has already entered into this realm of legal action because the applicant has made a determination to engage legal advice and send letters from that legal advisor to councillors. Ergo, it is appropriate that this matter now move towards the court given that legal entities
00:20:00 have already been engaged by the applicant. So it makes perfect sense. For this to be determined at that level, hopefully, we all hope, and I'm sure the applicant does too, that it doesn't end up in court, but rather can be resolved at mediation. Anyone else here to close, Councillor Stockwell? Put the motion. All those in favour? All those against? So against are Councillors Jackson and Glasgow. In favour, Wellington, Jurisevic, Wilkie and Stockwell. We go on with the general committee recommendations. Thanks, Patrick. Thanks, Patrick. Councillor Jackson: Thank you, Patrick. Mayor Wellington: Item number three is an MCU for an ancillary dwelling units at 64 Gateway Drive, Noosaville.
00:21:00 Item number four is a planning and environment court appeal, a refusal of an application for operational works for signage of 1-100 Rennie Street, Noosaville. Item number five is a planning and environment court appeal, a refusal of an application for an MCU for an office, restaurant and shop at 6 Heron Street, Peregian Beach. Item number six is the Environment Grants Policy. Item number seven... Councillor Jackson: Mr Mayor, I would like to deal with the Environment Grants Policy separately, please. Certainly. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: Okay. Can we have a mover and seconder? Moved, Councillor Glasgow. Second. Seconded, Councillor Stockwell. You care to speak to it, Councillor Glasgow? Anyone care to speak to it? Councillor Jackson: Yes, I have a question. In July, without calling for a competitive... Councillor Jurisevic: I don't want to... Oh, sorry. I'm requesting that the Councillor do take the advice of the Mayor earlier to stand when asking and speaking... Oh, okay. Forget it.
00:22:00 Councillor Jackson: Oh, dear. Yes, I have a question. In July, without calling for competitive applications or expressions of interest, Council agreed to give the Nature Conservancy a grant of 1.2 million Rennie Street. As described in the TNC Partnership Agreement with Council. I'm just interested to know how this grants policy, which already exists and is now under revision, how this grants policy enabled that grant. Speaker 1: Through the Chair. Thanks, Councillor Jackson. So as was outlined in the report to Council in July, under the Local Government Act, this grants policy meets the definition of a community grants policy. And it's within that framework that enables the granting of that funding. The grants policy also indicates that there's a range of criteria that needs to be met and
00:23:00 that Council will offer these grants through rounds a couple of times a year, but also can take applications. Proposals outside of normal grants rounds, but that those applications would be subject to a Council decision. So that's both the head of power that the TNC grant proposal was done under, that the local government regulation allows Council to grant an organisation a grant under their community grants policy. The environmental grants policy meets that definition of a community grants policy. And that there's a provision in the grants policy to accept out-of-ground grants, and that the decision on, determination on those out-of-ground grants would be a Council decision. Councillor Jackson: Thank you, Candidate. Thank you. Mr Chair, I would like to move an amendment to the motion, which is, I think, available
00:24:00 now. You can read it out. I'll read it out. So in addition to the motion that already exists, under the Section A, I don't know what happened there just now. I'm going to go to B and C, but it doesn't matter. It's the amendment. Yeah, it's the amendment. So under A, adding a second section, which says the wording change – sorry, I'd better read the whole thing. It says repeal the environment grants policy adopted on the 21st of February 2019 and adopt the revised environment grants policy provided the attachment one to the report with the following changes. Number one – and we agreed this at the last meeting – the environment grants policy in additional words included under the heading of Council policy. All initiatives funded by the environment grants policy will have tangible and measurable outcomes. And, second change, the wording changed in the policy under the heading multi-year environment collaborative projects in paragraph four to read, Council will retain the flexibility
00:25:00 to receive and assess NEC project applications sought outside of this time frame through an open application process, or EOI, but all projects will be subject to Council approval. Councillor Jurisevic: Sorry, Mr Mayor, can I just request the move of what NEC project refers to? What's the NEC? Councillor Jackson: I apologise. It's the multi-year environment collaborative projects. Most of what's written in that section two is already in the policy. Do you want me to speak to this? No. It's not Tony's point. Mayor Wellington: No. We'll have to find out if there's a second or first, but anyone can ask questions, of course, of the mover. Councillor Wilkie: Yes. Just a question. Section one of the amendment, is that repeating what's already in part A of the original motion? Councillor Jackson: That's not an amendment of number one.
00:26:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, it is. Speaker 2: Well, I can answer that. As I read it, the way it's been laid out is because there's additional – the original resolution had an amendment shown – and I give it to the outside way, and put it into two paragraphs. Paragraph one is not changing anything from what was dealt with at general committee. Paragraph two is the additional . Mayor Wellington: So it's confusing, isn't it? The second to Councillor Glasgow. Councillor Glasgow moved the original motion. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Glasgow moved the original motion. Second. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I ask a question of the mover? I presume that the change that you're proposing in substance is in relation to an amendment The requirement in the second last line that out that receive an assessed multi-year environment collaborative project application sought outside the time frame, I presume what you're adding is the part that says through an open application process or EOI and you confirm that.
00:27:00 Councillor Jackson: That is correct, Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Wilkie: Just another question. There is already a grant application process in rounds. So would this be suggesting that project applications can be sought outside, I guess it's a question to you, Councillor Jackson. Project applications can be sought outside of the established grant round time frame. But another grant round timeframe. A grant round application process would have to be established on top of the original ones to take in these out-of-round grant applications. Is it suggesting an extra out-of-round grant application round? Councillor Jackson: Basically that would end up being how it would need to be carried out.
00:28:00 Can I just say that most of the wording in the quotation marks starting with Council will retain is already there. So I have in front of me here the policy, the policy as it stands now and as it's currently proposed says, Council will retain the flexibility to receive and assess MEC project applications outside of this timeframe, but all projects will still be subject to Council approval. So my addition is that these applications that are assessed outside of the timeframe would still, therefore, trigger open application process or EOI. Councillor Wilkie: Yes. Now I understand what's contained in the policy. But my question is, would this, by enabling an application outside of the timeframe, the grant round, would require another open application or in effect another grant round on top of the existing grant round to allow.
00:29:00 Mayor Wellington: Would it trigger a whole new grant round? Yes. Can I suggest you direct that question to staff rather than to the members? Oh yes. Councillor Wilkie: Who, who, where did you answer that? Mayor Wellington: Through the Chair. Speaker 1: Through the Chair. That is my understanding of how that would be practically implemented. The, we currently offer the multi-year environment grants annually. But the policy retains the flexibility that outside of that, it's probably about a three or four month process from start to finish. That outside of that process, that Council has the flexibility to take out of that, out of round grant applications because things do crop up throughout the year. That's consistent with what happens in, in the community grants process. So that would be my understanding that, that, that change would result in a, another round of applications being offered through an EOI. Mayor Wellington: So if we were to compare what currently happens, for example, with the community grants, there
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 is an opportunity to allow for a very rare and occasional EOI. If we were to take out a single grant to occur out of round, but that doesn't necessarily trigger a whole new EOI or open application process. Council has the capacity in the community grants to simply make a decision. Whereas this, if it were passed, would treat the environment grants differently in that we would not be able to simply, through a Council meeting, approve a single grant because we would have to go out to an EOI process if it was out of round, round. Speaker 1: Yeah. Having, having said that. You've just seen this, that, that would, that's my understanding is how this would, this would work. The community grants process and the environment grants do allow that flexibility because on occasion there are proposals or issues that crop up that do require Council consideration around potential funding or support. So that out of round option is in, in both of these consistently policies.
00:31:00 But yes, that's, that's what would happen. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Just one last question, just for clarity. It's my understanding that the economic grants are mainly done out of session, not by recalling that it's, that there is actually, we've changed that process a lot so that we can deal with things as they come up without going to an EOI. Would you like to explain the economic grants process? Speaker 1: Yeah. That's, that's correct. So Council has three, three, a number of grant programs, but they sit under three areas, the environment grants, the economic grants, and the community grants. The community grants and the environment grants operate on the same process and are offered at the same time through, through rounds and also offer an out of round process. The, the economic grants Council changed probably about 18 months, two years ago to be open all the time. So they don't have a round process, but they are open all the time.
00:32:00 Speaker 2: Continual assessment. Speaker 1: Continual. Yeah, that's right. Speaker 2: Can I just add to that? The only other difference with the economic grants is that there's a delegation for the CO to approve anything that's up to 30%. So it's a minor type issue. Everything else comes to Council. This, this and the community ones, everything comes to Council. That's the only other difference. Mayor Wellington: Councillor, so I think you have enough information now to determine if anyone chooses to second it. Can't be, as was pointed out, Councillor Glasgow. So is there a seconder for this amendment? Councillor Wilkie: I'll, Mr. Chairman, I'll second it for the purpose of my life. Mayor Wellington: Councillor Wilkie. Thank you. Councillor Jackson, care to speak to it? Councillor Jackson: Yes, I do. Yeah. Um, I think I'm concerned that, um, whereas the smaller grants which are given to the community when they apply for grants to, for the environment grants. Are done in a rigorous manner and there's a competitive process where they apply, there's selection
00:33:00 criteria. They go through a process of being assessed and then they are given the funding accordingly. And of course it comes to Council finally for approval. And in contrast, uh, the one that has occurred so far, and we're talking there, I think the smaller grants are up to $15,000 or $5,000 to $15,000, something like that. They're small, as I understand. Am I incorrect? Speaker 1: Um, I can't confirm what the quantums are in the community grants. Apologies. Karen's not here. Mayor Wellington: They're up to $30,000. Councillor Jackson: Up to $30,000? Yeah. Okay. So those, they're small. But then the one example we have where there was no competitive process was $1.2 million. And that was rather significant. Um, we are actually, um, when we are giving grants, we are actually using rate payers money. It's not, we're not a public, private company.
00:34:00 We're not just handing out money. We actually are a public company, public service, and we are using rate payers money. And I believe that the correct way to distribute grants is through a competitive merit based process. Whether it's during the grant period or whether it happens to end up being outside of what was normally a grant period, I still believe that a competitive, transparent, and open process is required. And hence the minor amendment there that says, um, that it would be an open application process or an EOI. Just for your interest, I have done a bit of a search on the internet. To see what other council's policies are and when it comes to grants, I couldn't find any grant policies where, um, there was a clause saying, and if we don't, we can do something in between that isn't competitive and if council agrees, we'll just do that.
00:35:00 All the other ones that I found, um, and that was in the Southeast Queensland area, had very specific, um, commitments. Um, So this seems to be something Noosa has, um, which is a bit different than others. Um, so my aim is with this amendment is to make sure that our environmental grants, which is rate payers money, is, um, done through open call for applications and expressions of interest, which gives opportunity for, um, others to apply for it. And then the selection is done on the merits. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Stockwell? Yeah, I will, uh, I won't be supporting it. Um, I think the, the policy has drafted.
00:36:00 It has a lot of merit. Having played the grant, the environmental grant game for over 30 years, I'm aware of the variety of situations where a ability to move quickly is more likely to bring reward than me going through a process without, um, suffering from any lack of transparency and governments. Um, so. To give a very current example, we had a bush care group this week come to us from Peregian, suggesting that now is the time to get in and address all the viney weeds on the edge of the burnt out area because it's the first time they've been able to access it with any ease. But to do it in the timely manner, they'll need some funding to actually support both volunteer and paid bush carers. There's an ideal example of where being able to move quickly, should it be desired to go through a grand process if there isn't an existing base budget which could assist with that.
00:37:00 There's a perfect example where you would want to move quickly without going out and saying any bush care groups in Peregian who want to go or any commercial entities. I think that's one good example. The other quite more common example is... Where higher levels of government put out a call that might be ideally suited for a local group or entity to apply, but has a need for a matching dollar contribution. Where council's investments through a collaborative multi-year project would be greatly enhanced if that group had the opportunity to have council consider their proposal out of a grant round. So that could then go into... The application to state and federal funds and therefore have a higher chance or high likelihood of success in those funds and therefore driving the environment levy dollar further.
00:38:00 So for those reasons, I think there is good grounds to retain the flexibility. I don't believe that the current process or the way the policy is worded will lead to any lack of transparency and or governance. I think the whole idea of collaborative projects is it's people working together, not people competing. For a limited amount of funds. And I think it should retain as written. Councillor Wilkie. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One of the strengths of the Noosa Council has been its capacity to respond proactively and nimbly to opportunities that come up through the community and respond to its needs as they arise. And the out of round grants allow that to happen. Regarding the... The example that happened earlier this year, it's pretty well a once in a lifetime offer from one of the world's most respected conservation movements, sorry, conservation groups to co-contribute $1.2 million to partner with the Noosa Council and the way the grants policy is written, it allowed Noosa Council to take advantage of that rather than waiting another year before it could.
00:39:00 The grant had to meet all the criteria as written in the policy. It was handled in a very open and transparent process. It was subject to a written report that was made available to councillors along at the exact same time as the wider community and came through a meeting round process. The public could scrutinise, could scrutinise the... The public could scrutinise, could scrutinise the... The report, the debate was live streamed, and as I said before, the grant had to meet the criteria. If we make out-of-round grant applications subject to another, if we have to construct another grant round every time a new grant comes towards Council,
00:40:00 we could have many grant rounds every year, and if I understand correctly, each of them, to be conducted correctly, takes three to four months. So it would just bog the whole system down in red tape, and it seems to be overly bureaucratic. I understand the intention, which is to make it more, the intention is to make it transparent. Of course, we all understand around this table that we are dealing with great payers' money. That's why the grants have to meet the criteria, and if an out-of-round grant comes before the Council, it comes via the form of a report, which all councillors, and the residents of red-pays have access to, and they debate in a public forum, which is live streamed. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Jurisevic?
00:41:00 Thank you. Look, I won't be supporting it either. There's an element of suggestion here that somehow or other, this process of an out-of-round grant proposal has less scrutiny than the... the normal standard grants process. I'd argue that it has more scrutiny, because typically in any of the grants rounds staff make a decision and a recommendation based on the information provided to them, and councillors tick off on this, whereas something like a project out-of-round comes before Council for a decision, and usually is scrutinised to a very high degree through the, not only the staff process, but also the Council process. It's got to be a valued project. It's got to be of significance to the community, to at least, to get through staff scrutiny in the first place, to turn around and be put up out of rank. Most of the community groups are there. This is the exception rather than the rule, and so I think the last example that I can think of of an out-of-round grant provider
00:42:00 would have been for the Cooroy Hall roof reconstruction, from memory, if I may have that wrong, but that's something along those lines. It was one that I can recall that we had to, that had to then go out to, whilst it's not a multi-year environment opportunity, that had to go out to some sort of open process or EOI for a community group. I just, I don't understand. I know that the project to which the councillor is trying to direct this at was an unusual offering for Council, but a project in keeping with the environmental outcomes that Council is trying to achieve in the long run. With regard to the river health and the like. I see this as a bit more restrictive, more red tape, and more process to go through when I think the, any grant of this type that comes before Council
00:43:00 undergoes a far more, a myriad of greater scrutiny than through the standard process. Mayor Wellington: Yeah, I might be supporting the amendment. Whether a decision is made in round or out of round, the decision is still made by Council. And if an out of round, which is a rare event, comes to us, and someone's unhappy with it, they have the opportunity at a statutory meeting to argue against it and vote against it. In fact, if we're to look at the TNC issue back in July, my memory is that it was unanimously supported at that time. But this isn't really about TNC anymore. This is about what we do going forward. And going forward, I don't see that creating the TNC. I don't see that creating the new rounds out of round is going to be any more beneficial than considering the individual application, which still has to be determined by the Council. Councillor Glasgow: Councillor Glaston.
00:44:00 Look, I am on the fence with this. It's a bit of a touch on, but I do support transparency in our Council. And someone that's on the chair of the RADF, which is a very influential grant program. And I see how it can help different people in different ways. I support it. I think a little bit of transparency is a good idea. So, yeah. That's good. Mayor Wellington: Care to close, councillor? Councillor Jackson: Sure, I will. Yeah, look, I'll just relate to some of the things people have mentioned. There's a fear that somehow there will be lots and lots of rounds because there'll be so many things coming in the middle of the year. I think that's unlikely, even from the examples that people have given. There aren't that many rounds that are, or that many in between things that happen. There's been a mention of, my intention is to make it transparent. That's an element of good governance, but basically my interest is in good governance. And good governance to me, when it comes to rate payers' funds, is competitive selection
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 and not just a single choice. I think that councillor Jurisevic said that I was projecting towards some particular thing, which I think was the Nature Conservancy. I'm not pointing at that at all. As councillor Wellington said, I'm looking forward into the future. I'm not, I only have referred to the past because that's the example that we have. And yeah, I guess basically I'm going to continue saying that I think that as a government, we have a duty to our... We have a duty to our rate payers and residents to treat everyone fairly and to offer opportunities for people to compete and to make sure that that is being, the money is being distributed in a fair way, which I think when you only have one applicant who wasn't part of the
00:46:00 round, and there hasn't been competitive selection, that's not quite the same thing, regardless of how much reports we need in our papers. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: I'll put the amendment. All those in favour? Councillor Jackson, Councillor Glasgow. All those against? Councillor Jurisevic, Wilkie, Stockwell and Wellington. The amendment is lost. We go back to the original motion moved by councillor Glasgow, seconded by councillor Stockwell. No one has spoken to it yet. Does anyone wish to speak? Councillor Glasgow, you have first right. No. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Stockwell. I'd just like to say that this is a final step in this process. And we actually, when we get to look at the guidelines, applicants for collaborative environmental grants will have been through a process of working with council, working with a range of institutions, probably a range of different local community groups and maybe
00:47:00 some larger ones. They won't be competing against each other. They'll be being assessed against those criteria that for the first time are clearly enunciated in the guidelines. It is that which the grants are assessed against. They're not assessed against each other. They have to look at their impact on the goals, objective, desired outcomes set in the environment strategy. They have to look at the capacity of the organisation or groups of organisation to deliver what they propose to deliver. And for that reason, this concept that it is better to be cooperative, to be competitive, I believe is a lack of understanding of what this whole process is about. Councillor Jackson: Excuse me. Lack of understanding. I think point of order, that's already suggesting a reputational damage to me. Mayor Wellington: Yeah. I think you should be talking to the substantial motion. You do seem to be referring to the amendment, which has already been and gone, Councillor.
00:48:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do apologise. I'm talking about the benefit of having a grant. I'm talking about the benefit of having guidelines. The benefit of having guidelines, I believe, is that we don't need to make groups compete against each other. It is a very good policy approach to create the capacity within the environmental grants policy, but we are also noting that the guidelines are being adopted. And to me, they're the critical step. I think the most important thing to be clear about, and I think they are the key to this, is that we now have that mechanism clearly enunciated that the groups who wish to access the grant funds know where to target their efforts and where to target their applications. This is exactly what those groups asked for in about the third month of this council, that they wanted to be able to know where are council's priorities and how do we address them. And I believe the guidelines associated with this motion are a key step in achieving that.
00:49:00 Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak to it? Councillor Jackson: Well, I think I will speak to it. Yeah, sure. Look, I'd like to say and thank Craig Doolin, who's done a lot of this work, that I've always been impressed by the work being done on the environment, not just the policy, but the strategy and the implementation plan. And all the consistency that has been done so that everything, which some of it had had to be retrofitted, but the analysis that's made it a whole and made it consistent and made it work all together has been quite phenomenal and I understand a large amount of work needed. So, you know, I'm actually quite supportive of the revisions that have been proposed and of the grant policy in principle. I think that is terrific that people are going to get opportunities to apply for grants and
00:50:00 that this is going to be consistent with our environment strategy, which again has involved so much work. I'm simply not going to vote for it because this amendment of mine, I think, is something that is unfortunate. It wasn't included. So I won't support the... The endorsement of the policy. Mayor Wellington: Councillor Jurisevic, I see you're moving to your feet. That's unfortunate. Councillor Jurisevic: I said I'll rewrite some of what Councillor Stockwell said. This has been a long time coming. I mean, we have had an environmental grants policy. And from a competitive aspect, all grants are... To call it a competitive process is a misnomer. It's a lot of pool of money available based on budgetary requirements. It's a lot of money available based on budgetary requirements. It's a lot of budgetary allowances for the year as to which is available to communities to undertake these sort of projects.
00:51:00 What is good about this environmental grants policy is that it addresses the challenges that we've had with regard to environmental grants and the competitive nature against other community grants in that same pool of money. And moving forward, this strikes to address the type of projects that will be supported by environmental grants going forward. Something that, since we started on council, we've been able to do. We've got a new council that the community have been screaming for. Something that was lost through the transition, through the move to an amalgamated and a de-amalgamated council. And I think that the community at large, particularly those involved with the environmental craze going forward, will be very welcoming of the changes that we've made here. Mayor Wellington: Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak to it? You care to close, Councillor Glasgow? No, I'm cool. Councillor Glasgow: I'm going to sit around the table. Okay. Mayor Wellington: Okay, Councillor Jackson, just to be aware that, you know, your name will come up as being opposed to the Environment Grants Policy motion. You are clear on that, of course?
00:52:00 Councillor Jackson: I'm very clear. Mayor Wellington: Okay, thank you. Okay, I'll put the motion. All those in favour? Jurisevic, Wilkie, Glasgow, Stockwell and Wellington. And against? Councillor Jackson. The motion is carried. We go back to the General Committee Recommendations. We go to Item 7, which is Council Meeting Scheduled January to March 2020. Item 8 is the Social Strategy Implementation Update for 18-19. Item 9 is the New Suspicion Shoreline Erosion Update for September 2019. Item 10 is Waste Management Annual Report for 18-19. Item 11 is the July 2019 Waste Management Report for 2019. Item 12 is a minor change to Development Approval for an MCU for reconfiguration of a lot at 215 David Loway, Peregian Beach. Item 13 is the Financial Performance Report for August.
00:53:00 And the recommendation is that those recommendations except dealt with elsewhere be adopted. Moved, Councillor Jurisevic. Seconded, Councillor Jackson. I'll put the motion. All those in favour? Thank you. The motion is carried. There are no further questions. No further ordinary meeting reports. There is no confidential session. The next meeting is on the 17th of October and will be held at the Federal Memorial Hall and Community Centre in Skyring Creek Road Federal, commencing at 6pm on the 17th.