Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Councillor Wilkie: We're going to be really quick today, aren't we? Councillor Finzel: Oh, are we now? Okay. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: All right, welcome everybody to the General Committee meeting. I've prepared a meeting open. I have all councillors in attendance and no apologies. I have someone to confirm the minutes of the General Committee meeting held on 19th April 2022. I'll move to Councillor Lorentson and seconded Councillor Finzel in favour. I'd also like to begin by acknowledging the traditional custodians of the land on which we meet, the Kabi Kabi or Gavi Gavi people. I respect the elders past, present and emerging. We have no presentations. We have no deputations. And the first item referred from the committee is the Economics Development Grant Program application by Noosa Chamber of Commerce and Industry. And we have Kim Rawlings, Councillor of the House of Commons here, and Karen. Councillor Finzel: Yes, I'm a councillor. Councillor Wilkie: Yes. Councillor Finzel: I, Councillor Finzel, inform the meeting that I have a prescribed conflict of interest in
00:01:00 this matter. In March 2020, Ms. Pamela Sweetapple, who was the Secretary of the Noosa Chamber of Commerce, donated $2,630.33 to my 2020 election campaign, where I was one of three candidates that ran as a group known as Future Noosa, which is no longer an entity. As a result of my prescribed conflict of interest, I will leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Karen. Right. Okay. Councillor Sinha, how many questions to start? Otherwise, I have a motion I would like to test with you. Speaker 13: I do. Councillor Jurisevic: Just to try to bring it up so that I can...
00:02:00 Question for the CEO, if I may. CEO, with an organisation like the Chamber, how do we ensure that supporting the Chamber aligns with the needs of other locality-based business organisations, such as the Cooroy Chamber, Tewantin Traders, Pomona Chamber, for example, particularly with regards to duplication of needs and advocacy for free? And how do we ensure that we provide the best facilitation of services to the business community? Speaker 10: Through the Chair, Councillor Jurisevic, it is really important. We are a local government area connected to villages, and each of those villages have their own entity that helps business to be able to thrive and grow. I think it would be important that, through this process that we're undertaking, that we ask the Chamber to be able to provide invitations to those other business organisations who are able to join in this particular project. And if they are able to join in this particular project, then that would be something that I think the Council would be able to and should support.
00:03:00 But however, noting that we are independent villages, they may not want to participate. And we as Council will still provide support through. It may give some duplication over time, but it is supporting the ethos that we have of individual but connected villages. If a Traders Association or a Chamber wants to continue operating in their own right and don't want to be part of this particular project, we'll respect that and still be able to provide that support. So through the team, we'll be able to ask the Chamber to put that forward and make that a KPI within this particular piece of work. The invitation is there. If they take that up, fantastic. They can be part of it. If they don't, that's okay. We'll still work with them directly. Councillor Jurisevic: So I notice in the motion as it stands and in the recommendation of staff, KPIs, including membership and funding targets, are mentioned. Yes, and you've mentioned there that the support or acknowledgement of the other business organisations is something we can put in as a KPI.
00:04:00 I'd like to see that done if possible. Speaker 10: We can, absolutely. Yes, we can amend that. Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Jurisevic: The other question I've got, with regard to this being a grant procedure that is non-competitive and doesn't go through a round of grant funding applications, applications for the economic grants are made as they are presented. What is the acquittal procedure for council grant funding with regards to grants and funding agreements that council provides to the community, such as this grant? Speaker 7: Yes, through the Chair. So the acquittal procedure is the same as all of our other grants. So the grant process goes through our Smarty Grants process, and if the grant's awarded, we establish a funding agreement, and as part of that funding agreement, there's an acquittal report that's required as per all our other grants, community grants, environment grants. So the same process would occur here, Joe. Councillor Jurisevic: So this is being proposed to be in two parts, two parts of payment, and the second part
00:05:00 being paid upon agreement with the Chamber upon presentation of a progress report. Excuse me, just a process question, has the amendment been moved? This is the staff recommendation. This is exactly, I'm talking to the staff recommendation. In that regard, could an element of acquittal be made when that first amount has been expended, as part of that report coming back to council, to see what that first $15,000 was spent on for oversight? Speaker 7: Yes, that can occur. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: I recall last year, there was some federal funding aligned with this as well. Can you talk me through that? Speaker 3: There was tourism NUSA funding, federal funding for the Chamber. Councillor Finzel: Or maybe it was...
00:06:00 Can I? We might have to take that on. I don't know. I think it was Councillor Stewart. Speaker 7: Apologies, we don't have that information at hand. Mayor Stewart: Yeah, I thought it was sort of matching. I thought it was a match process. Not for this grant. Not for this grant. All right. So just coming back to the question Joe asked, so the process that this was undertaken, this grant, is exactly the same process for all other grants, so environment and any other grant within the civil process? Speaker 7: The only difference with this is the economic development grants don't have a timeframe. So we don't advertise them and say you need to have the grant application by the 20th of Feb. Whereas environment grants and community grants, we do do that. This program's open all the time, so people can apply at any time. That's the only difference. Otherwise, the process is the same through Smarty Grants. The assessment's the same. We have a couple of assessors. It's moderated. It's acquitted the same. The same. Mayor Stewart: There's this one too. Speaker 7: Yes. Mayor Stewart: Okay. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Kim, could you perhaps talk to the key differences between the staff recommendation and also the updated recommendation motion regarding the upfront payment of 75 and why after discussion
00:07:00 with staff that was suggested as a way of helping to change that? Mayor Stewart: Are you moving this? So has this been moved? Have you moved this motion? No. Councillor Wilkie: I'm asking a question at the moment. I'm happy to move it and we can have questions. We'll move this along. I'll move this. Do we have a seconder, please? Councillor Jurisevic: I'll second it. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Joe. Hi, Joe. Did you want to... Are you planning to enter a motion? A amendment? Councillor Jurisevic: I was planning to enter another call, so it's probably best that I don't second this. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. So I'll speak to it. The initial motion granted no funding initially and recommended funding only be granted once the Chamber had provided project plans, KPIs, and an application that removed duplication of projects. The most recent advice from staff is that the Chamber does not currently have the capacity to draft these project plans or KPIs. It needs to engage a consultant to do this work.
00:08:00 The 7,500 upfront is recommended to enable the Chamber to do this work. The 8,500 upfront is recommended to gain the admin support needed to prepare these essential plans, KPIs, and revised application. Any efforts to assist the Chamber to clarify and confirm its strategic direction, aims, and objectives can only help bring certainty to the benefit of its members and wider business community. This work will ensure the organisation's efforts are not wasted and relationships between key stakeholders remain constructive and focused on issues of importance to the membership. Staff advise that the upfront part grant of 7,500 will enable the Chamber to do this work. The 8,500 upfront is recommended to engage the external expertise needed to assist the group to gain its focus, and that is to everyone's benefit. Once this essential work is done, a further report, including the staff's assessment, will come back for councillors to assess. As I said before, the way the recommendation was initially written, the 15,000 will not be paid until all this work has been done, which the Chamber needs an external consultant
00:09:00 to do. This will ensure that they get the resource they need to provide these essential plans and KPIs and revise application. And I think if we've got a strong Chamber with a clear strategic direction and focus, that's to everyone's benefit, hence the reason for the motion. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Vicki, can I ask a question? I'm inferring from Frank's comments that the Chamber of Commerce were actually consulted about this, and that this is something that we need to do. They have clearly indicated they don't have the internal capacity to undertake this themselves. Is that correct? Speaker 7: Staff have been working with the Chamber for a number of months on preparing the application and the plan and the associated. And it's got to a certain point. The Chamber have indicated that their intention is to get some external resource to support
00:10:00 advancing the project management plans and the application process. And the deliverables outlined in the strategic plan. So part of this grant, the intention was for that additional capacity to be sought by the Chamber. In terms of this specific resolution, which was circulated last night. Last night, yeah. No, there hasn't been consultation on this specific resolution. But the intention, there's been consultation on it. Councillor Lorentson: In your experience, is it reasonable to say that this is something that we need to do? Is it reasonable to actually dictate the amount that's designated for engagement of an external source? Or is it more in the spirit of partnership and collaboration that we just assume that the Chamber will engage with consultants at a cost that they see as reasonable? I'm just asking, have we ever done this before?
00:11:00 Seven and a half thousand designated for an external source. Speaker 7: What we have done before is provide grant funding to help volunteer organisations build their capacity. We've done that on a number of occasions through community grants, through environment grants. That's a regular ask of council because, you know, most community organisations are volunteer based. And we often help those groups go from a volunteer group to a sort of entity. You know, help them with strategic planning, help them with capacity, help them with admin, help them with project support. We do it for Noosa's Biosphere. We've done it for many organisations. There's definitely not an unusual allocation of funding from council to help build capacity to an organisation. So, no, it's not an unusual ask. Mayor Stewart: Can I ask, just on page 12, total amount requested is $30,000 and the total project cost was $41,174. Could it be presumed that $11,174 may be used by the Chamber for this exact purpose?
00:12:00 Speaker 7: That's their in-kind, that's their contribution. That is their... Mayor Stewart: They're putting in their own money, and that's my question. Speaker 3: It could be. They do have other activities that they're hoping to achieve over the next few months that that funding could go towards. Speaker 10: And if they're in-kind, it's not monetised, is it? Speaker 3: Not all of it, no. There's some funding, but not all of it, no. It is not monetised, that's correct. Councillor Lorentson: Vicki, can you explain, on page 13, it says that a full funding of this application is recommended to council, but conditional on the Chamber providing more information on how it will ensure that the desired outcomes and community benefit are achieved. So, my reading of that is, unless they have defined project plans, unless KPIs are included, um... they don't get paid.
00:13:00 Is that how it's read, or am I wrong? Speaker 7: No, that's correct. That's the officer report and the officer recommendation, that there's no allocation of funding until that information is provided. So, they'll need to do that work to actually get the first payment. Do you want to add to that? Councillor Lorentson: No, that's okay. Did you have any more questions? Speaker 7: I can see... Councillor Lorentson: So, I'm just trying to get my head around this, given how late this amendment was given to us, or circulated late last night. Um, what's been proposed is already a condition of the agreement, except we've added a requirement, but then to spend a designated amount, seven and a half thousand of their 15,000, which is the first part, so half of their first funding, to get external consultants. Um, is that right? Speaker 3: It's an admin resource to work for the Chamber. Okay. Speaker 7: And we don't specify, the resolution, as I read it, says seven and a half thousand to
00:14:00 be made available to the Chamber to provide support. So, it doesn't specify they need to get an external consultant, or it's an allocation of funding. We understand that they would like to get an admin project support position to help prepare all of this documentation. Is it... Is it... Is it... Speaker 3: The Committee did the hard yards by preparing the strategic plan. Very good. It's now about who's going to prepare the plans to get these outcomes delivered. So, it's about paying a resource. Mayor Stewart: I prefer to use the word resource, which is what we do. So, Kim, just to clarify, I think I'm similar to where Amelia's sitting, and I'm not speaking to the motion, I'm just asking a question. The Chamber, you worked, or one of our staff members worked collaboratively, has worked collaboratively with the Chamber, this report is a staff recommendation, it's had direct to sign off. This is what the Chamber came up with, we came up with, what we came up with after discussions
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 and with the Chamber, is that correct? No, no. Speaker 7: So, this is a staff recommendation based on assessment of the grant application. We haven't consulted with the Chamber on the Office's recommendation of the assessment of the grant. We don't do that. Mayor Stewart: Okay, so it's a staff recommendation, and it's what has come to us, and it's their suggestion based on all the KPIs, all the processes that we've had to do in the past, in regard to this is matching every other process that we've, grant process, except the sign off with the time. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. Is there, oh, sorry, Tom. Councillor Wilkie: I think Joe and Tom. Yeah, it's okay. Councillor Wegener: Yeah, go ahead. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm just trying to clarify something that was stated there with regard to funding of staff positions through grant applications, and that's sort of along the lines of what we're talking about here. We're talking about a facilitation of a resource in the form of a staff member.
00:16:00 Speaker 3: Project officer, project role, project consultant, project officer. Councillor Jurisevic: And whether that applies in community grants, because my understanding in the past, that hasn't been something that we've been typically funding, and why this would be different from other community grants in that respect. But I'm just trying to go through the wording of the other community grants at the moment to clarify that. Yeah, we would have to take that on, yeah, we'd have to take that on, no. Is that something we can check against the criteria of other grants and see that, because I notice here, the funding cannot be used for, I'm looking at the, our grants, items already funded under grants, grant right of fees, contingency costs, repayment debts, personal equipment, funding for a staff or member, social events or uniforms. So that's where I flagged that as. Speaker 7: That's in the community grants policy. Yes, that's where I flagged that as being consistent. I don't believe that's in the economic development and grants policy. But we can check the consistency. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, the point being that what you said there, Kim, was that we've done that in other areas.
00:17:00 Excuse me, that we've done that. Because my understanding is we don't fund staff typically for community organisations. Speaker 7: My response through the Chair was that we have provided support to build capacity in organisations. Capacity could be in various ways. You know, they might, some organisations might get specialist consultancy support or things like that. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll ask for the purpose of consistency that we get some examples of where we funded that before. Speaker 7: Tom? Councillor Wegener: Quick question. Why is this before us? I mean, if this is a grant application, so how is it managed to get before council instead of being with your department? Speaker 7: So the economic development grants policy specifies that where we have a grant application for 30% or more of the total allocation of the grant pool for that year, that it requires a council decision.
00:18:00 And this application is for 30% or more of the total grant. Okay. So that's why it's with council. So the decision sits with council because of the amount. Okay. Councillor Wegener: And just reading it, it seems that this establishes the Chamber of Commerce as the peak body. Well, it says right here in the roadmap that it aims to be the peak body. Are we establishing the Chamber as the peak body through this grant, through this process? Speaker 7: So that's the Chamber's aspiration? Yes. So the Chamber's aspiration is to become the peak organisation. They have been connecting with other traders associations and business associations. Part of their committee is this cross sort of fertilisation. Some committee members are on other Chambers and traders associations. So they have been playing a bit of a role in terms of coordinating and bringing together all of the associations. So, you know, that's their aspiration.
00:19:00 Councillor Wegener: Okay. And then one last question. Concerning the methodology here on the, you know, page 18 and this first page of the roadmap. I'm just going to read it. On one on one interview with Acting Committee President Ralph Rogers provided detailed background, aspirations, ambitions to deliver on and on. Now, it just, that's just such a red flag for me because it says, you know, we're talking about. Excuse me, Thomas, just a quick. Yeah, yeah. Is this normal for one person's opinion for the methodology to be based off one person's comments? Speaker 7: So further on it does say that there was a strategic workshop with members in the committee. So it's both a one on one with the Chair and then there was also a strategic workshop with the committee members. So it wasn't just the one on one.
00:20:00 Councillor Wegener: Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: So I thought it was Amelia then. Councillor Lorentson: My question is, when I look at the committee on the Chamber of Commerce, yes, it appears that they have internal capacity to do this job. And I'm just wondering, in the spirit of. Collaboration, whether it's recommended that we go back to the Chamber and ask, is it something that they would like to undertake internally? I've got here a cross section of. What's the question? My question is, is there opportunity? Excuse me, Frank. I did ask the question. Is there opportunity, Vicky, for us to go back to the committee and ask the question in the spirit of collaboration, whether rather than designating a set amount, seven and a half thousand dollars out of your $15,000 funding, whether they would
00:21:00 like to undertake this project internally. And I've got here in front of me a cross section of the members of the Chamber, Ralph Rodgers, ex-CEO, business owner, entrepreneur, Pat Rodgers, who's a legal advisor that specialises in corporate and governance law and his company is strategically clear advisors. Joel Aventura, who's a broker and risk manager with 56 years in locating. Thank you, given that they have, given that we've got the internal capacity. Speaker 10: Through the Chair, Councillor Lorentson, the Chamber, like all business chambers, are made up of business people that are not just invested in their own business, but the entire community and, and are very well qualified to be able to take up an opportunity to be able to take up a project such as this. What we're looking at though is that the Chamber have applied to us and they have requested
00:22:00 that we as a Council provide them support. Within that support there is some external consultancy to help them take what is a strategic vision type document to a document that's got more thought out KPIs, deliverables, etc. So in answering your question, absolutely, we can go back and ask that question of the Chamber, whether this is a project that you could deliver internally. But I would advise that if they could deliver it internally, they probably already would, because all of their contributions wouldn't be in line. So this, this is a scenario of them reaching out external funding, how can they then utilise that external funding. But if I've missed anything, I'll refer back to the team. Okay. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. The officer's question is, can you just be clear, this is a funding, a grant that is open to anyone at any time in regard to economics and the Chamber have applied for it.
00:23:00 Has anyone else applied for it? Speaker 3: We've had a range of applications throughout the year. Okay. So, but it's open? Mayor Stewart: It's open and encouraged, actively encouraged. And they just have applied? Speaker 3: Yes, that's correct. Mayor Stewart: Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, how many businesses will we have across the Shire? Speaker 3: 7,000, approximately 7,000. Councillor Jurisevic: What's the current membership of the Chamber? Speaker 3: It's, range is, I think it's about 70 at the moment, so one of the important KPIs will be to increase membership. Councillor Jurisevic: So about 10, currently 10% representative and a number of other business organisations in the Shire, but. Speaker 3: Now that's 7,000 on the ABN, so. Councillor Jurisevic: 1%. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Brian? Yes. I don't want to enter now, but if you are researching, I'd like any advice. We've ever given them money to give a group the chance to put in a project application that can be approved. Because I believe the current one is severely deficient.
00:24:00 But just have we ever done this before of actually giving the capacity up front to get an application to a point where it's suitable for approval? Because I don't think it is at the moment. The next question. No, I've asked for that advice, not coming there, because I know it would be something that needs research. So it's a one on notice. The next question is, I notice in the current application, they talk about it focusing on pillars one and two. And in pillar one, and most of part two, it's all internal mechanisms of the group. So the next question is, is it the outcomes from the environment grants about treating the outcomes of the economic development strategy? And there's two points. Yes. Is it really the role of council to support a membership drive in these grants? And second one is, considering political activity, has it been previously ever given any money to any group of any type to actually be an advocacy organisation?
00:25:00 You can take it on notice. Speaker 7: We may need to take that on notice. I guess the initial comments are. The grant application is to support growing the organisation, building the strategic capacity and representation of the organisation. It's a benefit to both council and to the wider business community to have a functioning chamber of commerce that's representative. It provides an avenue for council to work directly with a group that's representative, and it also provides representative. It provides an opportunity for the wider business community. So in terms of the overall intent that's bound up in the strategic plan, we do think it's a good thing. Our economic development strategy talks about networks, talks about building capacity, talks
00:26:00 about, yeah, smart biosphere, building ecosystems, those sorts of things. So we do feel that, you know, having a functioning, productive, representative business association does align. We've done with some of the intention of the economic development strategy. Mayor Stewart: Kim, is it correct in that it says here the economic development grants policy endorsed by council in November 2017 supports the delivery of the local economic plan and enables collaboration and strategic partnerships between council, business representative groups and the business community. So it is in our policy and our charter to facilitate these kinds of things. Speaker 7: Yes, it is. That's what the grant programs are about. Can I? Brian? Can I? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. So in respect to advocacy and in terms of the looseness, like, I don't disagree that the roadmap of the strategic plan is a good one. I've got no problem with it.
00:27:00 My problem is with the lack of specificity in the current application and the eligibility of certain actions that are within that roadmap, which I don't think the ratepayers should be funding. And advocacy, I noticed that in the objects of the constitution, I noticed that there is a third part of the process that we approach to about promoting and advancing non-political line manner, to influence government public interest of members, trade, commerce and industry. And to discuss and deal with any subject affecting the business interest of members and the community in the area. So just very think, like, the first two I could see. But the third one I presume is where the reason of everything. Is it, once again, can we really map, can we really go down the track of giving a grant Councillor Wilkie: This is a follow-up question, is this what these plans will be specifying in greater detail?
00:28:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Just to clarify, we need to get to that stage before we come back with another report. Actually requesting the grant funding to go further. So we need a lot more information. A lot more information is intended to be, by this motion, intended to be supplied before proceeding with actually any disbursement of funds. Councillor Lorentson: Just in reference to Brian's comment about whether we're funding someone that is taking, the Chamber who has an advocacy role, my question is, isn't that what every organisation does? I sit on World Surfing Reserve, Tourism, Noosa, I sit on small groups, and one of the powers of strength in community and numbers and groups is the power to advocate on behalf of this community, small business, our environment, to state and federal level.
00:29:00 And even to council. So I reference on page 12, and the question was already asked, Frank, if you can just let me finish. So on page 12, Vicki, under the economic development grant projects, one of the objectives is to attract additional funding to the Shire. Again, my question... Councillor Wilkie: You've seen the debate on the staff. Councillor Lorentson: My question is... Councillor Wilkie: I mean, I'm the Chair, so... We have to start answering your first question. And that was about, is advocacy quite a common action of community groups, community business groups? Speaker 7: I would say yes it is. I would say community groups gather around a shared mission, shared vision, and to be representative of that vision and attract members who support that vision is a fairly common thing around community organisations.
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 You know, we often reach out to community organisations to get their positions on a range of issues. You know, council strategies, those sorts of things. So, you know, to seek advice from a group of people experienced with a shared mission around a particular issue or topic is a form of advocacy. So yes, I would say it is something that community organisations do do. And we would expect from them. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Jay, you had a question? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, I think I'm following up from Brian's question to some degree. I mean, with regard to advocacy, I mean, a group that has 1% representation of all businesses across the Shire. How do we ensure... I mean, should we be funding an organisation... And I noticed within your report there are letters of support of two other business organisations that isn't representative of business organisations as a whole,
00:31:00 or has support of the majority of business organisations for this to be an umbrella organisation. Speaker 7: With the issue of funding, it's a decision of council, Joe. We're providing you with the information to help you make that decision. Speaker 3: We really believe that by strengthening the organisation, they will be able to work harder on representing their members. Councillor Jurisevic: I guess that's where the KPI request of being put in there to show that it has majority support would be representative of that. Tom. Councillor Wegener: This is before us and we're voting, but if we vote yes, then it goes back to the grants application stage, or do they get this? Speaker 7: The amended motion is the current motion on the table. If council support the amended motion, then an allocation of $7,500 would be paid to the Chamber of Commerce to help them achieve the special conditions that are listed in the motion.
00:32:00 And with that information, once that information we received, we would then report back to council. We would do an assessment process, then we would report back to council before any further funding would be considered. Councillor Wegener: And if this amendment doesn't get up, then what happens? Speaker 7: If this amendment doesn't get up and it reverts to the officer recommendation, then no funding is provided to the Chamber. They are required to, if they want to proceed with the grant, they're required to deliver. On the project plans, the KPIs, all of those sorts of things, before we make a payment. Councillor Wegener: Okay, so the reason this is in here is for them asking, it's over 30% of the budget, we're asking you whether we can put this grant forward. We say, yep, you can put the grant forward, then they go back and they make the grant, and they put the grant forward. Speaker 7: No, they've made the grant, we've assessed it, and the officer recommendation is that there are some conditions that we would like them to meet, in terms of providing a little bit more information, before they receive the first payment.
00:33:00 Councillor Wegener: Okay, great, okay, so it's all, the grant process is all go, they just have to come back with some information, and then they get the payment. That's right. Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: I now have to clarify a couple of points raised there. What is the overall grants budget for the year for the economic development, to be, for this to be over 30%? Speaker 3: This year. This year it was reduced to $30,000, for this to June 30. This year it was $30,000. Councillor Jurisevic: So this would be, so the request for $30,000 is the entire budget. That's right. Okay, $7,500 becomes 25%. Speaker 7: Yep, and it would be, the payments would be staged, so part this year. Councillor Jurisevic: So it would still be for 30,000, but it's been in one, two, one or more stages. Speaker 7: That's right. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay, so that's why it's for us, it's still for the entire $30,000 would be up for consideration. Councillor Lorentson: Anyone care to speak to the motion before I close? I have a question. Yes. Another question. Tourism Noosa, when Tourism Noosa set up, and I'm imagining many, many, many years ago,
00:34:00 did it have the support of all tourist operators and businesses, or did that, did their membership build up over a period of time? Speaker 7: Councillor Lorentson, I couldn't answer that question, to be honest. I would have to take that on notice and research that. That was some years ago. Time's running out. Speaker 10: And the network that's in place through the Chair, Councillor Lorentson, is long held across tourism Queensland and local tourism organisations. Speaking of the regional tourism organisation that's funded by the state, state tourism organisations that then end up going to Tourism Australia at a Commonwealth level. With Tourism Noosa, Tourism Noosa is an LTO that is so unique, it punches above its way. I would say it would have been, at a point in time, as Noosa does very, very well, garner everybody together on a cause, and then it would be able to go and take forward and promote
00:35:00 the region. So I'm sure Council would have been in lockstep at that point in time with them, given the importance of the tourism industry. But yeah, for us at the table as officers, long, long history before us being here. But I would expect that it's that. It's been born out of the tourism organisation networks that's established across all states, territories, and that line that's leading from Tourism Australia all the way through to your local tourism organisation. But I'm sure everybody got together at a point in time and said, this is a good thing to do. And they built up over time. And like all organisations, they have employed. Mayor Stewart, you have the floor. Mayor Stewart: I'm very supportive of this application. This is for a $30,000 grant. KPIs are in place. Measurable outcomes and necessary deliverables are stated under the staff recommendation. This is a not-for-profit organisation. They're looking to gain assistance from Council for us to provide support services to the
00:36:00 local business community. We talk about this all the time. We have a business roundtable. We've seen how beneficial that is. I've seen firsthand the work and the advocacy of the Chamber through our business roundtables during COVID when they were able to obtain deep cleaning, or I was able to advocate on their advice to the treasurer for that deep cleaning. And we received funding for our businesses in tens of thousands of dollars to help them during those times. So I've seen really on the ground that this is a Chamber that do support our local businesses. We have set over 7,000 local businesses in this Shire. We know how hard they've been hit. It's just been hit after hit with COVID and severe weather events. So this is not a huge amount of money. It is still incredibly important because it is public money. But this is an amount of money that we are putting towards helping and assisting our business community. It's fundamental. As Councillor Finzel says all the time, we are fundamentally changed by COVID. Our businesses are fundamental.
00:37:00 We're here. We should be here as a support network and to help all our community, including our business community. So I'm very supportive of this. They have developed a 2021-24 roadmap and strategy, which redefined what the organisation stands for, where it sits and how it can be effective, add value and benefit business and the community. Two independent assessments of the grant application against the stated criteria were undertaken. Recommendation comes from staff to support the Chamber in this initial critical step in their pathway to success. I want to thank the Chamber for their application. As we've said, it's open to everyone, but they've taken the initiative to put forward and to really put their money where their mouth is and help the business community. I think we should be supporting it. I'm still unsure about this amendment by Councillor Wilkie on the basis that I just don't know if we're adding red tape upon red tape. The report has been done, as I said, by our staff. It's a recommendation that's come through.
00:38:00 It's had director approval. There are the necessary measurable outcomes and deliverables and KPIs on page 11. So I'm still unsure about this amendment, but I'm very supportive of it. The application as a whole. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Wegener: Oh, a question. Do you have a question, Joe? Oh, the other applications. So we're going to, if we vote for this, this or the original amendment, do we then see the other applications that were coming in through for the same pool of money? Is this prejudicing against those other groups that are coming in through for the same pool of money? Because if we knew that some other group came with this application that was fantastic, well, we don't see it. So are we making a decision on the spend of this pool of money without looking at the other ones? Speaker 3: There have been no other applications for a while. All other applications are well under the threshold.
00:39:00 They were $2,000. So we haven't received any competitive application. Yeah. Speaker 7: There's nothing in the current, in the pipeline at the moment that would be competitive to this. Because it's a program that's open all year, so throughout the year, Vicky's referenced before, we've received grant applications before. That's earlier on in the year. And they're small amounts generally, Tom. They're $2,000, $3,000. And under the policy, there's delegation to the CEO or the director because of the threshold for those, which is why the policy's got in the 30% or more should come to Council. Councillor Wegener: So this isn't pushing out? This isn't... No, no. You've got a pool of money. It's not taking more than... Speaker 7: Not at all. Councillor Wilkie: No. Okay. Tom Archer. Councillor Jurisevic: So just to clarify, out of the $30,000 pool of money for the economic grants that are available this year, $15,000 is only being proposed to come out of this year's budget, and there are other amounts that have already come out of that $30,000? Speaker 3: That's correct. Yes. Councillor Jurisevic: And so that's less than the $15,000?
00:40:00 Yes. And there's still... What's the current balance of this? Speaker 7: There's still capacity in the budget, Joe, to fund the $15,000. Councillor Jurisevic: That's what I'm trying to allude to. Speaker 7: This financial year. Councillor Jurisevic: To the points that are raised in item one, and that is that grant approval to include proper disclosure of all funds to align with all other recipients of Noosa Shire Council funding. And I'll just add the words at each stage. Councillor Wilkie: Seconder, Council has stopped. Councillor Jurisevic: I do that to be consistent with all other grant proposals that come before Council and to make it clear and concise. In a non-competitive format of process, that before we proceed, that we'd be assured that funds are being spent as directed and that the KPIs and that have been achieved before
00:41:00 granting further allocations of funding. Councillor Wilkie: All right. Anyone else care to speak to the amendment? Councillor Wegener: So is that to Joe's amendment? To Joe's amendment. To my amendment. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. There's no other amendment? Yeah. Move the motion. Move the motion, yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Just a question. Recipients of Noosa Shire Council funding. Is that in terms of grant program? Councillor Jurisevic: I'm happy to add the word grant in there if that clarifies the position for you, Council. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Brian? Yeah. I'm happy, but the whole Council has to agree to do it. Yes. Councillor Jurisevic: Yes. Everybody happy to add that word? I'd say if it's more specific. Yep. Councillor Lorentson: For just purposes of clarity, is number five to replace the amendment that no, so it's to add two. To add two. Okay.
00:42:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Everybody happy with that? Mr Chair, do we need any further time? Councillor Wilkie: No. Councillor Joseph used to close. Councillor Jurisevic: No. I'll forgive him. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. All right. Approved to debate. Those in favour? Okay. That's unanimous. That becomes part of the original motion. Yep. To which myself and Mayor Stewart have spoken. Brian? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yes, we're in that. I'd like to move the amendment with some additional words to item four. I'll just wait for Cathy to bring up item four if we can. Yeah. This one? Yeah. Speaker 10: Okay. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And after the word above supporting information, add the words, and a strong focus.
00:43:00 Speaker 14: After the word? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, so with above supporting information and a strong focus on deliverables, and I Councillor Jurisevic: I'm happy to second that for the purpose of discussion. Councillor Wilkie: Alright, seconded by Councillor Jurisevic. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do that and I understand that the intent is to provide an administrative resource to I suppose it is a capacity issue, it's about the lack of time within the committee members.
00:44:00 However, having advocated for and been involved in the development of the criteria for economic grants, I've got a pretty strong view about what was in place. What was intended to be funded and it was about delivering a service that led to capability development within business, that led to increased connectivity. To me, pillars two, and I'll read out some of pillar two, is it to engage business and establish relevance and increase value, to develop and launch impactful tools for business success. Yes. And pillar five, it's about creating a climate of, yes, sustainable economic growth in Noosa, jobs, wages, growth and capital, enhancing quality of life, becoming a conduit, conduit, well it said, and advocate for a skilled workforce, contribute to increased business sector diversity in Noosa.
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 So the majority of those things are what I believe the economic grants are set up to do, is to get other people helping us deliver our plan. I don't believe they're set up to be like a digital economy. I don't believe it's appropriate for a general community development grant to pay support for a volunteer group because they haven't got time. And I don't believe it's appropriate for ratepayers to fund advocacy. Now some of those particular items which even made me advocacy elsewhere, but that is really the core role of a volunteer group. And as I said, I can't recall any other grant ever being given to support a group based on building their numbers. And membership and advocating. Businesses don't have to be members to participate in an income system. Businesses don't have to be members to take advantage of capacity building being delivered by the Chamber. They're the things that I believe the economic grant is. And so, to me, if when it comes back, if it continues just to be a generic admin because
00:46:00 we're too busy to run our group, you know, the answer will be no. If it comes back and it's got key deliverables that I can see match what we want to do in terms of business development, in terms of economic diversification, in terms of how we get collaboration between sectors within the business, then there might be a different answer. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Cousins, would you speak to the amendment? Councillor Lorentson: I will speak to the amendment. Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. I think if you read the roadmap and strategy, I interpret it a little bit different to you, Councillor Stockwell. I looked at the higher policy. And the higher policy, and I quote on page 18 of the roadmap and strategy, it states, there's never been a more critical time for Noosa stakeholders to work together towards
00:47:00 sustainable, economic, social, and environmental outcomes. And then I go back to the report that's published in the New South Wales Times. It's been written by council staff. And I quote the report which references, which states, a strong alliance with a supportive and able chamber could deliver council's new economic development strategy, smart biosphere, and help drive and support economic diversification in the Shire. That's what I've taken from the chamber, that it's trying to position itself as the peak economic driver and body in the Noosa Shire. And the other parts of that building membership, that's all part, that's the how, but the why, why they've been set up is that higher order to work with council to deliver its economic development strategy.
00:48:00 I don't mind, A, your amendment, and I will support it, but I do want to remind everyone around this table that we've got time. We've got a group of volunteers. These guys are not paid. They're a group of volunteers, they're relentless, and they're committed to their sole purpose, which is to support small business, and to also help diversify our economy. This is a group that clearly has articulated that we need to do more than tourism. And they're committed to working alongside council, partnering with council, to deliver that outcome. There's no financial reward for these committee members. And yet, I'm sort of listening around this table that, are we actually creating barriers? Are we creating red flags unnecessarily to a group that we need?
00:49:00 We have a small economic development department. They're under-resourced. And we've got these able, capable committee. And they're under-resourced. And I think we should be embracing this opportunity, not creating barriers. This is about small business. It's about our economy. And our job should be here to support, and not create roadblocks. So, I will support Council Stockwells. And then we'll see what happens. But I will not be supporting Council Wilkie's amendment. Councillor Wilkie: Just a clarification. I haven't made an amendment. Councillor Lorentson: Oh, excuse me. Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: Just want to clarify something that Amelia brought up there. And I'm trying to read it through the pillars. The element of diversity, and understanding what exists in the way of business, and what
00:50:00 doesn't exist for opportunity. We're within the pillars. We're within the strategy. There's the role of the business. There's the role of the Chamber, fit and fill those voids, or an understanding of the saturation and the voids within our business community. Or is that a role of Council? Speaker 7: I think it's a role of Council, first and foremost. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. That's what I want to clarify. Speaker 7: Yeah. First and foremost, it is. It's the evidence-based. It's underneath our economic development. It's our development strategy, essentially, about what our economy consists of, what the diagnostics of our economy is, where are the dominant sectors, where are we potentially vulnerable to external shocks and things like that. Councillor Jurisevic: An example of that would be the digital economy, where we've created the digital hub to facilitate that need. Speaker 7: Yeah, absolutely. So first and foremost, I think that is a primary key role of Council.
00:51:00 But in all of our strategic endeavours, partnering is a really important piece. Absolutely. Whether it's our environment strategy, our social strategy, or our economic development strategy. So partnering with organisations like the Chamber in our endeavours to multiply our impact, to access other strategic expertise, I think is a really important piece, Jo, in any of our strategic endeavours. Okay. Mayor Stewart: I'll speak to this. Yeah. Yeah. Look. I... I'm willing to support Council Stockwell, but I've, you know, I mentioned before that it is a not-for-profit, and I just want to bring up what Council Lawrence has said and agree, that it's made up of volunteers. This is an organisation. They spend hundreds of hours a week with the sole purpose of helping our community and our businesses thrive and helping our economy. So I think, you know, we should very much be embracing this and not putting up roadblocks
00:52:00 or hindering. We have, as we all know, a very small economic development team. When you've got experts and businessmen and women who are on the ground, who are at the grassroots level, fighting the good fight every day for the business community, we should be embracing their help, we should be embracing them, we should be supporting them as much as we can. I think our economic development team do a stellar job on very limited resources and budget. I think it's an area that we're understaffed and we need to put more resources at. But this is almost a hybrid where we can actually rely on the support of our community who are willing and wanting to help us. And I think that this is a great way of getting that support and assistance for our community. And I want to commend and thank staff, Kim, thank you and the team. I know how hard you guys work. I know you have great relationships with the business community. I want to see that grow. I want to see it prosper. I want to see it develop. And I think this grant is a breakfast, you know, not first step, but it's a great continuation
00:53:00 along that line. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Anyone else want to speak for a minute? I'm going to support it because all it's really doing is helping, just ensuring that the great words and the strategy match real world outcomes. And I think that's what we need to do. And that the organisation does remain focused on business activities and business advocacy. And that can only help their memberships. It can help clarify their focus. And I think that's a good thing. They've written pillars two and five. And I wholly endorse everything that's written in there. It all sounds fantastic. And this will just ensure that that's matched in with what we're doing. And I think that's the real world outcomes in terms of the deliverables on this grant process.
00:54:00 So I think it's fine. I don't know. Joe. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, I'll support the amendment. I think it does clearly align with the, as you said there Mr Chair, membership focus and business engagement. I think that's a point that we've raised already and that item five, pillar five is the nurse of climate of ideas, incubation and growth. I think they are strong. I think they're commendable pillars and commendable outcomes that we're trying to achieve here. The thing is, we are trying to support, but we're trying to support with a resource and that resource is funding for a resource. And that's something that we just need to be mindful of, that we're consistent with going forward and that no one is suggesting that we don't want to support the Chamber in any way, shape or form. It's just being consistent with the way that we support one organisation, particularly one that is representative of 1% of our business community at the moment to grow and expand with the support of all business, of all the business community so that it is representative of the whole and not the part. So I'm happy to support the amendment.
00:55:00 Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Anyone else wants to speak before Councillor Stockwell closes? Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I will close and thank you for your support. When I look down the actions in those two pillars, I can see actions that are easily measured. There are outputs that a traditional grant will say, yes, we've done it. Whereas I look down some of the other pillars, they're far more here and far more difficult to get a real key performance indicator. The actions that I see in that two and five are the classic ones that I see as being environment grant material. It's not a roadblock because it doesn't say must only, it says a strong focus on deliverables. And that, I think, sends a clear message is, yes, we know you're trying to build, but if we're going to fund you, we want these deliverables set out and we want to say this many events, to this outcome, this is what we're going to target, or this many actions in this regard. So to me, it's just about giving a little bit more direction, which may make the process,
00:56:00 you know, for the first step of seven and a half thousand, one that gets to an end point Councillor Wilkie: Those in favour? If that's unanimous, it becomes part of the original motion. Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion now, before I close? Only myself and Mayor Stewart have spoken to it. Councillor Jurisevic: Look, I will. I'll support the motion as it stands. I think what we're doing is requesting a bit more clarity around the process. Requesting, as we would any grant application of this nature, KPIs that can be measured so that we actually see a return on investment. I see it being, you know, the business community do contribute to the ratepayer base and they pay their rates. And so if the entire business community sees this as a benefit to the business community, I'm prepared to support it. If there's measurable outcomes that can be achieved and that can be documented and can be focused on,
00:57:00 and I think that final amendment does focus on probably where some of those more achievable deliverables are within the five pillars, then I'm happy to support this going forward. I think it does need a bit more work, and I think that's what we're asking to go back, just to ensure that all of those are delivered in the document. And that we do this in stages so that we can see that it does align and that grant funding is being spent where it's intended to be spent. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Griswold. Councillor Tom. Councillor Wegener: Great question to you. So it just seems to be a very generous offer in this, before us here, for the $7,000 to come up front instead of asking them to do various work and then get the next. This seems like it is generous. Would you call it a generous offer? And even going outside and saying this is, we're really trying to help you out even more than you're asking for. Councillor Wilkie: Well, generous is a subjective term.
00:58:00 I'm taking advice from staff with what they would need. We need to hire a resource to do the work. Look, if you want to help the Chamber achieve the objective to do this work, the project plans and the KPIs, this is the way to go. If you want them to do it without any funding, without the opportunity to hire an external resource using council funding, don't support this. So generous is a subjective term. I'm taking advice from the staff about what it would take to hire an external resource to help them achieve the project plans and KPIs to give this application a real chance of success and then moving forward as a more focused Chamber. Councillor Wegener: Okay. And this is a normal, this isn't, is this unusual to come out with and say, you know, instead of, we're going to do, you asked for this but we're going to give you this instead because it's going to help you out more and that's been your recommendation as well? Speaker 7: We have in the past.
00:59:00 For the grants part. So what this does is part award the grant. So we have in part awarded grants before because we've, the application might have, you know, need more information or we felt that only part of the application aligned with the objectives we were trying to achieve. So there has been examples of where we've awarded grants in part before and that's what this essentially is doing. Saying in part, we'll award grants. We'll award you the grant. We want this further information before any further allocation of funding through the grant would occur. Okay. Councillor Wegener: I'll speak to the motion then. Just say, yeah, I'll support this as it seems to me it's really establishing a two-way relationship with the Chamber and with Council. So it seems a very positive step forward and very, in my opinion, generous. So thank you, Frank. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Come on. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask a question?
60 minutes in ¶
01:00:00 Can I ask a question, please, before I speak? Can I defer my decision until myself or Council have talked to the Chamber of Commerce to understand? Councillor Jurisevic: Councillor, you could make a, you could move a deferral motion here and now for this to be, to stay on the table until other matters have been done. That's my understanding as the Chair and as the CEO. Is that not correct? Councillor Wilkie: There could be a procedural motion. Councillor Jurisevic: A procedural motion to defer the matter. Councillor Lorentson: I like saying it. Oh, yeah. There's a procedural motion in that case. Councillor Jurisevic: I was close to doing it myself, so. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. I'd just like a procedural motion to defer this decision until Thursday's ordinary meeting. I'll second it then. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Speak to the motion. Councillor Lorentson: Just to get some clarity. Like I said, we, I got notice of the amendment late yesterday and I would love the opportunity for myself, other Councillors, and also Council to talk to the Chamber of Commerce and just get an understanding whether this is actually going to help or hinder them.
01:01:00 And then I'll be able to make a more informed vote on Thursday. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Look, I'll, I'll speak to the procedural motion. If we vote for this today, this is not a decision of the Council. The final decision on this happens on Thursday night. So if we can, we can pass this now or not. And staff are free to, you know, talk to the Chamber of Commerce. Councillors are free at any time to talk to the Chamber of Commerce. I think if we move this now, this will give a, a clear message of the direction we may want to go. The intention of the, of the motion is to give them support to do the work required by the Council. Or the initial recommendation was they do the work and, and, and, and, and, and, and, without any financial support. So, um, I'll be, I'll be asked, I'll be voting that the, um, we don't write a matter
01:02:00 on the table. We just, um, push the matter down the road a bit further. Um, I won't be supporting the procedural motion. Mayor Stewart: I'll support the procedural motion. Uh, like Council of Arranston, I like clear information as well. Um, this is something that came, you know, um, it's, it's come recently. Um, this motion and I, I'd like to, um, get a better understanding between now and Thursday night about the impacts and implications. Um, and yeah, I'd like to, um, more information I, I guess. Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: I'm happy to support the procedural motion. I was of mind to, uh, move the same procedural motion given that we've got a number of questions that we've asked of staff to deliver answers to, uh, before Thursday night's meeting. The procedural motion in no way alters the situation that we've got. We've got a, a, a, a proposal before us to consider further by Thursday. In no way, it just means that Thursday night we make the decision instead of my, moving
01:03:00 it here and then having to reiterate it again on Thursday. I have absolutely no concern with moving the procedural motion and I support it wholeheartedly. Councillor Wilkie: Anyone else wish to speak to the procedural motion? Roland Bader? I'll close. Oh, very close, yeah. Councillor Lorentson: Um, sorry, I just want to close. Um, I also, we understand how the meeting procedures work, that a final decision's made at ordinary meeting. Um, but a lot of people in the community don't. They actually look at a general meeting and they look at the vote 5-2. And, um, I don't want on record that I don't support, um, the Chamber of Commerce. So, respect and accept what you've said, Frank. Um, but people in community don't actually understand how the process works. Yep. So, for that reason, I hope you can support, um, this deferral. Councillor Wilkie: Uh, put the motion on the table.
01:04:00 Councillor Wegener: So, this is. Councillor Jurisevic: The procedural motion has been laid on the table. That's unanimous. Councillor Wilkie: More information. Yep. That's unanimous. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. And then only the mover of the procedural motion and the chairperson may speak to a procedure. Oh, that's what I thought. Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: Oh, right. Thank you. Oh, thank you. That's, that's, that's what I thought. All right. Thank you, Kim. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Kim. We'll now move on to. Yes, thanks. Um, to item two. This is the Minister Threatened Porn and Species Recovery Roadmap. I think. Mayor Stewart: Oh, we've got to get Councillor Fensel back. I'll do that. Councillor Wilkie: Yep. Joe, did you. Thank you. Speaker 12: Request this. Councillor Jurisevic: I, I requested this for the significance of the, uh, the matter. Yeah. Speaker 9: Joe, just move on. Welcome to, um, our. Councillor Wilkie: Hello, Dave. Welcome. Councillor Jurisevic: Good morning, everyone. Councillor Wilkie: Where are we? Speaker 1: I can't hear you. Where is it? Councillor Jurisevic: It's on this. Oh, it's on this agenda. No, I'm just trying to find which agenda I'm on. I've actually got open. Councillor Wilkie: Is this just for the significance of the job? Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. It's only for the significance of Frank. This is, I think it's something that, uh, needs to be heard with all Councillors. Thank you. Thank you.
01:05:00 Councillor Wilkie: Okay, so the nuisance-threatening foreign species recovery roadmap, Joe, did you have further questions? Councillor Jurisevic: I did. Don't. The recommendation is the roadmap will be subject to an ongoing consultation program prior to consultation. Can you outline what the proposed ongoing consultation program will entail? Speaker 1: Through the Chair, there's a wealth of experience in the community and with other agencies like State Government that have a lot of information about the status of threatened species in Noosa Shire and also in Queensland. So our notion is to engage with those different stakeholders to come up with the right answers before we release this as a final sort of procedure sort of thing.
01:06:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Okay, further than that. One of the things that's been proposed in the past is wildlife corridors and wildlife crossings. Will that be covered within this recovery roadmap? Speaker 1: Correct. Particularly with mobile species like koalas, obviously road mortality is one of the big problems. Councillor Jurisevic: So it will strengthen the position for budgetary considerations for those type of things. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Anyone care to move it? Councillor Jurisevic: I'll happily move it. Councillor Wilkie: Move for Councillor Jurisdict, Senate, Councillor Lorentson and Joe. Councillor Jurisevic: I think this is an essential piece of work to finalise and identify the threat species in our region. Nine have been chosen. The Noosa Nine has been discussed before. It follows on from a previous Noosa Nine.
01:07:00 And just to clarify in the middle, is this Noosa Nine different from the previous Noosa Nine? Is there a variation in the nine species listed here to what has been listed previously? Speaker 1: Yes, there is. But what you've got in front of you is a draft. So again, the final thing will be a result of a lot of community consultation. Councillor Jurisevic: So to further that, this will identify the species that are of concern to our community moving forward and the ones that we most want to undertake and protect and deliver outcomes to protect for the future. Speaker 1: And through the chair, I can say that choosing these species, they're like the indicated species. If you look after koalas, the whole raft of other species gets looked after as well. Speaker 6: Thank you, Dave. Councillor Wilkie: Now the councillors will speak to motion. Brian? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, I will. I'm just going to repeat something I said last week because I think it's important. And I'm not going to move an amendment. I did notice that in terms of the freshwater species, the Noosa Nine only covers, my mate, the Mirror River Koi. And there are some listed and vulnerable species that occur in the Wollum,
01:08:00 like the Oxalian Timberbird and Honey Blue-eyes little fish. And the Wollum is a really important element. It only really comes from Stradbroke and a bit further north, and it's really dependent on what we call sub-acid water. So the species around there are unique. So I think it's good that when we go to consultation, we start looking at those species. They might be as pretty or whatever or as well known as the others, but they do play a role. So for example, local enthusiasts, when we had the oil spill several years ago, identified that the pygmy birds were lost from some of our coastal creeks where the oil went up. So also if we're near urban areas, if we're finding a lot of lime near the creeks between the nutrients, those species may be adversely affected because they may be the low-nutrient acid waters. And the other one that I mentioned on Tuesday, which I think is one that is more iconic, like the koala, that other councils are looking at in their threatened species and may be on a trajectory towards listing is the platypus.
01:09:00 There is evidence that there are significant declines of platypus around Australia. And it is one more broadly representative of freshwater ecosystems that does, you know, if you look after what they need, you look after a lot of other aquatic ecosystems as well. Councillor Jurisevic: So your side confers the question based on what Councillor Stockwell has alluded to there. And what you said earlier, Dave, that these are species that are the principal species, but sub-species then get protected as a result. As a result of this, how does species such as the platypus, such as the, I'm trying to remember the species at Carramar that was identified when we, when the prawn or the crayfish, how are species like that also identified and protected by the works going here for these nine? Speaker 1: Well, the swamp crayfish is actually listed as endangered. So that will be captured under the legislation.
01:10:00 Things like the platypus, as Councillor Stockwell said, are probably on the way to getting listed. So I think, I believe it's really important we look at those species. Again, they're indicated species of freshwater health. Councillor Jurisevic: So they're covered by the fact that, you know, being indicated species and these being indicated species, that those other species will also get an element of protection, but also recognition and significance of their endangered status, that's what I'm trying to say, in the overall roadmap. Speaker 1: Through the Chair, what I'd say is that species that aren't listed now, but they may be listed in the future, certainly worthy of consideration. But again, going through that community consultation process will identify those things. Okay. Councillor Wegener: The benthic layer that, from the Skeletor report through the mud and the anaerobic situation going on under the mud in the river, is that part of this roadmap?
01:11:00 Did I? Speaker 1: Through the Chair, the report basically looks at species that are actually listed or threatened. And I'm not sure if there's any species that were in the benthic layer that are actually in that category. Yeah. We'll take that on notice, if you wish, and look at that. That's a very good question. That's all important. All right, thanks. Councillor Lorentson: I have a question, Dave. How is this roadmap being funded through general rates, or is there opportunity to use funding from an environmental level? Speaker 1: So the resource at the moment is a fauna management officer who's developing this, but he's also looking at other fauna management issues like flying foxes. That's funded under the environment levy. So the proposal going forward, and again, if it goes down in the report, this will be subject to future budgetary considerations, but it'll be through the environment levy. Councillor Wilkie: Fantastic. Thank you. Any other councillors for specific motion? Could you close, Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: No. I think enough's been said, and I think the pertinent questions have been asked. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you.
01:12:00 We'll put the motion in favour. That's unanimous. Thank you, Dave. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you very much. Thanks, Dave. Thank you. Cheers. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Next item, 3D hazard mapping tool, appointment of SEM table. Councillor Jurisevic: This was out of... Councillor Wilkie: This is referred from the service... Service and variation. And... There was... Councillor Jurisevic: Brian referred this one. Mayor Stewart: No. Councillor Wilkie: No. Oh, you did. Councillor Jurisevic: Sorry, you did, Frank. Sorry. Other way around. Councillor Wilkie: Now, the only reason this is referred here is because in the original report, it said at the end of the two-year period, and if councillors decided to... to continue on with the... The table... Use the equipment, it could be covered... The 13,000 annual cost could be covered by getting ready with grant funding. Financial staff had a different view of that. There was some uncertainty. This change motion just acknowledges how... What councillors would have to consider
01:13:00 going forward. Just get some clarity as to the process going forward in the future. Thank you. Thank you. I'm moving that. Seconded by Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Wegener: Frank, do you need to read it? Councillor Wilkie: I can read it. The Council note the report by the Disaster Management Officer to the Services and Organisation Committee dated 10th May. Agree to enter into a medium-sized contractual arrangement at the same table for the provision of a 3D hazard simulation tool for a trial period of two years in accordance with Section 235A of the Local Government Regulation 2012. At the end of the two-year trial, officers will assess the merits of the 3D hazard mapping tool in supporting disaster management activities and whether to continue using it long-term. Funding of ongoing costs will then be considered through future budget processes to determine whether general revenue, grants or other funding is applied. Whereas in the original report it said it would be funded perhaps under the Get Ready Funding Grant Program and the financial staff said that's uncertain.
01:14:00 Whether that's the case or not. Okay. Any questions of Jones? Councillor Jurisevic: I'm going to follow up. Please. Mayor Stewart: I just wanted to know, I know one of the councils, Karangai Council? Karangai, yeah. Karangai, sorry, I beg your pardon. How have they found this technology? Speaker 5: They've been really good, yeah, with their climate-wise proposals have been going really well. It's really good. It's been adopted well by the community and it's been, you know. It's very good, actually. Speaker 8: Yeah. Yeah. Fantastic. Okay, thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Am I right in recalling that they may have demonstrated this as part of the Fire Tech type conference we had there in Richmond? That's right. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll follow up on the question that Councillor Wilkie actually raised at the last meeting. And that is the funding source that was proposed as a potential funding source being...
75 minutes in ¶
01:15:00 Speaker 5: Get Ready. Councillor Jurisevic: Get Ready Funding. Thank you. I was just trying to remember the name of it. Is that something that we would typically fund ongoing software licence renewal through? Speaker 5: It can be. It can be, or as I spoke with Trent about this, it can actually be... So it does fit the parameters of Get Ready Funding too? It does, yes. Councillor Jurisevic: If it's being used for the purpose of... Yeah, engagement with the community around disaster management. Thank you, James. That's all I wanted to clarify. Mayor Stewart: Sorry, so just on the back of that, so then, Councillor Wilkie, is that then again your... It can be used through the category that you're funding? Speaker 5: My advice is that it could potentially be used for that, or if we look to use rates for that, that can then free up more money within Get Ready for other new initiatives. So there's... Councillor Jurisevic: And that would be my argument as well, that Get Ready Funding, you don't need to determine what Get Ready Funding was needed year in, year out, to see whether there was sufficient funding to allocate to... Speaker 5: That's right. Our annual allocation is around $22,300, and so how we split that up and use it is...
01:16:00 Thank you, James. ...determination. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I have a question. In terms of the application of the 3D modelling with hazards that are natural resource-based is really obvious, but I presume it could also be a tool in getting people to understand, say, local area planning in hill slopes and things like that. It wouldn't just be a hazard, a thing that had to be an assignment hazard. Any type of planning that requires people to understand the impact of topography would be, that would be useful. Yeah, very much so. Future models of what this may look like. Yeah, Joe. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you, Frank. Given that this is emerging technology, new and understanding, is there an opportunity here to partner with other agencies like CUFAS that are involved in fire management, and or the state, other state agencies, with regard to funding this, not only for our council, but for other councils going forward? Is there an advocacy role here that we could play if this is successful? Speaker 5: Yes, potentially we could, yeah, certainly.
01:17:00 I mean, we do intend to use it through the FITEC Connect out of Parisian Digital Hub, and then our new disaster resilience officer as well can be used to... Councillor Jurisevic: So if we use it on a grander scale, we may be a smaller pool and in a larger pool. Very much so, yes. Mayor Stewart: I just want to reiterate how important I think this kind of funding is, and resilience and this technology is just really, really leading the way. Our FITEC Hub down at Bridging Digital Hub is doing amazing things and this is just one of the things to come out of it all for us to use. And I think every tool in our armour, to be prepared and to be resilient and to have our community ready is a powerful and great thing. I also want to thank James, James is here this morning, but he worked all weekend. We had briefings Saturday and Sunday morning, but James has been on Weather Watch for about the last four or five days and doing a tremendous job.
01:18:00 So I want to thank you, James, for all your hard work, because it is a seven day a week job and you are not sleeping much, you constantly, you are our eyes and ears. So I want to thank James for all his hard work over the past sort of week. Councillor Jurisevic: Nothing better than a two o'clock in the morning when the alert goes off on your phone, is there, James? What now? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And reciprocally, I'd like to admonish the CEO for bringing the armament at the end of the interview. Councillor Finzel: Can I just add to that that I think, you know, the comments raised today about you being 24-7 on the job, which is great. I think the more that we can, you know, get funding that's going to engage, you know, new technology as we move forward and, you know, position ourselves as a smart biosphere and innovation. I think anything where we can get that, we can convert the data that you collect and apply real practical outcomes for education and, you know, resourcing recovery. I think it's, yeah, well applauded, so thank you.
01:19:00 Speaker 5: Yeah, I think so. It makes the job easier, that's for sure. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, exactly. Speaker 5: Yeah. Councillor Finzel: John? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, I'll speak to it. I fully support this. We're often asked, what do we learn from the disasters that we go through? How do we prevent things from occurring again? One of the things in the recovery, the recovery strategy is adding resilience. The word resilience didn't exist in the, barely existed in the first draft of the Queensland recovery strategy and now exists all through it. We now get funding for resilience, which is unheard of, because elements of resilience were typically reconstructed to the level at which they were destroyed and no resilience was added. This sort of technology and this sort of understanding of our environment puts us at the forefront. Gets us forewarned, gives us more pre-warning and it shows that we are actually learning going forward so that we can better inform and better work with our community on the imminent dangers that disasters occur in the community.
01:20:00 Too often we're seeing, to the north of us, the ongoing occurrence of flood after flood after flood within a small period of time and communities being bombarded with having to survive the elements. This is one of those tools that hopefully going forward will help us to survive those elements a lot better and be able to forewarn and better advise our community going forward. So on any of these type of initiatives going forward and proving that they're going to get their value and worth over a two-year trial, I think is the way to go forward. Well done, James, for bringing this to us. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. Councillor Bryan. I do say, it will be a very interesting two years. For many years, people have used three-dimensional modelling, whether it's just building a sandpit and showing it that way, because people learn in different ways and a lot of people need this physical presence.
01:21:00 In hazard planning and assessment and community capacity building, if you teach one way to make their fire, the huge influence of sloping aspects on fire behaviour. And if people can see, oh, wait a minute, I'm up here, and it's a western slope and it's 30 degrees, oh, the fire's going to be this, get up there really quickly. When I witnessed in Tim Beardworth many, many years ago, two weeks had been burning around and it hit the creek and it stopped and it got back up. It got to the western face of the thing, got up from the top of one tree because the flag was high, and it hit and went on to the top of the western side of Tim Beardworth in about 30 seconds. Those sort of things. If we look at landslip, trying to get people to understand the hazards of implicit within living in our countryside in landslip prone areas. It may hopefully be able to do things like show us where not to build your access tract over these double hours of slope, which is a key thing that generally creates the instability
01:22:00 of putting cuttings that let the water come out quicker than it would of if it wasn't. So to me, it's a really valuable tool and it's one that will both inform within the biotech sector, but also within the general community such that people get a much more physical grasp of the risks of living in various places around the country. Councillor Lorentson: I'll just speak quickly without repeating what's already been said, but in agreeance with the discussion around the table, I think that the only way we can prepare for risks, just like what just happened over the weekend, is if we actually properly understand the risk and this technology gives us that opportunity. So I welcome it. And yeah, we have an obligation to our community to help them. We have to help build resilience and this is a great opportunity to do so. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: We'll put it to the vote.
01:23:00 Those in favour? That's unanimous. Thank you, Jane. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
90 minutes in ¶
01:31:00 All right, welcome back, everybody. We're up to item six, report directed to the general committee, the Noosadrive Pathway Project Reference Group,
01:32:00 appointed by the Council as a reference group. We have Mitch and Craig. Craig, could you just talk a bit about the project, please? Speaker 6: Sure, sure. We've received software grant funding for this project, and so it's part of the planning process. So this is coming up with... a conceptual sort of design. And I'll let Mitch speak to it as well. Do you want to say anything, Mitch? Speaker 9: Yeah, so we've had a couple of projects which have led us to this specific project. So we did a planning project last year, co-funded by the Cycle Grants people, and that recommended this as a project to take forward. And then since we've gone and made an application to the Cycle Grants team again, and we've received funding for the design portion of the project. So now we're in the early, early phases of the design portion of the project, and we're looking to form a reference group to help inform specific attributes of this path and help guide us through the community consultation process,
01:33:00 I suppose. Councillor Wilkie: So for those listening, where does it start and end, and what features will it include? Speaker 9: So really broadly, and there's a lot of elements to be decided, it starts at the Noosa Junction roundabout. So the intersection between Noosa Drive and Sunshine Beach Road goes up over the hill on the northern side of the road and links into Hastings Street, somewhere around Lyons Park, where there'll be other projects potentially connecting in all the way down to the beach, I suppose. Councillor Wilkie: And you said it features biophilic design. Can you speak a bit about what that means, please? Speaker 9: Yeah, so we've got a draft vision statement which does mention the biophilic design principles. So what we'd be looking at is a design that incorporates natural materials where possible, but also enhances the natural portion of the environment. So we'd be looking at some streetscaping-type works, including lots of planting, trees, shade,
01:34:00 and also ensuring that the pathway is inspired by nature, so natural curves and natural finishes, if you will, which we can achieve this. Councillor Wilkie: So the Park Road Boardwalk is providing a reference point in some regard for this one? Speaker 9: Yeah, so there's potential that part of the project would be just, you know, a concrete path-type finish, but there are sections that will need to be raised boardwalks, and where those sections occur, we'd definitely be looking towards the Park Road Boardwalk for some design inspiration to connect those missing links. Councillor Lorentson: In terms of the project reference group, Mitch, I note that it includes reps from the Noosa Junction Association, the Haston Street Traders Association, Zero Emissions Noosa. Will there be opportunity for other groups
01:35:00 to be represented, including, for example, our surfing community, Tourism Noosa, Surf Life Saving Club, and even communities in our hinterland in Eastern Beaches, given that the park is going to be funded by general rates, and the benefit will be derived by the entire community? Speaker 9: Yeah, so the reference group, I suppose, is relatively streamlined, and it's those people that you spoke about there. But what we do have within this process is a community consultation plan, which we'd use that project reference group, if we could, to help us identify those kind of key stakeholders that you were talking about, and then we'd engage with them directly. They wouldn't necessarily be on the reference group, but we'd be going to them and seeking feedback and their input, taking that on board, and putting it through the structure to make decisions.
01:36:00 Councillor Lorentson: So access and inclusivity, which is a space that we are committed to being in, I'm assuming, or I would be pushing, if I could, on the reference group, to have that representation as well. Speaker 9: Yeah, so again, we would be wanting to get to a certain point where we can engage with those stakeholders meaningfully and get their feedback on the process and design. We've done some preliminary contact initially, and we've come up with them going on to what we'd probably call the key stakeholders list, and we'd engage with them based on that. Speaker 10: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. I'm happy to move it with Councillor Wilkie as chair and Councillor Lorentson as a member of the group. Councillor Wilkie: I'll second it. Seconded, Councillor Stewart. Speak to the motion. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think it'd be useful to have a reference group that involves both council staff and the groups you've mentioned.
01:37:00 I think it is a high visibility program. I think where I'd like us to start thinking about, though, is last week, we did a briefing. We did a briefing on a package of projects and priorities, and I think it'd be good to bring a reference group along that looked at all those and had that sort of longitudinal type consideration of where the priorities are, having, you know, being exposed to it. That may be, when we get to that step, maybe that's where we do say, well, there does need to be a stronger community presence or there needs to be an environmental presence or whatever. So, to me, yeah, I think the two councillors I've mentioned are the ones that put their hands up, and yeah, it's a important part of the cycle and pathways strategy, and it's one that, if done well, will have big outcomes. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Stockwell. Do the councillors wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Lorentson: Tamia? I'll speak to it.
01:38:00 Firstly, this is a legacy project, and it'll be built for the benefit of the whole community to protect our lifestyle and the place that we're all called home. I want to thank the councillors, first of all, for their support and confidence in electing me on this reference group. I want to, because all these things, this matters to me, I want to make reference page six of the report. It states that an opportunity exists to appoint councillors to the project reference groups for the purpose of minimising any reputational risk to our Noosa brand. I want to talk just really briefly about that. I'm, I sit as an observer on the Tourism Noosa board, and I learned two years ago, almost from day dot, from an ex-board member, Mr. Nick Heap, about what's, about experience protection and what that means, and why our biggest challenge
01:39:00 and opportunity is, is about just that, about experience protection. And that if we lose what makes us special, then we lose our age, and we lose what makes Noosa so desirable. So I first-hand understand the challenge and the opportunity that's sitting on this reference group. And I want to talk again, just, if you can allow me just a couple of minutes to talk about these experiences that we stand for, and the challenges that we face. And I'm talking basic things like going for a surf or swimming in clean water, or koala watching in the Noosa National Park. That is under threat, and more so than we think. So investing in things like pathways and cycleways, they're not going to stop people from driving in cars, but what it will do is provide people with options.
01:40:00 Like walking and cycling. And as Councillor Stockwell just mentioned, this is part of a multi-pronged approach to reduce emissions and congestion. And it involves not just improving facilities of cycling and walking, it also includes creating networks of trails in our hinterland and protecting ecological valuable land. And I hope also that this council will also have the appetite to trial out-of-the-box type solutions in this quest to protect experience, such as, and I'm persistent, my local loop, which is a one-way priority e-bike and bus lane loop. What I call this investment is smart growth and protection of the brand, the Noosa brand.
01:41:00 We need to provide transport options and a walkable Shire with high quality of life that protects and preserves its environment. This is our point of difference. This is our competitive advantage. And if we lose it, it will be a hell of a lot of money to get that back. So I'm up for the challenge of minimising any reputational risk to our Noosa brand. It's something that we must, in every decision we make, remember. Remember why we all came here. And it's because it's the best place on earth. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor, would you speak to the notion? Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, look, I... I look forward to seeing this project go forward.
01:42:00 I have reservations about the current alignment that's proposed. I see the hill as being one of the major challenges for people going from the junction to Hastings Street and the level of that hill. And I have suggested other alternative routes that might have been considered that may be more favourable, particularly to those that may have accessibility issues. And I'm wondering if those get considered as part of this process and whether those groups get involved as part of the reference group, in particular with regard to whether there's alternatives. And whether the alternatives actually do get considered to see if there is opportunity there to take some of that slope out of that hill when walking from point A to point B. So, provided that gets considered, that gets considered as part of the process and we're not fixated on the exact alignment
01:43:00 as is proposed at this stage, I'm happy to see this going forward. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask the question? Has the group to date considered things like inclinators or, as Joe pointed out, ways of mitigating or reducing slope? Speaker 6: Yeah, so part of the original planning for this project is that we did the high priority route corridors. And you'll be aware of that project. We've brought up and we've adopted that. And then out of that process, this alignment was determined. And then the next stage is to put it in for a TMR site on there, which we've been successful in. And basically the brief at the moment is that corridor. So that's how we've got to where we've got to date. And there's extensive consultation engagement as part of that high priority route project. And we looked at various options for getting from point A to point B in that Sunshine Beach, Noosa Junction area
01:44:00 through to Hastings Street. Councillor Wilkie: Any other speakers? No? Thank you for bringing the report. It's very timely that the design for this project is starting now. This is a time when use of electric bikes and electric scooters are at an all-time high and increasing. And electric technology for bikes and scooters has really helped mitigate the challenge of the hill. You can get on an electric scooter now and they're so powerful it'll take you up Noosa Hill. So in many regards, the challenge of the hill has never been less for people who have access to electric bikes. We also have free buses. Running, maybe not a trial. They may become more regular. There's regular bus service from the junction over to Hastings Street.
105 minutes in ¶
01:45:00 So this is very much part of the overall strategy of moving, giving people options of moving people around, not necessarily the car. The outcome of the reference group, which was at the Park Road Boardwalk, was very exciting. It's such a beautiful, very interesting project. It's a beautiful structure. The way it curves through the forest there and the design accommodates trees. There's trees going up through the middle of it. And if there are, what you mean by high foot design is a love of nature and that's represented and honoured in this design. It's going to be another project that the community will just love. So I'm very excited to be part of this project as well. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Stockwell, do you want to close? Yeah, I'll close. Just because I don't get the opportunity to argue against Councillor Jurisevic. We've been through a process, Councillor Jurisevic, and your options were too costly and not to the shortness and length we need
01:46:00 to get to commuters. And we're here now. We've got this project. There may be 10 years hence where we can afford the $10 million to go on the platter route, or the $20 million or whatever it was. But I think Councillor Lorentson's focus on experience is really important, is when we built the boardwalk, we changed it from a place where we walked and it was quite okay to one where people go there to experience the walk. And we talked about five different designs. I was there as a community member on that reference group and we looked at biomimicry. It's a snake in one way. It's a wave. All of the fencing is also a wave. It's all about how you make people feel like we're embedding that experience in nature. Now there is the classical problems of a slight steep slope. And this is what this does. It takes the gradient out. But there's also the practical thing, regardless of whether you're driving anything
01:47:00 with an electric assist, is that the two lane road down the hill is quite dangerous for people who aren't in cars. So it's taking people who may wish to ride their scooters, bikes, whether it's electric or not, and putting them in a totally separate corridor. But then the other issue that needs to be considered is that they are so powerful now that pedestrians, particularly elderly ones, don't like them zipping past on the same pathways and we have to think about how do we separate them. I suggested that we have gap jumps and we have the mountain bikes going over the top of the pedestrians, but people thought that was a bit too far. I think it's really important to understand that this is really another signature project if it's done well. But it's one that's highly practical in that if people say, let's park in the junction and just take that walk, that's what we're going to do. But it becomes something that it's not, oh, look, we have to get up the hill again. It's up. Let's go for the walk down. And Councillor Lorentson mentioned her pet idea.
01:48:00 My pet idea is we never get down to Noosa Parade level. Is that in time we actually go off and we go to the beach via a treetop walk across the Mays car park. Can you imagine getting to the beach without having to cross the road? It would be a design challenge. But to me, that's the sort of thing that we have to think about is how do we make that experience of walking, riding, scooting to the beach so much fun and so entertaining that the thought of jumping in your car is, well, why wouldn't you do it? Councillor Wilkie: We'll put the motion over to Baylor. That's unanimous. Thank you, Clare. Thank you, Mitch. Thank you. Next item, Fired Contract for Project Management Services for 2022, Flood Recovery and Reconstruction. Larry's online. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Hello, Larry. Councillor Jurisevic: Hi, Larry. Councillor Wilkie: Morning. So, Larry, are you able to talk us through what you're asking here?
01:49:00 Certainly, Councillor. Speaker 13: I'll take the report as read. I'll just give... Can we crank him up just a touch? ...the flood event in February called Alpha 22 where we had a number of events and a number of issues that we had to deal with very quickly and then a number of issues that we've been working through and then more issues that we're going to be dealing with in the future a la the Black Mountain landslide but it's going to take us a lot longer to investigate, to design, and to... I thought the opportunity to get funding through, because it's a disaster, we get opportunity to get funding through the Queensland Reconstruction Authority and we want to make sure and we all want to make sure that we maximise that opportunity and ensure that we go through all the right channels and provide the right information to, as I say, maximise
01:50:00 and ensure we get the funding necessary to minimise the impact on our community and on our rate plans. Because that funding is available for that exact purpose. The QRA, Queensland Reconstruction Authority, has some very strict guidelines which you can understand because it's so much broader. This disaster was so much broader than just Mr. Shire. And so we need to make sure Speaker 13: that we meet all of those guidelines and ensure that there are no gaps and opportunity for us to miss out on funding that we require and hence. Thank you. So, in saying that, we think that at the moment we're still working through the exact costing because it's still very much, like I say, some of the projects are still in the investigation stage, but our understanding is that it's somewhere between $20 and $30 million worth of work that needs to be undertaken.
01:51:00 That work will be on top of our current capital works programs, so it's a major piece of work, it's not something that we can just flip the switch with our current resource to address, and our expertise in doing that in meeting the QRA guidelines and funding applications is something that's quite onerous and our experience is not as great as some other groups. Speaker 13: So, right from the start, we engaged a company called Erskine, who did the initial work, and right during the actual event, we're at a lot of the investigations and getting understanding of the emergent works, the works that we needed to fix immediately, and also then understanding the next level and then the further broader level. We've been engaged with those. The cost to date for that has been, we've been given.
01:52:00 Pre-payments, if you like, from the QRA to a certain level, so we've been able to utilize some of that money, but the works going forward are a much larger piece of work. This report and request is for us to engage Erskine, for a much larger sum, but also, and a reasonable sum, given the amount of work that needs to be done, so it's not something that's just a large number, but it is actually, when you're qualified against the work that needs to be done, it's very reasonable to deliver this $20, $30 million worth of works, but we are looking to engage Erskine continuing in their current role, and as a single source procurement process, and that's hence, this is why it's coming to Council for this reason, to get your endorsement on that. There are other companies that do this type of work, but very, very few and far between.
01:53:00 Speaker 13: Erskine is a local company, it's on our local buy process and procedures, so we can access it that way, and they are highly recognized and highly valued by QRA in the work that they do, so they are their preferred supplier, to be honest, and we're very lucky to have them. Normally, they do a lot more work up in North Queensland, and with the floods in the last week or so, they will be getting some work up there, I'm sure, so we need to make sure that we engage them and get them focused on, or keep them focused on our work down here. Speaker 13: So, the works that we're proposing is a sum of up to $2 million for their works, and another $100,000, so it's $2.1 million in total. Again, this is, it's basically a sum that we would kick off as we go, rather than being an absolute, it's an understanding based on the rate card, and totally funded, this $2 million is totally funded by QRA, so from a risk perspective, it's spending $2 million of grant funding money, or funding money, to achieve the outcome of delivering $20 to $30 million worth of work.
01:54:00 with the projects, as project management, and our investigation and project management. Sites, the additional $100,000 is something that we can't claim back from the, from QRA, it's to, to basically go through the process of setting this up, and that's, again, that's an estimate, that's $100,000, it's not absolute, we would obviously try to spend as little of that as we can, but it is an amount that we think is a reasonable amount of money to, to deliver this, this work. Speaker 13: So we're asking for a access to $2.1 million to engage us on, and to ensure that we do maximise our outcomes from the QRA funding that's available.
01:55:00 Do you have any questions? Yeah. Thanks. Mayor Stewart: Larry, thank you. Just, just to clarify then, so the cost of our rate payer for all of this is only $100,000, well, I'm not going to say only, is $100,000 in the $2 million? Up to, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Up to. Yeah. So not, maybe not even. And then there's $2 million which is recoverable under the DRFA grant funding. Speaker 13: That's right. That's right. And we, and we wouldn't do it unless we can. Mayor Stewart: And if we don't do this, Larry, if we don't spend this $100,000, we potentially miss out on that $20 to $30 million in grant funding, is that correct? Speaker 13: We'd have to do it another way, and it would delay the whole process. We would have to then go out and try and find somebody else. Mayor Stewart: And again, because we're all in this, in this COVID world to begin with, and then in the disaster world, and then in the, you know, just the overall lack of availability of contractors and or suppliers, then this, we've already got this in place, and this allows us to do it as the most expeditious way that we can.
01:56:00 And with over 500 work orders. Yeah. We've already raised, which have been made, managed accordingly. It's a significant amount of works. And in that, I imagine, is obviously Black Mountain and the landslip there, which is very significant. Speaker 13: Absolutely. So we've got huge, huge numbers, and that piece of work will be sent down on Friday for you to see, just to give you a sense of the scope of work that is actually on our plate, that we're working through, and still to be delivered. Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: So yeah, just to follow on from that, Larry, just to clarify, with regard to resourcing, by. Bless you. Bless you. God bless you. By employing, I've just lost their name again now. Erzcon. Erzcon, thank you. They would undertake the project management design works.
01:57:00 I mean, who is responsible for design of the upgrades, or reconstruction of these roads, and project managing all of this? This would all fall to Erzcon? The plan is to have them do the majority of the project management. So they won't necessarily do a lot of the design work on it. They are engineers, but they may outsource that. That would all be part of the understood project cost that would be then funded by QRO. So any. Councillor Jurisevic: So if we need to do specialist design work, then we would outsource that. Bless you. So when you. Speaker 13: I mean, here, inside council, we've already got Julie, who's online now, as our reconstruction, disaster reconstruction officer. Speaker 13: The intent is to continue to have that more of a, from our side of things, to manage all of the contracts that are going to be in place. Councillor Jurisevic: I guess what I'm trying to work my way into here, Larry, is with regard to reconstruction, the element of resilience is built into reconstruction design and works going forward.
01:58:00 I notice in the list of projects that are mentioned on page in the attachment, it includes Anderson's Road. Now, a lot of work has already been undertaken on Anderson's Road. The Calvert or the causeway there is obviously still a concern for residents there, but is that a recovery of the works we've already taken on Anderson's Road that's incorporated here? And out of those 500 works, how many have we already undertaken and what can we recover through this funding? Speaker 13: Well, at the moment, we can recover all of the ones that we've had to take, and that's the process we've been going through, is to ensure that the works are fully documented and with Hurston's help, with QRA directly, and Julie, is to make sure that those works are within the guidelines and are recoverable. The Anderson's Road works, the current piece that we're doing is putting some more culvertable pipes through there and building the road up.
01:59:00 That's... In response to the Black Mountain landslide, we're trying to create a better, more resilient roadway through the causeway, but that's still, to some degree, temporary works, Council. That's still... We need to look at that in the future and say, well, is that still enough or is there a better way to do it? But right now, we need... While we're doing the Black Mountain works, we need to ensure that Anderson's got more resilience to it. Speaker 13: That's the piece that QRA have now absolutely endorsed and fully support and are right with us in delivering that piece. Councillor Jurisevic: Good to hear. Now, this relates to Cat B funding. Cat D funding, as yet, has not been announced, as I understand it. Have we had any concept of when that may be undertaken? Look, I think there's... Again, that's why I wanted to provide some of those papers to you and add the report. It's not a simple matter. There's Cat B, Cat C, Cat Ds coming out, and they're coming out at different times.
120 minutes in ¶
02:00:00 And that's in reaction to the disasters that are happening. Again, there's some really difficult, difficult issues that they're trying to deal with, not just here in Noosa. So, as they come forward, then we're right in lockstep with them in terms of understanding what is available, what can be done. And again, by using the Urskens of this world and having a good relationship with QRA, which Julie and the team have really built, is that we're able to understand that and Speaker 13: be ahead of the game and get our opportunities front and centre. Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: So, with... Sorry, I've got one more to go. With regard to further resilience, and I'm assuming that works around Cat D, works that improve resilience to the community. Yes. Projects that we know, areas that are... That currently suffer from flooding. That's the opportunity there for further work, or at least design work and investigation
02:01:00 into what could be done to further enhance resilience in our community. Speaker 13: Absolutely. And I don't think that's been the beauty of... I think we've talked about this before in other meetings, but that's the beauty of what's going on now. It's not just life for life prepared in place. It's really looking at what can be done better and what are the opportunities and what's the cost to do that. What's the return on investment. Speaker 13: So, we're absolutely looking at that and there are some opportunities around Noosa that we want to make sure that we do. Just not... Go back like the like and then cross our fingers and hope that it doesn't happen again, which we have had in the last few weeks. So, it's really important that we do look at that and see what opportunities are there. It's not all going to be able to happen because, again, it's so broad and big. Speaker 13: Not just talking about Noosa from a QRA only perspective, but we'll certainly put our hand up where we possibly can. Councillor Jurisevic: So, one final question there, Larry, with regard to once it's going to be put into place,
02:02:00 do we have any timeframes on funding availability and actual deliveries of when that can commence? Speaker 13: Well, it's basically happening to some degree now. I think it's going to take a while. We're doing it again on a rate card. We just know that it's going to get larger and larger. We just want to make sure that we've got... We're not... We're not... We're not hamstrung when the time comes to actually continue this work. We want to make sure that we've got this money available or this endorsement can be made. So, it is available for us to engage as the needs arise. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. Larry, it's a question of what this investment facilitates. And I'm thinking when I look at a potential reconstruction value of between $20 and $30 million, which is the equivalent of what used to be an average total capital works program. So, a year's worth of work just in reconstruction on top of everything else that might be in
02:03:00 the budget. Am I right in thinking that by getting the specialist in, that we're going to be able to get those works that you've listed, some key roads, able to... We're in a position where we can, throughout the year, get them done as soon as possible. Whereas if we just said, no, we're going to do it within our existing resources, it may be, A, that we might not get an application to the same standard, and B, we wouldn't have the capacity to get to a point to be delivering by the end of this budget year. Speaker 13: Absolutely, Chas. That's exactly what the process is. We don't have the resources to do that. And to try to scale up to do that is really, really difficult to get in this market. But also, these guys, they've got the runs on the board, got the confidence on the government, and we think that that's going to be our best way to ensure that we maximise the return. Thank you. And the timing.
02:04:00 Speaker 13: Yes. Can I take a minute? Mayor Stewart: I'll second it. Councillor Lorentson: I have a question. Sorry. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Sorry. Councillor Lorentson: Sorry. Moving. Speak. Yes. Mayor Stewart: Can you talk to the motion? Talk to the motion first. Yes. Larry, I want to thank you and the team. This Contract and Project Management Services for 2022 Collaborative Recovery and Reconstruction just gives a very small snapshot of all the works that you and the team are doing. You have so much on your plate. Like James, you worked most of the weekend with the, you know, with briefings. So I want to thank you and the team. I think this is very prudent. I think it is $100,000 that is, must be spent by us. I think it's too big an opportunity to miss. The 20 to 30 million is very significant. It's a huge cost that if we, if we can get grant funding, it is significant to our rate payer. It's a major benefit to them. And I think it is prudent. We have, as you said, there are over 500 work orders raised.
02:05:00 We've got a major landslip. We all know that. And my concern is if, if we don't engage this consultant and we take time and potentially lose out on necessary grant funding, I think it's, it's not, that's not ideal. So I think it's, and it's potentially far more burdensome, burdensome to you and the staff who are already with a capital works project of such a significant size at capacity. We've seen the delays. We've seen the increases in costs. So I think it's, it's a very, I think it's, it's actually really money that is being well spent. And we will really see a tenfold, a hundredfold the benefits to our community from, from this expense. But I do want to reiterate my thanks to you and the team, your presentation, this information. It's outstanding. And thank you for your hard work. Thank you. Speaker 13: Thank you, Julie. Julie's online. Thank you. Thank you very much, Julie. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Julie. Councillor Lorentson: I have just two questions.
02:06:00 I'm assuming, Larry, that under the, the local buy arrangement, that, that financial and legal sort of checks were undertaken for Escon and they're rock solid? Yes. Speaker 13: Yep. And that's, that's the process we took. And that's why we're able to do this. So we have been very diligent in this, making sure, and with our procurement team, but also with Julie's background as well, ensuring that this, all the, all the boxes are ticked. Terrific. And, and that's why, how they go through the CEO and get, get endorsement, this needs, need to come to a higher level to the council to get the endorsement of council. So that's the process we've undertaken. So we're more than open and above board because we've, we've, we've met all the, all the necessary requirements. Councillor Lorentson: Great. And in terms of the risk, Escon as the principal contractor, do they bear all the risk?
02:07:00 And what risk are we exposed to? Speaker 13: No, it's like any contract. There's risk in it. We need to manage them to some degree. We need to manage the contract that we're putting them under. But then, you know, it comes down the line. But I don't think it's because we're looking to get all of this funded through the government. We won't, we won't step forward unless we get QRA's seal of approval on each of these projects as they go into funding this. So we'll, we'll scope with, with Escon. We'll have a project plan on how to deliver it. Get a cost plan against that. Take it to QRA. Get them to agree it. Then we go back and deliver it. So that's, that's the process to make sure that we, we're not doing things and then going off and QRA can turn about halfway through and say, oh, we didn't, we didn't agree to fund this. That's not the process we're going to be taking. Speaker 13: We make sure that it's all signed off along the way.
02:08:00 So again, to reduce the risk. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Right. Any other councillors wish to speak to the motion? Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: Yes. This is clearly the way forward with the level of, of reconstruction required between 20 and 30 million as an estimate and still more to come with regard to Cap D, betterment and resilience projects going forward. This is clearly the way with on top of our existing capital works program to proceed and try and deliver to the community as soon as possible to, to ensure that those assets are returned to at least the level at which they were and if not betterment where we possibly can. And the funding, funding permits, but obviously opportunities here going forward. I appreciate the, the time the staff have taken to bring this opportunity to us. And I support this wholeheartedly to move forward as quickly as we can to work with QRA to
02:09:00 fund those projects and get our community assets back to, back to a standard and a enhanced resilience as soon as possible. Councillor Finzel: Can I just say. Councillor Wegener: Go ahead. Go ahead. Councillor Finzel: Oh, okay. I just think, thank you to the team that have really shown good governance here. Put us on the front foot and especially to the people who have been involved in this project, especially strengthening these partnerships to deliver a, a huge volume of works. I'm especially supportive for those communities that are, you know, stranded during these flood events. And I think the sooner we can replace infrastructure and have people feel that their anxiety can be reduced and that counsellors on the job, I think this is a perfect opportunity going forward. Setting everything in place. We've got the process underway early. We're reducing risk. And strengthening those partnerships. So I think it's a really good step forward for this council and growing gender trust
02:10:00 and community that we, we're on the job. So thank you really to the team that's worked on this. It's been a big, fast moving body of work. And I think you've delivered us a safe and sound process moving forward. So thank you. Tom. Councillor Wegener: Okay. Question. So on page 13, the contract is awarded. The contract is awarded. They have rejected Sunshine Coast contract in favor of Noosa Council. Is that, that's Irkson. Great work. Thank you very much. Yes. With God's speed. Team, go to it. Yeah. That's all I have. That's just stuck out, you know. Councillor Lorentson: I'll speak. Thank you for the report. Larry, in particular, I think you really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really clearly communicated two things. Firstly, that the $100,000 spent is good value.
02:11:00 And secondly, you've also helped articulate the emergency or the urgency of getting this sorted. And I want to just take the opportunity to recognize high risk sites such as Black Mountain Road Landslip. And let that community know that they are so not forgotten. And the sooner we get this contract is executed, the sooner we can commence, or not commence with Commenceworks, but the sooner we can sort out these high risk sites such as Black Mountain Road. Thank you for a great report. Speaker 13: Thank you. Can I also, I forgot to mention, I'm trying to online, but the procurement of this contract is pretty awesome. They've done a terrific job in getting this to this point. Yeah. Thanks. Thank you. Thanks.
02:12:00 Councillor Wilkie: Thanks, Stuart. You were too close. No. That's what they said. Put it to the vote. Paul and Taylor. That's unanimous. Thank you, Larry. Thanks, Larry. Councillor Wegener: Thank you, Larry. Councillor Wilkie: Perfect. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Start road building. Councillor Wilkie: Next item. Patrick and Tom. Yes. Declareable. Councillor Wegener: Declareable conflict of interest. I, Councillor Wegener, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter is that I have an NBN tower located on my property and receive income from NBN via a lease agreement. It could be viewed that I have an interest in mobile phone networks and NBN towers. However, as the application is by Telstra and it does not indicate that I have an interest in NBN or Optus infrastructure, I do not believe I have a reasonable, I do not believe a reasonable person could believe I have a perception of bias.
02:13:00 Therefore, I will choose to remain in the meeting room. However, I will respect the decision of the meeting on whether I may remain and participate in this decision. Councillor Wilkie: Just a clarifying question, Tom. Do you own the lot, the piece of land that this telecommunications facility has proposed to go on? Councillor Wegener: No. No, I do not own that lot of land. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Mayor Stewart: I'll move it, Councillor Wegener. That is in the public interest that Councillor Wegener participates and votes in this matter because Councillor believes that he does not stand to receive a personal benefit or loss in relation to this matter and therefore a reasonable person would trust that the final decision is made in the public interest. I thank Councillor Wegener for bringing it to the table's attention, but I think in this case, that's actually no conflict. Councillor Wilkie: Can we have the Councillor speak or ask questions? Those in favour? Thank you. Councillor Wegener may stay in the room. Any other? Yes. Questions of staff? Tell us what the application is all about.
02:14:00 Speaker 8: Yes, sure. Yes, good afternoon. Proposals for a telecommunications facility to be located on low density residential zone in Pomona. It is in consistent use underneath the plan within that zone. The proposed infrastructure is satellite and other equipment to be co-located on the site where existing exchange buildings are present. The site has been historically used by Telstra for more than 40 years as a telecommunications facility. The proposal is recommended for approval based on the fact that it's co-located with an existing facility and it's minor in nature. There's recommendations for extensive landscaping conditions that will improve the amenity of the site where landscaping is proposed along all boundaries to improve the amenity to the street and to adjoining property. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Questions of staff? Karen. Councillor Finzel: Oh, yeah.
135 minutes in ¶
02:15:00 I'm just, thank you for the report. Can you just tell me how big the satellite dish is going to be? Like how? Speaker 8: Yeah. So it's proposed. They roll these out. They roll these out over about 100 sites within Queensland. They vary in height depending on the site and the angle of the dish. So it can be, I've been advised because I sought clarification on the height of it. On this particular site, it will be 2.35 metres in height. Councillor Finzel: From what is the diameter? Speaker 8: Diameter, oh, I'd need to get back to you about that one. I think it's in the roaring there somewhere, isn't it? Yeah. So I'll have a look on the plans. Councillor Lorentson: 2.3 from that. I did see something. Speaker 4: There is. Page 21 of the report. 19. Figure 3. Oh, I couldn't read it. It does make reference to a 1.8 metre satellite dish mounted on the pole.
02:16:00 Yeah. Yep. Councillor Wilkie: Yep. Thank you. Joe and then Amelia. Okay. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Telecommunications equipment doesn't typically sit on, telecommunications facilities don't typically sit on low density residential land within the Shire, do they? Why does this one continue to sit on, is this the only telecommunications facility that sits on low density residential land within the Shire? Okay, take that one on notice. I'll rephrase the question into, is this an opportunity for us to review as part of Planning Scheme amendments whether this facility should have a new designation for the land upon which it sits rather than sitting on low density residential land? Speaker 4: It would make sense that the ongoing use of the land for nearly 40 years for a telecommunications facility would be reflected in the Planning Scheme? Councillor Jurisevic: Given that we're going through Planning Scheme amendments at the moment, is that an opportunity to look at this particular parcel? And for any other telecommunications facility parcels that may not be covered or may be sitting on low density residential land?
02:17:00 Councillor Lorentson: And Patrick, can you also talk to Jo's, or answer Jo's questions in reference to existing use rights? My understanding that given it's been sitting there for 40 years, it actually has existing use rights which can't be extinguished. Speaker 4: That is correct, Amelia, that this has ongoing existing use rights. I think that's detailed in the report and we could not extinguish those use rights. And Jo, just to answer your earlier question around bringing this through to the next round of the strategic amendments, I suggest it would be too late in the process to add another item and further review for the strategic team to undertake as well. Can I also add, I am aware that there are telecommunications towers within rural land, they're within high density residential zone land and even commercial zone land, I think, around 30, 40 years. So there's a whole range of locations where we have communications towers.
02:18:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Well, I'll flag that as an item for future planning scheme amendments. So yeah, if we may, to review all of the telecommunications facilities in the region and see that they're appropriately designed. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I move to the motion? Yeah, I was going to move. Okay, move. Councillor Finzel: I just wanted to make, can I make a comment first around that? Councillor Wilkie: It's been a long question. Well, I guess it's a question. Councillor Finzel: I'm just wondering, with the extinguished, you can't extinguish the land rights, but what about the change, you know, that's quite significant with the amenity, given that that will be quite a significant height and diameter against the backdrop, especially like that corner is a shot straight up to the . So is there any way that, is it in the review that Councillor Jurisevic has put forward that we, although we probably can't do it now, but to be reviewed? I know it's been used for 40 years, but this new height and the diameter of the infrastructure that's going to be put there, has that been taken into consideration?
02:19:00 Speaker 4: Well, I think... Councillor Finzel: Because it's right in the middle of a neighbourhood. Speaker 4: It's 2.35 metres in height and 1.8 metres in diameter. Yeah. So... Councillor Finzel: That'll be quite significant on that side. Speaker 4: Yes, it's probably like a shed in terms of its built form appearance. It's not excessive. But notwithstanding, there would be an opportunity with any planning scheme amendments or any, you know, to have some site-specific controls that may limit the height of structures or the amount of site cover that could apply or whatever it might be. There could be some provisions specific to the site, yes. Councillor Finzel: But we can't apply that to this application? Speaker 4: Is it too late for that? Well, we've done an assessment against the relevant codes. Speaker 8: Okay. So, we've included some extensive landscaping conditions. Three metre buffer along all boundaries. So, that's to adjoining property as well as to the street. So, that will completely screen the infrastructure from the street and from adjoining neighbours.
02:20:00 We've asked for mature height to be up to three metres. So, with the infrastructure at 2.3 metres at the highest point, significant screening would... It would ensure significant screening to the infrastructure. Okay. Councillor Wilkie: Can I just... I'll take the motion. Brian? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. This is one of my regular dog walks. And I was actually... I had no idea it was a Telstra site till the sign went up. So, in terms of its current fit and visibility, because it's tucked back away and it's a very wide road reserve there, I don't think it will impose gravity. The conditions will obviously make that better. Not like the backyard of number 29 railway trade would obviously would have an increased presence of the infrastructure. But where it is, it's tucked behind the temporary structure and the existing structure. I was actually going to bring up another planning scheme matter in that this is a very large lot. And the front half is likely to be exceeding the supply of Telstra.
02:21:00 But it's not part of this development. We should contact them and say, would you like to do what Unity would do and put it out to legal? I don't think that's the best place to... Not the proper to look at community housing, because it's in a very key location just down from the stops. And that would certainly buffer if there was tiny homes or a couple of units or whatever in the front yard. It's probably got a thousand square meters of surplus to their need. So, when we do look at the scheme review, yeah, well, one of the options would be just to put the community use over the actual structure if it's going to be long term. But then look at the front and encourage them to look at their social corporate responsibility and do what Unity Water did. Okay. Good reception. Speaker 10: For the chair. An even great reception. I've also received a call. That's a good call. Tuesday. I'm sorry. Last Friday afternoon with Telstra. So, we were able to meet with our key accounting executive. And we're looking at a number of different ways we can work more closely with Telstra.
02:22:00 But they are our conduit into what is a huge organization. With what we put forward comes to Stockwell. We'll take that on board. And then we'll bring that back through to the planning team and the executive. So, we're looking good. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Councillor Wilkie: Amelia, you had a question? Councillor Lorentson: A couple of things. And for purposes for anyone listening, there will be, if that is brought forward, part of any amendment changes does involve community consultation. So, I just want that on record. Also, I just wanted to help Karen with her question before I think it was lost in a little bit of discussion. So, my understanding is that, and please clarify, Patrick, that the existing telecommunications facility with the exchange building, that has existing. Use rights. The application before us, we're here to make that decision whether it's, we agree with the recommendation that regardless that it's on low residential density and in an inconsistent
02:23:00 land use, that we're fine for it to be approved. That's a decision that we can make in council. It's not, that's not an existing use right. My question is, who is the applicant, who derives the, who derives the benefit? And is there a need for such a structure? I didn't get that in the report. I'm sorry, I was just. Speaker 10: Sorry, I was just starting to talk to Patrick. Could you point it forward? Okay. Can you not interrupt him? Councillor Wilkie: Who is the applicant? Councillor Lorentson: I can repeat. Speaker 8: Okay. So, the applicant is Telstra. Councillor Lorentson: Who is the applicant? Who derives the benefit? Telstra. And is there a need? Councillor Wilkie: The applicant says Telstra. Yeah. Speaker 4: And it would be Telstra owned land? Speaker 8: It is Telstra, yeah. Speaker 4: It's Telstra owned land. Yeah. Okay. Mayor Stewart: The Telecommunications Act, I mean, they can put this up wherever they like, can't they? I mean, it overrides our planning scheme, is that correct? Yeah. Speaker 4: There's a Low Facilities Determination Act, which allows for certain infrastructure to
02:24:00 be developed without the requirement for planning approval. And that, I think, comes back to like a three metre extension to an existing facility. Certain panel and satellite dishes can be applied as well. In this instance, it's obviously not met those criteria. That's wrong. Speaker 8: And that's why we had that proposal before. Yeah. Speaker 4: Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: So, in answer to Amelia's question, what's the need for this facility? To improve reception? Speaker 8: Yes. My understanding is upgrade in the area. Councillor Jurisevic: Given the comments that we've heard from Councillor Stockwell, and myself with regard to the future zoning of this, the landscaping currently talks about being on the boundaries. Is there an opportunity here to actually further enclose this, rather than being on the boundaries of the property, where zoning may facilitate some future use on non-utilised land, and actually bring that landscape in closer to further enclosing?
02:25:00 Speaker 8: Yeah. So, there's proposed landscaping around the new infrastructure, as well as next to the Exchange building. The landscaping conditions acknowledge that, but also go over and above that. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm suggesting that the landscaping could be close to the buildings, rather than out on the boundaries, to facilitate enclosing of the building within this landscaping, and leaving the rest of the open space. Okay. Can that be conditioned, or is that ... The way I read it, we're talking about the boundary. When I look at where the boundary is on Figure 1, it's quite a ways out from where the actual outbuildings are currently. Speaker 8: Yeah. So, we've got a landscape concept plan that actually includes landscaping, as I said, around the proposed infrastructure, and some of the existing. But yes, you're right.
02:26:00 It has been conditioned around boundaries, to facilitate some future use on non-utilised Councillor Jurisevic: I'm suggesting to further improve it that we don't put work on the boundaries and work closer to the app building as close as possible without interfering with the satellite dish facility. Is that something that can be achieved by Thursday night? Speaker 8: Yeah, I'd have to probably go back to the applicant around that because I've already checked with them in terms of the height of the mature vegetation on the boundary. So bringing their three metre high at maturity with the vegetation being at three metres high closer to that infrastructure, I'm not sure what that means in terms of what the impact would be on that. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm going to request before Thursday night we have a discussion with the applicant and see if that's a feasible option. Speaker 8: Absolutely. Thank you. How much closer? Sorry, Joe. That's it.
02:27:00 Councillor Wilkie: Anyways, Amelia. Councillor Lorentson: Lisa, in terms of submissions that have been raised, this is an impact accessible application and the report says that it was publicly notified for a period of 15 days. I note there was one submission made and I have the submission in front of me and the conditions of the recommendation actually address all those issues. So I'm happy with that. My question is, were the neighbours that will be directly involved? Were they impacted? Number 29, 31, 33, 35 and 23 Whale Road Parade and those in Church Street, were they notified? Do they get special letter drops and have they raised any concerns given that they're the ones that are going to be directly impacted with potential visual obstructions or amenity issues? Speaker 8: So the adjoining neighbours received a letter. So under the Planning Act, they're required to receive a letter.
02:28:00 The public notice went up on the land. So in terms of consultation with the wider community, I don't believe that occurred in this instance. Yeah. Speaker 5: Sabotage the local papers? Speaker 8: Yeah, absolutely. It went on the paper, some of the properties. Absolutely, yeah. Councillor Wegener: You go ahead, Jeff. Councillor Wilkie: Tom and then Joe. Councillor Wegener: Is there a concern in the community of extra radiation coming down, you know, through that? Is there a concern of that, of the public safety from this? Speaker 4: Well, we didn't receive any submissions in relation to that, for this application. So haven't done a pulse check and checked individually with the people of the area to know how they're feeling about that issue. But we certainly have a condition that is recommended as part of the recommendation that addresses the electromagnetic emissions must not exceed the requirements of the regulations.
02:29:00 Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. Yeah, just while you're having that conversation with Telstra, is it possible to also ask whether the temporary building on stumps is redundant in the view of technology advancements and whether or not there are any future needs perceived for the site with regard to other equipment that may be required in the future? Speaker 8: So I can, yeah, I can ask them about future needs. For the site, absolutely. Councillor Jurisevic: And really, any elements of redundancy there, whether that amountable is intended to remain or whether they need it or whether it can be, yeah. Speaker 13: Yeah. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's exactly stated in one of the plans that is, I don't know, I think it's going to be removed. Councillor Jurisevic: It's a question, that's it, yeah. Yeah, so when... Well, that will change the boundaries of which they require as well. So whether there's any future provision, if that's going to be removed, is there anything else?
150 minutes in ¶
02:30:00 Yeah. If that is going to be removed, when it's likely to be removed, and when any future provisions that may be envisaged for that site. Okay. Councillor Wilkie: And, Councillor, would you speak to the motion before Brian closes? Thank you. Councillor Stockwell, Mr Close? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, I will. And, yes, it is an interesting one. I do point out to Councillor Jurisevic that if it is currently zoned for residential, so you could build a house there, but anything else in terms of residential development would require a front boundary landscaped areaway, so putting it around the boundary doesn't do anything in terms of preventing those options. I do suggest, in terms of Councillor Wegener' comments, that I believe there's only documented evidence that proximity to NBN towers is what changes people's minds. No. Okay. Councillor Wilkie: Put the motion those in favour? That is unanimous. Councillors, there's been more than an hour and a lot of water drunk since our last break, so call it another break.
02:40:00 Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Thank you. Speaker 12: Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Thank you. Exactly. Councillor Wilkie: Welcome back, everybody. We're up to Item 7, which is the development application for Operational Works, described title works. We have our Coordinating Engineer Mark Lewis, Planner Patrick Murphy, and welcome to our Marine Approval Specialist Consultant Tonya Richard. Thank you Tonya. Perhaps someone from the team could tell us about what we're looking at today, what is an Operational Works application? Speaker 12: I imagine you're all familiar with the application in itself. Never heard of it. So yes, essentially it's an oyster restoration project governed by the codes that are there, prescribed title works as part of the process,
02:41:00 owner's consent from the state, referral to the state for conditions and approval, or approval of conditions in that order, and an assessment in-house for assessment against our codes. Given the special nature of this, we don't have that in, against the referral to Tonya and her organisation. Councillor Wilkie: And Tonya, could you talk about what documents you assessed this application against? Speaker 14: Of course, so Noosa Council as the assessment manager received the application for prescribed title works, and the role of assessment manager is to assess the project against the relevant codes, and also in this instance the State Coastal Protection and Management Regulation, so I assessed the project, the application against those elements, which were under the Noosa Plan, the Noosa Plan Local Area Code, the Waterway Works Code, and also the State Coastal Protection and Management Regulation prescribed title works code.
02:42:00 And in summary, my findings of assessment, of the assessment against those three codes, was that the works do comply with the codes, subject to various conditions which I have specified in my report. So if you'd like more specific detail about each code assessment or the conditions, I'm happy to speak further about those, if you'd like. Councillor Wilkie: Well, can I ask the most relevant ones? Speaker 14: Yes, of course, so first of all the Noosa Local Plan Code, just a little introduction. Some of these codes were obviously written with the intention of not to include such works as this. This is a bit of a different scope of works, obviously prescribed title works on the seabed of the Noosa. So it's not your typical title works application, which is a private plan for private use or public use. So the first code I assessed against the Noosa Local Plan Code, my findings were demonstrates compliance with the key elements,
02:43:00 which were performance outcomes 31 and 32, which the works avoid or manage significant adverse impacts on relevant natural heritage values. And the project will enhance marine habitat complexity and connectivity by restoring the oyster reefs, while limiting impacts on existing recreational uses of the Noosa River. So that was quite straightforward, that assessment. There was no relevant local plan code, planning, sorry, local zone codes. The kawalis just mentioned was specified in the state, planning policy, but obviously given there's no impact to the kawala habitat trees, that is not relevant. The Waterway Works Code was also assessed. The project was assessed against the Waterway Works Code. The key performance outcomes relevant to this code,
02:44:00 which the project adequately met, was not proposing prescribed title works on the southern bank of the Noosa River and tributaries between Noosa Heads, Lyons Park and the Waver Bridge. The works are located between those two locations, but given that they're on the seabed of the Noosa River, I assessed that the intent of the code was met, given that there'll be no visual impact between those areas. And the access, character amenity and access was also a key element. And the configuring of the proposed loadout site at Noosaville to minimise interruption to existing foreshore uses, primarily by allowing sufficient space for recreational boaters and commercial companies to access the distinct shorelines. Obviously that was a key element of the code, to ensure that the proposed works don't impact any uses of that site, which the application demonstrated compliance with that. And then the code that required the largest assessment
165 minutes in ¶
02:45:00 was the State Coastal Protection and Management Regulation Code. Which through the proposed performance measures and management, environmental management scenarios, I assessed that the project did comply with this code. There are a lot more specific items in this code that require a detailed response. But my overall assessment was that it did comply with that code for various items, namely in B, proposing the habitat restoration works that are compatible with the character and amenity of the Noosa River and surrounds. The project also demonstrates compliance with signage and navigation aids, which are consistent with Maritime Safety Queensland requirements. The project proposes to completely avoid disturbance to intertidal vegetation, including mangroves and salt marshes, and minimising impacts to seabed vegetation,
02:46:00 including seagrass and macroalgae. The buffering of mangroves proposed, including the seagrass beds, also buffering of and ongoing public access to the foreshore, including at the four restoration sites is proposed. There are measures to allow safe passage of vessels past the sites. Engineering of the rock substrates is in accordance with the applicable standards, including assurance by an RPQ certified engineer. There's a proposed buffering of existing tidal works by at least 30 metres, which is called for in this code. And the works will also improve the stability of the seabed at the restoration sites, and there'll be monitoring is proposed to ensure that there are, to monitor any potential impacts as they may arise. Construction materials are clearly compatible with the marine environment, and minimising and monitoring of seabed sediment disturbance
02:47:00 as a result of the proposed work. So those items are all just key elements of the code that they've appropriately demonstrated compliance with. That was just presented in my summary. So that's the three code assessments I did. There's also a few other things in the report that you may want to talk about specifically. We could probably handle that with questions. Yeah, if anyone wants to. No more, that would be. Councillor Wilkie: I'm happy to move this, to move along. You can ask questions. Of course, yes. I'll move it. I'll do it. Seconded by Councillor Stockwell. Can I? I'm sorry, carry on with that. Sorry. It's been moved. Seconded. External consultants, marine approval specialists have assessed this project against the NUSA Plan 2020 and the Coastal Protection and Management Regulation 2017 and concluded the project complies with the NUSA Plan 2020 and the relevant codes of the Coastal Protection and Management Regulation 2017. State Referral and Assessment Agency, SARA, recommends approval of the project subject to referral agency conditions.
02:48:00 Marine approval specialists have also recommended a construction and environmental management plan to govern site environmental management practices. Conditions of approval have been proposed by SARA and marine approval specialists. Approval relates to Phase 1, which is the pilot phase of the project, which has four defined sites and locations. Phase 2, regarding ongoing projects, will be subject to further evaluation and approvals. The NUSA Oyster Ecosystem Restoration Project aims to restore rock oyster ecosystems to the Nusa River estuary and improve fish habitats and fisheries resources. The applicant has engaged in similar projects around Australia and proposes the following benefits. Provision of complex habitats and habitat types for marine species, filtering of water, removal of suspended sediment and pollution, nutrient processing, bank stabilisation and protection, provision of habitat and feeding grounds for a multitude of intertidal and marine species, and enhancing marine and coastal large island tourism activities such as fishing, diving and bird watching.
02:49:00 The four proposed sites are Tewantin, Goat Island, Nusa Sound East and Nusa Sound West. The proposed restoration sites have been subject to assessment and studies such as bathymetric mapping, marine and intertidal habitat mapping, river user analysis, habitat suitability modelling, restoration suitability modelling, community consultation, decal site engineering. These assessments and reports were submitted by the applicant as part of the application and being reviewed by marine approval specialists as part of the development assessment process. The applicant has also submitted a comprehensive project restoration plan and this is included as attachment to the report. The application materials includes a range of environmental management and monitoring commitments, primarily documented in the Nusa Oyster Ecosystem Restoration Project restoration plan. These management and monitoring commitments include installation of signage and aids to navigation to ensure public safety and safe passage of vessels,
02:50:00 minimising or completely avoiding impacts to intertidal vegetation such as mangroves and salt marshes and seabed vegetation, avoiding impacts to or buffering of marine and coastal wildlife. Development of a monitoring evaluation and reporting system, development of a construction and environmental management plan. This has been a science backed evidence based project with the potential to improve the health and biodiversity of the Nusa River and I commend the work that's being done by the Nature Conservancy and also the staff in this partnership with the Nature Conservancy. Councillor Finzel had a question. Councillor Finzel: I just wondered if I could move a procedural motion into a report back to us from the audit as per the last meeting last month. Can we do that now? Councillor Wilkie: I don't think that's... We've got an operational works application before us and what you're proposing... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The council's open
02:51:00 to move that procedural motion to the point you were raising in the debate rather than that process. Councillor Wilkie: Okay, we'll leave it. We'll leave it. We'll move the... We'll put it on the table. Procedural motion. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: I'll second it. I'll second it. Councillor Stewart. Can I just get what that motion looks like? It's another procedural Speaker 10: to when it was handled. So when... Ordering... No. No. So we... So we... So we... Speaker 14: So we... So we... So we... So we... Thank you, folks. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
02:52:00 Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Councillor Finzel: In terms of good governance, in terms of aligning ourselves with our five themes of good governance and I'd like to take this opportunity to make sure that we are making all decisions moving forward with all the information that we need given the controversy around this in the community, this debate.
02:53:00 And what was raised in the previous meeting, I think it's prudent and wise moving forward in terms of good governance and we have fundamentally changed since COVID and all these disasters. This is a project that started well before us in 2014, as we're well aware. A lot of changes have happened in them, including we're waiting for a review of all our policies, etc. For example, that have spoken into this. We're waiting for a review to see that they're up to date. Is this current? Is this where we need to be making considerations, moving forward on a planning application when the answer has not yet been divulged as to what process and how this has been done in the past? So I think we need a strong focus on deliverables and outcomes. We need to see where does the TNC now sit within the economic rationale now that we've got an economic plan.
02:54:00 In our strategic planning, where does all this fit? I think we've just got to get it right, given the community is divided on this subject and it's gone on for, you know, since 2014. I think we need to have the report back from staff before we proceed forward on any other conversation. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Councillor Finzel. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'd like to see a procedural motion or except for a point of order. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. So is it just the Chair that responds to that? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The point of order is I think the motion is ultra-virus, and I'll explain that. The motion is asking for the consideration of matters that are outside the scope of a code, which is against legislation. Councils can only consider in this statutory role the assessment criteria within the code that's presented to us to delay it for details outside that code would be a breach of legislation.
02:55:00 I therefore think the motion is ultra-virus. Councillor Wilkie: Can I get some advice from the CEO on this? Speaker 10: Chair, absolutely, Councillor Stockwell is correct, but also that this is a code-accessible application. This is dealing with matters that are sitting outside. It is on the block to Council not to side by 1st of June. It will be deemed approved anyway. Okay. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: All right, we'll put the motion. Those in favour? I'm sorry, the point of order. Point of order, I will. You can't put it to the meeting. Councillor Lorentson: You can't put it to the meeting. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: You can't put the motion if it's deemed, if you're agreeing with me it's ultra-virus, it shouldn't be put to the meeting. Yes, it shouldn't. Councillor Wilkie: Wouldn't that just rule the motion? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No, it would be an unsuitable meeting conduct if it was preceded. Councillor Wilkie: Okay, well, is that correct, Mr Sittes? Okay, so the procedural motion is invalid. Could I move the motion then?
02:56:00 Well, we're clear to deal with one motion at a time, Councillor Lyons, and so this motion has been struck. It's ruled invalid. Councillor Jurisevic: Meeting a procedural motion or? Councillor Lorentson: I'd like to move a procedural motion to defer the application for further information to be received before the ordinary meeting. And I'd like some detailed disclosure of expenditure, which includes the total cost of this application. Councillor Wilkie: I think that's outside the scope of a code application. We just, if there was what Councillor Finzel was asking for. So you can ask for it to be deferred for more information about a code accessible application, but not subject to the order. Speaker 10: The matter before the council's consideration is an operational works approval. So this is separate to, well, it is connected somewhat. It is separate to the previous report and the contractual arrangements that council has with the major Conservancy and the Australian government.
02:57:00 So this is separate, this is an operational works approval matter, and it should just be dealt with as that matter. Mayor Stewart: Okay, so can I ask a question then? On the operational works application. The application that was put toward the, put forward to the state government, I had a copy of it, it said in the vicinity of this could potentially cost around half a million dollars. When I asked for clarification about what that expenditure entailed or what made up that money, I wasn't, I wasn't given an answer. Councillor Wilkie: So this is not a question for staff now. We're talking about Councillor Lyons' application, sorry, motion to defer the matter until we all go to the meeting. Mayor Stewart: No, I thought we'd gone past that, I thought she couldn't. Councillor Wilkie: No, she, she can defer the, I mean, ask the item while we're talking to the ordinary meeting, but you cannot specify that items outside of the code-accessible application have been previously part of the motion. Mayor Stewart: I withdraw my motion.
02:58:00 Can I ask questions around the operational works, if this is an operational works application or the questions are associated with this? Councillor Wilkie: Well, now that Councillor Lyons' motion's been withdrawn, is that correct? Councillor Lorentson: Well, on, because I've been advised that my reasons, which is requesting a detailed, or detailed disclosure of expenditure of costs relating to this application, is not valid. Is, that's, that's, is that correct? Speaker 10: It's not valid as operational work. Councillor Lorentson: Okay, on that basis, I will withdraw my motion. Thank you, thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I would, I would point of order Councillor Stewart, who's also raising issues regarding that are outside the scope of this application, so the question is out of order. Mayor Stewart: So, I'd like some further clarification, just on operational works, when we talk about approving operational works in any capital infrastructure, we know how much it costs. Is this not the case here, we don't have costings associated with this?
02:59:00 Speaker 12: No, we're, we're assessing it against the code. Commercial sensitivities or obligations are not part of the code. Speaker 10: Okay. So, through, through the Chair, Mayor, we, we are an impartial, an impartial approver in relation to this. We wouldn't ask the commercial liability of somebody applying for operational works to conduct a, any operational works within the Shire. That doesn't matter to them. We're looking purely as to does the work that we would be approving fit the codes that are applicable to that. That's, that, that's all that this is. Councillor Jurisevic: So, relevant to that, in, in reference to that, Ms Seah, if I may, through the Chair, it would be the same as asking someone to divulge the costs of operational works on a planning application for road works or, or the like. Absolutely. It would be. Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask the question then?
180 minutes in ¶
03:00:00 The report in front of us that was commissioned by Marine Approval Specialists, can I ask the cost involved in engaging an external source and who bore the cost of that and where did that money come from? Speaker 12: Well, where it came from, that's out of the planning budget, from that point of view. Absolute costs? Absolute costs, yeah. Councillor Lorentson: Two and a half grand. Two and a half thousand. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. And the reason behind going to an external? We don't have the expertise. This is so specialised. Thank you. We don't have the expertise. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: That's inconsistent. I'm going to, no, I'm going to talk to the motion. I'm going to clarify it for councillors. The role of councillor in assessing a development application is stipulated by law. Even before you could become a candidate, you were told what your responsibilities are now and since then you've had more training. The law requires you to assess this application only against the code requirements.
03:01:00 It's a legal statutory role that we are currently playing. We cannot put our policy hat on. We cannot put our hat on as a grant funder. We can only put on one hat. That is a statutory assessment hat. And the only way that you can vary from the staff opinion, if you believe there is aspects of the code, then it does not meet. There is no other debate, no other questions do you put before the meeting today. And so, unless you've got greater expertise than the person who's got the expertise in assessing this application that said that it complies, there is only one way to vote legally. Mayor Stewart: Can I ask a question? On the operational work? Yes. Just on page 43, proposed four sites include Tewantin, 2,254 square metres, Goat Island, 837, Noosa Sound East, 1,839 and Noosa Sound West, 937.
03:02:00 So just looking at Tewantin, 2,254 square metres, that's more than half an acre. Can you give me a, from your opinion, what impacts that that will have? I mean, half an acre is a lot. What does that have on our river? Our river uses, our marine vessels? And I know that signage will be erected. But will this be, how many, how big? Will they be lit so boat users at night can see them? Can you answer those sort of questions? Yes. Speaker 14: Yes, certainly. So in terms of environmental impact first, so obviously the application sets out. I've done very detailed marine habitat mapping of the flora and fauna values of the sites, The area has been completely mapped of habitat values and largely there will be minimal impacts
03:03:00 to the riverbed given its largely bare rocky sediment or rocky substrate. Obviously it's not covering vast areas of seagrass or macroalgae on the riverbed. So the application details how they will manage those environmental impacts during the construction phase and obviously I've suggested that council condition a construction environmental management plan as part of the approval to ensure that there aren't impacts to the Noosa River and obviously they propose various mitigation measures which improve anything from sediment, managing sediment plumes, to minimising impacts to the intertidal area. So that's kind of environmental management. Your other queries, use, like recreational use. So the foreshore use won't be impacted. There's some areas I think that will be inaccessible for the period of construction works in terms of navigable access over the area.
03:04:00 I think at low tide some of the areas at the sports sites will be above water. So but in terms of navigable access of boats and things that won't impact that given it's not going to largely affect the depths of the river, I guess, and the vessel drafts, I guess it will be compatible with the river prior would still be the same. Sorry, and lighting, there's no lighting proposed. The construction work will be done in a day. Time, sort of no construction lighting, but the signage will, there's some proposed wordings and some signs will be put up, which are in line with Maritime Safety Queensland requirements and also council requirements, I believe.
03:05:00 Am I at least answering your questions? Was there anything else I missed? Thank you. But yeah, no lighting. I don't think it'll be a navigable issue. Mayor Stewart: Okay. Speaker 14: Yes. Councillor Lorentson: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Just let me know whether I've read this correctly, but on page 8 of the report by the TNC on the project restoration plan, it says that the works that are proposed are intended to restore 3,600 square metres of oyster beds in phase 1, which equates to between 1.7 and 9% of the original area expected to have been covered by oyster beds in the Noosa River estuary. So do I read that as phase 2, that 91% of oyster, there'll be a lot more reeds? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Once again, out of order. We're not dealing with phase 2, we're dealing with an application on phase 1.
03:06:00 Councillor Lorentson: Okay, so the 3,600 square metres. Of works proposed in this submission equals 1.7 to 9% of the original area expected. Is that correct? Is that how it's supposed to be read? Speaker 14: Yes, I believe so. The vast areas of the Noosa River in the 1880s through to the 1940s, I think, were heavily farm, oyster farm. So there was huge areas of oysters in the Noosa River historically, which has now been largely, I don't think there's any extent, oyster reefs left, so that does seem a large area, given that it's a small percent, but it's still overall a small percent of the original area, given that the original area was a huge area of habitat. Councillor Wilkie: I had a following question on that same point, about the extent of the original oyster reefs. It says that there was 41,530 square metres to 207,000 to come.
03:07:00 It says that there was 41,530 square metres, which is between 4 and 20 hectares, isn't it, on page 7? Which one of the management services report that Amelia was referring to? So that range equates to the scope of between 1.7 and 9%, which is obviously on page 8. Yes. And I'm not certain of the individual extent, but I know that it was. Speaker 14: No, that's correct. So ecological service professionals in their work, they would have been able to, you know, use various indicators and estimate approximate original areas of oyster reef habitat, I think, in their study, I imagine. Councillor Jurisevic: Based on documentation that they had to hand. Speaker 14: Yes, that's correct, and their mapping and whatever their specific criteria was to work out past extent of habitat. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Do the councillors wish to speak to the report?
03:08:00 No. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. The public hearing's a neology amount of work done. Thank you for your professional opinion. Yes, yes. With regard to the planning aspects of the operational works. And... Speaker 14: Great, thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: And can you speak a few more times? Speaker 14: No, pleasure. Apparently, yeah. Thank you. Can I just ask? Councillor Finzel: Karen, yes. For you to just please clarify, did you mention there were three things that were not compliant? Speaker 14: They weren't not compliant. There were some areas that the application needed to demonstrate compliance. So terminology maybe was incorrect. So they do comply. Everything complies with the code. I think I just meant that there was elements that they needed to demonstrate compliance with, I guess, that I needed to go off and specifically take compliance with.
03:09:00 Mayor Stewart: And what were those three elements? Speaker 14: They were, let me just get my answer. That was prescribed title works code. Prescribed title works code. Yes, that's correct. Oh, sorry. Yes, so in the Waterway Works, sorry, there was one element which was the development is the code calls for no development to be located between the Lyons Park, Noosaville Lyons Park and... Speaker 12: On the bank in that area, the section of the river. Yes. So in other words, it's an undeveloped section and the idea was you didn't have man-made structures through that section. Speaker 14: However, the application does propose what prescribed title works between those two points, but given that the works are located on the seabed of the Noosa River and aren't creating an impact to visual amenity, I think that the works with the intention of the code was met, given that the intention of the code would be to avoid impacts to visual
03:10:00 amenity there, given it's an undeveloped part of the river. Councillor Finzel: Okay, and what code? Now, what was that? Speaker 14: That was the Waterway Works code. Is that correct? Let me just double check that. It was one of the Noosa plan. Yes. Councillor Jurisevic: I mean, your assessment, Mel, the Waterway's code refers to man-made... Speaker 14: I'm sorry, we haven't... Yeah, we're still with one. We're iterating what that was. And the other... What was that code? So it is this one. So that's the Waterway Works code, that item, which I assessed that it was compliant, given that it was not going to impact the bank of the Noosa River. The PO-9 of that code talks about access, which needed a closer inspection of would access be impacted by the works through public use of the foreshore and public use of the river, and I assessed
03:11:00 that it was compliant, given that the potential interruption to existing foreshore uses, and that it would be minimal, and that the access would be maintained, so there wasn't an element that completely would prevent access, and the management measures they proposed were sound to allowing continued usage, especially at the load facility, where they proposed, I think it's Hilton Esplanade, that's where the barge would load, well, that's where they proposed the construction works would load, the barge would be loaded with the rock, which would then take over. So that area was the key thing I looked at in terms of would public use of that area be impacted, and the measures they proposed all got the sound to enable public use to continue at that site. So that was another, so essentially with these code assessments, a lot of them are just not
03:12:00 relevant, not relevant, not relevant, and then you obviously get to a few that really need close inspection. Okay, thank you for that. Councillor Finzel: So what's the second one? Speaker 14: So, so there were two items from the Waterway Works Code, so that probably, I don't know. Speaker 12: PS7 and PS9 out of the Waterways Works Code would be the relevant ones. Speaker 14: And what was the third one then? And now for the Prescribed Title Works Code, which is the State Coastal Protection Management Regulation, yeah, so all the performance outcomes there were, were met, there wasn't anything particularly significant. Significant there, the potential impacts to marine habitats and things were all largely avoided or minimal. The signage was inconsistent with MSQ requirements.
03:13:00 Access, that talks a lot about access. So essentially, that code was, was all met, given the documentation that the applicant had provided. So that was the first one. There wasn't anything particularly there of concern. But obviously, a lot of the risks are around construction and ongoing management of the site. So hence my recommendation for a construction environmental management plan to ensure that it works at the which would which. I've recommended Council approve to ensure that all the methods proposed by the contractor have been adequately met. Speaker 6: Thank you. Speaker 14: Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: I have a couple more questions and I'll ask guidance from the Chair if I'm acting outside the scope of this report. But just for clarity, are we, in front of us, are we, is this application to restore rock
03:14:00 oyster ecosystems? Or are we, so are we building reefs? Or are we building, are we, are we, are we, are we, are we, are we, are we, are we, are I'm confused in all the language. Speaker 14: Yes, I understand. There's a lot. So essentially, I believe the intention of the project is by introducing additional rock and oyster shell substrate to the Noosa, the seabed of the Noosa River. That primarily will, the intention is to repolonise the oyster populations by providing appropriate substrate. And as a result of the restoration of that ecosystem, you then get some follow-on benefits through greater ecosystem function through fish habitat areas, nursery spawning area by creating new rocky complex habitats. There are secondary values, other things like water quality, filter feeding of other species, including oysters and also nutrient cycling.
195 minutes in ¶
03:15:00 So there's some broader benefits of the restoration. Councillor Lorentson: So potentially, we could be building marine parks. Is that what you're saying? Speaker 14: Potentially. There's a fish habitat area, which is a highly protected fish area, state's protected area. But potentially, yeah, through increasing habitat values of the lizard, that may be an option. I mean, I'm not sure the state's views on the establishment of new marine reserves. But yes, theoretically, that could be a possibility. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Just a point of clarification. The whole of the Noosa River, from memory, is already a declared fish habitat, is that right? Speaker 14: Yes, that's correct. Yeah. So the project also does require a state resource allocation authority. It's called for works in a declared fish habitat area. And I think maybe two of the sites are in FHA and two are not in FHA. So that's a highly protected area for its fishery values.
03:16:00 Councillor Lorentson: My other question is just... Just questioning, not questioning, but just asking, is the report accurate? On page 48, in terms of community consultation, the report, council report says that the overwhelming feedback from these meetings was supportive, and that statement's reiterated in the TNC report. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. When you go to the TNC report, on page 39 onwards, on page 48, sorry, okay, the TNC report, the data tells me something different. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.
03:17:00 In regards to consultation with commercial fisher engagement, it states that the position of four of the six commercial fishers regarding the project was not supportive. Speaker 14: Mm-hmm. Councillor Lorentson: So questioning is, would you regard that as overwhelming support? And on page 41, in regards to riverside homeowners, most showed positive interest. However, in regards to tourism operators... And on page 41, in regards to tourism operators who had boat ramps or jetties entering Noosa Sound, TNC sent profiles of the project and requested meetings, but no one responded to TNC request. Again, I'm confused how that's interpreted as overwhelming support. Page 39 of the TNC report, it says that on the 14th of December, there were nine publicised public consultation sessions of which, during which, 38 locals met face-to-face.
03:18:00 According to the TNC report, four to six people expressed concern, which means 32 people that they met face-to-face were supportive. And again, I just question how the conclusion was. There was no response to the TNC report. There was overwhelming support when the commercial fishers were not supportive, the tourism operators didn't even respond, and you had 32 people who turned up to nine sessions who agreed. Is that accurate? Is that accurate? Yeah. Speaker 12: Well, I suppose it's semantics as to what the word overwhelming support means. Do you break it down into a majority of the people responding in support? Or do you... Councillor Lorentson: So, can I then change the question? The Noosa River Advisory Group, they were set up to provide input to this actual project.
03:19:00 Were they consulted, given that they were representative across all stakeholders? Point of order. Speaker 11: No. No? I don't think that's a good question. Councillor Lorentson: So, my question is, were they consulted? And can we... Does that... Councillor Wilkie: Sorry. Councillor Lorentson: I'm sorry, I'm just, again, going back to the accuracy of the report. Councillor Wilkie: The operational... Yeah. Just to clarify, so it's a code-assessable application. Speaker 7: Now, as you know, code-assessable applications aren't subject to community consultation. But this... In the report, we've reflected information that the TNC had provided in terms of the wider project. So, from a process perspective, there's no requirement to consider the wider project. There's no requirement to consult on a code-assessable application. If it was an impact-assessable application, yes, that would be the case. So, that's an important point, just to note that it's a code-assessable application.
03:20:00 Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Yeah. So, discussions about community consultation are largely outside the scope of the code-assessable application. Yeah. That's right. Perhaps when the report comes back to Council about the order, that can... I apologise. Councillor Lorentson: But I'm actually just asking a question that's come out of the report. It's in the report. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And Kim has partly responded to the question I have. But there's... The follow-on consequence of that is, while there is no statutory requirement for consultations... Question across. Yeah. While there's no statutory requirement, we do consider any feedback into code assessment. But it would only be if it was relevant to... Is that correct? Yeah. Speaker 7: That's correct. The other aspect is in terms of the Noosa River Advisory Committee. They were all consulted on the pilot... On the sites quite extensively. An agreement was reached with the Noosa River Advisory Committee on the sites.
03:21:00 Speaker 11: So... The project was conceived a long time before the Noosa River Stakehold Advisory Committee was formed. So, that's the first point. The Noosa River Stakehold Advisory Committee have been advised of all the technical parameters of the project, and they have inspected the sites by vote and had a look at them. They haven't braved any fundamental opposition to the sites at the meetings, but nor were they specifically asked whether they supported it or not, because the project was already in charge. Mayor Stewart: Sure. I recall our last meeting, there was an update, but there wasn't the opportunity for them to... That's correct, isn't it? They weren't actually asked their thoughts, were they? They were just given a briefing about the project. Speaker 11: They were given a briefing about the project... That's right. ... for their overall information. And Council's done that on a number of different brand visits to the English, such as dredging. Yeah. Mayor Stewart: They were doing a lot. There wasn't discussion about the merits of the project at that time, was there? Speaker 11: I'm sure there might have been some discussion on the side of the... Yeah, there was no intention to...
03:22:00 Mayor Stewart: Yeah, that was my recollection, too, of it. So, okay. Speaker 11: Thank you. Thank you, Kim. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. All right. Councillor Wilkie: Any... Yes. We'll just get to the motions. I've got a question. Mayor Stewart: I've got a question. Yeah. Just when... Sorry. Just the... At the last line of your report, it says, therefore recommend that the application be approved subject to referral agency conditions provided by SARA. They're the conditions that Councillor Finzel was talking about, correct? Speaker 14: No. No. So... No. So the... Subject to conditions provided by SARA. Mayor Stewart: I think that's... Speaker 14: So there's two sets of conditions. Yeah. Just a little introduction. So Council is the assessment manager, and SARA, the State Assessment and Referral Agency, which is the state agencies, given there's two state matters triggered by the project, the project is referred to them, and they have provided conditions for the project and have approved it subject to those conditions... ...on top of the Council conditions. That's right. Yeah. Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Okay.
03:23:00 Can I just ask a question? I don't know who it's directed to, but it's with regard to a report about the high risk of, like, disease. I mean, I don't know about that. With this, like, some oysters... Yeah. Yeah. How does that fit in with this report in terms of putting in infrastructure into the river that could potentially... I don't know. How are we mitigating the risk around this disease? That could affect our ecosystems that we're trying to, you know, build and create artificially. Yes. How are we mitigating that risk? Speaker 14: So the application... The applicant does put forward some management measures and talks about the risk of the disease, the QX disease, and also the winter mortality, the parasite and the protozoan, to potential diseases. Essentially, they're very hard to... To identify and manage, and the key management measure they've put forward is to monitor,
03:24:00 to monitor the health of the oysters that will potentially... Will grow on the oyster reefs, monitoring, and then potentially the use of disease-resistant stock. So there has been some hatchery-produced stock that is resistant to these two diseases that could be used... Introduced... Instead of the... The... The... The... The current Noosa River Oyster. I'm not exactly sure of the specific piece of name, but that is the main... The key proposal they've put forward is to use disease-resistant stock. Yes. That is certainly a risk of the project. Yeah. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. So how does that work then? Who carries the risk of the... If, say, someone comes along, they eat these oysters, because you can eat, I think, the ones that aren't introduced into the system. The natural ones. Yes. And then, I think, signs are going to be put up to advise people who don't eat it. Yeah. If we approve to put this structure in the river, and then if someone comes along, they
03:25:00 eat that, is council at risk to be sued because we've approved the infrastructure in the river? Speaker 14: I mean... I'm sorry. Speaker 10: I'm not sure we've got the expertise to answer that. I think... Look, we would take further legal... So I would take that on notice, Councillor Finzel. But what I would say is that if council has mitigated as much risk as it possibly can by introducing a species that is resistant to disease, by working with the Nature Conservancy, and if it has then signed the particular area that the... This is part of a rehabilitation project, and the oysters there are not for human consumption, and somebody then chooses to then still harvest and then eat those oysters, I think that would be something that we would like to take legal action, and it's something I'm sure we would defend. But I could take further legal advice. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: CEO, would the same risk apply to anybody eating an oyster anywhere within the river
03:26:00 Speaker 10: system? Yeah. So would the risk be any greater? We've introduced the infrastructure. Would the risk be any greater? Yeah. Councillor Joyce, I think the issue here is that we have introduced this, so it would be a risk that would sit with all parties to the agreement. But yeah, happy to check and ask that question. Okay. Councillor Finzel: Because I know TNC did raise that as one of their orders. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. Any other councillors to speak before I close? Okay. I'll put the motion all in favour. In favour of Councillor Stockwell, Wegener, Jurisevic and Wilkie. Okay. In support of the Gains, Finzel, Stewart and Lawrenson. Motion's carried. Thank you very much. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Mr Mayor. Councillor Wilkie: Next item is Financial Performance Report. Thank you for joining us. Can I take a line? Yes. Go on, please. Mr Mayor.
03:27:00 Any new capital? He hasn't said it. Hasn't there? My hands hurt. Speaker 8: You added a few words to that. Speaker 2: Okay, Council's financial position at the end of April. We are 10 months into the financial year and we are still retaining a positive outcome, both in terms of revenue, being above budget and expenditure being below budget. In terms of revenue, waste fees are up in both in terms of rates and collection charges, sales and recoverables and gate fees. Development, building and plumbing fees are above budget, as well as a range of other fees, including the NAC, permissible part of dining and local laws.
03:28:00 In terms of costs. We have staff pay fees, which are driving cost savings and salaries and wages. But this is partially offset by additional labour hire to cover the gap. And materials and services are under budget across a number of areas, including environment, economic development, beaches and canals, libraries, galleries and waste. Capital works are running slightly below budget. Bearing in mind the ambitious target. We have a total of $38 million for our capital works this year. But today at $26 million, we are already higher than any full year spend on capital works in any previous years since the email automation. There's a number of significant contracts in place and hopefully we will see another $10 million of spend forecast between now and June.
03:29:00 But there's obviously some constraints in there with disaster impacts, contract for lead times. And supply chain constraints. And that summarises the budget recap for the end of April, councillors. Questions? Mayor Stewart: Trent, there's been some commentary around coming to the budget consultation. We're starting at May this year versus March last year and that it's too late. Can you talk us through a bit about that? Speaker 2: Sure, councillors. You will actually see on your agenda. We have a list of things that we're going to talk about. We have a special meeting on Friday, which is to actually present the draft budget. And that will commence the public consultation process for two weeks. Yes, last year's consultation did commence in March. The key difference was that when we commenced earlier in the piece, the challenge is Speaker 2: that we don't have a draft outcome or proposed decisions to actually put to the table and
210 minutes in ¶
03:30:00 put to community and community and business in terms of what we're proposing and what So the challenge is that if you go too early, there's not transparency over those decisions that are being proposed. By coming out with the draft budget, we're providing some clarity and transparency over what decisions have been proposed and enabling some full feedback on that. And no, it is not too late. Obviously, we've got further budget workshops post the close of the consultation to make those changes and feed those back through to the budget process. Thanks, Rich. Mayor Stewart: And just on Ms. Vincent's commentary again, that Council spending on staff means less funding for infrastructure and facilities. Can you talk us through that one too, Trent? Speaker 2: Councillor, as you know, we use a build from base budget approach. We've used that since the amalgamation. So we do consider all our decisions separately in terms of investment in materials and services,
03:31:00 contracts and staff separately. And I think it's important to note that we do consider all our decisions separately in terms of staff increases. Those staff increases aren't just related to non-infrastructure elements of Council's budget and Council's services. Speaker 2: If you look back over the last three to four years, you'll find examples of increases to asset management and canal management staff, which are assets, priorities are getting addressed properly in terms of the whole of life. Planning staff, project management staff. Support staff, those. Transport strategy, as well as plumbers and electrical apprentices. Obviously, there's been increases in other areas as well, but it's not just limited to the non-infrastructure areas. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll go further on that one, Trent. Can you just allude to the level of capital works funding since 2014 to current?
03:32:00 I think you mentioned something a little bit earlier with regard to the level of capital works. $26.1 million is currently expended in 10 months, being more than the entire capital works budget in the past. Speaker 2: I'd have to take that one on notice in terms of exact numbers, Councillor. But I do believe in the first two years, our capital works investment was in the realm of $14 to $18 million. So our capital budget, we did have a peak here about six years ago, where it did reach the same level as we are now. But this year, in particular, has seen a significant increase, where we are pushing well beyond the $30 million mark. And we did start the year with an ambitious $50 million target. Councillor Jurisevic: And with regard to external funding for capital works, how does that compare in the last couple of years' budgets compared to previous years? Are we getting a far greater amount of external funding coming in to fund capital works?
03:33:00 Speaker 2: That's correct, Councillor. I think, again, we've seen a significant increase in the last couple of years. We are on a record with the external funding. To quote our former CEO, the rivers of gold, as he would call it, our budget this year for grants and capital revenue is $13 million. We're actually over that present $14 million. I think over the two years, when we forecast out next year, and you'll see that come through the budget, there's another $13 million. So we're talking $26 million in external funding over two years, which is unprecedented for us. And it has driven, and pre-emptively driven, a lot of decisions about capital works over the last two years. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Amelia. Just to continue Clare's, the Mayor's question, there's been commentary in the community about the consultation. Trent, my question is the liveability survey, which we received 1,600 people within the last
03:34:00 Will that be used to inform and guide Council's budget priorities, A? And I see that, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but to me, that's a seriously effective consultation tool, and possibly more effective than the engagement that we had last year, where I think we had 123 people reporting. Do you think that there are any plans to apply to have your say in the budget consultation? Will the information from the survey, will we be using that, plus the feedback from the last budget? Will all that information that's already provided already before Council, I know that in our workshops that has guided us, but just clarification from you, Trent, how important were those
03:35:00 engagement tools? Speaker 2: Sure Councillor I can answer to that. So as presented at the budget live stream in March special meeting we have taken the liveability survey as the key informing consultation survey process to the budget and as you state I think it's one of our record response rates in terms of consultation and at 1600 responses given our population it is a very statistically valid exercise. Last year's budget consultation at under 150 and many of those about a third of them were generic or template responses which may question whether they were different respondents to or the one and the same does challenge the level of response in terms of a broad cross-section of the community to provide that feedback which is why we've used the liveability survey up front to inform the priorities and then by feeding it back through the draft budget we give opportunity to ensure that we have understood what has come back through the liveability survey as correct feedback. So you could say that the budget consultation this year are possibly more genuine and meaningful than they have been than they were last year? I'm hoping so Councillor.
03:36:00 And I think it's really important that we continue to align our future decision making in regards to the liveability survey and it's a piece of work we'll continue to work on internally. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. And just to follow on from that Trent, is there an element within the budget going out that identifies projects that directly relate to the liveability survey and the elements within? Speaker 2: Yes Councillor, there will be in relation to the capital works budget as well as any new investment in projects. At this point we haven't refined the process well enough to retrospectively look back at what we call our base budget or our business as usual but that's the improvement piece of work we'll be doing next year.
03:37:00 Councillor Jurisevic: And the other question I've got in relation to levels of service, have levels of service been, since we've had that levels of service catalogue, have we altered the levels of service? Yes, we have altered the levels of service out there in the community and have we, probably a question for the CEO going forward, is there an opportunity to review the levels of service to see if they need any alterations going forward or as part of the budget process? Speaker 10: To the Chair Councillor Jurisevic, I would say that this budget is very much set to go to the community right now and then when you look at what PlateScore has helped inform this budget, I think the next budget is the one, particularly when we'll be having new corporate plans. That those service levels can then be monitored against what the expectations in PlateScore are, the financial resources and the human resources we have available to deliver, new corporate plan and then an operational plan that sits under that.
03:38:00 Councillor Jurisevic: So is there an opportunity through this consultation process for the community to flag any areas of service delivery that we're not meeting their expectations so that we can consider them? Speaker 10: I very much welcome that and welcome that at any time. Thank you. It just doesn't have to be at the budget. If we're not delivering at about, we encourage the community to do that at the time. Mayor Stewart: Pretty clear. Trent, there's a misconception, or can you clarify this, that there is a misconception that employee costs used to be 44% of rates and levies and they're now 50% and this is driving inefficiency. Is that, is it correct to say that 21-22 budget employee costs of $38 million out of $110 million budget, which is 34%? Speaker 2: That's correct, Councillor. You'll see that on attachment one of the report, which is the problem and loss statement. You'll see that our current budget of $110 million is made up of $38 million in salaries and wages. I can't, I don't have the historical figures offhand, unfortunately, to confirm the comparative
03:39:00 fact, but in terms of where we are now, our mixed debts tends to stay quite, quite stable. As we, as we grow and we spend more, it's as much about the investment in, it's as much about the investment in materials and services and contracts as it is in staff. Mayor Stewart: Thanks, Trent. And finally, can you talk to me about Council's debt? You know, there's concerns that interest was quite significant last year, but with such low interest rates. Can you talk to us about where we're at now? Sure, Councillor. Speaker 2: You'll see, if you look back over our prior year financial statements, you do see significant spike that jumped up and down in finance costs at face value. The challenge is for Councils and the broader community when they review our financial statements to unpack what's making up those spikes in finance costs, in particular for what's driven Noosa Council's movements in finance costs have been, twice in the last
03:40:00 three years, we have undertaken a review of our debt portfolio that's resulted in an early repayment of $10 million to our debt. Which did incur a loan payout cost, if you like, what the big four banks would do to our side. They do to us as well. And we've also refinanced our debt. We took advantage last year of the record low interest rates and cleared out and refinanced a lot of debt that we had at 6% to 7% out of the de-malgamation and locked that in at quite a low percent, around 2%. So as we all know, after the recent RBA rate rise and more forecasts, I think it was a very prudent and sound decision for us to have locked that in for the next 20 years at such a low level because that opportunity has now been gone. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Trent. Councillor Lorentson: Trent, one more question, if you don't mind, and one that I've been asking now for two
03:41:00 years, and one that I really want to raise its importance. I've been watching legal issues. Legal expenses just creeping up, creeping up to a point 2022, we've budgeted 1.866 towards legals. To me, I know it's identified as a priority with this budget, but I just think that now is the time to act. To me, I think it's getting a little bit out of hand. I just want that on notice. Thanks, Trent. Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: I acknowledge the work of our finance staff with keeping the budget above board, keeping costs and benefits within the parameters of our financial safeguards and I welcome the
03:42:00 challenges that are presented and the opportunity to turn around and review those with regard to our budget going forward. Mayor Stewart: Thank you Trent, I want to thank you and Pauline for all your hard work leading up to the budget. We've still got about six weeks ahead of us but I want to thank you both and all the team for all your hard work, we really value and appreciate it. And I also want to thank you for answering some misconceptions that are floating around, really appreciate hearing and for people listening too. Where we are actually at and fact checking some information that can sometimes do the rounds. So thank you for that too. Councillor Finzel: I just want to add, just reiterate what's said but especially the work that we've had to get on board with the disaster recovery works. So I just wanted to say thank you for the work you've done in that space because it's
03:43:00 fast moving and ever changing. So it's good to know we've got a team behind us that's able to do that. Thank you. Speaker 2: Thanks Councillor. We'll find that we'll continue to update you on the running track of costs through the monthly report over the next 12 to 18 months on that as well. Councillor Finzel: Thanks Trent. Councillor Lorentson: I just want to add my thanks Trent. We had a brilliant Director of Finances. Michael Shade, we've got another brilliant Director of Financial Services in you and your team. So we recognise it, we acknowledge it and we thank you. Furthering what Claire, what the Mayor has said about just misconceptions in the community, I want to just make one quick statement that we do take community consultation quite seriously.
03:44:00 There's been a lot of discussion around this topic. There's been a lot of discussion at the table amongst all of us councillors that we have two decisions. One to go out and do what we call token consultation and two is to go out and do genuine meaningful consultation and we are committed to genuine and meaningful consultation where what you say matters and will impact on our decision making. Again thank you and I'm glad we've had the discussion to clear some misconceptions. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Thank you councillors for speaking to the motion. Thank you Trent for the report. The Summary of Inventories and Services Expenditures is also a good item in this report. Legal expenses were mentioned before. Legal expenses have always been flagged as an area that is likely to increase given the scarcity of development.
225 minutes in ¶
03:45:00 And also the predicted increase in speculative development applications. Noosa Council has always had a proud position of defending its planning scheme and I'm really pleased to belong to a council that continues to defend the Noosa Planning Scheme against speculative development applications and also paid for the expert advice when needed. Thank you for the report. The table is closed. Councillor Jurisevic: I think that's all we've said. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. We'll put the motion up in favour. So it's unanimous. The first round of the operational report Mr CEO. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Speaker 10: The first report is presented to the council table and I also would like to pay credit to the team that has been able to contribute to the third quarter operational report. We do have some of our directors online and in the room if there's any specific questions to be asked of the operating report I will take it as read, but I'll provide some commentary
03:46:00 We have a couple of questions for you to help go through some of the key points. Third quarter January through March 22, needless to say, heavily affected by disasters. From the 22nd of February, an auspicious day, my first day, all the way through until around about mid February, our operations and our day to day were really heavily affected. Not only staff just being able to get to the office, but then even being able to ensure that we're delivering our capital program and all the other elements of the council on our side and stature. COVID has also affected us as well, so it is the picture that keeps on giving. We see spikes and ebbs and flows. And even over the last three weeks, we see a trend of one case and four cases. We currently are managing 10 cases within staff phase right now. We've seen from even today, this meeting's been affected with staff having to isolate at home to be able to manage family. That are affected by COVID.
03:47:00 A summary of the high profile elements of the report. There's five of those. The CHAP, which I'm still working through and getting my head around it. Implementation continues on that piece of policy work and planning that council is delivering. I'm very happy to see the resilience projects and the work that the team are doing to be able to deliver that. The Kin Kin Recreational Hall stage two and three has commenced, is working through to get that delivered for the council. The destination management plan, the initial project start has been well established. It is now time though to go to the community to be able to understand how the DMP will be able to inform them and the type of news that they want to see. We're ensuring the ministry that's not just recovering, but growing and how we can manage on average each day, every day, a floating additional population of 5,000. We know in the peak days though, that'll push up to well above scale. It's going to be 10,000. How will that infrastructure hold that? The DMP is going to be such an important part of delivering that.
03:48:00 The short stay local law commenced on the 1st of February and we're seeing that now starting to settle. I'm not seeing as many complaints coming across my desk as the CEO and we are starting to have that deliver the desired effect, which is the management of short stay accommodation and ensuring those that are partaking of that are respectful of the community around them, the community that they are visiting and being part of for that period of time. Our transport strategy, our free buses, they're fantastic and I think it's a great initiative of that transport strategy that we can start to really push further in the future. We are talking about how we can implement the transport strategy. Part of my contribution to the council is can we mature that sort of movement strategy? We're now starting to get past of what the day to day means of driving cars around. Our municipality, we can't continue to carry that load. What does a movement strategy mean for us and how do we look at all of the different
03:49:00 elements of movement and what that means for our community in the future and what central hubs could look like for us as well? Start turnover has risen slightly by about 1.2%. It's something that we're keeping an eye on as a council. There is the great shift right now. From what we can see, all businesses are struggling with not just retaining staff but maintaining what they currently have. But local government in particular is starting to feel the bite of what was traditionally a moderately to highly well paid vocation with great benefits to the private sector in different parts, paying well above and beyond and starting to be able to push past what is affordable for us as a council. But when we do look at employee benefit costs and the conversation that came about from the last report before the council's table, a third expenditure of OPEX against
03:50:00 employee benefits is the metric that you'd like to continue to look at. So we're looking at 34%, but we're right on that line. 33% is generally there. You know you're going pretty well when you have your employee expenditure. What causes us additional costs is when we need to be able to bring in the labour hire, the casuals, the temp workers to fill the holes that we have within our current workforce where we just can't get proof through. And that's a problem that we'll need to address further over time. Finance. We just had the finance report. We have great liquidity. I have no concerns as to where we sit as a council financially. We've always got to be aware though that there is the next risk or the next big issue is going to occur and ensure that we're financially sound around that. For us for the future, it is really starting to be able to look at what contributed assets mean for us as we do have different developments or different initiatives come to light.
03:51:00 And then how do we maintain them within our workforce. So that whole of life project costing is going to be very important for us as we deliver that over time. Our systems focus and review. It is important for us to be able to keep ahead of where we need to be from an ICT perspective. As I alluded to earlier within the committee meeting, we met with Telstra last week. We've been meeting with Optus. We've been talking to Optus later this week. And then also Tech One will be coming to meet with us. How can we ensure that we've got the very best ICT capability for our staff within our budget that's delivering on our day to day. I have just completed my incoming three months report. So I've pulled that up a little bit early. That will come to the next round of meetings. We'll put that to the council. I think the workshop would be appropriate. I can talk to you about that. And then recommendations is what I'm putting forward. But the outcomes of those recommendations. It's not just let's just do this. If we undertake that recommendation in action, the outcome we want to achieve is clearly documented
03:52:00 and articulated. We're very much focused on budget. That's what we're all focusing on within the building right now. Larry's team delivering the capital program. Kim's team is absolutely flat out and delivering day to day. And Deb keeping the governance and the day to day ticking over is doing a fantastic job there as well too. And I do have to also acknowledge Kerry Gusee and the community team. They are high performing. They work extremely hard. And they are some of the unsung heroes. We don't see them at the table here very often. But the work that they do and their contribution is really quite special. When I look at community support, I don't know another council that delivers so much like that. And it's just very proud. Councillor Jurisevic: And they do. Speaker 10: They absolutely do. So council, I'm very happy to be able to take questions on the operational report for the third quarter of this financial year. And we do have the directors involved in the room to assist with any specific questions
03:53:00 of departments. Thank you. Thank you so much. Councillor Wilkie: Can you cast those questions on the CEO? Mayor. Councillor Lorentson: I'm going to throw a curly one. So. You know, I think I asked this question when I first came to council, was a pandemic ever identified as a black swan event? And the answer was actually yes. Floods. A year ago, what council was guessing as the next black swan was a major flood event. Yes. That's happened. What's next? What's next? That's coming around the corner next. That's right. Speaker 10: We seem to get it right. We get it right. Councillor Lorentson: We absolutely do. Speaker 10: Yeah. What would keep me awake at night of the external factors is the Australian and the global economy and then financially what that will mean for us.
03:54:00 What happens after next weekend is front of mind. There is. Either way, there will be a change within Australia that will occur at the Commonwealth Council. How much and what that means, we'll find out on Saturday night or Sunday morning. But that then leading to global instability and the financial pressures that we will see come to bear. I think I saw today the Commonwealth Bank is looking at in December 23 about $58 billion of very low interest mortgages coming off that low interest mortgage. So when we look down the road, we're seeing these very high valuations at the moment. I think Noosa will unfortunately be in a bubble given our limited land supply that those valuations will always creep up. We're always a desirable destination. It's a matter for us as a Council to manage that for our community. All of the external factors, it's going to be financial.
03:55:00 They're going to be the biggest issues, the biggest pressure. And then from that, that trickles down to everything that we do. So yeah, that would be my concern. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Spot on, I reckon. We've talked about the external pressures. You've had your feet under the deck for three months. Yes. Internally, what's keeping you away from it? Is there anything that you're concerned that you're seeing in your three months here, just lagging and thinking we need to spend more time and more resources or other things that are challenging your thinking coming from a large city like Darwin or a small Council Speaker 10: like yours? From a positive perspective, the engagement of this Council. We are very heavily engaged and I see that everybody is out with them in the community too often. If you go to the Council table, one person may be not carrying the load. This Council actually carries the load very evenly for everyone. What keeps me awake at night right now is our facilities, is having a look at where we currently
03:56:00 sit. There'll be a discussion that we'll need to have about some of our facilities. Where they are right now and what strategies we can put in place to be able to manage that. The next part of that is, and it all flows through, is how we deliver our internal and external customer service and our culture. They're probably the biggest things and they all need to relate as to how we deliver services to our community. We have a fantastic, engaged Council that is out and about the community. We have a fantastic, engaged Council that is out and about the community. The eyes and ears of the community bring information into the administration, so we absolutely get that from every council, everybody provides that. It then comes down to our facilities, our planning, where do we have our staff and how do we ensure that they have the very best to deliver the best, our culture and our customer service.
03:57:00 A couple of areas there where I think we can absolutely improve, but align all of those up, get those right. The opportunities for Noosa, that are always the areas that we continue to be larger than a lot of other councils, we're very, very lucky with what we've had. Councillor Jurisevic: I hope you rest easy and actually get some sleep at night. We don't have to bring out the Horlicks. Speaker 10: Thank you, thank you. Just finished my report, so it's a good 30 pages and it details around about 20 areas where I've had a look at for the council with recommendations, actions and outcomes. Fantastic. And I'm really happy to put that to the council. As an exec, we're talking about structures, how we can support each other better. I do see some of the execs that absolutely, everybody is working extremely hard, but some portfolios have more responsibility than others, and how we can create more of a pyramid structure where we're evenly dispersed, the roles, requirements, responsibilities is what we're working towards.
03:58:00 And I've given my thoughts to the exec, and it's for us on a collaborative basis to work together as to how do we do that. How do we take that forward, and then for us to sit down as an exec and talk to council about it. Councillor Jurisevic: I think the next question I was going to ask you, you've gone there, you've been there already, well done. Councillor Wilkie: And Scott, we've budgeted for a new corporate planning process. Yes, when are you in the business map process to begin? Speaker 10: 30 June. So once the budget's adopted, I'd like to be able to get a team around with the scope up. I have some themes that are in place already, some outcomes that we should look at, a five-year plan that delivers under the actual KPIs, that project to be finalised by 31 December, to then inform the financial year moving forward. I do understand and I like what had been done with the 20-year corporate plan previously. A recommendation for council's consideration is that we get a corporate plan in place, and then we look at it.
03:59:00 And that would be more appropriate to be able to lead in those longer-term things, but I have our five-year corporate plan that probably a year into the next term of council, that council has the opportunity as of mid-term of that plan to be able to review it, put that stand by, and then longevity to 2028, and doing that work and going through, we will really have two elections over the life of that plan between 2020 and 2021, so I think that's something that we need to look at, and I think that's something that we need to look at, and I really believe that when we look at it, we really are the custodians of the future, and we, when you start to look at, if we get our corporate plan finished by the end of this financial year, there will be two future councils that will have to work through that, so, but so we will get moving on that straight away as a priority, that's the envelope, we drop everything down under that envelope. Mayor Stewart: Can I move it? Speaker 13: Move Mayor Stewart, so that Council can develop. Mayor Stewart: I'll be brief, thanks Scott.
240 minutes in ¶
04:00:00 It's been a very interesting few months. The weather has been, you brought the weather with us. I want to thank you for your leadership, your hard work, your support for all of us as a council individually and collectively. It's really valued and appreciated. And I want to acknowledge all the exec team too because I know that you have a great relationship with them and that's been a huge support and will continue to be such a great support and you all work really well together. So I feel very comfortable and I know all the councillors do. So we've got a terrific, we've got a terrific staff and our executive team and our CEO, we're in really safe, great hands. So I want to thank you for your work, great report. I just always turn to behind schedule and there's not many of them to be honest, the projects, we're doing pretty well. And that's testament to, as you alluded to, all our departments, how well they run, how well they're led. So yeah, thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I've got a question. And it's probably to Director or acting, no she's Director, Kim, we highlighted the development of the destination management framework concept in our key initiatives and this is probably the first time it's come up for public scrutiny and the, there's a sentence in there that may give the wrong impression, it certainly gave me the wrong impression yesterday, from an external perspective, a presentation was made to TOOZ and NOOSA and preliminary introduction made to SECCO.
04:01:00 And I think it's very interesting now that we have a clear, very consistent and well defined concept and I think in terms of what's going on in the business community. My question is, has the broader community been involved in consultation today, and if not, what is proposed? Speaker 7: Thank you. Councillor Stockwell. So the Destination Management Plan is in its evidence-based gathering investigation phase and some contacts are starting to be made with business community and Tourism Usa and some parts of the community more broadly.
04:02:00 Part of that evidence base is gathering all the information that we've got on hand, that we've done community consultation through a range of strategies. We've got the liveability survey, we've got a raft of community consultation data that our project manager is pulling together. In terms of sort of the plan for wider community engagement, there is a very clear plan. So there'll be community engagement on a set of social indicators that'll go out to the community. There'll be community consultation on the overall sort of story around the destination. We'll be doing a range of sort of groups, community group input there. And then all of that information, the evidence base will provide, will develop like a discussion paper and then that'll also go out for community input and engagement. So there's quite a lot of community engagement planned over the sort of next three to nine months. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And I've got a couple of questions. So the next one is about, in the report it talks about the procurement starting and the question relates to initially we were looking at the opportunity
04:03:00 that was presented by the fact that Tourism Noosa had won an award that had a very well respected consultancy gave an amount of money to them which was part of that award. And we were looking at the potential partner with Tourism Noosa to utilise that as part of its initial assessment phase. Is that currently under consideration? Have we reached out to Tourism Noosa to look at that opportunity? Speaker 7: Yeah, that is currently under consideration. We have met with Tourism Noosa about that. And that's currently being considered in terms of what that might look like going forward. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. The final one then is, I note that we're looking at a range of council representations. But this project identified as quite significant, but we haven't got a project control group or anything like that set up. Is that something we should be looking at internally at least to have a project control group which does have a couple of councils say they're giving some high level,
04:04:00 policy direction input discussion? Speaker 7: Yeah, I think we can look at that, Councillor Stockwell. So the governance around the project sort of internally has been established. The project reports every six weeks to exec. And there's an internal reference group that's been established. But I think, you know, a PCG to kind of help guide and key milestones and decision points would be useful. We've done that for other large projects. So we're happy to look at that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And I'm happy to speak to the overall report. But I'll start where I ended there. And Cathy, if I can have just that slide from the council briefing. I think it's important. That's the first one on my left. That one. I think it's important from a community perspective that it comes up and just reinforcing that the approach we're looking at on destination management is one that's collective ownership. And so whilst staff have maybe already taken some early taking at the business groups,
04:05:00 it's to me really important to understand that this is a community tourism business council approach. It's not a sector based or it's not just purely economic development. It's about describing the assets we want to protect and what attracts people to live here will also attract people to live there. So for me, that's really important. And I don't need to make any changes. I think we just need to consider how that's best achieved. I think overall, the three months as we say, it's probably a continuation of a large organisation that has continually had to react. The, you know, ever since the 2019 bushfires, we have been reacting to disasters. And the fact that we've been able to perform other things while we're doing it is a testament to that. It's not just the commitment of staff, but also the fact that we are very focused on
04:06:00 our community and trying to deliver. So while there are some areas that we'll see that aren't behind schedule, the fact is that we're, you know, it's not quite process management. Certainly it is continually having to react to disaster and its response. And, you know, once again, on the weekend, one can hope that it's at least two years before we're looking at drought assistance. Sorry. It is. It's the idea that I put in. I think that when we look from a quarterly report perspective, we need to both thank the staff, but also start looking at what now needs to change. A little bit like, you know, I really liked the report that came up on the disaster recovery. We're not going to try and, you know, we're not going to try and, you know, we're not going to push everyone to the limit to try and get up a application.
04:07:00 We're going to go spend some money to get experts to do it for us. And I think that's where we have to look at is what are the priorities? How are we best to get there? And can we take some of the pressure off by looking at different delivery models to get there? And I think other than that, thank you for the report. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Thank you, Kim. Kim, while you're there, the CHAT, did you subscribe? Did the CHAT have to go to the state government at all? Speaker 7: Yes, it did. CHAT had to go to state government for final endorsement, which I believe has happened. Councillor Wilkie: Yes. Speaker 7: Yes. Councillor Wilkie: Were there going to be any land use implications falling out of the CHAT? So there's a range of... Potential amendments? Speaker 7: Yeah. So there's a range of implementation actions and an implementation plan that comes out of the CHAT, and as Council might recall, we've also got a ministerial condition that came with the approval of the Noosa Plan that required us to complete the CHAT process
04:08:00 and then consider any planning scheme implications and land use implications of that. But that will be something we need to do in the next six to 12 months. Councillor Wilkie: So it's not part of the current round of amendments? Speaker 7: It's not part of the current round, Frank. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I have a question on that? All right. The CHAT-related one from LGAQ? Oh, the funding... Speaker 7: Two grants funded. Oh, yes. Yes, yes, yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So would you want to explain what they are? Yes. Speaker 7: I need the information in front of me, but... I think you already get it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. So it is public information, so that would be the two grants. One was for the coastal management implementation of an implementation plan of $100,000 and a living fortune... Which would be the river. Speaker 7: Which would be the Noosaville foreshore. So we're working with infrastructure services, the Noosaville foreshore master plan, and building
04:09:00 resilient design responses in that process. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So that's a good example of how staff are working and going out and finding the funds that are available to boost our response to do it. Councillor Jurisevic: And it's good to see if there are funds available. Yeah. Speaker 7: Just to be clear, we put in expressions of interest, and they've been successful in our expression of interest to go to the next stage for those. Councillor Jurisevic: That's not actually guaranteed, but... Speaker 7: That's not actually guaranteed, but we've had success and some support from LGAQ to say, please move forward with your next stages. Oh, okay. Councillor Jurisevic: Raising community expectations. Oh, we'll get it. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. City Manager. Thank you, Mr. City Manager. Thank you, Mr. City Manager. Thank you to all the executive and all staff for everything you do to contribute to this.
04:10:00 Thank you. And the mayor alluded to a couple of behind schedules on the list of favourites here, but when you consider the rhymes and reasons behind these, I'm not surprised with behind schedules. And some of them are waiting for a new CEO to materialise, which actually went through two processes, so there was a delay there. So there are arms and reasons when you, as Councillor Stockwell alluded to, when you look at the fact that we've been fighting a disaster since 2019 of one shape or form, and that with our relatively small staff, we've managed to keep things essentially on track is, I think, a resounding success from our perspective. I welcome the new CEO and our new infrastructure director as well as fresh pairs of eyes to keep us on track and to maybe bring us some ideas and some methodologies that may improve and enhance the way that we do things.
04:11:00 And thank you. And it's always good to have those fresh perspectives. It's good to hear that after three months in the saddle, the CEO thinks that we are doing an admirable job and that we are keeping our head above water and that the financial situation that we find ourselves in is one that would be the envy of many councillors around the state, not around the country. I think all the things that the CEO alluded to there are things that we'll address. I look forward to going forward with the new corporate plan, and I look forward to welcome the opportunity to move forward on that. Well done, Mr. CEO. Thank you. Welcome to the panel. Thank you, Mr. President. I hope the motion has been a favour. That's unanimous.