Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Mayor Stewart: Good evening everyone. Here we find ourselves again. I declare the ordinary meeting open. I would like to acknowledge today that we are meeting on the traditional lands of the Kabi Kabi people and I pay my respects to the elders past, present and emerging. I note that everyone is in attendance and there are no apologies. Item two on the agenda is the confirmation of minutes. Firstly, the minutes of the ordinary meeting held on the 18th of June, 2020 to be received and confirmed. Do I have them? Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Thank you, Councillor Jurisevic. All in favour? Taken as read. Thank you and accepted. Secondly, the minutes of the special meeting held on the 10th of July, 2020 be received and confirmed. Do I have a mover and a second? Thank you, Councillor Finzel. A second? I'll second. Oh, Councillor Wegener. Thank you. All in favour? Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Councillor Bobby, which special meeting then? Mayor Stewart: We only have, we have one mayoral minute today in relation to the purchase of 24 Cooroy, Noosa Road, Tewantin, lot 375 SP151415, former Tewantin TAFE site. I would like to move.
00:01:00 That council note the mayoral minute provided to the ordinary meeting dating dated 16th of June, 2020. And instruct the CEO to discontinue negotiations with the Queensland government regarding the purchase of the former Tewantin TAFE site located at 24 Cooroy Road, Cooroy, Noosa Road, Tewantin. Agree to instead adopt an advocacy role, potential suitable end users, e.g. leases or purchases with these likely to be from the education or training sectors. And request the chief executive officer to write to the Department of Employment, Small Business and Training and to the state member for Noosa, Sandy Bolton, thanking them for their assistance in this matter to date and advise of council's decision not to proceed with purchase negotiations, but to instead advocate for a suitable user to be found to activate the site, reaffirm council's desire to see the site activated at the earliest opportunity, provide details of approaches to council from potential users.
00:02:00 Potential end users to date and offer council's ongoing assistance to facilitate the activation of the site. The Tewantin TAFE campus was constructed in 2004 by the Queensland state government. It had a short history, opening in 2006 with 716 students and closing in 2014 with 256 students, many of whom were studying off campus. Since its 2014 closure, the facility has mostly sat idle and unfortunately been subject to vandalism and building deterioration. The site currently remains the responsibility of the state's Department of Employment, Small Business and Training and through the assistance of the member for Noosa, Sandy Bolton and departmental staff, council has been provided with first option to purchase the site.
00:03:00 Sandy has been a strong advocate for this facility being reactivated and has worked tirelessly to support our council throughout this process, for which we are grateful. On December, on the 20th of December, 2018, council agreed that the site would be re-activated. Council agreed that subject to successful negotiations, the CEO was authorised to purchase the site for up to $1.7 million. Previous reports on the TAFE site outlined its significant environmental values. Following the decision to purchase, it is my understanding that council environment staff commissioned a flora and fauna assessment of the site. A number of threatened species were identified and staff advised that because of this provision, provide for significant constraints on further development on the site beyond the existing development footprint. Thank you. The most important is the recently amended State Koala Conservation Plan mapping. New mapping released in April this year now includes the site in a koala priority area and shows cool koala habitat area present on the site.
00:04:00 Strict vegetation clearing restrictions prohibit clearing of the koala habitat areas within koala priority areas. As such, future development is limited to the existing cleared footprint of the former TAFE campus. The protections of the site under Federal, State and Council statutory provisions now provide significant protection of the site's environmental values. As contractor negotiations commenced with the State, they disclosed that native title still applied to the site, as a result of the State not submitting a native title assessment when the site was converted from a reserve to freehold in 2006, which is a requirement under the Native Title Act 1993. The implications of this disclosure are as follows. Council required the State to validate the grant of freehold over the site by entering into an Indigenous land use agreement with the traditional owners, the Kabi Kabi First Nation people, prior to the purchase proceeding. These negotiations, due to their complexities, can be protracted within definite completion timeframes.
00:05:00 Council now finds itself in a continuing impasse with unknown completion timeframes and increased contractual complexity, in addition to the new COVID environment. As part of its due diligence, investigations and evidence-based decision-making process, Council has also commissioned updated building condition assessments, property valuations, economic feasibility and market rental assessments. Previous Council pre-feasibility assessment of the site indicated a range of potential end-users and outcomes that would have reduced financial risk to ratepayers. However, staff now advise available options have since reduced as a result of new development constraints and environment protections on the site. Consultants were commissioned to undertake a strategic land use options assessment to assess feasibility in detail. In light of the constraints to expanded development on the site, the use option analysis finds
00:06:00 the size and layout of the buildings would suit very limited uses, and the commercial risks to Council and ratepayers from managing the site as a rental property are significant. The current economic environment will also make it more difficult to locate a suitable tenant. It is recommended that Council act in a facilitation role only in the potential transfer of the site to interested parties from the State Government. The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on Council's finances has required Council to make many difficult decisions about priorities and spending, including the completing of importance of new projects. The 2021 adopted budget includes an operating deficit for the first time in many years, and careful management will be required over the next two years to return the budget to surplus. Staff have also commissioned updated building condition assessments and an economic feasibility assessment, which indicate the purchase of the site would involve capital expenditure
00:07:00 comprising estimated upfront building repairs of $1 million and forecast building renewals to $2,030 of approximately $7 million. In regard to purchase price, it is important to note that the cost of purchase for the site is only a minor component of the whole-of-life cost of owning the facility. Even if the site was gifted to Council, a general rate increase would still be required. Community interest in the former Tewantin TAFE site has been driven by desire to see this important community asset reactivated and reused. That desire is shared by member for Noosa, Sandy Bolton, who has expended considerable effort to date to realise these aims, and we are very grateful for all her hard work. The argument for not purchasing the site has recently become more persuasive given Council's finances having been severely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, with those impacts now likely to be felt for a number of years within this community. Whilst timeframes for the sale of the site remain uncertain, there is an opportunity
00:08:00 for the State to explore tangible opportunities to provide a lease direct to a tenant to allow prompt reactivation of the facility. The interests of the Noosa community are now best served by Council, formally withdrawing from purchase negotiations and advocating for and assisting the State to activate the site via a suitable end user. We must, as we have said, save where we can to spend where we must. Sometimes the best deals you make are the ones you never enter into. In this instance, it would be very difficult to do so. It would be prudent to suggest that that was in fact the case. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Madam Chair. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Look, I fully support the Mayor's minute and I would like to endorse her comprehensive and well-reasoned comments on this very significant issue. In short, the pivotal points for me are that the uses that the Council was investigating using the site for that gave a viable return to ratepayers are no longer possible under the greater protections on the site. And that involves a biodiversity overlay under the Noosa planning scheme and also koala habitat
00:09:00 mapping under the State regulations. The issues of native title, as the Mayor said, still remain unresolved and there's some sort of an undisclosed liability there that may potentially afflict any new owner. The potential users are now able to directly negotiate with the State owners of the property and there has been significant interest expressed through staff here and also through Sandy Bolton. And they're now able to more directly negotiate with the State. And this decision here today removes the uncertainty and clarifies Council's position, Council's interest, and brings us one step closer to finding an ultimate use and I'll be supporting the minute. Speaker 2: Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Anyone else like to talk to the motion? Councillor Lorentson: Like many members of this community, I wanted to see the TAFE site reactivated and reused
00:10:00 and the environmental values of the site protected from private purchase and development. Over the past few months, we've been given options for future use. We've identified and assessed risks and benefits. We've looked at the implications and contractual complexities around the site's native title. We looked at both environmental considerations and financial considerations in depth. We are satisfied that the site is protected under the new Noosa Plains overlays. We're satisfied that due diligence and due process has been undertaken. We are satisfied that the cost to ratepayers in the form of a rate increase would not have been received well in this COVID-impacted climate. And we are satisfied that with the help of our State MP, Sandy Bolton, that the site does not sit derelict. And that Council, by adopting an advocacy roadmap, will be able to reduce the impact on potential users. We are satisfied that the site will be reactivated and reused as, hopefully, an education or
00:11:00 training facility. I therefore support the mayoral recommendation to discontinue negotiations with the Queensland Government regarding the purchase of the former Tewantin TAFE. Speaker 2: Thank you, Councillor Arnston. Would anyone else like to speak to this motion? Councillor Stockwell. Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: This is one that I will be agreeing with, but with a very heavy heart. The last time we discussed this, I argued very strongly that this site is a key community asset. It has both social value, economic value, and environmental value at the heart of the old part of Tewantin. It's no doubt in my mind that if the State had been able to offer us unencumbered freehold title, that we would have been able to do that. And the report we'd be looking at today would be up to giving out a lease to one of the
00:12:00 worthy groups that may be incidentally being there. We would have bought it a year ago. We were quite confident then that we could sustain the impact, ongoing impact, on rates. We were travelling a very high part of the economy. Right now, we've just bought down a budget that we've cut to a budget that we've cut to a point so that we could keep the impost on rate payers to zero net rate rises for the vast majority of our rate payers. And we will have to chart a path back from that. Adding, with one single asset, one and a half to 2% in future years is just not something that is wise to do at the moment. Part of the reason I've got a heavy heart is I understand the immense amount of work, lobbying, and badgering by the member for Noosa. I happened to say to her the other day that if I was still a bureaucrat, I would consider her a nightmare.
00:13:00 And that was a compliment because she goes into bat for this community and no more than on this particular matter. And her aim is to get the site into community ownership. I believe there still is a good outcome, and I believe that stepping back at this point means that we're more likely to get to that outcome earlier than if we would continue the negotiations and elect to try and sort out those encumbrances that currently sit over the site. So for that risk, I support the mayoral minute. But as I say, it's with a heavy heart. Speaker 2: Thank you. Councillor George. Councillor Jurisevic: This was always the wrong building. Built in the wrong place at the wrong time. And it's been fully managed ever since. And the unfortunate consequence is a building of great significant value, but there's been less to deteriorate by the state government over a long period of time. I've always been cautiously monitoring this situation with regard to the purchase.
00:14:00 I've never felt it was our role to purchase this building. But I acknowledge that a great many in our community wanted to see the building put to good use and probably the only option available was for council to purchase that building. And I think it's a good thing. The potential for other uses on that site, and since we started going down this process, those uses have diminished. Unfortunately, it doesn't make it a valid proposition for us, but also in these COVID times, it presents a financial challenge for this council to turn around and purchase a building that will potentially inflict somewhere near a million dollars to revitalise. Had we been at this point six years ago when the building was made derelict, a million dollars could have been saved for the state. But here we are now, regardless of who manages the burden of this building going forward, there's an asset that's been left to deteriorate.
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 Sadly, in this community, you'll have seen it and desire to see the building reused and repurposed. For many, many years. I'm hoping that by taking this point that we are, that we're not leaving it in the hands of a state that won't reactivate the site and won't take that opportunity. There are entities champing at the bit to be on there, as Sandy has well advocated for many, many years. It's just a matter of having the will and the desire to make it happen. Six years too late, but I'm hoping that somewhere within the next 12 months that that site will. be reactivated and we'll have a valued and much respected tenant in the future for the future of the site. But I concur with all of the points that the Mayor raised in it. I mean, we had we had an opportunity here to to reactivate this site and to purchase this site. But the constraints that we now find ourselves with on this site don't make it a viable option anymore.
00:16:00 Thank you. Speaker 2: Thank you. Councillor Weaven, you've touched the piece, haven't you? Councillor Finzel: I would like to say thank you to all the staff and everybody that has worked hard on this and to Sandy Bolton and all the people over the years, including community who have engaged at many different levels to keep this site much loved within our community today to reduce financial risk to rate payers with the current climate, I support this resolution. I would like to say that this is a place where we've got to keep our vision. Vision is the ability to think about or plan the future with imagination or vision. Stepping back creates a space which has the potential to be filled and reactivated to a usable site and hopefully a site which this community can be proud of. So thank you.
00:17:00 Mayor Stewart: I think it's all been said. Thank you, councillors. I think we've all been privy to the information that you've given us. And I think as hard as it has been, I think this is the right decision for us going forward and it's the right decision for our community and I have full faith in our state member that she will find the right tenant for this property. Thank you. Speaker 2: We might put it to a vote. All in favour? Mayor Stewart: That's unanimous. Thanks Kylie. Thank you. Item four on the agenda is petitions. I believe Councillor Lorentson has a petition. Councillor Lorentson: Yep, I move that the petition requesting that Council make Carathas Court Park, Cooroy, a leash-free dog exercise area be received and referred to the CEO to determine appropriate action. I'll second that. Thank you. Thank you Councillor. Thank you. Do you wish to speak to that Councillor Lorentson? I'm presenting a petition on behalf of 121 residents and dog owners in Cooroy.
00:18:00 They're requesting that Council reverse their recent decision to make Carathas Court Park a dog leash park and return it back to a leash-free dog exercise area. Mayor Stewart: Thank you very much. Thank you Councillor Lorentson. All in favour? Thank you. Carried unanimously. Thank you Kylie. Does any other councillors have any petitions? No. Item five we move to. There are no deputations. Item eight number eight on the agenda is a consideration of committee recommendations. The first set of recommendations are from the planning and environment meeting on the 7th of July 2020. And that is on page 10 of our agendas. Item one was referred to the general committee.
00:19:00 Item two is for a minor change to a development approval at 36 and 40. Hofmann Drive, Noosaville. Item three was referred to the general committee. And item four was referred to the general committee. Would anyone like to move the recommendation at the bottom? Thank you Councillor Stockwell. Thank you Councillor Jurisevic second. That's the bottom of page 12 of the planning and environment committee recommendations. Be adopted except where dealt with or held over. All in favour? Thank you. The next set of recommendations are for the services and organisation committee meeting on July 2020. Item one is the Gove Noosa Christmas 2019-20 peak period traffic management evaluation. Item two is the community disaster response and recovery grants COVID-19. Item three is for the Noosa cultural plan 2019-2023. Implementation update.
00:20:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you Councillor Jurisevic. Thank you. Thank you. All in favour? Thank you. The next set of recommendations are from the general committee on the 13th of July 2020. And this is on page 14. Item one is councillor representation on the climate emergency Australia strategic advisory group. Item two is the Noosa river oyster ecosystem restoration project project management plan. I'd like to pull this out and deal with it as a separate resolution please. And I have amended motion. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. I'll second it. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Thank you. Speaker 2: That's not, is that mine? That's not mine. It's yours. Speaker 1: Yeah, this one. Yeah, this is the one that there may be a, I don't know. I don't know. That's mine. That's my amended motion. Speaker 2: That's from Amelia's. That's Amelia's. Speaker 1: Yeah. I'll just explain to councillors. The Mayor's indicated that she is aware that there may be a amended motion coming forward.
00:21:00 It's when the issue of the oyster rigs are being discussed. And the advice I've given her is that it's probably best to do it at the beginning of that process rather than halfway through, even though it's only in relation to a proposed amendment, that the matter, instead of being on the table while the whole matter has been discussed, not just halfway through the debate, when the foreshadowed amendment is going to come forward. So the advice I've given to the Mayor is she should declare that perceived conflict of interest at the beginning of the debate on this issue. So when the foreshadowed amendment comes forward later on, it's already been addressed rather than halfway through. Thank you. Thank you. So I think the Mayor should make that declaration now. 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 another councillor foreshadowing that they may move
00:22:00 an amendment during debate on this matter that mentions the Masso family. I advise that Michael Masso provided a $500 donation to my election campaign on the 21st of February 2020. I believe that I could consider this item impartially in the public interest and require a request to remain in the meeting room to participate in the debate and vote on this matter. Speaker 1: This is it. Yep. Thank you. And councillors, once again, a bit like this morning actually, with the special meeting with the Mayor, the players have perceived conflict of interest. The Deputy Mayor automatically assumes the Chair for this matter to be considered by the meeting. Councillor Wilkie: Mr. CEO, I'll ask a question. The amendment that's proposed to be moved proposes that the fishing families, and I think they're mentioned by name, be included on the technical advisory group. In your opinion, does that constitute a perceived or a real or material conflict of interest? Speaker 1: Yeah. To answer that question, I think this is what I call the lower end of the scale in terms
00:23:00 of that. The foreshadowed amendment does identify that they're looking to include one representative out of five fishing families who are identified by name. One of those named families is the Massoud family, and one of the members of the family has made a donation to the Mayor's election campaign. And the advice I've given to the Mayor is, as a matter of caution, that should be disclosed, which is always the way with potential perceived conflicts of interest. But as I said, it's probably at the lower end of the scale, if I can use that term, in terms of the nature of that conflict. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. In that case, I'll move the resolution that Councillors note the perceived conflict of interest declaration of Councillor Stewart and resolve that this represents a perceived conflict of interest in this matter. And Councillor Stewart may remain in the meeting room to participate in the debate and vote on this matter. I'll second that. Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Sess, we've heard from the CEO.
00:24:00 This is on the lower end. The important thing is that these declarations are made. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Point of order, Mr Chairman. Councillor Wilkie: Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You're not standing up. Councillor Wilkie: Oh, thank you. Thank you, Councillor Sess. Mayor Stewart: You're used to the general reading, aren't you? Councillor Wilkie: Yes, I am. I get a bit lazy from the general. That the families are mentioned, but even if the member of the Massoud family was to be appointed to the technical advisory group, there is clearly no material or personal benefit that's going to be accrued by Councillor Stewart as a result of that. So I'm confident that Councillor Stewart can remain in the meeting room and act impartially on the matter. And I hope you'll support me in that. Councillor Lorentson: I think there's two main points. There's two main questions that we've got to consider. First is the reasonable man test. There was a reasonable and fair-minded observer in the room. Would they think that the Councillor might make a decision contrary to the public interest? And the second question that I considered is how would inclusion of the Councillor in
00:25:00 the deliberation of the decision affect public trust? I'm also confident that Councillor Stewart should remain in the room and there would be no conflict. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Am I correct? One more яd. Councillor Jurisevic: We know that the matter has been brought up before us, but the only reason that there's a perceived conflict of interest being mentioned here at this time, when we've already discussed the matter at previous committee, was that the mention of the Massoud family and the potential of a mention there, and no other reason that there was no requirement to make a declaration of perceived conflict of interest. Speaker 1: That's correct, because the amendments being foreshadowed tonight actually names that family, and that's why the advice I've given to the Mayor. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. If there's no further comment, I'll just close by saying I think the decision for Councillor Stewart to remain in the room is a very fair and even-handed decision.
00:26:00 So I put the motion those in favour. Councillor Wegener, that's unanimous. Thank you. Speaker 2: I'll move my motion. Councillor Wilkie: Mayor Bridget, Mayor is in. And I'll second Councillor Stewart's motion. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, thank you, Councillor Wilkie. I move the motion that Councillor note the report by the Environmental Services Manager to the Planning, Environment Committee, dated 7th of July, 2020, and approve the project management plan provided as attachment one to the report as meeting the requirements of the project implementation plan outlined in the Alliance and Funding Agreement, subject to Council approving an independent scientific expert to provide a review of the project's monitoring, evaluation, and reporting plan. The review is to include an assessment of the effectiveness of the methodology, project goals, measures, outputs, and outcomes within the context of ecological restoration, and the terms of the three-year contract, and recommendations, if any, for improvement to be included in the monitoring and evaluation plan, and note the terms of reference of the Noosa River Oyster Restoration Project Technical Advisory Group provided as attachment two to the report, and establish a Noosa River Stakeholder Reference Group to provide strategic input, local knowledge, and expertise into river management, and the implementation of the Noosa River Oyster Restoration
00:27:00 initiatives, initially providing input into this shellfish restoration project, and more broadly into finalisation and implementation of the Noosa River Plan, and delegate to the CEO to determine the terms of reference and undertake a process to establish the Noosa River Stakeholder Reference Group, together with the appropriate role for Councillor representation on that group. Sorry, Councillor, can you just bring that down so we can see the whole thing? Speaker 2: Hang on a sec. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. I won't rehash the long and detailed history of this project I did on Monday at the general meeting, nor will I seek to move further amendments around measurable outcomes and baseline data, as I did on Monday. As stated on Monday, I acknowledge and respect the fact that the previous Council entered into this agreement, supported this alliance, and we have an existing partnership with TNC.
00:28:00 We have a signed contract. I will, however, seek to gain your support for this amended motion. I think it imperative that for this project we provide as much input, consultation, feedback, and advice from as many people as we can. Engaging an independent scientific expert can only help this project going forward, and provide increased comfort among the community. I would suggest that with this support provided by the previous Council for this project, that appointing an independent scientific expert would be a fair and reasonable ask. A review of this project and an assessment of the effectiveness of the methodology, project goals, measures, outputs, and outcomes within the context of ecological restoration and the terms of the three-year contract and recommendations, if any, for improvement by an independent scientific expert be included in the monitoring and evaluation plan can only be of benefit for all of those concerned. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Mayor. I support this motion. I thank the Chair. It can only, this sort of oversight, can only give further assurance to the credibility and professionalism of the organisation that we're partnering with.
00:29:00 I understand that they're comfortable with this form of oversight, this peer review of the monitoring, evaluation, and reporting plans. Indeed, it will involve criteria and measures that are far more comprehensive, rigorous, and relevant, that can stand up to scientific scrutiny far better than any that we as councillors could perhaps come up with, probably with the exception of Councillor Stockwell. And I think it's, if this gives further assurance to especially the new councillors, I think that's appropriate and fully support that. And I think in the end it can only add to the credibility, rigour, and assurance surrounding, that is already surrounding this fantastic project and this partnership which we're very lucky to have. Thank you. Speaker 2: Anyone else like to speak to this motion? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Stockwell. I'm also willing to support it. I think it is a good initiative that places a little bit more oversight from an independent scientific expert.
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 The TNC obviously has a range of scientific expertise in their own organisation, but it is a large contract for this council and therefore seeking assurance that the processes and methodologies to make sure that we do both monitor and evaluate because the whole purpose of monitoring and evaluation is actually to get improvement. And so you monitor and evaluate a project so you know if you need to start to make changes during the project and also to work out what the impact of the project is going to be. So having an independent scientific expert is a valuable additional element which will give, I hope, a range of people some satisfaction that all is well. Thank you. Speaker 2: Councillor Wegener. Councillor Wegener: Well, earlier this week we had a pretty splintered debate over the Loyster project and having this will bring, I think hopefully, a new era of looking at this project and looking at it from a different perspective.
00:31:00 Looking at the project through the press and all coming on the same team and really having a look at it instead of us arguing amongst ourselves, having an expert coming down and helping inform us and as well as the entire public on this. So, yeah, I support it wholeheartedly. Thank you. Speaker 2: Councillor Jerusalem. Councillor Jurisevic: I think scientists should use the peer reviews. I think this is an element of that process. Ensure, give an assurance to council and to our committee. The monitoring and evaluation reporting plan is of the highest degree. I'm sure it is already. But our expert tells us it's the best he's seen in his years on council. But to get that independent scientific expert to give us that assurance and, again, peer review of scientific processes is something I'm sure that TNC won't have any issues with.
00:32:00 And I'm sure if it adds an extra level of assurance for the councillors, I'm more than happy to support it. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Does anyone else like to speak to this motion or move an amendment? Councillor Finzel: No, I just want to speak to it. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for bringing forward this motion. I fully support it. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: I support this motion, but I'd also like to move to amend and note the terms of reference of the Noosa River Oyster Restoration Project Technical Advisory Group, provided as attachment to the report and request the Nature Conservancy to agree to amend the membership of the TAD to include a member of one of the historic commercial fishing families, Massau, Girton, Clearies, Clarks, Harpers, to add independent, valuable local input into the project. Speaker 1: Seconder? No, you can't. Speaker 2: Would anyone like to second that motion? Oh, I've been seconded. Thank you. Councillor Finzel? Councillor Arnston?
00:33:00 Can you speak to that motion? Councillor Lorentson: I've requested that the Nature Conservancy agree to amend the membership of the TAD to include a member of one of the historic fishing families to add independent local ecological knowledge. I understand that this advisory group is a technical body, so the question here is, can a fisher provide technical advice? According to an article published in the ICES Journal of Marine Science, which is a peer-reviewed scientific journal covering oceanography and marine biology, fisher's local ecological knowledge forms, quote, an important part of best available information for fisheries in science and management. There's also many published research articles that agree that local ecological knowledge and formal scientific studies on fish species decline could complement each other. Further, in the General Committee report, dated the 14th of January 2019, in relation to the Alliance, there was reference made to the tradition of fishing,
00:34:00 the traditional ecological knowledge of the Kabi Kabi traditional owners. This was recognised as an important source of information to support restoration suitability modelling. I note and I agree and commend the TNC for appointing a Kabi Kabi representative on the tag in recognition of this. I believe that a member of one of our historic fishing families would also provide valuable information regarding fish ecology and behaviours that could be used in conjunction with the knowledge of the traditional owners. Councillor Finzel: I would like to speak to that with reference to the General Committee report, 15 July 2019, page 12 of 43, where point A, number 3, respects both the traditional owner and historic commercial fishing family heritage, and it is to be considered for inclusion as a core element of the Noosa River plan for fisheries.
00:35:00 The project, from the Nature Conservancy, states that the project or event for which they are applying benefits the residents of the community, and they would like their full intention is to include community for the purpose of public interest. I support this recommendation to include the fishing families on this group. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Sorry Mayor, can I just confirm which report the Council was referring to there? Councillor Finzel: The General Committee meeting report, 15 July 2019. Councillor Jurisevic: Oh, okay, 2019, another one this time. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah, thank you, Mayor. Look, I absolutely endorse the comments of Councillor Finzel and Councillor Lorentson, Lorentson that the commercial fishing families and their representatives certainly do have a valuable contribution to make that needs to be taken on board as this project moves forward in the partnership with TNC and all the stakeholders and the council.
00:36:00 The question I have is that, and it's been raised, that the technical advisory group, and we have heard this, principally state government bureaucrats as well as, I should say state government officers, bureaucrats is a dirty word, state government officers as well as council officers and the Nature Conservancy and Kabi Kabi representatives. The stakeholders listed in the report are also quite vast and also include other groups and individuals that also have a role to play. They also have very worthy contributions to make. So if we were going to include commercial fishers in this group, there's also equally worthy groups and individuals that should also be included. But this is not to disregard the contribution that the commercial fishing families can make.
00:37:00 It's a question of what is the most appropriate vehicle for them to engage and make the contribution through. And we see in the Mayor's motion, part C, is the establishment of a Noosa River stakeholder reference group to provide strategic input, local knowledge and expertise into river management initiatives, initially providing input into this particular project and more broadly into finalisation and implementation of the Noosa River Plan. I certainly, and I don't think there's a council around this table that wouldn't think that commercial fishers should not be engaged in that capacity, and the stakeholder reference group will make sure of that. But I do support the recommendation that the TAG remain a technical group principally, whose principal goal and objective is to advance the permitting process through state government. So I support the intent to involve the commercial fishing families,
00:38:00 but I just question the vehicle by which we wish to engage them, and I would suggest the more appropriate place would be through the Noosa River stakeholder reference group. Mayor Stewart: In reply to Councillor Lorentson's motion, I firmly believe that increased community participation and consultation is absolutely paramount to the success of this project. Indeed, historical extracts from relevant documents would support this wholeheartedly. Going back January 2019 and the report which was brought by council to the General Committee agenda, specifically noted in risks and opportunities that the prioritisation of the next phase of the oyster reef project, of this partnership proposal provides a greater opportunity to better engage with and involve local recreational and commercial fishermen as part of a second and third stage of the oyster reef project who are not heavily engaged in the first stage of the project. Early community engagement is proposed to build support and understanding of the proposed next phases of the project
00:39:00 and also provide for volunteering opportunities. So I do support Councillor Lorentson's motion. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think we're all going to agree on one point, and that is that local knowledge accumulated after decades of activity and fishing on the Noosa River is a valuable expertise. There is no doubt, and the references to peer-reviewed literature is quite clear, that all good management takes an understanding of local knowledge and traditional knowledge, as well as scientific expert knowledge. It is an expertise. It is something that is invaluable to any restoration project. But when I look at the terms of reference for the technical advisory group, I say the same thing that Councillor Wilkie does.
00:40:00 And that is, is this the right group to get the most value out of the limited time of our local people? Do they provide ongoing expertise on the implementation of the project and support in overcoming legislative, scientific and practical barriers that have occurred during the term of the project? Do you want to ensure that the project meets all technical, statutory and policy requirements in a timely manner to the satisfaction of relevant decision-making authority, or ensure actions within the project plan are effectively delivered and communicated to all stakeholders? I believe, while they could have a role, I think that there is no doubt in my mind that the best place and the most appropriate place for that representation is in the State College Reference Group. Their local expertise needs to be acknowledged. And as Councillor Wilkie said,
00:41:00 the people who have been picking up litter for decades along the river also have local expertise. People who have been looking after other aspects of the river that may be available to the State College Reference Group are equally important. And it's equally important that we do have a range of different stakeholders to inform the project. And I actually think that the project will benefit more if they don't sit on the Technical Advisory Group, but the Technical Advisory Group are informed by their input into the Stakeholder Reference Group. For that reason, I won't support this amendment. If a further one came up about ensuring they go into the Stakeholder Reference Group, I would be quite happy to support it. Councillor Wegener: Earlier this week, I asked for... Stand down. Earlier this week, I asked for...
00:42:00 Is this a question? Well, I asked for more information that we... Did staff say that they would give more information on this? Speaker 1: I think you... Councillor Finzel: You did ask. Speaker 1: Your question was whether there'd be any feedback from the State Government bureaucrats in terms of whether we had external members on there. I think that was what you were asking. Councillor Wilkie: It was Councillor involvement at that stage. Oh, Councillor involvement. Councillor Wegener: Sorry, it was a different question. Yeah. Yes, that's right. That was a different question. Yeah. It was a different question. Sorry about that. My apologies. Speaker 2: Would you like to speak to the motion, Councillor Woodman? Councillor Wegener: It just seems to me that this is Council micromanaging something, and we probably... When Council gets too involved in something like this, it becomes a micromanager. I love having a scientist coming in and overseeing it. I love the stakeholder, the reference group,
00:43:00 but I'm just worried that this is micromanaging and it sets a bad precedent. Speaker 2: Councillor Driscoll. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. Look, I appreciate the intent of where the Council's trying to go with this and trying to probably resolve elements of rift that have developed over this project and all the elements under the title Bring Back the Fish that seem to have... offended a particular element within our community. But yeah, look, I'm looking at what the TAG is there and intended to do. I appreciate there's an expertise within the commercial fishing families. I agree it's probably, without a doubt, belongs within the Noosa River Stakeholder Reference Group. Could they be in both? Given that the parameters around what the technical advisory group is to do is to facilitate the permit process and all of those bureaucratic processes
00:44:00 that we have to get through in the first instance. And then beyond that, you know, the situating of where reefs are best situated, there may be an element there. But I honestly don't think that they would feel comfortable in amongst the technical aspect of permits and the like. Certainly a valued stakeholder going forward. And their advice would be appreciated. I would hope that with the establishment of this reference stakeholder group that the TAG would, if needed be, refer to them if there were questions to be raised. But I'm challenged by the process here. But I don't think it's absolutely the best fit in this case because of what the TAG is intended to do. Thank you. Speaker 2: I think everyone has spoken to the motion. We might print.
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 Oh, sorry, right of reply. I beg your pardon. Councillor Orister. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. And I appreciate all the good points that have been made at this table. I think one of the reasons that I asked for a member of the historic fishing families to come on board is, again, just for community reassurance, the TAG membership has been appointed by the TNC. And I thought this might be an opportunity for AHU to sort of combine a community rep with someone with technical and local ecological knowledge that they can contribute to this group. I agree that there's also a great place for them to be on the stakeholder reference group. And I actually think that there's a place, you know, in both groups for them. But again, thank you for the good debate. Okay. Mayor Stewart: And we'll put it to a vote. All in favour of Councillor Lorentson's amendment? That's Councillor Finzel, Stewart and Lorentson.
00:46:00 Speaker 2: Against? Jurisevic, the remainder. Yep. Mayor Stewart: So we go back to the... Speaker 1: The original motion. Mayor Stewart: The original motion. Speaker 1: I think everyone has spoken to that. Has everyone spoken to that? Except for Councillor Lorentson. Is there anyone that hasn't spoken on the original motion? Speaker 2: Councillor Lorentson. The original motion. The original motion. Councillor Lorentson: No, I approve the original motion. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. No. I approve the recommendations. Excuse me. Speaker 2: Oh, amendments. Sorry. Mayor Stewart: To move the... All in favour of this motion? Councillor Wegener: Wait a minute. We're... This is the original. The original. I'm thinking the original. Councillor Lorentson: The original. Councillor Wegener: The original. Councillor Lorentson: We're talking original motion. Councillor Wegener: What's the original motion? Which has your amendment concerning that? Yeah. Speaker 1: So just to explain that. So what we're... Just the process. Councillor Stewart moved a motion, which included additional wording for what the
00:47:00 general committee had on Monday, which was the independent scientific expert review, if I can call it that. Then the motion or the amendment from Councillor Lorentson was lost. So we're going back to the original motion. And that's what the Mayor has now called for a vote on. Councillor Jurisevic: The Mayor didn't take up the option of a right of reply? No. Mayor Stewart: I will take up an option of a right of reply. Look. Thank you. Sorry. I think I would have thought my motion had come in under amended. So I do apologise on that. I do think this project... I think they're welcome additions. I think they will all add to greater transparency and I think more comfort to the community. And I thank Council for providing latitude in that respect. And... But I still come back to my... And I think these are all really welcome additions. And I'm very happy that they're there. I just cannot support this motion of approving the project plan unless we had what I specifically...
00:48:00 Well, what was requested in regard to the historical and baseline data. I still think that's fundamental. But as I said, I do appreciate... I think it will be a greater and stronger project because of those amendments made. And I think it will provide more comfort to the community. And I think it will provide more comfort to this Council. So I thank you for that. I'll put it to a vote. All in favour? Speaker 2: To accept that. All the gentlemen. Against? You're catching your motion. Pardon? You're catching your motion. Yes, you did. Yes, you did. Yes, you did. Yes, you did. Yes, you did. I thought mine was . That's all right. So we're catching the original motion, so we'll just... That's all right. That's all right. We're just going through it. So... Councillor Wilkie: Right. Speaker 1: So I'll just explain what Councillor Stewart moved was the motion on Monday with the additional
00:49:00 words of the... Councillor Jurisevic: Independent Scientific Review. Speaker 1: ... Independent Scientific Review. And that's what the Council's just voted on. Yeah. Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: All right. That's nice. Yeah. Speaker 2: That's all right. That's all right. Councillor Jurisevic: Do we move on to the next item? Yeah. Let's go. Mayor Stewart: The next item three is the... On the agenda is a year-old ring-tail environment project. I'm Stan, Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: If you can bring up my... What? Yeah. No. ...Declaration, please. A warning piece. Speaker 1: Oh, sorry. Speaker 2: There. There we go. Speaker 1: Someone else could have moved it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You could have moved it. Give me information. Okay. What's going on there? So, I wish to declare a perceived conflict of interest under the Local Government Act due to the fact that as a sole trader in my business, Watershed Australia, I have both been contracted by and subcontracted officers of the Noosa and District Landcare prior to becoming a client. So, this included taking a paid two-day consultancy, facilitating a meeting of Landcare members
00:50:00 in 2015, and also subcontracting Landcare for a project of similar length. I advise that there's no network nexus between... Okay. ...Landcare prior to becoming a councillor and the matter before us. I am an ordinary member of the group, a long-standing association, including a councillor representative that assisted in its foundation in 1989. I have collegial relationships dating back to the 1980s with members of the Landcare councillors. I've previously provided a very detailed list of that item. I won't bore you with it again, but if you do take that into consideration, both as a professional role in the State Government Public Service and also in the relationship with my members of the... Other relations I have with members of the current Landcare Committee. Since Monday, I have sought advice on this matter from the section in the department that
00:51:00 the integrity commissioner referred me to. I am confident that I only have a perceived conflict of interest. I am confident that... Thank you. ...no member of my family, myself, that there is no close associate of mine that will benefit from the matters being discussed. As a result, I believe I can consider this item impartially and in the public interest and request to remain in the meeting room to participate in debate and vote on this matter. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Thank you very much. So, I'll just ask one question with regard to the involvement of Landcare in the Urural and Retail Project. I mean, my understanding is this is negotiations between the State, HQ Plantations, Noosa Parks Association and Council. And Landcare has no direct involvement in the...
00:52:00 in the process going forward. Can you just confirm that? Sure. Speaker 1: Landcare were not what I call the original project partners, so that was the State Government Three departments, Council, Noosa Parks Association and HQ Plantation. The negotiations that are underway at the moment are between the State Government, Greenfleet, Noosa Parks Association and Council. Landcare have done some work on the land with funding provided by a third party, which was the Body Shop Philanthropic Organisation. That didn't come through Council. It had no involvement with Council. That's a separate matter. But there's been no funding provided to Landcare in relation to this matter from Council. Councillor Jurisevic: Based on that, I'll move the resolution. The Council's known to perceive conflict of interest in the equation of Council Stockwell. Resolved, this represents a perceived conflict of interest in the matter. And the Council of Stockwell may remain in the meeting room to participate in the debate and vote on this matter.
00:53:00 Councillor Wilkie: I'll second that, Madam Chair. Councillor Wegener: Can we speak on the matter? Yes. You can ask questions. Speaker 1: If you wish to speak. Speaker 2: Do you have a sweet? Councillor Jurisevic: No, I think I've asked my question. Councillor, do you have a question? Councillor Wegener: First, I'd like to ask your advice, Brett, on this. Brian, because we've gone through this several times with Brian Stockwell. Speaker 1: Yeah, sure. And I guess probably for the third time today, talked about conflicts of interest. And, you know, probably really state what I said before is that it's natural and okay for councillors to have conflicts of interest because you live in the community, you're involved in the community, you're in organisations, you have neighbours, friends, family or whatever. The trick with conflicts of interest is to make sure you declare them and that they're dealt with appropriately. When you look at conflicts of interest, really you're looking at a couple of things.
00:54:00 And you've probably talked before about a continuum where, you know, at one extreme where you have a personal matter, you have a contract with a councillor yourself. Well, clearly that's at the one end of the scale. At the other end, you've got a third cousin who once, you know, did some work for council or whatever. So you've always got that continuum in terms of what that relationship should be. And the Act actually gives some guidance on that. For example, if you're a current board member of an organisation, then there is no exemption. If you're an ordinary member, there is an exemption. Then the question comes in between if you're a past board member, was it last year or was it 25 years ago? And that sense of nexus comes in there as well. The other element is in terms of the nexus for the degree to which the other party is involved in the matter before the councillor. In fact, I hadn't thought about this before. An example would be the previous matter where the mayor indicated that she knew one of the family or one of the five families who may or may not become on a working group.
00:55:00 So that's quite a remote nexus. So the same thing here, you know, to what extent in this case is land care currently involved? You're not involved in a contract or any arrangement or funding from council. We've done some work on the land with funding from a third party. Council doesn't own that land or have tenure at the moment. So it's a relatively remote nexus. But as always, as I've said this before to councillors, I can give you advice, but ultimately you need to make the decision in terms of whether you see a perceived conflict of interest and whether or not the councillor remains in the room. Councillor Wegener: In the past, Brian's left the room several times, and I just find that that's a very chilling precedence to ask him to leave because the nexus is distant between what he's done. And the conflict of interest is on the very low end of the spectrum. And, you know, under these conditions and under this precedent, you know, I, for one, will not be working with any local community groups in any sort of advocate or role at all.
00:56:00 And then I would worry, you know, Amelia may be interested in advocating for the the Airbnb's or the short term tenancy. But, you know, she could be tarred with the same brush. I mean, it's just it seems that we're really focusing on the very end of this bottom end of the scale and even Karen with Pomona, you know, if anything comes up about Pomona, it's just like, oh, my gosh, you know, Karen might have a conflict of interest or the mayor has a fishing family and we're talking about oysters, you know, I would like us to get together, but basically get some rules here amongst ourselves, because it is up to the vote here, regardless of the tests that are given to us by the state. It's up to us to kind of figure this out, because I think that all of us will be chilled a little bit for by getting involved with community groups in the future, if we if we just have such a standard that we've got over that we've the precedence goes, it gives us a terrible standard to work with.
00:57:00 Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. I'd like to note and acknowledge Councillor Stockwell's. Your. The fact that you went to the integrity Commissioner and and did some due diligence, I acknowledge that and appreciate that, and I have actually reconsidered my earlier position, and I do think you can add value to this debate, and I do believe that. That a reasonable and fair minded person in the room. would believe that you will make a decision that is not contrary to the public interest. Speaker 2: Thank you. Anyone else would like to speak to this question? Councillor Wilkie. Councillor Wilkie: I'm very moved by what Councillor Lorentson, the significance of what Councillor Lorentson said, because it's it's about making fair and equitable decisions and about allowing people to stay in the room after having done the right thing by making the declarations and then adding value to our discussions so that we can be assured as a group that we're making the most informed decisions so.
00:58:00 Councillor Lorentson, thank you very much for your consideration on this issue and the way you've approached it. I do appreciate it. Speaker 2: Anyone else like to speak? We might put it to Councillor Stokwell. Sorry, Councillor Stokwell. Councillor Jurisevic: Look, I appreciate something that Councillor Wegener has said has eluded me to just go back with regard to when Councillor Stockwell does leave the room in relation to that. He's always forthright in declaring his perceived or conflicts of interest or otherwise, where there is a direct relationship or a direct value to the entity such as Landcare. Councillor Stockwell always leaves the room and I respect and admire him for that because he does take his perceived conflict of interest or other conflicts of interest very, very seriously.
00:59:00 He has done the right thing and gone and double checked with the integrity commissioner that there is no issue here. And Landcare is not directly involved in this process. I see no issue with that or any conflict at all in this matter. And the last one I was going to say, as our recent environmental expert on our council, I see that his value to any debate on environmental issues is one that we should welcome at the table every time. Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Just a point of clarification. I think I said it right. You did. The integrity commissioner has advised that they're too busy to consider these matters and referred me to a member of the department. It was the department that I ran the scenarios by and gave me advice and hence how I made that declaration. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Stockwell, for being so transparent in that regard.
60 minutes in ¶
01:00:00 We'll put the council resolution to a vote. All in favour? Unanimous. Unanimous. So there is... Speaker 1: I need to have to deal with that. Mayor Stewart: Yes, the ringtower. There is... I'll move it, Madam Chair. Thank you. And second, thank you. Do you like to speak to the motion? Councillor Wilkie: No, thank you, Madam Chair. Mayor Stewart: Would anyone like to speak to the motion? We have a recommendation on page... I need to then put that to a vote. Put that to a vote, yes. A particular one. Item 4 is an update on council grant funding allocations. Item 5 is the financial performance report June 2020 interim position. Item 6 is for the planning and environment court appeal number BD1605 of 2020 at 191 Hollett Road Noosaville. And on that one, Mayor, there's
01:01:00 Speaker 1: some alternative wording that staff have looked at in consultation with our lawyers and have Deputy Mayor Stockwell: provided that. I'm happy to move it and I'll read that for the changes. The council note report by the manager development assessment to general committee meeting dated 13th of July 2010 regarding planning and environment court appeal number BD1605 and of 2020. And A, agree to allow the appeal as proposed changes to the subdivision plan are considered minor and would be an improved outcome for the site in comparison with the approved subdivision plan. Given the changes, reduce the development footprint and numbers of lots from 52 to 40. B, note that allowing this appeal does not in any way alter the council's legal position in relation to the four other current planning and environment appeals over the site concerning the extension of the original development approval or diminish its strong opposition to subdivision of the land, which he considers would be a
01:02:00 fundamental conflict with planning requirements to the site under the plan in South East Queensland Councillor Jurisevic: regional plan. Sorry, can I just confirm the track changes on that from what was, that reads to me exactly the same as what was in the general committee. Speaker 2: Can I just see the track change? That's general committee. Hang on. Thank you. I'll second this motion. Thank you, Kylie. Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We are before the courts on this one, so I'll be brief. Yes, on Monday's committee, I asked for the council's planning and environment solicitor to have a look over the wording. My understanding is that's who has provided this enhanced wording, and I think it does more clearly and strongly put our position in the right place. Thank you. Thank you. And I think it is preferable to go down this track than the previous one that came out Speaker 2: of committee. Thank you. Does anyone else like to speak to this motion? All in favour? Mayor Stewart: No. Thank you, Kylie. On the bottom of page 16, we have, thank you, Councillor Wilkie.
01:03:00 Thank you, Councillor Jurisevic. All in favour? Thank you. Item nine, we have no ordinary minute meeting reports. We have no confidential session. We have it, have it, have it, have it. We have had no questions submitted from public question time. Councillors, the next ordinary meeting will be held on the 20th of August 2020 at the council chambers here in Tewantin. Thank you, Councillors. It's been a long day.