Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Good morning everyone. I declare the meeting open. I would like to acknowledge that we are meeting on the traditional lands of the Kabi Kabi people and I pay my respects to their Elders past, present and emerging. I note that everyone is in attendance. Today's special meeting is to consider the 2021-22 Noosa Council Draft Budget Consultation Feedback. We have Director of Corporate Services Michael Shave here and are there any questions for Michael? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh, we're standing up. Okay, Michael, there's a range of different feedback there. When we get to the issue in terms of you lumped four together that address climate action, there's a couple in there in terms of the response to the Climate Hazard Adaptation Plan, which is still a draft, particularly the ones regarding coastal management.
00:01:00 Now, is there any item in the budget that will look at that response that promoted it through coastal foreshore management? Speaker 1: So, yes, you're correct. There is funding that's been allocated. It's allocated in the budget, in the draft budget for a coastal hazard plan, management plan. Coastal foreshore management? Foreshore management plan. Yeah. So, yes, so there is funding that has been committed to progress that initiative. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Now, there's a range of other feedback in terms of the climate response and then on page 16, the Zero Emissions Noosa Group that does a lot of great work in the community has highlighted that they didn't see that we've adequately identified how we were going to meet our targets, both in the environment strategy and in the draft climate response plan.
00:02:00 I would add to that the Zero Emissions Operational Plan. So, other than the $400,000 for the Zero Emissions Operational Plan and the money for the coastal foreshore management plan, is there any other key initiatives in this year's budget to take us towards our target for zero emissions? Speaker 1: So, there is, through the Chair, there is additional funding that's been set aside for continuing a range of studies around zero emissions strategy. So, there's $50,000 that's been set aside in the budget. There's also part of our increase in our community grants program. There's funding also specifically that was councillors were keen to see to help promote solar and water harvesting initiatives through the grants program. So, there is funding within the budget in addition to the $400,000 specifically for the capital program for zero emissions.
00:03:00 Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: I'm finished. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Go on. Councillor Lorentson: Just a few questions in regards to the tourism and economic levy, Michael. Will tourism funding decrease as a result of the proposed changes? Speaker 1: No. The tourism funding is, there's $2.52 million set aside in the draft budget, which is obviously councillors obligated to provide those funds under a current contract with Tourism Noosa. So, it'll be the same level of funding. Only $21, $22 for tourism. Speaker 2: So, just to add to that, it's been the same for the last four years. No change. Thank you, Gert. Councillor Lorentson: Just for the benefit of the viewers, can you clarify, maybe this is a question for Brett,
00:04:00 can you clarify council's role in tourism and tourism nurse's role in the tourism business? Speaker 2: Yeah, sure. That's a good question. One of the things that council does is to fund tourism promotion. So, our role, and perhaps some of the confusion that's arisen over the last couple of weeks, is what's become a core council role is the funding of tourism promotion, not the doing of it. The doing of the promotion, the marketing, is very much in tourism nurse's area. That's what they're good at. That's what they do. So, if you like, that distinction is destination marketing is tourism nurse's role. Our role is to provide the funding to enable them to do that. Councillor Lorentson: So, just for, by way of clarification, the proposed changes don't jeopardise the $2.52 million that we're allocating for funding for Noosa tourism. Speaker 2: That's right. So, the council, 2017 if I remember at that time, did a new funding agreement with tourism
00:05:00 Noosa. They've always had funding agreements going back 20 years. That's right. So, that funding agreement has changed. So, that does lock in that $2.52 million which Michael mentioned before, which is in the upcoming budget. What we'll need to do is that five-year agreement's coming to an end, we do need to negotiate a new agreement about what that funding will be. That'll apply from 1 July 2022. That seems a long way away, but we'll start that process and see one of the recommendations today, to start that process sooner rather than later. Okay. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. We're collecting a new rating with transitory accommodation and tourism and economic levies going to be charged in this new rating system. Can I ask, how does council plan to use that funding?
00:06:00 Speaker 1: So, there's, in terms of the proposed rating structure, you know, council was keen to look at, you know, reviewing our structure so that we were, at least at the beginning of the year, a little bit more transparent around those transitory accommodation or short-stay properties. So, whilst our mix of how we collect rates will be changing across transitory and residential and commercial properties, the key point probably is council's proposed draft budget operating position, which is we're forecasting a return to surplus one year earlier, which is great. A minor surplus. So, we aren't, if we're thinking about are we collecting a windfall here from those properties, no. Those properties will be contributing toward all the council services and operations, as for other properties.
00:07:00 Whilst, and council, in terms of our making decisions on our levels of rate increases across the board, we've been mindful of our operating position to make sure that that's reasonable and we're not over-collecting where we don't need to. So, I hope that answers the question. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, just to follow on on that, we've got a range of submissions on that topic. And I look at the one from Stays, which is one of the online platforms, and it makes some sweeping statements I think there might need to be some clarification on. And they talk about they're deeply concerned with what appears to be a view formed by council on a poorly assessed and analysed situation. And down lower they talk about it appears to be a serious lodging flaw. Is my recollection right? Did we have an expert in the field from a consultancy provide us with an analysis and recommendations? And can you tell us if what we're proposing is similar to other coastal tourist towns and whether we're on par or whether the rate is higher or lower than, say, the Gold Coast? Speaker 1: Yes. So, we did engage an external consultant who's done a number of rating structure reviews
00:08:00 across Queensland and New South Wales. And they did recommend the proposed structure that we're looking at. We have in the draft budget. And they did also reference similar structures in place in other high tourism areas, such as the Gold Coast and Sunshine Coast, who have had these structures in place for a number of years. And, yes, in terms of the relativities between a residential property and a transitory property, we are, at Gold Coast, we are charging a higher proportion or a multiplier on top of a residential property as what we are charging. So, that's what we're proposing. And Sunshine Coast is slightly below us in terms of that relativity. So, thank you. Councillor Wilkie: As part of the research you did for these changes to increase the rates on short-term accommodation and home-hosted accommodation, there's also some data collected about the fees charged to guests per night at these properties.
00:09:00 Can you indicate how long it would take some of these properties, generally, if you can generalise, or give specific examples of how long it would take some of these properties how long it would take for them to recoup the cost of these increases in terms of a nightly cost or a weekly higher cost? Speaker 1: Yeah, the, in terms of, obviously, the transitory accommodation categories are based on our rate in the dollar methodology. So, obviously, the higher value properties would pay, would pay more in general rate than a lower value property. But keeping in mind, too, higher value properties would pay more in general rate than a lower So we're seeing a lot of people who have been receiving income and the ability to charge for those properties compared to a lower value property. So the median increased on these properties, so the middle amount is $14 a week. So if you put that in perspective to potentially what a property could be let for on a weekly
00:10:00 basis, we think that the proposed impacts could be absorbed quite comfortably by those So we're looking at those properties and at the higher end range of properties in the Shire, we're talking potentially the rate increase being less than one day's short term higher for a property. And that's, again, we think that's quite reasonable and achievable in terms of what we want to achieve for our overall rating approach. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you, Michael. One thing you mentioned there was the Sunshine Coast and Gold Coast Councils. Now, my understanding is that, like us, they at some stage did have a tourism and economic levy associated, but have now transitioned into a similar model to what we've got. Is that correct? Speaker 1: Yes. Sunshine Coast Council was in 2018.
00:11:00 They consolidated there, effectively did what we're looking at doing. So they did that back in 2018. And again, they have an arrangement with Visit Sunshine. They have a Gold Coast where they were previously funded via a tourism levy. That arrangement is still in place. And now that's funded by general rates. And similar with the Gold Coast, they've introduced transitory accommodation rating categories. They have a high tourism, it's a high tourism area, and they've adopted a similar approach as well. Councillor Jurisevic: So what we're effectively seeing here is more closely aligned to what other councils have been, have transitioned to over a year. Speaker 1: Yeah, and I think to be fair to us, we've had a lot on our plate in the last seven years, and we're just sort of getting to the stage where we can start looking at some of the granular stuff around how we rate and so on. So I think the time was right for us to review, whilst Sunshine Coast and Gold Coast are quite mature organisations, and they're quite large too, so more resources and time to be able to look at these sorts of impacts.
00:12:00 on their rating structures. So we're, in a sense, we're sort of coming in behind them in alignment. Councillor Jurisevic: So whilst we've looked at two councils like that, two fairly substantial councils that have had the resources to do their rate review at an earlier stage, are we aware of any other councils that continue to raise the tourism record or collect it for tourism planning? Speaker 1: I possibly would have referred this to Brett, but without doing a good job, I don't think we're going to be able to do a good job. I couldn't say who in Queensland would still be. Speaker 2: I can't think of anybody off the top of my head, but there might be some out there. I just can't say that I've gone through all the councils in Queensland. Well, I think we've just about put one of the labs through. I just can't recall Councillor Joe, but none of them are springing to mind right now. Thank you. Go on, Tom. Councillor Wegener: It seems, though, that there's an argument that reoccurs quite a bit, and that's the line of vision, you know, the simplification of saying, well, there's a tourism levy, and the businesses, you know, are paying for that levy, and we know it's there.
00:13:00 And the argument is that a future proves, you know, the tourism economic levy in the future by having that money through a levy instead of through general rates. It's a pretty popular view in here. Can we explore? I mean, it seems that there's a lot of support within the community to go back to the levy system, if there is that support within the community. Speaker 1: Well, yeah, I can. I'll start. Brett might want to finish. Look, I think the beauty about the consultation process that we've gone through is that we're getting the feedback. And, you know, as Brett mentioned, in hindsight, how we worded some of these things in our budget documents. Could have been better, and we'll learn from that in terms of future budget consultation processes.
00:14:00 I think what we, the feedback we've taken here, and you'll see in the recommendation, the report is that, you know, there is a desire to see transparency in how Council articulates how much we're investing in tourism and economic development each year. And we've made a recommendation saying, look, we've taken that message on board. And we can resolve, or Council can resolve to actually enshrine in this budget, the future budgets, you know, that we include that information in our budget documents that we publish as part of the budget. So, look, good feedback in terms of the staff, myself, I've taken that on board, and I've put that recommendation forward to Council to consider. Speaker 2: Yeah, I'll just add to that. To a large extent, the... The relationship between the levy and the funding paid to tourism and Noosa was decoupled quite a few years ago because the amount paid was fixed.
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 So, in other words, it didn't depend on whether the levy went up or down or what happened to it. So, for example, in the budget last year, the Council reduced the tourism and economic levy by 5% as part of its COVID response to try and minimise the financial impact of COVID on our local business community. That had zero impact on the funding provided to tourism, especially because it's the funding agreement that determines the amount paid, not the levy. So, that decoupling has occurred over a number of years. So, the whole issue is, what's the amount of resources to put into tourism marketing and funding of this region is determined by the funding agreement, not by anything else, and that's been the case for a number of years. Councillor Wilkie: Just a process question, Michael, we're heading, we have a draft budget and this is, we've received feedback on that. We're heading towards ratifying the budget by June 30. Could you just explain the opportunities provided by the budget reviews that occur throughout the year for the Council to review its priorities?
00:16:00 Speaker 1: Sure. So, Council generally adopts its annual budget more or less around 30 June. Give or take one or two weeks either side. Council also, under the descriptions in the Local Government Act, can amend its budget during the year and Council, our current process is we have three, three opportunities to do that through the quarter budget review. So, the first budget review we have is generally around August, where we consider primarily our capital, particularly projects that are not quite finished during the year. And we want to then, you know, re-jig our capital budget to allow for those funds that were unspent in, in the previous budget. November, we do another budget review where we consider emerging, emerging revenues, expenditures, and other emerging issues that we need to address, and that gives us flexibility there to, to amend the budget.
00:17:00 But we also do another one in April. So, we have three budget reviews, three budget opportunities per year to, to change things. But obviously, being mindful of our sustainability policy and making sure we're efficiently managing our finances and, and our cash flows. Councillor Lorentson: So, yes, thank you. So, inviting feedback two weeks before we need to adopt the budget process is not an exercise in vain. You've just explained that there is opportunity to implement a lot of this feedback in the, in, within the next six months and then, when we have the opportunity to amend the budget. Is that right, Michael? Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah. And look, in terms of our consultation piece that we've done for this budget, which has obviously been a good learning experience for us all, you know, we, whilst we put the, the draft budget out for two weeks, we have started the engagement process back in March. And we have had a number of different feedback pieces where we have discussed those issues around the table and we've, we have changed things in our, our budget.
00:18:00 So, it's. You could say it's a bit of an iterative process where we do also have opportunities to consider any further feedback that we, that councillors might want to dwell on or have further conversations with the community on certain issues that could also result in changes to the budget during the year. Speaker 2: I must just add to that. I think, you know, this is our first Gallup the budget process consultation and I will do a debrief in terms of what worked and what didn't. One of the interesting things for me is that. To a large extent, the most effective part of the consultation should be what, what I call the first page, which was back in March or when we took it earlier, where you've got the blank piece of paper and say to people, what do you, what do you think? Because that actually is how then influences the councillors to be worked through the draft. But the issue there is a lot of people aren't as engaged because they haven't got something tangible to focus on. Whereas once we get to a draft stage, which is when people are more interested because it might affect them or not affect them or they might not like what they see or what it might be, that's when we're up against some of the harder deadlines.
00:19:00 So I think that's one of the things we've got to think about next year is how do we get that balance between doing the more effective stuff up front where people are probably less interested in getting engaged because it's not tangible to them compared to getting the draft budget and we're up against harder timeframes and how do we touch that through that time. So it's been a good process for the first year. I think we're going to take some learnings out of it and see how we can improve it for next year as well. Councillor Wegener: I'm sure that all of us want to congratulate all the people that did do their submissions because it's phenomenal and it's really quite, quite a lot here and I learned a lot. When you say that, I would love somehow to hash out more of this, you know, these suggestions because I spent a lot of time, all of us have spent a lot of time on them, but really, we do take these things really seriously, don't we? We do take these things seriously.
00:20:00 For me. For me. No, there's no question. Councillor Lorentson: We keep talking consultation. My question is, why was Tourism Noosa our industry expert body in tourism? Why were they not consulted about what is a significant change in the proposed rating system? Speaker 2: Yeah, part of it was probably the difference between the perception of what the effective change was to the effect of the change was then it's actually not going to be any impact on their funding. So we got all of the business groups together on the Monday afternoon, the first day of the consultation and went through the changes. We actually thought that the biggest change in the budget was going to be about the short-term accommodation because that is the biggest change in our infrastructure. And that's what we thought would get more feedback on. So, as I said, I think the issue, the learning out of us there was that the perception about whether or not there was an impact on their funding because of the tourism levy issue was probably underestimated on our behalf, but the reality was that the funding didn't change for them, but we didn't read that as well as we could have.
00:21:00 Councillor Jurisevic: That's interesting opportunity to follow on through that. Some misapprehension, misunderstanding about that, about that funding of the levy and all the rest of it. So can you just explain who previously paid the tourism economic levy that funded tourism activities, tourism activities as well as economic activities that we've now derived? And also what is going to change by the methodology that we've got here with regard to who's going to pay for funding of tourism nursery and economic activities? Speaker 1: Yeah. So under our existing tourism economic levy, we've got about $1.5 billion of levy. We had about 6,000 properties that contributed towards the levy and that included properties that are currently offered for short stay.
00:22:00 So we were capturing those properties through a mechanism. Commercial properties with an indirect benefit from tourism promotions, so they also paid. And also our normal properties, our resorts and motels. So they all contributed towards the levy. So going forward, obviously we've changed our rating structure. So whilst now it's general rate, we're still collecting that equivalent amount from the different categories. Transitry accommodation categories will be contributing towards tourism promotion. Non-residential commercial categories will also be indirectly contributing because their rates, they're not, they haven't decreased, we've kept them the same. So you could argue that they're also still contributing towards tourism promotion. And going forward, we'll be again looking at the overall mix of, you know,
00:23:00 A, how much do we want to collect for tourism and economic development activities? And then in terms of our rating structure next year, we'll go back and have another look at, you know, the mix between the different categories and how much we want to collect from each category to contribute towards that. Councillor Jurisevic: So we're much the same way that when the tourism and economic levy was, as a levy was collected, and there was a value to that at the end of the year, it was clearly articulated. We'll be able to clearly articulate the rates that are contributing towards tourism and economic spending as a category item or a line item for the sake of transparency. Speaker 1: We could do that, yeah, but it wouldn't be that difficult. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Go on. There you go. So, Michael, we had, earlier this week, we reviewed this bushland reserve strategic management plan. There was concern from the groups that manage the coastal reserves about how the impacts
00:24:00 of foot traffic and climate change, coastal erosion is going to be handled in those reserves. We informed them that was going to be covered by the actions falling out of the coastal hazards adaptation plan, which is yet to be finalised, and also the coastal forest management plan, which is yet to be undertaken, but actions may fall out of that later in the next financial year. So the actions that come out of the climate change adaptation plan and also the coastal forest management plan may be funded at a future budget review in the 21-22 financial year. Speaker 1: Yeah. That's what it means to them. Sure. So, yeah, if the plans are not yet delivered or prepared and delivered early, you know, with enough time to consider the actions and there's appetite to start implementing, then definitely there's November and April budget reviews to consider any funding need for those actions.
00:25:00 Yep. Councillor Jurisevic: So the principal, just to follow up, so the principal reason that they haven't been clearly articulated here is because those plans aren't finished and the actions of those plans just haven't been put on the table to funding? Speaker 1: Correct. And as councillors are aware with our built from base budgeting approach, those plans are, even if they fall into, say, next March or April and the implementation can't actually commence until 22-23, then the relevant branches in council will include initiatives and funding in their base budgets to start commencing those actions or implementing the actions. Mayor Stewart: Is there any more questions? Yeah, Michael. Councillor Lorentson: Michael, there were a lot of concerns. There were concerns over transparency of funding in regards to the tourism and economic levy. My question is, what processes or what is council proposing to do to address those concerns over processes, over transparency, and how can residents be satisfied that the funds
00:26:00 provided to tourism are spent appropriately? Speaker 1: And I probably spoke about this just earlier, but... Yeah. Yeah. I'll probably just say recommendation C in the report I think adequately addresses the concerns. I think if we... If council resolves to be transparent around its budget documentation and what it's investing in tourism each year, then it should help allay those concerns of transparency. Councillor Wilkie: So, just a follow-on question. If I understood Councillor Lorentson's question, or I made a related one, how would residents be satisfied that the levy funds are spent appropriately? Like, what sort of reporting requirements are placed on tourism in Noosa? I'll cover that. Speaker 2: They already have reporting requirements, including providing a copy of their annual report to council, including their annual financial, audit financial statements.
00:27:00 And you might recall that normally each year around about January, February, this year was February, they come and report to council on that, and also give six monthly updates in terms of what they're doing. Okay. So, there is that reporting obligation back to council. I think what Michael's indicated is that recommendation C is to provide more information in our budget reports that come to council and our adopted budget documents, which identify what that funding for tourism is that should be put forward. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: In relation to our new rating for transitory accommodation. Yeah. There were a lot of concerns raised in regards with home hosted properties, quote that it was unfair, disproportionate and discriminatory. Have we made allowances for mum and dads who are simply renting out a room in their house to pay bills?
00:28:00 Michael, the feedback is that there are no noise issues, no extra burdens placed on council services and infrastructure. How have we addressed or protected that? I think it's important for our residents who are simply renting out just one or two rooms in their home. Speaker 1: Obviously, the draft local law is still being considered by staff. I think there is legitimate concerns from those properties that are home hosting in terms of the potential impacts on them from a rating perspective. Our draft revenue statement has still been prepared. However, within that, there are concerns that there might be an increase in the number in the definitions and the content of the revenue statement will be including provisions where if home hosting is allowed for a period of, you know, a maximum period, then that would be considered a normal property. A normal residential property. Anything over that, then obviously there is an argument there is impact.
00:29:00 There is impact on services and infrastructure and they would fall into the relevant transitory category. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. So, by way of just clarity, can I just use an example, Michael? So, if we throw that number at maybe 60 days or 90 days and that if a resident rents out one or two rooms for, say, a maximum of 90 days, they're exempt and not liable to pay the rating. After that period, whether it's 60 days or 90 days, it's considered a business and therefore they're subject to the rating provisions. Speaker 1: I would tell you. That is an accurate analysis. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Just a point of clarification. It's my understanding that general rates isn't a fee for service and it's not about how an individual home or an individual business impacts. It's about how we equitably distribute the burden of running the local government.
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 So the question is, is it about impact or is it about that it is equitable for people who are running a business? It's about how we equitably distribute the burden of running a business to have a higher rate of the dollar than for people who aren't. Councillor Jurisevic: Good question. Speaker 1: All those things. Councillor Jurisevic: Good question. Just following up on the question that Councillor Lonniston raised there. Given that we have an understanding of the short-term transitory accommodation, do we know how many properties out of those 5,000 that we suspect are associated with that element of the industry? How many are actually just short-term? Are they just home-hosted with one or two veterans? Speaker 1: Currently, based on our records and not saying that those records are 100% accurate, we're looking at around 200 properties that we currently have in terms of our rate record that we would consider the home-hosted. Thank you.
00:31:00 Mayor Stewart: Is that out of 6,000? Speaker 1: Sorry? Mayor Stewart: Is that out of 6,000? Speaker 1: Out of 4,500. 4,500. However, putting a disclaimer on that. Obviously, the local law introduction may help crystallising that number. Councillor Jurisevic: That's to the best of our knowledge. Yes. Are there any more questions? Mayor Stewart: I'd like to move the recommendation on page three of our agendas with the addition to item D. So I'll read this out. Item D. I request the Chief Executive Officer to report back to the next round of Council meetings regarding the process to develop a new partnership funding agreement with Tourism Noosa, which will commence on the 1st of July, 2022, following the expiry of the current agreement on the 30th of June, 2022, recognising Tourism Noosa's important role in undertaking tourism marketing
00:32:00 for the Noosa region. Councillor Jurisevic: Oh, sorry about that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: This is a slight but significant amendment. That tourism promotion has evolved into core Council business was a statement which caused a lot of angst and upset. For that, we apologise. And we have apologised to Tourism Noosa. The meaning and perhaps better wording of the statement should have been, supporting and funding Tourism Noosa has evolved into core Council business. The mistake was ours. And as I said, we are sorry. Council and Tourism Noosa have a very strong relationship. We have for the past 20 years. That won't change. The partnership will still continue. And what lies at the heart of the partnership is the funding agreement, which will not change. No matter where the monies are derived from, a levy or out of general rates, our relationship with TN remains steadfast and is governed and protected by the funding agreement, which we have with them. The 2021-22 budget includes $2.52 million required to be provided to TN under the current
00:33:00 agreement by Council. We are very grateful for that. We are now expediting the process for a new funding agreement with Tourism Noosa as a show of good faith and our commitment. I'd like to also take this opportunity to thank all those people who provided our feedback. It's time out of their day, away from their families, and we're very grateful that they have taken the time to provide us with necessary information to act on decision making. There are a number of channels used to gauge the feedback. We've talked about this in previous meetings, so I won't rehash, although I will say that they were significant. We have initiated consultations for the first time in regard to face-to-face and Your Say and the Balance Your Budget operating tool. As Michael said, it's a learning experience, and we can take many lessons from what we have learned. So this is the first time we've done it, and going forward, this will only get better. We can always improve. We know that, and next year we will improve on what we have done.
00:34:00 But it's a good first step, and it's a step in the right direction. So I'd like to thank Michael very much, and I'd like to thank all our community who did provide that valuable feedback. We really appreciate it. I'd like to reaffirm our commitment to Tourism Noosa. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Just on that point. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Do you think there's a capacity, and judging by some of the questions around the table, for a pre-consultation consultation on some aspects of the budget? I mean, we've undertaken consultation about the tourism levy. We had multiple meetings with Tourism Noosa, and we've taken their feedback on board and responded. Do you think there's potential to work in a pre-consultation consultation period in future budgets, based on what we've heard around the table? Yeah. Speaker 1: I think, as the Mayor's alluded, we'll learn from this process, and some of the things we could have done better. And I think that's definitely something we'll learn from, the pre-consultation consultation.
00:35:00 Councillor Jurisevic: And in that regard, as far as budget consultation and feedback, how many other councils in Queensland undertake this process, and what is the... And why is it that we have... Yeah. ...a broad to the point of undertaking this draft budget consultation process? Speaker 1: Look, there's different sort of levels of engagement that have happened over the last few years with councils. Previously, the councils have consulted. It's been more about putting... Almost what we've done two weeks ago, they've put out their budget sort of in May or late June. Here's our budget. We've got two, three weeks to review it and come back with feedback. And that's what we've done. And then that's considered. So in terms of the prioritisation education piece, which we attempted to do earlier on in March, with the balance the budget tool, and I've actually just clarified this, there's
00:36:00 only Livingston councils, the only other councils actually using that tool. But there is a lot of eyes watching what we're doing and what Livingston are doing in terms of potentially utilising that tool and that education piece. Because I think that was important. I think that was important. We looked at about how do we educate the community about the challenges in local government budgeting and the prioritisation and the different levels of service and services we have. So that's... I think that's a key piece that we'll continue to look at. And I think next year we can look at going further in terms of prioritising individual projects, particularly our capital projects and getting feedback on our capital investment programs. So yeah, there's... I don't know. I don't know. Not a lot of councils are doing it or doing it differently. We know that legislation is coming from the state government to actually mandate public consultation on budgets. So we're trying to get ahead of the curve here.
00:37:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'd like to move an amendment. My amendment is to add an additional clause and it's to read, to address the concerns raised in regard to the inadequate funding of climate action request assistance. I'd like the CEO to bring forward suggestions to Budget Review 2 as to no or low additional cost options to accelerate the implementation of the following actions in the Dry Climate Change Response Plan. Firstly, Action 2.1 Transition Council to 100% renewable energy by the end of the financial year. For example, through the negotiation of a power purchasing agreement in association with other local governments, institutions and businesses. Action 4.2 Transition Council to 100% renewable energy by the end of the financial year.
00:38:00 I do so councillors, we've gone out and we've asked for responses and yes it is at the end of the process so it's not really appropriate to try and amend the budget but we do have reviews and I think it is and when I read through the submissions on this issue I agreed with them. I went back and I looked at what we had funded and what we hadn't and I believe we haven't made enough steps. We declared a climate emergency in 2019 and to give you an idea about relativity we have got overt funding for that our climate action in this budget roughly equivalent to what we're going to pay for one new set of scales at the resource recovery centre. However I'm not suggesting that we have to spend more money. So the first item there councillors is you've been made aware of what's happened in Victoria recently where Melbourne council got together with the uni and civil businesses and they went
00:39:00 to the power purchasing agreement to buy electricity at a cheaper rate for their rate payers but build a new wind farm in the process and then that spread out to a range of different local governments. Our electricity agreement runs out in December this year and there's a range of councils in that agreement that we currently get our purchasing agreement that are instantly going to 100% green power as part of that. There is no reason and no excuse if we say we want to be a leading business and a leading government that we shouldn't be buying 100% renewable energy and it's likely that you'll get it at very little if any additional cost. Net zero emissions by the end for our internal fleet. We've gone through the organisation and done things like you know low energy lights and sensors. We've put solar panel on the roof but there's one issue we haven't addressed and that's the amount of fuel we use. Currently our fleet and our fuel and diesel uses are 823 tonnes of carbon each year comes up so it goes into the atmosphere
00:40:00 and it's one thing if we start a program that it'll engage all staff. So I suggest efficiency and that's about asking every staff do we need to make this trip? Is there ways to reduce our fuel efficiency? Should we be buying electric bikes for short small scale inspections around here rather than driving four-cylinder cars? There's likely to be significant savings if we just go efficiently. Do we look at non-business use of our vehicle fleet and then the savings for that can fund an internal offset. So whatever savings can be put to things like putting more solar panels on buildings of councils. So it might not necessarily be this one or the depot might be on community facilities but we're offsetting the emissions from the fleet more generally. So it's not I don't want accreditation I just want this internal offset and if it's a charge and if it's just part of doing your project that forces staff to look for the efficiencies and hopefully it starts the conversations in every place where this car's most of them are
00:41:00 probably going to be complaining about the idea but that's the conversation we have to have. And the last one is we've had in our events policy for example the ability to have an environmental management charge for some years now. So we do know that one of the most obvious and really community-friendly solutions to climate is planting more trees and we know that our events really like a high quality of urban environment so there may be opportunity for no addition cost rate payers to fund an urban tree planting program that both achieves those climate outcomes but also includes enhanced amenity and better pictures for the events when they're doing their promotion. So councillors I think it's important the cost of offsetting our actions I think can be done at very low or no cost. I think there's one of the suggestions is we start a advocate a business officer to go out to other businesses to show them how to do their business in a green way without costing a lot of money. I think before we do that we have to make sure that we're the leading business
00:42:00 in this community showing the way about how to work in the 21st century. Mayor Stewart: Just a question. Power purchasing agreement. Can you tell me what you know about it and if that would actually cost our organisation more? Speaker 1: Probably just following on from Brian's comments. So currently council procures its electricity through a retail arrangement through LocalBuy. That agreement's currently being renegotiated so we're one of I think a number of at least a dozen councils that and obviously we get bulk buying power there. We probably need to go back and look at that and see what we can do about it. We need to investigate the opportunities there in terms of where and I know we have specifically asked to have green power included as an option in that that new arrangement so we need to investigate through that process what would that mean in terms of because obviously Noosa went out on its own it possibly wouldn't get the the efficiencies in terms of cost savings however if
00:43:00 a number of other councils in that group were looking at the same thing. So I think we need to explore that further once that that new arrangement's in place. Councillor Wegener: It's a question for Brian. So it's when it comes to these sort of agreements a critical mass will will supporting a green power renewable energy makes a lot of sense to you? Do you think that it will be cheaper for everybody? But sometimes we wait for who's going to be the first and if that person does it then oh my gosh we'll wait for that person to do it. But you know we're a new set. Do you think that we should be jumping forward and being the first? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes I think the key thing in that you can have a power purchasing agreement now and buy from existing renewable energy sources but what the Melbourne example was was they actually got the
00:44:00 collaboration which funded additionality so more renewable no emissions power or low emissions power coming into the grid and that's what we'd like to achieve we know in close proximity there's a number of different solar farms if we got together with all these councils can we actually build regional jobs by giving that critical you know we're going to buy it for this for three years and that's just enough to make the financial decision to go down and start building that farm. That's what you'd ideally want to get. Mayor Stewart: Mr CEO this says the important word here is draft climate change response plan. The word draft we haven't actually adopted our climate change response plan. Are these premature to make be making these decisions before we've actually adopted that? Yes thanks maybe I'll just give a quick update Speaker 2: where the climate change response plan is. Council might recall that earlier this year we adopted a draft for the purpose of public consultation. That public consultation has occurred and staff
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 are assessing all those comments and looking at what changes need to be made to the draft which we put out there but it hasn't been adopted by council yet. It's due to come back to council probably in July staff are just working that through so it is a bit unusual to look at adopting actions when the plan hasn't been adopted that's that's not typical the way we would do it but you know it is open to council to do that but ultimately the intent would be to bring the climate change response plan back to council for adoption in July. There's probably two elements that apply from that. Well staff will be recommending it when we get to that point. Number one is that we establish a community reference group or in a better phrase to look at how we implement that that plan and the second is also develop the detailed action plan about what priorities should be in terms of there's eight themes in there which prioritisation we should do first where we should be making investments and make recommendations to council along those lines.
00:46:00 Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Follow-up question. In 2016 we adopted a zero emissions operational policy. Isn't it true to say that a transition which cancels electricity to 100% renewable and transitioning council fleet to a zero emissions strategy is totally aligned with the adoption of that policy that's been adopted for five years? Speaker 2: Question two. You. Yeah. Yeah sure the zero emissions targets are certainly there. What this does is reference the draft climate change response plan which hasn't been adopted. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And just another question. The environment strategy certainly has all these actions in them including the third one that was adopted and endorsed is that correct? Speaker 2: I can't answer that off the top of my head. Going back to the environment strategy whether the last action is in there. Councillor Wilkie: I'd have to go back and check that document.
00:47:00 Was it zero emissions Noosa 2026? Was 2026 the target date to achieve these objectives? Speaker 2: Yeah that's the target date to achieve the ultimate objective which is zero emissions. Obviously we need to do things to get to that point on that journey. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. And perhaps a rhetorical question. Is today the day when we're considering feedback on the consultation process for councillors to lock in budget commitments for things that they consider important? For example actions flowing out of the coastal hazards adaptation plan, coastal foreshore management plan, cycling and walking strategy, zero waste to the Noosa River by 2030 strategy. Is this an opportunity for us to lock in our funding commitments for our pet projects today? If that's a rhetorical question, if you consider that a rhetorical question I would draw it. Speaker 2: I don't intend to give a rhetorical answer to that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I ask a rhetorical question? Does the words bring forward suggestions as to no or low cost options suggest to you that I'm trying to lock anything in?
00:48:00 Councillor Wilkie: I'll answer that rhetorically. It's the words to accelerate the implementation of the following actions that have caught my attention. Mayor Stewart: We have an amended motion and we have a seconder. Tom would anyone else like to speak to the motion by Councillor Stockwell? Councillor Lorentson: I will. We have made a declaration as a council of a climate emergency. Further, Australia is a signatory to a major international human rights instrument and council has embedded human rights in all our policies. The community by way of feedback is holding us to account on in signatories to the declaration of climate emergency to human rights.
00:49:00 I think we've got an obligation to step up and time running out. I'm actually going to support this application and I do want to make a reference to our human rights act because there is a connection between human rights and climate emergency. All three這邊 están en contacto con esta demanda de Podemos,my cond following act. Councillor Jurisevic: I respect and admire what Councillor Stockwell is trying to achieve here. I'm a little challenged by what's in front of us though, as the draft climate change response plan hasn't come out with its priority actions, or identified what the noble low cost additional options might be. Whilst the three actions that have been
00:50:00 presented there are admirable, I'm not even sure that we can, without having gone through a few processes, that we can achieve them by the end of the financial year, even though it's an aspirational part. However, I'm willing to support because it does I think do what Councillor Stockwell is trying to do. It's actually trying to drive that change, is trying to ensure that what we are doing, and we have been looking into one of these things. I mean, I've sat in a number of presentations about power purchasing agreements and options like that. I mean, I think it's aspirational that we do transition our fleet to zero net emissions. And the urban greening programme, four streets and public spaces, is to draw down carbon is certainly three admirable programmes that we should be pursuing. Just challenged by the timeframe within the financial year and the fact that the draft
00:51:00 climate response plan hasn't actually been adopted and the priorities that haven't been addressed yet, but I'm prepared to support Councillor Stockwell on this one. Councillor Wilkie: Good job, John. Yeah, look, I'm very interested in seeing what comes back from the draft climate change response plan. These actions in themselves are very worthy, worthy actions, and they're likely to be supported. There may be more that we're wanting to support as well. There are also a range of other climate change related plans that are underway and there'll be actions from that, that many of us around the table are wanting to support as well. But I did think this was, I do compliment Councillor Stockwell for bringing it forward. And we haven't seen a classic piece of wedge politics for a long time and I'm getting a bit misty, angry
00:52:00 for the old days. But as he said, it's to bring forward the suggestions as to how they can be accelerated. It's not actually a funding commitment at this stage, even though we all agree that these are very important. Actions. But we do need to do more work as to what they're actually going to cost. And as Brian said, that's the piece of work that this, this amendment will create. It'll give us the opportunity to assess the costs before we commit. And I'm also looking forward more fully and it's not going to happen until we get the findings of the climate change response plan back before us anyway. So I'm happy to support it. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Wegener. Anyone else? Councillor Wegener? Councillor Wegener: 1st of all, I think I'll support this motion. And I think that most people would assume that's what we're doing already. And it's not a surprise, I think that most of the community
00:53:00 would say, well, of course you're doing that. It's not a surprise. I do want to use one quote from our submissions. And it is, this person is talking about what, what NUSA does. They're talking about tours and resets specifically, but I think it fits in this circumstance from submission 57. The service, facility, or activity for which the rate is levied is one of the carrying out and implementation of Noosa local economic plan, which includes projects and activities that are aimed at growing the Noosa economy. Well, I think this is exactly what growing the Noosa economy is actually about, is taking the leadership and moving forward towards 100% renewable energy. And I think that will lead to what this person is talking about. This person says a reason for investing in Noosa was the understanding of the outstanding values of Noosa and what it does. And so they've come here, invested in Noosa.
00:54:00 This is entirely consistent with our economic plan, with what we're doing and expectations. This is entirely consistent with our economic plan, with what we're doing and expectations of this person that took the survey, took the time to write to us. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor. I'm a little, I'm a bit like Councillor Jurisevic, I'm a little challenged with this. It is an unusual process, as our CEO said, to implement these suggestions without actually having adopted the climate change response plan. But to reiterate that, they are just suggestions. I'd also like to note that of the 30,000 rate payers, we have four responded. So we really need, there's two words there that are important, they are draft, which we've talked about, and I'm happy to support this even though it is unusual, and suggestions, these are only suggestions, and they're good ones, as Councillor Wilkie said, they're good suggestions and they certainly should be looked at, there's two other words that we need to think about, they're cost, what will this cost our community, the other one is do our community, do our community want this, these are suggestions brought forward by Councillor Stockwell, and as I said, these are
00:55:00 good ones. But the question really is, do our community want it? So as Councillor Wilkie said, I'm actually really looking forward to getting back that draft climate change response plan and looking at the feedback and seeing what our community want. Now, if a community want it, and it's cost effective, and it's not going to cost our community, then deal me in. So I'm happy to support this. Councillor Finzel: I guess I'm going to have something to say. Everybody else has had a stay, thank you for listening. Look, my main concern around this is moving away from a process, because we're always on about process, we're on around consultation with community, I understand we have declared a climate emergency, and I fully support that we need to have some action to support that moving forward. I agree with what's said around the table, I think that moving away from the process around waiting for the climate response plan is a little unusual. However, I do go back to say that we're asking the CEO to bring forward suggestions at the budget review, so I guess I'm happy to support if we look at suggestions around adequate funding, but I personally prefer the option of sticking to the process around the plan to inform us of those discussions, but in support of the table today, and in support of the wider movement forward to attaining a climate response plan.
00:56:00 I will support it today, thank you. Councillor Seppi, would you like to close? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I will. Now, Councillor Wilkie suggested I was trying to wedge politics, but it's quite the reverse. At the fundamental level, we had a number of submissions, and I always say it doesn't matter if you have one submission or a thousand submissions, if they make sense, you respond to them. The submissions on tourism made sense, we responded by saying, this is our path forward. That's what this does. Yes, I might have been setting an aspiration for new targets by the end of the financial year, but it's really important is why I've chosen those three out of the climate response plan.
00:57:00 Is what I've decided was I can pick three actions that I believe won't affect the bottom line of the budget. So I'm looking at actions that I believe will have minimal impact on rate payers. So that's why I was prepared to go down there. I'm looking at alternative ways of generating opportunity to reduce our emissions further and adopt the principles that we adopted back in 2016 in terms of being a zero emissions council. Mayor Stewart: I'll put the motion to a vote. All in favour? That's unanimous. Thanks. That brings us back to the original motion. Councillor Lorentson: Can I make an amendment? I'd like to make an amendment. No, no, you're fine. Sorry, you were standing. Sorry, my apologies. Keep going. I'd like to make an amendment.
00:58:00 Gee, note that the council reviews its rates and charges on an annual basis and that council is also committed to its ongoing community engagement process as part of the development of its annual budget. Mayor Stewart: Second that. Oh, second that. Okay, thank you. Council answer. Councillor Lorentson: Some may call this amendment redundant. I call it necessary. We've received feedback that it's that is critical of the council's consultation process. It's lack of transparency. We've received feedback that that questions our proposed rating chart changes in particular transitory accommodation, whether it's too high, whether it's too low, whether it's discriminatory. We've witnessed over the past few weeks misinterpretation of draft changes. So I wanted to add. This amendment to avoid all doubt and to remind rate pays and residents that every budget adoption is only for 12 months, and that includes all decisions about rates and charges.
00:59:00 This is new territories and we may have got it wrong. Further, I also think that the amendment takes on board the feedback we've received about consultation with residents and us as councillors. We must continually remind ourselves of our obligation and commitment to our community engagement process. And over the last few weeks with our interaction with the tourism industry, I've been reminded that we can do this better. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I take this opportunity to thank Councillor Lorentson and for raising this as a separate item. Because while we're dealing with responses, we're also dealing with learning from an engagement process, and I look at some of the issues and we look at the classic one about the levy, and this is a classic thing in business management in terms of the ladder of inference, fellow Harvard Business School professor raised this ladder of inference, and this is when people select facts from events, and they translate that from their previous experience, they interpret the facts to form the basis of their assumptions.
60 minutes in ¶
01:00:00 So, what we're dealing with in terms of the campaign of tourism and Noosa was a range of assumptions based with a very minor administrative change. We had no stage where we communicated that we're going to change anything significantly other than which bank account the money that we collect goes into, and I gave the analogy the other day, is if one of those businesses had a long-standing relationship, maybe someone who came every Christmas and for 30 years they paid them with cash, and then the next year they turned up with their credit card and said, can you pay that, they wouldn't say the world's changed, they'd say, this person is paying me out of a different account, and that person is paying me out of a different account, and that's all we did, but it became this big debate about tourism, which is also good, because we see in these responses that we've got both sides to the story, both the people who say that tourism and Noosa are doing a fantastic job, which we all agree with, and those who say we're struggling with the impact of tourism, because perhaps because tourism and Noosa is overachievers, so we have that balance, that's good about communication, so I think we as councils also have to learn, I know I said why wasn't tourism and Noosa engaged, we're so used
01:01:00 to budget processes being confidential, that we were probably just taking that and then we're putting out information, so there's all these learnings, and I do think that as we go through, we should do next year differently and better, as the CEO talked about, that the engagement process, which added the most likelihood of actually getting what you want in your budget, was three phases ago, and it wasn't huge input, so we have to look at that. And I suppose the other thing that we've also been, by putting it out to the public, is we've seen some media from some old wallhouses that still have tremendous passion for this community, and that's also good, because that challenges us to say, okay, they have this view, they've come to these assumptions, are they right, are we right, are we doing the right thing, and I think that's really important that you do create debate, and by the time we get to adopt a budget, we'll either be very certain we've made the right decision, or we won't
01:02:00 Mayor Stewart: be certain we've made the right decision. Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Would anyone else like to speak to this amendment? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, look, I'll support the amendment. It might be redundant, but I don't think it is, actually. I don't think it is in any way, shape, or form, because the process of ongoing community engagement as part of the development of a tangible budget, this is the first year we've actually undertaken a lot of this engagement process. So to make that commitment, it's going to be ongoing, regardless of whether the State does or doesn't, and how long the State takes to make changes in that, this Council's committed to that process. I think Councillor Stockwell alluded to it quite well. We've actually got some learnings to come out of this, both from the language that we use,
01:03:00 the process that we undertake, and how we communicate those changes. A minor change, as Councillor Stockwell alluded to there, became a part of the development You've got to explain why you change things, and take people along that path to understand the process of why change is being implemented. It's not change for change's sake. There's always a rhyme and a reason why you go through that process. So, I mean, the Council has always reviewed its rates and charges on an annual basis, but the element of ongoing community engagement is something I'll continue to support as part of the development of the annual budget. And I thank Councillor Lorentson for including it here. Thank you, Councillor Stritch. Councillor Wegener: A question. Note, the first sentence, note that Council reviews its rates and charges on an annual basis. Just a question. I just want to understand. Michael, what does that mean for you?
01:04:00 Is that extra work, or is that just rate normal procedure? Just normal. Normal. Speaker 1: Normal business as part of our budget process. Okay. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. Anyone else like to speak? Just a question, Madam Chair. The provision under COVID, didn't the State Government give the Council the capacity to review its rates at the six-monthly mark? Like twice a year? Is that still, is that accurate, or? Speaker 1: Yeah. Possibly not every six months, but due to COVID, the State Government has continued that relaxation where a Council can. Yeah. Adjust its revenue statement, which includes its rates during the financial year where previously it was just once a year budget. Once a year. That's it. Yeah. So, yeah, that provision still exists. Yeah. Yeah. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Speaker 1: Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Anyone else like to speak as well? I'll put it to a vote. Councillor Lorentson might not be able to close.
01:05:00 I'll put you up to close, Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: No, just some of the comments made around the table represents that we are, in fact, community-facing Council, and I'm proud to be sitting at this table. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: I'll put it to a vote. All in favour? You're nameless. Thank you very much. Councillor Jurisevic: Madam Chair, can I request to have a short recess? Mayor Stewart: Sure. Absolutely. Five minutes? Yes. Councillor Wilkie: Five minutes. Sorry. Sorry. I'm going to run.
01:09:00 Mayor Stewart: We have a number of amendments. Would anyone else like to move any further amendments for you?
01:10:00 Councillor Finzel: Yes please, Chair, I'd like to make an amendment to item 3, to address the concerns raised in regard to the inadequate funding of climate action, request the CEO bring forward suggestions to budget review. As to no or low additional cost options to accelerate the implementation of the draft climate change response plan. Mayor Stewart: Do you have a seconder for that? Councillor Wilkie: I'll second that for the purposes of debate. Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Councillor Ward. Thank you. Councillor Finlayson? Yes. I just think it is important as we head forward to an innovative future that is responsible for the climate and how the world works. The world is going to look for our grandchildren moving forward. And I like the debate and the suggestion around the idea of let's have a conversation around the perhaps proposals of further monies being budgeted to those outcomes.
01:11:00 However, I don't think we should limit it to just a few action items. I think we should make it a broader conversation and also wait. I'm very much a stickler for process, given that we haven't seen the climate change action plan come back to us. I think we should make it a broader conversation and also wait. I think it's a good idea that we leave it open so it can be a broader conversation around the inadequate funding, as raised by Councillor Stockwell, as proposed to just limit it to those three action items. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Kylie? Can we see that to what was originally there? Councillor Jurisevic: Sorry. Could we see? Just to limit those to three actions, is it not? Councillor Finzel: Yeah, just to limit it to three actions. Councillor Jurisevic: Like it limits it? Yeah. Councillor Finzel: Let's not limit it. Mayor Stewart: Would anyone else like to speak to this amendment? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Stockwell? Yeah. I won't support it. Well, I appreciate the intent.
01:12:00 There is power in leading. And there's power in us as the policy leadership team in this organisation, in this community, of putting the step forward. And so what that doesn't do is actually have the affidavit. It doesn't say what it's going to achieve. I'm happy for a broader one to come forward. But I won't support it because I do think it's important that we look at our own organisation and we take every opportunity this year to try and reduce as many emissions as possible. And I believe those areas need to be looked at. If we don't identify those areas, they may not be looked at at all. Councillor Jurisevic: A couple of questions for the CEO, if I may. CEO, are you confident that if the draft climate change response plan comes to us in July that we'll have a list of recommendations ready by Budget Review 2? That's the first question. Speaker 2: I'll just refresh my mind.
01:13:00 Budget Review 2 is? November. November. At that time, it should be okay. I can't guarantee, but I think that would be certainly well in the ballpark. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. And secondly, if this amendment were to succeed as opposed to the one that Councillor Stockwell alluded to previously, would that preclude the suggestions that Councillor Stockwell raised from being the suggestions that are brought forward for consideration? Speaker 2: No, I wouldn't preclude those, whether there's others as well or what the prioritisation might be different. But those three would obviously be taken into consideration as well. Councillor Jurisevic: And thank you. That was the third part of my question. The possibility is that there could be more, I didn't know, or low-cost additional options that we can consider if we are on a more broad concept. Or would it matter as to which amendment was up as to whether other additional actions were brought forward? Speaker 2: It would matter, depending on which one of these gets up, in the sense that if the existing
01:14:00 amendment has already been passed, those three must be brought forward. There might be others as well. But if this broader amendment put forward by Councillor Carron is there, those other three aren't guaranteed to be in that group. But they could be considered as part of the process. Councillor Wilkie: Could we, could you scroll up to the former amendment? Councillor Jurisevic: Is there any way we can have amendment 1 and amendment 3 on the same? Again, amendment 3 is E without actions, without 1.1, 2 and 3 as I understand. Is that correct? Yes. Councillor Wilkie: Just a question. Councillor Finzel, in relation to your amendment, you're wanting to make it a broader consideration of actions that fall out of the climate change response plan, including, so your intention is that it include these three actions plus any other actions that may come out of it, out of the climate change adaptation plan, response plan.
75 minutes in ¶
01:15:00 Councillor Finzel: Well, I could reconsider. We could debate this and then add them in for specifics, but I was just trying to have a broader conversation and not limit it to those three without the action plan speaking to us first so that we follow due process. Okay. Councillor Wilkie: So, for example, would you be, is the intent of your amendment to, would it be satisfied by a wording that suggests accelerate the implementation of the draft climate change response plan, including the following actions? Is that? Would that change of wording cover the intent of what you're saying? Or have I just confused the issue? Mayor Stewart: I wouldn't be including but not limited to.
01:16:00 Yes. All right. Councillor Finzel: Yes, Chair, thank you. That was a good suggestion. Speaker 2: We have a motion in front of us now that we need to deal with. Mayor Stewart: Would anyone else like to speak to this direct amendment? Councillor Lorentson: I'm tending to prefer Council Stockwell's amendment. I'm in favor of a call to action. I think the more specific the actions, the more achievable they are. Again, I go back to the feedback that was received as part of the consultation feedback, and it was a reminder that we've signed a declaration of a climate emergency. Okay. We need to get serious and I think this is our opportunity to knuckle down and address three and there may be others but these specific actions I think are a really good starting point.
01:17:00 I think the broader the actions, the longer the list, the more opportunity that we're going to just be lost in conversation so I'm not prepared to support this amendment. Councillor Wilkie: Look it is a pity that a discussion of the valuable piece of work that is the climate change adaptation plan is in this forum when we all haven't come armed with that document or prepared to debate the pros and cons of each and every action that's included in that as worthy as they all are. I agree that any consideration of funding of actions that come out of the climate change adaptation plan is a pity. I want it to be a broad ranging discussion, not limited to those three actions but I also agree that any motion passed by this council has more weight and intention when it is specific so for the purposes of this debate in this context contained within a discussion about community feedback on the budget consultation process,
01:18:00 not a climate change... Not our response to the climate change response plan which is still a draft and we've yet to get that feedback, I'm prepared to go with the more specific actions but I'd perhaps like to revisit the wording of this to make it clear to our community that we're not just limiting ourselves to those three specific actions although I'm happy for them to be articulated. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, given the discussion around the table, I won't support the amendment as it currently reads, but I would be willing to support something that is a variation on what was before us to suggest something along the lines of including but not limited to the three actions which council stopped or are limiting to.
01:19:00 Mayor Stewart: I think that what Councillor Stockwell put forward is aspirational, I think they're very aggressive targets, but I do agree that it is good to be specific, I commend Councillor Finzel in what she was trying to do and I think those words included but not limited to may be worthwhile looking at down the track, I think having specifics on the table is strong, but I don't think it limits us to limiting ourselves to the three actions that we're looking at, I think it is good to be specific, I commend Councillor Finzel in what she was trying to do and I think those words included but I don't think it limits us to specifics, I think there's a whole broad reaching things we can look at and a lot of those will be raised by the community and will be their wishes and their ideas, so I think that's very important to take.
01:20:00 So I'm happy to continue to support Councillor Stockwell's motion, but I do appreciate what Councillor Finzel said. Thank you. Would you like to close, Councillor? Councillor Finzel: I'd just like to say thank you everyone for giving this a debate. Of course I'm always open to community consultation and feedback and I look forward to the plan coming back to us so we can widen out broader consultation around that, thank you. Thank you. All in favour? Mayor Stewart: Against? You did it, you did it Brian. Councillor Wegener: So you don't want to come back to that Mr Secretary? Councillor Wilkie: No. Mayor Stewart: So that now goes back to the original motion. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. I'll move an amendment. Including but not limited to the following actions, it honours what Councillor Finzel was
01:21:00 trying to achieve, but also the specific intent of... Would you like a seconder? Councillor Wegener: Yeah. I'll second it. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Thank you Councillor Stockwell. I think it's been well canvassed and we arrive at the best outcomes through the range of views around the table and I think this will get us there. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Lovely. Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak to this motion? Amendment. Councillor? Councillor Wegener: I'm just loving this debate that we're, you know, just really all on the same page as far as bringing forward our response to climate change. Yes. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Anyone else like to speak to this? All in favour? Unanimous. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: We're not there. Mayor Stewart: Four amendments. Councillor Jurisevic: And it's better. Mayor Stewart: All right. Back to the original motion we have before us. I am the only person who has spoken to this motion. Well, it doesn't feel like that.
01:22:00 Would anyone else like to speak to this motion? Councillor Jurisevic: Not that one else is giving up. I will. I think Councillor Stewart alluded to it quite well before. I'd like to thank the community for their input. And I'd also like to thank Michael and all of our staff that have been engaged in the process. Because it's not just Michael that does all this heavy work. There's a lot of heavy lifting behind the scenes at Michael. Michael gets to take the credit for it today. But there's a lot of people involved in council that have been behind the process here. And I welcome this opportunity for a draft budget going out for consultation. I welcome the feedback that has come. And I think council has actually taken stock and listened to the feedback. And we'll learn and grow from the opportunity this feedback has given us. I appreciate the amendments that have been made as a result of some of that feedback. I think that shows that we have listened. We have it here.
01:23:00 And a reminder here that what we're discussing here is the consultation process, not necessarily the adoption of the budget. So there is still an opportunity for that to happen. And we'll continue there to review what we've got here in that final process of the budget if need be. So again, well done. I congratulate not only the staff, but also the councillors in this process. To get to this stage and to be one of the leaders as far as councillors in Queensland go on community budget consultation process is a great place to be. And I look forward to next year's budget when we go through it all. Thank you, Councillor Driscoll. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think who would have thought that we would have had such engagement on a budget? The first time I was involved with any engagement on a budget, they called a public meeting and one person turned up. But this has been a really valuable exercise. The fact that it's come late, we'll have to work out how to try and get this sort of debate
01:24:00 coming. We've had everything from why isn't the New South Britannia Gardens master plan? I've talked to staff recently. I think it might be something we can do within existing budgets. To advocates for increasing the heritage levy more, which is one thing that we debated as well, whether we should. And we had this wonderful expose of the perspectives in our community about one of our biggest and flourishing industries, tourism. And I suppose that while we didn't get a lot of support from the local government, we did get a lot of support from the local government. Our communications or the message didn't go out 100% the way that both the industry and the community would have liked. What it did do is consolidate where we're heading and this budget. And that is that we are not looking at changing the nature of the relationship between probably Australia's most successful tourism marketing body and this council and this community.
01:25:00 What we are doing is looking at producing a budget which equitably distributes the rates burden in order to maintain a relatively low rates for their residents while also managing to put in the largest ever capital works program three times bigger than when we were in an amalgamated council. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Stewart. Councillor Williams. Councillor Wegener: Well, again, I'd just like to thank everybody for writing in. And a quick little comment. That this is just so much better than social media going through and wading through there to see what people think because this is just so much more valuable it seems. I really love the comments and they really open my eyes up in so many ways to so many different issues. Thanks. I really appreciate this process. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you, Tom. To the community, thank you for everyone who took the time to make a submission.
01:26:00 I really want to reinforce that this is not a tick and flick exercise. That your submissions really matter. I'm going to just make a little bit of a comment about Tourism Noosa. I'm the observer on the Tourism Noosa board. And I need to make this statement. We're all, as a council, we've acknowledged the importance of tourism to the economy and to our community. But I just wanted to throw some information that I've learnt just sitting on the board. Tourism is the backbone of Noosa. Accommodation and food services, it's the largest employer, responsible for 3,647 jobs, not including the multiplier effect of tourism and hospitality, support services and supply chains. Tourism supports and involves vulnerable groups, like women, youth, rural populations,
01:27:00 indigenous and migrant workers. Tourism supports and involves vulnerable groups, like women, youth, rural populations, indigenous Tourism supports our hinterland and reminds our visitors that not all roads lead to Hastings Street. Tourism Noosa is helping us shape the future of tourism by working towards a model of green travel and smart tourism, by improving the impact of tourism on local communities, focusing on environmental sustainability, by understanding that the importance of smart, sustainable destinations and the need to market and build capacity and capability to attract and keep those high-yielding visitors. On May 20 this year, Tourism Noosa was recognised as Queensland's top tourism town and was awarded $25,000 in strategic consulting and capacity building packaged by EarthCheck. That money is going towards destination management and includes facilitation of a workshop, a
01:28:00 team of councillors and an appointment of a dedicated relationship manager for council. I sit on the board and I just want, for the benefit of the viewers and the benefit of the councillors here today, to just let you know who sits on this board. We've got the CEO of Sunshine Coast Airport, Andrew Bodie. We've got the Deputy CEO of Queensland Tourism Industry Council, Brett Kaepernick. Director of Noosa Longboards, Michael Holmes. The owner of Pelican Boats. Craig McGovern. The Manager of Netanya, Graeme Bradford. Erina Kilmore, the Director of Sales at Australia Zoo. Darren McLennick, the Manager of RAC View Noosa Resorts. James Kendall, the General Manager of Discovery Adventure Group. Louise Formosa, who's the Deputy Chair and Director of Eumundi Noosa Training. And Richard Stephens, the Chair, who needs no introductions.
01:29:00 Councillors and the community, this is our industry body. These are our experts. The official tourism destination organisation for the Noosa Council region. We need them. This is not a space that we can fill. This is a space that only they can fill. So, thank you, Tourism Noosa. We recognise and acknowledge the importance that you play in this community. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Orrington. Councillor Wilkie or Finzel? Councillor Wilkie: Oh. Do you do? No. Mayor Stewart: No, John, that's fine. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Look, the pivotal change in this budget, from my perspective, has been the decision to more highly rate short-term accommodation properties and the home-hosted accommodation businesses to help the Council fund and mitigate against the impacts of increased visitation
90 minutes in ¶
01:30:00 on the infrastructure. We know that... Under the 2016 census figures, we get an average figure of maybe two, 2.1 persons per average household. We know that if that is a short-term accommodation property with four or five bedrooms, there could be up to 10 people, or eight to 10 people in those households. So it is having... Each individual title is having a greater impact on our services and infrastructure. So it's only fair that they are rated proportionally. It's only fair that they are rated proportionally higher to help us mitigate against those impacts. The other thing that the rise, the proliferation of short-term accommodation and home-hosted accommodation has done is make more acute the housing availability crisis. And Council is having to dedicate resources into mitigating against the crises that are developing in that space, which is traditionally a state government realm, but we're a very responsive and responsible local government.
01:31:00 And we're doing what we can. And we're doing what we can. And we're doing what we can to mitigate the social and economic impacts of the crisis caused by the rise in short-term accommodation, the sort of unintended consequences, really. And we'll be working with the state government to help find a solution now, complement the Mayor and Council Stockwell for being, and local MP Sandy Bolton for their work on the housing affordability target. So it's about, it's a user pay system, really. It's only fair that the accommodation properties that are having a greater impact on our infrastructure and making the housing accommodation and availability crisis a bit more acute are more proportionally rated to help us offset those impacts.
01:32:00 I also thank everyone for their support. I also thank everyone who's taken the time to write in. As Councillor Wegener said, it's much better than Facebook. It takes a lot more thought and consideration to put pen to paper or type out a submission. And I'm sure I won't be the only councillor who'll hang on to this through the course of this financial year when it comes to making decisions on the budget for June 30 and doing the budget reviews. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Councillor Finzel: Councillor Finzel. Mayor Stewart: Oh, thank you. Councillor Finzel: It's been a good debate that's here this morning. So just for clarification, the report before us today is Noosa Council Draft Budget Consultation Feedback. So I think the opportunity to engage our community in feedback and have a voice is really important. I think to acknowledge our community and to give them voice in the space that they're in,
01:33:00 to have a say on what affects their lives every day is where the real value lies in this conversation today. And I think as we partner with our community and provide them voice with regards to what matters to them in their daily lives, given the impacts of COVID and how we're fundamentally changed and moving forward, this collaboration and bringing everyone together is really vital. So I want to thank everybody today that has put a submission in. Thank you to all of the staff who have taken the time to make a submission. We thank all the staff as well that have been involved in the process around that. I'd like to thank all the councillors that have given a lot of time to consider and review all the feedback that was received. And what I would also like to mention is the transparency that's been provided through this process. And I think moving forward, it's going to be a challenge but also a commitment to a
01:34:00 future where everyone is embraced and has opportunity to express their voice on what matters to them in their daily lives. So thanks, everybody. Mayor Stewart: I think it's all been said. I'd like to reiterate again our thanks to the community, to our staff, Michael, all your team, Trent. Thank you very much. Tourism Noosa should take heart in all the comments and sentiments set around this table today. I'm going to quote to finish a famous industrialist, perhaps one of the world's most famous, Henry Ford. He once said, coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress and working together is success. So I think Noosa Council and Tourism Noosa came together 20 years ago. They're staying together since that time. And we look forward to working with them together to achieve ongoing success for Noosa Shire as we move forward. Thank you. I'll put the... Sorry. Motion to a vote. All in favour? You know this. Thank you. That is... There are no other items on the agenda.