Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Councillor Jurisevic: The ayes have it. There are no presentations or deputations, so I'll move on to Item 5, Reports, Consideration of the Committee. Item 1, Noosa North Shore Ferry Tender Service Tender. In attendance we have Dennis in the property section. Dennis, would you like to give us a bit of a summation of the item for those on board? Speaker 8: Yep, sure. So the report provides the outcomes of the Noosa North Shore Ferry Tender. The incumbent operator has been providing the service since 1999 and their current agreement with us ends in June 2024. So we're getting towards the pointy end of the process, which we kicked off primarily mid-last year with a full review of the service and various reports to council and a decision to go out to tender for the fully out service.
00:01:00 So we released the tender in May of this year and it was a difficult procurement environment, but we've had a very pleasing outcome of the tender process with a competitive field of tenderers from capable tenderers across the board. We've had five tender submissions from three companies. We've had three business tender submissions from the C-Link Group, which is a fairly large company and a very large business in C-Link, the largest ferry provider in Australia. So the recommendation is for one of Intrada's tenders, which involves significantly larger ferries and comes with a lot of improvements to the service.
00:02:00 Councillor Lorentson: I've got a few questions, I'll start with page 2, page 3, page 4, page 5, page 6, page 7, My first question is, and if I'm reading it correctly, Sealink scored the highest, 15.48, and they're also sort of drew me to Sealink where they were the ones that were the more sustainable.
00:03:00 You know, the hybrid electric diesel really stood out from all the other tender applications. Just my question is, why were they not chosen, given they had a high score? And more importantly, were you utilising an electric engine powered from a permanently connected cable? And did they intend? And did they intend to source 100% renewable power supply? So that to me was a standout. Speaker 8: Yeah, Sealink's submission was excellent. I mean, they really demonstrated that they are one of the strongest players in this space. You're right in saying that they had the highest non-price score. I think there was 3% in it, a significant price disadvantage of going with that option.
00:04:00 Councillor Lorentson: So change my question. With the tender, the recommendations for Fiverr's Den, the Tender V, do they have any plans to provide a more sustainable alternative to diesel engines? Is that part of their tender application? Speaker 8: Their tender application is to fully offset their emissions. So we get brand new boats with brand new engines at current emission standards. So IMO, Tier 3 diesel. Diesel engines, much better than what we were going to have on in the existing ferries. And their proposal is to fully offset their emissions using the green fleet offsets through the Ural Forest project. Councillor Jurisevic: For the entire, the contract is 20 years? Speaker 8: Throughout, yeah, for the life of the contract. Councillor Jurisevic: For the life of the contract, 20 years. Mayor Stewart: Indeed. Thanks.
00:05:00 I note this is a contract that is looking at for a term of 20 years. And on page 5, it says Council requested pricing to be submitted for 10, 15 and 20 year time frames. Was there a specific reason why we didn't choose 20, because that's a long time, I guess, to lock us in? Speaker 8: Yeah. And I recall the discussions that we had in the lead up to that, in the lead up, or some of the concerns we had prior to tendering were some of the resistance to change under the current contract, which has been in place coming up. So, we're aware that, you know, if a new player was to enter the space, which we've had through the tender process, that there's a significant investment in vessels involved, sort of circa $8 million plus, and that they'll need to amortise that cost through the life of the contract.
00:06:00 So, it's borne out in the results. The shorter the term, the higher the cost, and it's in the order of 15% per five-year term. So, 15% more expensive for a 15-year term, a further 15% more expensive for a 10-year term. Mayor Stewart: So, those ferries that we're talking about that are involved, the new ones, are expected to last, obviously, the 20-year time frame, because I imagine in 20 years, so much more will be electric. Speaker 8: Yes. Yes, and we've put it to Entrada that, and they're quite amenable to the idea of electrifying at some stage through the, it's not a particularly complex sort of engine and drive system because it sits on the side of the barge, and it's quite easy to swap out, provided the, and we will have them sort of consider any of that design aspect from the outset. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm assuming the most difficult part would be to arrange a connection to mains power. Speaker 8: Correct, and some of the sort of safety and design things that go around that.
00:07:00 And to my mind, you know, if we're looking at electrification through the course of this contract, it may be that hydrogen or other things are in the space as well in the future. Councillor Lorentson: Tender B, on page six of the report, the tender poses significant advantages on the way of vehicle capacity. Ninety-five percent increase. In terms of vehicles per hour, do we have that number? So I know that the current scope for the tender went out. Speaker 8: Yes. Councillor Lorentson: The current scope was for a minimum vehicle handling capacity of 240. Yes. What does 95 percent increase in vehicle capacity equal in terms of vehicles per hour? Speaker 8: So there's a real range of operating scenarios. Yes. Depending on demand, whether you're operating single ferry, two ferries sort of equally servicing both banks, or two ferries focusing on one bank in particular.
00:08:00 So across those scenarios, we do have all the figures because we've involved our traffic engineer, and they've also been submitted by tenderers. And it's in the order of 45 percent to 70 percent increase in vehicle handling capacity. Councillor Lorentson: So that's great in terms of freeing traffic on Moorindil Street, but in terms of beach traffic, have we considered that impact? Speaker 8: I think it's fair to say that that's on the radar of QPWS, and it's really the control point for that is their permit regime, and it's their simple levers to pull for QPWS, and it's on their radar. Councillor Lorentson: So potentially, is there an unintended consequence that we may be creating more traffic along the New Zealand North Shore?
00:09:00 I know that's a separate issue, but it's not. Don't we have some sort of duty of care to ensure that we're not creating another problem at the other end? Speaker 8: Well, one of the real key aspects of the tender, and one of the real key issues that we've also been trying to address, is the impacts on Tewantin with when we get two kilometre long queues. And so I think that's fairly clear that the demand is there regardless of the conditions at the ferry if people are prepared to queue for two kilometres, but it was a driver in this tender to deal with those queues and the impacts on Tewantin residents in the suburb of Tewantin. So the combination of the ability to deal with traffic better and to not create those queues, as well as later in the report there we talk about duplicating Merindal Street on the southern
00:10:00 approach, those things will substantially deal with the queuing issues that have previously impacted Tewantin suburb. Councillor Jurisevic: It would be fair to say that the volume of traffic able to access the North Shore is based on the permits that are issued by the state, not on, so the number of vehicles aren't controlled by the ferry, it's controlled by the number of permits that are provided. Councillor Wilkie: Just to clarify that day trip, is there any limit on the amount of people who can access the North Shore for a day trip? Not currently. No. It's only for camping that's limited. The number of permits for campers is limited, but not day trippers. By the number of camping spaces. Camping spaces, yes. But day trippers not. No. Councillor Lorentson: So it could potentially be. Councillor Wilkie: I understand what you, it's a good question councillor. Councillor Lorentson: Further to. This has been referred to a general meeting.
00:11:00 I actually have those numbers. Has it? Yes. Yes. Councillor Jurisevic: I haven't been informed. I haven't been informed. Ryan sent it. Councillor Lorentson: When did he do that? Councillor Wilkie: Last night. Councillor Jurisevic: I didn't get it. Speaker 8: I don't know. So existing directional capacity where you're focusing on traffic from a particular direction is around that 240 vehicle mark that we set in the tender.
00:12:00 Councillor Lorentson: So 240 going and coming back home? Is that what you mean by direction? Speaker 8: 240 one way. Councillor Lorentson: 240 one way, 240 coming back home? Speaker 8: No, it's 170 vehicles in one direction from, say, the southbound side. And 70 vehicles in the other direction from the northbound side. Councillor Lorentson: Okay, so one's a 27 vehicle, they vary, the other one's a 12. So there's two different sizes, right? Speaker 8: No, that's 240 is the existing peak capacity. Councillor Lorentson: Oh, sorry, it's the existing, yeah, I've got those numbers, yeah. Speaker 8: Moving to around 340 under this proposal at peak. As a peak capacity, yeah. Councillor Wilkie: With the 27 and the 12 operating. That's correct. Councillor Jurisevic: In your summary submission table there, Dennis, you've got a column that says caveats and departures. And for the first tenderer, we've got no, and for the other two tenderers, we've got yes.
00:13:00 Can you explain what the caveats and departures column is about? Speaker 8: Primarily, they're about infrastructure. So one of the things that the incumbent NUFA unit trust required for us to do, to be able to maintain its levels of service, are to introduce ticket booths. Basically for it to deal with moving to electronic payments. As an example of one of its caveats, it also required the upgrade of our local slipway. And similarly, or similarly, CLINC had infrastructure caveats that went to the electricity supply, and upgrades of the approaches, and things of that nature, in its tender as well. Councillor Jurisevic: So there'd be additional costs to council on that basis, for those, that provision. Mayor Stewart: Dennis, we're the only place in Queensland that has the daytrippers, just the one day pass.
00:14:00 Speaker 8: I'm not an expert on these things. Mayor Stewart: I guess my question is that, looking at that, looking because, you know, obviously with an increase in ferry size, it means more vehicles on the North Shore. Is that a discussion that we have separately about, you know, potential to look at minimising the impact through, you know, a three-day pass or increases in costs of ferry with resident exemption or, you know, deduction? Is that, does that form part, that's a separate issue, Larry? Speaker 10: Yeah, it's true, yeah, that would be, so obviously coming out of this tender process, a separate discussion between now and the 1st of July 2024, is obviously a pricing discussion. That needs to happen, and obviously during that time frame, we hopefully also further continue our discussions with obviously the residents working groups on the North Shore, as well as, as state government, about the permit. Speaker 8: Just to clarify, you're talking about the QPWS permit regime, though?
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 Yes, yes, yes. Which is, which is sort of, Councillor Jurisevic: The other element there, the other element there would be the Great Sandy Straits National park management plan. I mean, can we, going forward, as to what the state, what the state may or may not introduce in the way of restrictions. Speaker 10: Also, with reference to the larger vehicles, again, it's probably just for information and clarity. A larger vehicle reduces the operating cost, and you'll see with the tender process, the larger vehicles have a lower price point in the tender process, because it's much more efficient for them to run, for the operator to run a larger vehicle, because they're not duplicating during intermediate and peak times, where unneeded, two vehicles running consecutively. And the opportunity cost of obviously significant road upgrades, which we will potentially consider separately. Speaker 8: And the existing ferries are diesel as well, aren't they? Yes, yep. So they date back to the 90s.
00:16:00 Councillor Wilkie: I have some questions, Mr. Chair. Fire away. You mentioned that one of the reasons why this, this group was successful was they had a full suite of contemporary and road tested payment ticketing and information platforms and technologies. Could you give us some idea of what that entails? Speaker 8: Look, essentially, they deal with 700,000 customers in transport a year at the moment. So all the electronic payment systems, web platforms, business operation platforms, websites, and so forth. Are already available. They're already there and a key part of service provisions. A lot of the services that they provide are even more customer focused than, than a vehicle ferry. So things like tours, dive operations, bus, bus lines and bus tours, these things have
00:17:00 an even stronger customer focus. So they really did demonstrate that they have all those tools. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: You also mentioned that there are recommended tender prices above the current contract budget and you've signalled that a pricing review is imminent and it's from reading between the lines it sounds like price increases are also inevitable. Can you flesh out the implications of that in terms of its potential impact on numbers using the ferry service and who may be exempt from the price increases? Speaker 8: Yeah, I can talk to that. I think the increases that are posed will be modest. They will come
00:18:00 with significant uplift in the levels of service and that the discounting of the price discounts to residents on the North Shore, workers and owners, will continue so they're not at risk. Councillor Wilkie: And the other question I had was the changeover period from one service provider to another. Can you tell us how that will be managed so that there's minimal disruption to services? Speaker 8: Yeah, well the intent is there'll be no disruption but it is a fairly complex process. Even the process of getting the vessels down to Noosa from the shipbuilder in Cairns is an involved one. But we do have a program starting from procurement, construction of those vessels,
00:19:00 through commissioning, surveying, transit, installing infrastructure and so on. So it's coordinating. Essentially what will happen is the larger ferry will come down first and be installed in situ in the days and weeks leading up to the commencement of the contract. So there'll be a point at which that we're ready to switch from the existing operator to the new ferry. So there may be a brief period there where we sort of have both operators sort of providing the service while the changeover period continues. So there may be a brief period Councillor Jurisevic: I wonder about you, given that there's two ferries, you could actually take one offline and implement the other during a low peak season changeover or something along those lines. Speaker 8: There's quite a bit of infrastructure to deal with as well in relation to cables and anchors. Councillor Wilkie: That was my question, will they use the same cables, Dennis? Speaker 8: I think that's to be determined in the coming months, but I think that's unlikely.
00:20:00 I think that'd be... The cables get replaced. Councillor Wilkie: But in exactly the same locations. Speaker 8: I can't say exactly the same, but similar. Councillor Jurisevic: You would think that with a new ferry, as part of the insurance, they'd have to upgrade to a new cable and all the rest of it. It'd be part of the installation of the insurance perspective, rather than... If you could guarantee the integrity of the previous one, because you don't know how long it's been operating and all the rest of it, one would assume that you'd need a new cable. Speaker 8: The cable's replaced. The cable's replaced every year. Oh, they are? Yeah. Mayor Stewart: Dennis, we saw in the floods that the Noosaville North Shore, because the ferry was cut off, and we had about 350 people, Joe, didn't we, at some point, stranded over there. Is there any provision, and that was because the ferry just stopped working, so it isolated that North Shore. Any provision, any discussions around disaster management or in the case of an emergency,
00:21:00 was that even a feature of this or not? Speaker 8: Yeah, I think it's just a big face to the floodwaters, that it is one of the primary risks of a flood. So if you load it with vehicles and try and run the gauntlet, then you're placing vehicles and people at risk. Mayor Stewart: I guess no Plan B was discussed, or I guess it probably couldn't be. I just know that was an issue. Councillor Jurisevic: The other element to that is the approaches. I mean, the approach to the ferry on the Tewantin side was under water for a good 500 metres or more. Yeah. Back to the bus turnaround and beyond that, I believe. So that would, I mean, in what we're talking about here with regard to what we're looking at in infrastructure upgrades for Marendal Street, is that being considered of raising that road to try and take it above flood levels? Speaker 8: Well, I don't know that it, as far as this service goes. Like, it is at risk of flood.
00:22:00 It's one of the primary impacts. It's not really something that you can design out and operate in a flood. So, you know, improving the flood immunity and the approaches doesn't really give us... Councillor Jurisevic: Well, they're going to be an element of resilience and operation if we get it above the, you know, that it doesn't... that floodwaters aren't impacting the approaches once the... I mean, it's something that we could discuss and look at with regard to the design of any improvements to those approaches, one would think. At least look at whether that's a feasible element. If we're going to spend money. Speaker 10: Through the Chair, the other consideration factor with flood resilience is the flow of water. So the other challenge for us during that event is at what point is the flow of water stable enough... Speaker 7: Certainly. Speaker 10: That is actually safe to start the ferry service across the river again without risking the infrastructure and the people on the boat.
00:23:00 Councillor Jurisevic: And that's the other element. With a larger ferry, does it make it more susceptible to the volume of water coming down? Because it's the larger surface area of having water hit it. You'd think so. Have any of those thoughts been discussed with the operators? Speaker 8: I think it's more stable. We're actually adding a lane to the... The larger ferry's width. So it's got more stability. But as you say, it's longer and presents more of an area to the floodwaters. And my understanding under the safety regulations is decisions about those things rest with the ship captain. And yeah, it's... Councillor Jurisevic: And that's what I'm getting to. They operate on the Daintree River. The Daintree River being a flood far more often than the Noosa River. One would assume they have a level of expertise and knowledge around... Flood impacts on their ferry operations. Is that something we can find out from them as to what the flood capacity of the larger
00:24:00 ferry and the smaller ferry might be? Or what the impact of floodwaters, the volume of flow, the speed of flow that they can operate in? Is that something they might have some knowledge of? Speaker 8: Yes. But I wouldn't intend to provide it through this process. Councillor Jurisevic: No. At some stage that we might be able to see what experience they have and knowledge and understanding of operating in flooded waters. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Just an operational question. Dennis, do they give you any idea of numbers of employees they would require and whether they'd source them locally? Speaker 8: Yeah. It's in the order of about 13 for the operation. And I think the first port of call for staff will be those operating the existing service. And... Beyond that, there's obviously managerial staff involved within the company.
00:25:00 But there is a recruitment process that's part of the lead up to providing the service. And everyone needs to be local, which is by the nature of the service. So it's not really a case of bringing in a workforce. No. It's finding a workforce. Councillor Wilkie: Using local, experienced staff. Yeah. I'm happy to move that it go. Councillor Lorentson: I've got just one more question. I'm happy to second. Councillor Wilkie: Yep. Councillor Lorentson: Just one last question. In regards to the service plan, so the agreement incorporates the service plan and according to the report, the service plan outlines the tenderer's commitment to adapt and respond to changing customer needs and technologies throughout the term of the agreement. Yep. Is the commitment the same as a requirement
00:26:00 and can we have access to the service plan? It's 20 years and I'd actually love to see what's required under a service plan. Speaker 8: No, you can't have access to the service plan. It will be part of the contract. It's a yes. It is a contractual requirement. It forms part of the contract and there's commitment under the service plan which becomes part of the contract. So it commits to flexibility and adaptation and the contract also provides the tools to adapt and vary through the term of the contract as need arises. Councillor Jurisevic: Does that answer your question? Councillor Lorentson: Yes. So it's a requirement? Yes. It is a mandatory requirement? Speaker 8: It's not part of the tender process
00:27:00 that councillors are provided with tender documents. Councillor Jurisevic: Dennis, I've only got two other questions and I'm interested in this electric option. It mentions the technologies in use in Sweden and Norway. Is there anywhere in Australia or in New Zealand that technology is in use? No. So it would be at first? Yes. And there's no indication as to what sort of costs around the infrastructure? Did they supply any idea of costs with regard to electrical infrastructure that may be required from the council's perspective? Speaker 8: There's a shared infrastructure burden under the proposal. They provide the transformer to the vessel connection and they've asked that we provide the electricity supply to the transformer. To the transformer. Councillor Jurisevic: The transformer therefore sit on the vessel or on land? On land. Okay. Speaker 8: And we've made some estimates around that but it is kind of conjecture because there'd
00:28:00 be a design process to go through that. Councillor Jurisevic: You'd have to talk to Energex as to whether the capacity is on that service at that point, whether there's any upgrades. And the proposal. I've got no idea what the sort of electrical capacity would be for their transformer. Is that mentioned in their tender? Speaker 8: The advice we had would be that you're talking three phase, 415 watt supply. Councillor Jurisevic: Or the power requirement. Speaker 8: It's 11 kVA existing supply down Merindal Street. But I'm not sure of how that plays out. How much more? That's all. Yeah. Speaker 10: Any other questions? No. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Speaker 5: Just coming in off the back of that answer then. Is there anyone that's bought opportunity for community battery or, you know, battery to be put down there in the future given we're looking at those technologies and
00:29:00 then power? Speaker 8: Yeah. There's battery powered vehicle ferries in operation in Scandinavia but they close tens of millions of dollars. But a community battery to provide the power supply. I think the amount of power that you're talking about to continually operate ferries of these sizes would dwarf the size of most community batteries unless you're talking huge community batteries. Councillor Jurisevic: That's fair. We haven't got any idea of the power requirements from electrical perspective. Not at this stage. So that's all conjecture, Dennis, until we know that. That's right. I mean, if you didn't have that detail. It would be interesting to know that detail if it's available. Speaker 8: It isn't. Councillor Jurisevic: Is that possible to get that before the next meeting? Speaker 8: What is that that you're asking? Councillor Jurisevic: The power requirement for an electric vehicle ferry that they're talking about supply. Speaker 8: I can try, yeah.
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Any other questions, councillor? Karen, you finished? Anything else? Speaker 10: I can answer the questions. Councillor Jurisevic: Okay. Thank you. There's nothing further. We've got a motion to defer to general committee. All in favour? Ayes have it. Thank you. Thank you, Dennis. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Dennis. We've got an extra week, Dennis. We don't have that. Very good. That's an extra week of questions. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, the questions just keep coming. It's really interesting. It's really interesting. Thank you, Dennis. To look at something new. Mayor Stewart: It's great. Good amount of responses. Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: The possibility of a new source of power might raise all sorts of questions. Lena Greener. Item two, Noosa River Holiday Park Management Tender Services. Robin. Good afternoon, everyone. We're talking about the Noosa River Holiday Park. Would you like to give us a bit of an overview of your report? Sure. Speaker 1: The Noosa River Holiday Park is located at Munna Point in Noosaville, and the park forms
00:31:00 part of the Noosa Holiday Park's business unit, which is an important contributor to Council's revenue and utilised to offset the general rate. The Noosa Holiday Parks also play an important role in our regional economy, for our community and our tourism industry. Council engages management contractors to provide holiday park management services, and under the local government regulation, we're required to go to public housing and public tender for these services. In July this year, we went out to market with a tender for the Noosa River Holiday Park Management Services. All tender advertising requirements were met. The tender closed in August, and Council received two compliant tenders. The distribution of evaluation criteria weighting between capability and delivery, and the pricing, which encompassed 75% of the overall scoring, recognises that the Noosa River Holiday Park is a non-profit park, and that the level of service delivery provided by our management contractors is critical to achieving our budgeted revenue levels.
00:32:00 The evaluation process consisted of two comprehensive evaluation panel meetings, and an independent financial capacity assessment undertaken by a consultant. The evaluation process and the panel determined that the most advantageous contractor for Council is 1-8 Proprietary Limited, and as such, the recommendation in front of you today is to award the contract for the Noosa River Holiday Park Management Services to 1-8 for a base period of five years, commencing on the 22nd of November. Mayor Stewart: I've got a couple of questions. Sure. Fire away. Thanks. On page 18, it talks about, when we talk about capability delivery, we talk about digital solutions for operation. Posed in a very specific way. What are the innovations in booking and guest management? It seems to be a very forward-focused organisation with a focus on digital technology, and
00:33:00 also you mentioned proposed contract value adds for councils such as website enhancements. I'm just wondering if there's any elaboration on just that. The technology, they seem to be really a leader in this field, and that was quite a big part of it, so I just wanted to elaborate a bit further on that. Sure. Speaker 1: I'll try and balance out, obviously, the commercial incompetence aspects of their innovative pathways. Sure. They are a forward-thinking organisation, and a systems-based organisation, so they employ a lot of off-the-shelf digital platforms to help undertake their resourcing, their rostering, staff allocation, cleaning programs, preventative maintenance programs, and also a high level of data collection as well. Okay. Councillor Lorentson: Can I also add? Sure. So I did some research on One8. They also won in 2022 Traveller's Tourist Award, recognised for excellence.
00:34:00 So I was really impressed with One8. Can you confirm, do they also operate our other parks of Boreham Point and Noosa Northshore? Are they the same group? Speaker 1: They do currently hold those contracts, yes. Councillor Lorentson: They do. And in terms of website enhancements, what are some of the things that you would like to see from One8? I've really got to say it was blown away at One8, their operations. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm assuming they'll help facilitate booking for all three parts with one company. Speaker 1: Yeah, look, from a tender evaluation perspective, we just look at what's in front of us for this contract. Obviously, if you step to the side and look at collectively across a region, there are some benefits from having one operator within a website and booking management space. But, yeah, for the purposes of the tender evaluation, we just considered what was in front of us. Councillor Jurisevic: Well, it's interesting you say that, because reading through the tender evaluation, apart
00:35:00 from capability and delivery, which I'll ask you about, financial capacity, Belgravia seem to be ahead. Experience, they're even. Workplace health and safety, which is one of concern, is significantly ahead. Environment and sustainability, Belgravia are ahead. Contribution to local economies, much of a muchness. What is the significant difference between the two? Councillor Lorentson: Good question. Councillor Jurisevic: Sure. Because from a price evaluation, Belgravia certainly outweigh the other. And that seems to be the major factor in play here with regard to the two tenders. Speaker 1: Yeah. I'm happy to talk briefly to all of the evaluation criteria for that. Councillor Jurisevic: That's the main one. I mean, the others said, and I can see weightings on one side, except capability and delivery, and the fact that you mentioned technology and some of the other elements, I'm not seeing that in the evaluation. I'm seeing almost an element of the opposite, apart from the capability and delivery. Speaker 1: Sure. The capability and delivery is allocated 40% of weighting, and it's a really broad and
00:36:00 important part of our evaluation and consideration. I'll probably answer it in two ways. At a macro level, the capability of a management service. The capability of a services provider is linked to our levels of service and guest experience. And our guest experience is linked directly to our revenue. So that's the macro level. Talking about capability at a micro level, we're down to the granular items about making sure that facilities are kept clean, that there's quick systems to respond to repairs or things that are impacting on a guest experience. There's making sure that there's enough staffing and resourcing to handle volumes of calls. And check-ins. So that's the micro level. And having a high quality of all those micro activities collectively is how we successfully deliver the program and achieve revenue levels. So the way in which or the methodology or the how of all those services are delivered,
00:37:00 that's the capability. So within the tender, 1A provided a high level of information around how they would deliver those things. Programs, systems, flowcharts, workflows. It provided the evaluation panel with a high level of comfort. A higher level of comfort than the alternate submission did. Councillor Jurisevic: That's interesting because when I look, I mean, the question I asked you was to, as to which other parks they manage. Both manage a significant number of parks within the Queensland and New South Wales region. That could, and all of, you know, that seem to be fairly well managed. Fairly high grade parks in the system. I mean, they have to go back and check further than that. So it's interesting. It's really down to what they provided you in the way of your patients and how they manage the facilitation. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. Speaker 1: One thing I've learnt over the past couple of years and built a really good network with all the other local government holiday park offices.
00:38:00 So each quarter we catch up and talk. So people jump on from all the local governments around the state. You know, and a large topic of conversation is how we procure management services and what the scope of them is and how we do pricing and all those things. One thing I've observed is that there's two key pathways that councils procure management services for holiday parks, and it largely comes down to the size and depth of the organisation. So for example, Sunshine Coast Council has a really, has a lot of depth in their building and facilities program and team. And so what they see from their management services provider is probably more the original type management services of handling guests and bookings. Smaller councils such as Noosa Council have started the journey into procuring a broader range of services from our management providers. So things like doing plumbing maintenance, electrical maintenance, coordinating repairs for us, because we have a lower headcount and depth within our building and facilities
00:39:00 team. So I think with what's happened with Noosa Council is there was a service review back in 2016 or 2017 that kick-started a program to start to outsource a higher volume of tasks to our management services providers. And the difference is that probably between the two submissions, one entity being 1A has more contracts that deliver that broader range of services. They have smaller contracts. They have some lease arrangements, which means they're responsible for everything. And Belgravia has more of the more traditional style contracts where it doesn't encompass such a high level of plumbing and electrical and building maintenance. Councillor Jurisevic: That explains it. Thank you. I looked at both and Belgravia actually has four on the Fraser Coast, one on the Gold Coast, two in Byron and the other has two in Noosa.
00:40:00 So it was a, for me, the parks they were managing, I mean, they had a, seemed to have a similar capacity of, with the parks and a similar diversity of parks around the region. So thank you. That's scratching the surface a bit deeper. Thank you for clarifying the depth that you went to with regard to what you're achieving. You're welcome. Trying to achieve there in the contract. Councillor Wilkie: Can I ask my questions now? Please go on. Page 18, you mentioned the proposed innovations and you mentioned an offsite call centre. Is the call centre in Australia? Speaker 1: Yes. Councillor Wilkie: Great. Speaker 1: In Brisbane. Councillor Wilkie: On page 23, the criteria regarding workplace health and safety and quality systems, which is about the protection of the people working at the facility, which is a Council-run facility. It rated quite a bit lower than the unsuccessful tenderer.
00:41:00 What assurances have you seen in the tender documents that have convinced you that anyone working on site will not be at risk in any way? Speaker 1: Sure. Councillor Wilkie: So just because they rated lower doesn't mean their submission was deficient in an OH&S capacity in any way. Speaker 1: No, that's right. Both tenderers have comprehensive workplace safety and quality systems. Both tenders have compliance health and management systems in place and evidence of that was provided within both tenders. Things like policies, procedures, referring to the legislation and providing information as to how they comply with legislation, both had comprehensive systems. The difference in scoring of the 1.2 points is related to the ISO rating that Belgravia has. So that's the International Standards Organisation and any entity can seek certification, ISO
00:42:00 certification across a number of industry requirements and Belgravia has chosen to do that. Our procurement evaluation requires us to recognise that as a higher level of assurance. Yes. It doesn't mean that companies that score lower than that have a deficiency. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. Thank you. And based on what you've seen in the tender, what changes do you expect, what improvements do you expect to see at Noosa River Park as a result of this management team taking over? Speaker 1: Look, in terms of occupancy and guest experience, we're quite high. You know, we score up over 97% occupancy. Some of the things that the tender has picked up or the contract has picked up are a range of building management and facility management services, so things all the way down to equipment
00:43:00 maintenance, timber maintenance, looking after fencing, ground, some of those sorts of things that at the moment we're trying to organise in an ad hoc way. We'll have a contract of our package of work. And that's an important investment. I think it's important. I think it's an important investment in the asset, achieving revenue levels into the future. Because if things start to look tired and wear down, then that impacts on guest amenity. So I'm looking forward to putting that in place. I think we'll achieve some opportunities for innovation and improvement and really forward thinking tourism outcomes. Because it's a forward thinking organisation. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: And given that the three Noosa Council run parks and resorts, we're looking forward to seeing those parks and resorts be run by this company. Is there the likelihood that there's going to be referrals from one to another, rather than seeing
00:44:00 another caravan park as a competitor, they're more likely to refer a guest who can't get in across to, say, from Boring Point to Noosa River or vice versa, to the north shore? Speaker 1: Certainly. I know that- And work together. Yeah. I know that that happens between Boring Point and North Shore. But to be honest, there's a lot for the industry. There's a lot of customers to go around at the moment. So I know that even with having two separate operators, those things were in place where you'd refer guests on. Because ultimately, it's the regional look. We want people to come to the region- And have their stay and enjoy their time here. Certainly, I'm sure there's programs or opportunities with having one operator in place. Councillor Jurisevic: Well, I want to imagine one booking system. So if one park's booked out, they may look at the other two parks coming to the region because they're on the same website. Yeah. Yeah. Assumedly. Speaker 1: Correct. Currently, our website allows for someone to drill down to the park they wish to book and proceed with that booking. Councillor Jurisevic: Is it our website, the booking website?
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 Or is it the operator's website, the booking website? Speaker 1: Our council's website. Councillor Jurisevic: Yes. Speaker 1: It links into our booking system through an API. And we have a booking system as well. Councillor Wilkie: No more questions. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. Like Councillor Wilkie, again, I'll bring up the Workplace Health and Safety Quality System. And I'm glad you clarified that. That seems like a significant difference, though. That's over 20% difference for the ISO standard in the evaluation of Workplace Health and Safety. Now, Workplace Health and Safety doesn't only apply to the workers. It also applies to the people that are utilising the park. Speaker 1: No. ISO is an additional level of certification. No, I get that. Councillor Jurisevic: But I'm saying Workplace Health and Safety and the way that they operate their Workplace Health and Safety impacts on visitors to the park, not just the employees of the park. Sure. So to see a 20% difference in ISO 5000 ranking, that ranks it very highly. That seems like a ... We evaluate that requirement, even though Council don't aim to achieve
00:46:00 ISO 5000 standard in its own operations, because of the cost involved, that we evaluate it extremely highly. Speaker 1: Within the response schedules and the templates that we use, it specifically asks for if that ISO level of certification is achieved. And if it's a yes, then the evaluation panel is required to attribute a certain level of scoring to that. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm getting to the level ... That's over 20% more just to get that ISO 5000 certification. Is that correct? Speaker 1: I might defer that question to procurement. Councillor Jurisevic: Well, if we could have a ... If we could ask the question of procurement, that seems like a significant consideration in their evaluation of that stand. That's all. Sure. Speaker 1: Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you, Robyn. Speaker 1: You're welcome. Thank you very much. Councillor Jurisevic: If we could get some feedback on that, it would be appreciated, Robyn. Speaker 1: Yeah. Sure. No problem. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Apart from that, all good? Anybody want to move the recommendation?
00:47:00 I'll move it. Councillor ... Lorentzen had a hand up. You can second? Yep. All in favour? Okay. Thank you. Speaker 8: Thank you. Speaker 5: Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Item three on the list is the Noosaville Shire Council Sold and Specialised Supplier List. Madam. Councillor Lorentson: I, Councillor Lorentson ... Councillor Jurisevic: Oh, hang on. Hello. You've got the declaration there, have you? Yes, I do. Fire away. Councillor Lorentson: I, Councillor Lorentson, inform the meeting that I have a declarable conflict of interest in this matter, as my husband, Chris Lorentzen, is an employee of Page Furnishes, Provider Limited, who I propose to be included on the Specialised Supplier List. As a result of my conflict of interest, I will now leave the meeting room. What matter is considered ... Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you for being so open in declaring that. Adam, would you like to give us a bit of an overview of what you've gone through in this process?
00:48:00 Speaker 4: Sure. So, as we know, like government regulation, 2012 governs our procurement activities, processes. So, what that typically means for medium-sized contracts between $15,000 and $200,000, we're required to invite three quotes. For anything in a large-sized contract, greater than $200,000, we're obliged to go through a written tender process. But the legislation also provides a number of exceptions. So, Section 231, approved contractor lists, which we very rarely use. Section 232, which is registered pre-qualified suppliers, which you would have seen reports coming to Council seeking approval of things like trade services. 233, preferred supply arrangements, which we're using less of nowadays. Section 234, which is local government arrangements, which is local by. which we use quite extensively and section 235 which is other other exceptions and those
00:49:00 exceptions include sole specialised suppliers confidential nature emergencies auctions second hand and government agency so this report focuses on the sole and specialised component because both of those other exceptions require council resolution before we can use these types of suppliers so this this report seeks to refresh the existing sole and specialised suppliers so the last time it came to council for approval was back in October last year and this is a refresh of that existing those existing lists with a small number of amendments and a number of Councillor Wilkie: additions any questions i do um adam thanks for the report what i didn't get from the report and and forgive me if it was in the october report what's the process by which these suppliers
00:50:00 are chosen is there an internal panel that selects them and who's on that panel uh no there's not so Speaker 4: it goes through procurement firstly um to identify if um it is truly a sole specialist Councillor Wilkie: so there is an invitation that goes out so for example i mean we as councillors are asked to endorse this but i don't know the process yep can you perhaps talk to that so Speaker 4: the first step is to an invitation to all staff to identify that we are looking at a refresh for this arrangement um and to seek nominations so those nominations typically will come to myself uh and to scott eisen the procurement manager for a review and to identify whether we agree if it's sold or specialised um so there is a number that we do uh reject um because you know we simply don't agree and we believe that a competitive process as outlined in the legislation can be followed for those procurements and ultimately uh trent also reviews the report for what he believes is appropriate as well
00:51:00 and yeah it's as simple as that i've added another step just to look at the expenditure typically of these types of arrangements so a number of what we've added here is relatively small in expenditure especially a lot of the advertising so in some instances it's probably over the top adding some of these to the list because the expenditure is so small things like the advertising in these smaller magazines that the art galleries have asked for it is almost insignificant and it doesn't even take us to the threshold of 15 000 where quotes are required um but it could expand also who's to know where it's going in the future with some of the expenditure on these advertising items but then there's some some some that are quite significant insurances yes so you would have seen quite a number of insurances that we've had on there lgm um jlt um spur is quite
00:52:00 Councillor Wilkie: significant well there's a couple of questions around that well okay yeah so just following something you've said um adam what would it be some of the reasons why a nomination from a staff member would be rejected Speaker 4: it would depend on what it is obviously but if we believe there is a competitive market out there for that transaction then it would be rejected on that basis so if we believe that it's reasonable to expect the staff member to seek quotations it'll be rejected and i can probably clarify Speaker 10: yes an example might be if we talk about a common industry or trade it might be a trade service or a mechanical service where it's it's not sold or specialised we know there's obviously a number of operators that may be able to provide that type of trade or mechanical service in the shire
00:53:00 and that being the case we have a number of other procurement arrangements under the regulations we have other panel arrangements in particular we do have panel arrangements for trade and mechanical and then we will refer those applications to those other panels this is because this Speaker 4: is purely about those sold and specialised yeah okay you may have requests for consultancies which we typically will reject because while the nature of the consultancy might be special whatever it might be it's still a competitive marketplace for that type of service you know physio therapy for example while it is some circles regarded as special we can still go out through Councillor Jurisevic: a competitive quote to seek that service yeah i could do with my shoulder pain yeah clean i think i've got a couple of questions first one was i was surprised to see Pitney Bowes a very old name in
00:54:00 typewriting that actually there was a software entity that finally changed you know but things like spur and cue leave and um the local government mutual lgm they're all supplies that we've used in the past why are they being added to a specialised supply list or a sole supply list women their services that we've Speaker 4: utilised in the past well they had been um but and our obligation typically is as i stated at the start quotations or tenders so um so for spur for example we're spending in excess of two hundred thousand dollars a year so the minimum obligation is for us to write tenders but obviously that's Councillor Jurisevic: impractical in this example so they weren't actually our own it's because they're the only they're the only agency that can do that exactly exactly and that's what the whole point of this report is about well i'm surprised to see it's taken us that long to add them to the list where they're the only supplier anyway absolutely that's that's i guess that's what threw me i went hang on surely they're on our list because they're the only supplier well and i guess when i was reviewing
00:55:00 Speaker 4: the list also the same question was posed by myself you know where well hang on it should be there Councillor Jurisevic: and that's why i've gone through the process as well we're not on a specialised supply list or a sole supply list okay i'm really taken aback by that and cue leave not actually having been on Speaker 4: the list before but there you go now it could be it could be argued also one of the other exceptions that i mentioned was uh section 235 f government agency that you could apply through that uh subclause but it's interesting the commentary when you look up the legislative commentary for government agency uh it's not that clear because we use government agency for other purposes where we i don't know if you've heard us using piggybacking where if sunshine coast council has a contract arrangement in place and it it benefits council members council we'll go in and use that then that's our understanding of section 235 f
00:56:00 Councillor Jurisevic: i said just surprised to see them there today that you know nine years what is it again eight years nine years into this council that spur q leave and um and um lgm work worked on some sort of specialised or some supply list already that's all that's all apart from that no no problems with it um i noticed that in i was sort of wondering why council lawrenston made the declaration i'm looking through the members in the additions and they're not there but of course when we look at the overall list of all the suppliers they're listed there so i'm i question whether she needed to make that declaration when there was no amendment to an already operational that's great function there but uh i'm glad you know i acknowledge that she's made the declaration and walked down as a uh as the honourable thing nothing controversial nothing controversial anyway no there wasn't any element there with that with that regard so i was a little a little surprised when i read through it and then i've got why is she walking in and i'm so oh yeah because in the attachments they're actually listed as already ones that are arrangements already exist yeah no no but apart from that now
00:57:00 i'm happy with that i'll make i'll move the uh the recommendation over the second time one second they're going to council welcome no further discussion all in favor thank you madam thank you thank you thank you i believe item for the advertising spending policy we have deb online ah Speaker 2: yes welcome Councillor Jurisevic: deb yes sorry before we hang on dead before we go on we just have to get councillors to back in the room we were going to keep you out there for a while but we thought we'd better bring you back in Councillor Lorentson: how can you not miss me Councillor Jurisevic: i don't think you want to go there deb can you give us a bit of an overview on the advertising spending policy track changes and final
00:58:00 Speaker 2: version yes i'd love to do that this policy was due for a new it was last reviewed in 2014 not long after we had established as a new council the major changes with the policy are to reflect changes in legislation as well previously our policy is required is to have certain inclusions relating to how money is spent on things like around election period but also the sorts of things that are in the public interest so this revised policy complies with section 197 of the local government act it further elaborates on the purpose of the policy and the the types of things that are that we should spend money on advertising um which are in the public interest so you'll see that that section of the policy has been expanded and this was also at the request of our auditor risk committee who felt that they they would like to have had that section extended so it was very clear
00:59:00 about what it is um you know what's appropriate um to be able to spend money on in advertising it also reflects to our media and our communications we use social media a lot more now and it picks up that as well whereas in the past when the policy was originally written it didn't um highlight that so i do have to acknowledge i made a mistake in the executive summary i referred to the um the council report date as being the 16th of 9th that was actually the committee date the actual previous resolution on the policy was the 25th of september so i just want to bring that to your attention so i'm happy to take any questions or if you'd like to expand on anything um with the proposed amendments council wilkie's flagging a question for you yeah deb you mentioned Councillor Wilkie: you mentioned that this captures council's use of social media as well is that correct yes that's Speaker 2: right it acknowledges that we do use social media and we do we do it to um to you know as a as another
60 minutes in ¶
01:00:00 channel to get news out there quickly to the community and to promote our services and the various activities for our different business areas or even so much as even in going out for information and engagement okay we're utilizing those channels now so does that also then include Councillor Wilkie: press releases yes as well yes definitely okay thank you yeah that i said i'm there's an element Councillor Jurisevic: of challenge in in in advertising versus promotion of council um you know um the opening the i'll give a give an example i mean at the opening of the bridge are we allowed to mention that the mayor opened the bridge in that case you know that where does the line become advertising where does the line become acknowledgement of the work that council's undertaking in its day-to-day operations
01:01:00 Speaker 2: well we talk about when you look at the section of policy that expands on what is in the public interest it talks about new or continuing services if the bridge was a new bridge for example into that area um promoting the achievement of council's goals and objectives i suppose that the point here is very is about you know that it is within the public interest that that the um the advertising isn't i suppose overly um you know more than what would be reasonable in the circumstances and that there isn't um and it's not linked to some you know to a political game that might be if it was closer to an election and that's why that section around advertising prior to elections is included clarifying question previously previously just just councillor jerusalem just print the policy previously didn't provide a lot of detail on that so there was uncertainty so we that's why we expanded that but sometimes you can't you know encapsulate
01:02:00 everything but in that example where you've given the opening of a bridge it's a new council service and facility so it would be reasonable to expect that you would be able to you know promote that Councillor Wilkie: and advertise that deb um it's called advertising spending policy so i i understand the need for rigor around uh advertising and when you're involving the expenditure of ratepayers money Speaker 2: that's right that's right and look the big the point here is around transparency and what is it you know acceptable to the community and that's the very focus of the Councillor Wilkie: So my question is, does this then relate only to expenditure on social media ads, boosted posts, because the others are not?
01:03:00 Speaker 2: Well, we do identify social media. Boosting posts really just increases the reach of that particular advertisement. Councillor Wilkie: And the cost. Speaker 2: Yes, and there is a cost associated with it. I suppose it goes back to that reasonable test. There's a difference to promoting it for the benefit of the public, and if reaching a broader group is advantageous that way. Then definitely, but if it was doing its percent of doing it without a real, you know, and it not being in the public interest, then you'd have to question it. Councillor Wilkie: So I'm wondering, do we need to distinguish between promotion of council activities requiring the expenditure of money to a third party, or just normal information sharing through press releases and social media?
01:04:00 Because this is advertising. Councillor Jurisevic: And this is along the lines of what I was alluding to, Frank, thank you. Councillor Wilkie: But this is, because it seems to be a broader thing. I've just learned that this is, it does include social media, and that's in the first line of the thing. But it also is press releases. So we're talking about all sorts of media. So is this a media policy, or is it a spending policy? Speaker 2: It's a spending policy. If this would have been come up through another area, it would have come up through transfer into finance. It's more related to the financial, that suite of financial policies that we have around how we spend our funds. So it really is around spending. There previously were the, there was previous legislation in place that was quite restricted in this place, in this area. But with the changes and reforms that have been made, the area in the actual, in the regulation was lightened a little bit.
01:05:00 But it was on the basis that council, then, you know, had to introduce policies on spending, on advertising. So it really is more the financial aspect. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. So in the paragraph about, say, midway down page 44, council must not during the period of three months preceding an election of the local government other than a by-election, or during the period after the date of the by-election is advertised until the day of the election, you've got here, place advertisements relating to future plans, but unless. So should that also mean place advertisements or issue social media or press releases relating to future plans? Is that what we're actually agreeing to here, or are we talking about paid advertising only? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, because that means within three months of an election, you couldn't put out a media statement where a councillor was cited as having, was quoted in that because it would be seen to be promotion.
01:06:00 Speaker 3: That's what I meant. Councillor Jurisevic: This is the point. Councillor Wilkie: That's what I meant. That's not what we're talking about. So maybe this doesn't apply to social media unless it's paid social media ads. Maybe it doesn't relate to press releases. Maybe it only relates to paid advertising. Or if it does relate to press releases and social media, then I think the wording of this needs to reflect that, because I'm not seeing that. Mayor Stewart: So that means then that we can't put out any press releases that the council's doing three months prior to the election. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, that's, that's along the lines of what, that's why we're trying to clarify. Speaker 2: Excuse me councillors, this relates to paid advertising and the use of public money in doing that, it doesn't release, it doesn't apply to media releases that we put out, as Ken would normally put out to inform the community of different, different, whether it be opening of facilities or whatever, it really relates to the paid, paid advertising, and I think possibly the definition of advertising might be very different. Are you getting to as well, councillor Wilkie? Councillor Wilkie: Yes, so in that, in that case, with the earlier discussion we had, I was, I was led to believe that this applied to press releases as well as social media.
01:07:00 But I'm, I'm thinking, do we need to have social media in there? We do need to have social media in there? If we're only talking about paid advertising? Paid social media. Speaker 2: We, we, we do actually pay for social media advertising, as you said, through Boost, et cetera, as well. Councillor Wilkie: Okay, I, I think we just need to clarify that. This doesn't relate to, yeah. I, I had the same concern as a friend. I was misled in the earlier parts of this discussion, yeah. Mayor Stewart: Deb, can I ask a question? Just on the section 197 of the advertising spending of the local government regulation, it says advertising is promoting for the payment of a fee, an idea, goods or services to the public. And when I cross over and look what we're saying, we're saying council may incur expenditure for advertising only if the advertising is for providing information or education to the public, and the information or education is provided in the public interest.
01:08:00 Well, that's a narrower definition than what section 197 allows. Speaker 2: Yes, it is, it is, and it, it is, and it, I suppose, it, it provides a further, I suppose, boundary around it. If, if you, if council is not happy with that, with the, with those examples there, you know, I can take that on board, but it provides greater clarity or detail around what is acceptable. Mayor Stewart: Well, I, I think, I, I think we should be following the, the guidelines. The guidelines of LGAQ, and if we're narrowing it, then we have to have a good, right, reasonable background information on why we're doing that. Councillor Jurisevic: I don't think we need to. I think, I think if we look under purpose, and we look at the second sentence, under where it mentions section 197, it says the regulation defines advertising as promoting for the payment of a fee, which was your point, an idea, goods or services to the public. A media release is not a paid advertisement. Mayor Stewart: No. A media release is, is a media release. We can only incur expenditure for, and then it's not consistent with what is above, and it's not consistent with the section 197 of the local government regulation.
01:09:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Where does it say that? Mayor Stewart: On page 41. On page 41 to 39. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, well, where does it say we can only expend? Mayor Stewart: Under council policy. Council may incur expenditure for advertising only if the advertising is for providing information or education to the public, and the information or education is provided in the public. Public interest, and Deb has just confirmed that's a much narrower version than what section 197 is, which is advertising is promoting for the payment of a fee, an idea, goods or services to the public. Councillor Jurisevic: Well, that's what it says in, that's what it says above under purpose. Mayor Stewart: But, but it's not, the policy says something different. Councillor Jurisevic: The policy, the policy states under purpose section 197 that you've just, you've just quoted. Mayor Stewart: No, that's, that's, that's section 197 of the local government, and then our council policy, the amendment is narrow, which is what Deb's just said. Yeah, okay. Councillor Wilkie: If this is relating to paid advertising in media and social media, then I'm, I'm happy.
01:10:00 I just got confused by the drawing in of the press releases as being captured as part of this, but if they're not, I'm happy with the wording. Speaker 2: Deb, if I may add, there are some press releases that we pay for. Well, for example, if we're advertising a major document for consultation, we will actually pay for an advertisement in the newspaper. It's not actually a press release, but it is an advertisement. Councillor Wilkie: That's an advertisement, yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: Well, I'd, I'd argue that the, I'd argue the two-page sprint that we take out in the Noosa Journal is paid advertising in any. It is. Any promotion in that is paid advertising. If a councillor's mentioned in that during, during a period of time, it could be misconstrued, so. Councillor Wilkie: They should, yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: So, that, that was where I get the, I get the blurred lines, Deb, in those, those elements.
01:11:00 Speaker 2: And also something that the Audit and Risk Committee asked for, and they wanted to provide more details so it was clear, so there was some clarity around what was and wasn't considered to be acceptable. So, that is the reason for expanding those sections through HO for, because this policy doesn't, is used by staff and helps guide staff. So, by providing those examples and expanding that, staff can see how they're, you know, things can fit within the policy, or where they are required, and, and what the requirements are, as opposed to, say, a more generalist, a more general, um, interpretation just as quoted in the, um, section from the regulation. Mayor Stewart: I'm going to move the amendment. Councillor Wilkie: We can't hear. We can send it to General.
01:12:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Send it to General Committee. Mayor Stewart: Oh, you're going to move the motion. Councillor Jurisevic: If you don't agree with the wording of it. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah, I'd like to refer it to General. Um, can I, I've got a couple of questions, Deb. Uh, firstly, on page 41, what I noted was deleted in the 2014 endorsed, um, policy, was, um, the purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines regarding the use of Council resource. So, guidelines and, um, my understanding of a guideline, it's not mandatory. It's a general recommendation, um, that's not included in the new Council policy, which then makes it mandatory or a rule. My question to you is, um, what are the penalties? What happens if you don't abide by no longer guidelines, but, but you, you, you don't abide by the principles, or is it...
01:13:00 Councillor Wilkie: It's not a regulation. Councillor Lorentson: Is it a misconduct breach, or I, I'm just trying to understand why it's, the, the wording guidelines has been omitted in the new draft. Speaker 2: Um, the previous policy was very brief, um, and, um, as in, when we were referring to guidelines, and, and I suppose it goes back to that point I ma, uh, mentioned earlier about expanding that area of what type of advertising, um, and the types of advertising you can, that is permitted to send money to. Um, that expands it, um, so, the gui, I, I suppose, in this, guidelines is referenced to a term, it's not actually saying there's a set of actual guidelines, it, it's to provide guidance to staff in spending money on advertising that is acceptable under the legislation, so, um, and if you, if you then ask me, um, you know, what's the penalty, or, or if, if it's, if then, if it's acceptable under the legislation, so, um, and if you, if you then ask me, um,
01:14:00 if money is spent on advertising that isn't in the public interest or doesn't comply with, um, the legislation, then it would, it would, it would, there would have to be action taken dependent on, it would probably, it would be in relation to a staff member not following, uh, an appropriate policy in that place, you know, in that situation, it would be, um, some sort of, um, disciplinary matter, but it would probably be on the basis of making sure the officer was informed about what the policy boundaries were, what the appropriate action is, and, and, um, some sort of letter of warning, but, um, but that is in relation to a staff member. Councillor Jurisevic: Well, we would assume that before anything went out for advertising, it'd gone through the necessary number of hands to make sure that everybody was happy with the wording and the, and the, and the format and all the rest of it anyway, and it would get picked up. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. So, Deb, we're required under the Local Government Regulation 2012 to have the policy, and, and if, if spent, money is spent on, uh, on advertising that is, is inconsistent with what's outlined under the regulation, they'd be in breach of the regulation as well.
75 minutes in ¶
01:15:00 Is that correct? Speaker 2: That the... Councillor Wilkie: Because they say a local government must, under the regulation, local government must spend money on advertising only if, A, the advertising is not in line with the regulation, B, the advertising is not in line with the regulation. That's in the regulation. Speaker 2: Yes. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Speaker 2: Yes, yes. So... Because our policy is made, um... Councillor Wilkie: Makes it, clarifies it for staff, yeah. Councillor Lorentson: Um, but at age 45, the policy also applies to all advertising expenditure undertaken by councillors as well as council officers. So, my question is, um, that should... Councillor Wilkie: It's not personal, personal expenditure, is it? Councillor Lorentson: Um, can I have some clarification on that? Yeah, good question. Because I'm, I'm reading this that we catch it under this policy as well. Can you, um, explain it there?
01:16:00 Speaker 2: Yeah, the area, um, the relevance is, is, you know, the section of the policy that talks about advertising, um, prior to elections. So, um... That's three months. But, yeah. Councillor Wilkie: But we can. Speaker 2: That's where it's relevant. Councillor Wilkie: We can personally advertise. And that's when we do personally advertise, Deb. Councillor Jurisevic: So, this is, this is the utilisation of council funds for advertising, not personal funds for advertising. Councillor Wilkie: So, to all council advertising expenditure undertaken by councillors and council officers. Speaker 2: Yeah, it relates to council, council... Councillor Wilkie: Council funds. Yeah, but Councillor Lorentson's picked up on a good point there. It's, can we, could that be clarified? Council advertising expenditure? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. On page 45, instead of just advertising expenditure? Yeah. Sure. Yeah. Mayor Stewart: That is it, yeah, that is public money, not private money. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: It does read like that, doesn't it?
01:17:00 It does read that way. Councillor Lorentson: Otherwise no one can advertise prior to, prior to an election. So, Deb, at Christmas we normally sing and post that on our social media. That is intended to influence our electorate. Well, we no longer be allowed to do that. There's, there's no hope, there's no hope without, there's no hope without winning votes, if there's a good reason why. Councillor Wilkie: We do have to pay them to listen. Councillor Jurisevic: It's gone off, it's gone off piste here, so I think we're getting back on track, please. So, so can I just clarify then, the changes that you would like made were the, the last Speaker 2: point that was made in relation to council advertising on page 45? Councillor Jurisevic: The roles and responsibilities, adding the word. Mayor Stewart: I wanted some, I wanted to add some wording, but I'll have to do that in general. Councillor Jurisevic: We're going to refer it to general anyway. General and look at the wording and any tweaks that we think are necessary. Mayor Stewart: So is this for a further report? Councillor Jurisevic: No, all right. Mayor Stewart: Just for general. But for further discussion? Councillor Jurisevic: Further discussion.
01:18:00 Mayor Stewart: Further discussion. Councillor Jurisevic: Which is moved by Councillor Stewart. Can I have a seconder? I'll second. Councillor Wilkie, you'll be happy to leave that until general committee to go further? Yes, sure. All in favour? Thank you, Deb. Thank you, Ken. Speaker 2: Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Thanks, Deb. We'll leave that till Monday week's meeting. So we'll move on to item 600 of the report, so noting for the committee, the annual 2022 annual disaster management report. I'm trying to work out why the number five appears after six, but anyway. James. Coming up, James. Would you like to join us at the table? And give us a bit of a summary of your report on the 2022 disaster management annual report. Right, councillors. Councillor Wilkie: Hello, James. Councillor Jurisevic: How are you? Welcome, mate. Welcome. Speaker 6: It's been a hell of a year. It's still coming. Yeah. Yeah.
01:19:00 So just, would you like me to just step through the report? Yeah. Yep. Speaker 9: Sure. Speaker 6: So we were just talking about some of the main activities occurring at the moment. So the Noosa Local Disaster Management Plan, it's called BMT at the moment. They're helping us with that plan. I've got an update on the plan this afternoon. I hope to get a draft out to our LDMG representative shortly so that they can have a review and hope to get that out this year. It's backed by our risk assessment as well. So that risk assessment will go out to our LDMG members as well with an opportunity for them to provide feedback and find out what we see as risks for the area and then what we need to push up through the district and state. So that all dovetails in together. So I'm going to finalise that this year. So we've had a considerable activation. Obviously, in February, March, we had our floods. That was a large activity.
01:20:00 The largest event we've had this year was followed shortly by something in May, which had the potential to look like February, March again, but fortunately it didn't. There's been a lot of work going on and still go on in relation to that event. We've got more and more tranches of funding that are being passed out every other week at this stage. So there's a lot of work going on putting together applications for funding, ranging from economic to environment to all sorts of different... Social. Floods. Sorry. Speaker 7: Social. Speaker 6: And social, yeah. In light of the event we had in February, we normally do run a local disaster management and LBCC training exercise, but because of the event we had, it's taken to that we would have exercised accordingly because it was a protracted event. We have, however, followed up with lots of training for our staff. We've also been going to a lot of exercises around that have been held by the state. Quite a few exercises in Brisbane. One a South East Queensland exercise on a cyclone.
01:21:00 Now a tsunami exercise in Brisbane and then we've been working with a company called Floodmap and we're looking at flooding exercises as well. Engagement and collaboration. We had Cheryl Patterson's bushfire position finished up in June, July this year. So we unfortunately lost that position and then, however, we had the floods, they've now given us an opportunity for another two years. So we've now moved on to a flood resilience and recovery officer which has been advertised and we're going through our process at the moment. So hopefully we'll be able to appoint someone in a flood role this time rather than a bushfire. It would be nice if they just gave us a disaster person full time but we just keep going from disaster. But that's where we're at in terms of that. SES is still going strong. We've got a couple of things that we're still working with SES on. That's particularly our Borean Point and also Pomona. So we've been working with the local controller and that community there to find out what's
01:22:00 the best way to house their equipment for one and keep them well prepared. So we have opportunities to move some assets and create a better space for them to actually respond from. So we're just working through that at the moment. We've investigated some toilet options for them. So both Borean Point and Pomona as well. So we've found some containerised style toilet shower combinations and we're just waiting on quotes for that. Fortunately there's a SES grant that's come out. You can get up to $75,000 as part of an application for facilities. So with that and then the SES local group have said that they could potentially put some money towards it as well. So we'll see what these final quotes come in as and then we'll be able to apply for up to $75,000 plus local and then we'll see what the residual is required and then we'll have to look for that sort of budget where we can to make up the balance for those two.
01:23:00 Councillor Jurisevic: So we're looking at them as a temporary solution? Speaker 6: So there's no, it'll be a full time solution for Pomona and then Borean Point will be a full time but it will be into a septic system. So that's the challenge. That's the challenge. But it will be the same, exactly the same style of facilities, just be loaded on top of kind of a 6,000 litre cell that then gets pumped out regularly. Councillor Wilkie: This is to disaster proof the toilets is it? It's to give them toilets to utilise because they don't have, they have to go down and Councillor Jurisevic: utilise the public toilets. They don't actually have any in their facility. Councillor Wilkie: In the evacuation centre? Councillor Jurisevic: No, not the evacuation centre, in the SESG. Sorry. Speaker 7: I didn't understand what you were talking about. One of the options, sorry to the Chair, is that Borean Point is the toilet that we provide because when the floods happen the public toilets are cut off. Yes. So this would create a potential public amenity as well that the SES would use but we could make it available to the public. So it kills two birds with one stone.
01:24:00 That's the idea. Thank you. But 75 grand sounds like a lot of money but that doesn't get you a toilet. Councillor Jurisevic: That's a cheap toilet block. No. That's a very, very inexpensive toilet block. But then you've got to pump out all the rest of it. Yeah. Speaker 7: So we're looking for other funding to do it. Councillor Jurisevic: That sounds like a great report on where we've been. Resilience and other activities going forward. We've spoken about the SES questions that have been raised. What other things are in the pipeline for the year going forward with regard to resilience measures and that that the community might want to know that we're looking to deliver Speaker 6: for them? Sure. So Ian has just joined us as well but Ian joined us this year in May as our disaster resilience officer. So his position was funded by the Luxembourg bushfires grant that we applied for. Part of Ian's role is working with communities around historically bushfires but also other natural hazards. And going out to schools.
01:25:00 So Ian will be going out to schools in late October and November. Part of our get ready in schools program. So we'll be delivering that. We've also got the new sim table that was approved through this group and taken to general. So we have that now. We're doing a special workshop this Thursday at Peregian. So that'll be actually showing the sim table in action. We'll be getting training from the US via teams. And we've brought up a couple of expert users from Canberra and also from Sydney. And to make a group of users Australia wide who can use this sim table and have sort of a best in practice for community outreach as well. So we're looking to demonstrate that and showcase that on Thursday. So that will be something that we will utilise when we go out to community to show how to be resilient in 3D. Councillor Wilkie: So it's mobile? It is. Speaker 6: You'll take it out to the community? We will take it out. Yeah. So initially I said we'll do our training. So it's more like a train the training session. And then we'll work towards our program and delivering something where we will take it out to community. Doesn't require a big bag of sand.
01:26:00 Quite a few days. Councillor Lorentson: So James, I've got a couple of questions. Sure. Just recently we had a round table with a polystyrene and environmental groups to use the environmental spillage of polystyrene on our beaches. One of the recommendations that came out of that round table was for a coastal emergency disaster response group to be included as part of a local disaster management group. Has consideration been given to that? Speaker 6: I think it's part of the recovery group. So we normally look after the resilience and response phase. And then we have a recovery group which is headed up by the local disaster management group, which is headed up by Kerry Contini. And so subgroups under that are generally required. So you'll have an environmental subgroup and things like that. So I probably can't talk to that just yet, but that is probably something that would be required. In terms of the polystyrene, we were looking at some options as well around coastal debris
01:27:00 and marine oil spill as well. So we're looking to enhance our capabilities with an SES trailer that we're going to take from Warring Point, which is underutilised and create a marine debris oil spill response trailer. And we're getting some SES trained up in oil spill response and working with MSQ in that capacity. So there's that. But that group, to answer your question, sorry, I'll have to defer to Kerry for that. Councillor Lorentson: Okay. And treated wastewater overflow, which are our coastal geosystems, rivers and beaches, would that also be considered under this subgroup or environmental group? Yes. Speaker 6: Potentially, but that's more, I guess, a response and preparedness, and that's working through our Unity Water LDMG reps at an LDMG level. So exercising how they would respond and knowing what their risks are. Councillor Jurisevic: We've got the annual meeting with Unity Water coming up. Great opportunity to turn around and pose that question to them. Councillor Lorentson: It's in my diary. Speaker 6: Ian actually went to a Unity Water annual exercise last week. Oh, okay. And so we've got representation there.
01:28:00 And what was their scenario, Ian? Speaker 9: Yeah. So it was a mock cyber attack from Brisbane to Noosa and what was happening with pump stations and water and sewage. So it was an exercise that went three-quarters of the day. But our contacts with Unity Water are really strong, and I think that's something we can certainly talk to them about for sure. Fantastic. Councillor Lorentson: And you said identified. Yes. As an imminent or emerging risk with our Audit and Risk Committee, because that is a real consideration that something may go seriously wrong. Well, may already be happening, but has that been identified by our Audit and Risk Committee? Councillor Jurisevic: Well, so you fall under the responsibility of Unity Water, one would think, under their audit. Speaker 7: More specifically, I don't think. Yes. Well, I think it's... Because it's not our...
01:29:00 It's not our asset. Not our... It's our... Some level of responsibility, but it's theirs to maintain and theirs to create. Stormwater also. Councillor Lorentson: Stormwater infrastructure and... Speaker 7: Yeah. And certainly that's a separate thing, but that's not a sewage issue as such. Sewage is the Unity Water. Stormwater also contaminates and pollutes our oceans and rivers. Councillor Lorentson: Sure. Speaker 7: Absolutely. Councillor Lorentson: Is that captured? Speaker 7: Well, it is because it's an infrastructure, so it's within our infrastructure risk exercise, because we have to make sure that we've got the appropriate infrastructure to deal with stormwater. But how far we go with that is the issue. Councillor Jurisevic: As much as silt and... Speaker 7: Well, and also... And all of our erosion. All of our everything doesn't cater for a one in 100 or what we'd ask, but not two in 100 or what we're having. Speaker 6: So I think it's probably in extreme events that some of these assets are going to be compromised,
90 minutes in ¶
01:30:00 and that there probably would be outflow. That's right. And unfortunately, you just have to rely on that solution, which is dilution, and warn people about the hazards of being in. That's why we tell people, stay out of water where you can, and tell them about risks. And we do regular... And we get regular treat inspections and monitoring to make sure that it's free and safe to go back in the water. But that message should always just be about stay out while there's storms around. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. Speaker 6: Sorry. Speaker 9: You had something right there. Oh, councillors, only one thing I was going to add to that. I was there as an observer, but being me, had meetings afterwards, and there was a thing that happened out of that which might be really helpful. There's a... Taryn Collis sits on our LDMG and was here only a week and a half ago, so about two weeks ago. And then part of our... James and my relationship with her was the question at the end is, what does council feel it needs more from us? And then now tying that together with obviously having a catch up day with them, that would
01:31:00 be the perfect time to ask the question. But a lot of this was really about those scenarios is when we get... When water was happening, what's happening with substations, where are we diverting to, how do we feel we can deal with load, particularly with, you know, flooding stuff that's coming up as well. So I think that would be a really timely question, and one they're probably ready for. Because it's one they'd ask for us to ask them. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: And the other element for resilience going forward from my perspective is ongoing flood studies to try and identify if there's any other means of assisting the community when floods occur. That whether we can better manage or better protect our community with additional means. We've undertaken two. The first one is, I think it's a good question. We've done flood mitigation measures in the past with regard to Reifel Street and Daintree State. Now there are other flood mitigation measures that we could look at putting in place or
01:32:00 things along those lines that may make us a more resilient community going forward. Speaker 6: We definitely have to do investigations and probably model it before we can look at mitigation options. Work package three under category D is a tranche of funding that's just been released. Working with Cheyenne and Oscar on that at the moment. We've come up with a range of items that we'll put through with the priority list through to Leo and then also to Larry for review prior to going up to the executive team to then put forward for funding. So we've probably got, it must be 11 plus different opportunities that we're looking for. Councillor Wilkie: Excuse me, James. The forecast, this being the third lamina in a row. Sure. There's forecasts of potential cyclones. This season. And some possibly early. How do the various communities know where they're meant to evacuate to in the case of a serious cyclone? Sure. And do we have any cyclone proof evacuation centres?
01:33:00 Speaker 6: No, we don't. No. The nearest one is Rockhampton. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Speaker 6: And that's all of Southeast Queensland is in the same boat as that. Yes. So no, we don't. We don't. We do evacuation facilities. The only opportunity if we did have a large cyclone come through is evacuate early or people have to just hunker down their own homes and then come to us post-event, but that's just something we have to deal with. We do have a meeting coming up with JCU, Geoscience Australia, and us, we've got Larry, Gary. There was a severe wind hazard assessment report that has been done. It's been released to us. We are getting a chance to have a workshop on that on the 25th of this month. So we'll see some outcomes on that and see what sort of impacts severe wind has on our building stock and what that would mean for our community. So that will provide us with a good update on what would happen. The update from BOM so far this year is that there's a greater than 73% chance of higher
01:34:00 than average cyclones. So there's normally four per year in Queensland. So that means we may get five. They do say that in Australia there's 11 per year with one making landfall. So there is, you know, that's Australia wide. So it's not as like the media makes out, it's not too bad, but there is the potential there and for East Coast low. So that I think once we've got more information we can make, but we've got plans in place. We do have sub plans, specific plans on things like that, and we can tell the community where we can go. We've got established evacuation centres through the leisure centre and we've done some work in there and that's still occurring at the Cooroy Library and a number of places. Councillor Wilkie: Will the new community house at Peregian, for example, be used? Could it be used? Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean, potentially any facility could be used. It's just whether or not they'll withstand the event, I suppose. So we've done investigations and audits on this leisure centre and it didn't pass as being anything substantial in the amount of money that would be required to spend on
01:35:00 that building. It wouldn't be worth it. It would be better to harden any future facilities and create a location where people could shelter in place. So that if you were looking at, you would build to a higher design standard. Councillor Wilkie: Rebuild the leisure centre, for example. Harden up the leisure centre. Speaker 6: Yeah. Huge cost. Councillor Wilkie: And where are the Js? The J can... Same thing. Will it withstand? Speaker 6: We'd have to probably go through an assessment. An assessment. An engineering assessment. Speaker 5: But nothing was built to cyclone standard. Would it be more likely for councillors that a new facility such as the one that's being proposed for McKinnon Drive, so Noosa District's sports complex, that you'd actually build it into that and try and retrofit an existing facility, which is always complicated and very expensive and you never quite get to build it. Mayor Stewart: The outcome that you want. On that, and is it the capacity, say something like that, Kerry, that we don't have, and
01:36:00 you said no one in the South East Queensland has a cyclone proof building, is it the capacity to have resilience funding allocated to that project on the basis that it not only would it be a sports complex, but it's got... The bunker. Absolutely. Speaker 5: Potentially if that's the decision the council came to, that we went, okay, we think, given the changing nature of weather patterns, and that we want to, you could potentially apply for funding. Just like we apply now to retrofit something, you could apply for a new project. Mayor Stewart: Would it make sense then that we don't have a building? Speaker 6: Yeah. So Livingston Shire, I think, got around $8 million towards one of their major buildings in their shire, because it was their local disaster coordination centre. There is significant funding out there if you can apply to a facility. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. In terms of the resilience funding that's available to councils, again, I refer to the round table polystyrene meeting.
01:37:00 Another recommendation made at that meeting was for a coastal disaster management hub, like whether it, you know, a container or something, but just so that there's rubbish bags and cleaning stuff and things like that. And one point contact for emergency situations for communities. And we recommended, and actually suggested, just using existing buildings along eastern beaches. So I'm thinking like Sunrise Beach, where the toilet facilities are. So it gives their opportunity to make applications under resilience funding, or a coastal disaster emergency hub. Councillor Jurisevic: Well, we've got community buildings and community facilities that we could utilise in the event of an event.
01:38:00 One would expect like Peregian Community House, for example. Speaker 6: I think the mobile option is probably more where we'd be heading for this. And that's that twin axle trailer, the SES one. It's full battery powered. It's got lighting systems. It's got big storage and drawers and everything like that. So it can absorb. That's what we're hoping to incorporate. Speaker 7: That's what we're looking to set that up as our coastal disaster sort of hub, if you like, for a mobile home. So it's a, let me show you some photos. It's a very big, it's like a caravan. Councillor Lorentson: That's it. Speaker 10: Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: Doctor, you mentioned there just triggered something in my mind. Where did you go with that question, Amelia? I've forgotten where I was going. Councillor Lorentson: Coastal hub. Coastal hub. Before that. I was referring to toilet facilities along the eastern beaches, maybe. I was thinking, you know. Councillor Jurisevic: That's all right. Go on. Go on. Whatever. Whatever you triggered in my head. Let's just go on. Don't worry. If I remember, I'll ask you. Yes, sir. Yes. Anything further, councillor?
01:39:00 Sorry. I'll move it. Speaker 9: Just for council, it was just one, I just wanted to add for resilience. There's a, on the 31st of October, the day before the summer storm season and bushfire season starts, the mayor, and it's only just been confirmed today, but in the mayor's diary and I'll send an invitation out to all of you at Tewantin State School, we're doing a council, or I should say a Noosa-specific launch of storm and bushfire season. So we'll have response vehicle, SES, RFS, QFIS will all be there, we'll be there with the kids. And it's actually going to be the end of one of those Get Ready presentations. So as far as resilience, our main messaging and all of that is, you know, back to James' baby, which is obviously disaster dashboard and Noosa alert to sign up for that. So if there are things coming, we're able to obviously put a strong message into the community to be aware. Councillor Jurisevic: And QFIS and SES are delivering those. Councillor Wilkie: And there'll be media around that and the Noosa insert will be, yeah.
01:40:00 Speaker 9: And Cairns will cross all of that as well with us. Councillor Wilkie: Sounds impressive. I'll be prepared, get prepared to be blown away. Speaker 9: Yeah. Very good. Councillor Jurisevic: And QFIS and SES deliver those sort of services, those sort of facilitations out to the community as well. I attended one at Federal a couple of weeks ago. Councillor Wilkie: Nothing further? Good report. Very comprehensive. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll move it. Can I have a seconder? I'll second it. Councillor Stewart, all in favour? Thank you, James. Thank you very much. Keep up the good work. Thank you, James. Keep up the great work, mate. We'll move on to item 60J, full year report to 30th of June. We've got Kerry in the room and Brad online. Welcome, Brad. Speaker 3: Afternoon, everyone. How are we? Here we go. Councillor Jurisevic: And seeing as it's your report, Brad, would you like to give us a bit of an overview of the full year report for the J for the year? Speaker 3: Yeah, no worries. Okay, so just stepping through. Obviously, yeah, pretty solid result.
01:41:00 Obviously, talking to Scott and being in the role for about six months now, just getting Speaker 3: my head across some, yeah, some of the key, you know, barriers to performance and things of that nature. I think obviously COVID has played a big role in the last couple of years in terms of the Speaker 3: impact on the running of the venue, but certainly things have sort of turned the corner, I think, particularly the back up this 20th year. We've seen, yeah, the venue really bounce back strongly. So end of year performance was good against budget. I think revenue was up about 12%. Which was great. And expenditure was around about 10% under, which was good. So as you would have seen in the report overall, you know, the centre finished about 219K ahead of the net budget and position, which I think is a really, a really good result. Just with the, you know, the impacts and uncertainties of COVID and obviously data
01:42:00 only just started to, yeah, to obviously subside a little bit. All in all, I think it's a really, really good year. All the revenue streams performed strongly, you know, venue high was back up again. The bar and the kiosk equipment higher. Obviously there was a hit there with the revenue fell by 5K with the finalisation of the USC lease. Speaker 3: But other than that, yeah, most of the revenue streams performed really strongly. Obviously, yeah, and bouncing back to sort of pre-COVID levels, which is a, which is a good sign. Obviously the bar, as I said, has done particularly well. As I said, it's, it was really strong. Speaker 3: And it's something I think the, I was just good and pleasing to see that, you know, those service offerings were being re-engaged in the community as people felt more comfortable, you know, attending live shows and performances.
01:43:00 All the controllable expenses were good. I think, yeah, the managing the site really, really well. Speaker 3: Obviously Scott and the team are, are doing a great job. You know, materials and services was under budget. Obviously there's some savings there with, with employee benefits. That's come about just with a, obviously a, they're running a little bit understaffed Speaker 3: at the minute as most of the facilities are, and been a bit of a challenge with, with staffing. But overall, yeah, they've done a really, really great job in terms of just, you know, keeping things running smoothly and, and the staff there are to be congratulated with Speaker 3: taking on, you know, a fair chunk of extra work at times to make sure that the facility runs smoothly. Just moving forward, Capital Works. It wasn't a lot done there in the last 12 months.
01:44:00 We have, over the last little period here, just obviously tidied up and done some renewal of the facelift. So we've actually, you know, done some, some minor works there just to refurb that to, to make it a little bit more appropriate. The main theatre entrance and the ramp deck has had a little bit of an upgrade. And obviously we've got some future Capital Works in the pipeline with the tech equipment upgrades that, that Scott and the team will work on over the next, I think there's a, Speaker 3: some allocation over the next five years for, for equipment in that. Can I just touch base on that, that point there, Brad? Councillor Jurisevic: I'm looking at, I'm looking at page 54 and noticing depreciation and amortisation over the last 18, 19, 19, 20, 20, 21 was actually, depreciation was increasing. I'm assuming, and then on 20, 21, 22, there was a significant drop in depreciation.
105 minutes in ¶
01:45:00 I'm assuming that that's a result of the ongoing bits of capital. Whether it's capital works or the expenditure on the place and the, the level of depreciation increasing. And this year actually, without any further capital works, we've actually finally got the, the break in the depreciation. Trent's, Trent's in the room and he's looking at me like he's, he's got the answer to the question that I asked him. Speaker 10: Do you want to share? Yes, I do know the answer, Councillor. It's more about the work we've done between finance and asset management with what we call our Asset Data Improvement Project. So we basically stocked the stocktake and a breakdown of all our building assets in the 2021 financial year. What it did ensure is that our appreciation that we're charging for all our buildings and the valuation applied to them to the valuation at the same time was current and reflective of accurate asset information, particularly coming out of some of the fine tuning of the data that we have carried over from the email information.
01:46:00 So what you're seeing this year in particular is what is now the latest value of the true and correct valuation and appreciation of the data. Councillor Wilkie: Trent, oh sorry. I've got another dollar question. Calculating question. On page 52, it says the net result or surplus is a $730,000 deficit. On page 53, it says the same, $730,000 deficit. Page 54, the bottom of 20, 21, 22 actuals, it's $583,000. And then, so it's a different figure. And then on page 53, where it adds up the direct costs for controllable expenses, comes to $878,660, which is close to it.
01:47:00 And then you've got the same figures, controllable expenses on page 54, the same four figures, and you've got them coming to $150,000 less, $730,900. When I add them up, they come to $878,761, which is closer to the figures on 53. So I'm trying to understand the discrepancy in the reporting here. I may not be reading the figures correctly. Speaker 10: I have to take that on notice, councillor. Councillor Wilkie: Did you notice that? Mayor Stewart: I noticed. One of my questions was the differentiation between the two figures here, $583,000 and $730,000. That was one of my questions too. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. And the controllable expenses, when they're added on page 53, they come to $878,000. And then, but on page 54, the controllable expenses come to $730,000. But when I add them up, they're $878,000.
01:48:00 Speaker 5: I think we just, yeah, take that on notice and provide a clarification. Thanks. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Mayor Stewart: I've got a few questions. Councillor Wilkie: Can you finish, Frank? Yes, thank you. Mayor Stewart: Brad, I'm not sure if this one's for you. I'm just looking at the historical performance. So we look at 2018-19 to 2021-22, and obviously, 18-19 is before COVID. We go back to lease revenue. We're down, say, $48,000 thereabouts now compared to 18-19. And when we look at venue hire, we're down about $10,000. So that's about $60,000 we're down from those pre-COVID days. We're still making a rather large loss. And I'm just wondering, is there any capacity? And I see that the leasing, obviously, there's talks here at the back with Montessori and Noosa Gymnastics. But, you know, even if we go back to those pre-lease days or those pre-COVID days with the lease and the venue hire, do we have the capacity or the composition to up our revenue
01:49:00 stream in another way? Speaker 3: Yeah. Well, obviously, with the USC, obviously, vacate premises. Yeah, those rooms are obviously now free. There obviously has been some internal discussions, which Kerry might be able to allude to a little more about what we do with those spaces in terms of opportunities for staffing, things of that nature. But, yeah, I think, you know, we're still looking at that. But I think, obviously, from what I understand is that once USC decided to remove themselves from the lease there, that, yeah, all options are on the table in terms of looking at opportunities to get, yeah, whether it's commercial or what not, to the buildings, though. Mayor Stewart: So, Brad, lease revenue, that wasn't included. USC was a separate component to that, was it, under lease revenue?
01:50:00 Speaker 3: I'm not 100 per cent sure. Speaker 5: I could probably just come back to you on that one. Councillor Jurisevic: It says on page 54 that lease revenue fell by $5,000 based on USC lease finalisation. Speaker 5: So, that does include the former USC revenue. In terms of leasing out that facility, it is under a particular zoning, which means leasing it out can't be purely to a commercial entity. So, for example, you couldn't have retail in there. It has to be. Yeah. It has to be in line with the community zoning, which is why an educational facility was able to go in there. So, we have explored a number of areas. There's not been one where they then would sufficiently commit to it. So, there's been a number of inquiries, but nothing that has gone on any further.
01:51:00 We will continue to monitor that. But in line also looking at, well, what are Council's broader needs in that venue space? Mayor Stewart: Yes, right. So, I mean, if the difference is only $5,000 for USC being there or not, and we're looking at such a loss, a substantial loss, I guess my question is, is there the capacity then, and I guess this comes back to our event policy and, you know, obviously differentiation between not-for-profits and what they're charged, compared to actually groups or organisations that draw a profit, who hire out the venue, and we've got a number of them listed here, is there the capacity to, you know, I guess cover some of those costs or losses by increasing the higher cost to these organisations, as I said, excluding obviously not-for-profits? Speaker 5: It's really, it's an interesting question, because we're in a space, for example, where there are private providers in the space, particularly to commercial use.
01:52:00 So, you know, there are commercial offerings that can provide the type of on-site, for example, catering, et cetera, that might not be available in the J. Now, those room spaces there are of a fairly small nature. So, they do have commercial people who will hire them, but they're not significant sizes. They're small, more boardroom or small training sizes. Mayor Stewart: Even for the events, so, I mean, like looking at all the events, some of that, they're profit driven. Speaker 5: Oh, yeah. So, I guess this is what Brad's meaning, that in terms of the theatre itself, which is where you're seeing that commercial nature, that is increasing back towards pre-COVID bookings. So, at the moment, their forward bookings are very, very strong in that space. Those smaller rooms, as Brad mentioned, we're doing some, you know, we're doing a lot of
01:53:00 small refurb of them. Once USC left, they were pretty tired and old. So, they're having a refresh. And then we'll test the market again to see what interest there is. At the moment, they're being booked on an ad hoc basis, but we will test the market. And as I said, look at it in line with . Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Just looking at the historical financial performance on page 54, 21, 22 actuals, there's an error in the calculation. The total operating result is consistent with the figure given on 53 and 52 of about 730,000. So, it is still quite considerably less than the last two years, and even at pre-COVID levels. So, you're heading in the right direction there. Mm. Because it's accepted that it's a subsidised venue for all the benefits it provides.
01:54:00 Yeah. And you've minimised, you are minimising the losses there. Speaker 5: And this, I mean, this is the facility that was most impacted by COVID. Yes. Even when the public health directions relaxed, it wasn't to the point where production companies, Yeah. had confidence that they would actually book the facility. So, while we might have been technically open for business, actually having, you know, the touring companies weren't out there, they're back in force now. And our hope is that, you know, we continue to see results grow. Obviously, you know, we're looking to see what, you know, further revenue can be generated. And, you know, we've had discussions, for example, about the layout and use of that facility to see what, how more could we maximise that footprint, and get a higher return for
01:55:00 Council. Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: And I guess having Brad as a fresh pair of eyes in the, Speaker 5: This help, absolutely. Councillor Jurisevic: In the room is, is somebody else looking at it from a different perspective, so. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: And Brad, could you pass on compliments to the production staff there, the feedback from events that are held there is that it's very high production values, in terms of the quality of the lighting, the stage looks fantastic, the sound is good, and the staff are always very professional. So, feedback from the hires is excellent. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah, they do a great job. Just following up on your, on your comments just now, Kerry, are there, is there a master plan, or is there a plan for upgrades, renewal, expansion of the gym? Yeah, I think that's a really good question, Jay, because, you know, I've been there, and it's actually at full capacity when there are some shows, and it's in a, in valuable
01:56:00 community hub, the not for profit organisations, so I would personally love to see it expanded. Have we got, have we got future plans for, for the, Jay? Speaker 5: So there, there was an existing business plan, which has come to the end of its, you know, I guess, lifespan. Through that process is when we actually put in place the mezzanine, which opened up further seating. That was a really instructive process, because it showed us you could go so far and get maximised value. To go to the next level was considerable. There was, there was no point in just tweaking a bit further, because you wouldn't get the shows. They're either this size, or they're much larger. So one of the tasks on the table at the moment is to do, well, what is the next business plan for the Jay? And I said, looking at the existing footprint, we do think there's underutilised space in
01:57:00 terms of its layout that could be maximised, but to achieve that would require an investment from Council, and Council would need to make that decision about, was that investment value for money? Councillor Lorentson: And now that we've opened the Pritchin Beach Community Hub, there's, there's a lot of competition, but there's more, more options. For community space, yes. For community space. So that needs to be factored into future plans soon. Councillor Jurisevic: All right, nothing further? Can I have a mover? Councillor Stewart, I'll second it. All in favour? Thank you, Brad. Thank you, Brad. We'll move on to the next one before you disappear though. The National Leisure Centre full year report due the 30th of June. I'll get you again to, there was a summary of the report. Speaker 3: Yeah, no worries, thank you for that. Yeah, obviously, you know, same sort of thoughts from, from my end. I said, you know, a new set of eyes into the facilities. Councillor Jurisevic: You know, Cathy and the team there have done a fantastic job.
01:58:00 Absolutely. With sort of the same challenges and barriers. Speaker 3: But in terms of just talking to some of the, the, the budgetary stuff, yeah, obviously, delivered an operating deficit of $558,000, which was $140,000 favourable to the budget, which I think is a pretty strong result given the uncertainties of COVID and obviously revenue was about 7% up, expenditure was under about 8%, so that was a good outcome. Revenue stream performed strongly. Venue high was up by about $25,000, which was good. Retail and food sales were up. They've done some tweaking there to the operations of the cafe and some product offerings and things like that. Speaker 3: The creche revenue decreased a little bit, which was probably a byproduct of... Councillor Wilkie: The ageing population.
01:59:00 Speaker 3: But certainly, yeah, just, just some of the programming changes that have occurred with COVID and, and, and just hasn't seen that return of some of the changes that have occurred over the, obviously, the mums to, to, to utilise or dads to utilise the facility. So, so that might strike a little bit. But overall, again, sort of, you can see a bounce back of some degree to, to pre-COVID levels, which is obviously what you want to start to see. A bit of an uptick in consumer usage patterns and the landscape in and around COVID's changed so that it's, so people are starting to reintegrate themselves back into community support, into the utilisation facilities, which is what you want. So, other than that, employee costs were below budget by about 107K. There are a couple of vacancies there at the minute. Speaker 3: And again, the, the staff there led by Cathy have, have worked tirelessly and, and probably
120 minutes in ¶
02:00:00 been stretched at times. But we, we, we, we do have a plan at ATT&CK to try and address that a little bit. But the nature of the, yeah, of the environment, the ATT&CK staff's hard, so there's been a little bit of turnover there. But overall, the, the historic performance shows that it's, that it's operating pretty consistently. And, and again, there's some recovery there, which is, you know, what you want to see. So, were there any questions to, to anything in the, in the budget numbers there? Councillor Wilkie: Just a, probably one for Trent about the jump in depreciation. And amortisation. You're onto it too. For 21, 22. Councillor Jurisevic: I was, I was heading in. And internal charges. Trent. Coming up 16 grand. Councillor Wilkie: These are, these are costs beyond the staff's control there. So, why is the, the jump, big jump in depreciation and amortisation for the NLC? Speaker 10: Yeah, the same, the, the same way in the previous report, you saw a drop. As a result of us doing a, a, a new pooled valuation of council assets for the new facilities.
02:01:00 As well as the stock take. It's picked up changes and corrections to make sure that our appreciation across the board is correct. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm, I'm struggling with this one because I appreciate the, the legislature at the, at the NAC or at the, at the J. We've had some investment. There hasn't been a lot of capital investment at, at the legislature's level. And yet, we seem to have this large increase in depreciation. Speaker 10: Council, it's not about the amount of capital investment that's occurred since the last financial year. It's about us getting independent value within to come across and actually reassess what the current construction cost and replacement cost is of all our assets. And also to reassess what the remaining and useful life of those components within the assets are. So, if you, if you, for example, went to the leisure centre, you've got, you've got some large infrastructure there in terms of say like fans, et cetera, that have
02:02:00 a shorter useful life than what some of the structural assets would. So, what that evaluation assessment does is it obviously does move things around. But it makes sure that we are setting aside, providing our money. Councillor Jurisevic: So, the, the period of write-off for something like the fan is a smaller period of time than say the actual building, which is a 50 year lifespan, 40 year, 30 year lifespan, whatever. Speaker 10: And probably you didn't want to put forward the foreign legislation as well. Councillor Jurisevic: Forgot about the foreign, yes. Speaker 10: So, items like that, like the receiving of the J and the AV equipment, things like that, need basically some specialised written pending assessment as to what their useful life is and what their basic structure is. Mayor Stewart: I've got a question. And it might be actually one for Larry, based on what I'm going to ask. Basketball courts. We talk about grassroots infrastructure and we were talking about this last week about, you know, it's such a growth area for our genius for sports. We've got two basketball courts in Noosa Shire.
02:03:00 Basketball courts can make money, Larry, when you build them. You know, is there the capacity to leverage and put more basket, I'm just looking at ways we can increase revenue. So, you know, I understand community asset and there will be a cost, but anyway, we can increase revenue. Can you plus provide services coming into the next 10 years, you know, be it grassroots infrastructure, sporting infrastructure? Speaker 5: Yes. So, that, in the 22-23 budget, as part of that, we set aside funds to do an option study on the leisure centre. It amazes me that next year it's going to celebrate its 30th anniversary. So, it's very timely to look at what is the future of that building. And looking at the uses that are currently there and taking into account the changes that have come about through COVID and prior to then. When we had, you know, a lot of work was done about what's the future of organised sport?
02:04:00 What's the future of people wanting to undertake individual activity? One of the big things we're looking at, you know, so if we wound back maybe 10, 15 years. The talk in the industry was that we wouldn't actually need these great big large facilities anymore because everybody wanted to be out doing cycling, running, surfing, etc. The talk around, particularly in our climate, in our areas around climate change is, well, actually, some of those heat, some of those sports which would have been done outside now actually will shift inside. So, we need to rethink that and go, well, hang on. These facilities may still be required, but be required in a different format. So, all of this is being looked at as part of the options and asks for that building to say what's right for that building, but also what else needs to be taken into account. Like, for example, you know, growth sports, sportswear.
02:05:00 We've got seeing a high level of interest from either the user group or potential user groups. Councillor Jurisevic: The other element with that precinct in general is that there's a lot of interest from either side. I mean, if we do look at any expansions or anything like that, obviously, the capacity for transport and getting to and staying at the venue while you're there have got to be looked at as well. Speaker 5: Yeah. So, for some years now, we've had sitting on the capital works program to undertake a master plan for Wallace Park. Due to competing priorities, it gets pushed off each year. Councillor Jurisevic: I think I flagged it again. Speaker 5: My hope is that we get to do that piece of planning work because you're absolutely right. There's a lot of users in that precinct and they're very popular facilities and we see conflict in transport there.
02:06:00 We've done some interim parking studies in the past. We came up with some concepts. Some of them were, you know, quite edgy. Looked at straightening, for example, the road. One of them was to actually make a one-way road so that that way you could create formed parking. So, I would be thinking all of that should be looked at as part of a master plan. Councillor Jurisevic: We've got that overflow park, that car park that we've created in the interim. So, it's time to go to the next level and actually get that master plan undertaken. Speaker 5: We continue to work with TransLink around public transport because the public transport option. Yeah. And, you know, to a range of reasons, people are reluctant to walk from the next bus stop into Wallace Park.
02:07:00 People have got mobility issues, et cetera. Mayor Stewart: Yeah. And at the same time, we can look at just, you know, more things for our Duke and Willis or we can provide our teenagers and, you know, their sports. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: Basketball courts is a no-brainer, I think. Yeah. And it would be great not to be charging them and just have basketball hoops on council facilities. So, that's, you know, free. Well, we've looked at half courts. We've looked at half courts in some locations in the past. I don't mind charging them if it can be provided as a free service. If it's outdoor. If it's outdoors. Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: We've certainly got the parks to put them in. Speaker 5: We've got the public and we have a public one. And we do have some in place and they're very popular. Yeah. They are. Yes. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Do we know anyone who knows anything about that sport? Councillor Jurisevic: Pick up your basketball and do the thing on the finger, Larry or ... Speaker 5: So, that often ... We have an expert. That options piece of needs assessment is under way at the moment. So the first thing it's doing is having a really good look at the structure of that building and the condition that it's in.
02:08:00 If I reflect back to the report that James brought up around disaster management and whether that could be used as a designated cyclone shelter, very costly to do. It's an old building and it was built to the standards of its time. It certainly works for us as an evacuation centre. It works very well as a standard evacuation centre. But all of that will be taken into account as we do a condition assessment and then look at options next. Councillor Wilkie: I'm going to move it up. Sorry, after you, Amelia. Councillor Lorentson: Just a clarification, page 65, future direction, as part of staffing and structural review, undertake the planning and development of a LAWA or leisure centre. Councillor Wilkie: That was my question. Local area work agreement? Councillor Lorentson: Very good. Councillor Wilkie: It's a term I haven't heard either. What is it and why is it deemed to be merited for the NLC workforce and not, say, the J workforce?
02:09:00 Speaker 5: So we already have... So local area work agreement is an industrial arrangement under a certified agreement. So what it says is that you've got a particular group of staff that have different potentially industrial arrangements compared to the rest of the organisation. So what it says is that you've got a particular group of staff that have different potentially industrial arrangements compared to the rest of the organisation. So for example, our waste staff that work at our transfer stations and our landfill work under a local area work agreement because their hours are different. So they work, for example, four days on, four days off. So it's an agreement between those staff and the unions and council. So it's not an enterprise agreement? It is. It's a subset of an enterprise agreement. I should know this. Similarly, we have one at the Aquatics Centre because it's running, yes, very, you know, different spans of hours.
02:10:00 The award that it sits under is very complicated in terms of classifications of positions. So it enables us to simplify those things. And so we're investigating whether one would be appropriate for the Leisure Centre as well. We used to have one for our Leisure Centre staff when we were part of it. And now we have one for the Amalgamated Council. Mayor Stewart: Councillor, just on the NAC, should we approve? Speaker 5: You will be receiving a NAC one, yes, next round. Councillor Jurisevic: I was going to ask, are we missing one? No, next round. Okay. Anything further? No. All happy? Councillor Stewart moving it. Councillor Lorentson is seconding. All in favour? Thank you. Move on to Ida. Mayor Stewart: They're great community facilities, Kerry. Speaker 5: Oh, fantastic. Thanks, Brad. Brad's doing a fantastic job. He's stepped in there, and as you said before, a fresh pair of eyes really helps. Councillor Jurisevic: I can tell he's always at the facilities because I can't fit him down.
02:11:00 Mayor Stewart: They're excellent. So, again, thank you, Brad. Please pass on our thanks to all the staff, too. Thank you, Kevin. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Moving on to item eight, the Cooroy Butter Factory Management Update for 2022, and I'm assuming you're stepping in for Tracy today? Speaker 5: Yes, I am. Thank you, Council. So, there's apologies on behalf of Tracy. She's presenting at a conference, so we're unable to be in two places at once. Councillor Jurisevic: Good to hear. Speaker 5: So, today we're bringing to you the update report for the Cooroy Butter Factory. So, the Butter Factory is under an arrangement whereby instead of council operating facility, which we used to do, we went through a very extensive community engagement process in 2014, straight after de-amalgamation, to look at what the future of that facility would be and how it was best to operate. We trialled a community management model that was quite different from what we'd done in the past,
02:12:00 which had been more purely artist-oriented management models. This was a blend of business orientation and arts background. And that has been very successful. It's a very challenging building to operate in. It was designed as a butter factory, so it's very industrial in nature, and trying to then operate something else in it can be quite challenging. And that had often been the undoing of previous community organisations that were running. The burden of trying to operate a service in that facility was hard. So, the model that we've had in place has been very successful. We provide a lot of support. We provide a lot of support. We provide the Cooroy Future Group, who were the successful organisation that went through an EOI process. We provide them with a contribution to assist in operating the facility.
02:13:00 And that has been on a reducing factor over the past five years. And it's now down to us only providing a service. And it's now down to us only providing around about 30% of the operational requirements for that building. So, that's a huge success story in terms of being able to provide a high-quality service that has a lot of community buy-in at a much reduced cost to the ratepayer. Councillor Wilkie: And you can't underestimate what's been achieved there, because it's a disincentive for any group to think the more successful they become, the less subsidy they get from the council. So, they know full well that the more independent they become, the less money they're going to get from council. Speaker 5: It's a careful balancing act, which we carefully look at to make sure
02:14:00 that we're not reducing the amount so much to the point that it puts them on an unsustainable footing. And if that was to occur, the pressure would then be back on council to run that facility. That it would be, you know, at least four times the cost of what we're currently paying. And we would not get the same outcome. We know when council runs a facility as the full operator, you get much less community volunteer input because it's seen as a council facility. And so, therefore, council's responsibility to pay for it. So, in this situation, you've got a volunteer-run board, huge numbers of volunteers that contribute to it. They contribute to operating it and they're enabling, being able to pay staff to provide that stability. So, it's a fine balancing act. Mayor Stewart: Kerry, just a couple of questions. Just 369 visitors, obviously, are down since 2019, quite substantially, no doubt, because of COVID.
135 minutes in ¶
02:15:00 Volunteer hours are down, but contracted staff has increased. Is that because the volunteer hours are down and they're having to make up? Speaker 5: Yes. So, they went through a period where they, you know, they had to make up. They, like many of our facilities, we, the volunteers, had to retreat. And the nature of many of our volunteers is that they are in that vulnerable age group. And so, in that space, the butter factory increased its paid staff. Now, the amazing thing for the Cooroy Future Group is that they had the financial resources to be able to do that. They had put aside money for, I guess, a rainy day. This was their rainy day. And they were able to afford staff to keep that facility going. Mayor Stewart: Income and expenditure, a huge rise for income since 1819. There's equally a huge rise in expenditure.
02:16:00 Speaker 5: Yes. So, one of them huge success stories is their retail shop. So, that was a very innovative. Idea that they put in place there. So, often, regional facilities like this will have a shop and they work on a commission basis. Doesn't generate a lot of revenue and it's hard to get momentum. They've got a very unique model in that they're renting shelf space. So, basically, an artist is hiring shelf space for a number of months. And then there's commission as well. So, both the rent and the commission goes back. So, they've increased their revenue, which has enabled them to increase expenditure in necessary areas. So, for example, to be able to pay for better exhibitions, to be able to bring on additional staff, to be able to have classes.
02:17:00 It's a big increase. It is. And at the end of the day, they're growing year by year. And what we said to them at the time is this was very much a hand-holding process. And gradually, each year, we would let go the hand a little bit. And they are now, you know, they're fully independently operating and going from strength to strength. Councillor Lorentson: And has the hinterland playground been good or bad for business? Speaker 5: It's certainly much busier there. So, you know, I've had these discussions with both the library and the butter factory. Things are much busier. It's hard because of the timing to understand whether it's purely around the playground or around coming back to life post COVID. So, I would assume from what the discussions I've had,
02:18:00 the extra business in the library can directly be, some of it directly attributed to the playground because of the demographic. The butter factory itself, because they are now very much part of that hinterland arts trail, I think theirs is very much around COVID, coming back out of COVID and visitors starting to reengage in that space. Councillor Wilkie: And if you look at the visitor numbers for page 69, the final column, January to June is only six months. And if you double that, it's 18,000, which is more than the visitors, the totals for the previous three years. And the same with the volunteer hours. If you double the volunteer hours in the six months for this year, it's more than the previous three years. Speaker 5: They're coming back very, very strongly. Councillor Jurisevic: One would think more people in that precinct would raise the awareness of not only the library but the butter factory.
02:19:00 People go, butter factory, what's this? And at least call in or... Is it destination? Yes, it is. It is lovely. Speaker 5: They have really found their pitch point. They have brought in Kevin Wilson as their coordinator. Kevin previously was the gallery director for Noosa Council. He's an outstanding gallery director. He had retired. And they asked him for some assistance. A great fleet of expertise to bring in. He was with Queensland Museums or Queensland Library. He was. When he left us, he went to the state. He's done some amazing work. And yes, he agreed to help them out. And now he's agreed to stay on. Best thing that ever happened. So he has a very strong network. And really understands.
02:20:00 Creating that differentiation of a product. He's not creating the regional gallery. It's not the railway gallery. It's very much the butter factory. What does that look like? And really maintaining its identity. Councillor Wilkie: His reporting is so detailed too. That what you see that they achieve every month is amazing. Speaker 5: The Coroy Future Group's constitution. And the way that they manage their change in their committee was one of the things that was very strong in their expression of interest. Their governance model is very strong for a community organisation. It ensures that there's always fresh eyes and energy coming in. But also people that have been there for a while. So you're getting freshness, but you're getting stability. And so it's a very sustainable model. Councillor Wilkie: And people with business acumen as well. Speaker 5: Absolutely. A lot for the arts. Yes.
02:21:00 That's where we've seen struggles in the past. People might have been very committed to it from an arts perspective, but not have the business perspective. And then they would start to struggle. Councillor Lorentson: There was a lot of risk for council to support a community managed sort of model. Yep. And I applaud it. I'd love to see it more because it's just community binding. We're empowering our community to do what they do best. Absolutely. Yeah. Mayor Stewart: I think it's terrific. It's great. They did a great job too. Councillor Jurisevic: It's where council's role and council's facilitation and council's working with their community is the sort of thing we've got to look at. Councillor Wilkie: That was the feedback we got from that public consultation we did about the future of the Biter Factory. Yeah. Speaker 5: Wasn't it? Yeah. There was such ... We looked at a range of options with them. We went through extensive process. The EOI process itself was very extensive and that was sometimes some difficult conversations
02:22:00 because it had to have that business acumen as part of it or we knew that history would repeat itself, that unfortunately that building would be the downfall. And here we are now quite a few years later. I'll move it, Mr Chair. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. At the end of that report, you do mention council's responsibility in maintaining that building. Yeah. Are there any significant concerns coming up with regard to maintenance or upgrades that are required? Speaker 5: The ongoing is around leaking issues, an old building not built. Acoustics? And acoustics. Yeah. It's leaking and acoustics. Okay. So the acoustics are a challenging one because of the ... I thought we had a report on that. We have. There are. And that's some of the things that we have been looking at. There are some things that you could put in place. Councillor Jurisevic: Lots of ink cartons. Speaker 5: Yes. Yes. It's a little bit like that. It's around then about what that does to the feel of the butter factory.
02:23:00 Yes. But certainly there's been a lot of work put into trying to secure the building to a certain extent. Councillor Jurisevic: Yes. I've heard a moving from Councillor Wilkie, a seconding from Councillor Jurisevic. There's been no further discussion. All in favour? Yes. That being the last item on the agenda, I'll declare the meeting closed at 3.55. Speaker 4: Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.