Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Mayor Wellington: Okay, welcome to the ordinary meeting of the 16th of January everyone. We begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land that we're gathered on tonight, that's the Gubbi Gubbi or Kabi Kabi people and pay our respects to those past, present and emerging. We then proceed to attendance and apologies. Councillor Stockwell is visiting us all the way through the ether from Tasmania. In order to facilitate this we do need a resolution to allow him to attend via teleconference, so there's a motion on the screen there. I'll move that. Well, it's already moved. Oh, you moved it. Sorry, I didn't realise. Councillor Jackson. Seconded by Councillor Glasgow. I'll just read the motion. In accordance with section 276 of the local government regulation 2000. Council provide approval for Councillor Stockwell to attend Council's ordinary meeting the
00:01:00 16th of January 2020 by teleconference. I assume no one needs to speak to this. I'll put the motion. All those in favour? Thank you. That's carried. Welcome to the meeting, Brian. Speaker 3: Good evening. Mayor Wellington: You're now officially attending. I need a confirmation of the minutes of the ordinary meeting from the 19th of December. Moved by Councillor Wilkie. Seconded by Councillor Glasgow. I'll put the motion. All those in favour? Thank you. Would you like to say aye when Speaker 5: I say that, Brian? Aye. Aye. Mayor Wellington: Thank you. There are no mayoral minutes. There are no petitions, I don't think, are there? Anyone got a petition? Speaker 5: No. Mayor Wellington: There are no notified motions, no presentations, no deputations. So we move on to consideration of committee recommendations. Being January in this round, there were no portfolio committees. There was simply a general committee meeting, which of course was held on Monday. So we go to the recommendations from the general committee meeting. Item number one is amendments to the environmental levy policy and private land conservation policy guideline.
Public question: BRIAN O’CONNOR ¶
00:02:00 Yeah, there's been a change. I was going to say, I believe it's an amended version. Councillor Jackson: Yeah, I'm moving the amended version. Mayor Wellington: Okay. So just for the sake of clarity, what was discussed at Monday's general committee meeting was that, as part of the proposed new policy, the draft agreement with VCA landholders was taken out and it's now being reinstated. So the policy now includes a new paragraph that includes reinstating the details of the binding covenant example in Appendix 2 and the VCA example in Appendix 3 and authorised the CEO to make the necessary changes to the guideline to reflect those details. Okay. So that's being retained in Appendix 2 and 3. The rest of it is as in the agenda. I second that. I second it. Councillor Glasgow, do you wish to speak, Councillor Jackson? Councillor Jackson: Well, I'm not going to just briefly say that I appreciate the work council staff have done
00:03:00 to introduce an additional way of providing opportunities for people with voluntary conservation agreements. Okay. And I think that the amendment, which is in the agenda, is in the agenda. Thank you. Mayor Wellington: Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak? I'll put the motion in. All those in favour? Thank you. That's carried. Aye. Speaker 5: Unanimously. Mayor Wellington: We go on to the further general committee meeting recommendations. Item number 2 is another change application for an MCU entertainment and dining business at 6 Thomas Street, Noosaville. Item number 2 is another change application for an MCU entertainment and dining business at 2 18 and 20 Hofmann Drive, Noosaville. There's been some new wording recommended beyond that, which was recommended from the
00:04:00 general committee. The new wording comes from council's planning solicitor. That has been distributed previously. Is everyone aware of this changed wording? Yes. Or do you want time to digest it? Just have a moment. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm aware of it, I think. Speaker 1: Yes. I've had time to read it. Thanks. Speaker 4: I've had time to read it too. Councillor Jurisevic: Is that all of it, Kev? Does it go further? Mayor Wellington: No, that's a bit more. Can you scroll, please? I thought there was something there. Keep scrolling. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, okay. That's as we read it. Yep, okay. Mayor Wellington: Ah, there's more. It goes on and on. Yeah, yeah. Councillor Jackson: It's mostly referencing, isn't it? Mayor Wellington: That's right. It's mostly referencing. Speaker 2: And then there's a bit more strength given at the end. Mayor Wellington: For the sake of clarity, most of it is just sort of procedural tweaking, but the last three
00:05:00 paragraphs, I think, should be read out. They read, the proposed uses are clearly defined by the NUSA plan and the applicant's proposed use definitions are unnecessarily inappropriate and have the potential to cause confusion. Clause 15 is there are no discretionary matters which would warrant approval of the development proposal. And 16, for the aforesaid reasons, approval of the development proposal would not advance the purpose of the Planning Act 2016. I'm looking for a mover and a seconder. Councillor Glasgow: I'll move that. Mayor Wellington: Moved, Councillor Glasgow. I'll second that. Seconded, Councillor Wilkie. Councillor Glasgow: Do you wish to speak to it, Councillor Glasgow? No, it's all just there. Mayor Wellington: Anyone wish to speak to this? I'll put the motion. All those in favour? Aye. Thank you. It's carried unanimously. We go back to the recommendations of the General Committee meeting. Item number four is a request to change the development approval for an MCU for premises at 25 Kauri Street, Cooroy. Speaker 5: I'll ask that we deal with that separately.
00:06:00 Councillor Jurisevic: There were issues associated with that, Mr Chair, and information received from staff in regard to it. Mayor Wellington: Certainly. So we'll deal with that item on its own. Thank you. Thank you. Now, there were some questions raised at General Committee, and there was a staff response circulated. Has everyone received that staff response? Yes. Yes, that's right. Okay. I'm looking for a mover and a seconder, unless there are any questions relating to this item. I'll move that. Oh, you're a busy boy tonight, Councillor Glasgow. Moved, seconded by Councillor Wilkie. I'll second. Do you wish to speak to it, Councillor Glasgow? No. It's all reserved, Chair. Anyone wish to speak to this? Councillor Jurisevic: Just to ask a question to clarify the issues that were raised by councils at the time. With regard to the road widths and the requirements for footpaths around the site, I don't have
00:07:00 any particular issue with the closing of one of the accesses, but I do see that the loss of... Or the decrease in the width of the footpaths, I don't see any particular issue with the Councillor Jackson: Point of order, Mr Chair. Councillor Jurisevic's question is not relevant to the motion before us. Mayor Wellington: No, well, in a way I agree and in a way I don't, Councillor, in that the issue is about the egress to the property from either street. Therefore, the issue came up at General Committee whether or not Olivine Street was wide enough to be able to take all the vehicle traffic. So I think I can allow. Councillor Jurisevic: I was heading in that direction with my question. And for staff, and my question for staff is the one that was raised with regard to the matters that were raised at Monday's meeting. The widths of roads at both Kauri Street and Olivine Street, how were they derived at with regard to safety and parking and the requirement for footpaths on both of those access roads?
00:08:00 Mayor Wellington: Thanks, Kerry. Speaker 3: The widths were currently conditioned in the... I don't have any approval to be consistent with Council's planning scheme policies for road design, so there's the policy sets, road widths based on the amount of traffic those roads are likely to carry in the future, so they're consistent with that. For Kauri Street in particular, it's quite a wide street at the entrance to Kauri Street, approximately 11 metres wide, but then towards the end of Kauri Street it narrows down to 8 metres, it tapers down. So the current conditions are that it's quite a wide street at the entrance to Kauri Street, approximately 11 metres wide, but then towards the end of Kauri Street it narrows down to 8 metres, it tapers down. Speaker 2: Can we say something? Mayor Wellington: No, I'm sorry you can't. Are you satisfied with that answer? Councillor Jurisevic: Yes, just to clarify the staff response with regard to the questions raised by councillors on Monday.
00:09:00 Mayor Wellington: So the response is clear that the widths of the road are in keeping with that in terms of the design for Cooroy and the types of roads that they are. So they're no bigger, no smaller. Speaker 3: That's right. Mayor Wellington: Councillor Wilkie? Just to explain, sorry, before you do. I'm sorry, under our standing orders we can't allow for members of the public or people in the gallery to interrupt the meeting session. Speaker 2: Sorry. Are we able to concern our, we've already sent you guys numerous emails. We've had no reply. We have many concerns. Mayor Wellington: Okay. We need to take this up after the meeting if you don't mind. Sorry, we can't include, we can't incorporate you as part of the meeting. But I'll make sure that staff and myself come and talk to you at the end of the meeting.
00:10:00 Speaker 2: That would be fantastic. Mayor Wellington: No worries. Councillor Wilkie? Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: So you were saying that the planning scheme requires a road with the park. So you're saying that the road will be 8 metres, right? The note we've got in front of us says site frontage 6.5 metres. Does that mean the road will be widened as part of the works that are going to be undertaken? Speaker 3: Do you, Mr Chair? Olivine Street is, from memory, 6.5 and I'd have to check that, but it is narrow because it serves less traffic on that street. And the width of Olivine Street would allow two cars to pass, but it wouldn't allow parking. You'd have to, as your, it would allow, if cars were parked on the street, you'd have to wait for the cars to pass. But that is the standard for that style of access street. Kauri Street is 8 metres wide and that allows two cars to pass and one car to be parked on the side of the road at the same time. Councillor Wilkie: Sorry.
00:11:00 The note we've got in front of us here, it says, refers to Kauri Street, but it says site frontage 6.5 metres conditioned to be 8 metres wide. Does that mean that section of, that width of road will be widened as part of the works? Yeah. Speaker 3: Sorry. Yeah. So currently that section of Kauri Street is only, the road pavement is only 6.5 metres wide. It is required to be widened to 8 metres for that section in front of the site. And that's consistent with the remainder of Kauri Street. Okay. Councillor Wilkie: And then it says, north of the site, it is 6 metres wide at the adjoining property, extending to 8 metres. So that, can you explain, will that 6 metres north of the site, will that be widened as well? Speaker 3: The land north of the site hasn't been developed as yet. There's no approval on that site for development. Okay. So there's no curb and channel. So it's envisaged that as that site develops, it will also be widened to 8 metres. Okay. So that will be consistent with all those streets.
00:12:00 So the beginning of Kauri Street will be 11 metres. It will then narrow to 8 metres, which will continue all the way up Kauri Street eventually. Mayor Wellington: Thank you. Councillor Claster. Councillor Glasgow: Yeah, just for the sake of people having a go, from Monday, elaborate a little bit more on the tree policy. I believe there's a little bit of a situation there with the current tree. Is that right? Hence why there's some road widening not going on? Speaker 3: Not quite. There's some significant trees adjacent to the site in the road reserves. So some of the design requirements around the site have taken into consideration the retention of those trees. Yeah. So there is some of the road frontage requirements give some consideration to those trees. Mayor Wellington: Correct me if I'm wrong. That was a decision made when this was approved previously, how it was to retain those trees. Speaker 3: Yes, that's right. This is not part of this application before us at the moment. Councillor Glasgow: That's right. It's not part of this application. We're not required to provide those trees. We're a previous application and that is in a way inhibiting the widening of the road
00:13:00 at all or? Speaker 3: No, they're just, they restrict us in terms of where the footpaths go and whether we could provide off street car parking in the road reserve if we wish to keep those trees. Oh, okay. Good. Good. Mayor Wellington: Okay. Any further questions? Anyone need to speak to this? Put the motion. All those in favour? Aye. Thank you. The motion is carried unanimously. We move on to item five, which is development assessment fees and charges variations for April through to the end of December. Item six is the Noosa District Sports Complex Master Plan final. Item number seven is the final version of the Cooroy Sports Complex Master Plan. Item number eight is the financial performance report for December. Item number nine is local government legislative reforms, electoral and other legislative reforms in relation to accountability, integrity and other matters bill, a report on that. Item number 10 is the update on sustainable tourism stakeholder reference group.
00:14:00 The recommendation is the general committee recommendations tonight be adopted, except we're dealt with or held over by the resolution. I'll move that. Moved, Councillor Jackson. Seconded, Councillor Wilkie. Seconded, Mr Chair. I'll put the motion. All those in favour? Aye. Thank you. That's carried unanimously. That concludes the recommendations today. We'll move on to this evening's meeting. However, we have a report direct to the meeting, which is a report on the draft South East Queensland Koala Conservation Strategy. Peter Milne, thanks for joining us. Any questions, councillors? Councillor Jackson: Councillor Jackson. Yes, I have a couple of questions that I'd be interested to hear more about. Sure. Peter, thank you for your report and recommendations. I'm interested to know a little bit more about the Cooroy Sports Complex. I'm interested to know a little bit more about the recommendation that the submission is suggesting reinstating
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 catXPMAV areas. The reason given is that this would have the opportunity for council to do offsets for koala habitats. I wonder if you could explain how those offsets actually work, so you could explain that a bit. Peter? Speaker 4: Sure. So, under the Vegetation Management Act, there's certain areas that are category X, and they're mostly developed areas. They've been developed in the past. Some areas may have been developed up to 30, 40 years ago. So, in that time, we've had regrowth vegetation. So, regardless of the mapping of the legislation, that area still can provide koala habitat. Even though it's category X under the VMA. Under the VMA, there's not necessarily any vegetation protection measures, unless there's
00:16:00 another policy or legislation in place that covers that. Okay? So, typically Noosa Plan, the koala policy, state koala policy as well, can also cover that. So, if you can imagine, there's multiple layers of policy that can cover those areas. So, by removing category X, unfortunately, we lose some of the protection mechanisms, particularly avoid, mitigate, offset provisions in some areas, because they don't go through that assessment process on the state policy. So, avoid, mitigate, offset. You may not be able to stop development, but you may be able to mitigate some of those impacts. You might be able to put in corridors. You might be able to retain certain habitat trees. So, avoid, mitigate means reduce the impact as much as possible, but to offset is you're offsetting residual impacts. So, impacts that you couldn't possibly avoid, we then offset and then apply those offsets
00:17:00 in other ways. Councillor Jackson: So, could you explain the word offset and what it actually is? Speaker 4: Sure. So, the offset policy provisions are set under the Offset Policy Act. Which was brought into effect in 2014. And offsets can be a number of things. They can be planting trees on another site, so creating koala habitat elsewhere. They can be a financial contribution. It might be for a particular study or research or something that'll help with koala conservation. There's a range of different offset provisions. The most common one is actually planting trees, trying to reinstate koala habitat elsewhere. Councillor Jackson: Okay. So, can I just understand if the financial contributions you just mentioned, they would be used for other koala related habitat matters. Is the funding actually quarantined in some way so that it is in fact used for that? Speaker 4: Yes, that's correct. So, it can be, it depends who the assessment manager is.
00:18:00 So, it can be quarantined at a state, state government level. They have an account for offsets. We can also, we also exercise offset funds as well. So, for example, we can also, we can also use offset funds. We did have an offset down at Settler's Cove area, which we delivered at Guruene Nature Refuge. So, funds from there were used from that development to actually reinstate koala habitat now. Councillor Jackson: Sorry, just another question. You mentioned at the beginning, as you were explaining, that most of these particular types of properties are, you said, already developed. Yeah. So, but then you talked about development assessments. So, it sounds like they're not really all developed. Is that? And perhaps I'm wondering what implication it has for ones that in fact are developed. Speaker 4: So, they have been developed at some point. So, they might have even 20, 30 years of regrowth. Obviously, trees can keep growing. Councillor Jackson: But they have houses on them or something. Speaker 4: Can be. Category X areas have houses, development.
00:19:00 Yeah. But some areas don't. They haven't been developed. Okay. At this point in time. So, nevertheless, it can still create koala habitat. Councillor Jackson: Yeah. Speaker 4: Yeah. Councillor Jackson: And, if you're an owner of such a property, that's what I'm trying to understand. Yeah. Yeah. Speaker 4: Implication for the land holder? Councillor Jackson: Yeah. Speaker 4: Okay. Well, it being removed from that category X, from the koala mapping, there probably is very little implication for the land holder in that case. There's probably more of an implication for the land holder if that category X wasn't removed, if you know what I mean. Councillor Jackson: Yeah. Well, meaning what would that mean? So, what would be the implication then for that land holder? Speaker 4: All set provisions might apply. Councillor Jackson: If it's not removed. Yeah. But it doesn't go retrospective. They've already owned it. So, I mean, I don't understand this because- You're going back and forth. You're saying they're developed. And then you're saying that they would have to pay.
00:20:00 But I don't quite understand that because they seem to be developed already. So, I don't- Speaker 4: Not all properties are developed- No. Okay. In the category X. Yeah. Some have got regrowth vegetation. Councillor Jackson: So, the ones you're referring to are the ones that are not developed. Yeah. Okay. Thanks. Yeah. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Any other questions, folks? I just had a question. Yeah. A follow up to, could you explain what the acronym XPMAV and CATXPMAV mean? What are they? What's the literal translation of that, please? What does that mean? Speaker 4: Yeah. It's probably maps of accessible vegetation. So, this is an agreement between the landholder and the state as to how that land is developed. It's not something that council is privy to. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. And the Ewell Wintile Forest was mentioned- project was mentioned. What is the significance of that project in terms of what the state is trying to achieve with this plan?
00:21:00 Speaker 4: How would- I believe the Queensland Government- The government actually sees the Ural Ring Tar Project as a flagship project for the state because it has so many multiple stakeholders involved, you know, local government, state government, local environment groups, the commercial operators like HQP Plantations, so they really see that as a really good model that they'd like to pursue in other areas, so it is really like a pilot project I guess for the state, that's why it's so significant and that's why it's mentioned in there. Mayor Wellington: I see they've given it a new moniker too, it's now the Noosa Koala Corridor Pilot. Speaker 4: Okay, it's got another name. Councillor Wilkie: Peter, you mentioned, perhaps it's one of the things you'd like to make a submission on, that in Noosa 50% of koala records, I assume that means sightings, koala records, are found in regrowth vegetation,
00:22:00 yet young regrowth is exempt from these proposed vegetarian, vegetarian, vegetation, these vegan clearing provisions. Is there, are you deliberately, is it going to be exempt from all regrowth or just young regrowth? Speaker 4: Various stages of regrowth, young regrowth is not protected. The regrowth in the planning scheme, for example, over seven years, it does, it is protected, and as it gets past that seven years, it's actually, it's, the koalas love regrowth. They obviously, records are found in the regrowth areas, but we, often we don't have sufficient protection for those regrowth areas. There's a whole lot of exemptions that people can apply for within regrowth areas. And so it does, given that Noosa's fairly unique in that we do have 50% of our records in regrowth, we need to look closely at how we can better protect those regrowth areas,
00:23:00 because in some places it's just not protected. Councillor Wilkie: And what is the state thinking in moving to remove young regrowth, or make young regrowth exempt? Speaker 4: Well, that'll be under the VMA, so that's under the, they've got high value regrowth as a protection measure mechanism. So typically, you know, very tall regrowth that's been there, you know, at least seven years. That's as far as what they recognise in the VMA. So we probably need to look a bit closer to see how we can further that protection, perhaps through the planning scheme, through the biodiversity overlay. Again, just to get more protection around that regrowth. Because just because it's regrowth now, it's only this high, may not necessarily become koala habitat now, but it could be in 10 years' time. So do we exclude those areas from our koala habitat areas, even though it's not the right vegetation at this point in time?
00:24:00 I guess that's the question. Okay, thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Councillor Jurisevic? One would have to assume that an assessment would be made on the type of regrowth, the type of trees and that, that are regrowth, and to see if they are actually koala habitat type regrowth. Or are you suggesting that it could be replanted as part of an offset program and then could be developed into koala habitat? Speaker 4: Yeah, certainly an area that right now may not be mapped as koala habitat, if we could replant those areas, we can then turn that mapping over into a mapped koala habitat area. That raises the protection level of that soil. Councillor Jackson: Councillor Jackson? Speaker 4: Thank you. Councillor Jackson: Peter, there's also another item in the recommended submission, and that is about fire management. It says there are a number of exemptions for clearing vegetation, particularly concerning fire management. Greater policy guidance is based on expert advice is required to ensure what clearing is relevant and practical
00:25:00 to not only help protect life and property, but minimise impacts on koala populations. Given that we've just been experiencing extreme fire events, I'm wondering what sort of, what kind of, advice, guidance are you actually seeking here? Speaker 4: Mostly in terms of setbacks, in terms of bush in relation to, to assets, asset protection and life protection. And a lot of, a lot of the impacts from fire are from ember attack. And so by clearing a fire trial may not necessarily help protect an asset. So I guess the reaction is that it can be over clearing. You do need a separation. You need a separation for access for emergency services.
00:26:00 But if there's an over clearing, you're not really achieving a result, a good result, either for fire protection or for, or for koalas. And obviously there's that conflict between life and property protection and also protecting koala habitat. Councillor Jackson: So is there a potential for a conflict between protecting koalas and property? Most definitely. And that's what you're seeking, guidance where this conflict isn't a conflict. Is that what you're seeking? Speaker 4: Yeah, that's, that's definitely right. That's, there is a conflict there that we can, I guess, landholders can actually over clear. That might be an immediate reaction, but we need to look closely at what, what the, what the, the policy guideline is behind that. We need to develop good policy guidelines so we don't over clear. It may not, in some areas, it may not necessarily be the results that the people are after. But it's kind of, it's, it's sort of a, an automatic response to the, to the fire issue.
00:27:00 Okay, thank you. Any other questions? Just with regard to. Councillor Jurisevic: In terms of Jurisevic? Just with regard to the, the development assessment. Now, it's clear from what the state's trying to achieve here. Is that significant development assessments with regard to koala habitat will now fall to the state to approve with regard to clearing of koala habitat. Speaker 5: Is that correct? Yes, that's right. Speaker 4: So, so previously local government had some jurisdiction or authority to assess clearing in koala habitat areas. That has now been shifted back to the state. Okay, so it's anything to do with impacts on koala habitat will be assessed by the state. Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: So are there any areas earmarked for development within the Noosa Shire that may be impacted by the proposal here? Significant areas in particular?
00:28:00 Speaker 4: Not that I'm aware of. Not, not at this point in time. Any, any major, and Kerry might be able to answer this better than me, but if development assessments, applications were lodged previous to now, they're still assessed by the state. They're still assessed under the old provisions, so there's no change. This is just a draft document going to court's proposal. In the future, in some ways, in some areas, there'll probably be stronger controls. But in other areas, there may be less controls. If you want to add to that now, I can. Speaker 3: Yes. Just while we can't disclose the mapping and some of the locations, because we've been asked to keep this confidential by the state, there are, we have seen that there are significant areas in Noosa where currently there would be an offset for koala habitat loss through development proposals. And the new mapping will mean there'll be no offset applied. And yet we know that it is definitely koala habitat and koalas are known to frequent the
00:29:00 area. So some of the changes proposed are quite concerning for that reason, because they are quite significant areas. Mayor Wellington: And this is the same issue that Redland Shire had? Speaker 3: It is. It is. But, yeah, we're bound by, we're bound by the fact that there are significant areas where we can't disclose the agreement and that we aren't able to disclose that. But it is, I find it very concerning because their whole goal is about no net loss of koala habitat, and yet they've weakened it to in one area where there'll be no, because there's no offset able to be taken. Councillor Jackson: Can I just clarify, is that related to the PMAV stuff, the CatX? That's still the same things that we looked at before? Yes. Yes, that's right. Mayor Wellington: Councillor Custon? Councillor Wilkie, you had a question? Councillor Wilkie: No, that, that was along the lines of what I wanted. Yeah, that was it. Just wanted you to understand, so. Mayor Wellington: Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah, thank you. Mayor Wellington: Any further questions? Looking for a mover and a seconder? I'll move it. Moved Councillor Wilkie, seconded Councillor Jurisevic. Councillor Wilkie: Would you like to speak to it, Councillor Wilkie?
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 No, just to thank Peter for the work he has been doing in this field for many, many years, and also the tasks that you have ahead of you. Thank you for the report. I realise you're bound by confidentiality, you can't exactly say which areas will, these protections will no longer apply. I hope that your submissions will address that. Just a question, will the submission, before it goes to the State, come back to us, or do we need to ratify it? Mayor Wellington: I think that you'll find that the recommendation gives allowance for any minor changes, and to, what was it? What's proposed, so no, my understanding is that there's a very tight deadline here, and so the submission will not be coming back to us, because there simply isn't time to meet the deadline. Councillor Wilkie: Okay, well I guess. Mayor Wellington: That's why the report's been rushed to us now. Councillor Wilkie: Yes, I guess I can only express the hope that this strategy does result in its stated aims of providing greater protection for this, for koalas, and help strengthen the local
00:31:00 government's existing protections. And compliments it does, and not weaken it. Speaker 5: Anyone else wish to speak to it? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, I'll have a quick answer. Councillor Jurisevic. I said, one of the most concerning parts of the report for mine is on page 23. Within the KPA, 150,700 hectares has been identified as being suitable for restoration, compared to the amount of lost habitat since the 1960s, there's a significant amount. But in this report, they're only identifying 1,000 hectares for rehabilitation. Okay. So there's a long, long way to go when the koalas are fighting an uphill battle. The recent bushfires in southern states are an example of the challenges that koalas face. We know the challenges koalas face within our Shire. So I'm hoping that we'll see far more than 1,000 hectares dedicated, and offsets, and plantings along those lines dedicated towards koala conservation in the future. Mayor Wellington: Thank you. Any other councillors wish to speak?
00:32:00 Feel the need to close, Councillor Wilkie? No, thank you, Mr Chair. I'll put the motion. All those in favour? Aye. Thank you. That's carried unanimously. That concludes the reports. There's no confidential session. However, we move on to public question time. Mr O'Connor, would you care to come forward and ask your questions, please? We'll do them one at a time, if you don't mind. Speaker 5: Thank you. By withdrawing use of Council from the South East Queensland Council of Mayors that is negotiating with the State and Federal Governments, a 2020 City Deal funding agreement centred around a bid for the 2032 Olympic Games, has not our Shire lost out on a share of the reported $58 billion in infrastructure investment, economic and other benefits that will flow from the signing of the City Deal,
00:33:00 involving all other local government areas in South East Queensland, except Noosa? Mayor Wellington: Thank you. Brian, I'll answer that one. Your next question will be answered by Michael Shave. My response is as follows. Noosa Council has not been a member of the SEQ Council of Mayors since 2015, in fact. Noosa Council was not getting sufficient value for money from its membership. The policy agenda for the SEQ Council of Mayors focuses on city and population growth-based issues and does not align strategically with Noosa Council's future priorities and our future needs. Not all South East Queensland Councils, in fact, are a member of the SEQ Council of Mayors. Gull Coast City Council, for example, one of the biggest councils, has chosen not to be a member of the SEQ Council of Mayors. There's very little that Noosa Council is likely to gain from City Deal funding. City Deals, in fact. Because City Deals is primarily focused on high population growth areas requiring significant public infrastructure to support the growth.
00:34:00 It's highly doubtful that Noosa would benefit from City Deals in terms of direct funding for public infrastructure, even if City Deals does come to fruition. And, you know, it's been on the table for many years and it hasn't really progressed. Just to explain, as Mayor, I speak with other mayors of the SEQ region whenever I need to. I can pick up the phone at any time. Of course, I deal with them at various functions and forums where we all sit on the SEQ Regional Planning Committee. So I see them at those meetings, LGAQ events, etc. The CEO is also in regular touch with SEQ Councils through their respective CEOs. Most particularly, of course, as he is Queensland President of the Local Government Managers Association, but also informally through his CEO network. So in the end, the tens of thousands of dollars, and we are talking tens of thousands of dollars, required to annually participate in the SEQ Council of Mayors is not really considered to be money well spent.
00:35:00 We believe we can put it to better use on behalf of residents without any significant loss of engagement opportunities with other councils in South East Queensland. Speaker 5: Thank you. Mayor Wellington: So your next question, please. Speaker 5: Next question. By Noosa foregoing inter-regional cooperation on transport connectivity and other common interests via the South East Queensland Council of Mayors alignment, instead, as the Mayor says, to forge closer ties with the Gympie Regional Council, what tangible outcomes have been achieved through that alliance? Speaker 1: I think I'll answer that one. Look, the close relationship between Noosa and Gympie Councils, it continues to deliver rewards for both of us. Some examples of some tangible outcomes, as you requested, that I can mention tonight are, firstly, Gympie Council has been very supportive to Noosa during the recent local disaster events. For example, during the recent fires, Gympie offered immediate support and access, if needed, to their heavy plant and equipment,
00:36:00 such as graders and dozers. They also offered their evacuation centres as backup should they have been needed, so that's one. Secondly, there have been many examples of information and resource sharing. Council recently hosted the Gympie bridge crew, who came down to compare... Mayor Wellington: They don't play cards, they build bridges. Speaker 1: ...to compare our work... to compare work practices. This afforded us the opportunity to demonstrate how Noosa... Our Noosa Council's success in the use of battery-powered equipment and plant related to bridge maintenance. Thirdly, Gympie and Noosa have provided each other with expert staff to assist with specific employee recruitment. This can mean that Noosa staff can sit on Gympie interview panels and vice versa, which has occurred. We share information at the operational level regarding governance, governance matters. For example, we have shared internal audit plans, which has allowed the opportunity for each Council to review the other Council's forward plans and practices for continuous improvement.
00:37:00 Both Council CEOs periodically attend the respective audit and risk committee meetings of each Council. This active participation allows the respective CEO to contribute positively at the meeting and also to consider improvements to their own governance and risk practices. We have established an agreed sharing of procurement information, allowing comparisons of costs and arrangements related to many essential items that both Councils need to purchase, in addition to exploring shared arrangements, which combines our buying power in the market. We are also progressing discussions between the two Councils currently to identify opportunities to maximise the use of plant and fleet through shared arrangements. So whilst this list isn't exhaustive, I believe that it does demonstrate the current good working relationship between the two Councils. Speaker 5: Thank you. Thank you. Speaker 1: Thanks Brian.
00:38:00 Mayor Wellington: So that concludes tonight's meeting. The next meeting is on the 20th of February here in Council chambers at 6pm. I declare the meeting closed. Thank you for your attendance everyone. Safe travels, Councillor Stockwell. Speaker 1: Good evening everyone. Mayor Wellington: See you all. Bye.