Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Speaker 10: Okay, good morning everybody. I declare the meeting open. We acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land on which we meet, which is the Kabi Kabi or Gabi Gabi people. Pay respects to elders past, present and emerging. We have all councillors in attendance today via Zoom. We have no apologies. May I have someone to confirm the minutes of the General Committee meeting held on 13th of December 2021, please? That's Councillor Lorentson, seconded Councillor Finzel. We have no presentations. We have no deputations. We have no items referred from committees. All reports are direct to General Committee today. So the first item is the contract number T001. T002-2000056, cleaning for the Noosa Shire Council buildings and facilities tender award.
00:01:00 We have Larry present and Chris Steel present on line for any questions that you may have, Councillor. Do the councillors have questions? Just put up your hand. Speaker 8: Mr Chair, I have a question. Yes, Madam. Speaker 10: It's Claire. Madam Claire. Speaker 8: Just in regard to running the meeting, we've got a little hand signal here. How would you What would you like us to do? Would you like us to have our hands physically up or would you like us to raise the hand on the computer? Speaker 10: Mayor Clare, it would be easier for me if you just had your hand up. I'd be able to see it easier than the small icon. I like that. Yes please. Thank you. Good question. Speaker 4: Any other questions? Speaker 10: Amelia. Speaker 4: I'll start. On page 4 of the report it says that part of the recommendation that the award contract is subject to satisfactory performance by ECOVIA. Does the award contract have KPIs and performance management framework
00:02:00 in the contract that measures value for money, transparency and accountability? And further, does the contract identify and quantify the environmental aspects of the contract? And will our environmental team be asked to review those environmental aspects? Speaker 10: Okay, question for you Chris. Speaker 2: Yes, quite a broad one. So with regards to the environmental side of things for this particular contract, ECOVIA scored pretty highly in my mind with their submission. So their aim is to be carbon neutral or negative by 2025. Their environmental plan targets this with fleet vehicles to be electric.
00:03:00 Currently half of their fleet is electric and they're moving forward to that. They also charge their vehicles with solar power, their own solar systems. And they've got, they're also involved with bushland remediation projects as well as lake rehabilitation projects as well to support that. They've got goals around eliminating waste to 100% as well as their recycling side of things as well. They've also moved some interesting things around their banking as well to more Australian ethical standards. So they've got quite a good alignment with council's policies with that which we found to be very advantageous. Speaker 4: Respectfully Chris, that's not my question. My question was, does the award contract have KPIs and performance management framework in the contract?
00:04:00 How do we measure whether we are receiving value for money and whether environmental aspects are achieved? Speaker 2: Yes, so that was the environmental aspects side of the question. With regards to the KPI side of things, there are some KPIs I believe that were built into the contract itself. And we will be meeting with the contractor on a monthly basis undertaking site visits for example, monitoring staff attendance and ensuring that the standards are kept high for council. Especially around the COVID side of things at the moment as well. We've got quite a lot of things going on around that. Around the buildings to achieve those. Speaker 4: And how do we measure the value for money? Speaker 2: Value for money? It's a bit of a tricky one with cleaning. We basically are looking at hours on site.
00:05:00 I think would be the key one. Ensuring that they're attending to their jobs. The periodicals are being completed on time. But there's no additional spend. So there's no items that creep in over time. So that's a bit of a tricky one. So we're making sure we've got it all wrapped up in that one month sum. Speaker 4: And how often is the criteria reviewed? Speaker 2: Monthly. We would have that monthly meeting. Thank you. So there'd be an area selected to do a walk through with the contractor. And we'd achieve that quite happily. Speaker 4: Thank you very much. Thanks Chris. That answers my question. All right. Thank you. Joe. Speaker 8: Sorry. Thanks. Sorry Claire. Thanks Chip. You all right? Yep. Chris, just following on from that statement, because that formed part of my question about we're in a really different place now with cleaning with COVID. So I guess that formed part of my question that this company certainly, we need to go
00:06:00 above and beyond in regard to our cleaning and have all those COVID safe practices in place and an additional cleaning requirements if necessary. So we need to pivot too in our cleaning that if we need to go into a deep clean clean quickly if someone in the organisation has COVID or we need to be flexible in that aspect. In previous contracts we didn't. It didn't even form part of our psyche. Has this company spoken about that and can ensure that, that they can go above and beyond the normal, I guess, cleaning arrangements if we do need to take some pretty severe, some drastic sort of matters into our hands? Speaker 2: Yes. Absolutely. We've got no concerns around that at all. So Covia, when we first initiated the COVID cleans, Covia stepped up and really covered that up for us with ease. And also in recent events with the Noosa Aquatics Centre, the Cobra was actually the company that came in and did that deep clean for us.
00:07:00 Okay. Thanks. Pretty responsive and they were on site and got it all sort of done for us. Thanks. Speaker 8: Thanks, Chris. Speaker 2: Joe, you had a question? Yes. Thank you, Frank. Councillor Jurisevic: So Chris, to follow on from that, that gives me the assumption that at Covia you're a current cleaning contractor, at least in part? Speaker 2: Yes, correct. So they currently clean the avenue building and the waste locations. Councillor Jurisevic: And this contract now allows for all areas of council and they would be the principal contractor doing all areas of council? Speaker 2: All areas, yes, within this contract. So the Noosaville depot, Pomona depot. Okay. And the other areas that are not covered by this contract? Yeah. We don't reach out into the leisure centre, the Noosa Aquatics Centre or those sort of locations simply because they're actually managed by their own budgets, et cetera.
00:08:00 So they've got their own contracts. But I believe that Covia actually are contracted to somewhere like the Noosaville Library. Councillor Jurisevic: So how were it, the length of it? I believe you had the question. How were Covia the ones who called in for the recent clean at the Aquatics Centre? Speaker 2: That was actually, that was organised by the Noosaville Aquatics Centre themselves. So they actually called upon Covia to come in. Okay. Thank you. I believe. Speaker 4: I have a question. Speaker 10: Amelia, you have a question? Speaker 4: I note Covia is ISO compliant. Maybe something that's not in the contract. I think you can come back to us at the ordinary meeting. But can you give us some information in regards to what a company has to do in order to meet that requirement of international, what is it, international standardisation, organisation?
00:09:00 What a company has to do in order to meet the requirement of the ISO-1401-14-001? It's an environmental policy. And my understanding is that it's a really good accreditation to have given our environmental policy. Speaker 2: That's correct. So the ISO standards are set out as a documentation set up. Speaker 4: Yeah. Speaker 2: And they are audited around that as well. So they have to have a level of documentation which meets the accreditation in a nutshell. There's also one for quality as well. So quality assurance. Okay. It's also an ISO standard we look for. And it's an international standard. So it's quite high. Speaker 4: It's an international standard. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. Speaker 10: If there are no more questions, we have a recommendation before us. Are any councillors prepared to move it as a motion?
00:10:00 Speaker 8: Karen, we have... You're not on... Speaker 10: You're on mute, Karen. Councillor Finzel: Thanks, everyone. Can you hear me now? Speaker 10: Yes, Karen. Councillor Finzel: Yes. Thank you. Yes. I'd like to move a motion with an amendment to add item C. Speaker 10: All right. Perhaps if you would like to read out item part C, Karen. Councillor Finzel: Yes. Thank you, Chair. Item C, request the CEO to undertake the development of a sustainable procurement policy, which will supplement... Thank you, Chair. ...the procurement policy and ensure that procurement is undertaken in consideration of an appropriate balance of social, environmental, ethical, economic and other priorities. This draft policy will then be presented to council at a subsequent meeting for endorsement,
00:11:00 implementation and communication to the stakeholders. Speaker 10: So it's moved, Councillor Finzel. Seconded. Seconded. Are you seconding that? Speaker 8: Yes, I'll second that. Speaker 10: Yes. Seconded by Councillor Stewart. Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. I believe the addition of this item number C will benefit council moving forward to look at the overarching policy to include sustainability with regards to all the items I mentioned. I think that it will bring us up to speed and ensure that we align with our... Thank you. ...other policies in the organisation through our corporate plan right through to our climate response action plan. And I think this gives opportunity to staff to go away and look at this, and it's a rather large body of work, to be able to bring back and report to council through workshops to
00:12:00 identify that we are meeting targets within the organisation and without to be able to address... Thank you. ...our processes within the organisation to align with policies that we have written. Speaker 10: Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Councillor Joe. Councillor Jurisevic: Question for the CEO, if I may. Larry, this seems to suggest that we don't have a sustainable procurement policy within Councillor Jurisevic: our, or anything within our procurement policy around sustainable procurement. Do we have, and can you elaborate, or do you need a bit more time to elaborate on that? Well, we do need a bit more time to provide information with regard to what sustainable practices there are in our procurement policy charitable. And whether this... Our conditional body of work is required.
00:13:00 Speaker 3: Through you, Mr Chair. The... Thank you, Councillor. The... Yes, we do. Speaker 3: We do have a broad range of these criteria within our procurement policy. However, they are very broad. And the... Thank you. There's been a fair bit of discussion over recent times with our contractors as they come forward in terms of how do we assess them against the environmental capacity of the contractor or supplier, the social outcomes, all of those sorts of things. And it's not been very clear, I think. So this really is more about going back and looking at it and saying, well, how do we make sure that there is the right balance there? We have a... We have a... We have a... We have criteria for local involvement, local capacity. We have criteria for data for money. We have a number of them. And the trick is to balance them. Some of them need to be adjusted, I think. And one of the risks we have with this is if we don't take a step back and have a look
00:14:00 at it in a much broader term, we run the risk of actually eliminating some of our local suppliers or smaller companies and even some of our larger companies if they can't meet some of their criteria. So I think it's really important to look at the criteria that we set just because they're arbitrary criteria as opposed to more defined and more direct criteria that are specific to a particular contract. So I think it's just time for us to step back and have a look at that and make sure that we've got it right. That's what I think this does for us. It's not to take away from what we already have. It's really just to look at it and refine it. Speaker 10: Thank you. Trent, did you want to say something there? I see you have your hand up. Speaker 5: Thank you. Through the chair, councillors, just to support what Larry has said there, this motion would provide a policy that supplements or underpins our existing procurement policy.
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 So it will help us define our role as a start, whether it is in terms of selection of tenderers or is it KPI's or is it, you know, it's just a matter of what we've got to do. So I think it's important for us to look at that as a more broadly advocacy and making sure we have that right balance between not just environment but the social and economic outcomes. And there's a lot of complexities to that. So this policy will help us to find that and make sure we're consistent in the application of that for all future tenders. Thank you. Speaker 4: My question is, is this the correct process for asking for the development of a procurement policy? I think that's a good question. And given that there's been no discussion with councillors or staff about this, what are the commitments, human resources, just understanding process? Question to CEO or Trent. Speaker 3: Certainly, councillor.
00:16:00 We're already down the track of this because we have had discussions around this. So the procurement team has already been working through some of this and trying to understand what the broader capacity is. And understanding that there have been a lot of questions around it. So yes, it is a bit of work, but I think that the team is already on to it. I think this is really just formalised. It's not specific to this particular contract that we've got in front of us today. It's really a broader case than that or a larger piece in terms of just reviewing our policy. But this seems like an appropriate place to bring it to the table so that as amended it now commits us as council. So I think it's a piece of work that we need to do. And I think that our officers are not well down the track, but certainly down the track
00:17:00 in terms of considering it and trying to work out how best we want to put it together. Speaker 10: All right. I'd like to move an amendment, please, to Part C. I'd like to move an amendment, please, to Part C. Requests yeah, I'll cut and paste that. OK. Requests the CEO to undertake the development of a sustainable procurement policy which will supplement the existing procurement policy, which contains sustainability measures
00:18:00 and objectives. The procurement is undertaken with a more detailed consideration of an appropriate balance of social, environmental, ethical and other priorities. I think this acknowledges the concern raised by Councillor Jurisevic that it may give the impression that we don't already have a procurement policy which has sustainability measures front
00:19:00 and centre in it. It's quite clear in the policy that the procurement activities are aimed to achieve advantageous procurement outcomes by promoting value for money as well as probity and accountability, advancing Council's economic, social and environmental policies. And under environmental protection, it's quite clear that the purpose of the procurement practices are to foster the development of products and processes of low environmental and climatic impact, including procurement decision making, goods and services that contribute to achieving Council's zero emission organisation strategy. And I just note that ECOVIA have committed to a policy that will have them carbon neutral by 2025, which is quicker than the Noosa Council is going to achieve their targets. So they're going over and above what the Council's already doing in that regard.
00:20:00 The other environmental protection elements of this procurement policy are provide an example to businesses, industry and the community. By promoting the development of products and processes, they're going to increase the use of climatically and environmentally friendly goods and services and encourage environmentally responsible activities. And we also heard that ECOVIA have had half their fleet are already electric, half Council's fleet aren't electric. They're committed to bushland rehabilitation, lake rehabilitation. They're aiming towards zero waste and looking at ethical banking. So the policy is delivering sustainability outcomes. Currently, it's not. But I do take the point that we can always do better, especially in the realm of environmental sustainability. And for that reason, I fully support Council Finzel's scrutiny of this policy and drive to improve it. We're all committed to a policy of continuous improvement. And I think this part C does help us achieve that.
00:21:00 We've heard from the CEO, the staff already reviewing the weighting criteria. And we've heard from the CEO, the staff have given to environmental sustainability. And when you look at it, the environmental sustainability weighting is 5%, which could give the impression that we're not rating it that highly. So if the staff are looking at how we can weight environmental and sustainability outcomes more highly to get outcomes better than what ECOVIA committed to as part of this tender, then I'm all for it. My wording is very minimal. I'm not saying that it's a bad thing. But it just encapsulates the truth that there are already sustainability measures contained within the existing procurement policy. But I support Councillor Finzel's drive to improve it even further. Councillor Stockwell.
00:22:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, my other question is really for clarification and probably Trinh is the correct person to answer it. What we've got here is something that's typically called a socially responsible procurement policy. Am I right in recalling that we've actually already got a motion on the books to this effect and that staff were requested, perhaps even the last member of council, to develop it and it's only because of the unusual circumstances we're in that we haven't got around to it? Speaker 5: Councillor, I'd have to take that on notice. I know through some of the tenders that have come through in the last 12 months, similar questions have arisen and whilst we have made commitments to progress consideration of environmental and social factors, I don't think in the last 12 months we've actually specifically said it would be a sustainable procurement policy as such, but I will take it on notice and
00:23:00 refer whether we actually have, under a previous term... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, I'll speak to the amendment now. That is my recollection and it either goes to the very early time of this term or last term when we started to look at these issues. It's something that is generally an add-on to your normal procurement policy to have a socially responsible element to it and I think it's important to understand the balance and I think the motion has got to all in. Things like these policies tend to seek to both maximise the local outcome as well as things like looking at who you are using, are they training local people, are they employing people perhaps who are disadvantaged in some way in getting to the workforce as well as some of the ethical aspects and you can see in the example here with the covia that they've
00:24:00 demonstrated. We've even docked ethical banking standards which is great to see in any tender or request for quotes. So I'm happy with the suggestion in terms of the refinement to give reassurance but to me this is something we've been progressively working on. I remember, what I remember is I remember expressing some frustration a little while ago about the fact that we hadn't progressed that particular motion some time ago in regard to it but my recollection may be wrong but yeah, I'm happy to support the amendment. Speaker 10: Do you have any other councillors who wish to speak to the amendment? Speaker 4: I will. Councillor Loringston? I'm happy to support the amendment C which refines our existing procurement policy which
00:25:00 already contains sustainable measures and objectives. I also want to make note of section 13 of the Local Government Act and just for purposes of clarity, state that we are under an obligation under section 13 of the Local Government Act to promote continual improvement. So I think this is in keeping with our commitment. This is a commitment and obligation under the Local Government Act for continual improvement. So happy to support. Speaker 10: Thank you Councillor Loringston. Councillor Jurisevic? Councillor Jurisevic: Likewise, I'm happy to support the amendment. There are areas of our sustainable procurement policy which I have questioned over time. Issues like trying to get enhanced use of recycled material into food products that we purchase. How that fits in with the looser design standards.
00:26:00 And the like have been a challenge in the past. So I'd like to see that dived in deeper. So this element of the amendment I think addresses areas like that that we can discuss further with regard to procurement in the longer term. Speaker 10: Thank you Councillor Jurisevic. Any other councillors wish to speak to the amendment? I'll wave my hand. I will. Speaker 8: Thank you Chair. I'm happy to support it. Look we can always strive to do better, strive to do more. And this just reaffirms it and puts it on record. So happy to support. Speaker 10: I'll wave my right to close. I'll put the amendment. Those in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you. The amendment becomes the motion. And Councillor Finzel is the only councillor who has spoken to the motion. Any other councillors wish to speak? Councillor Jo? Councillor Jurisevic: Look I'll acknowledge the elements of sustainability that have been mentioned by Christine from
00:27:00 this contractor. I know that they are the highest rating in environment and sustainability amongst the contractor team. So it is good to see contractors looking at and taking up environment sustainability measures within their contract agreements and their contract agreements. The way they undertake their business operations. I applaud Etovia for the work they do and I understand that they have been working and cleaning council buildings in the past and look forward to the continued good work relationship with them for the future. Speaker 10: Okay. All right. Before Councillor Finzel, Councillor Stockwell? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, I just want to take the opportunity to acknowledge what we were out there doing in terms of the management systems the tenderer, the recommended tenderer has put in place. I think when you go for government tenders, there is always these questions and it's great
00:28:00 to see that it's trickled down into a commercial cleaning business and you've got ISO 14001. That's a bit of a process to develop those environmental management systems. I just did one over the Christmas break for myself. I suppose what we had done in previous procurements is we've asked contractors to come up to our standard. In this case, the contractor should say, well, come on, try and catch up to us and I think that's great to see that there are businesses in the Shire that are leading and that, for me, that is exactly the recommendation that the actual outcome you'd want if you had already adopted a socially responsible procurement policy. Okay. Speaker 10: Thank you. Councillor Finzel, do you wish to close? Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Chair. I'd like to thank everyone for their support with regards to the additional item C and
00:29:00 congratulations to the organisation that has got the contract. I'd like to reiterate what Councillor Stockwell just made comment around how we see organisations now striving to reach the outcomes of sustainability and sustainability. I think this is a great opportunity today to express Council's commitment to strong leadership and government moving forward and I think this is a great time to be able to move in this space, recognise where we are, where we've been and where we're going. So, it's with great pleasure. I bring this before the Council today and our community to continue in the space of showing good governance and leadership by this Council despite COVID and its impacts on our community.
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 We're still all working together for the common good. So, thank you. Speaker 10: Thank you, Councillor Finzel. I'll put the motion in those in favour. That's unanimous. Thank you. We now move on to item two. Item three. We have the Government approval for a dual occupancy and associated operational works to include short term accommodation at 6 Anglis Street, Noosa Heads. We have Kerry Coyle with us in place of Will Cichard. Kerry, could you give us a brief summary of the report before us, please? Speaker 7: Thank you. This application is an application to change an existing approval for a duplex dwelling at 6 Anglis Street. This is an application to permit both units to be used for either short term accommodation or permanent accommodation. Both units have three, contain three bedrooms and there is a basement car park with two
00:31:00 car parking spaces for each unit as well as a visitor space on site. So, the application is recommended for refusal for similar reasons officers have raised previously, that while this area, Noosa Heads and Noosa Heads and Noosa Heads and Noosa Heads and Noosa Heads and Noosa Heads is intended for visitor accommodation, short term accommodation in the area has continued to increase and it has eroded the supply of dwellings and the style of dwellings in the area. So, approximately 45% of residential dwellings, including houses and units and Hastings Street are being used for short term accommodation, which is quite significant. So, the application is recommended for a dual occupancy and associated operational planning scheme to maintain the area for predominantly permanent accommodation and there just is no need for further short term accommodation in the area. Speaker 10: Thank you. Questions, councillors?
00:32:00 Mayor Clare. Speaker 8: Kerry, thank you. I saw that on page 22 that, you know, it says 45% of residential dwellings in Noosa, including housing units, were used for short term accommodation. And then I note the submission by the applicant for a dual occupancy in Noosa Heads and Noosa on page 17 that says, we note that short term accommodation uses exist on six of the 23, which is 26% of residential properties on Anglis Street. And of the 62 residential sites in Angli, sorry, I'm just getting some feedback here, sorry, static here, within a 150 metre radius, 46% sites are for permanent accommodation uses. So, 74.2 are currently used in that area as permanent. Is that correct? Speaker 7: The information we have is from April 2020 and the scheme calls for a broader look at the area than just the street itself.
00:33:00 Speaker 7: So the residential media density zone calls for the neighbourhood to be obtained, to be maintained as permanent accommodation. So the applicant really needs to look broader than what they have done so in their response So if you look on page 21, at the top of page 21, you'll see that officers have included a map showing all the properties that in April 2020 were being used for short-term accommodation. Now that map doesn't necessarily include all the sites with an approval that are already allowed for short-term accommodation permanence. Speaker 10: Thank you. Sorry, Carrie, just to clarify what you just said there, you're saying the map at the top of page 21, which shows short-term accommodation as of April 2020, you said it doesn't necessarily show the full extent of short-term accommodation?
00:34:00 Speaker 7: That's correct. So that map does not include all the approvals that have been issued prior to the 2006 scheme, which would allow short-term or permanent accommodation. It only maps at that point in time which properties were being used for short-term accommodation. So the suggestion is there's likely to be more than what the mapping shows. Speaker 10: So it doesn't show the properties that have existing use rights, for example? Speaker 7: Yes, at that point in time, that's right. Speaker 10: For those that have received approval subsequent to April 2020? Speaker 7: That's right, it doesn't show those things exactly. So it doesn't show the superseded scheme approvals. Okay. So it doesn't show the superseded scheme approvals that have been given or any other approvals that were given prior to 2006 that will allow either or. Speaker 10: Okay, thank you. Speaker 8: Carrie, this street is very close to Hastings Street and around that little cove area, and it's medium density residential.
00:35:00 How far away is it from the, I guess, visitor accommodation, tourism accommodation? Are those streets sort of the next few streets over, or how close is that to those precincts? Speaker 7: Well, I haven't measured it by kilometres or metres, but I would certainly say that we can say that it is close to Hastings Street. But I'd also point out that the area is reasonably close to the junction where permanent residents would simply like to locate and live. So yes, it is in proximity to Hastings Street, but it's also in proximity to the junction. You know, that street would be within walking distance of Main Beach and Hastings Street. But similarly, I'd suggest within walking distance of the junction. Speaker 8: I think I measured it, and I think it was about 1.5k to Hastings Street, according to Google Maps.
00:36:00 Speaker 10: Councillor Joe, you've got a question? Councillor Jurisevic: Yes, similar question. Carrie, I'm looking at figure eight on page 21, and I'm assuming the area is marked in orange. Short-term accommodation in the form of resort-type complexes and other various short-term accommodation provisions. Speaker 7: So figure eight is the zoning pattern for the area, and the area shown in what I call orange is zoned for visitor accommodation. So that is the area intended for visitor accommodation in Moosa Hands. So the area where you see the dots and uncoloured is actually the medium density zoned area. Thank you. Speaker 4: Carrie, I have a question. So I just need clarification. The planning scheme decides where to locate short-term accommodation,
00:37:00 and the Moosa plan that was endorsed says that short-term accommodation is a consistent land use in medium density and high density residential area, which is where this property is located. Have we changed our policy direction on STAs? Was the housing needs assessment report that Council ratified in December, was that our change of policy? Is it endorsed? And has that been communicated to anyone making applications and industry experts? The reason for refusing this, because it is contrary to the Moosa plan, in the fact that it is consistent use in the medium density, the reason is that increasing visitor accommodation will impact on amenity and availability of dwelling units for permanent residents. So again, my question is, have we got an endorsed change of policy direction,
00:38:00 and was that the housing needs assessment report? Because I didn't find enough information in that report that actually addressed this issue. Can you provide some clarity? Speaker 7: So the current use of plan 2020 does identify that short-term visitor accommodation is a consistent use in the medium and high density residential zones, as well as the visitor accommodation zones. But what it does do is the planning scheme rightly sets a number of requirements for such an application to meet. It sets requirements that the medium density zone must be maintained predominantly for permanent residents. It also sets other requirements for car parking and height and density and lifelines. So whilst it is identified as a consistent use and that policy has not changed, it is not meeting our current policy which requires it to be maintained
00:39:00 for permanent residents. The housing study that was done was just a study, an analysis of all the information that's currently out there, and it identifies and reviews the current housing shortage and housing crisis that we have in Noosa. It makes a number of statements around short-term accommodation, but it does not include recommendations yet to change the planning scheme. That will be a separate report that comes before us. It will be available to all Council in March. So at this point in time, our scheme has not changed. The policy remains the same. There will be recommendations to Council in March to Council about changes to planning scheme in response to that housing needs analysis. But it is officers' recommendation at this time that this proposal does not meet the current scheme. Speaker 10: Thank you.
00:40:00 Councillor Stockwell? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: A follow-up question on that. So actually in page 25 of the Agenda you summarised, Her Honour, and you said that she noted that the improvement of the general community generally will not usually be established unless it's demonstrated that the relevant community is relevantly lacking in the provision of the facilities required, to follow that a mere improvement in services and facilities will not of itself establish a requisite need. So in this case, what you're saying is there is no provision of the facilities required to establish a requisite need in terms of housing needs and the relevant lack in provision of short-term rental. But couldn't it be argued that the housing needs assessment has clearly identified that we now have the data to suggest that we are significantly lacking in residential accommodation? Speaker 10: On mute, Kerry.
00:41:00 Speaker 7: Sorry, all. Thank you. Yes. This application does not comply with the scheme requirements to maintain the area for permanent accommodation, and they have not been able to demonstrate a clear community need in the interests of the community for short-term accommodation, which was a feature in the appeal for the spotlight development at the business centre. Speaker 4: Thank you. Thank you. Can I ask, are we aware of any potential challenges to previous refusals of STAs on this ground? Have any applicants who have refused short-term accommodation, are you aware of any that are appealing the decision? Speaker 7: We have two applications that council refused for short-term accommodation, that the applicants have appealed the decision to the Planning and Environment Commission.
00:42:00 And then we have a motion to approve a decision that has been made by the court and then seeking, obviously, for that decision to be overturned. So those matters are still early in the appeal process and are with council's planning solicitor. Speaker 10: Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: Mr Chair, I just wanted to note that Figure 7 is recorded as, or documented as, all short-term accommodation properties within Sunshine Beach neighborhood. Just for clarification, I should rectify that, there were, say, three or four short-term accommodation properties within Sunshine Beach, I believe the area is Moosaheads, not Sunshine Beach. Speaker 7: Yes, you're correct, Joe. You see that area is not Sunshine Beach, it's Moosaheads. Speaker 10: Thank you, Joe. Councillors, we have a motion before us. Anyone care to move it? I'm happy to move it. Move, Councillor Jurisevic. We have a seconder, please. Seconder, Councillor Wegener. Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: I think the grounds that staff have alluded to are more than sufficient grounds for refusal.
00:43:00 The lack of long-term accommodation is something that Noosa and many other areas are suffering from, and continuing to approve areas for short-term accommodation when there's a lack of long-term accommodation is not something I'm going to support. So I support the staff recommendation. Speaker 10: Thank you, Joe. Who's next, please? Councillor Wegener. You're on mute, Tom. Speaker 9: Yeah. Thank you. I will support the staff recommendation as well. This recommendation is consistent with the housing and accommodation reports. We're looking at a housing crisis for our key workers, and as I know, one doctor is having a very difficult time finding accommodation. So our key workers are running out of time. They made plenty of money. They made a little bit of money, but we need more accommodation for our key workers.
00:44:00 And so I see this as consistent with the report, and I support the recommendation. So thank you. Speaker 10: Thank you, Councillor Wegener. We have a councillor who wishes to speak. Councillor Jurisevic, do you wish to close? Councillor Jurisevic: No, I think it's all me, too. Speaker 10: Okay. We'll put the motion to those in favour. Okay. So the first two in favour, that's Councillor Wegener, Stockwell, Jurisevic and Wilkie. Against? Councillors Lorentson, Stewart and Finzel. The motion is carried. Next we have the Planning and Environment Court Appeal Number 476 of 2020, refusal of application for material change of use for a mixed-use commercial development situated at 2 to 18 and 20 Hofmann Drive. We have Kerry here to give us a bit of a summary of the significance of this court win.
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 Speaker 7: Thank you. I don't often put a report to council on planning appeals and the outcomes of appeals, but I thought this one was an important one to do so because the grounds and reasons in the judgement for the court, according to council's position to refuse this application, were so thorough and used and really showed the importance and the role on the planning scheme. It also recognised the Noosa style and the built-form requirements of the scheme and also our long-term strategy that we have had for the Noosa Business Centre. So it was a really important win, particularly in the face of the decision we were all planning at, because many councils had cited issues in defending their decisions to refuse application under Noosa's new decision rules, and certainly at the outset of this appeal
00:46:00 our legal team were also concerned that this would be a finely balanced appeal. But the outcome is a good one. The judge has confirmed council's decision to refuse the application was the right one. The judge certainly cited the decision. It was cited while there was some need. The need was in the interest of the community for the additional retail, which it was largely a retail development, and sought for the site, and that some of the businesses proposed that were to locate on the site. One, Noosa was already well serviced for those facilities, but also there was a short drive to Mooroochydore to, should, Mooroochydore, Mooroochydore, Mooroochydore, Mooroochydore, So it was an important win and one why I've reported it to council.
00:47:00 Speaker 10: Thank you. Questions, councillors? Councillor Tom? Speaker 9: Carrie, were you actually surprised to see the mention of Morichidor and that the court saying, well, you know, for these bigger things, these bigger retails, Morichidor is the place because it actually has the population support, the population to support those big, big businesses. Well, Noosa has population is a bit different. So it's just drive to Morichidor if you want to drive, if you want it, the big giant. Do you want to drive to Morichidor for the department stores and things? Speaker 7: Um, no, I wasn't surprised. Morichidor is the principal activity centre for the region. So it is intended to have the full facilities and services for residents. It has always been Noosa's plan that we wouldn't provide everything in Noosa for residents and
00:48:00 that there would be some expectation to drive to Morichidor for some services and facilities. Obviously, the essential needs to be located here in Noosa, but those occasional ones can well be located at Morichidor. So, of course, our plan is to ensure our centre is an employment based centre and provides that opportunity for residents of the Shire. Speaker 10: Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: Carrie, that's not the same. There isn't provision already within the area for areas like this. We do have showroom types. We do have a lot of areas that are open to the public. We do have facilities or showroom type availability of properties doing up that have already been approved. Speaker 7: Yeah, well, Noosa is already well serviced by showrooms. There is an allowance in the new scheme to allow some expansion to that of showrooms as well as retail, but not just
00:49:00 not to the extent that this applicant was proposing. The extent was quite significant. Councillor Jurisevic: And that would also mean that a revisit of this by this applicant could incorporate some showroom and or retail within their development, but they would have to address the Councillor Jurisevic: principal aims of the scheme more prudently. Yes, there is an allowance on this side for Speaker 7: additional retail showroom. I think it's around 3,000 square metres, but this proposal was nearly for 8,000 more in retail. I think it's around 3,000 square metres, but this proposal was nearly for 8,000 more in retail. So, that's something that they could consider and look to change, but they would also need to revisit their building design to ensure it was more in keeping with the built form. Thank you. Does someone care to move the motion? Speaker 10: Councillor Stockwell, seconded by Councillor Stewart. Councillor Stockwell? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, I think so. And I thank Kerri for bringing this report to us because
00:50:00 this is a really important decision, not just for this site, and not just for the business centre. As Kerri mentioned, in local government there is increasing concern about some of the recent decisions since the Planning Act amended the decision rules for the court. And this one I hope other judges will have a look at, and I'm sure there'll be legal teams that'll make sure that other council judges are aware of it. It's particularly important that her honour is one of our recent appointments to Planning Environment Court and has appeared to have taken a very diligent approach. The key thing that I saw in the report were, in terms of need, and we've cut this already, it had been the interest of the planning team to maintain the hierarchy by directing such need for Dixie and Kiwanis. In any case, the soon to be open Maroochydore Spotlight will be available to service any residential need. We've had that conversation. If Noosa's planning scheme has not set within a regional context to have a principal
00:51:00 hub and for a business centre, we've always said we'd have a district one. I think when it looked down to the appropriateness of the land use, she highlighted that creating the Shire Business Centre with all the requisite elements will take decades, including the lifetime of many planning schemes, and it was legitimate to protect strategic parts of the Shire Business Centre while that development was occurring, which is precisely what the planning scheme for this Shire Business Centre is. Now that is important for the business centre, but that also is a really important point for the Gem Life appeal. It says that it is appropriate to protect areas for future development because you need it over multiple planning schemes, and that I think is a really interesting point. He talked about it is the Council's responsibility to engage community expectations in preparing a planning scheme like it did with the 2020 scheme.
00:52:00 Okay, and once again, a range of applicants, our talents at the moment, are challenging our role as the planning authority and saying they know better, and I think it's really important to highlight that Council's responsible for planning our community, not people who buy blocks of land and have wonderful ideas. Their responsibility is to construct development in accordance with the community wishes as put down in the planning scheme. And it goes on to say, moreover, that the Council must take into account a broad spectrum issues in preparing a planning scheme, not just issues of need or perceived need for a particular type of recast. So, to me, it's an important decision, and I think it's summed up in the impact of the Noosa 2020 plan in the second point where it was said that it demonstrates that the planning
00:53:00 authority, consistent with the regional plan shaping SEQ, has maintained its emphasis on the child business centre being a true activity centre, rather than merely a retail centre. And to me, that's a really important message to send out to any other owners in the child business Speaker 10: centre. Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Anybody else wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Jo. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, I'll just follow on from that. The one paragraph that is highlighted to me from the judgment is the appellate has not demonstrated that any employment benefits for the community arising from the proposed development are above those that would arise from the use of the land in the manner encoded by the scheme. The scheme has been developed to try to look at the employment opportunities and better employment opportunities, not just keeping the lowest common denominator retail and the like. We are trying to improve, and that's what the scheme has derived to do, particularly in that area. So it's good to see that the judge has taken that on board, and that
00:54:00 that's a specific element within the planning scheme or on the planning scheme the judge has highlighted. So like Brian said before, all those things that Brian said, I concur with. I think this shows that our scheme and the intent for the land uses here are the most prevalent thing that we need to be considering. And the future is to see if we can get development to understand the land uses there. Speaker 10: Thank you. Councillor Lorentson. Speaker 4: I just want to note on page 30, the cost of the appeal was $426,000, which is a lot of money. But money, in my opinion, very, very well spent. Again, not to go over what Brian and Jo both said. My highlight, I had the luxury of time to read the judgment. And what I've noticed is that there's a lot of money that's been spent on the land use. So this is what I've highlighted over and over again. And the message, like you said, Brian,
00:55:00 Jen Wythe, and any other person in the community that want to challenge the planning scheme, that it's not the role, and this is quite, it is the role of council in creating the schemes to the project and plan for the future, the future needs of the Shire. It is not the court's role either. So great, great, great statement, and great result. The planning scheme is strong and well. Speaker 10: Mayor Tom. Speaker 9: Yeah, I would just like to say this seems to be the ultimate vindication of a well thought out, well written, well documented, created planning scheme. So congratulations to the staff and the team and everybody. And is the planning scheme, I think, is a fantastic project. It is quite a fantastic result. Thank you.
00:56:00 Speaker 10: Mayor Paterson. Anybody else? Mayor Paterson. Look, I'd like to say a few words too, because it is important. The court, this court decision is significant because it recognizes the important role planning schemes have the community and the importance of councils consistently voting in support of them. The decision supports the importance of landscaping and architectural design in creating the look and feel of Noosa's built form requirements, and the importance of the Noosa Business Center for economic development and higher value employment over purely retail. It also acknowledges that convenience shopping is entirely different to essential needs, and that in terms of essentials, most needs can be met in Noosa. The decision acknowledges that due to its sheer size, the principal regional activity center of Maroochydore and surrounds will always contain more discretionary retail opportunities and items than can be contained in Noosa, and it's meant to,
00:57:00 and that some discretionary spending will always leak outside Noosa Shire borders. The judge makes the point that having to drive to Maroochydore for certain discretionary items is not a sufficient reason to overturn a planning scheme that seeks to encourage the creation of higher quality employment and enterprise instead of more retail on the Noosa Civic site. I commend the staff that have prosecuted this case successfully. Brian, do you wish to close? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Oh yeah, briefly, I think there's some very good points raised, and I think it was Councillor Jurisevic that suggested that we still have, or you listened to the response from the staff, that this site still can have a spotlight size to fit the planning scheme, or if you do more camping than sewing like me, it could be an anaconda which is owned by the same company. So the planning scheme isn't, very restricted, what it says is that we want a mix of uses coming from this particular site,
00:58:00 and that the application that's put in didn't reflect those mixed uses, and didn't reflect our requirements. So from an individual development perspective, that's important to understand is the planning scheme isn't overly restricted, it's trying to give the community a variety of different retail business, and elsewhere across the business centre obviously the biggest change has been the fact that there's many hectares that allocated a high density residential living to make it through activity centre as it goes. Speaker 10: Put the motion those in favour? That's unanimous. Next item, full financial performance report, reporting period to December 2021. And we have Pauline Coles here. Pauline, can you give us a bit of an overview? How are we tracking? Speaker 6: Morning, Councillor. Firstly, I'd just like to note that the January 2021 research programme two should actually be January 2022 on the report. And also to highlight this month's report,
00:59:00 that we have some additional commentary around the tourism and economic development investment summary on page 34, as well as including a summary of legal expenditure as requested previously by Councillor Lorentson. And we've also expanded the risk section to give some examples of the risks that may impact on Council's financial performance to give some context of how it might be impacted. Okay, so we are halfway through the report. We've got a couple of questions, so we're going to go through the 2022 financial year and Council's financial performance is still tracking above budget. Our operating result is three and a half million dollars above budget year to date, and this is predominantly driven by revenue. Generally, that's waste, utility charges, sales of recyclables, disposal fees, holiday park revenue, development assessment fees, building and plumbing applications, and all of these continue to track above budget. It should be noted that when we developed the 2022 budget, we didn't factor in any revenue growth, and in some cases we did include concessions to allow for any potential COVID closures that have yet to
60 minutes in ¶
01:00:00 eventuate. So we anticipate that we may continue to see some additional upside depending on outcomes from the current situation of COVID. Some of this revenue upside, it should be known, will be utilised as part of the budget review too that's about to come to Council after this briefing paper, and that will help offset some emergent expenditure items that have been identified, and these will be discussed as part of that budget review too briefing paper. Operational expenditure overall remains in line with budget as does capital revenue. Capital expenditure, however, is currently tracking below year to date. This relates to some timing issues around the Doonella and Lawndale Road bridge projects and Noosa Dog Beach, and some scheduling works around the Tewantin bypass road works which will push out into the 2022-23 financial year. So, so far we are still tracking on in line with budget and doing quite well.
01:01:00 Do councillors have any questions that they'd like me to cover in more detail? Speaker 2: Councillor Jo? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, I'm going to brought up the legal cost summary there because it mentions that the budget spent is due largely to costs associated with Kin Kin Quarry. My understanding is the Kin Kin Quarry legal costs weren't in the original budget, they were supplementary to that, and they're actually being taken out of a different budget source and not the legal costs. Can we clarify that? Speaker 6: Well, in terms of my understanding, it is coming out, there are partly some consultancy costs, but this is including some consultancy and legals relating to legal cases. Kin Kin Quarry was in fact a budget year into December. And the year-to-date numbers that is being addressed as part of the budget review to bring in some budget to offset those costs. Speaker 4: Colleen, we've just discussed the Hofmann Drive case and the appeal costs were $426,000.
01:02:00 Is that part of this summary or is that to be paid? Speaker 6: Some of that will be part of this summary. Some of that depends, well, I'm not sure of the timing of that time frame of that case, but I'm assuming it would have covered several years. So we'll only relate to those financial costs that have received this financial year. Speaker 4: Okay, thank you. Speaker 10: Colleen, on page 34 of our agenda, it says CEO's offers $210,000 above year-to-date budget, and you've got 132.6% or $402,000 of $303,000 budget spent. I'm just having trouble, just the $210,000 supposed to reflect the difference between $402,000 and $303,000? Speaker 6: Sorry, the $210,000 is above year-to-date budget. So it's $402,000 of the $100,000. Oh yeah, so it doesn't apply enough, sorry, my apologies.
01:03:00 Yeah, we'll come back to you on that one. Speaker 10: Yeah, so is it, if we're arguing to say it's closer to, you know, $100,000 difference? Speaker 5: Mm-hmm. Actually, through the chair, I can step in on that one. You'll find that our year, the $303,000 will most likely be the four-year budget, councillors. We are $210,000 above budget, and that is the Kin Kin costs incurred. Speaker 10: Okay, so have we spent $402,000 or $513,000? Speaker 5: We'll take that on notice, whether it's the $402,000 or the $303,000 that needs correcting, councillor. Speaker 10: Okay, so, and over the... Thank you, Trent. Over the page, legal costs summary, it's got legal and associated costs of $206,000 above year-to-date budget. That's got, you know, $210,000.
01:04:00 58.2% or $914,000 of $708,000 spent, it doesn't seem to look at 50, that doesn't seem to represent 58% if we've spent $914,000 of a $708,000 budget. Could you help unpack those figures for me, please? It looks like if we've spent $914,000 of a $708,000 budget, we're 129% spent. I'm just having trouble deciphering the figures. Speaker 5: That would be year-to-date, Councillor. Speaker 10: So we've spent $914,000 of a $708,000 year-to-date budget. Speaker 4: So we're above the year-to-date budget, so I'll wait.
01:05:00 We're above, yeah. Speaker 10: But it's not 58% though, isn't it? So 58% of, what's the 58% relate to? Speaker 6: So the 58% is the actual percentage of the whole year budget. So we've spent 58% of the whole year budget. Speaker 10: Okay, thank you. Speaker 8: Fred, just on that, I thought that the Kin Kin Quarry costs to date were about $196,000. That was what came out of Budget Review 2, is that correct? Speaker 5: That was correct, yes. Bearing in mind that Budget Review 2 is at a point in time, so we've gone through the process of collating our Budget Review 2 submissions, which takes about a month. So obviously in that time, more invoices may have come through, which we'll have to deal with at a future Budget Review. Speaker 8: So on this, because it says CEO's offers, has some of the funds then, and it says largely due to Kin Kin Quarry, and then we've got on the next page, legal and associated costs to Kin Kin Quarry.
01:06:00 Has some money being factored out of the CEO's budget, as well as I guess then the general budget for legals to pay for the quarry? Is that correct, the quarry case? Speaker 5: The quarry case has been funded directly under the CEO's Budget Council. Speaker 8: Okay, and will it continue to do so as we progress with the trial? Correct. Speaker 5: Okay, thank you. So it won't feature in the Outstandard Reporting Category of Development Assessment Appeals. So, okay. Speaker 8: So our legal costs plus then the cost of the Kin Kin Quarry, which is a separate item line under the CEO's budget. Correct. Speaker 10: Councillor Jurisevic? Thank you. Speaker 8: Hence, I reiterate my initial question. Speaker 3: The legal costs summary report, Councillor Jurisevic: refers to the legal and associated costs of China's $6k above year-to-date budget. But the CEO's office is wearing the costs of the Kin Kin Quarry,
01:07:00 and the legal summary refers to the Kin Kin Quarry as part of those costs. Can we get a, can we get a, can we get a, before Thursday night, can we get a clarification of what's associated under legal costs, and what's associated in the CEO's office, because they're not in the same category, I'm sorry. Speaker 5: There's more in the CEO's office than just the legal costs. So, there are a range of expenditure items in the CEO's budget, including consulting, etc. Now, in terms of the CEO's legal expenditure, being $217,000, as noted on page 35, that is all Kin Kin Quarry. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. So, that's the point I'm trying to raise, Brett, that the CEO's office and budget for Kin Kin Quarry is in the CEO's office, not in legal and associated costs. Speaker 5: They're, they're two, so when we budget, council will be budget by the type of expenditure
01:08:00 and the area where it occurs. So, when we do a legal expenditure summary, we don't have a branch for legal. Legal expenditure can occur across the entire organisation. So, what you're seeing on page 35 is a breakdown of where legal expenditure has occurred in various different activities in council, both in terms of development. Just the legal, the legal budget that we initially set, that is the expenditure across all areas Councillor Jurisevic: of council, regardless of what we initially set as the, as the budget item for legal costs. Speaker 5: Correct. Correct. Because there has been concern in the past that obviously, obviously the primary focus of, of legal expenses historically has been the discussion around development appeals. We're also aware that legal expenditure is incurred across the whole organisation. It might be on HR matters, property leasing matters, it could be building and plumbing appeals, governance related. So, the idea, the intent, the first part that I was putting this up was that to try and
01:09:00 help break out the fact that legal, the different types of legal expenditure are occurring across the organisation. And that we don't proactively budget for reactive legal issues. Councillor Jurisevic: No, but we do, we do budget for legal expenses and we do have a line item for legal expenses across the, across the board. Correct. So, can you see my confusion where in one summary we turn around and say the CEO's office is wearing $210,000 of the cost. And in a summary below, it turns around and says, well, we don't have a line item for Speaker 6: the CEO's office. It should be referred to as legal expense in the summary above, in the normal commentary.
01:10:00 Does that make sense? No. No. No. Councillor Jurisevic: I don't think it, I think in the legal cost summary it should refer to the fact that the CEO's office, outside of the line item, the CEO's office is wearing that additional cost because it refers to it directly on page 34 in those comments. But saying that the CEO's office is wearing $210,000 of the cost, which is in addition to the line item for legal costs for the year, that the summary should be referring to. And that it should say that the summary, in the summary, that we've incurred additional one-off costs for items like Kin Kin Quarry that haven't been accounted for in that line item initially in the budget. Speaker 10: Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Stockwell.
01:11:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, is legal costs associated with X, Y, Z and K? Yep, can do councillor. Speaker 10: Further questions councillors? Someone care to move the report? Councillor Finzel? I'll take this. Councillor Stockwell? Councillor Finzel? You're on mute Karen. On mute. I need to hear your lovely voice. Councillor Finzel: Sorry, am I good to go? Speaker 10: Yes, we can hear you. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. Thank you for the report from the staff. The workshop we attended the other day was really, provided good information. We had good discussion around the points. Further additional points have been raised today. I'm looking forward to moving forward to preparing the next budget. I think it's a good report and we're tracking well. So I think given the impact of COVID,
01:12:00 and economic impacts across our community, across the business sector and other organisations, it's good to see that council has worked through these challenging times and have managed through good governance and leadership to deliver services and maintain a budget that's on track. So thank you to the staff and the councillors and everyone involved that's worked hard in this space during trying times. Thank you. Speaker 4: Can I ask a question? Yeah. Just risk. There's a list of risks and I think just reading through them, you actually understand the enormity of the challenges you guys have faced. In regards to the risk of failure of council infrastructure due to natural disaster or other emerging issues that may require significant unplanned investment, was one of those emerging issues, was that actually identified by council months and years ago?
01:13:00 A tsunami. Sorry, I'm going back to the threat of tsunami. Was that actually on our risk register as a possible risk? Because that would have some serious impact to infrastructure, stormwater pipes, roads. Speaker 5: I'd have to take the specifics of whether a tsunami is identified in the risk register on notice, councillor. Obviously, in a severe weather event, even if it's a cyclone or a depression, stormwater inundation is one of the key risks that we face and have faced in the past with a range of weather events. So I'd just have to confirm whether it's a tsunami specifically identified. Okay. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: It's certainly mentioned specifically in the disaster management papers. It was here? Speaker 10: Yeah. Okay. Okay. Okay. Speaker 10: Thank you. Thank you.
01:14:00 I'd like to compliment the finance staff for their excellent conservative budgeting which always gives us a bit of a buffer to play with in terms of dealing with emergent issues and also contract variations that we're facing at the moment as a result of the stimulus funding that's flooded the market with greater demand for products, materials and labour and so we're very well placed financially principally because of your prudent conservative budgeting so I thank you for that. Karen you wish to close? No thank you Chair I think we've covered it sufficiently thank you. Put the motion those in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you Pauline. I'll now come up to Budget Review 2, BR2 for the 2021-22 financial year. Speaker 5: And Trent for the benefit of those who may be listening, could you give us a bit of an overview of the key points of this budget review please? Sure, councillors in the audience, under the Local Government Act we are obliged to review our budget on a periodic basis. This represents the second review for the financial year, Budget Review 2. The aim is to take up any emergent matters in terms of unforeseen expenditure as well as
75 minutes in ¶
01:15:00 to identify where we potentially can offset and fund those emergent matters from, as well as address any emergent capital works and timing issues on major projects that may straddle multiple financial years. So overall in terms of the movement to council's budget, in BR1 our current budget is a $692,000 deficit. We will see the current budget proposed position of BR2 as a marginal improvement on that at $631,000. And the other main movement is in regards to capital works expenditure which will reduce from $53.7 million down to $48 million. It's important to note that that is not primarily a reduction, it's purely reflective of timing of major capital works that are straddling multiple financial years where the works will finish in the first quarter of 2022-23.
01:16:00 Speaker 10: And Trent, the deficit on paper which is reduced to $631,000, could you explain why that's a deficit only in paper because of accounting standards and the way we account for grants received? Can you just explain that please? Speaker 5: Sure. One of the primary inputs to our current deficit relates to grants and it is in relation to a disaster recovery grant where we received two years ago $1.2 million for disaster recovery and resilience funding. We've been progressively spending that over the last two financial years but as we continue to spend that this year, the revenue propped up our operating position in terms of operating profit two years ago when we received the money but we're spending it this year.
01:17:00 So in terms of cash flow, the deficit doesn't put us in a reduced financial performance position, it's purely timing of that cash in and out. Speaker 10: So would you be fair to say it's actually cost neutral? Speaker 5: Correct and hence the objective or the aim at Budget Review 2 of trying to keep our deficit or position neutral between Budget Review 1 and Budget Review 2 so that we aren't actually moving into a deficit. We're retaining that cash neutral position. Speaker 10: And the report makes a lot of references to variations and could you explain what you're principally referring to when you mean variations? What's the principal cause?
01:18:00 Speaker 5: With reference to capital works? Yes. Capital works variation can be a positive note, it can be a project that is coming under budget where the actual tender cost or contract cost is lower than anticipated. Other than that in regards to additional spend for variations it can be in relation to where there has been a change of scope or an emergent matter that has required and been pre-authorised by capital works exec to spend more on that project. And so because of the change in scope there's additional expenditure. Speaker 10: Thank you. Further questions councillors? Speaker 4: How does our financial position and performance compare to similar sized councils? Trent do we have that information? Speaker 5: Annually as part of the budget process we do do some benchmarking on on comparative performance the
01:19:00 local government state government through its department local government does periodically put out benchmarks so some of that information we can probably cover through one of the live stream budget sessions that we have later in the year. Primarily you'll find though we are in a very sound position driven a by our stable rate base, b our current low debt, and c our strong cash holdings. Speaker 8: Sorry just a question Trent, you spoke of the variations and the differences in cost, it's fair to say that this is a problem that's happening across Australia. And indeed the world isn't it and the variations aren't to do with anything but the impacts or in many ways the impacts that COVID have had and supply and the ability to get materials. Speaker 5: Definitely supply and the cost of materials has been one of the key featuring factors in this budget review.
01:20:00 Definitely in terms of source construction materials such as steel has been difficulty and so we're seeing that come through in some of our tenders around bridges etc um it also is there are there are some in there in terms of um where we we've brought in additional works and a good example of that is for Tewantin bypass Begmans Road where we've added additional works into into the into the project to address adjoining related infrastructure work at the same time so it's about economies of scale Councillor Jurisevic: in an effective delivery of service in that. Thank you. Joe. Yeah Trent a question with regard to stormwater drainage uh maybe one for Larry or for yourself um the Gympie Terrace stormwater works are ongoing but I
01:21:00 know there's a project in the Noosaville foreshore park stormwater on yours is that not part of the Gympie Terrace stormwater works or is that some additional project that has come to light as a result? Speaker 5: I can answer that if you like Larry. So the answer is and it sounds like a convoluted answer yes and no the broader works in the precinct involve the Gympie Terrace stormwater project as well as the Noosaville foreshore park works they've been separated as two separate projects because all the stormwater work for the Gympie Terrace section obviously as the name suggests um goes under the road work um whereas the Noosaville park foreshore works relate to the culverts and the outlets that are under the park itself so in terms of timing for work obviously there is a greater imperative for the Gympie Terrace project works given that any future reseal or pavement
01:22:00 works along Gympie Terrace are dependent on that work occurring first hence why they've been separated. Councillor Jurisevic: And hence why the Noosaville foreshore park uh works can be uh the timing can be pushed out a bit further I want to get it up. Correct council. Thank you. Speaker 4: In regards to um our CEO um Brett de Chastel he he left and we've also had some executive directors leave their positions um what impact did they make on the bottom line just in regards to payouts I would imagine it would have been Speaker 5: um significant uh correct councillor yes there uh there have been costs incurred in association with movements in council executive fortunately in terms of our budget in terms of our offering operating line expenditure salaries and wages there have been some vacancies both in terms of
01:23:00 managers and officers positions so we've been able to cover any additional costs within our bottom Speaker 10: Trent, I had a question about the table on page 46. You acknowledged there were some totals that may need to be revised. I'm wondering, do you have those figures today or could they be part of the general committee minutes for people who may be perplexed by the sums? Speaker 5: I'll put those in the ordinary meeting minutes, Councillor. So I'll take that on notice and we'll amend to the ordinary. Speaker 10: Thank you, Trent. Someone care to move the motion? Councillor Stockwell. Seconder, please. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll move the motion, but also while you're there, we did also discuss the desirability of making the line on sustainability programs a little bit more general, so that might be something that comes up for general as well.
01:24:00 Yep. The one that we referred to part year ago, including council deducing electively contracts to 100% renewable funding to be utilised by sustainability officers for further pressing zero emission priorities, I think the informal view was if we made that forward to ensure there's going to start as much flexibility as is the best option for that money, it would be a good option and perhaps that's something we'd come to general as well. Speaker 10: Seconded by Councillor Finzel, Cathy didn't get that. Thank you, Brian. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, I'll talk to them. The good news in this budget in terms of in this budget review is that aside from the three large projects, because of the way that the market's working will be put out in terms of when they start and therefore become multiple years, there isn't any great significant black swans that have hit us since the beginning of the financial year.
01:25:00 The matter that I just talked about, in terms of sustainability programs, that's in response to a council resolution last year, where we asked staff to go away and come back and look at low cost options to look at making our vehicle fleet and our council electricity zero emissions by the end of this financial year, and they've come back and said, look, we can, for a figure of $84 million, we're going to be able to do that by the end of this financial year, and they've come back and said, look, we can, for a figure of $84 million, we're Thank you very much for your time today, and thank you very much for the opportunity to be here today to talk to you about some of the things that we can do to reduce our emissions by green power for that part of our electricity that isn't produced by our renewable energy systems. But there may be benefit in rather than just buying green power, using that money to install more solar power or some other mechanisms that in the long term will reduce our emissions more significantly than just buying green power. So that's what that item's about. It also highlights that the fuel bill is less than what the emissions from our fuel use is less than what from electricity, but at this stage a bit more work needs to be done to work at the most efficient system to look at either reducing or offsetting.
01:26:00 We have since the start of this budget submitted the two electrical vehicles, and obviously will be a start of the construction. But the majority of our fuel use and therefore our emissions come from our large plants. We don't want to be looking at things that will inhibit us using the best effect. And if it comes to offsetting, it may be that offsetting those emissions will be less than $50,000 a year, if that's the best option. I think the other thing that has been interesting in this budget, and Cathy, if you could bring up that graphic, I think it's really important.
01:27:00 There's always the comment about in councils and around the community about what it is to the... Can we make that bigger? We can't. There's a loop. So, you know, there's a feeling that our council prioritises a lot of energy. And what I've done here, as a result of the question I got asked, was look at this particular budget review about those capital works projects that are to specific locations. So it excludes the things like the Shire White resale, the reseals, the waste, the big waste budget, corporate works. It also excludes that large project we're doing as a contract job for DTMR. And what that shows is that about 50% of our capital works are occurring in the hinterlands, and about 50% of the size of the capital works that are being handled are happening in the coast.
01:28:00 And, you know, that compares really variably when you look at the population in the hinterlands, only 40%. So one of the things we have to keep on reiterating is that the council does spread equitably its investment in projects. And I think the other key thing that comes out is I also did an analysis on the same basis between this, the budget in the Budget View 2, compared to the end of the Budget View 3 in the end of the last financial year. And that graph down the bottom clearly shows a significant growth in capital works as a result of those stimulus packages in both the hinterlands and the coast. So it's important to understand that, you know, this budget, even though when I look there, there's another probably nearly $30 million worth of projects that go across the whole of the Shire. And we're probably, you know, what we've looked at here is a $48 million capital works budget this financial year. And that's about $20 million more than I think the record we had in the last term.
01:29:00 So it's a very busy time, and it's very trying circumstances. But I think the good news is from the bottom line, and from a budget perspective, and how that situates our community going forward, is we're in a very good spot. Speaker 4: Brian, can I ask a question in regards to your graphs? In terms of site-specific capital works projects, is that number of projects or is that in dollar value? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's dollar value. Speaker 4: Okay. Thank you. Speaker 9: Brian, did you gather the information to make the graphs? I did. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes. Good to know. So I can see that you've got a few hours going through both the Budget View 2 documents and Budget View 3 last year as well as Budget View 1 to do the adjustments in the current point of view.
90 minutes in ¶
01:30:00 I can send it around to Council. I've got the graph, what I think that involves. Speaker 8: Thanks, Brian. I appreciate that. I'd really like to see that information. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker 4: I commend you on the simplistic way that you presented the information, and perhaps that's something that can be, I don't know, utilised on our website, so that the community, because that's really easy to read. But yeah, good job, Brian. Thank you. Speaker 10: Karen Finzel. Councillor Finzel: I just have a question, Brian, in your research, and I can't see it, but it may be there. Did you break down where the funding was actually sourced from to deliver the projects? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No. Councillor Finzel: It would be interesting if we could have that percentage of breakdown to identify where the funding came from that went to the specific projects across the Shire, if you could find time to bring that addition to it.
01:31:00 I think that would be fantastic. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, I'm just looking through them. It's going to be a lot of grants. Yeah. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Nice addition to the new finance team there, Brian. Speaker 1: Thank you. Speaker 10: Thank you. All right. Anyone else wish to speak to the motion? All right. Brian, you wish to close? Nothing. Put the motion, those in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you, Trent. Thank you, Trent. Thank you. Thank you, Pauline. Councillor Finzel: Thanks, Trent. Thanks, Trent and Pauline. Thanks. Speaker 9: Thanks, Trent. Pauline. Speaker 10: Now on page 64 of the agenda, which is the 2021 Community Satisfaction Survey Results. We've got Deb Yetsey here to give us a brief overview. Thanks, Deb. Speaker 1: Okay. Good morning, councillors. So this report outlines the results from the survey that was conducted in June this year.
01:32:00 So this is the third survey that we've done of this type. The previous ones were in 2017, 2019, and then this was up in June. And then the report was submitted to us in October. So that's the reason for the slight delay in reporting back to council. So this report surveyed 400 of our Noosa residents. It was also offered on our website to allow people the opportunity to complete it. And I think we had around 160 people who completed it online as well. So that's a really good result. The survey, demographically, looked at age, young people, age groups, age groups, age groups, country, coastal, and took on board a number of things in looking at the demographics in the people who were surveyed. So it measured the community satisfaction with our services and also assessed the importance of those services. So there are 41 services that were surveyed under five themes.
01:33:00 And the survey method that was used, there were two methods. So the survey method that was used, there were two methods. One was a direct, where a direct question is asked, asking the person to provide a response about whether or not council was fulfilling its responsibilities and providing value for money. And then there was a calculated method which looked at summarising all the performance ratings for the different services and also then comparing it to performance, to the importance of that particular service. In our overall result, the result, which is the total performance index, is down slightly from 2019. So in 2021, it was 72.07%. In 2019, it was 74.59. And in 2017, 73.24.4.
01:34:00 Now, in amongst all of this was COVID. A newly elected council. So they can't remember the factors in their situation. So the survey went out, it was during the period, the COVID period. So as well. So the report examines the results in detail. The market finance report examines the results in detail, whereas the report that I've provided to you today is a higher level view of some of our higher performing services, our average performing. And then those areas where can be, that we can actually focus on, where we can actually make some real gains. So these are performance improvement targets. They're listed on page 69 of my report. And they are the ones that are important to the community where we can actually make some improvements and it will make a real difference to our total performance index. One of the things I have to say in this report is on my page one, in my third, in the second
01:35:00 paragraph from the end, I identified the top six performing services relative to importance. And I never said that they were the top six performing services. I said that they were the top six performing services and other information services up top, but they were our highest performing service. So my apologies for that. So if you then look at the top six performing, you would then drop off community safety. Or you could say the top seven performing, and that would include community safety. The other thing I'd like to bring to your attention is that the actual cost of the survey was actually reduced. We were able to negotiate a reduced cost. So instead of the $23,000, which I identified, it's actually $19,800. So I just wanted to bring that to your attention as well. Going forward, this information is really valuable information that we can use, especially when we look at developing our new corporate plan. It also signals to us there may be some areas where we might need some more information. And we might need to dig a little bit deeper into the results or gain some further feedback from the community, especially if we want to look at allocating resources and improving
01:36:00 some of our services. So it's a very useful tool. The LGAQ Queensland conducted the same survey of councils, each biannually as well. However, they ceased doing that in 2019. So while we are able to benchmark our performance to other Queensland councils, we can only do it for the early years and not for the rest of the year. If you then make a comparison to those councils, historically, we have performed well and above the average for provincial councils. And even our result now is still a good result because if you look at similar types of surveys across other Queensland councils, you'll see that performance ratings generally are down slightly. And I think that COVID has had a big impact on the results.
01:37:00 However, just to give you some context, you know, we are still performing well and the community still is feeling that we are providing value for money in our services to them. So that's my introduction. So I'm happy to answer any questions if you have any. Speaker 10: Councillor, questions? Speaker 4: Mayor? Speaker 10: I've got a few. Speaker 4: In regards to methodology, Deb, you mentioned that the survey method included phone contact and also people were allowed to complete the online survey on our website. Was this the same type of methodology that was used in 2017 and 2019? Speaker 1: In 2017 and 19, it was a telephone survey. It wasn't actually on the internet. One of the problems with the launching it on the internet is you can't be reassured that
01:38:00 the people who are completing it actually fall within the demographic groups that we were aiming for in our survey work. But we felt that it was important to put it up there to gather that information as an additional piece of information to inform it. And when you look at the results that came back from the online survey, the people who completed the survey online, they're not the same people. They're not out of par with what the telephone surveys were. And the telephone surveys that are done are not just to residential homes. Because a lot of people now don't just have a home phone anymore. A lot of people work from mobile. So it was a mix of residential as well as phone surveys. Speaker 4: So I hope that answers your question. So I was just sort of trying to understand whether it was like to like 2017, 2019, 2000. And that answers your question. Yes, it does. Were all the issues that were identified or asked of respondents, were they breaking
01:39:00 down into precincts? Do we know where... You've talked about demographics. Do we know the... I've got my numbers here. Of the people, 156 people online and those interviewed, 400-odd people, do we know where they come from within the Shire? Speaker 1: Okay. So when the survey was first being put up, it was the survey that was being put up. It was the survey that we initiated. We actually gave all of the, I suppose, the locations across the Shire. So we made sure we had the representation there. For me to go back now, I can't tell you if there were so many from Pomona or so many from Peregian. From a demographic point of view, the details report, which is attached to this agenda, does contain more information around the breakdown demographically around age and even some stuff around households and things as well. But it's more in the detail of the report. Speaker 4: So can I just put on notice maybe for future surveys, can we look at maybe breaking down
01:40:00 the issues in precincts? I think that makes the information or the issues, to me, a little bit more relevant. What's more of higher priority? Say, for instance, in the hinterland, it's not necessarily the same as those on the eastern beaches. I think that information is more relevant. I think that information would be quite useful, Deb. Yeah. Speaker 1: No, I understand. And it may be that the wellbeing survey, I'm not, I can't answer this, but it may be that the wellbeing survey, if you look at this survey, along with the wellbeing survey, maybe that can provide some of that information as well. But I'll take that on board, Councillor. Speaker 4: And in regards to the demographics, you said that you've got details as to the demographic profile of all the respondents that were surveyed. When questions are asked about, say, value for money in regards to rates, can we have
01:41:00 some context around the answers? I'd love to know, were those who answered that questions, how many of them were homeowners? How many of them were renters? I think it would just give more context to the survey. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And probably my question is, do we have that information first, Deb? Do we understand? Speaker 1: Look, from my reflection, when I've looked back with some of the, with the questioning, there is some commentary around whether or not people are homeowners, et cetera, whether or not they're female or male. The way that they've addressed it in, and I'm just probably referring to more to do with the public opinion questions that start on the page. Thank you for that report, 41 and 42 of the market facts report. When they look at the responses from the responders, they do actually give some breakdown of ages,
01:42:00 for example, in answering telephone calls, 33.8% were female and what they indicated, et cetera. So there is some breakdown, but it may not be fully comprehensive. But I'll take that on board at this point. Speaker 8: Deb I've got a few questions. I thought that some of that was covered in the full report but I guess my question is, there's no feedback, we're down, but I just wanted clarification on this one because I found it interesting. On page 67 of our agenda, in 2021 there are some additional responsibility areas that the community has judged council to be performing better compared to 2019-17. These include park, playgrounds, public amenities, environment protection and conservation, environment controls, revenue raising, community health, community services. Is that correct?
01:43:00 It's just, yeah, I'm just wondering if they're the areas that this has said to be performing better but then we're down. I just want a clarification on those areas. Speaker 1: No, there definitely are some areas that we are performing better where we have improved. I'll have to go to the actual... If you can bear with me a moment, I'll do that.
01:44:00 I'll use the park, playgrounds and public amenities as an example where the Noosa mean this year was 3.99 and that is for importance and then when you look at the mean for 2019, it was actually 3.93. In 2017, it was 4.23, but it did decrease from 2019 to 21, but that's just in importance. When you then look at performance, the mean was 3.95, with 3.95, and then if you compare that to 2017, it was 3.92, in 2019, it was 4.
105 minutes in ¶
01:45:00 It varies, so maybe the way that I've described that, it does vary. It may be an improvement one year and slightly less the next year, but the details of those are contained under each of the theme results in the detail of the report. Speaker 8: And Deb, just another statistic that stood out for me was, and I thought it was an interesting one, considering this was done at the height of COVID, that horn and halo effect, that when everything's going well, people are happy. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Going well, things people, you know, find fault, which is understandable, it's human nature. But a large proportion of respondents, 88.8%, were either satisfied or completely satisfied regarding feeling part of their community, compared to 76.1 in 2019. Well, that's 12%. Yeah. That's an interesting statistic, that they feel part of a community when they're, you know, when we're going through so much as a community. And I'm wondering if that hasn't, I mean, I guess a crisis hasn't brought a community together, you know, or banded together.
01:46:00 Speaker 1: I'm just wondering, could you explain that statistic? That was unusual for me. It is unusual. And I do think there's a, in what you've just said, I do think, you know, in times, in situations like this, people do band together. I also think that the work that's been done over the last couple of years from the previous result has actually helped bring the community, again, we've improved things like community safety, the work that's been done by the community services department has actually contributed to that, and in the implementation of some of our different strategies as well. It's very hard for me to say specifically what it is, but that's a great result. Yeah. The other result that was really favourable was the, you know, the community feeling safe. So there's an actual improvement in how people actually feel safer in their communities as well. So I think it's probably a number of variables in amongst that.
01:47:00 Speaker 8: Thank you. Speaker 4: Going back to COVID, so you mentioned that COVID has influenced community sentiment. Did we ask throughout the survey, I couldn't find this, Deb, but were any questions asked of the community? Yeah. Did you ask about how it was coping with COVID and how well supported they felt by all the different levels of government? Was that a missed opportunity? Speaker 1: No, it could be considered a missed opportunity. The survey has their structured questions, and then we're able to ask a number of additional questions, and we pay for that to be able to do that. And at the time that we developed the survey, we focused on the things that, you know, were sort of, I suppose, at the top of our list. At the time, it could have been an opportunity, definitely. It's not something we previously surveyed, so if we wanted to actually then go and make a comparison, we couldn't do that. But it is, it could have been, it could be considered to be a lost opportunity.
01:48:00 But, you know, with the number of questions I've posed, Amelia, it would be, Councillor, it's a question of, you know, we could have asked that question at additional cost. Speaker 4: In terms of equity, inclusion and accessibility, again, I think I've noticed in the report there were some questions in regards to accessible infrastructure. Did we delve enough into inclusion and accessibility? You know, is infrastructure inclusive and accessible? Is that something, again, we can just put on note for next lot of questions or next lot of survey? Questions? Speaker 1: Look, I think it's, this survey is designed to give us some high level sort of indication of areas where we can definitely improve. But what it also does is, if there are areas where we feel that we need to do more work, we then need to go and engage and consult more with our community on the, on specific issues and find more, find out more information.
01:49:00 So the accessibility may be one of those areas that we need to then dig into. I think it's important to be a little bit deeper on to get more information. So at a high level, it's difficult because, you know, how far do you go in the detail on particular issues up front? So, but what this does, this is a great opportunity for us to now to look at a number of areas and say, well, actually, we do need to find out some more information or better understand what the community is thinking on this. Why isn't our service measuring up to the standard that they think? Or where can we improve? What are their expectations? So we can, this is a, this is sort of a great sort of first, I suppose, indicator. And then we can go deeper and look at that in further, in further work. Speaker 4: So in terms of demographics, did the demographic profile actually reveal that maybe someone with a disability responded to the survey?
01:50:00 So I'd love where you're going with this. What can we do to improve services? Just... Speaker 1: Look, I don't believe that it did. I think there are also some very, some considerations in what you do ask of people. The page 65 of the market report actually outlines the questions that were asked of the people when they contacted them to participate. It taught, it asked them about whether they were interested in discussing the local government issues. It asked about some stuff personally about them around their home, you know, whether or not they were an employee of, say, of council. Have they been living in the area a certain amount of time? But they don't go into, to asking around disability. And I think to do that, you'd have to be quite careful that in respecting people's rights and privacy.
01:51:00 But I understand why you've asked that question, but we haven't, we haven't done that. Okay, thank you. Speaker 10: Karen. Councillor Finzel: Oh, thanks, Deb, for the report. That leads me into the question off the back of the discussions with Councillor Lorentson in regards to demographics and inclusivity. I didn't see it, but I may have missed it. Did you drill down anywhere about data around Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people? As a council, you know, through our leadership and advocacy, we want to journey towards reconciliation. And is there any area that we've covered more specific information around that people's group to inform, you know, planning moving forward in council with regards to like reconciliation action plans or how we look at the organisation in terms of training and things like that?
01:52:00 Or cultural borders of council buildings? Did we get enough information around those people's groups or do we need to dig down further to that? Speaker 1: You would need to dig down further because this is really focused on things like age, gender, work status and, you know, renting or living in your own home. It hasn't gone in, it hasn't gone to that level of detail around cultural background. It hasn't done that. I'm not sure in relation to our plan, our various council plans and strategies and the consultation and engagement that happens on that site, I'm not sure how far some of these studies go, but in this survey, no, it didn't go down to that, Councillor.
01:53:00 Councillor Finzel: Thanks, Deb. Earlier you said that you would look into the survey to get further information to look at allocating resources and funds for additional policies and things like that. So where would you get that information if not through these questionnaires? Is there a process in council that we find that information? Speaker 1: Well, I would expect that, so this information, the information that's being provided from the survey covers a wide-ranging number of services, and each of those services have managers and directors that are responsible for them. So in undertaking the survey, while I coordinate the survey, when it comes down to reviewing the results, further investigating our services and our levels of service, that has to be, that gets taken on by the response, relevant responsible manager, whether it be a manager or a director, or even at the CEO executive team level to further dig a bit deeper into that.
01:54:00 So, depending on what the service is, then it might be the particular department, or it might be something that's actually looked at, if it's a broader issue, it might be something that the executive team or even council has a further discussion on, and look at what we can do in that space to actually improve. So, it's, I suppose, the strategy going forward is, we did identify that this is a great information to be used when we're developing our new corporate plan, and determining as a council what our priorities are, and to be able to develop some initiatives that then support that, we may need more information, and that would be part of that initiative going forward. So that's a great opportunity with the corporate plan. And from the corporate plan, then, your operational plan and your budgets flow out of that.
01:55:00 So, yeah, so I suppose that's our highest level planning document in that regard. And I've probably digressed a little bit, but I just, I suppose, want to make the point that in these 41 services, the departments have responsibilities for delivering that service, and so it'll be different areas that will take the lead on some of these things. Thanks, Deb. Speaker 4: Deb, on page 49, and there's a lot of, the greatest challenge for the local area, and this comes up, you know, throughout the last 12 months, is population growth and affordable housing. Were the respondents given any sort of preamble information about, you know, the roles and responsibilities of all the different levels of government in this space? No. Speaker 1: Okay. No, they're not. No, no, they're not. And really, the responses that came back from the respondent in these types of questions were quite open-ended, so what had to then happen was those responses needed to be grouped, and they're the headings that they were grouped under.
01:56:00 So, no, they weren't, Councillor, they weren't given a, they weren't. Okay. Thank you. Speaker 10: Someone care to move a motion? Brian Stockwell? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Second. And I'm going to hand on to the staff recommendation, so I'll read that out for the, as per the staff recommendation. Speaker 10: So, we've got a seconder by Councillor Lorentson. Speaker 4: Well, he hasn't said that. Oh, thank you. I'll stop. Do you want to see where you're going? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll read out the initial. Okay. But A, to thank staff service for maintaining high levels of service in difficult circumstances, noting that 13 service areas scored at above 75%. B, note the results of the community satisfaction survey inform the development of the council's new corporate plan.
01:57:00 And C, request the CEO to further review and identify opportunities for improvement for those services identified as priorities for enhancement of overall performance, as identified in the table Performance Improvement Targets on page 69 of the General Committee Agenda dated 7th January 2022. Speaker 10: Okay, we have the floor, Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do so. We, to the question, we've identified a range of good results, and I think it's really important to understand that this gives us an organisational-wide snapshot. And to perform at 75% or greater in these surveys is, you know, an accomplishment in itself. And to do it in a year where society is being turned upside down as a result of a global pandemic is really a testament to our staff. And I think it's important that we do acknowledge and let them know that we appreciate their efforts. I think the other two is about, if you did this survey, or if you see that we're expending money on surveys, I think as a rate payer, you'd want to say, well, okay, so it's not just going to lead to a press release.
01:58:00 It's going to lead to some systemic review. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And that looks at building on our strengths and addressing the weaknesses. And so, in terms of C, I think it's just as important to highlight where the survey identifies they think we're not doing as well as we could in areas of high performance, high importance for our local community. And to give you one example, one of the areas that scored, I think, around 65% or below was car parking. And so there is an area that the community, has a particular interest in, particularly when you can't find one, whether you're in Cooran, Pomona, or Noosa Heads. We know that the population growth and the growth in drive tourism throughout the last year has had significant effects on the level of congestion and the level of motor vehicle accessing key sites within our Shire.
01:59:00 So that might be one area where when you go looking at it, you won't find very easily what councils' strategic priorities are for car parking. In fact, it'd be probably difficult to find a movement in the 10-year capital work program. And that may relate to the fact that what our transport strategy says, we want to move people, not cars. And therefore, we're trying to encourage people to ride their bikes to go by public transport. But there is a range of issues around the HINC plan. So to me, that's one area where the community is saying you're performing slow, and there probably is opportunities for both out of policy, strategic and also as a coming into the budget that we can look at reviewing. And I think it's all part of our existing corporate plan where we've made an amendment for continuous improvement. And again, one of the key reasons you do this survey is to drive continuous improvement across the whole organisation. But other than that, I think the results are really positive in terms of the outcomes within the context of the survey we've taken.
120 minutes in ¶
02:00:00 And staff would be quite proud of that result. Speaker 10: Thank you, Brian. Other councillors? Speaker 4: I support the motion of amendments that Councillor Stockwell's put forward to us. I think they're great amendments. Probably the only thing I don't agree with. I just want to add is that in regards to C, when we look at re-examining and improving in this process of continual improvement, it's important to understand that that is not just a job solely for top management, the executive team or the CEO. That practice relies greatly on all the staff and even us as councillors. And that bottom-up improvement is the employees that are closest to the problem. It's us that's closest to the problem. And we should not be disconnected from it and, in fact, empowered to help solve the problem.
02:01:00 So thank you, Councillor Stockwell. I support your amendment. Speaker 10: Mayor Stewart, did you wish to say something? Speaker 8: Yes, thank you. Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. I think this is a good amendment. I think that I too would like to acknowledge the staff for their efforts. This has been an unprecedented two years and they have worked incredibly hard in very difficult circumstances and under very trying conditions. I think that this is an opportunity. It's a great opportunity for us. You know, we haven't had the results that were as good as 2019. We're not alone in that. Across the board of councils, it seems that is the case. That satisfaction is down. But this is an opportunity to reset and, as Councillor Stockwell has made with his amendments, to really empower us and the organisation so we can strive to do better.
02:02:00 I think we can take this feedback on board and use it in a really proactive way and to drive that corporate plan, to drive that decision-making. So I think it was a really worthwhile exercise. Deb, I want to thank you and the team for putting it all together. It's a big piece of work. And again, I think we're doing well. And as I said, there's always room for improvement. But I really want to acknowledge the staff because they do so much of the heavy lifting for us. And so much of these results is because they've done their job so well. So I want to thank them. And let's take this data, let's use it as a platform, and let's come back bigger and better. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker 10: Thank you, Mayor Stewart. Councillor Jurisevic? You're on mute, Joe. Thanks for going on mute. Look, they're always challenging, these sort of surveys. They're general in nature a lot of the time and difficult to get specifics out of.
02:03:00 Councillor Jurisevic: As Councillor Lorentson was trying to allude to there with some of the detail that she would have liked to have garnered pride and some of the other councillors as well. But they are a good indicator. As I said, I'm relatively pleased with the results through the challenging years that we've had, particularly with COVID in the community and the dysfunctional nature of optics in general as a result of the happening of that. And I guess we get some of the feedback on that. We've also got a lot of people at home probably in there with a lot more time than they used to to give us their opinion. But I want to have a place where we can get some of that feedback. We've got these sort of people all the time and I think continuing to try and improve and provide the sort of services and get the right sort of feedback from our community is important. So I want to continue to support these whilst I've got a modicum of distrust of the information
02:04:00 when it's as generic as it is. But I appreciate the fact that we need to – we've always had an opportunity to improve our services and our delivery to our community. Speaker 10: Thank you, Joe. Councillor Finzel? Speaker 8: Who are you? Councillor Finzel: Thank you for everyone's contribution and especially to Deb and the team for the work that they've done here. It's great to have this inform our decision-making and our commitment to continuous employment. I think it's really pertinent, especially at this time, to consider the most vulnerable within our community, the people that are most marginalised and the people that may, for whatever reason, may not have had a significant voice or contribution with regards to how
02:05:00 the questions were posed and privacy things through this survey. However, I think given what I've heard tonight, I think it's really important that we move forward and I think there is strong appetite to dig deeper and look at how we can best provide policies, how we can work best as we journey towards reconciliation, inclusivity and embracing those who do sit on the edges of our community and sometimes do not have a central place that sits within our conversations. And I refer back to the Noosa Shire Council back in 2018. It did have a small say around a social justice charter and how that sits at the heart of the values and beliefs that we underpin in our community. So I think this gives us perfect opportunity with the addition of C into the recommendation for the CEO to identify opportunities for improvement.
02:06:00 So I think this is fabulous moving forward. I think we want to put it out there that we are strong leaders in this space. And that we will address the difficult and challenging issues as we live in difficult times with the impacts of COVID and the fundamental change that has brought to our community and our society as a whole. So I'm looking forward to a bright future. We're moving forward. We can project to a sustainable and inclusive society where everyone's valued. Thank you. Speaker 10: Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Councillor Wiggender. Thank you. Speaker 9: Just quickly. Thank you very much to Deb and the team. When I read the results, my gestalt was, wow, this has really been quite successful. We're doing pretty good considering all. So thank you very much. And thank you for all the teams involved. And thank you, Brian, for bringing on AB&C as amendments.
02:07:00 Thank you. Cheers. Speaker 10: And, Councillor, just a point to note that we're not actually talking about amendments. We're talking about a motion. If someone wanted to change what we've got before us, we'd have an amendment, but that's pedantic at this stage. I'd just like, in those being said, I'd like to add my voice to the vote of thanks for the work that staff have been doing in these difficult circumstances. They are working very, very hard. They're at the front line. Those in customer service in particular handle the complaints and the requests, which are nonstop. They're literally dealing with thousands of them. And they deal with them very, very well. And also the front line staff who are delivering the services, I hope they're not disheartened by this. It's very, it could be potentially disheartening to be working as hard as you are and get a drop in feedback from the community. But as being said, I think that's more reflective of the malaise that we're, we all can feel from time to time about the uncertainty we find ourselves in with the COVID situation.
02:08:00 So thank you very much. We are going to be taking that feedback on board. We are going to be responding to it. We're going to learn from the feedback and see how we can improve our services. And the reason we do these surveys ultimately is about improved services for our community. So thank you, Deb, and thank you, staff. Speaker 1: Thank you, Councillor. Speaker 10: Councillor Stockwell, you wish to close? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I will close just by reaffirming the, when you go to a university, you get 75% of budgets in distinction, and we've got 13 areas there, I think, on that distinction level, and the others are all in the credit. I do want to thank Deb for correcting the report. She would have got a lot of lively minds as you've mentioned out there, highest performers.
02:09:00 It's really important to note that the library and house... ...other information access is consistently the best performing area, and in the last result, they got just under 83% score, so it does show you the sort of services and how much they're valued, that their library services and digital access does provide for our community and how important it is to the modern world. Speaker 10: Thank you. I'll put the motion. Those in favour? That's unanimous. And that's the end of the agenda.