Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Councillor Jurisevic: No, this is Randy Monterey. This is way down front. Okay, we're on. Speaker 1: All good. All good to go. Mayor Stewart: Good evening. I declare the ordinary meeting open. I would like to acknowledge today that we are meeting on the traditional lands of the Gubbi Gubbi people, and I pay my respects to the elders past, present and emerging. Speaker 1: Councillor, just before we get going, just can I ask, we had a bit of feedback from some of the community that with the noise on the table, with the rustling papers or whatever near the microphones, it can get a bit loud, so we've just got to be conscious that we keep the table noise low so that it doesn't interfere with the sound on the video if you don't mind. No thumping. No thumping the table. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, Brian. Mayor Stewart: I note that everyone is in attendance and there are no apologies. Firstly, the minutes of the ordinary meeting held on the 21st of May 2020 be received and confirmed. Councillor Wilkie: Unforgettable. I'll move that. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Do we have a seconder? Councillor Wilkie: I'll second. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor. All in favour? Thank you. There are no mayoral minutes.
Public question: BRIAN O’CONNOR ¶
00:01:00 Speaker 1: There are two other minutes. So the other minutes were the special meeting held on the 21st of May. Mayor Stewart: OK. Speaker 1: ...and one was to get someone to move in. Mayor Stewart: OK, I'll move those. Speaker 1: I'll second. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Thank you. All in favour? Thank you. Carried and accepted. There are no mayoral minutes. There are three petitions this evening. I have been given two. The first is a petition of 35 signatures requesting parking permits for residents of Widder Circle. I move that this petition be received and referred to the CEO to determine appropriate action. Councillor Wilkie: I'll second that to Councillor Stewart. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Lougheed. The second petition is... I need to just call the table. Oh, all the way back. All the way back. Thank you. All the way back. Thank you. The second petition is in regard to 85 signatures and it is a request to upgrade a bus stop in Furness Drive, Tewantin by providing a bus shelter and extending the existing bus stop pathway to meet the Monterey Complex entrance driveway prior to summer 2020 be received and referred to the Chief Executive Officer to determine appropriate action.
00:02:00 Do I have a seconder? Second. Thank you. All in favour? Thank you. Thank you. The third petition is from, I believe, Councillor Lorentson Dunham has a petition. Councillor Lorentson: I would like... I have a petition by the residents of Sunrise Beach that are requesting a pedestrian crossing on Tingira Crescent located opposite or near the beach chalet. They have identified this area as a high safety risk to the public and are asking for urgent action. I have a petition in front of me that has been signed... I have a petition in front of me that has been signed by 289 residents who support this request, citing that the Orealla Bridge closure has diverted highway traffic onto Tingira Crescent and has made crossing the street extremely unsafe for residents, in particular, the children and the elderly.
00:03:00 I've also spoken to many residents who, in addition to feeling unsafe crossing the road, are also suffering from anxiety. The area is a community hub with a lookout, Sunrise Beach public toilets and showers, chalet and co-cafe, and beach entries number 36 and 37. I have made an earlier request to put in a pedestrian crossing and was told that this would slow down traffic and create a bottleneck. I believe that public safety and wellbeing of the community should be prioritised. I move that a motion be brought forward to be received and referred to the CEO to determine appropriate action. I move that a motion be brought forward to be received and referred to the CEO to determine appropriate action. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll second that. Mayor Stewart: I'll second that. I'll second that, too. I'll second that, too. Thank you. All in favour? Thank you. There are no notified motions, no presentations, no deputations.
00:04:00 Item number eight on the agenda is consideration of committee recommendations. Item number eight on the agenda is consideration of committee recommendations. Item number eight on the agenda is consideration of committee recommendations from the 5th of June 2020. Specifically, the items are Queensland Audit Office 2020 Interim Management Report, Internal Audit Update, 2019-20 Shell Financial Statements and End of Financial Year Update, Risk Management, Insurance and Corruption Update, Effectiveness of the Audit and Risk Committee. The recommendation is the Audit and Risk Committee Recommendations dated 5th of June 2020. The next set of recommendations is on page five of our agendas and is for the Planning and Environment Committee Recommendations.
00:05:00 Item one has been referred to the General Committee. Item two is for the minor change to a material change of use of premises for a service station, convenient shop and food outlet at 140 142 Eumundi Noosa Noosa Road, Noosa Junction. Item three was referred to the General Committee. Item four was referred to the General Committee. Item five was referred to the General Committee. Item six is the biosecurity surveillance program. Item seven is referred to the General Committee. Would anyone like to move to the Planning and Environment Committee Recommendations? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So moved. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Thank you. All in favour? Yes. Thank you. Let's hear it. The next lot of items for recommendation is from the Services and Organisation Committee from the 9th of June 2020. Item one is tree management and maintenance, preferred supplier arrangement.
00:06:00 Item two is the Regional Arts Development Fund Grant Recommendations. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. I'll have to declare a perceived conflict of interest in this matter as defined by section 175D of the Local Government Act relating to the use of materials for the development of the Hintland Art Group. I have been actively involved in supporting the group's great upcycling challenge and exhibition, including judging the annual exhibition for the past two years. I'll ask that I leave the room while the matter is considered. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Grisham. Councillor Wilkie: I'll move the resolution. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: I'll second that. Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can we recycle? Yes, we can. Thank you.
00:07:00 Mayor Stewart: Item three is the Budget Consultation which was referred to the General Committee. Item four is the Council at Romina North. Thank you. I will move that the Services and Organisation Committee recommendations for the 9th of June 2020 be adopted except when dealt with or held over by separate resolution. Councillor Jurisevic: Seconded Madam Chair. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. All in favour? The next lot of recommendations are from the General Committee dated the 15th of June 2020. Item 1 is the material change of use and operational works located at 2 and 4 Russell Street, Noosaville. Item 2, and this is on page 11, sorry, pardon, it is on page 13, is Planning and Environment Court Appeal number 219 of 2020. Refusal of an application for two detached houses and 12 multiple housing units and reconfiguring a lot.
00:08:00 One into four lots plus easement at 27 Otunga Heights. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'd like to deal with that matter separately and I will move the Committee recommendation. Councillor Wilkie: I'll second that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do so and it's to clarify concerns that were raised by the community with me and rather than talk to it at the beginning, I'd just like to inquire of the CEO as to the role of councils and the appropriate processes that occur when council finds itself in an appeal with a development. If you could clarify the roles of councils and what we can and can't do, please. Speaker 1: If I understand the question, it's really what happens when an appeal is lodged and what council's interaction. Yeah, so council's got a policy about how we deal with development assessment applications and that goes through different phases, you know, pre-lodgement, through to assessment, decision making and so on.
00:09:00 It's pretty clear in our policy that once an appeal has been lodged, councillors don't have a role in engaging with the applicants and obviously if you do get approached, the best thing is to say we've made this under appeal and we can't deal with that. We can't have this on. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, on Monday we had a wholesome debate about this issue. There was some material presented which gave concern to some members of the public that there actually had been meetings held with councillors and I believe that's not the case. So there's no breach of any process. But I think it's important that publicly we state that yes, there was, I understand the appellant did have a registered lobbyist provide information to most councillors. I didn't receive it myself. And that information was made available but no councillors entered into a without prejudice meeting. I believe we made the decision on Monday and I think we will again tonight,
00:10:00 based on the expert advice of our staff and as we all quite should do, follow guidance on these matters, particularly when it comes to appeals relating to the Planning Act. Mayor Stewart: Item 3 is the Planning and Environment Court of Appeal number D63 of 2020. Refusal of a line of change to a development approval for a jetty at 60 The Peninsula, Noosaville. Item 4, Planning and Environment Court of Appeal number D67 of 2020. Refusal of an application for a barn at 5 Taylor Court, Cooroy. Item 5, Environmental Project Grants. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, I wish to declare a perceived conflict of interest and provide particulars as required under the Act. Having reviewed the requirements under the Act since Monday,
00:11:00 I believe I have to give a more fuller outline. Of the interest I have in this matter. And specifically in relation to, I have adopted the guidance from the Office of the Independent Assessor. I do have a long-standing association with Noosa District Landcare and its predecessors. I am currently an ordinary member of the Association and as stipulated by legislation, this in itself is not a conflict of interest. I therefore outline the other elements of my association with this not-for-profit organisation that may give rise to a conflict or a perception of interest. My long-standing collegial relationships with a number of people involved in the Noosa District Landcare Group dating back to the 1980s. I was involved in the initiation and was subsequently appointed as the Council of Representatives to start the entity in its initial form, which was as a subcommittee of the Gympian District Landcare Group. This process was driven by the Council at the time and, as equipped, also resulted in this Council winning the inaugural State and National Landcare Awards
00:12:00 for local government in 1990 and 1991. I have had professional roles as a public servant between 1998 and 2014, which has brought me in contact with the group over the years. This includes as the Department of Natural Resources and other similar named departments, as a Mary River catchment coordinator, 1998 to 2000, as the North Coast District Senior Natural Resource Manager between 2000 and 2003, between that department as a Principal Planning and Policy Officer on a statewide role in 2004, in the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, being the South East Queensland Principal Catchment Ecologist and the Leader of Sustainable Production Systems between 2004 and 2010, and the Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation Regional Services for Sunshine Coast between 2010 and 2013. Due to the public service nature of these roles, none of the dealings with Noosa District Landcare during this time are, in my opinion, are defined under legislation as a personal interest. The Commissioner also suggested that I have a personal issue
00:13:00 that I would have a personal interest if I was perceived to have a personal interest in the outcome of a close friend's bid for a Council contract or similar. So since Monday I have reviewed my relationship with the current Management Committee of Noosa District Landcare and can advise as follows. The current Chair is Dr Kim Barnes, who I know purely through her role at Landcare and as a relative of her husband, Dick Barnes, being the Treasurer of that organisation, a retired businessman, and a beef, you know, most enterprising beef producer in the Shire. It is a long-standing collegial relationship with his voluntary roles both for Landcare, Country Noosa, the Noosa Community Biosphere Association and the Noosa Biosphere Reserve. I've known Committee Member Jeff Black for the longest period, having both been on the Committee of the Koora Forest Association in the early 1980s, where we tried to stop the pine plantations which we're currently trying to put back to native forest. Jeff has also lived up the road when I was building my first house and provided neighbourly assistance in the 80s.
00:14:00 Committee Member Paul Steele is a Fanding member and I know him purely through that context. Committee Member Dr Melanie Hassell is a businesswoman who I'm dealing with in a role in Landcare and as a Councillor in her previous roles in the Noosa Hinterland Reds Association Committee in relation to development approval at the Nindroya Industrial Estate. Phillip Moran is a General Manager who I've known since his earliest days in the group in the late 1990s. My relationship with Phil is forged in our shared interest to look after this place. While I consider Phil a kindred soul and a mate, he went to Bedford & Gammon, I went to Brisbane State High, so there's no way we could be close friends. Councillor Finzel: No, seriously, it is my assessment Deputy Mayor Stockwell: that the collegial relationship developed over many years does not constitute one of a close friend and is not receiving the grant. It is his employer, a not-for-profit community organisation, that is. I do not believe I have any close friends within the executive roles in the organisation to the extent that they would trigger a conflict in this matter. I do have a prior business relationship
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 between myself and Landcare. In 2015, I took a very short two-day consultancy, which I charged 40% of my normal full rate as a community organisation, where I facilitated a meeting of members and staff of Noosa Landcare to conduct a SWAT analysis and to help guide their strategic direction. I have checked the report from that meeting and there is no nexus between anything that came out of that meeting and the grant application at hand. Also, in 2015, I subcontracted Noosa and District Landcare to provide professional assistance in development of a planning tool for use by a government entity calling upon their expertise in environmental offset, which also represented about two days' work. These dealings do create a personal interest. However, considering the passage of time and the low value of interest, I do not believe it is sufficient to warrant me leaving this room. Noting the advice of the Office of Independent Assessment says that the interest must be of some substance or value rather than merely a slight or low value interest. Having reviewed the Office of Independent Assessment guidance
00:16:00 and assessed particulars of my interest, I reaffirmed my advice on Monday that I have a perceived conflict of interest, that I can, under the Act, remain in the room and deal with the matter in the public interest. Mayor Stewart: Councillor Stockwell, I'm looking at the information from the Office of Independent Assessment and it says if you think that a fair member, fair-minded member of the community might perceive that you might be unable to make a decision in the public interest because of your personal interest. Do you think that a member of the community listening to all of that history that you've just espoused, and it's a very long history, could think that you would be impartial? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. In fact, I've had the most phone calls I've ever had after a meeting of people who have suggested that they couldn't see the fairness of what occurred on Monday. Mayor Stewart: And, Councillor Stockwell, you said that you have received money from this organisation when determining on the scene. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yep.
00:17:00 So, I'm going to go over a one-day workshop and write the report for it. Yep. Mayor Stewart: And is there a possibility that in the future you may also engage work with this Landcare at some point as a consultant? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Possibility I could enter into relationships in the future. Mayor Stewart: At any point in time? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yep. Mayor Stewart: So, next week, potentially, you could enter into an engagement as a consultant? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, I'm too busy. Mayor Stewart: But if they ask, that would be a possibility, that's not without thought. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Any, like I can't rule out any future possibility, yeah. Mayor Stewart: Okay, thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I say that in the current environment as a councillor, I'm highly unlikely to accept it? Mayor Stewart: No, but there is the opportunity to accept it. And you think you can still, based on that, be impartial? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, yes. Councillor Wegener: Well, I think that any one of us in this room could be hired by Landcare tomorrow. Yourself, a lot of us could be. We all have expertise, we're all very good at things that we do.
00:18:00 So, we're looking more backwards than forwards, I believe. In this case. Mayor Stewart: Well, I don't think I could be hired by Landcare because I don't have the expertise or the experience or the history that Councillor Stockwell has with that organization. That's just me, though. Councillor Jurisevic: There's no motion before us at this point in time. Councillor Wegener: Well, another thing that's up is, does the councillor have particular expertise in a topic and would their exclusion diminish the robustness, soundness and quality of the discussion leading to a poorer decision? And, of course, there's nobody more expert, no bigger expert in Landcare than Brian Stockwell. So, we will lose out on any discussion concerning anything concerning Landcare without Brian being in the room. Councillor Wilkie: Madam Mayor, we seem to be moving towards debating this particular motion about whether Councillor Stockwell should stay in the room.
00:19:00 So, I'd like to test a motion if that's all right. So, I'll move that the councillors note the perceived conflict of interest declaration of Councillor Stockwell and resolve that this represents perceived conflict of interest in this matter and Councillor Stockwell may remain in the meeting room and participate in the debate and vote on this matter. I'd like to move that. Do you want a seconder? I'll second it. I'll second it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Look, on Monday, we tested this and at that stage, it was apparent Councillor Finzel, yourself and Lawrence were not of the mind that Councillor Stockwell could remain in the room and he did the noble thing by removing himself from the room without it having been put to the vote. We do have a document from the Office of the Independent Assessor before us and I'd just like to ask some of the questions that the OIA has recommended that we ask ourselves and each other before making a final decision on this.
00:20:00 The first one is, does Councillor require more information from the councillor to prevent a financially detrimental decision being made? I would argue that Councillor Stockwell has almost brought us to death with the amount of information at his associations here in this regard. Question two, does the councillor have a particular expertise in a topic area and would their exclusion diminish the robustness, soundness and or quality of the discussion leading to a poorer decision? I would say there's a strong case to say yes because we are all councillors. We do have contacts in the community and working with community individuals and groups is seen to be a good thing. That's how we understand what's going on. That's how we assist community groups in our role. So my answer to that would be a yes. Would the exclusion of the council be perceived as being undemocratic in that they are prevented from representing their community on a particular topic
00:21:00 of significance to their community? And I would say arguably the answer to that is yes also because Councillor Stockwell is known as a very effective advocate for the environment in the Shire and also the groups that work in that sphere. Would the council's inclusion in the discussion and or decision be detrimental to maintaining public trust in the council or local government more generally? And I will concede that given the points that are raised here that may be a debatable point. Are there any other local factors that may be relevant to the inclusion or exclusion of the councillor in the discussion of the decision? I would just like to make councillors aware that in recent times there has been a narrative that's being run that seems to demonise councillors' connection with community, especially volunteer community groups, as if that's somehow a sinister or a bad thing. And I suspect that Councillor Stockwell may be the victim
00:22:00 of that in this case. And on balance I would... Sorry. The last one is how does the situation compare to previous situations? And historically Councillor Stockwell has made these extensive declarations. The important thing under the Act is that the declarations are made, that it's all put out on the table, that the connections are made and we're aware of it. So I think that's the important thing. In the past Councillor Stockwell, having made the declarations, has been allowed to stay in the room. But again, it'll be guided by the group on this. It is a new council. Times are changing. So I'm advocating that Councillor Stockwell will be allowed to stay in the room based on balance, the answers to the questions provided by the Office of the Independent Assessor and the fact that we're having this debate in an open session. That's why I've called it...
00:23:00 Speaker 3: Can I say something? Councillor Jurisevic: Can I say something? Can I say something? Mayor Stewart: Can I say something? Can I say something? Thank you Councillor Wilkie and look and thank you Councillor Stockwell for drawing our attention to your long history. It's certainly you do have expertise in this area. You derived a material benefit in 2015. You were paid as a consultant, you've worked as an advisor and you're currently a member even though you're not part of the board. There's something to say that you won't derive a material benefit from this organisation going forward but as Councillor Weakness said there's something to say that any of us won't but with your expertise and long-standing history I'd say there would be more chance than you would specifically than anyone else around this table. I think it comes back to the words fair-minded member of the community. If after everything that you've just raised, if I was sitting here watching that as a fair-minded member of the community would I think you could make an impartial decision and the answer to that is no. So that's why I'm asking that.
00:24:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Well I'll oppose that here Mayor. I concur with the points raised by Councillor Wilkie particularly with regard to Councillor Stockwell's knowledge as far as knowledge and understanding of the environment around this table. Councillor Stockwell will be by far and above the most knowledgeable person in the room more often than I'll even win staff in the room. He has worked in these areas at a state government level and at a council level. Councillor Wilkie: And I'd argue that any decision on environment it's it's worthy of having Councillor Stockwell's opinion as as an expert at the table in the room Thank you Mayor. It was raised that Councillor Stockwell is a member of Landcare but under the Local Government Act as was stated
00:25:00 before it's important to note that being a member of a voluntary organization does not in itself constitute a conflict of interest. Mayor Stewart: Councillor Wilkie, Councillor Jurisevic, Councillor Lorentson, Councillor Finzel and Councillor Wegener against? Councillor Wilkie: Thank you Madam Mayor. In relation to this grants program, now more than ever programs such as these are needed. It may seem a small matter but by a simple show of hands in favour
00:26:00 of this motion tonight we indicate that this Council is committed to proper process, financial responsibility and waste minimisation, job creation, fairness and equity, enriching social capital and community connections and remaining a source of support and certainty to our community in times of disruption. In terms of process, as we stated on Monday, this is a properly authorised grants program administered by professional staff with grant recipients accounting for expenditure through acquittal. Council offices publicly advertise the call for applicants through paid newspaper advertising, the Council e-newsletter, emails direct to community groups and on the Council website. The volunteer groups took the time to fill out the application forms and entered applications in good faith with an entirely fair and reasonable expectation that, even if they were unsuccessful, that the advertised process would be followed through on. In a time of disruption and chaos, now more than ever, it's important the Council
00:27:00 serves as a source of support and certainty and invests in programs that build resilience, confidence and connection. Honouring the commitment to finalise this grant round tonight will do that. On the point of financial responsibility, in recent weeks we've had great discussions on how we can minimise waste and cost to ratepayers in these times brought by COVID. We've even agonised over the impact of $1 on the bottom line for ratepayers, which is a good theme. It's relevant then to note that ratepayer funded resources have already been invested into getting the program this far. The cost of newspaper advertising and the estimated 93 hours of staff time involved has already cost an estimated $3,500. Approving these grants validates and ensures we do not waste the ratepayer funds already invested. The impulse to save funds that can be used elsewhere is entirely understandable and admirable. As understood, the funds involved here are invaluable. For example, environmental levy funds, already set aside specifically for environmental
00:28:00 purposes, that cannot be used otherwise under the Local Government Act. Supporting all grants, as we have already done tonight for the Regional Arts Development Fund grants on page 8 of this agenda, shows a fair and even-handed approach to such programs, especially considering RATF grants are funded from the general rate, monies which can be used for almost any purpose, unlike levy funds. If we approve the RATF grants, which are drawn from funds which can be used elsewhere, it would beg the question why would we put a stop on immediate payment of grants from a source that can only be used for that purpose. But if there are ideological reservations about the grants programs, reviewing the environmental grants policy and strategy is an entirely healthy exercise for a new council and an appropriate way to manage and accommodate different perspectives. And I'd like to compliment the new councillors on how quickly they've understood the need for us to act on a strategic level, setting policy and the strategic direction of the council rather than intervening in operational matters. Allowing this grant round to run its course and then review the program as part
00:29:00 of a strategic review is part and parcel of this approach, an approach that would not disrupt and build the confidence and trust of this community. In a time when every job is precious, investing in these grants would see the employment of a part-time volunteer coordinator, web designer and see funds go towards local nurseries and the purchase of plants. These are not large sums. But they will be funds circulating through the local economy at a time when needed most. Like the business support measures that we've approved, money that would otherwise be in council hands now remains in the pocket of businesses and circulating in the community. The same with the grants program. It's best for these funds set aside specifically for these volunteer run programs to be sent out to circulate and stimulate activity. Both regional arts development fund grant projects and environmental grant projects also build that intangible social capital.
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 These are all activities that deliver social, emotional and physical benefits that are hard to put a price on. The first year of the Urban Wildlife Gardens Project, NICA undertook 70 house visits. And given that many are couples, this involves about 100 to 120 participants. Without COVID, about 100 house visits would have been more likely. Overall, a really good response. The application for the Hinterland Bush Blink program states that they will undertake at least 20 events during the year. So this is 20 separate conservation events with volunteers, probably at 20 different locations. It is anticipated there will be about 20 participants at each of these, about two to three hours each. So 800 to 1,000 volunteer hours. I've spoken with one of the volunteers today and they are enthused and very hopeful we will improve these grants tonight so they can begin coordinating these activities. One of the many statements from new councillors that has resonated with me is,
00:31:00 it doesn't matter what we say, it matters how we vote. Which also echoes the admirable credo of deeds, not words. Colleagues, through a simple show of hands and the affirmative for this motion, we can show we are committed to uniting, not dividing, financial responsibility, honouring commitments, fairness and equity, proper process, enriching our social capital and human connections, improving the environment that underpins our prosperity, and ensuring this council continues to be a source of support and certainty for our community in difficult times. Dear councillors, I implore that your support for this program be unwavering and, dare I say it, unequivocal. Councillor Lorentson: Community groups need volunteers, support, trust and funding to keep going. They reflect what is good in this world, kindness and generosity of spirit.
00:32:00 They help shape and build strong local communities. What councils provide in terms of funding just keeps them going. Without the small amounts of money that council provides, a lot of their activity would never get off the ground and their contribution would be lost. I have been a volunteer and I've applied for community grants. So I know, or should know, that I am a volunteer. I should have known how much, so little, will do to help small community groups move forward. I support the Environment Project grants funding recommendations and I look forward to working with our community groups so that I can learn how to best support them in the future. Councillor Jurisevic: I think there's one thing that's clear, as I said, a very impassioned solicitation there from the Council of Wilkie and I concur with all of the sentiments there within the council. One of the things that is an expectation of any grants round is that when the grants come to fruition and are supported by us to be provided to the community,
00:33:00 that the community have that expectation that on the due date that those funds will be available so they can get on with their projects. Through the COVID, no more important than through this COVID environment, we've got no idea of the impact and the implications that have hit so many of our community groups. Over time, this just allows a few, a very small amount of funding to go towards three very worthy programs that will deliver outcomes for those groups. Councillor Finzel: Thank you everyone for your comments around the table this evening. Firstly, I'd like to state that at no point did we disagree with the grants, the process or how the money was delivered. We asked for a deferment. I would like to say that I myself have been a volunteer in communities and have run volunteer organisations.
00:34:00 It was never my intent to cause any harm to our community groups, nor the impacts and importance in our community. I believe that we should enable volunteering in organisations to strengthen our volunteer programs and causes at all times. I believe our volunteer programs inspire more residents to volunteer and deliver great outcomes for our community and engage and respect our social capital. Volunteering increases the impact of volunteers and the good works that they bring to our community and that is evident in this Noosa Shire. The Noosa Council at all times supports volunteering for the economic, social and environmental wellbeing of this Shire. Thank you. And in no way was our request for deferment used to diminish that. I made my decision to agree with the deferment based on economic rationale, especially with the impacts of the recovery program as indicated to me by staff and I've accepted their recommendations.
00:35:00 Moving forward, I would like to say that the recovery, sustainability and cash flow of this Shire in these unprecedented times remains the dominant thing in all of our minds. And moving forward tonight, I just want to say that I appreciate and value the social capital in this community and the great works they contribute. Thank you. Very good. Councillor Wegener: Thank you. This issue has brought a lot of discussion around the value of our volunteers and we talk about the honey pot and people, we've talked about tourism as the honey pot or the people of the honey pot.
00:36:00 Perhaps our volunteers are our honey pot here in Noosa because there are so many. We're delving into this through NICA and so forth yesterday. The amount of volunteers is phenomenal. And I think we are very grateful. It's an aging volunteer group that are out there. We'd like to think that all of us would hopefully get involved in bringing the next generation into the volunteer group as well. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, I heard the word, the discussion on honey pot on Monday. And for those, I'll quickly recap. We had a presentation where Hastings Street was one of them. It was described as a honey pot. And I said, I disagree. It's a natural environment, the honey pot. But I must admit, I'm wrong. If Hastings Street is a honey pot, the natural environment is the whole damn apiary. And our volunteers are the bees that keep the golden flow that comes out of our natural resources and our natural assets. They're the ones that are looking after the hive of our economy. It's not just our tourism economy that is based on the natural assets.
00:37:00 30 years ago, I did a survey and I repeated it. The natural environment is the number one reason why people move to the hinterland of this Shire. And it doesn't just stay like that. With the threats ranging from climate change to very localized ones, if you're not continually maintaining it and you're not continually to educate people, and while people have talked about a number of the projects, the middle one there about Noosa native plants is about education. And the Noosa Integrated Catchment Association have produced some of the highest quality citizen science publications that I have seen in that long career that I've bored you with. And you do realize by reading out that I was in fact trying to give a little indication about the value that sits out in organizations like Landcare. If you look at the credentials of their committee members, many, many communities would be very envious. We have one of the top 100 chief financial officers being treasurer of a local organization.
00:38:00 So it's really important to understand it's not just about the volunteers. It's also about the outcomes. And we only get to the outcomes if we continue to provide our community groups with the resources in order to provide the education needed. And in terms of Noosa native plants and all the other publications, moving and migrating those to a modern web platform is really important. I quite often use that web base. And I quite often recommend it to other people. And these are the small ways that council can make sure that overall this community looks after both its natural environment, but also satisfies the need for local people to learn more about it. Mayor Stewart: Thanks, Councillor Stockwell. On Monday, I voted to defer the environment and project grants until budget review two, based on the information debated at that meeting. Specifically, it was information which was not included in the budget. It was information that we gained from a report which we all received. It read, if COVID-related restrictions were to extend to the end of 2020 or be tightened,
00:39:00 then two of the projects recommended for funding would need to work with council with regard to possible extension for their projects, neither a time sensitive or seasonal. So it could still be delivered with some delay. Similarly, the third project we heard had also asked for an extension. So potentially a deferment would be in their interests. I still think that saving where we can to spend where we must is critical, and that's why I voted to defer. However, I acknowledge that the grants put forward, as I said on Monday, have merit, and the monies allocated to them will still go ahead whether we wait three months or not. To defer grants to community groups which have gone through the proper process and undertaken the necessary steps is not something I will put forward tonight. I will support the motion unequivocally. Volunteers across the board are the backbones of our community. No one disputes that, and never has, it has never been raised as an issue.
00:40:00 What I will say is this, in the future, I believe there is an opportunity for us as a new council to revisit all grants and policies across the board. Procurement, tenure, measurable outcomes, key performance indicators and rationales are just some of the factors of inherited and new projects which need to be understood by those of us who are new to this table. These are new times, uncertain times and now more than ever we need to ensure fiscal responsibility, good governance and open, robust discussions. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: No, thank you. Mayor Stewart: All in favour of the motion? Councillor Wilkie: No. Mayor Stewart: The next item is the budget public consultation. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, I'd like to move that council note the report by the Director of Corporate Services To the Services and Organisation Committee meeting 9th June 2020 and A, following Council's adoption of the 2021 budget, agree to engage with the community via your say Noosa on firstly, how the allocation of any additional funding should be prioritised if it becomes available through the financial year and two, where services expenditures should be reduced if further budget reductions are required.
00:41:00 B, agree to engage with the community on their preferred public consultation model for the 2021-22 budget process and C, request the Chief Executive Officer to provide a report to Council on the outcomes of both public consultation processes for Council's consideration before it meets to consider its scheduled budget review 2 in November 2020. Councillor Wilkie: I'll second it, Madam. Thank you, Councillor. Mayor Stewart: Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, Councillors. On Monday, I moved to defer this so we can have a broad conversation and distill our ideas because we all had ideas about how we would like to meaningfully engage the community and I think what we've got in front of us is a framework that is both attuned to the dynamics of what we're working in post-COVID but also provides meaningful opportunities right from the outset to actually engage the community.
00:42:00 Allow the broader community with input, not only on how they think we should prioritise allocations depending on what happens over the next few months, but also about how they believe the community can be meaningfully involved in the lead up to the next budget. It might have been something we could have done if COVID didn't hit us this time around, but it simply has not been possible and it would have been more tokenistic if we gave people an idea that they're just throwing in their pockets and not getting funded. So, councillors, I recommend this approach. I think it will stand us in good stead and
00:43:00 it gives the community that broader opportunity to help us craft the way ahead. Councillor Lorentson: In June 2019, at the adoption of the 2019-2020 budget, the previous council announced that their council would be commencing public consultation on future council budget processes. On 21 June 2019, at an ordinary meeting, again, the previous council unanimously moved a motion to try a public consultation on the 2020-2021 budget. Two weeks ago, in June 2020, the newly elected council were told of this promise for the first time. And given a recommendation by staff to defer the trial. The main reason was because the date for adoption of the budget was July 10th.
00:44:00 Simply, there was not enough time to put into place a well-planned process that facilitated meaningful participation. We therefore decided as a council that it was better to get it right than to take the risk of alienating the community further by carrying out token consultation processes. So what is proposed in this motion is a promise to get it right and to deliver appropriate, well-planned and meaningful community engagement. Mayor Stewart: As I said on Monday, there has been much debate around our 2021 budget, indeed as it is referred to the COVID budget. Staff have told us they have never seen anything like it. For the old councillors, they would no doubt agree with that. For the four new councillors who sit around this table, we unfortunately know no different. It has been sharpening of pencils, cut costs and spend where only necessary.
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 Tough times are being felt not only by our council but others all over Australia. The Lord Mayor of Brisbane stated, in the 15 years I have been a councillor, I have no doubt this was the most challenging budget we have seen. Indeed, the hurt is being felt far and wide and time has not been on our side. As a senior staffer said, normally we start this budget process in November. You guys started in May. We haven't had the luxury of months to prepare and nor have we had the opportunity because of COVID to engage in community reference groups, community feedback and open and frank discussions about the budget with ratepayers. Seeking their guidance and say as to what projects and initiatives they saw as a priority hasn't been able to occur and for that we are sorry. These are unprecedented times and like every other councillor in Australia, we are navigating uncharted waters. Our Director of Corporate Services has told us that every 30 days of not issuing rate results results in approximately $35,000 worth of lost interest revenue, which means that
00:46:00 each day we defer this budget past the 10th of July 2020, we cost the ratepayer money and the longer the deferment goes on, the more money it costs. We talk about costs. The motion put forward is a good one. It seeks to adopt the budget in the required time without incurring unnecessary costs to the ratepayer. It enables meaningful, measured and thoughtful interaction, engagement and feedback from the community before Budget Review Number 2. It gives you, the ratepayer, the opportunity to engage with us within the coming months via YourSay and it provides a platform for your voices to be heard, your priorities understood and your concerns acknowledged. It may not be the Nirvana put forward in November, but it is the one we find ourselves with.
00:47:00 These are difficult times and we face difficult decisions. As we move forward as a community and recover from COVID, we can assure you that as we move into Budget Review 2, your voices will indeed be heard, your thoughts valued, your opinions and feedback acted upon. Thank you. Speaker 3: I will close. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thanks for that. I think the reality of this situation is that the budget did start in November. That was the first one. It was thrown in the waste paper basket mid-February. It's probably the first time in history that our Manager, Director of Corporate Services had done two budgets in one year. And he used to be a good looking fellow, now he's got bags under his eyes. So I think in summing up, the aspiration of the last Council was to do more this time around, but the situation is we had to deal with what was in front of us at the time.
00:48:00 The community will get a chance to see where we're at and to influence come Budget Review 2. I do, I suppose, want to finish with just thanking, it's not just the Director of Corporate Services and his managers, it's the whole organisation taking to the process to try and do the best by this community, which they will find out about when we do adopt the process in a few short weeks. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Yes, it will. Pauline Clayfield, motion? Yes. Thank you. Item 7 on the agenda. Development application for a minor change to a material change of use for 140 multiple dwelling units and associated facilities, shop, restaurant, multi-function room and gym at 75 Resort Drive, Noosa Heads. Councillor Finzel? Do you want to go on this? Councillor Lorentson: Yes, please. Speaker 3: Do I have to say anything? Yeah, you're good. Councillor Finzel: I declare a real conflict of interest in this matter as defined in section 175D of the Local Government Act 2009 due to my relationship with Lee McCready who is associated with the applicant Altum Constructions.
00:49:00 Lee McCready was involved with my election campaign in 2020. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: I declare a perceived conflict of interest in this matter as defined in section 175D of the Local Government Act 2009 due to my friendship with the applicants Rob and Lee McCready of Altum Constructions. And I will choose to leave the room for debate on this matter. Thank you. Speaker 1: Councillor, just a process question obviously to me. I'm interested in a conflict of interest in the left of the room under the Act the Deputy Mayor automatically assumes the chair, which is the councillor, so it's probably easier to do it from there and to work if you wish.
00:50:00 Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Councillor Stockwell, you have a declaration. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I wish to declare a perceived conflict of interest in this matter under the section of the Act. On February 24 this year, I sought a review by the Independent Council Election Observer as to the public claims of the Future News team of which Ms Lee McCready was public identified as a campaigner. Lee McCready is associated with the applicant Ultim Constructions. I do believe I can consider the matter impartially in the public interest. On Monday, I requested to remain in the meeting room. I believe this is a matter of significant principle in terms of the role of an elected representative seeking to ensure that the law is obeyed. However, I have sought the advice of the relevant authorities on these matters and until such time as my issues
00:51:00 have been resolved from a professional, ethical basis, I will leave the room. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Thank you. Councillors, we have a new motion that an amended motion for tonight's meeting. This changes to condition two and condition 83. Do we have a staff member here who can talk to that, please? Kerry, could you explain why we do have these change conditions before us, please? Speaker 3: So since officers completed the report, we've picked up an error in the report in the table of the very long list of approved plans. We have left one of the old plans in. It needs to be deleted. For the basement plan, we've included the new one, but we needed to delete the old one.
00:52:00 So that's the first change. The second change is in relation to condition 83D, which is around the noise requirements for the site. This condition currently requires that the noise management plan referred to above shall be incorporated into the plan. We've made it into the bylaws of the community management statement for the body corporate of the building. Now, since this application was approved back in 2005, there's been a layered body corporate scheme put in place. So the site has a number of body corporates and an overarching principal body corporate. So it's important that the noise management plan is referred to in the community management statement for the principal body corporate. They will have overarching management of the site. So that's essentially the changes recommended. Councillor Wilkie: Okay, councillors, we've got a motion before us. I've got a question for staff, if I may.
00:53:00 Yes, councillor Jurison. Councillor Jurisevic: Having been contacted by the applicant, there was a clarification sought with regard to the definition of the outdoor areas and the indoor dining areas. Upon reading the report, I was unable to define the indoor area myself. So is it possible for staff to turn around and indicate via drawing or via plans what constitutes the indoor dining area, please? Speaker 3: So there's some plans, which I'll just ask Cathy to bring up on the screen for us to look at. And I understand, I think there's some confusion by the applicant as to where the indoor and the outdoor area is. So we can see the building here on the screen, and you can see the kitchen area and the space here. So I'm going to assume that's it. That is the indoor area. These are the two outdoor areas. And I think the condition is the applicant considers that in. So as we have a look at the plans, some photographs as well.
00:54:00 You can see the two outdoor areas. One first is showing the lower roof, and the second is also an outdoor area. It's only roofed. It has no walls. So it's certainly, they're both considered to be outdoor areas by our acoustic consultant. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay, so for clarification, in the area defined as indoor area in the plans is called shared space? Speaker 3: Yes, that's my understanding. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. Looking at the, if I can look at the images again. On the image, the second image there, I think it becomes figure six or seven in the report. There appear to be some type of plastic style curtains. Okay. So they're the ones with, that can be raised and lowered. Do they constitute a sufficient acoustic barrier for noise? Speaker 3: No, they won't. The advice from our acoustic consultants is they will not be successful in any way to
00:55:00 mitigate noise from the restaurant. The advice from the acoustic consultant is what would work would be some bi-fold doors that could be shut after 10 PM at night. So they could remain open up till 10 PM, and then shut the bi-folds after 10 PM. Councillor Jurisevic: I understand measures like that are undertaken by other restaurants and outdoor dining areas in the Shire? Speaker 3: Yeah, there are a number of approvals in the Shire that specify that the outdoor dining must only be till 10pm and it's common then to either shut the doors after that time or to move people inside into the indoor area. Councillor Jurisevic: And if the applicant were to want to install multi-fold doors or measures along those lines in this instance, in this location that would be under the covered area, would they be required to come back to Council with an application or is that something that staff could manage under a minor change of use?
00:56:00 Speaker 3: Yeah, it is something that staff could manage. Some time ago Council resolved to defer any future changes on this application to officers to decide. Officers though have, while we could have decided this application, we've chosen to put it before the Council because there was a difference between officers' recommendation and what the applicant was looking for. But yes, we could decide that by application. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you, Mr Chair. On the basis of that I'd like to move the staff recommendation. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Jurisevic. Do we have a seconder please? Councillor Lorentson is the seconder. Councillor Jurisevic? Councillor Jurisevic: Look, I commend staff. This has been a long-going application and a number of stages that have gone through with this development. I think the outcomes here are fairly clear. Whilst I see the applicant wishes some changes with regard to the recommendations of staff,
00:57:00 I think the recommendations are in keeping with those that we have in place. With regard to dining in particular, with regard to how other entities are required to operate within the Shire, I have no issue with the times that are recommended for indoor and outdoor areas. I think the indoor area now, we do have a clear definition of it. I think there is an outcome there that should the applicant seek it to extend that dining area, they can look to approach staff and implement those measures if so desired. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: I understand that the offices have had a number of discussions with the applicant around potential solutions for the restaurant, but no agreement has been reached. I also note that it's been suggested to the applicant that he may wish to defer or seek an agreement for council to defer the matter
00:58:00 to enable further discussion between the Chilacoustic consultants, council's consultants and the applicant's consultants. However, the applicant has advised that he does not want the matter deferred, in which case I support the staff recommendation and approve the application in accordance with conditions. Councillor Wilkie: Do you wish to close, Councillor Driscoll? No, I think it was me too. I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's carried unanimously. Councillor Jurisevic: Those that are left in the room. Councillor Wilkie: Those that are left, and the other councillors may come back in, please. Thank you, Tara. I agree with everything you said. Speaker 3: Thank you. I agree with everything you said. Thank you. Thank you. Do you want to move those? I'll move those.
00:59:00 Mayor Stewart: Thank you. There are no ordinary meeting reports. There is no confidential session. Public question time. We have one public question time application and two questions from Brian O'Connor from Pomona. As the meeting is closed to the public due to COVID-19, the CEO will read out Mr O'Connor's questions and they will be answered by Kim Rawlings, Director of Environment and Sustainable Planning. Thank you, Mr CEO. Speaker 1: Yeah, thank you.
60 minutes in ¶
01:00:00 Thank you, Mayor. It's a bit unusual to ask these questions. The chamber is closed due to social distancing requirements. I'm sure Brian O'Connor is watching at home and hopefully I do you justice, Brian. Question one. I inquire at the Disappear, the people of the Noosa hinterland that Noosa Council, through the Noosa Town Plan, says doesn't exist. So I ask, why does Noosa Council make its future planning on the basis that Pomona has a population of 1,198 in 2016? And not the 2,910 figure adopted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Likewise, the Council says Cooroy's population is 2,680 and not the 3,791 and so on for all the communities of the hinterland. What is the basis of these population estimates by Council, such that it rejects the ABS as the authentic source of population projections for the hinterland? And I ask Kim Rawlings, the Director of,
01:01:00 Environmental Sustainable Development, to provide the answer. And Kim, can you come up closer to the microphone, please, if you don't mind? Thank you. Speaker 2: Thanks, Brett, a.k.a. Brian. Evening, Brian. Thank you for your question. Brian, this, has asked this question of Council a number of times and we have provided a response to this question in writing a number of times and we will again today. It's a fairly... It requires a little bit of explanation and it can be a little bit complex, but I'll try and simplify it. The assertion in this question is not accurate. And the difference in the population figures referred to by Brian relate to figures that are used in the local government infrastructure plan, which we call the LEGIP. The LEGIP forms part of the planning scheme. Under the Planning Act, the LEGIP is required to show population data for what's called a priority plan.
01:02:00 The LEGIP refers to a geographic area, the PIA. The PIA differs, for instance, from a town or locality boundary. So there's a difference in geographic areas that result in the difference that the, that Brian O'Connor's querying about. The LEGIP population data is used to inform the PIA and it's based on a very sophisticated land use and population model that's done by Unity Water and signed off by the state government. The process for preparing the LEGIP is very strict and set out by ministerial guidelines. It's subject to two reviews by the minister and an independent review. The difference in the population referred to in this question relates to the population in the PIA area while using ABS data for an area that has different boundaries to the PIA area. So as a comparison, for instance, ABS collects census data by statistical areas, but reports the data through various data. There is different geographic geographies or spatial boundaries.
01:03:00 So ABS census data for Cooroy suburb is 3,791 persons, yet ABS census data for Cooroy urban centre and locality is 2,897 persons. They are both called Cooroy by ABS, but the boundaries are different. But the difference in the figures referred to simply relate to different geographic spatial areas and doesn't compare apples with apples. One is an ABS spatial area. And the other is a Cooroy infrastructure spatial area. However, what is important to understand is that council does take into account the population, both inside and outside the PIA area for the purposes of infrastructure planning for Pomona. Speaker 1: Thank you. And I'll just ask the second question on behalf of Mr. O'Connor. The TANF plan states clearly in section 15.2 that the population estimates and projections it has adopted are used to determine the type of population that it has adopted. That is, scale, location, and timing of development, and the desired standards of service the council delivers.
01:04:00 And so I ask whether by adopting population numbers and projections for the hinterlands significantly lower than those of the ABS in its principal planning document, is Noosa Council set to deliver inadequate facilities and services smaller in scale than otherwise would have been the case had ABS data been the determining factor? Again, I ask him to respond to that question for Mr. O'Connor. Speaker 2: Thanks, Brett. So the response to this question very much relates to the response to the first question. The answer is the same. Population figures both inside and outside the priority infrastructure area are taken into account for infrastructure planning. So this results in no difference in the provision of what's known as trunk infrastructure, as the trunk infrastructure planning includes all residential and non-residential development inside and outside the PIA. It's important to note that trunk infrastructure is higher order infrastructure, so trunk infrastructure
01:05:00 refers to things like major roads, sports fields, open space, of a district and Shire-wide nature. The legib is about trunk infrastructure planning, it does not include local, smaller, local paths, pathways, that type of infrastructure. That type of infrastructure is planned for, managed, and determined through council's asset management and capital planning process. As I said earlier, this is not the case. As previously mentioned, the preparation of the legib is strictly managed by state legislation, ministerial guidelines, and has undergone two extensive independent reviews and signed off by the minister. The rigour of these processes ensure that population figures used are appropriate and consistent with state population figures. So to sum up this fairly lengthy response, as explained, the assertion that incorrect population figures are being used for infrastructure planning is not correct. Speaker 1: Thanks. No supplementary questions? Not a supplementary question to confirm, I think, that we'll write out to Mr O'Connor
01:06:00 and put that in writing to him as well, given he couldn't be here tonight. For sure. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Thank you. That comes to the end of the meeting. The next meeting will be held on the 16th of July 2020.