Start of recording ¶
00:00:00 Councillor Wilkie: Councilors in attendance, may we have someone to confirm the minutes of the general meeting of the meeting for February 2023, Councillor Lorentson, Secretary Councillor Finzel. All in favour? That's carried unanimously. We have no presentations. We have no presentations. We have some items referred from the committees, the first being the short stay meeting or home hosted accommodation local law, 12 month review. Councillor Lorentson. Councillor Lorentson: I, Councillor Amelia Laurison, have a prescribed conflict of interest as I own a property. My husband and I own a property on Noosa Parade. It's a short term accommodation letting property. For that reason, I've chosen to leave the meeting and waiting for council to make a decision on it. Speaker 2: Thank you, Councillor.
00:01:00 Councillor Wilkie: Okay, this was covered in the planning committee last week, but we've got staff here again, Kim and Patrick. So for the benefit of people who may be turning in for the first time, tell us in a nutshell, give us a bit of an overview of this call. Speaker 7: So at the time that it was resolved to introduce a local law, which commenced in the start of February 2022, it was also resolved that there would be a 12-month review that would occur to determine if any changes were needed and to establish a multi-interest stakeholder group. So as part of that, there was a consultation undertaken with a range of stakeholders, both from residents, potentially affected by short-term accommodation, and also we had stakeholder industry groups work on the representation as well.
00:02:00 There was a survey that was sent out to both groups. The survey was different, obviously, associated with the different needs of each group. We received that survey, and then a stakeholder consultation session was held, whereby we, having reviewed the information, we dispersed our... our findings and our proposed recommendations to the stakeholder group. Essentially, the local law has been well received by both the stakeholder groups. Notwithstanding, there have been some improvements that have been identified. We acknowledge that the first 12 months have probably been preoccupied with the processing of applications, and that's had a really significant impact on our capacity to be proactive in terms of compliance. And that's come through quite well and clear, that we need to improve our allocation of resources in that space, and to be more proactive in terms of the compliance of signage and non-compliant properties.
00:03:00 And from the stakeholder point of view, sorry, industry stakeholder point of view, it came through that they were seeking that applications were processed quicker, that there was greater communication around the assessment of applications, and some might even cut more. So, we've taken this feedback, importantly, we're not looking to actually change the local law. The framework is operating well, we've got industry support in that regard. What we're looking to do is making some improvements in terms of sort of some of the back end processing of these applications, to make them more efficient, some better communication on their website, and communication to stakeholders. And being more proactive in our compliance realm. Importantly, we're seeking that there be additional resources allocated to the team to enable this greater compliance to occur.
00:04:00 And that is to be funded through the renewal fee, the application of a renewal fee, which we recommend commences at the start of July of this year. And that fee will be allocated on a sliding scale, depending upon the drawing type and the type of use that's undertaken in that frame. Councillor Wilkie: There's a proposed change regarding the use of the security thing? Speaker 7: That's correct. So, we use big services for the hotline, but we also use a service for a security service that would go out into 10 properties. There's only one instance where that was actually used for the 12 months associated with the need, or why we allocated them. So, we don't consider that it's necessary to continue to use that service going forward.
00:05:00 Councillor Wilkie: And just to clarify, the security service had an activity that was observed in Canterbury? That is correct. Any questions, councillors or staff? Clare? Murph, Councillor Stewart. Seconded, Councillor Fletcher. Councillor Jurisevic: That's alright, I did have questions, but the hands have been raised, I'll get to them. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, thank you Kim and Patrick, because it has been a really informative 12 months and done a lot of stakeholder engagement and obviously the responses here. So, this is a good step forward, in fact it's a great step forward, because it will improve the efficiency of the approvals process and it has responded to industry feedback. The application forms, lodgement processes, supporting information on signage requirements and website explanatory information. In response to stakeholder engagement, the proposal is increased resources to assess the backlog of SDA applications, report and make recommendations to council on the resourcing costs, fees and charges in regard to compliance, continue to identify SDAs operating without approval, reduce time frame to submit the application within 14 days of being notified, undertake compliance action for SDA operating without approval, undertake an audit and compliance action on SDA approval and signage, require photographic evidence of approval and signage, and report to the Council on the resourcing costs, fees and charges in regard to compliance, continue to identify SDAs
00:06:00 approval signs for new approvals, review agent signage, information and messaging, there's a whole lot around that. There's a whole lot around the application process, the assessment, the conditions. I've sat in with a number of residents and I think that these recommendations in this report will go a long way to addressing, if most, if not all, the concerns raised for our community. We are the first council in Queensland to have taken this, there hasn't really been any law, it's never perfect right from the start. 12 months on, we're certainly making huge and significant strides in this area and hopefully we're going to be of benefit to everyone in our community. Thank you. Mr Stewart, do you have a question?
00:07:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, a question to start. I note in the report there's no mention of raising the fee for an application for an SDA. Yet when I read the report, there are currently around 1,300 properties identified as operating without approval, which would require proactive compliance action and need to gain an approval under the local law. It's anticipated this will increase the workload and number of applications to be assessed in the next six to 12 months. Given that we're putting on extra staff, being proactive and all the rest of it, why is there no consideration to raise the fee as of the 1st of July for those that haven't been compliant and made an application for SDA compliance? Speaker 3: Thanks, Councillor Jurisevic. Some of you have considered this. At this stage, we are very focused on getting everyone who's operating short-stay on board. So the fees are set based on a cost recovery.
00:08:00 So we're hoping, before the end of the financial year, with a real push, that we will get the most properties that are operating on board. Should Council want to consider that, I would suggest it needs to be done through the basis of an application. Councillor Jurisevic: So would you agree that by having to put on these extra staff and undertake additional proactive compliance to identify and get these properties to apply, that there is additional staff, resources and time being required? Speaker 3: Yes, there is some additional time and resources required. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Just a follow-on question. Is it proposed that the additional cost of the additional staff and time be covered by the proposed renewal fee? Speaker 7: The report recommends two new positions, some compliance positions, and yes, it's recommended that that be done through the renewal fee.
00:09:00 Councillor Wilkie: And the current application fees that were set, they're still current, they're $900,000? $250,000 for a house, $220,000 for a unit, $240,000 for a home, most of the accommodation, $240,000 for a house, using the four times maximum system rates. So that money is still coming in as applications come in. Speaker 7: That's correct. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Any other councillors who would speak to the motion? Tom. Councillor Wegener: I'll just quickly say, what a great education process it's been for me, and I'm sure the new councillors here, to see this process go from, you know, kerfuffle in the community, through to discussions with the council, to the enactments of the new local law, to the watching of the new local law, be carried through, and it's really quite a process, and it's a slow process. And I think, if there's one thing to learn from it, is I think that, with all those consultations, as they want to know what's going on,
00:10:00 if there's something to really work on, and we've talked about this since the new council was come on board, is really the need to continue to communicate with the people, because there's a lot of very, very inaccurate information going on about disruption and accommodation for a very long time, and it seems to me that they're saying, we want better information, and that's where we're going to step up, is giving better information, because we have to kind of knock really bad disinformation on the head, if we possibly can, to divert that, without letting it, letting the molecule turn into a mountain, that sometimes has disruption and accommodation in its sphere. So thank you for your hard work. Thank you. And I'm really happy that this has moved this way, and we're going to follow through with the recommendations. Thank you. Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, I'm pleased to see that this has come to fruition, and has been, in the main, accepted by the industry as a way forward,
00:11:00 and a successful way forward. I see that there are still challenges and all that's in it, and I'm pleased to see that the staff have been flexible in managing the process, because it is a new process, and it's a first-time process, going through to ensure that we streamline the facilitation. The Council has been pretty proactive in trying to facilitate this, and working for compliance, and with 1,300 properties still identified as operating without approval, I will be looking at the next three months as that time, that hopefully those 1,300 properties will see their opportunity to come on board, and that during the budget process, I'll be suggesting that with the additional staff time and resources required to facilitate any properties that haven't complied with the approval process, that we look and review the application process fee for the additional time and resources that staff will require in the future to manage those properties that are not yet lodged in the approval process.
00:12:00 Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Our councillors will speak for motion. Thank you. I'd like to start by just reflecting back on why this law was introduced in the first place. It was introduced and implemented in response to calls from the community for action to protect their amenity. There were an exceedingly high number of complaints during the last council. In fact, County Department reported this as the highest number of complaints recorded about any issue. And at the time, there was the inability of the police service to respond. To the noise complaints and other amenity complaints, it was unreasonable to expect the police service to manage this. It fell to Noosa Council to take the proactive step to manage this particular land use. As the Mayor said, we're the only council in Queensland using a local law to manage the negative impacts of short-term accommodation via a local law.
00:13:00 I believe there are two others in Australia. The groundwork began back in 2019. The stats show that almost two-thirds of the short-term accommodation businesses that need to apply for local law have done so within 12 months, which is a very encouraging statistic and testament to the hard work of the staff that's been done. This local law, like planning scheme regulations, were introduced in the face of enormous resistance and criticism. Some said even the planning scheme regulations would kill off Noosa's tourism industry. There's all sorts of legal action threatened. The statistics show the visitor numbers now are as high as healthy as pre-COVID levels. The users' tourism industry is alive and well and hasn't suffered. And although we're not there yet in terms of reforms to the, refinements to the local law, the feedback from residents and industry indicates we're on the right track and it's making a difference in protecting the resident and visitor experience in Noosa.
00:14:00 I'd like to join the other councils in thanking the staff. I'd like to thank the staff for the hard work they've done. There's 10 to 5 that's been working on this. We could have dedicated millions towards this and got it done a lot quicker but we are a relatively small council with limited budget. And I really support an increase in resources to increase, deal with the backlog of applications and ensure the scheme works as it is intended to. So thank you. Council Stewart, do you have any questions? No. Okay. Motion is in favour? That's carried unanimously. Councillor Finzel: Thank you, Kim. Thanks, Pastor. Thank you.
15 minutes in ¶
00:15:00 Councillor Wilkie: Next item is the Noosa Council Threatened Porn Recovery Roadmap. On page 32 of the Planning and Environment Committee Agenda, referred due to the significance of the issue, welcome David and Rebecca. David and Rebecca for those who are watching for the first time, could you give us an overview of what this roadmap is all about please? Speaker 5: Right, so Council developed the roadmap in response to the Mr Environment Strategy. It's been developed over the last 12 months. Specifically it's to address a key objective under the Environment Strategy, which is the protection of threatened fauna across the Noosa Shire. The roadmap's undergone a comprehensive stakeholder consultation process whereby community organisations, expert consultants, academics from around the region, nominated a list of nine species. And we're meeting here today just to discuss a few point of details of the roadmap in terms of that.
00:16:00 Questions? Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: So, whilst we've nominated nine species for priority, the report talks about 29 species. What are the benefits of a management priority for nine species for the remaining 20 species? Speaker 5: Great, so just to answer that one basically. So the Noosa Threatened Recovery Roadmap was developed under the Noosa Environment Strategy. Which called for six to eight species. We went with nine because of the fact of previous work that has been done on the Noosa 9 by previous employees. We thought that was a really good driver to keep the momentum of the media campaign that went alongside that and marketing work back in 2017. So we're already going above the NES commitment with the nine species. And again, it comes back to resources as well. Obviously, you know, the NES was developed, I guess, to ensure that...
00:17:00 You know, the workload of, say, 1.082 staff members could deliver that objective. And that's what we're sitting with. So there is constraints in terms of data resources. Councillor Jurisevic: Not the question I asked, David, sorry. Whilst we prioritise nine, what are the benefits for the other 20? Are there benefits by working on those nine, priorities on those nine, that the other 20 species will get? Speaker 5: Oh, sorry, I misinterpreted that. So, of course, so we selected the species to be representative across the different ecosystems across the Noosa Shire. So given that approach, we're basically... When we look at threatened fauna recovery, we're not just looking at the species. We're looking at the habitat that those species reside in. So, for example, if we look at species like koala, they're within the Noosa 9. But we will get flow-on effects for things like cow ploughs, greater gliders that use as eucalypt ecosystems. So we've designed in that perspective so that we get that uniform spread of resources across different habitat types, in turn benefiting the collective 921 species.
00:18:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. That was what I was trying to determine. And also, whilst we may focus on these, I mean, what have we done in the past? What are the habitat restoration projects that council has put in place in the past that not only facilitates these nine species, but the 29 significant species that have been identified in this report? Speaker 5: Yeah, great. So I'll touch on just the last couple of years and then Rebekah might talk to the previous strategies book prior to that. Councillor Jurisevic: So this is our business as usual approach that we have in place? Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean, the Threatened Fauna Roadmap is all about consolidating the efforts we do for species. So we do a lot of proactive management and ecosystem restoration activities. But to actually quantify what those restoration activities are, what our activities are contributing towards, and where all the stakeholders can, I guess, assist with that. We need that direction that we can get by using those iconic species.
00:19:00 But recently, obviously, we have the key, sorry, we have the Euro Ringtail State Forest transition to national parks. So that resulted in 2.5 hectares of land transitioning to national park, mainly for koala. But of course, we get benefits on other species like greater gliders and whatnot. So moving on from there, we've obviously carried out monitoring programs for koalas as part of that project as well. So we work with QUT to develop those baseline koala population monitoring data. And then we can obviously look at the trends and changes to see if that project is having the results that was anticipated to have specifically for koalas. Regarding glossy black poppitoos, we assist with the Great Glossy Click, the Great Glossy Count, which is supporting the Great Glossy Black Conservancy Program. We also do a lot of work for flying foxes as well recently.
00:20:00 That's been shown with our Statement of Management Intent that we developed last year. That was to create a clear direction for Council to manage flying foxes. Not just, you know, to manage the human wildlife conflicts that we do with flying foxes, but also to protect the species as a whole across the Shire. We've also done some work with a campaign called Koalas on the Move, which was an initiative that was developed last year. And we teamed up with TMR and ISA Biosphere and delivered an educational road campaign to target drivers to reduce the impacts of airstrikes on that species. And that was actually quite successful. We've actually recorded zero strikes on the roads that we targeted during the campaign. As opposed to five strikes in the previous year. With sea turtles, for the first year we teamed up with the Sunshine Coast Council and their turtle care program to assist in the clean up for the turtles,
00:21:00 clean up for the hatchlings event. That was fantastic to get involved with that. And it also strengthened our relationships with key stakeholders, you know, regarding sea turtle management. And species like the Mary River Cod, Mary River Turtle, we've teamed up with the MRCCC, BMRG, which is the Burnett, Mary regional group, to apply for flood recovery grants under the DES to look at baseline monitoring programs to work out where the species are across the Shire. And then I'll just finish with the grey gliders. So we also supported Nusseline Care this year to do a baseline monitoring program, again from grant funding that was available, to work out where the species is across the Shire and what measures and actions we can move to develop in response to that. Councillor Jurisevic: Can you turn to the right, Rebecca? Yeah. Speaker 2: I've got a couple more here. I think that's a really good summary from a species perspective. We obviously have broader programs around conservation, including the Council's Environment Levy Acquisitions Program,
00:22:00 where we acquire large parcels of land that's suitable for conservation and rehabilitation that point out of our forward conservation state. They're really important parcels that are selected there for improving connectivity across our landscape, allowing for monomovement and dispersal migration. We also have our Natural Areas Program, where we're managing Council's own natural areas and improving the health and resilience of the ecosystems within that estate as well. So I guess when we're talking about threatened species management, we're not always looking at it from the individual species perspective. It's a multi-species approach and that's the whole of the landscape as well. Councillor Jurisevic: And as far as actual environment rehabilitation projects, I mean, you mentioned a lot of monitoring programs there. It's great monitoring, but what are we doing? And the programs that you mentioned there, Rebecca, with regard to land purchases and the like and connectivity, but are there other specific land rehabilitation projects,
00:23:00 apart from Ural and Ringtail, that we're doing? Work with the bush care groups, for example? Speaker 2: Yeah, so we've had strong partnerships with Miss District Landcare to rehabilitate parcels of land on private property and on public land as well. I don't know the statistics for that, but it's such an active, well-resourced group that we can really leverage a lot of our efforts here within Council through those strong partnerships, including with MRCC as well. Some of the programs include working with rural landholders to rehabilitate riparian areas, so areas along the waterways that have been degraded, that have significant slopping, where stock use that as their watering points. That's bringing forward benefits across our rural landscape that has those flow-on benefits to the species that occupy those rural and marine areas. Councillor Jurisevic: Now, one other area where we've talked about facilitating things
00:24:00 for water management, but I don't see in the... ..specifically in this report, is regard to wildlife crossings and the like. Is there any thought about where we go with providing wildlife crossing points and that to try and enhance the opportunities for those areas of connectivity to be actually reached or roads safely crossed so that species aren't being diminished, i.e. koalas and the like, but actually facilitating and raising awareness with regard to fauna crossings? Speaker 5: Sure. I think that Koalas on the Move campaign that was run alongside Noosaville Sphere and TMR was a good example of that, where we used the baseline moratorium to identify where the strikes had occurred, particularly koalas. But I actually remember when we talked about koalas, we were also talking morose location for other species because of that habitat connectivity across that road as such. So that was a really good example where we used the data to identify hot spots. The first thing that we've put in there
00:25:00 is the Driver of Weakness campaign, the Water Community Education campaign. The next step is to look at actual mitigations potentially across those corridors. So, yeah, we haven't quite got to that, into that depth as yet, but, yeah, I think it's an area that we can look to. Councillor Jurisevic: Can I suggest that is an area? I mean, having gone down to Briarby Island with regard to wildlife crossing areas and even the rope crossings over roadways for possums and the like to give them and facilitate things along those lines. Speaker 5: I think where this threatened fauna recovery roadmap comes into this is that with those species that we've nominated, user koalas as an example, creating that recovery action plan for that species is going to be the process where we actually identify those risks and then look at feasible mitigation options. OK. Whether it's fauna crossings, whether it's education,
00:26:00 we haven't quite got there yet because we haven't progressed the roadmap. Councillor Jurisevic: OK, I look forward to what that identifies and brings forward. Thanks, David. Thanks for the report. Speaker 5: Councillor Roberts. Councillor Lorentson: Hi, David. Hi, Rebecca. Can you explain the process of adding additional species to the list of management priorities under the strategy? Speaker 5: Yeah, I think going back to how we nominated the species based on the key habitat that they predominantly reside in and getting that proportion spread across the Noosa Shire, we think that we are actually getting those fauna effects towards other species. Yes, we've used a species as an iconic representation of that ecosystem type, but it doesn't mean we're not going to see those cross benefits across other species. So when we get into generating the recovery action plan, we'll be trying to identify what other species we can have co-reactions for and we will include them in those recovery action plans as much as we can.
00:27:00 But, again, it does go back to resources in terms of what we can deliver under 1.0 FTE staffers for the roadmap. So, yeah, I'll probably leave it at that if that answers your question. OK. Councillor Lorentson: And my last questions, I think you've sort of part answered. Will there be an opportunity to consider adding other species to the list if Council agree on, you know, supporting resources and budget allocation to this? Speaker 5: I'll pass it on to Rebecca. Speaker 2: Yeah. So we always imagined that this roadmap process would be an iterative process that we would review the program over time. And while it's the first priority species is the sea turtle and we have the other eight species for the flow out of that, we will be a bit opportunistic in terms of what other programs are out there, what funding opportunities there are
00:28:00 to be able to also look towards conservation initiatives for other species as well. And if there is a program that allows us to elevate actions or initiatives for certain species, then we'll have a look and see how that fits within our broader program. So I think we have to be a bit adaptive and not be too strict around how we run the process. But we do have a clear way forward for next financial year around the sea turtles and from there on we'll continue to see whether we can partner with other community groups along the way to try and elevate some of those other species actions as well. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Tom. Councillor Wegener: Funding opportunities out there that are going to be coming up and the community groups, and you mentioned the MRCC, Landcares, NBRF, and bush groups. There's quite a few of the bush groups that can benefit from the roadmap
00:29:00 and follow the roadmap and use it towards. Just off the top of your head, you have the three bush groups at the beaches. What other bush groups have you missed out on that can be using? Speaker 2: So NICA, Moose Parks Association, the other various research agencies that we work alongside. Speaker 5: The one in North Shore, Coast Care. Yeah. But again, it will be species specific. So at that point where we develop our reaction plan, we'll identify those stakeholders and community groups that are in a position to work. We've counselled some of the objectives that we're trying to achieve for those species. So it's very important that Councillor Wegener: to facilitate the groups that facilitate the plan. It's a two-way street, isn't it? Speaker 4: 100%. Councillor Wegener: Yeah. And we have approached, Speaker 5: we've obviously got the environmental project grants out at the moment and the multi-runs as well. And we've proactively approached organisations that are relevant to sea turtles.
30 minutes in ¶
00:30:00 The next one entering, we're encouraging them to apply under that grant process to get them all relevant. So, yeah. Councillor Finzel. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. Thank you, everyone. Just a question around outside of the nine nominated species, what reassurance can we give the broader community today? Because we've all received emails asking for the additional species to be added. What reassurance can I give the community that these other species outside of the nine will not be overlooked? Speaker 5: Yeah. I think the design of the roadmap, so how Council designed the roadmap was very strategic. As I said, we made sure that we worked out what key habitats exist across the Nisha Shire, what proportion percentage-wise they occupy, and then we based our species selection on those key habitats. So we're making sure that our resources over the implementation of the roadmap will actually improve all of those ecosystems as a whole. So that's how we can,
00:31:00 I guess, explain to the community that we are going to have those following effects for different species. As I said, as we develop recovery action plans for certain species, we'll dive into it a little bit deeper and we might find opportunities that we're not even aware of at the moment. And a lot of that will come from the community groups as well. Councillor Jurisevic: So would it be fair to say that whilst the nine are the focus, that all 29 will benefit from the work going forward and that the opportunities where all the one species is able to benefit from works or funding going forward, that that'll be an element that raises that opportunity? Speaker 5: Yes, I agree with that comment. I'll just use a quick example with sea turtles. So a threat that we would look to address for sea turtles would be climate change because we're seeing increased coastal erosion and decreased nesting activity on the beaches. But obviously, if we as a whole, as a community in the Noosa Shire addresses climate change, we're going to have obvious farm effects towards other species. So that's really, I guess,
00:32:00 a wider example of how this roadmap will work in terms of having those co-benefits towards other species. Councillor Jurisevic: And I guess the extreme of the question is that whilst sea turtles may be year one's focus, that won't stop us undertaking all the other ecological restoration works and programs that we've got in place that continue to serve and benefit all the other species that need that, those works being undertaken, i.e., the continued works in restoration in your Ringtail Forest, the continued work with bush care groups and all of those works that are business as usual is part and parcel of what Council does on a day-to-day basis. Speaker 5: And our existing reserve management on local lines as well, so... As well as bushfire management and all the rest of it, I guess. There's a lot of background work already there, so it's about consolidating that to have the beneficial impacts on the species. Thanks, guys. Council, Councillor Wilkie: we have a motion to vote. Does anyone care to move?
00:33:00 Councillor Jurisevic's seconded. Councillor Lorentson? Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: Anne? Yeah. Thanks, guys. A comprehensive understanding. I mean, the Noosa 9 have been mentioned for a number of years around Council as the focus. And again, by the focus, it doesn't mean that that's the only species that we conduct or undertake fauna management of. It's just where a priority exists with regard to a particular species in a particular year. All the ongoing work continues behind the scenes with work as usual with regard to the projects that Council undertakes. And those projects are a major priority. What was it? 2,400 hectares of mural and ringtail forest is one example. The continued purchase of land parcels that offer connectivity and the continued monitoring of the species that we do have in our Shire and we do continue to. Again, new species do get identified. Recently, we identified
00:34:00 a locality around Carramar of the swamp crayfish. So those sort of things keep coming to mind and staff take that on board. And I think going forward, there is a real opportunity here for a focus that in Noosa we probably haven't given a lot of focus to before. The sea turtles, which has been undertaken quite well to the south of us. Joining with Coolum District Coast Care to better manage and better understand the elements of sea turtles going forward in the next budget. As well as all those other species that Spencer has identified in his emails to us. But the 29 species that we've got identified that are a priority for Council going forward. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm going to move an amendment. And the amendment is ringing up there. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll just read the additional bits. So to approve the threatened Pomona recovery roadmap as referred to in attachment one to this report
00:35:00 for the purpose of implementation except as amended below. A. Include the Mary River Cod as an iconic species for freshwater waterways, wetlands and riparian zone habitats. B. Authorise the CEO to make the necessary amendments to reflect this addition. For example, the moving reference to the Noosa 9. Councillor Wilkie: Question. Councillor Stockwell, are you suggesting the Mary River Cod replaces the Noosa 10? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Well, as was mentioned, the Noosa 9 was a staff initiative for an event as a marketing tool. Whether we need a marketing slogan for a threatened species recovery is questionable. We could make it the Threatened 10. But I'm just, yep, I'll leave it at that. I'm going to come into my place. Councillor Wilkie: We'll have a seconder, please. Questions. Question. Question. Councillor Lorentson: So, my previous question
00:36:00 was just explaining the process of adding extra species to the list of management priorities. Your response, Rebecca and David, was resourcing and budget as being restraints. Can I ask the question, would an addition of this species ensure that the programs are manageable and what would be the implications in terms of resourcing and budget? Speaker 5: For sure. So, throughout the roadmap, we actually talked in detail about the, I guess, the link between the Mary River Turtle and the Mary River Cod. And we've always identified that throughout the roadmap as an opportunity to have co-benefit impacts on species under a co-reaction plan. So, it was always on our radar to do that. As I said, the roadmap went under a comprehensive stakeholder consultation process and the panel nominated the Mary River Turtle just over the Mary River Cod. So, I think we're always looking to include the Mary River Cod in the recovery action plan.
00:37:00 Whether or not we did have discussions during the P&E meeting about creating a joint recovery action plan, that is a potential option. The other thing that's been exposed to a lot of stakeholders is there's good community drive behind the campaign. I'm strongly believing that we should maintain the Noosanine. But we can include the Mary River Cod into the recovery action plans. What we've done with acid frogs, acid frogs was one of the Noosanine. They actually cover off three species of acid frogs. But we've just called them the acid frogs. Because obviously if we're developing a plan for one acid frog, we're going to do it for the whole three because they all live in the same habitat. It just makes resourcing sense to do that. So, there's no reason why we can't do a similar thing with the Mary River Cod and Mary River Turtle. But I would be apprehensive to change the Noosanine to the Noosa 10, for example.
00:38:00 Councillor Wilkie: Just to go to what I think is a hard answer to Councillor Lorentson's question, is will there be additional costs in working towards restoration or maintenance of the habitat of the Mary River Cod as well as the restoration of the maintenance of the habitat of the Mary River Turtle? They're all two different environments, aren't they? Speaker 5: Well, sure, there will be some additions there, definitely. But as Rebecca mentioned, keeping the roadmap adaptive, you know, we're only nominating sea turtles for the first year. There's opportunity where we can look at each species and see what bang for our buck we can get. So, as I said, it just makes resource sense, I guess, to the target of the Mary River Turtle. You know, we contribute a bit more, we target Mary River Cod. A lot of the funding streams are the same. So, if we get a funding stream come down for flood recovery from DES or whatnot, you know, the opportunities under that grant will apply for Mary River Turtle and Mary River Cod, which we've recently seen
00:39:00 in support of MRCCC's Speaker 2: by looking at both of those species. But as Dave said, the works or the actions that would come out of the results of that monitoring would be much the same. Councillor Wilkie: Could it be done under the current budget? Monitoring for both of these species or would the budget have to increase? Speaker 2: So, we don't have a budget for the Mary River Turtle at this stage. So, we only have it for the sea turtles. So, in future budget rounds as we are endeavouring to do that recovery roadmap for the Mary River species, we will be seeking a budget as part of that and also looking at grant options for that. So, Dave, Mayor Stewart: what I'm hearing from you though is with the Noosa 9 looking at the turtle, we're inadvertently anyway looking at the cod.
00:40:00 Yeah. And we can make that, Speaker 5: yeah, that's exactly right. So, we've said we always have an opportunity under the resources that we have and I've supported the team so, yeah, at that point. Councillor Finzel: Okay. Speaker 5: Sorry, Councillor Jurisevic: I thought Councillor Fiddle had a question for her. Councillor Finzel: I was just going to clarify that. Could you say we didn't have the resource in this budget for the turtle and for the sea turtle and, yeah, for this couple of So, how do you benefit the Mary River cod or need to fund in future years for the turtles? Councillor Jurisevic: So, going forward, and I'm looking at Brian's removing reference to the Noosa 9. Do we need a Noosa 9? We've got 29 species and I'm assuming that the cod fits into those 29. I mean, do we need to focus on only nine? First, the first question. I'll leave
00:41:00 you with that one. And the second part is, if we were going to do the Mary River, I mean, one would think that if you're monitoring in the Mary River, you could be looking at the cod and the turtle at the same time with regard to your monitoring activities. It's the same river system and the like, and they're both endangered species in there. They're two different habitats, but you're in the same area. So, is that a challenge to monitor two species? And could we change it to the Mary River species, much like acid frogs, so that we monitor both Speaker 5: species? I don't have any issues with calling it what you will, the Mary River species, the Mary River turtle, the Mary River cod. As I said, our intention is there to cover up on both species anyway under the roadmap for what you mean there is quite clear. So, yeah, I think we can approach it
00:42:00 a number of ways. As I said, you know, there's plenty of opportunities there that we're already pursuing on the grants and whatnot, targeting both of those species in terms of baseline monitoring programs. So, the work's already been done in that space. This is about consolidating and moving forward in a sensible approach, so. Speaker 2: Yeah, you asked the question, the first question, about focusing on the noose behind the river. We need to do that. So, there's already some momentum and some understanding out there in the community of that program. For us, it's about publicity and awareness arising around the efforts towards written species management. It is an alliteration, so I guess it sounds good. The work will continue across the board around our conservation programs regardless of what we call it. For us, that's the focus more than anything. It's to attract good funding to make sure we put the resources towards it
00:43:00 the best we can. So, it's really that noose is probably not so much of an issue for us as it is to just make sure we do a good job and communicate that well out to the community and partner with our different agencies to do a good job down the road. Councillor Jurisevic: Perhaps, so that when we target a particular species and there are other species that will benefit from it, we mention all those species not just the iconic species that is the leader of that opportunity. Speaker 5: Yeah. So, that noose and iron of all the species, that's the flagship for that habitat type. That's carrying everything else. And, let's face it, we do need that iconic value to create that community input, that community drive, that community awareness which is all going to assist in terms of, you know, baseline population monitoring data, everything like that. So, you just remember we do have those flagship species that represent those key habitat types and that's how the roadmap starts. Councillor Jurisevic: So, it really is just to facilitate promotion Exactly. around the work that's being done and the opportunities that it presents.
00:44:00 Yeah. Speaker 2: We have another update to our environmental monitoring program that we'll be presenting to the community this part of the year that looks at our environment strategy and what progress we've made today and what projects we're working on to achieve the targets that's set out in the environment strategy. So, that will take that holistic view of sort of showcasing the initiatives that we're working on but also where we've had successes around tree planting for example or areas of environmental restoration. I think that's where we can also provide awareness around the breadth of the programs that we're working on. Councillor Jurisevic: So, given that the work on the Noosa 9 is something that's already been progressed over a number of years, you don't feel it's worth throwing the baby out with the bathwater but to continuing that work and actually strengthening and enhancing that work and utilising that as the catalyst going forward. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you.
45 minutes in ¶
00:45:00 A suggestion that was made by someone sitting in the audience today which Spencer was Noosa 9 and Co. I actually think it's a great idea because it actually recognises do you think it's not a bad tag given that it actually encapsulates these interconnected ecosystems so it would capture the cod and all the other species that we would love listed in addition to the 9. Is that something that you would consider? Speaker 2: Noosa 9 and Co. Okay. Councillor Lorentson: Fantastic. Yeah. Excellent. Councillor Jurisevic: I think it shows that we focus I agree. I think it shows that we're focusing more than that. So is that an easy transition to make? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can I bring to the Chairman's attention that I have moved to motion there is now a series of questions which are verging on debate and I would like
00:46:00 to either ask for someone to second it Councillor Wilkie: has councillors have the right to ask questions at this point before a motion is seconded. Are there any other questions? I do have a question. Councillor Stockwell had raised the point that there is evidence that the Mary River Cod exists in Noosa Shire and not the Mary River Turtle. Can you speak to that please? Sure. Speaker 5: So we consulted with MRCC obviously our key stakeholder regarding the four things of Mary River. They expressed that there was high possibility in their opinion that Mary River Turtle was in Noosa Shire particularly within Six Mile Creek. From that advice we thought it was worthwhile to have the Mary River Turtle in the in the short list of species and so the ten stakeholders agreed with MRCC's the All-Martin and the Mary River Species over the Mary River Cod.
00:47:00 Not to discount the importance of the Mary River Cod but that's the process the All-Martin went through which justified the Mary River Turtle to be one of the species. Councillor Wilkie: And what were the key tools to put the Mary River Turtle over the Cod? Even though the evidence suggests that the Cod does exist in Noosa Shire but there's only the possibility of it turning back. Speaker 5: Yeah, so we've created a decision matrix which the stakeholders completed to nominate the species. Within there there were nine threatening processes such as climate change, habitat fragmentation, land security, etc. The participants scored each species according to those threats specific to that habitat type. they exactly got the Mary River Turtle over the Mary River Cod because obviously there's quite a collaborative decision there but that's probably a lot combined with that at that point. Councillor Wilkie: Can we have a second of the Councillor Stockwell's amendment please for purpose of debate?
00:48:00 I'm happy to second the Councillor's amendment. Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I do say I have a different view to the results of the expert panel. It's unusual of a Councillor. We'll say that with confidence but since I've been involved in the recovery of both these species for nearly 30 years now I think I've got the expertise to comment. It's been said that MRCC was on it so I went to the person in MRCC who's got expert knowledge on this. I actually was on his recovery group and he said cod is a definite whereas Mary of a Turtle is still unknown. I would agree that right now we know that cod is there and we know recovery actions where the Mary of a Turtle is simply unknown. That's the only other person on that panel put together that would have a better understanding of the species than myself I'm confident to say.
00:49:00 I too think there's a likelihood that Mary of a Turtle could be found in past the Six Mile Creek possibly downstream from Cooran where you're more likely to have the sandy nesting banks. That's one of the reasons why I don't think just having it as the iconic species is the right way to go. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: The other one Deputy Mayor Stockwell: is that the Mary of a Turtle has habitat niche and preferences that really aren't necessarily reflective of a range of other threatened and valuable species within freshwater aquatic ecosystems in the Mary. Whereas the cod being a top line predator requiring underwater habitats that include snags of old age including needing shading in the riparian zone needing healthy water flows you know environmental flows that you struggle with has a whole range of other
00:50:00 ecosystem processes that are threatening its survival but also threatening survival of nearly every other freshwater aquatic species. That's the main reason. I know David suggested that Noosa Nines got some acceptance. I would argue that Noosa Nines created a division ever since the staff member said we're we're excluding others. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think Deputy Mayor Stockwell: it's time to change our approach. I think it's time to look at I agree with the approach that's come here. From memory it was either the first or the second time it was used was in the Festival of Orders and didn't include any other festival of species. I think what we're seeing this week are species that are emblematic or are representative
00:51:00 or are iconic within ecosystems. Our aim as a Council is not to duplicate the work of the Department of Environmental Sciences. Our aim is to get threatened species recovery work that rehabilitates catchments and whole landscapes. And so for my purposes I have no problems about adding another species. I looked at the other species that scored similarly to the cod and the turtle and they don't necessarily add more whereas I think the cod does add more. Hence why I've gone down this path. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Wegener: Question for Tom Councillor Stockwell would you be satisfied if the name was changed to Nine and Co? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I will not professionally make a decision on about recovery of species
00:52:00 based on marketing tagline. Because that's what that does. It reduces it to saying there has been a good process leading to how these species have been selected. I'm not arguing that it's a process. I'm arguing that I think what's happened with getting two points higher has come with a recommendation from council that could be improved. I think it's important that we do send a signal to the community that yes we've selected a certain number of species but we're looking at their habitats not just the individual species. I think that's an important message. And if we were to I don't think we should have a tagline. I don't think our marketing should be embedded within a council policy document. Councillor Wegener: I just have a question. So, when we say we should be saving the noose environment and we could just beat up everything within the environment all things or we could narrow it down and use the koala as pretty much
00:53:00 the head species and I think that funding and public support and everything would be supported and helped facilitate getting grants and things because it simplifies the process and say this is what we're going to do because this is the particular catchment or landscapes as you said that's affected and this is the So, you think that right you don't think that using any animals Deputy Mayor Stockwell: you should be facilitating No, that's what I'm saying. I think the process is good. I think we need to prioritise our effort. I think the expert panel process where the stakeholders are getting down to this list is the right way to go for CSA. Things like koala it brings the community around it and it will help a whole range of recovery
00:54:00 actions around euclid forests. I just don't think we need to make decisions about what's in and what's out based on marketing. Mayor Stewart: I appreciate Councillor Stockwell's knowledge in this space but I mean can we keep questions directed to staff who are the experts and report what it is. Are any councillors free to ask a question of Councillor Stockwell Councillor Wilkie: about the nature of his the reasons for asking. Mayor Stewart: But that was beyond the original motion before we started talking about koalas. Councillor Wilkie: That's right. He's free to ask any question on what Councillor Stockwell is pertaining to. I have a question. Would Councillor Stockwell be happy to leave the handling of the addition or how they handle it to the staff if would you be happy to remove example removing reference to the Noosa 9 because that's quite prescriptive. Do you have to remove that part of your amendment and leave it
00:55:00 to staff as to how they handle this addition. I would be. Councillor Jurisevic: Can I ask a question in a different way. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Councillor Jurisevic: Would you prefer to say the Noosa 29 seeing as there's 29 species that have been identified. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: As I said I'll just give you that example. As already in the plan they talk about dealing with the cod and the turtle together in one recovery plan. I didn't think it was adding any additional work. I think you know there's some things that the turtle needs that the cod don't stay together. That would be a comprehensive thing so the turtle may have some requirements for that. Councillor Wilkie: I'll just remove the clause that says example removing reference to the Noosa 9. I support this. Marketing should not the value of marketing has a good outcome and that is in drawing
00:56:00 public attention to the plight of endangered and threatened species I think is a worthy thing and I appreciate the efforts put towards that and I respect the work going on in that space. There's so much that is grabbing at our attention these days and so if the staff and the community have already got some momentum around the Noosa 9 which helps focus our attention on key threatened species I think that work ought to continue. It is catchy. I respect Councillor Stockwell's view that he doesn't want to be engaged in that aspect of it but I think adding to Mary River Cod there is value especially after hearing the staff's advice that they can manage the work around both Mary River Cod and the Mary River Turtle in the same way. Bearing in mind also that this funding and the resources allocated under this resolution
00:57:00 are going towards the turtle the sea turtle and allocation of specifically targeted resources for all the other species will be taken over time but there is ongoing work as drawn up by Councillor Stockwell Jurisevic's question ongoing work going on continually that will benefit all the species. So I will support the addition of this. We do know it exists in the Noosa River and I'll support the amendment but I'll leave to staff as to how they handle our addition. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So Mr Tim as it's been moved in seconds it's not me that has to agree to its removal it has to be a majority of councillors who are accepting that removal. Councillor Jurisevic: I wouldn't suspect it has to be my amendment. No. Councillor Wilkie: No. So if Councillor Stockwell if you're okay for it to be removed
00:58:00 are the councillors for the purposes of the debate be prepared to have that clause removed from Councillor Stockwell's amendment? Councillor Lorentson: Sorry I'm not familiar with this process so through the chair can you explain? Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: So I'm suggesting that Councillor Stockwell removing reference to the Noosa 9 so the staff handle how they handle that addition. Councillor Stockwell is in favour of it but the rest of the meeting needs to consent towards that change Councillor Lorentson: at this point. That's not done through a proper amendment is really my question. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Well it's a standing orders and It's a minor change Can we clarify Councillor Jurisevic: with the CEO Can we clarify with the CEO Councillor Wilkie: It's a minor change to an amendment that the that the the mover has consented to but the meeting has a say in this as well. Councillor
00:59:00 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Speaker 1: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes This is a minor change. Councillor Wilkie: Just to, just as a reminder to that, this would have to be voted on. If you want to remove it, you can't amend an amendment. So this would have to be passed, become part of the motion. Councillor Jurisevic: That's what I'm saying. And then you'd have to make an amendment to remove it. Councillor Wilkie: So for the purpose of the debate, is the meeting happy to have that clause removed? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. I'm happy.
60 minutes in ¶
01:00:00 Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Okay. If the mover and seconder are happy. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Anybody else wish to speak to Councillor Stockwell's amendment? Mayor Stewart: Jake, do you have a question? You've had your hand up a lot. Speaker 1: I didn't want the Council of Australia to know. It was answered. Councillor Finzel: Okay. Well, given that Councillor Jurisevic: Council Stockwell's knowledge of the Mary River Cod, its habitat, and his understanding and the staff's responses with regard to how the Mary River Cod and the Mary River Turtle could be integrated into habitat rehabilitation and restoration processes and monitoring activities, I'm happy to see the amendment passed.
01:01:00 Councillor Wegener: Councillor Whittaker? Question, as we're going down, are we saying that since the Mary River Cod is an iconic species, what about the perch and the catfish and all those other ones, are they not an iconic species now? This is what I worry about is... That was a question. Yeah. Question. To you, do you think that you're limiting the others? I mean, that's what we seem to be doing is, if you put something on the list, you focus on that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think in how the term iconic species is used for this particular roadmap, I don't think it does downplay the importance of those other threatened species, but like the pygmy perch is a different ecosystem. It's associated with the waltham streams, honey blue-eyes and similar. So I don't have a problem with that. I think as long as the logic is clear and we can... We can communicate that logic that we're choosing species that we can base our recovery actions on that will benefit the whole ecosystem that they're chosen for, I think.
01:02:00 Yeah. Because there can be threatened species that are very narrow niches, very narrow habitat requirements, and just recovering them won't have great flow-ons like these, mate. Councillor Wilkie: I'd like councillors to speak, please. You're prepared to close, Councillor Stockwell? I need to. Okay. That's unanimous. That becomes part of the motion, the original motion. And I'd like... Oh, you have another amendment? I do. Okay. We have four. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: This one's a little bit longer. So it's now keeping A as above, rather than... So... Okay. And amending B, to immediately commence the implementation of the road map focused on the conservation of sea turtles by A, adopting a zero tolerance approach to driving on coastal
01:03:00 dunes targeting compliance and enforcement action on peak times during the turtle nesting and hatching season. B, further request staff commence immediate negotiations with Queensland Parks and Wildlife, Queensland Preserves Police Service, and the Teewah Working Group to determine whether or not to develop a joint education compliance and enforcement regime commencing this Easter break, potentially involving I, work one, fixed and drone-mounted surveillance cameras. Two, closure of the North Shore beach either side of Pytide if driving conditions would force general driving. Three, appropriate signage and presence of authorised officers during peak periods. C, advise a member of NUSA and the Minister of the Environment of the Council's position on this matter and seeking their support for any regulatory changes. D, to inform and budget the allocation required to achieve the desired outcomes. And D, becomes what there was there previously, considering a funding allocation for priority
01:04:00 management of sea turtles as part of the Council's 23-24 budget deliberations. Councillor Finzel: I have a question. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I've got several. Mayor Stewart: In the... We have a report coming from DES on Friday, which may or may not address the issue of some of the things raised here. It's coming to the Teewah Cooroy Working Group. Councillor Stockwell may not have been aware that that is coming. Are we pre-empting or predetermining what the report from the State Government is? Why adopting this? And do we even have capacity to adopt this based on what's going to be outlined in that report? Speaker 1: Thank you, Chair. Yeah, look, happy to. And the elements we may need to take on notice if this becomes a resolution of Council. Understand what the Council is wanting to achieve here from a conservation perspective. It's extremely important. It's four weeks. It's giving our Council offices four weeks to be able to deliver that, which I understand
01:05:00 why. It is going to be very difficult. It would be... Our team would need to... It would be very difficult to stop all other works and focus only on this. A matter for Council's discussion and consideration around this matter, but just quickly looking out from where we are today on the 13th of March and that goodbye in the 7th of April. That's four weeks. It will be difficult to deliver. I think this is a resolution. And Council would need to understand that all other matters that have been discussed by the environment team and other staff we're working on would need to cease to focus on this and this only, plus education. Mayor Stewart: Sarah, do we have even the capacity to... For the legislative authority to do all of that, based on the fact that, as I said, a
01:06:00 lot of this could or could not be, and no doubt it may well be, in that report? Is that our responsibility or is that the State Government? I mean, at what point are we... Do we have the capacity to make legislation? Or to make a resolution on that? Speaker 1: My mind would be to the amendment, actually, until it is that, in that it's requested staff commence immediate negotiations with Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, QPWS, working through the working term. That's where there would be a cross-jurisdiction, cross-organisation level of cooperation to do all of this. I would be able to achieve what is being requested, noting, though, that with some of this, it will be out of the control of the government, that we will need QPWS and QPS. And the other element that is there is item C of the amendment, is that we would be working
01:07:00 directly with the minister. So it would be direct to the minister's office. Whether there has been work that's been undertaken, I can't comment on that. I'm not sure. I'm not aware. But it would be to have the cooperation of those elements of the state. We do need to note that the hard-working members of QPWS are very stretched at this point in time. Very, very stretched. We support QPWS and the work that they do for our community, but they are stretched. So this would be a specific operation. They may already have a specific operation in place in Easter. We are unaware. And I'm sure that they do that at this time of the year. But that is some initial thoughts that I had for council's consideration on the amendment that you have required. Councillor Lorentson: Just a question. Just further to Clare's questions in regards to this report that's coming, my belief, 17th
01:08:00 of March. That TY working group, which I've just joined, my understanding it's four years in the making. There's been a lot of work done. There's been a lot of work by Sandy and the team around that table to have arrived at this position now that we're about to get a recommendation, which in fact may actually state all this. So my question is, does this recommendation, and I totally support the intent and the call to action. But does it potentially undermine all the hard work of four years with this group? I don't know. I'm a bit conflicted. So I would love to, through the chair, ask what your thoughts are. Speaker 1: Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Through the chair in response. It won't undermine that work. So your question of would it undermine? No. It would compliment.
01:09:00 But we do need to understand what the Department of Environment is going to bring to us on Friday. And we are waiting for that. We're looking forward to Friday to see what the outcome of four years' worth of hard work and cooperation has been able to achieve. It wouldn't undermine it at all. We would either be willing to do it or it would be complimentary to. My advice continues to be, though, four weeks for an operation such as that and see our support resources to specifically deliver this outcome. And if that's the view of Council, operationally, we would work to deliver that. We'd be understanding how that all is moving into SIS. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: If anyone seconds it, I'll actually give you some feedback. Councillor Lorentson: I second it. Happy to second it. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. I've got to say, I don't think I can because I moved the original motion. I would have otherwise. Councillor Lorentson: I'll second it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, Councillor... Can you say anything? No, no, no. I would like to explain. Yes, we have a working group. We've actually had ministerial delegations jointly from that working group.
01:10:00 Approximately two years ago, I suggested it was now time for the matters to be reported up to Council to get a position of this Council. We've never had an adopted position of this Council on these matters that are going back from the State. Yes, the State is about to announce the results of its survey and may then have management actions come out. I don't know. What I do know is that we should be communicating what position of this Council is rather than what position of the Council representatives on the Teva working group are. I also know that what I'm suggesting is A, adopting a policy position in what's B1 up there. Sorry, I was looking at my numbering so they might have confused you. In B1, that's adopting a policy position of this Council. We want a zero tolerance on the dunes. That's what we communicate to the minister.
01:11:00 Two is really about going into the next Teva working group with a position that this Council supports. It's not saying we're going to do this. It's saying they're the things to look at. And yes, it is only a short time. But when the Teva working group first came up, they said, we're going to do this. There was significant driving on the front of dunes over the top of Turtle Ecks and its nest, and it's still happening, that we did collaborate with QPWS to be down there during peak periods. My understanding was we did have some of our local laws as well as QPWS staff, and from memory they were stopping vehicles when the odds were high. The last part I'm not certain of. So what we're saying here is we want to negotiate, we want to go in with the position. And this threatened species, just for what Afton planned, provides one of the key reasons why you don't want as many vehicles.
01:12:00 I haven't gone into all the other issues of the Theo Working Group because it's not related to this item. I've only gone to the one of most significance to a threatened species. And I would think, if I was on that team, I would say, if I was on the Theo Working Group, I would prefer to have Council's position really clearly enunciated. I'd prefer to go in and say, yes, if the State Government comes out with this thing, Noosa Council will support you, rather than, oh, we'll take it back to the next round of meetings or the meetings two months later. It's not locking Council into anything like in B2. And I know we've used, well there's six Cameras now, because they've got number plate recognition on the beach access points. We've also known that the State Government has used it. That's why I've put it like that. Now, I've clearly said, I'm not committing this. There is legislative questions around whose responsibility controlling traffic on what is deemed to be a road is,
01:13:00 whether it's now purely under the Recreational Area Management Act, or whether, being a road, there is some Council jurisdiction over it. I'm not going into that because that would take longer than four weeks to work out. What I'm saying is we go into any negotiations to try and do as much as we can this Easter, because what's happened in previous Easters has been significantly impacting on the species, what we've just said, that we're going to concentrate on. And the best thing that, you know, the worst way to start the implementation is to say, well, we're waiting for the States to do something. That's my purpose. Councillor Wilkie: I'm going to speak against the amendment. And I do support what we intended, what Councillor Stockwell has tried to do, and turns out manage human impacts on the nursing offshore,
01:14:00 which is a huge topic in itself. It has implications for tourism, visitation, the regionals that are over there. Yes, if this was adopted, the turtle hatchlings, the turtle nesting, this would be protected. But the motion we have before us is essentially about adopting the threatened fauna recovery roadmap. This is a huge other topic in itself. There is a link, certainly, to the roadmap. But it involves multiple departments. It's a vast topic in itself. We have a report to be presented at the Kewa North Shore Working Group on March 17, which you will all be invited to. I would like this brought up there to see whether or not these other agencies, QDS, the Kewan Centre Parks and Wildlife Service, GES, what they've got in store for the North Shore.
75 minutes in ¶
01:15:00 It may be aligned with this or any. But I don't want to pre-empt it at this point. I would like... I think it's too big a leap to make for a motion that's essentially about the adoption of the threatened fauna recovery roadmap. So I support the intent. But I'm going to wait to see what comes out of the March 17 meeting. It could align entirely with this. So I can't support it for that reason at this point. Councillor Jurisevic: Question? The priority plan for this roadmap going forward is speaking about the 23-24 budget, is it not? Is there any allocation in the current budget for this roadmap? Mr CEO or Sarah? Speaker 2: That's documented in the report, the existing funding that's available for the sea turtle initiative specifically there.
01:16:00 Councillor Jurisevic: So given that we're nine months through, through the financial year, is there any funding left to allocate to any initiatives in the next three months and particularly over the Easter period? Speaker 2: Not that this one suggests to go to that extent. We would require additional resources to do any sort of educational signings or financial enforcement. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll argue that. I don't believe that the amendment actually suggests that council do it. But it talks about further request staff, immediate negotiations. Well, I am because they're saying the budget implications. Well, it is a question. It is a question, Frank. This isn't you're suggesting there's no budget. Is this actually suggesting that council will require a budget to implement this or is it to request that work be done by other agencies? Speaker 5: May I respond to that one?
01:17:00 Please. Yeah. So, yeah. So just for a little baseline information. Obviously, the Stretton Porn Recovery Road map has come out. We've nominated sea turtles as a priority. Under the roadmap, we've identified community engagement as one of the first implementation standards that we adopt for species recovery. Environmental services already met with Kooloola Coast Care, DPWS offices, Kooloom and North Shore Coast Care, and actually Gympie Regional Council in terms of creating care for sea turtles on Noosa North Shore, TYR's nesting habitat and whatnot. So the balls are rolling there. But in terms of delivery of that educational campaign via Easter, that does come back to staff resources as well. Okay. So to get that actually through and delivered via Easter is pretty difficult considering the staff resources at the moment. But the ball is rolling on that. Councillor Lorentson: Can I? Speaker 5: Tom, you've got a question there again.
01:18:00 Sure. When will the turtles be nesting? Councillor Wegener: That's the next question. Yep. Speaker 5: So great. So November would be a great time to have this implementation recovery road. Sorry. To have this recovery action plan implemented by. Because November kicks off the breeding season for the turtles. So yeah, that's our goal. And that's what we'll deliver under the roadmap for sea turtles. So the four weeks is towards Easter, but not towards the nesting season. Councillor Wegener: Sorry? We were talking about four weeks to implement it. But that's for Easter. That's our four week. Not the actual nesting season, which is November. Through which there comes a time. Speaker 1: Report three. We'll give amendments requesting that this work is undertaken as during the Easter period. It's four weeks from today. Okay. The advice from the officer. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. Speaker 1: I remember you had a question. Councillor Lorentson: Just through the chair. That's not my understanding of two.
01:19:00 Can I direct the question to Brian? Yes, of course. Brian, am I reading this right? Requests are to commence negotiations about a program that will involve. So you're commencing negotiations ASAP. That's during the Easter break. And the negotiations or discussions. Involve one, two and three. Yep. So it's not a call to action to implement this for Easter. It's about let's just get the discussions happening. Am I correct or not? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It does. It does. I think it does say commencing this Easter. I do believe there are actions that could be started this Easter. I'm not saying that all that will be in place by Easter. I'm just saying, for example, a sign going up saying zero tolerance of driving on the dunes. Your fine is this much. Here's the camera that's going to take your car's picture. Councillor Wilkie: So in answer to your question, it would be an enforcement motion.
01:20:00 It would be. Starting at this. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It could be. We have to negotiate. I'm just saying that's the target. We're going to say, nope, I won't do my closing speech. Councillor Jurisevic: So first, to follow on with Tom's question, OK, we know we're in turtel nesting season. Is it turtel hatching season? Speaker 5: Yeah. It could occur over the Easter. However, Noosa Council has not reported any nesting activity on our managed beach. So south of basically the first camping area up at Teewah. As I said, which I think will address the concerns raised that Council has already engaged with those key stakeholders. We are discussing that educational campaign. And that's what needs to come first, too, is creating that awareness before we move to the really good points that have been put forward. And we are in that process. OK. Councillor Jurisevic: And a question to Councillor Stockwell, if I may. Your main focus on, too, is the closure of the North Shore Beach either side of high tide to prevent driving on the dune and the implementation of signage, officer presence and or some sort of surveillance operation to ensure that if that's occurring, that fines
01:21:00 are implemented. That's the way I read what you're trying to achieve. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: There are suggestions of what might be. And that, to me, I'm trying to send a message to the people who are going to be driving up there at Easter if this gets in the press, to be really honest. I wouldn't have put one, two, three. Because I think they're the things we have to let people know. Because at the moment, the North Shore is being used like it's legislation-free zone. Councillor Wilkie: That's the way I see it. Tell me a question. Councillor Wegener: So you're saying that there might be, that if they're going to be hatching, they're going to be hatching during the Easter time? Correct. Yeah. We don't, we don't, you said we don't know. We don't know. It's not either. It may well be. That we didn't see later it went back to the ocean. It may be hatching at this time. Speaker 5: I guess that we don't have any nests recorded this year.
01:22:00 It's not to say we didn't, you know, we didn't miss one as well. It's possible that there will be a chance to monitor it on certain time phases. So that is a possibility. But as I said, we're working through, I guess, one of those points with starting up with education. We're already revolving that forward, so. Councillor Finzel: Karen. A question for Councillor Stockwell. If we were to make a minor change to remove commencing this Easter break, if we just left that open, or added after we have the meeting on the 17th, or are you happy to remove an Easter break there? Like, was it timed, given the impacts on staffing and other things? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Is it a minor change? Councillor Lorentson: It's more of a minor change. I don't think it's a minor change. Yeah, I think it's a minor change.
01:23:00 It's the minor. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think part of it is. You can always move it to me if you don't like it. Yeah, yeah. No, yeah. Councillor Wilkie: A question, probably for the CEO. Is there a potential for some media, possibly with some enforcement advice, to the general public prior to this that may come out of the deliberations of the T1 working group as well? Speaker 1: Gee, Brett, my mind. Absolutely. We need to deliver an outcome out of Friday's meeting. At the very least, it is an education story. But the hope is, is that with the stakeholders around the table, it's also an compliance story. Don't go there and don't treat it as a playground. It's an ecosystem. It needs to be managed at the highest level. And through the resources of our council, Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, the Queensland Police Service, we'll be there to monitor and enforce as much as we possibly can. Question, Joe, then Tom.
01:24:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Correct me if I'm wrong, but are there already fines that apply for driving on tunes? Speaker 1: Through the chair, I suppose. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah. Speaker 1: Tom, do you have a question? Councillor Wegener: Yes. Speaker 1: Yes, of course. Councillor Wegener: I wish someone would. Speaker 1: No. Councillor Wegener: I'm sorry. Yeah. I suggest that the Newsy community would expect us to support this amendment. They've seen enough. They don't need any more talking. We have the roadmap. The roadmap says this is where we have to go. We have Easter break. The thought that there might be dead turtles on the, dead baby turtles on the ground because somebody's driving over the tunes would just be an absolute nightmare for us. It would be an atomic bomb in our environmental world if that happened. I think we should say they may be there. Let's protect them. Let's start this. We have the roadmap. We are going to start this progress right now to stop people from driving on the tunes, and so I support this. And I know it's a bit of a rush, but I think that the Newsy community would expect this
01:25:00 action from us. They'd be proud of it. Tom? Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: I'll speak to it. Yeah, I'll support it wholeheartedly. I admit the timeframe of Easter is a stretch, but elements of this should be in place anyway. Driving on the tunes is a fineable offence. The one thing that the state can do, and the agencies that are there, is ensure that if driving on the tunes is something that is forced because of the tide situation, they should potentially close off Easter. Close off access to that area until the tide is sufficiently down and people aren't forced to drive onto the tunes. And it's the only element of force is the fact that people believe that there's only one way home and that they have to get on the tunes to do that. It's already an offence. They shouldn't be doing it anyway. So I see nothing wrong with what Brian's proposing here. I think a zero tolerance approach to driving on coastal tunes does deserve a targeting,
01:26:00 getting compliance and enforcement action at peak times, and tunnel nesting just helps facilitate that. I think it's an obvious way to turn around and make people further aware of their responsibilities with regard to journal management and driving anywhere near the tunes. The tunes do suffer dramatically with regard to driving on them when people do it, and it only makes it worse when the tides are there to help break down the tunes. I see nothing wrong with any of this. I see the opportunity there to very readily advocate to the state the actions that they'll be undertaking with regard to enforcement. And the QPS will be there over the Easter break. You can guarantee that, as will QPWS staff as they are constantly, to ensure that we have a zero tolerance position on this and that we should be ensuring that they take
01:27:00 enforcement appropriately. If need be, close the beach if and when the conditions are required. Strong advocacy from Council, Mr CEO, and the Mayor to the Minister and those concerned in the short term would be something I strongly support. Councillor Lorentson: I'll speak to it. I've been meeting with the residents of Teewah for some time about this issue. And now I've just joined the Teewah Working Group. To me, what's happening at the Noosa North Shore, and for someone who frequents it and kids frequent the North Shore, it is environmental vandalism. And I just think that, and I'm trying to say this really nicely, but if we wait through, if we go through due process, wait for the report, then the report goes out to community
01:28:00 consultation. And then it goes back to state. It's going to be some time before we get some action. I'd love the immediacy of this. It's a serious call to action. And I'd love to go to the meeting on Friday, as the representative of the Teewah Working Group, with a policy position that we have zero tolerance. What's happening at the Noosa North Shore is not sustainable. And to respect what members of the Gauntlet Council are saying, I'm not going to do it. But I will say that we need to look at the broader habitats, these interconnected species. This is not just about sea turtles, it's about the interconnected ecosystems. And I commend Council Stockwell for having the courage to bring this to council. I'm hoping that it's not too onerous what we're putting on staff.
01:29:00 But I just think it's it's like I don't want to wait till Easter. We need to do something right now. So I am more than happy to support to support this recommendation and go to Friday's meeting with this policy position. Councillor Wilkie: Ms Finzel, can she speak to the amendment? Mayor Stewart: Yeah, I'll speak to it. I said I'm going to Teewah for the working group too. And having met with along with Councillor Lorentson from Teewah residents the other week, there are serious concerns. We are waiting on that report. But everything moves slowly in government land, as we all know, at every level of government. So I'm happy to support this. If nothing else, then it will give us a position. And I'm happy to advocate. On behalf of all our residents, especially those in the North Shore around this issue, I'm happy to advocate and write to however many ministers it takes.
90 minutes in ¶
01:30:00 Thank you. Councillor Finzel. Councillor Finzel: Well, it is challenging. I understand the urgency of it in terms of environmental. But this has gone on for a number of years, well before my time on council. I am, yeah, troubled by the impact that it will be for the staff, considering there's already pressure in a lot of areas. And do we also then have to be writing a policy? Can I ask a question? No. We're talking about policy. Through the Chair, does this also mean that we find time to start rewriting this policy? Speaker 1: Through the Chair, yes. Through the Chair, Council, there's a number of actions that come out of the amendment motion
01:31:00 that we have before you. And there's a time frame to do it on. It's good to understand the clarity of the intent in that this is about discussion, compliance enforcement, raging, commencing, the Easter break, potentially involving the three elements that are in there. Work will need to be done. It needs to be over the Easter period. Our staff will be paid at the rates that are applicable during that time as well, and we'll need to ensure that staff have their appropriate leave, but before the Council, a resolution of the Council will absolutely do the work. Councillor Finzel: So potentially involving, so it may be that the passing of the resolution, but the outcomes may not be delivered in the years to come? Speaker 1: Through the Chair, no. We will deliver the resolution, but the actions that are potentially involving may not necessarily be part of what we deliver as a Council. We will need the support of the QPWS and QPS, understand what their operations are going to be and what they have programmed to be able to do during this period of time.
01:32:00 Should those elements already be programmed by those other government agencies, then that is absolutely critical. We have the ability to get that done. But we don't know what we don't know. And this has been working for us. We can't provide the advice to Council right now because it's just been forced to us. So we'll need to work through that. But there is enough there for us to be able to ensure a zero-expérience approach to driving, delivering on our local rules, QPS delivering on our requirements. Item two, request immediate negotiations with QPWS and QPS. That can start immediately and we'll have everybody round the table this Friday. Compliance with the enforcement regime commencing this e-staff, potentially involving the three items you see before you here. And the advocacy through our Mayor and supported by myself as the CEO to our environment minister, Minister Scanlon.
01:33:00 So in looking at that, we can work through that. There are elements that we will need to resource and work through. But a resolution of Council is for our Council officers to do the operation later. Thank you. Councillor Finzel: How much of our staff, authorised officers, do you envisage? Speaker 1: I'm going to move and proceed with a motion to just lay on the table. Councillor Wilkie: It gives a chance to talk to staff about budget and application in terms of staff staffing. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Affirmative. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: To our councillors to start the budget invitations with financial stomach.
01:34:00 Budget invitations? Seconded by councillor Finzel. Having heard all the debate around the table, I'm convinced that we may actually be moving towards this. I can see the value, the symbolic value in doing it sooner rather than later.
01:35:00 Points that were raised about the time taken for the report to come back to the working group and then go out to further consultation and realise there's more consultation involved. I like the idea of immediate action as well. But I think we need to go into it eyes wide open. We know we're coming up to a very tight budget. I just would like councillors to allow us to have time to talk to staff about what this would cost and what we're actually asking of our ratepayers and our staff before we take this action. I'll put it to the vote. Over. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I've got a couple of questions, but it's a question to be asked at any time. Yes, go on. Considering there is no specification about what is required of START and there is a meeting where the state will say what it's doing is the day after the meeting, is there any chance that START could come up with any realistic budget forecast because there is nothing in
01:36:00 the motion to tell them what's proposed? Councillor Wilkie: Is there any chance that the state could come up with any realistic budget forecast because there is nothing like there's no cost in terms of the councillor's contribution? I'm only interested in the councillor's contribution. Speaker 1: Through the chair and councillor Stockwell, there's a procedural motion before the council to allow the table to provide as much information as it possibly can, budget implications. I would hope that bringing this you would have thought through what the additional cost may be to council. But just the availability of that. We have staff in our own right, so we would put together the cost of what staff are available if available to deliver on what's being requested. What the overtime amount would be based on how many rates over the Easter period. Utilisation of equipment to be able to travel over to North Shore and the length of time
01:37:00 that they would be there, should they need to overnight, etc. And then in the other elements of time that are required, should it be a wrecked signage, should our drones be utilised, should other elements. So based on what's being provided and just responding as quickly as I can, we could definitely work through staff availability, which would then equal staff costs. Utilisation of plant equipment, any other elements, we could bring that to Thursday's plenary meeting for further discussion and consideration by the council. Thank you. I'll put the motion out of the way. Councillor Finzel: Could I just have a note of note? I think this is a bit of like on the whole. We've got a request from staff about budgeting and, you know, it's not well thought through. I feel a bit like this is on the whole. I just want to note a bit, like I object to that, to asking staff to now give us, you know, budget implications and staffing requests. Speaker 1: Through the chair, I proceed your motion to lay on the table for further information is entirely appropriate and supported by the staff.
01:38:00 Councillor Wilkie: I'm doing it because I believe it's a proven way to go before we launch and take action on this. Councillor Finzel: Yeah, I think that's proven. I think the council are right now at the table to be asking staff, is that okay? Councillor Wilkie: It's entirely within the realms of council responsibilities. So I'm going to put this to the seat now. Councillor Lorentson: Can I have a quick, sorry. Yeah. Can I have a question? In terms of making informed decisions, can we include as part of the information gathering not necessarily the economic costs but also the benefits? So can we, I think in fairness, we should be also looking at the environmental, social and cultural benefits and to. Councillor Wilkie: How obvious that all is, I would say, in answer to your question. Councillor Lorentson: It is, but the cost and the benefits need to be outlaid is what I'm requesting.
01:39:00 Councillor Wilkie: Procedural motion is to allow councillors to discuss budget implications. Before. Before. Okay. I'll put the procedural motion as a favour. Councillor Jurisevic, Stewart, Finzel, Wegener, Wilkie, that is against. Stockwell and Lawrenceon, it's carried. That's that item. Do councillors require a break before the next item? Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Can we finish this item yet? We've only done one amendment, the second amendment was like, oh, I don't know, I don't know the whole table. Yeah, with you, yeah. Okay.
105 minutes in ¶
01:48:00 Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Speaker 4: The green space has been used for over five years, more recently since COVID that was increased to include falls, and that was obviously linked with the public health declaration. It's been a number of years since that report was brought to council.
01:49:00 And since then, we've actually gone top in this line. And since then, we've actually gone top in this line. And so, we've just brought a report to council. And so, we've just brought a report to council regarding inconsistent accounting costs and passing accounting principles. We wanted to bring the report to court. Our staff recommendation is to essentially give birth status quo. Our staff recommendation is to essentially give birth status quo. May 24 is the recommendation as for the dates that are water off the fire.
01:50:00 May 24 is the recommendation as for the dates that are water off the fire. May 24 is the recommendation as for the dates that are water off the fire. Mayor Stewart: May 24 is the recommendation as for the dates that are water off the fire. May 24 is the recommendation as for the dates that are water off the fire. May 24 is the recommendation as for the dates that are water off the fire. May 24 is the recommendation as for the dates that are water off the fire. Speaker 4: May 24 is the recommendation as for the dates that are water off the fire. May 24 is the recommendation as for the dates that are water off the fire. We've got the Carb Hype Guidance Technology Trial, we've got the Carb Hype Guidance Technology Technology Trial, there's long term planning that's working with DTMR, there's long term planning that's working with DTMR on our public transport, and how we talk about that in the
01:51:00 region, and to be a hub, so that we can see how they've been interrelated, and how they've been interrelated. We've got future open space, we've got future open space, land done, so that's one hour planning quite a lot of those, and so that's one hour we would need to do that. We've done some functional design review with DTMR, we've done some functional design review with DTMR, we would like to do that in terms of how well we arrive at public transport. And we're also looking at design meetings even this morning on the Noosaville Pass, that was on the Noosaville Junction, and down to the bottom of Mines Park. So there's a lot of projects happening, a lot of planning work that is happening at the moment. With this long term public transport and cycling infrastructure focus, yes this report does keep a status quo that relates to parking, but that's not the long term direction of
01:52:00 the planning work that's actually happening. It's more that the recommendations about giving time to hear from the community through the destination management plan, work with the Tewantin Noosa Lions Club, Blinds Club, to work with them on what we would have to do, you know, into the future. Because yeah, they do generate funds and that money does go into the community, and they do provide another community benefit, so it's not a, the report isn't a signal of moving away from strategy intention, the report is really just to give time for the public planning work to happen. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: I'd like to move a motion, the Council's for no exceptions at any time, so everyone can go on. And I'll read it out. Thank you. Council note the report by the project manager, special project to the general committee meeting dated 13 March 2023. And A, note that Council's resolution on 17 September 2020 allowed temporary parking in the Noosa Heads Lions Park on long weekends and school holidays during the Queensland
01:53:00 government's COVID-19 public health declaration, principally to accommodate the South East Queensland drive tourism market during interstate and international travel restrictions that were imposed as a response to the pandemic. B, note that the Queensland government's COVID-19 public health declaration ended proms October 31, 2022. C, note that continued use of the Noosa Heads Lions Park green space for car parking on long weekends and school holidays is contrary to the Department of Resources park designation, Noosa design principles, Noosa plan, the transport strategy, and the spirit and intent of Council's September 17, 2020 resolution. D, note that Shire-wide free weekend buses that provide alternate means of accessing Noosa Heads Precinct was introduced to the network in February 2022. E, discontinued car parking in Noosa Heads Lions Park on long weekends and Queensland July and September school holidays after this Easter period as per the September 17, 2020 Council
01:54:00 resolution. F, approve the use of the Noosa Heads Lions Park reserve for paid car parking during Christmas and Easter school holidays for educational purposes. C, write to the Department of Resources to inform the intended use of Noosa Heads Lions Park reserve for peak period parking during the above mentioned periods and that community engagement and future use of the park is proposed to be undertaken as part of the Noosa Council's destination management plan. H, note that the Noosa Heads Lions Park reserve for paid car parking on long weekends and December 16, 2020 was introduced to the work of the Tewantin Noosa Lions Club to determine new paid car parking pricing for Lions Park that offsets the reduction in revenue and better reflects the cost of car parking on community green space in the Hastings Street Precinct. I, approve allocation of 50% of the car parking revenue after GST to the Tewantin Noosa Lions
01:55:00 Club and the remaining revenue go towards Go Noosa initiatives and park remediation. J, that an amount equivalent to 50% of the Council's share of the profit from car parking in the Noosa Heads Lions Park reserve be held in reserve and allocated to recreational improvements in Noosa Heads Lions Park for residents and visitors alike, noting that the term profit refers to Council's share of the revenue less costs associated with parking on the reserve. K, seek community feedback on the use of Noosa Heads Lions Park for car parking as part of the proposed destination management plan. Madam Secretary, thank you very much. Senior Councillor Finzel. Thank you. Councillors on September 17, 2020, this Council agreed to allow temporary car parking in Alliance Park only for the duration of the COVID-19 public health declaration. This declaration saw lockdowns and travel restrictions, interstate and international border closures which dramatically reduced visitor numbers.
01:56:00 The extension was intended to help encourage and accommodate the South East Queensland drive market and support Tourism Noosa's marketing pivot towards the day of visitor as a temporary measure of home rent. Queensland Government's COVID-19 public health declaration ended in October 2022 and therefore, as per the spirit and intent of this Council's resolution, use of its community-owned green space along against the store holidays for car parking ought to also end. Borders and travel restrictions have lifted, visitor numbers are back to near record levels and traffic congestion appears to be back at pre-COVID levels. We do not need to be encouraging the South East Queensland drive market any longer and need to return to the community use of this green space on long weekends and school holidays. This is the agreement we have with the community and the Tewantin Noosa Lions Club to allow car parking to continue during long weekends and school holidays is to break this agreement. As further staff report, the continued use is contrary to the Noosa Planning Scheme
01:57:00 and the Department of Resources Park Designation, Noosa Design Principles and the Transport Strategy. As further report, approximately 14,000 vehicles per day enter the congested Noosa HECS precinct during the peak period. The additional 150 to 200 overflow car parks in the Lions Park are not considered to make a measurable difference to supply and demand and their availability serves as a motivator to those tourists to drive rather than catch a free bus into Noosa HECS. In recent years, an arduous report cited the significant impact of the Melaleuca trees due to vehicles parking under the trees. The park also incurs damage to the subsurface drainage as a result of vehicles parking on the grass area. We know use of this green space for cars is not sustainable and is a contributor to traffic congestion. The $20 a day parking revenue goes towards funding community works, projects and donations by the Tewantin Noosa Lions Club. Council transport initiatives and ongoing repairs to the park
01:58:00 caused by vehicles. This motion will also see Council staff work with the Tewantin Lions Club to set a new price for car parking to help offset downtown revenue and better reflect the cost of parking on green space in one of Australia's and the world's premier holiday destinations. Feedback from the Lions Club indicate 99% of motorists are OK with this price of $20 for all day parking close to Long Beach and Hastings Street in Wywood Bay. Nearby Bay Village charges around $30 for half a day. Another iconic popular destination, Bombo Beach, charges $19 for only two hours. This motion proposes a middle ground which allows Lions Park car parking during Christmas and Easter to continue until the outcomes of the consultation about the future uses of the Lions Park as part of the destination management program is resolved. It also opens the way for Council to possibly charge a rate of $20 per day to use our precious green space and reflects charges in nearby and similar locations.
01:59:00 Councillor Noosa is well and truly discovered by day visitors from the heavily populated neighbouring shires in South East Queensland during COVID. Queensland's health COVID travel restrictions are over. We don't need to sacrifice community green space on one weekend and school holidays to the vehicles of day visitors anymore and we invite them to use the free buses, regular public transport, or park in properly designated parking areas. I urge Councillors to honour the resolution and our promise to the community that these periods of parking will end after the COVID declaration, or more accurately, the Government's COVID driven restrictions on travel have ended. Thank you. We have a question. Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: In the report in 2020, there was very specific advice given from the Minister of Health, Welfare and the State. That advice said, prior to the implementation of the 2019 Go Noosa Easter period traffic
120 minutes in ¶
02:00:00 management plan, the Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy advised Council by email that they were not, not supportive of Lyons Park being used for car parking after the Easter holidays, that being Easter holidays 2019. In August 2019, Council staff referred consideration to DNRME to allow paid parking for the 2019 Christmas holiday period to which DNRME was required. The Department of Natural Resources said that the Department maintained the position that they were not supportive of the reserve being used for parking. Have you received any advice to the contrary? Speaker 4: So, from what I have to talk with, I take it on notice, and talk directly with the property, from my recollection though, the recommendation from DNRME was to do public consultation on that. In 2019, so four years ago. Yes, yes. So obviously COVID 2019 occurred. The COVID occurred in 2019. So the opportunity for consultation on that would have been contrary to what the intent
02:01:00 was. Obviously the resolution sought to expand on the use of the car park to not just the Christmas and Easter, which was the original recommendation, but include, then went on to include the longer weekends. So that was the situation we're there now. Now we've got this opportunity where, like you say, the COVID situation has vastly changed. We've got a destination management plan processed. We've got a policy that is ideally about to occur. This should be the ideal time and mechanism to actually do the consultation around what DNRME was asking. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So I'm going to speak to the motion. I have significant concerns about a recommendation from staff that recommends a course that is not only inconsistent with the policies of this council, but also inconsistent with the policy and the legislation of the state. I may be old-fashioned, but I think it is staff's role to make sure that the policy says what that policy says for us to make decisions.
02:02:00 I don't believe the staff recommendation and elements of this are able to be made without ministerial consent. I believe we have clearly in a letter in June 2020, advice from those who we manage this park for, i.e. the Crown. King Charles. King Charles, whose designation it is. It's not the department's designation. It's Crown land designated for a particular purpose under the Land Act. And the advice is very clear. As the proposed use as a car park is inconsistent with the current purpose of the reserve, DNRME considers public commentation should be undertaken by council. We haven't undertaken it, so we can't say that we want to continue because we don't know. But they've got a policy. And that policy says one of the objects of the Land Act is that if land is needed for community purposes, the retention of the land for community in a way that protects
02:03:00 and still aids the community purpose. That's one of the top things for this Act. It says this is a recreation reserve. It must be kept for a recreation reserve. What this resolution is saying is... I'll do this. Okay. Now, what this resolution is saying is... Yeah, but we're still going to keep it so it's actually raising money for other things. Now, the Act also includes a trustee of the Land Act, that's us, that's the council, may only authorise the secondary use, so if we consider the car park a secondary use, by a personal organisation under the trustee lease or a trustee permit. We're not being proposed that we're doing that. But if we were suggesting a permit for the Lions Club to make money, our proposal would be to make money out of a car park in a park reserve, not for the purposes of the reserve. If the land is needed for community purposes, the retention of land for the community in a way that protects and still aids the community purpose.
02:04:00 Approval should not be given for trustee lease or trustee permit, which is an inappropriate use of the purpose and qualities of the trust land. And we know that Councillor Wilkie has indicated a range of conflicts that have occurred, but also we know that there's been other conflicts that have occurred over time. It is, if it's not in the public interest, and I believe the public interest is trying to dissuade cars from entering the Hastings Street precinct, because that's what the Transport Strategy says, is substantially exclusive and or commercial in nature. So this substantially excludes people from using that park or recreation purpose, and while it's for and not for profit, it is commercial in nature. So these are all the things you shouldn't be doing. An existing and consistent reuse may continue in some circumstances. If it can be demonstrated, the requirement for a secondary reuse to be used is not feasible or technical on planning grounds, and the community has not raised valid concerns, I presume the community has.
02:05:00 Requirements of a manager plan are addressed. In the last four years we haven't done a manager plan. The trustee declare that they are satisfied the occupation does not diminish the purpose of the trust. I, as a representative of the trustee, would say that we haven't ticked any of those boxes. We know that we have a park and ride facility at the AFL grounds that is vastly underused. We know that even during peak periods, car parks and the Noosa Junction are available. So while I agree with everything up to F, and parts of what follows, I can't support the amendment. Because I don't believe it's in the capacity of this council to go out and say to the Lions Club that we'll do this, unless we want to go and seek ministerial exemption for continuing to allow an inconsistent use in a recreational reserve contrary to our stated policy on this matter. Councillor Wilkie: So you're proposing an amendment to this about seeking ministerial consent?
02:06:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Since you asked for amendment, I'll amend it. Copy it all, please. I'll see if I'll get this one up. Copy the whole thing and I'll tell you what, and I'll change. Councillor Wilkie: Do you want to express that view? Yeah, I do. Okay. The CEO has a view about ministerial consent. Speaker 1: Councillor Stockwell is correct in what he's saying. Item G of the amendment, and in the, in the, in the, in the, in the, in the, in the, in It's not an amendment, it's a motion. So the motion that's been given by State Council, the community guide and jeep deals with the matter is that right to the Department of Resources to inform the intended use of this airline by preserving the period marked. That, with the addition of words if required, are right to the Department of Resources and the State Ministerial approval delivers what is required.
02:07:00 We do know that it isn't the Minister that will be approving this. It will be delegated down to a lands officer to be able to review and go through all the criteria the Council of Stockwell has spoken to today. We can't record what it is we've got and we define that process. So that's the requirement. That's where Council officers, we need to put forward to you as a Council, this is our recommendation of what should occur with this site. And yes, we do actually know in this meeting that we have a number of strategies. State policy is a matter for the State. That's for them to be able to go through. But we have our own policies. It will be difficult for this Council to be able to work through a process to withdraw in a short space of time around that, which is why we brought this for your consideration and discussion. Should it be though that Council makes the decision not to continue, that's a matter for the Council and we'll always deliver on what your resolution is stating there. But ultimately, item G of the motion that we had before you satisfies the requirements
02:08:00 that it was added and seek ministerial approval, that then satisfies the requirements. And we would then, upon a resolution of the Council, run not only to Minister Stewart as the Minister for Resources, but then also more than happy to be able to go up to the Deputy General and talk about urgency and time, and if it could be considered post haste. And we would then have the ability to be able to understand the views of the State. But until that's undertaken, we don't understand the views Speaker 1: of the State because it hasn't been put to them on a formal basis by a resolution of this Council. There will be a process, it will be delegated through to a Lands Officer, and that Lands Officer at level will make the decision that's required from there. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, so the amendment, so you've copied it all. Can you now move G up to be, yeah, yeah, you can put that in there. And if you copy it all there. Did everyone agree to that? Well, it doesn't matter. I'm including it in my amendment, so. Councillor Wilkie: Yes, the Council's .
02:09:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, if you just copy that whole of the current resolution. Councillor Jurisevic: So, we get remedied in the amendment that the Council launched earlier. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And so then, yep. Okay, keep going down, ABC, I'm keeping. Good. Yep. And then, move G to above F. The whole of G to above F.
02:10:00 Write to the Ministry to inform, to request. Councillor Jurisevic: What was the request for? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: To request approval. Councillor Jurisevic: Sorry, where is it? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, write and seek the Ministry approval to request temporary approval for the use. And then take out, to inform the intended use. The use of, yep. Yep. And take out, no, no, and for the use, and the use of Lyons Park for, for, for, for, for, for. Pick, period parking. Take out the rest of that. The first part of F.
02:11:00 First part of F as well, it's gone. Speaker 2: When you say first part. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, so everything down to the second dot point which says Queensland Easter School holidays. There you go. That's next year, not this year, why? Next year. 2023. All of the dates will be different. Yeah. Yeah. So Easter. Easter. School holidays in 2023. Councillor Lorentson: Can I just ask about the G's. Have you not changed any? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: No. None of that's been changed. Up to G. Yeah. Yeah. I agree with all what Councillor Wilkie was saying there. You'll have to take... F will come out and you have to renumber.
02:12:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: If you take a... If you like, I'll add a new F to keep the... I'll add a new G. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And you already have what I want to put in G. Pardon? So if you can get the motion I was going to move and take the item two of that. Councillor Lorentson: Do you want all the rest of the items to go in there? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah. Oh, well, I'm not amending those. So take them out. Oh, sorry, I am. I don't think it's in the Best Nation Managed Plan. I think that's a turkey. B. B? Yeah, make that G. Councillor Jurisevic: Just clarify the dates for Easter school holidays for 2023. It's Saturday the 1st of April to the 16th. Speaker 1: So you want me to put those dates in there?
02:13:00 Councillor Jurisevic: The 1st of April to the 16th of April inclusive. According to what I've just looked up. Councillor Lorentson: I've got 18th of April, Sunday 18th of April. So school's going back on Monday the 17th. I have the 1st to the 18th, Cathy. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, and then down the bottom and amend whatever the last one was. Councillor Jurisevic: 2023, not 2023. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: City Community Fair Back on the use of the Noosa Heads Lines Park. Speaker 8: I and Jay have all got the same. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, they all stay. And I'll just take out the last one. I don't know if we need to do a management plan,
02:14:00 but if the answer was yes, we want to keep it for car parking, then I think we should be doing a management plan under the Land Act. But I'll just take out as part of the proposed destination. Management plan. Councillor Jurisevic: The answer dates are referring to 2023 and Monday the 17th of April is the date that school recommences. Mayor Stewart: And it's Sunday the 16th. 16th. 16th. 16th. 16th. Okay. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. Okay. That's my amendment. I think it is. And I need to read out. So that item G be changed to item F and amended to read rights of department resource and seek ministry approval and take out four rather than two requests. So approval afterward approval, just have four rather than two requests.
135 minutes in ¶
02:15:00 So take out request for temporary approval for the use of Noosa Heads Lines Park and take out two requests. Reserved for peak period parking Queensland East School holidays 1st of April to the 16th of 2023. G, develop a new budget in addition to implement measures to achieve the transport tragedy outcome and to actively manage the number of cars accessing the Hastings Street, Main Beach and Noosa National Park present as 1. variable priced paid car parking with significant exemptions for residents 2. congestion charges with significant exemptions for residents 3. review the existing time control limits of parking spaces in this precinct and associated new parking restrictions in surrounding residential streets and 4. construction of temporary priority lines for buses and 2. wheeled transportation during peak periods And just the last one is seek Committee feedback on the usefulness heads when I spark the car parking lot.
02:16:00 Councillor Wilkie: And what are the other measures? Councillor Lorentson: Well we have a letter of site assigned so I'm extending G to F. Putting the new G in and amending K and then everything else stays the same. Councillor Finzel: I have a question. I have a question. Yes. In relation to the amendment to K, I'm interested in why we're using this link to the destination management plan when it could be seek Committee feedback on the use of Noosa Lions Park for car parking as parallel to the management plan. So I just want to find out if the staff... Why the recommendation has been to link this to the destination management plan when three years correspondence, which I'm interested in hearing the response from the appropriate department as to why this recommendation has come up for us. Speaker 4: So through you Chair, I'm expecting there would be quite a significant element in the destination management plan on traffic
02:17:00 and the impacts of traffic and the volume of traffic. So that would be a great opportunity for transportation. That would be a great opportunity in 2014 felt to actually talk about that. So to give you some statistics as well, the greatest number of vehicles came in on 31st of December, almost 16,000 vehicles per day on that particular day. And the number of cars that were parked in Lions Park were 347, which is about 2.2% of the volume of cars that came through. So I was thinking that, you know, using the destination management plan, we can really get that sort of mechanism out there to discuss volume, the benefits of the parking, how much of the benefit it does provide in terms of the car park availability and those broader aspects that it would pick up. So that was the staff's intention around nominating that mechanism. Councillor Finzel: Given that we go through a community consultation for land management plan, would that as questions not be answered through more consultation with the community?
02:18:00 Mayor Stewart: I've got a few questions, thank you. Have we had any complaints about, from our community, about the car parking during the holiday season? Speaker 4: We do receive complaints. I don't have a quantity of that, but we do receive complaints that it is inconsistent with the transport strategy and it should be used for green space. But we also get comments about the benefit of using a car park. So there is a pro and a con for that. Do you have any comments on this that we received from the community? Mayor Stewart: Do we have any breakdown of it? Speaker 4: I haven't prepared any. Mayor Stewart: Oh no, so a breakdown of whether or not it's the daytrippers who are using that car park or in fact your own residents? Speaker 4: Again, I'd have to go through and talk with Lions Club to find out whether they actually have a breakdown of who it is that's using it. I think it could be a mix.
02:19:00 You could find a mix between residents, daytrippers, even staff potentially down there that are using it. Mayor Stewart: Which brings me to my third question. Hey, with a lot of, I imagine a lot of our workers on Hastings Street and associated areas would use that car park. Have we consulted with the stakeholders in that area in regard to this report? Speaker 4: Yeah, so I have spoken at length with Hastings Street Association, their representative, regarding this. And we're in regular contact on a number of things, including this report. Mayor Stewart: And would they, what was their feedback in this report? Speaker 4: Well, they understand that it's a complex issue. And so that they're sort of building partners along this to see where we get to. Councillor Wilkie: So I was talking to the Lions Club representative yesterday, the same majority are from the region, except not this. Questions? Tom? Councillor Wegener: So, what we have before it, it's November 6th, the Lions paid parking.
02:20:00 So we're talking about whether we're going to continue the paid parking in the Lions Park. So the question is, why are we talking about developing a budget initiative to implement and achieve a transport strategy outcome? I mean, this is a huge jump from what was in front of me when I read it. Councillor Lorentson: Thank you. Councillor Wegener: I don't want to vote on this. This is something that's... Are you asking me? Yeah. No, no, no. Thank you. Actually, it's a question, Tom. The question is, they may be asking, who should I ask? Why are we talking about this when we should be talking about this? Councillor Jurisevic: Well, it hasn't been seconded yet, so no one's talking about anything. Councillor Wilkie: That's a question. It's a good question, Tom. But if we put it to, some of it's seconded, we can have a debate. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll second it for the purpose of debate. Councillor Wilkie: I'll start, and I will answer your question. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It's there because, in my opinion, we're being put forward a proposal that is in disregard
02:21:00 to a strategy that was adopted six years ago. We're putting it there because we're getting piecemeal solutions to kick the can down the road. Contrary to the direction that this council and the previous councillor said we want to go. It's there because we're dealing with a matter about car parking. We're saying we have to put it in a recreation reserve. What a load of bunkum. A recreation reserve is for the locals and our visitors to walk the dog, play in the swings, go swimming. And yes, there has been complaints. As early as, I think, mid-2000s, about 2008, we started to get resident complaints. And it was when I did, as the chair of the residence rate payers, did an analysis of how much green space was in the Noosa Heads suburb, I found it was well below standard. So there is very limited green park space for residents in Noosa Heads.
02:22:00 And I know every councillor in this table understands the current committee sentiment about why we go to such great lengths to accommodate. Visitors and such little perception that we don't do enough for residents. So there's one thing of saying, no, we don't want it in the park. But what we have to say is what we do want. And that's what the second part is. We want to go in there and dissuade cars from going down to that precinct in the first place. We want them to get the free parking at the AFL grounds and realise if they go up there, there might be some price incentives to turn around and go back the other way. If we look at the first one, variable price paid car parking. What the experts show is that car parking is most effective if it's 80% full. And what variable price, if you have the technology, does, once it gets 80% full, you start putting up the price until you get back to 80%. Condition charging might be easier. We still haven't done it.
02:23:00 These are only examples, just like the last one. That is, work well overseas. That a price signal to people might be enough for them to park at the AFL or park at Noosa Junction and catch the free bus. Time control limits. One of the concerns is going to be raised by retailers. But we know that if we vary the time controls to make them shorter and get more car turnover, that the experience is that actually builds foot traffic into shops. And the other part is, if we're going to put more people in the bus, we're going to put We know that the current situation with congestion is that some of the bus times are getting too long. And therefore, the other suggestion in the transport strategy is priority lane. So why I put it in there is saying, no, we don't want to keep going with the solution that is outdated, inconsistent with the land act, inconsistent with the state government policy. We want to go and do what we said we were going to do in 2017. That's why I didn't include destination management plan.
02:24:00 Because we've already made the policy decision. 2000 people commented on that transport strategy. OK. The destination management plan, in my mind, doesn't get to that level of detail. And I think you're right. If we are going to go and keep it there, then we need a land management plan under the land act. And what the state said, you might want to try and change the purpose of the reserve and see what the locals think about that. That's why it's up there, Councillor, is we can't just say, don't do it. We have to say, don't do it. But here's our response to try and address the problems that car parking is creating and congestion is creating. Mayor Stewart: Another question. One for Councillor Stockwell, all very valid. My question is to staff. Now, I only managed to write down a bit of what you said. But you're doing a new traffic study and transport model. You're working in conjunction with the DNP. You're looking at the draft corporate plan, movement and place flowing from that. You're doing long-term planning with DTMR. You're looking at transit hubs.
02:25:00 You're looking at the future of open space planning. And you're looking at car park guidance. Guidance technology? Is that? Speaker 4: It says how many cars are in the car park. That's the intention. Mayor Stewart: So it's fair to say there's been a lot done in this space at the moment. And no doubt, one to four potentially would be all incorporated. I mean, I didn't get everything you said down. But that obviously is all incorporated in what you're doing. And the purposes of the recommendation, and correct me if I'm wrong, is because this is still ongoing and hasn't been finalised and we don't have outcomes. Speaker 2: Yes. Mayor Stewart: The purpose of this recommendation is we do have a plan. It's just a matter of getting that feedback and implementing all of this and getting the feedback from this. And we haven't had a community consultation yet on this. So the purpose of the report is to ensure that every base is covered, correct me if I'm wrong, and that we have the data and the results of all of this to make informed, data-driven
02:26:00 decisions. Is that correct? Speaker 4: That is correct. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Finzel: On the back of data-driven decisions, I notice we've got Clint in the room. I'm interested in hearing the response back from the planning department with our previous correspondence. Because I'm just trying to understand where the destination management plans come in, as approved, and why it's going to get it properly into that space. And I think there's some evidence and data from previous correspondence to get more ahead of that. Speaker 9: Thank you. Thank you. I just wanted to share, going back to a few years when this report came to Council previously, it was really about, it's already been spoken about at the table, about a temporary use of the park while the COVID pandemic was happening. So at that time we wrote to the Department of Resources for approval, if you like, for
02:27:00 that activity to continue. At that stage, the Department came back and said that a land management plan was an appropriate tool if we were looking at maintaining cars or having cars on the park. And I wrote back at that stage and acknowledged their advice. And there's been an intervening period, obviously, where the activity has continued to, you know, continue, if that's what Council is considering doing. But yes, correspondence. There was correspondence to the Department and correspondence back with advice. Councillor Finzel: And the advice back, just to reiterate, that it was an appropriate tool to use land management? Speaker 9: The land management plan, we were looking at maintaining the use. And even at that time, by the legislation, the land management plan, which involves consultation
02:28:00 with the community about the use of the park. And then normally with that process as well, it forms a plan to submit to the State for approval, because they are the owners of the land. Council is the trustee. But yes, by the legislation, as Council Stockwell alluded to before, the land management plan is an appropriate tool in pushing to maintain the use. And that's the advice. Chair. Councillor Jurisevic: Yes, something Council Stockwell said earlier. Just ask, caused me to ask the question, with regard to the loop bus and possibly other bus services, how often did they not run on time because of congestion? Speaker 4: There would be times when they didn't run on time, no doubt, as most buses, particularly going into that area would. But the pattern is all the same. It's very cool on those buses. And I think it's one of our highest, you know, 40,000 odd people, I think, you know, crowning
02:29:00 a session like that. So I think it's a good question that might occur in that area. Mayor Stewart: I've got a question. With accessibility, if you're in a wheelchair or you've got a pram and you're a single parent, it's very difficult to get on a bus and to park your car. Is the Lions Club, is the Lions parking able, if you're in a wheelchair or you've got prams, to be accessible for all people? Speaker 4: Currently it's grass. So you would have to, you know, change the surface, for example. Mayor Stewart: But is it able to be used with prams and wheelchairs? It's flat. Speaker 4: Prams you could. I guess you probably wouldn't comply with the standards in terms of grass. But it would be, you know, some could argue whether it's simpler as opposed to getting on the bus. I'm not sure. That's, you know, each person's own opinion. Councillor Wilkie: I guess there are other...
150 minutes in ¶
02:30:00 Speaker 4: We do have, yes, disabilities as part of our setting. Councillor Wilkie: Cameron, do you have a question? Councillor Finzel: Yeah. I've got a question I've had with Kim Lawrence in the room. Yeah. Can I invite Kim up to just hear her side of what that... Why the recommendation as to the destination management plan as opposed to the state recommendation that the land management plan wasn't appropriate to... You might want to talk to us a little bit about... Speaker 4: I'll... Councillor Finzel: I'll help you up. Speaker 4: Yeah, so as the author of the report, so the land management plan, as our property officer just said, expected that consultation would occur in developing a land management plan. And so the idea is that we would use the destination management plan to form part of, you know, either our own internal understanding or that could be used as part of the demonstration or the consultation. Councillor Wilkie: Question. Would she... A land management plan would be a tool you would use if you want to change the use
02:31:00 of the park to car parks. Not necessarily... Green space. Yes. Okay. Yes, that's... Speaker 9: That's correct because you... You're looking to change the existing... Existing purpose and use. Yeah. So primarily... But it can be for a range of different matters. But in this one, that... Yes. Councillor Wilkie: Could I... And I'm... And I hope you want to hear it correctly, but what you're saying, Adam, that is not the intended long-term use... Speaker 4: No, the long-term intent, without wanting to jump to a conclusion of the community, the long-term intent is that through the destination management plan, we would hear that they wanted this green space. Hence, you don't need a land management plan. You've just heard from the community and they've come to a resolution. This is just a temporary outcome, temporary process while you do that activity. So we can inform the minister and department resources to say, note that process if we were to want to change. It's not our council's intention. We'll hear from the community.
02:32:00 We'll confirm once we find out. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. So with the... The amendment as it currently reads, seek community feedback on the use of this land park for car parking, doesn't prescribe whether it's the destination management plan or a land management plan. It could be any number. We'll decide on the most appropriate form of consultation. Absolute advice from the community and the management centre. Sure. Joe. Councillor Jurisevic: As far as the destination management plan goes for the Noosa Heads Precinct, my understanding is we're only just going to do our first pilot program. Do we have any sort of a timeframe when a destination management plan could be delivered for the Noosa Heads Precinct? The destination management plan as opposed to placemaking. So the destination management plan as a whole would encompass each element. It's not relying on placemaking as facilitating elements of that. So the destination management plan that's being undertaken at the moment would look at these sort of elements.
02:33:00 Speaker 3: The destination management plan is underway at the moment. Our first point of community engagement will be around the discussion paper and issues paper. More broadly on destination management, the visitor economy, community sentiment, those sorts of things. So it will be fairly high level issues and values of the community around visitor economy initially. The intention is then to develop a management plan which will... It will have a series of actions and statements and policy positions. Councillor Jurisevic: I would think that would be precinct based. Speaker 3: It could be precinct based. It could deal with a whole range of issues relating to managing our visitor economy and managing tourism. Councillor Jurisevic: But what's being proposed here without incorporating it as part of the proposed destination management plan is we could actually do a community feedback on Noosa Heads Alliance Park for car parking at any stage. Would that be correct? Without having to wait for the destination management plan or... Yes, you can. I could do that at any stage.
02:34:00 Councillor Lorentson: Can I ask a question, please? Yes. So, Brian, I'm trying to understand the amendment. Can you clarify what you're requesting is that we write to the Department of Resources to seek approval for paid parking at Lyons Park only for the Queensland Easter School holidays 1st of April to 16th of April. That's it. That's it. Okay. And not beyond that. And not beyond that. Councillor Finzel: Okay. And you don't think there can be any consultation for that request? Councillor Wilkie: I have a question, Adam. Some of these initiatives that are mentioned, the very highest car parking, congestion charging, time control limits, temporary product and that, they're among some of the initiatives that you mentioned earlier. Yes. Yes. Councillor Stockwell's... Yes. Does Councillor Stockwell's motion...
02:35:00 Speaker 4: Well, that would be part of the review, because we already have those initiatives in the transport strategy, that will be part of the things that would be considered. So, you know, it's consistent with what we already have, well, we don't actually have budgeted to put in paid parking, for example, but... Councillor Lorentson: I'll... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, I have a question. Yes. Yes. The council adopted this resolution. Would that suggest to you that you should be putting together something more than what you would if we didn't have this resolution? Councillor Lorentson: I'd like to speak to this. I won't support this amendment. We know it's not sustainable to continue using lines park for car parking.
02:36:00 We know that it's not the intended use. But I keep going. I'm back to, so what's the plan? What are our options? Where do these cars go? And what I'm looking at in front of me is not a plan. It's a wish list. I've been speaking about paid parking. I'm talking about priority lanes for two, three years. Nothing's happened. So, to me, I commend Adam. I think that's a plan. I think the original recommendation is, in fact, a plan. And I think this is tipping it upside down, we're turning the tap off, but we don't have any solutions, any options, and I think it's going to create a world of chaos in terms of congestion. We haven't considered economic impact for the businesses that may be impacted, and I'm not talking visitors, I'm talking locals, I'm talking the small business owners, I'm talking residents who frequent the national park every day, the surfing community that go in and out of, and I'm talking, I don't know, I just think that we had this excellent pandemic response to a crisis, and I think it's going to create a world of chaos, and I think it's going to create a world of chaos, and I think it's going to create a world of chaos, and I think it
02:37:00 need to be changed. We responded and collaborated with community and what came out was great policy. And I just think with a stroke of a pen that we're going to undo all that good work because we haven't sought. Collaboration. We haven't understood impact and we talk about COVID been over, but there's a post COVID crisis. It's not over, the post COVID crisis we have is in terms of high visitation numbers. We haven't got back to normal because we don't even know what normal is, Council Wilkie, and I've got in front of me just some stats on visitor night numbers and they're alarming.
02:38:00 We're not going down, we're going up. Domestic visitor nights 2021-2022, 4,244,483 domestic visitor nights. That's people within a two-hour range from my understanding that have come to visit Noosa. Domestic daytrippers 2021-2022, 1,025,540 daytrippers and compared to 2019-20, I've got a whole list down to 2010s. Our numbers are going up, not down. So I commend and support the staff recommendation to consult. First and then act. And I think we need to make decisions that consider this new landscape and these new challenges. And I think we should never neglect the experience and knowledge of our residents, our business groups, our small businesses, and the Tewantin Noosa Lions Club.
02:39:00 People with real-time data and on-the-ground information. I go and talk to them every school holidays to understand what's happening down there. They've had... Record. Oh, my gosh. They gave me some of their stats and they've smashed all records. Christmas. My God, 7,866 in amongst all these papers. They had record numbers of cars parking. And I think, you know, the idea, get them with all our suggestions, moving people, not cars. The reality is that we need to do more than what we're doing. And... Yeah. Talking to Adam and the guys downstairs, it's happening. Our destination management plan, it's happening. But it's not happening fast enough to all our frustrations.
02:40:00 But I think we've got to just have a plan. One of my favourite authors is Stephen Covey. And I like using his quote, and I feel like the mayor now, with a quote. But he says, make time for planning because wars are won. And I just think that if we don't plan, we are actually going to start a war. And it's not in this room. It'll be out in community. So I won't support this amendment. Councillor Wilkie. Oh, Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Jurisevic: Sorry. It's like we've done it already. Go. Off you go. Off you go. Off you go. Off you go. No, no. Off you go. Mayor Stewart: I won't support this because I support staff recommendation. This is a report from our project manager of special projects. And no doubt worked in collaboration with a lot of our staff who have been working for
02:41:00 many years on this. We have our director of infrastructure sitting at the table, who's supportive of the staff recommendation. We have heard about seven or eight things, and I won't go into them again, of what we're in the middle of and what our staff are in the middle of. Huge amounts of work, huge amounts of resources. We've committed to seven or eight different things that will really make a substantial difference. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen. Everyone supports green space. I think that's non-negotiable. But it was always on this, and it was always that the car parking would be on the understanding that it was temporary. This report talks about temporary measures for the next 12 months, until we have, as I said, all the data and all the information, and those studies, and that consultation has been finalised. We always talk about trusting the process. Everything is in council about a process. This is another example. We have to trust the process. The staff are going through a very well thought out and documented process that will give
02:42:00 us the optimum return. We haven't had any consultation with our committee in regard to this. If we just pull up stumps after Easter, well, what does that mean? What does that mean for the rest of the year? What does that mean for our residents, as Councillor Lorentson said, for our people who use that every single day or every weekend? What does it mean for our local businesses? What does it mean for our workers? We don't know, because we haven't had the opportunity to consult. This report enables us to have that community consultation done properly, like we always do it. We don't know, again, as Councillor Lorentson said, the financial implications for the Lions and for, indeed, ourselves. We use that money for great initiatives for our transport strategy. We use it to put back into our community. The Lions use it to put back into the community. They used it for the beach mat that Councillor Lorentson championed so hard on. They used that. Now, that beach mat is a huge resource to our community.
02:43:00 That was facilitated through the Lions because of the monies they had raised. They raised a significant amount of monies through this. Again, we don't know what the implications for our community organisation will be. They are part of our community, a very big part. HSA, we haven't talked to them about this. Now, when I talk about HSA, we talk about our local businesses, our local people, our local jobs. I want to know what the implications are for them. I want to hear their feedback. As I said, this is an all-encompassing and all-consuming issue for all of our community. It's one that we really need to take seriously, to take slowly, and this recommendation by our staff enables that to happen. So, I support the staff recommendation. As I said, we all want it to be green space. It was always going to be temporary. It always will be temporary. But until we get all of those things in play, and it's only for 12 more months, then we'll
02:44:00 have a better idea and understanding as to what is in the best interest for everyone. Thank you. Chair. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, look, I get where this comes from, Brian. And I hear your frustration, and I hear the frustration of running around the table. We want to move forward. We want to progress this. We don't want to be sitting here in another 12 months' time. And we've done every 12 months for the last nine years that I've sat on council, talking about the temporary car park at Lyons Park being extended for another year. And, you know, and the use of the funds by the Lyons and council. The challenge is that those funds are currently one of the sources that we utilise to provide for the free holiday buses. There's been a lot of discussion about that. This could be the solution to facilitate that. What the costs are and all of that depends on how often we wanna run those free holiday buses and continue to do that.
165 minutes in ¶
02:45:00 Park and ride options have been there, but we can't not getting successful success in people taking up those, those visitors taking up those options and utilising the free holiday buses. So maybe we need to be doing things like making less parking available, taking out the temporary car parking. I appreciate at the moment what we're talking about The COVID element that went in there, and Frank clearly in his motion alluded to the elements that need to be reviewed and taken back that were brought in as COVID measures. And those are the first steps, and I can see that. I applaud Councillor Stockwell wanting to get this moving faster, but I think we've got a due process to go through, Ryan. I do agree that we need to seek ministerial approval for an extension of the reserve for another period, for whatever period, which isn't articulated in Councillor Wilkie's motion.
02:46:00 So we probably need to rectify that. But, yeah, look, I'd love to support this, Brian. I really would. But I think we've got to go through an element of process before we get there and pushing as hard as we can to make sure that those measures... ...that we've been supporting and backing to get to this point, get implemented sooner rather than later, and that we do look at the budget initiatives and make sure that whatever's been put forward and proposed forward to actively pursue the options of paid car parking, congestion charges, time limits and all the things that Brian's alluded to here are budget initiatives that we support. But it won't be supporting the amendment as it currently is. Thank you. Question to start. Councillor Wilkie: The action to seek ministerial approval for temporary use of the Lions Park for the Easter school holidays, we wanted to do it for the Christmas school holidays because it's nothing to say we're only ever going to get approval for the Easter school holidays.
02:47:00 Instead of asking for 12 months of approval, we're asking for a few months of approval. We don't need...we can ask for Christmas school holidays. Speaker 4: Do you want to go back on? Chair, I could answer that, but I reckon our property officer would be more attentive. Speaker 9: We could, truly, you, Mr Chair, we can put whatever timeframe you'd like. The advice previously, to be clear, from the State Government's point of view, when you're going down the land management planning side, is that they need...proposal needs of a land management plan. So we can ask for it. That's fine. But I suspect they will come back with what they told us last time, is that, well, you really need to get your plan in place because you are...it is a use that's inconsistent.
02:48:00 Notwithstanding all the arguments, if I'm just saying from the property perspective and the legislation's perspective, the idea of going for communication...consultation, sorry, under the BNP, that's...you know, consultation. The consultation's the core of the whole. We're going to the Mayor's point of the core. That's the core of the whole in Councillor Lorentson. That's the core of the whole plan, really. I'm just saying we can ask for it, but I suspect the answer back would be you need a plan. And that's what the State delegated officer would say. Councillor Wilkie: So you're saying if we want to continue using it for car parking, we really should do a land management plan? Speaker 9: That will be the State's advice. And so whether we do it or not is another thing. Whether we keep pushing it. And there are a lot of processes here that have been talked about to get where we want to go. And I understand it's been phased out, our parking, and that's fine. But I'm just saying we can ask for it.
02:49:00 But I suspect the answer will be the same as it always is. Yes, Park. Yes, Park. Councillor Lorentson: Can I have a question, please? Yes. So in terms of Lyons Park, yes, it conflicts with Council policy and strategies. But through the Chair, can I ask a question to the CEO? I'm sort of just remembering a time when Council investigated, I think, an underground car park. Do you have any recollection or any information in regard to that? Can you answer that? And what was the process with Council? Did it go through Land Management Act when it looked at an alternate land use? Speaker 1: Through the Chair, Councillor Morrison, I'm well, well, well before my time. But I do understand that I have been a Sinclair Knight in the port, SKM.
02:50:00 Worked with traders, potentially, on Hastings Street quite a long time ago. Again, though, this would need to find its place. It is a state reserve for a specific purpose. Doing anything would need to change that. But, yes, my understanding is that Council, many, many, many years ago, did look at that site for a potential underground car park. That doesn't seem to be a policy-setting position of Council today. But, yes, you know, it's my understanding. Those that have been here a lot longer than myself may be able to remember some of the work that was done. But, yes, there's an understanding that that was undertaken at the point in time. It still will need to go through a, it's not our land. Councillor Lorentson: No. Speaker 1: Okay. State land. Councillor Wilkie: I have another question for you. These measures here, no cost car parking, congestion charging, time control limits, temporary priority lines, weren't they ideas that came up after consultation with the community?
02:51:00 Speaker 4: They are in the Transport Strategy. They do talk about those as a car parking management process. Yes. As an offer. Councillor Wilkie: I'm going to speak to the amendment. I think there's some confusion about, centres around consultation and where it's appropriate. Consultation, there's consultation that needs to be done if you want to use, keep using this green space as car parking. It's an inconsistent use with all the Council strategies, the State Government policy and intended use of the land. That's the consultation that needs to be done if you want to keep using it as a car park. The consultation, if you want to see these new initiatives come in, has been done already. In terms of the short term decision we're going to be making here today about whether we keep using it as a car park during long weekends and school holidays, that's already been broadcast with the community through our resolution, which was loud and clear, in 2020.
02:52:00 And that was after consultation with the community and the stakeholders. And that was, the clear agreement was, we're going to keep using it as a car park. Once COVID is over, or more accurately, the travel restrictions imposed by COVID, which was board closures, international travel restrictions, and tourism leases pivot towards the drive market, once that's over, it goes back to its intended use. So that's already been communicated really clearly with the community and we need to honour that. Otherwise, we're just going to confuse the community and not do what we told them we were going to do. I've got the same figures that Councillor Lorentson is referring to. And the points that were made about numbers being really high actually proves the point we're trying to make. This temporary measure was only there while numbers were down and COVID affected. Yes, international visitor nights are still down, but domestic visitor nights in Noosa
02:53:00 are as high as they've ever been, if not higher. Domestic day trips are as high as they've ever been as well. So the local visitor economy has well and truly recovered. That was very funny. There's no need for this park, green space, to be used as car parking on long weekends and school holidays. We're talking more than a 12-month extension here. What's happening? The report says it's actually a 14-month extension until May 24, after the next election. So it's, as Councillor Stockwell says, I'm a bit on the view, if we don't take action on this, it's like, I hate using the same kind of expression, but it's deferred, about kicking cans, but it's deferring a decision and making it a problem for another council. So that's why I'm going, actually, quicker, sooner rather than later.
02:54:00 As I said before, we're applying for a temporary approval to use the park, Queensland used to school holidays. If we resolve to use it for the Christmas school holidays next year again, we can apply again. And perhaps we may have even done some consultation in the meantime that says, the community tells us, no, we support the direction you're going. It's more green space. Don't give our green space over to cars. And we won't need to apply for it anymore, because the community will give us to return it to green space permanently. There's nothing in this resolution, this amendment, that's going to force staff to give us anything we haven't seen before, that hasn't been the subject of public consultation, that they weren't thinking of already. So I'm going to support it. Just like the North Shore resolution. It's a call to action. Time's running out for this council.
02:55:00 And resolutions like this show that we are serious about making real change and moving in the direction that, since 2017, the community has told us they want to move in. This is an opportunity to do that and signal that. So for the same reasons that were very eloquently and powerfully put in the debate about the North Shore issue, I'm going to support this amendment. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Thank you. Can I ask a question to start? With regards to the sort of things that are outlined, such as 1, 2, 3, and 4 in G, transport strategy-wise and budget initiative-wise, how close are we? Speaker 4: Okay. So technically, we're going to be putting out the plans that we run a tech trial. So that would be... Okay. So that would be things like your licence plate cameras, things... And the intent for that is a car parking management system, which is a guidance system to tell
02:56:00 you how many car parks are available. That could facilitate towards item 1 above. We need to see what the data is first. We... Again, we don't want to bring a recommendation until we've seen what the data of that technology is. And we don't... We need to see what the technology is. We don't need to see the performance, how that impacts the organisation, our policies, our staffing, any other parking management strategy that we need to create around those. So we need to sort of cover up all of that. So it's not just a... We don't just bring in something without fully considering all the impacts. And that's in this year's budget. So we don't have a parking management strategy... No, but you haven't got the tech trial. We have the tech... Yes, we have the tech trial. In this year's budget. In this year's budget. Okay. So that is dipping our toe into the data part of all of that work that needs to happen. Councillor Wilkie: And would you consider this sort of trial implicit in the term implement? That type of process and implementations and what do you... Does that mean...
02:57:00 Speaker 4: Well, we are implementing a trial, so then it's... I guess it's from us to then work out, is the trial successful? Do we report back to council and then say, hey, the trial was successful. What we've learned from this is this. Maybe through a future budget process, we will be recommending X, Y, Z. And that will be the data basis. And the way the technology... COVID has done a great job in technology these days. So it might work out that we can transition faster onto, say, item one, given the technology that's coming out. Councillor Jurisevic: And that's what I'm getting towards, is the... The questions are leading to next year's budget. Okay. We've got an allocation that could deliver elements of this in this year's budget. With regard to the measures such as... And again, it's such as. So some of the studies you're doing are working towards some of the elements proposed here. And in next year's budget, depending on how those trials go, we could put forward the initiatives that will start to deliver on some of the other outcomes that we're trying to achieve.
02:58:00 Sure. Speaker 4: And whilst Matt, through Chair, the transport strategy did nominate these as line items. There's so much devil in the detail. And so we would want to consult with the community about that detail. Yeah. I know, yes, in principle, we do understand the transport purists that you demand price, you may reduce the car parking demand. But the detail in what that looks like. And there's nuances about every location. We want to find out what that issue is. And how do we mitigate that so we've got, you know, the acceptance and understanding for the community if you're going to go to one of these options. Councillor Lorentson: I have a question. I'd like to ask the question of the CEO. Just recently, we spoke about raising the issue of paid parking and congestion tax back to council. Are we expecting to have that workshop and discussion starting soon? Yeah. And the reason that I'm asking the question is, if this amendment doesn't go up, it doesn't
02:59:00 mean we're discontinuing our discussions and our commitment to investigate congestion parking, paid parking, bus priority lanes. Again, I think it was less than a week ago that the matter was raised. Speaker 1: Yeah. Through the Chair, Councillor Lorentson, we did discuss the matter at the council discussion forum on the first afternoon. That's been noted. And we are looking to be able to do that. We are looking to be able to get time within the whole of council diary to be able to work through that workshop. And as the manager of projects has discussed, yeah, we are working through the data solutions that we need to be able to implement the technology. So this is moving. The council discussion forum was very clear what councils wanted to see. Councillor Lorentson: It was. Speaker 1: So we are looking to be able to get time. Councillor Lorentson: Excellent. Thank you. Speaker 1: Question. Is there any other discussion with us given the sense of urgency to that piece of work? Yeah. Absolutely, Chair. And many of the discussion projects have said this being a resolution of the council,
180 minutes in ¶
03:00:00 definitely that demonstrates the amount of urgency required. Clear direction for the council is what they want. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Tom had a question. Councillor Wegener: I was going to speak to it. Oh, yes. Go ahead. But I mean, this would count what you just said and say the opposite. But this is an analogy to the on the road map because there is a bit of a vacancy, a bit of a void for action. Here we actually have lots of action. The train is well and truly on the track. What Adam is doing is fantastic. I've been just so pleased with the free buses. I've been very pleased with the esplanade, the bike lanes. Our transport strategy is well and truly on the train. And I think that's what we need to be able to do. It's moving along and we just should support it. And I think that this is confusing and it might just derail the project. I don't see it actually saying this supports them.
03:01:00 They're already doing it. I would get really frustrated when we have a very simple thing to vote on and then all of a sudden we have an amendment that's very, very confusing and potentially derails the fantastic work that they're all ready, is in train, going along. I'm fully supportive of Adam and what he's doing downstairs. It's all that's happening. So I will not be supportive of this. I will be supporting the staff representation. Okay. Want to pose? Speaker 3: No, I guess really it's just to clarify. Councillor Finzel: The ministerial approval for a temporary approval, whether that's, don't, one lot of holidays or for a two-month period, do we or do we not have to seek community consultation? Speaker 2: That's a good question. Councillor Lorentson: Through the minister. Councillor Finzel: Or can we do that too? Yeah. I'm just trying to clarify. Speaker 1: So the, oh, I'm on.
03:02:00 Through the Shire Council, there's a process that the state will ask to have followed. And in relation to that, it has been requested in all my meetings about a land management plan. It's temporary in nature. So the discussions that have been held with the state have been, you know, we've been given the temporary nature of what we have. And, you know, depending on the definition of temporary, there's been a number of years now, albeit we have had a pandemic that we haven't had for a hundred years either. So the request to, through ministerial delegation, to be able to have the reserve utilised for an inconsistent use, there would be advice to come back for land use management plan. Whether that is to this day, I don't know. But it is a matter at officer to officer level. It goes to the discussion. So there will be a discussion that will be had around that. It will, I'm sure it will be in condition.
03:03:00 It's just what process will need to be applied. Councillor Finzel: So I don't know which comes first, that one or the change in management from the consultation? Speaker 1: This process will trigger a letter to the minister, which will be delegated through to officers within the department to make an assessment. Their assessment will much probably come back. We're in some conditions, and part of that condition will be our land use management plan. Speaker 2: Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Okay, Alan. Alan, do you wish to speak to the amendment or? No. Councillor Stockwell, would you like to close? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, I will. We'll take it. SMG separately. Councillor Wilkie: No, I didn't swear about it. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So in terms of SMG. Yes. It rectifies the incompetent aspects of the staff recommendation. Sorry. No, no, no. Sorry. I'm using it in the correct legal term. Councillor Wilkie: Councillor Stockwell, that's impugning improper.
03:04:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay, no. Well, I'll withdraw the statement. I'll withdraw the statement. Councillor Wilkie: No, I asked you to apologise. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm talking about the statement, not the staff's approach. I'm saying, can I clarify what I'm meaning? And then you see whether it was not meant to impugn staff, it was meant to impugn the process that was being proposed by staff. Councillor Wilkie: I would like an apology. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. I'll apologise to the staff. Councillor Wilkie: It is to return incompetent. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Okay. So it is to rectify what I see. I do apologise for any... It's not meant to... It wasn't... I tried to use a word that wasn't inflammatory. And obviously it was. To the author and those who approved the recommendation. Unreservedly, please. I apologise for the cause of offence. And can I explain what I'm talking about? Yes. Okay. When I mentioned... The word I used was about what we're seeking up here is getting it in the right order to seek approval before we go to approve an agreement. So that's what I'm talking about, is the process has to be right.
03:05:00 It's not meant to impugn staff. You can't say we're going to enter an agreement if you don't know if you've got approval. So I was talking about the process and I still believe that as worded, it wasn't the... It wasn't... Structurally clear. ...incrementable under law. Okay. That's what the process I was talking to you. I wasn't talking about the staff's competency. So I do... It was taken... It was... You probably would have been taking that. So I do withdraw and reserve that aspect. Okay. It was about the process of how we do it. Councillor Wilkie: Okay. You're qualified. Can you... We do have the author at the time. Would you apologise personally to... Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm happy to apologise to Adam in that respect. And it's to everyone who... And now... Councillor Wilkie: And now will you... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I didn't. But I apologise. Bill, would you accept that? Speaker 4: I'm sorry to say I don't accept it either, but I think...
03:06:00 Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So if there's more that needs to be said, as I said, I wasn't... I meant to see you first say that I'm not going... It's not a personal thing. To me, it's a structural thing and I am... Probably because of my background. So just to clarify, you withdraw the comment... I withdraw the comment and it was not meant to be in any way... Can you apologise? Councillor Wilkie: Can you apologise? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I apologise. And it was not in any way meant to be derogatory of the staff. Okay. I would... Councillor Wilkie: So for the record, Councillor Stockwell has withdrawn the comment and apologised. Can you... Yes. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm happy to let go on. Councillor Wilkie: Can you let me know if... Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm talking about the process... Okay. ...in terms of legislation. And so, to me, the first part fixes up that aspect of agreeing to something before we've got approval to do it, in the simplest terms, okay? The aspect of the land act is really clear, it's an inconsistent use and we've been told
03:07:00 by the representatives of the owner that they don't support what we're doing. It's really clear that we said in 2020 that we would, when the declaration was over, we'd stop doing it. The part under its current use is for the people, it's not for the cars. There is no argument, no question, that's what the land act wants it to be used for. Okay? The issue we've got is that... I'll use the word, kick the can down the road, is without clear direction to our staff about what we prioritise, we will continue to have this issue.
03:08:00 Without clear direction of this council... Because, quite rightly, Councillor Lorentson said we haven't got a clear plan. We had a clear plan back in the last term. You know, I first did a sketch plan of priority lanes with a bus station, Leitheside, Brindis Parade, probably 2016. It got into the strategy. We then had working groups with experts, councillors and community members, one working on priority lanes, one working on car parking, one working on another one, and we prioritised those and we got to what the priorities were that we had and how we were going to implement it. So when I get to number G, all it's saying is we want to budget an initiative to achieve the transport outcomes. They're some of the things we have looked at. And we want to know if this council is going to commit to those proposals before June 2024. Whatever. And it's not saying any one of those is the right one. Okay?
03:09:00 And it's not saying we're not doing complications. It's saying, no, we don't want to have a motion that says we're just going to have another 14 months of business as usual. We want to say, yes, we understand that Easter's upon us. We haven't got time to change it. We haven't got anything necessarily to duplicate or to respond to it. And that's where I've changed it. And to me, that's important, because we can spend the next 12 months putting things off, or we can spend the next 12 months saying what this council stands for, and to me, I'm going to try and do the latter. Councillor Wilkie: I've got the amendment to the vote. Councillor Stockwell's name goes in favour. We all support it. Councillor Stockwell's name goes in favour. Councillor Jurisevic, Stockwell and Wilkie, those against. Councillor Wegener, Finzel, Stewart and Lorentson, the amendment is lost.
03:10:00 We go back to the original motion to which only myself and Councillor Stockwell have spoken. Mayor Stewart: That's your motion? Councillor Wilkie: Yes. Yes. Councillor Jurisevic: Can I move an amendment? Yes. Can I move an amendment? Can I move an amendment? Yes. Speaker 1: Can I move an amendment? Councillor Jurisevic: Yes. Can I move an amendment? And that's to clarify G. Councillor Wilkie: I think G has been changed slightly. Councillor Jurisevic: I don't believe it was. It says write to the department to inform of the intended use. Write to the minister and request. I'd prefer to write to the minister and request. I don't quite like the language to be altered to. I'd prefer to write to the minister and request. I have the intent of what Councillor Stockwell had suggested in his amendment.
03:11:00 So write to the department, the minister and the department of resources to request the intended, the proposed use. The proposal goes to the minister, the Department of Parliament and request all the resources therein. Request and a proposed use, not intended use. So request instead of inform? Yes, request instead of inform. Councillor Wilkie: I'll second for that, please.
03:12:00 In purpose of debate. I'm happy to second that. Instead of writing just to the department, I'll write to the minister. Councillor Finzel: I'm happy to second that for debate. Councillor Wilkie: Are you Karen? Tom, thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Joe? I do so on the basis that we can't inform the minister. We are requesting of the minister. The minister has the right to refuse us. We can inform the minister. Minister all we like, but it's the minister's discretion that we're seeking and all the departments, which will be done through the various offices of the department. I just think that's the correct wording and terminology as to how we should approach the request to the department for the proposed use of the client's data. Councillor Wegener: Questions or commentary? I need to refresh myself here.
03:13:00 Did you just re-read it, did you see the changes from the first one? Councillor Wilkie: Oh, it's just the amendment with the changes on the page. Councillor Wegener: It's just the amendment with the changes on the page, so it's not that much of a change from here. Right, okay. This one's not. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: It's the first one inferred that we just had the right to just say we're telling you to redo it. We're intact. We're intact. What we have to do is ask for permission. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, that's that. That's all I'm doing is asking permission instead of just inferring that we will tell the minister what we're doing. Councillor Wilkie: It's a technical amendment really. Councillor Jurisevic: I just think it's more proper and correct. Councillor Wilkie: It gives the response more authority. I'm in favour. Councillor Lorentson: Could I move an amendment? No. Oh, excuse me. Councillor Wilkie: No. Sorry. No. Okay. Okay. Jody, would you close? No. I put the vote on favour of the amendment that's carried unanimously, becomes part of the original motion.
03:14:00 Yeah. Brian, the only people who have spoken to the original motion are myself and Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Lorentson: Sorry, John? Move an amendment. Councillor Wilkie: You can move an amendment. Councillor Livingston? Councillor Lorentson: That, I've got two amendments. I'll start with the infrastructure services. Provide a report to the council and advise in a traffic model. Mayor Stewart: Yes, please. This is not the staff recommendation. Councillor Lorentson: I know, but if this gets up, I want mine to go through. So, infrastructure services. Provide a report to the council and advising of traffic modelling and future impact. Speaker 2: I think this is what you had prepared earlier. Councillor Lorentson: Yes, please. Yes. Thank you very much.
195 minutes in ¶
03:15:00 Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: So request a report to council advising of traffic modelling and future impact should the park no longer be utilised for overflow parking at peak periods. Councillor Wilkie: Question of staff. You mentioned approximately 14,000 vehicles per day into New South Wales Precinct during peak periods.
03:16:00 16,000. And 16,000 on... And the additional 150 to 200 overflow car parks in Lydes Park are not considered to make a measurable difference to supply the park. Would this be a very easy report to provide? Speaker 4: This should not be difficult. Okay. Thank you. That shouldn't be either. Councillor Wilkie: Could we have a seconder for council advising's amendment? Thank you, Councillor Stewart. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah, I'll wait. You know, keep going to what's plan B and to get to plan B, we just need to understand what happens if the park is returned to recreational, not if, when the park is returned to recreational green space and how we plan to address future impacts, including the impacts on our road networks. How and where are we going to accommodate the extra vehicles, 200 to 400 vehicles every day, and more if the amount of domestic daytrippers keep going on, so I know that there is a body of work already been done in terms of traffic modelling, it would be great to get that information just to council, and that's why I've asked, included that, yep.
03:17:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I've just got one question, to do this well, would we, your existing traffic studies, would we be doing scenarios in terms of deterrence, of not having a car park? Speaker 4: Sorry, yeah, through you Chair, we can do models where we turn off the car park supply and see what that looks like to the intersection analysis, et cetera. Fantastic. Fantastic. And then you can put in some factors in, you know, by not having it there, it does that reduce the mine, you can do some sensitivity testing on that to see what it looks like.
03:18:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And this is that, the study that we are about to get the data from in terms of... Speaker 4: Yeah, so we've done some preliminary work in that area, the full Shire-wide data would make it better, but we might have some preliminary work that we could look at, but yeah, I would recommend we do the Shire-wide counts and all of that work first, and then we can do that, those adjustments, all those things, we can look at when you take out what car parking, what is the effect. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah. Speaker 4: Fantastic. Joe, do you have a question? Councillor Jurisevic: Given that we have been facilitating this additional car parking... Through the COVID period, going forward, we're talking about removing it from those other periods, wouldn't that immediately give us some information with regards to the impact of having those car parks and not having those car parks through those peak periods that we've been utilising through COVID? Speaker 4: Yeah, we do our data collection, and it could be something that we might find out, something new when we do that, you know, another time if that's closed, we do some other data collection, we can find out what those impacts are, for example, you know, do the car numbers go up, what do they go down, you know, anyone have where we've marketed the fact that that car parking is or isn't there, what is the change, and we can look at our bus patronage, you know, has that gone up?
03:19:00 Yeah, one would think without those car parks during that, yeah. That's right, we count a lot of metrics, and so it would be more about how did we make it known that it wasn't there, but then measure the impact. Councillor Wilkie: And there's been a welcome material, is there a welcome material that suggests that if you provide more car parks, it creates more congestion? Speaker 4: It's well proven around the world. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Yeah. Okay. Anyone else? Can we make a motion to say? May I just close? Councillor Lorentson: I'd just probably like to add that the data provided would also be really great feedback for the destination management plan and help inform its decisions.
03:20:00 Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: I put my hand to those in favour. Those unanimous. Councillor Lorentson: I'd just like to move another amendment as well. I'd like to move an amendment. I'm not sure where we actually are. I'll grab it. Thank you, Kathy. I'll read it out. Offer assistance to transition the Tewantin Noosa Lions Club in sourcing future fundraising opportunities as they become available. Councillor Jurisevic: Was that not mentioned in Councillor Wilkie's? Councillor Wilkie: I can answer that question. Oh, was it? I, I, my motion was to work with the Noosa. Tewantin Noosa Lions Club to discuss the pricing, particularly in the car parking, to help offset the revenue, but this looks like it might be broader than what might be available, and therefore might be, I don't know whether.
03:21:00 Councillor Jurisevic: Can we just go back and have a look at what Councillor Wilkie had said in his original place? Councillor Wilkie: It might be broader than what's required. Councillor Lorentson: H I J. Determinate. H I J. Councillor Wilkie: Delegate the CEO to work with the Tewantin Noosa Lions Club to determine the new paid car parking pricing for the Lions Park that offsets the reduction in revenue and better reflects the cost of car parking. Councillor Jurisevic: It doesn't mention about solutions going forward, does it? No. Okay. That's all right. I thought it had been, and maybe it was in the staff recommendation originally. Councillor Wilkie: No, it wasn't. Yeah, it was intended to pursue a good pricing that doesn't leave them out of pocket. Councillor Lorentson: I'm happy to second that one. I'll just quickly speak to it. As we've discussed around the table, paid parking at Lions Park is an important source of funding for the Lions Club and for the community.
03:22:00 Lions Club volunteers have been serving our community since 1967. In fact, this year they've just celebrated 55 years. All the funds that the volunteers raise go to Lions Park. I'll go straight back into our community. The Mayor referenced the All Access Beach Map and Noosa Main Beach. I'm going to add just some recent great stuff that they've done. They've just given $2,000 to the Seahorse Nipper Program. They've partnered with Live Life Pharmacy to provide personal care packs for those in need. They've assisted in funding too much needed bladder scanners for Noosa Care. And I just can keep going on and on and on. What this amendment proposes is some strategic planning and support and opportunities for Council to partner with the Lions Club in the future.
03:23:00 And it just would be just a shame to, you know, turn off their tap of funding. And I just think they give so much back to this community. It would be great for Council to reach out and give them whatever assistance they can provide. Councillor Wilkie: Anyone else wish to speak to the amendment? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I think it's important because one of the things I meant to mention is when we debate these policy issues, at times we have to be really clear about where we're going. And there is flow-on effects that for groups like Tewantin Noosa Lions, that do do great work in the community, and the impact on them is secondary. And I think we can't resolve from not taking the hard decisions, but we can continue to work with them to the blow on their resources,
03:24:00 which is largely used for philanthropic endeavours, can be minimised. And if I can get a bit of leniency, because I just did check what the legal definition of open competencies in the legal thing, and I was wrong, the way I was interpreting in my mind. So I'll do the reverse and say the same thing is when I'm critiquing a motion, it's not critiquing the staff. I think what the staff in the transfer section do is excellent. And the author of this report, I frequently said to the residents, is, I believe, is a future potential leader of this organisation, in this organisation. So I do apologise, as in my mind I was talking only about the legal impediments to implementing that particular recommendation. Councillor Wilkie: Now to Councillor Steve Jones. Councillor Jurisevic: Yes, Inspector, I think this is a no-brainer. This has been an income source for the Tewantin Noosa Lions Club for a number of years, and obviously assisted in the great work they do within our community.
03:25:00 If this is something that will cease in the future, we need to be aware of the implications and be part of the solution going forward to ensure that the good work of the Tewantin Noosa Lions Club continues in the future, or is able to continue in the future, with adequate funding. Councillor Lorentson: Can I speak to the amendment or would you close? I've actually got some stats in front of me just to let everyone know how much is actually collected through the gate. In 2018... Oh, sorry, 2022-23, $157,350. That's 7,866 cars went through the Lions car park. They give 50% back to Council. That's a huge amount of fundraising. And by volunteers, this is not a commercial enterprise, it's a not-for-profit. And I do want to close on something else,
03:26:00 which, Joe, you sort of alluded to. I talk to people about when they close down their businesses, and lots of businesses are closing down at the moment. And one employer said to me that rather than just giving redundancy out to his employees, he makes sure that every employee finds a job before they shut their doors. And I see the same sort of... That's the analogy I'm going to use here, that we understand who will be impacted the most and what we can do to mitigate that impact. So I hope everyone supports this amendment. I'll put the amendment. Councillor Wilkie: Those in favour? Unanimous. Councillor Lorentson: Next amendment, Councillor Anderson? Oh, that's it. OK. Councillor Wilkie: OK. All right, we'll go back to the original... Those amendments become part of the original motion, to which only... Ooh.
03:27:00 Myself and Councillor Stockwell have spoken. So it seems such a long time ago. Any councillors wish to speak to the motions? Councillor Jurisevic: What was the motion? Councillor Wilkie: It's basically what staff wanted to accept, that we honour the resolution in 2020, that once the COVID declaration was ended, we end the car parking and all we can... Councillor Jurisevic: I'm being facetious. Mayor Stewart: Sorry. So just to confirm, your motion is separate because it's not having any car parking in any of the holidays. It must be. And in the long weekends. Councillor Wilkie: That's correct, isn't it? No, no. Mayor Stewart: Except the Easter and Christmas. Councillor Wilkie: Christmas and Easter and Christmas. Yeah, but not holidays. But it's honouring the 2020 resolution which said car parking in the long weekends and school holidays within once the COVID declaration is over. Mayor Stewart: But yours is separate because the staff are recommending all holidays and long weekends. You're just recommending Easter and Christmas.
03:28:00 Councillor Lorentson: Yes. So it's separate from the original arrangement. I'll speak to it and I'm probably going to repeat what I've already said, but I just want to say it so that people make their decision and listen to my reasons. I'm not going to support Councillor Wilkie's alternate notion. And again, start with no one's disputing that the use of Lyons Park for car parking conflicts with Council's policies and strategies. Noosa Heads Lyons Park is a green space. Allowing cars to be parked at Lyons Park during peak school holiday periods and public holidays was a pandemic decision, policy response made in collaboration with stakeholders to address a COVID crisis. If we go with the staff recommendation which approves a 12 month extension for temporary use
03:29:00 of the reserve, what that does is it addresses, recognises and mitigates the post pandemic crisis that I referred to earlier. That is the high visitation numbers and the impact of these increased visitor numbers on our transport networks. So, I won't be supporting this and I will be supporting this for the rest of the year. I will be supporting the staff recommendation because we need to consider what's happening at the moment. We need to consider the new landscape and the challenges ahead of us. We're not returning to normal and again what I said before, we've got no idea what normal looks like. We also have a really engaged community, a community that we must consult with. So, we've got to understand
210 minutes in ¶
03:30:00 and respect the experience and knowledge of our residents, our business groups, our small businesses and the people that are going to be mostly impacted. We build confidence and trust with our policy response during the pandemic. So, let's not destroy this. We need a plan that provides alternatives and options to approve the recommendation in front of us. In my opinion, we'll create a world of hurt for small businesses, residents and, in fact, increased congestion and traffic. We know that it's not sustainable to continue using Lyons Park for car parking. It's not the intended use of the park but what are our options and where do these cars go? What is infrastructure traffic modelling? What are the future impacts including economic impacts? And again, what about the Tewantin Noosa Lyons Club volunteers? In 12 months, if we stick with
03:31:00 a staff recommendation, we will have consulted with the community. We would have devised a plan. We've already devised thousands of plans but we will have a plan, possibly a completed destination management plan and then we can talk about returning Lyons Park to its intended land use, so, for those reasons, I won't be supporting the recommendation before us. Councillor Wilkie: Just, again, the provision of extra car parking in that precinct, does that contribute to congestion or solar? Speaker 4: It's a complex issue depending on how you access that car park. But generally, yeah, if you signal that there's more car parking, you can induce more cars coming down that road. Councillor Jurisevic: I'll speak, no, I'll speak to it. I'll speak to it. No, I'll speak to it in the exact opposite tone to what Councillor Lorentson was alluding to there.
03:32:00 It's time. I agree with Councillor Wilkie. We made a resolution on the 17th September to respond to the pandemic. The pandemic is over and I appreciate We have a myriad of additional vehicles on the road, but this is our opportunity to actually educate those people that are coming here, that we have park and ride facilities, that we do provide park and ride facilitation, that we do have free buses, and there are alternatives to parking in Hastings Street. And maybe you should actually partake of those things that Council has facilitated over the years to utilise. So, no, I actually support the reduction of those additional times that we added through COVID. I think it's time for those day trippers and those people that are ringing their cars to realise that you're going to become part of the solution, not part of the problem, and utilise facilities that we actually create and have provided for you to come to Noosa and partake of public transport.
03:33:00 Mayor Stewart: One more question. Yeah, thank you. Adam, you're the author of this report. You've been working, as I said, there's six or, there's so many things that are on at the moment, you know, the music, the traffic studies, the DTMR, the long-term planning, the future of the space, we go on and on. Can you tell us why you, in your, as your role as Special Manager of Projects, why your recommendation was what it was? Can I just ask, do you feel like you're going to pass on? Speaker 4: I feel that it's a very complex issue, and I think you need to have that conversation with the community in the meantime for that, that that's the crux of the, the recommendation. Councillor Wilkie: Do you feel there needs to be consultation about withdrawing the car park? Speaker 4: Withdrawing that car park from Lime's Park. In the long weekend? In any situation, whether it's from the current state or the future long term, if in the future long term, but there is no car parking on that, I believe that we should be doing that
03:34:00 through consultation. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Speaker 4: That's the start. Mayor Stewart: Any councillors wish to speak to the motion? Yeah, I'll, I'll speak to the motion. I'm, I'm going to stand behind what I said about 30 minutes ago, or was it an hour ago? It's a long time ago. Councillor Lorentson: It's a long time ago. Mayor Stewart: I'm, I'm going to stand behind the staff recommendation, they know this better than anyone else, and I actually think everything that we have in play shows that we are serious about it, it is only temporary, and I'll come back to the fact that, you know, we've heard it from our staff, that this is what they believe the best way forward to engage and engage proper, thorough community consultation, we all plan and acknowledge it is and should be, and we're going to be doing it, and we're going to be doing it, and we're going to be doing it, open space for all of our community to use, and it will be, and this is, this is saying it will be, it's putting a time frame on it, it's putting a timeline on it, and it's putting a process, proper process behind it, in the meantime, in the back end, saying what Councillor Stockwell said, we do have a number of things in place, and let's not throw the baby out of the bathwater, and get rid of all the, one, or not even get rid of, but oversee, over, overlook,
03:35:00 all the incredible work that is being done in this space, all the things that have been talked about here are actually what's being talked about behind closed doors, what's being worked on behind closed doors, so I think that our community should take great comfort in the fact that there are seven or eight things in, or seven or eight processes that the staff are working on, in this respect, easing congestion is not easy, it has been a long time, no one would have ever predicted 10 or 20 years ago, the popularity of Noosa, we are dealing with long, long-standing infrastructure issues that need attention, and we are working hard in this space, it doesn't, it doesn't, it takes a long time, or it takes considerable amounts of time, but I think we should take comfort in the fact that everything that Adam has mentioned is, is in play, and is, and will come to fruition, and in the meantime, we will be undergoing the proper community processes, the proper consultations, we will be, we will be, we will be, we will be, we will be, we will be,
03:36:00 So I'm standing by the staff recommendation. Thanks. Councillor Wilkie: Right. Councillor Wegener or Councillor Finzel wish to speak to the motion before I close? You don't have to. Absolutely. Thank you. Speaker 3: Okay. Councillor Wilkie: I'm supporting this motion because it's about honouring the resolution that Council made that we're single to the community, that we would, after consultation, extend the use
03:37:00 of this community owned green space for the private vehicle for the duration of the COVID public health declaration. Principally because tourism was adversely affected there. The numbers are back. The drive market is stronger than ever. We've just heard that there was 14,000 to 16,000 vehicles a day entering the congested use of Hitch Precinct during the period. An additional 1,500 to 200 overflowed car parks in the Lyons Park are not considered to make a difference to supply and demand. That means it's neither here nor there. But we do know from countless briefings and reports that you add the promise of extra car parks down there. It is a driver to bring motorists down there.
03:38:00 It will create... But if you don't honour this Council resolution, it will create the opposite effect of what you're trying to achieve. I think also there's an element of responsibility here. What's being proposed? What's being proposed? I'm asking... I'm saying that we address this now. We do not leave it to the next Council. Leave it in place to the next Council to grapple with it. We're more than able to do that now. And all it requires is to have the courage to follow through on a resolution we collectively made. And that was the agreement we had with this community. Do we want... One of the KPIs that this Council has... One of the KPIs that this Council will be judged on was that there are actually more days... One of the achievements is that there are more days where green space was used by car parks in this Council than any other previous Council. We actually increased the amount of green space given over to car parks in real...
03:39:00 In real time during the course of this Council. And that we didn't honour our commitment to the community to reel that back once... Once... Once the COVID declaration was over and the visitation returned to normal. We're all aware of the concern in the community about the impact of day visitors. We accommodated them during COVID. And now we invite them to use public transport, the additional free buses that were put on during the weekends, at considerable expense to the ratepayers and levypayers. We invite them to use designated car parks on bitumen roads that are not accessible to Not our parks. There is a tendency in a base like this to imply that you take away 150 car parks in the Lions Park during long weekends and school holidays, but that's the only car parks available
03:40:00 in the Noosa Heads Precinct. Well there's no other way of people getting down there. There are plenty of other car parks down there. I disagree that we haven't already signalled the intention of this motion to the community loud and clear. And let's not lose our way councillors. We make the decisions. There is advice. But we're rarely being asked to follow through on a decision that we've made. And it's a commitment to the community that we've made. A commitment to the community. A commitment to the business community. People on Hastings Street, they don't want the car park, the Lions Park to be used for big land space turned over car parks ad infinitum. We're not asking, the staff are not asking for a 12 month extension.
03:41:00 It's till beyond the next election. 14 months. I'm saying we can deal with this now. The majority of what the staff are suggesting is contained within this resolution. Including respect for the Tewantin Lions. Finding alternative revenue streams for them. I think through the amendments it's actually been improved. I think I've said enough councillors. I'll put the motion to the vote. Those in favour? Councillor Wegener. Councillor Jurisevic. Councillor Stockwell. Councillor Wilkie. Those against? Councillor Finzel. Steward. Moved. Thank you very much. And I'm very grateful for your patience and advice. We do highly value your work. Thanks Adam. The comment is made actually by a future leader of this organisation.
03:42:00 I don't know if anybody agrees with that. And you are appreciated. Thank you. And another five minute break please councillors if that's alright. Thank you very much. Thank you.
225 minutes in ¶
03:50:00 Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Speaker 9: Thank you. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I wish to inform the meeting I have ascribed conflict of interest in this matter as I have a long standing business relationship with Healthy Land and Water, a subcontract disorganised Deputy Mayor Stockwell: and commenced in 2017 with invoiced work currently tolling a value of $57,703. As a result of my conflict of interest I will leave the meeting room while the matter is considered and voted on. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you Councillor Stockwell. Speaker 3: Councillor, the report in front of you today recommends Councillor enter into another three
03:51:00 funding agreements with Healthy Land and Water. This Council has been in partnership in various forms with Healthy Land and Water for over 21 years. This is a regular funding agreement that we do enter into with Healthy Land and Water and have done for many years. Attached to the report is the draft funding agreement. The report, it should Council be happy to continue our partnership with Healthy Land and Water, delegates it to the CEO to execute. We hope that it will be accepted. The program attached to the agreement outlines all the deliverables but in short Healthy Land and Water deliver on the report card, a new report card that Council have just received for our waterways. They provide expert advice. We work collaboratively with them on access to technical expertise and expertise in river
03:52:00 health and river management. We are advanced in this area. We have many Councils that are in partnership with Council Land and Water under a similar agreement. This is recommended for your consideration. Councillor Wilkie: Any questions for Council? Care to move the recommendation? I'll move the recommendation. I think Council would like to second it. Council Jurisevic? Yes. Councillor Wegener: This is a very important thing to maintain our relationship with Healthy Land and Water. It's, we need, we can't improve something unless it can be improved. Do you think you can measure it? Mayor? Is that true? You can't improve something unless you can measure it? Mayor Stewart: Correct. Councillor Wegener: Um, and I read here that the decline in grading from our A-minus to a B was largely due to an increase in catchment pollutant loads with sediment loads increasing from 349 kg hectares in 2021 to 1,112 kg hectares in 2022 caused by a very high rain rate.
03:53:00 So rainfall. And I don't think it was caused by rainfall. I think it was caused by a lack of good management of the soil, good land management. And I think that we need a much bigger program, largely community-led, private acreage or private property-led to confront this. But of course, Healthy Land and Water is an essential element in us actually tackling this problem. Because the problem with the river starts on land. And so a little bit of a way to get this little advocacy in. But it's so important for us to maintain a world, as a world leader in healthy and sustainable catchment management. Well, let's do it by continuing to support Healthy Land and Water, but also really look at our new corporate plan, which says that we need to look at regenerative agriculture and better land use on land. And according to our environment strategy, which says best land management by, by, by
03:54:00 80% of rural land, best land management by 2030. And so we haven't really hammered down that track yet. It all fits together. The health of our waterways is the health of our people, is the health of our residents, is the health of our agriculture, is the health of what we eat, who we are, what we breed, what we put in, what we put out. We need a circular economy. We are a part of this. We have the best and measuring healthy waterways with essential purpose. Thank you, Councillor Wegener. Councillor Wilkie: Will the councillors wish to speak in the motion? Councillor Robinson. Councillor Lorentson: Oh, I've got some questions, Kim. In terms of where they monitor, who chooses the sites? Speaker 3: I would have to come back to on that, which I can do before Thursday, if you'd like. But the sites are identified in the back of the agreement and then placed in the
03:55:00 So we have baseline and have ongoing annual reporting of sites. In terms of decision of the sites, I just have to confirm the exact process around that. I believe it's a collaborative process, but they have been established for some years, so we're regularly monitoring the same sites. There was some addition of some sites, I think, in the last agreement, but I'll have to take that on notice and come back to you. Councillor Lorentson: Can I also ask if you could come back to me? Are we monitoring Burgess Creek and are we monitoring contaminants just overall in all our catchments to identify the sources? Speaker 3: Yeah, I'll come back to you. Councillor Lorentson: That would be great. Another question? In terms of our monitoring programs, do we use standard operating procedures for collection and analysis? And where I'm going with that is, again, going back to Burgess Creek,
03:56:00 can that, if we identify a site, for example, Burgess Creek, can the water monitoring, can that provide independent analysis, is where I'm going with this, separate to the analysis that's done by Unity Water and maybe CEO? Question for the CEO? Speaker 1: Yeah. Through the Chair, Councillor Morrison, it is somewhat off topic. This is about the healthy land and water contract for the next three years, mainly monitoring our river health. Burgess Creek and the monitoring thereof by Unity Water as a utility and other of these are separate to this. I do absolutely understand your interest and how important it is, but this is very much about our river health and getting our grading of our river cards. It does look at catchments overall, but what is purported by healthy land and water across southeast Queensland
03:57:00 is the rating and gradings of the river systems. Councillor Lorentson: So freshwater creeks not included? I thought it was. It doesn't flow into the Noosa River. It has to flow into the Noosa River. Yeah. Oh, okay. Speaker 1: But, yeah, if we're able, Councillor Morrison, just to be able to focus on, if we have a request to, internally remain with healthy land and water corporation for the next three years, that's the decision we're asking for. Councillor Lorentson: Okay. Thank you. Speaker 1: Do you wish to speak to the motion? Councillor Wilkie: More questions? Councillor Lorentson: Oh, just more questions. What happens if we don't enter into the agreement? What's the downside? And is this current partnership providing good value? Speaker 3: If we don't enter into it, we no longer be part of the program where we receive the report cards for our river.
03:58:00 And as you know, the report cards for our river historically has informed our investment decisions, our planning, our strategy work, and how we go about ensuring ecological health of our river. So it's been a very important program both for our own technical decision making, but also for our community. It provides a lot of information about social and recreational indicators as well as environmental indicators. So we would no longer have access to that, which I think would be a substantial loss. There are clauses in the agreement that do allow any stage evaluation of the benefits and what we're achieving through the partnership and agreement. And if we don't feel at any point we're getting value for money or other deliverables aren't being achieved in terms of the agreement, there is an opportunity for Council to withdraw from the agreement. So that can be done at any time.
03:59:00 So yes, the fact that we are here recommending it to you, at an officer level, we believe the program does deliver value and that we should continue to be part of it. Councillor Lorentson: Fantastic. I don't disagree with that. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Do you want to speak to it, Joe? I will. I might start with a question, though. I mean, the elements of deliverables for Noosa Council, as I read this, Kim. Summary of activities for the program is the report card, the program governance, facilitate independent expert advice and oversight program and policy development. How much independent expert advice and oversight do we get from the Healthy Waterways program for, what are we, $20,000, $30,000 a year? Speaker 3: Yes. Again, Council, I'd have to come back to you with specifics on that, which I'll have to do before Thursday, on exactly what we've accessed over the last few years or in the life of our last agreement from independent advice. But what I do know is that we often call on their expertise.
240 minutes in ¶
04:00:00 We involve them in workshops on river health issues, stakeholder workshops. We seek advice around, you know, where we should be investing in terms of library and health, you know, because they have access to all of that information. So, you know, we do regularly access the expertise. Councillor Jurisevic: And that's great, and I'll go into my communications on this, because all too often what we see is... Joe, are you doing your... Yes, I'm talking, speaking to it, speaking to it. What we see is the socio-economic value of the river and we don't necessarily see in the reporting sufficient elements of the site. But here we are clearly getting the scientific value in the reporting and the oversight with regards to the river, with regards to the type of things we've done. Now, we know how our macroinvertebrates are a challenge. We know the silting of the river has become a challenge.
04:01:00 And all of these areas of improvement that we're working towards with the oyster programs and like are self-reporting and hopefully they will come back and through further reporting and further report cards from Healthy Land and Waters and the success of those programs going forward. So, I am quite happy to support this program and the ongoing support that it gives us with regards to scientific input as well as the other benefits that the river gives to our community and communities across South East Queensland, of course. Councillor Wilkie: Tom, you wish to close? Councillor Wegener: Yeah, when it comes to our own waterways here, especially the Noosa River, we have no excuses. The entire attachment is within our Shire, pretty much except for the, of course, Gibney, which all comes through the National Park. And at the headlands of the Berry River, it starts here and goes that way, through Six Mile Creek and so forth. So, we are a biased group. We're very proud of that. And we have all sorts of opportunities
04:02:00 to raise the standards. And again, the silt is a problem. And there's a program, an experiment, a grand experiment to keep it in Kin Kin and just fill it full of oxygen and steroids and good stuff. Actually, steroids are not good stuff. But just absolutely expand it dramatically to going from properties to groups of properties to micro-catchments. So, you can't do all of it, but imagine if you did a micro-catchment and did best management practice within a micro-catchment and then monitored how much the water coming down from there. The best practice is stopping the silt from coming, putting the trees on the top, regenerative cattle farming, regenerative agriculture, and just slowing that water down so it doesn't rip all that silt and mud and bring it into the rivers, but actually slows down it and feeds us, gives the water to our crops and our animals to feed us instead of washing silt into the river.
04:03:00 And I think that's where we're going and healthy land and water will help us achieve that goal. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Thank you for the motion. That's in favor? That's unanimous. Thank you, Kin. That's Stockwell. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Councillor Finzel: And now, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to introduce Mr. Robert Trent. Councillor Jurisevic: Mr. Trent would you give us another view of the financial performance report for March, please. Speaker 8: The report in front of you is the February 2023 financial performance report. Overall operating revenues continue to outperform forecast budget year date and operating revenues are marginally under budget year date.
04:04:00 Initial snapshot of operating revenues show that our operating revenue is $5.2 billion above budget. It's driven by a number of things. First of all is rates and utility charges, which is $740,000 above budget. Fees and charges are marginally above budget of $71,000. There's some ups and downs in terms of our fees and charges in there. We've got permits for weddings and footpath dining, $105,000 above budget. Plumbing applications are $164,000. That is, however, offset by building fees, which are equivalent down to $154,000. And development application fees are $149,000 below budget. A big driver in the revenue is interest income, which is $2.1 million above budget. And that's due to the investment of our surplus cash into higher yielding deposits, which continue to increase by our investment institutions in one.
04:05:00 The increase in the RBA in terms of yield rates. However, I do know that on the page 35 of the report, we've got the KPIs. It will show that the investment return is showing marginally on the target. That's only due to the timing of that cash coming in the bank. For those that are aware, we've just gone through our second rating period for the year. And the last day of discount offering of our rates and utility charges, that cash has been flowing through the bank quite quickly over the last few weeks. So you'll see all that cash being invested again next month. Sales are $1 million above budget, which is comprised in holiday park booking fees. And $430,000 and $240,000 for community facilities. And most of those, as you're aware, have offsetting costs in terms of additional room and farm fees to run those facilities.
04:06:00 Grants are up by $1.1 million. Speaker 8: A majority of that of $650,000 is from Queensland Reconstructional Authority in terms of the range of emergent and disaster funding recovery works. Operating expenditure is $306,000 under budget. However, noting the materials and services and our spend on contracts, $618,000 over budget year-to-date. Civil operations is $552,000. Holiday parks for the additional commissions is received from booking fees. And another overspend in the Environment Sustainable Development for consultancy and timing for needs to community support their contract provision services. Offsetting that in our expenditure is, I understand, in our employee costs of $948,000,
04:07:00 which you will see balance out next month as we have just passed through our annual certified agreement with additional costs coming through as our certified agreement is in line with CPI. That gives us our net operating position in February being $5.5 million above budget. Last but not least, capital. Capital revenues, grants and external funds are $13.7 million above budget, Speaker 8: and most of that is due to the advance payment from QRA and what further disaster funding. And obviously, as we come through the second half of the financial year with capital, we've extended 55% of our capital program, which equates to $31.8 million spent year-to-date, and another $9 million currently committed, and that's all for the Summary Councils.
04:08:00 Any questions? Joe? Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, Trent, what was the first figure you quoted? Rates and utility charges, you said $700,000? $770,000? Speaker 8: $744,000. Councillor Jurisevic: Rates, I've got $670,000 in front of me. $341,000 and $329,000? The first page, $28,000. Yeah. The first line under rates and levies. General rate, $341,000 above. Waste, $2,329,000 above. Speaker 8: That would be the major comprising items, Councillor. If you go to attachment one on page ... Councillor Jurisevic: That's right. So that's not all of them. There's more than just that. That's all right. I just did those figures and you went ... I'm sitting here going, that's $667,000. Hang on. That's where the additional money come from. Speaker 8: So that would be our other rates and separate charges as well. Okay. Councillor Jurisevic: Holiday parks, revenue, $435,000 above. Expenditure, where did we go?
04:09:00 $296,300 above. Offset by the additional revenue. What constitutes $296,000 above in holiday parks budget expenditure? $296,300. Speaker 8: That would be in relation to primarily commissions. So ... Councillor Jurisevic: As high as that in commissions? $290,000 in ... Speaker 8: Revenues as well. As well as it will be timing of contracts for maintenance as well as in relation to any direct operating costs such as water cartage or waste. Councillor Jurisevic: Right. Can I get a breakdown of those? Sure. That would be great. I'll just ... I'll just ... I'll just ... I know the figures are always around quite high, but ... lately, but I just found that quite a high figure. Speaker 8: And you'll ... you'll see ...
04:10:00 Okay. Councillor Lorentson: Trent. Page 40 of the report, in terms of legal expenses and consultancy services. Legal expenses seem to be going south and consultancy seem to be going north. Is that correct, how I'm reading that, or not? Speaker 8: So ... So, the consultancy might be a mix of it, maybe in relation to a legal trial, in terms of legal consultancy trial that we've filed over the last three months now. But I can take that on notice and you can just confirm what that mix of consultancy is. Councillor Lorentson: Oh, okay. Because that just seems ... yeah. Okay. Speaker 1: Versus legal. Councillor Lorentson: That would be great. Thank you. Speaker 1: Thank you, Councillor Robinson. It may be that I was talking to the management accountant for our office today, and seemingly, there's been all of the three-month legal trial work has gone through my budget, whereas my intent is to spread them all throughout the organisation, throughout all of my directors' legal budgets.
04:11:00 But we've got a very good consolidated understanding of what our spend is. We've got a very good understanding of the type of legal work that's happening across our business on consultancy. With the exception of planning. We're keeping planning separate. That'll be a report that we will bring to the next round of council meetings in April. Excellent. And we'll recommend some models, but it will give you a great understanding of the very diverse and deep legal work that our council has to undertake, and just the nature of our business. But I do think that anomaly might be what I'm picking up. There is consultancy work going on, and consultancies are important, but sometimes we don't have all the answers that the staff has. But I think that's going to be a change of legal down to consultancy. Councillor Lorentson: Yeah, I'm just noticing it's a balance. Speaker 1: That's moved into my budget.
04:12:00 Okay. Whereas we'll work through on VR2, but we'll come back to you with that. Okay. And we'll report in April around legal issues. Councillor Lorentson: Appreciate it. Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: The training costs are actually expended and staff are getting the training requirements that they need or deserve. Speaker 1: Absolutely. Councillor Jurisevic, I'm really happy to say that it has been a focus of not just the executive but the board and the leadership group of the $400,000 budget that we have in place. We've expended in excess of $230,000. Councillor Jurisevic: It's always good to see that it's going where it's needed. Speaker 1: And it's a clear focus and it'll add strength to all of the scenes. I want to have good news stories for Councillor Jurisevic when we go home. Councillor Jurisevic: I told you I'd have you on it. I'm happy to. I agree. It's very important. Councillor Wilkie: Just on that, CEO, it's not just the money spent, it's what the money delivers.
04:13:00 Yes. Can you tell us a bit about the sort of programs that you can have the student money on and what they're delivering and stuff. Speaker 1: Definitely, definitely. Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Again, it's extremely important that we invest back into our staff. But with the type of work that we do here in Council from a workplace health and safety perspective, we need to ensure that the currency of our staff are up to date as well. So of that $400,000, over a third of that is absolutely dedicated to just keeping our staff current with the qualifications that they need. We now work through leadership development and training. We've done a lot of work around that. And that's from our supervising coordinators all the way through to directors. I, with myself, have been involved in that as well. And that's really focusing on what our next group of leaders will be within Noosa and the type of behaviours we want to be able to see involved across the board as well. And then there's the incidental training. But what we're seeing is a real want from our departments to be able to undertake training, some blockages in different parts of the system to be able to get that done.
04:14:00 We're breaking that apart. And reviewing the budget bids is a really good example of bidding for training when we actually have budget in place. So creating better communication internally, understanding why things aren't being approved at different parts of the business, and pulling that away, getting it done, spending the budget, but having not just the benefit to the staff member and the business. The community will always win when we have well qualified staff. Speaker 6: Trying to keep staff at the forefront of change and all those. Councillor Jurisevic: Further to that, Mr CEO, traineeships and apprenticeships and the like, how are we currently situated with delivering opportunities to the community to be part of council and training through the organisation? Speaker 1: Through the Shire Council, it's a great question. And it's really a big part of what we want to be able to achieve through this current and upcoming budget. So Trent and myself, the directors, we work through what we can do in relation to not just the traineeships,
255 minutes in ¶
04:15:00 but really that pipeline of apprenticeships and also graduates for the future as well. Councillor Jurisevic: Well I know through COVID a lot of those opportunities ceased. So I'm interested to know that we've refacilitated them and they're back in process. Speaker 1: We're working through them. It is difficult and has some difficulties in managing our budget and our headcount as well. And all too often though that the training with us can end up as the staff member. They need to be the trainee. So we need to ensure that we're working a little bit more closely to deliver that. But last Friday, myself and the directors, we walked into this room for pretty much the entire day, worked through the entire budget for the council, budget bids. And part of our discussion was very much around how we're funding our trainees, apprentices, our graduates. So how's that going to work for us? And we'll bring that through with some proposals from council as far as our budget bids. But like always, there's so much to do.
04:16:00 We just don't have the funds to do everything that we'd like. But grow our own is what we really need to do. Councillor Jurisevic: That's what I'm alluding to, Mr CEO. Councillor Wilkie: I'm conscious of the time councillors and staff are having their way back. And if we have a move for this motion. Councillor Jurisevic: Yeah, have a move. Have it over. I noticed that the only area flagged there is capital expenditure but I know we're at a record spend. I was just looking for the figure associated with commitments with regard to the capital program going forward. Thanks Larry, that was it. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Alright, I'll put it to the vote, those in favour? Carried unanimously. Thank you Trent, up to the last item on the agenda.
04:17:00 Second item. The second confidential item is the Nursing Council brand refresh. We've had our Community Engagement Manager, Ken Ferg, here. Welcome Ken. Thank you. Would you care to focus through the report please, the brand refresh. Speaker 6: Yeah, so what you have before you at the moment is a proposal to refresh the current council organisation brand. The current brand's been in place since 1990, so over three decades. No doubt during that time it served the organisation well but as we know we've seen nurses evolve and grow over that time and the population is over 55,000 now. And the organisation growing over time has evolved, I suppose, to an organisation that wants to be modern, agile and sort of very customer focused. And our current brand is a little bit dystonian and doesn't really meet the criteria now with social media,
04:18:00 the digital world we live in and things like that. And how an organisation communicates and engages is very vital nowadays. And the whole purpose of the brand refresh is aimed to take us and acknowledge the past and also take us in a new direction as to where we want to go as an organisation and the staff as well. The brand refresh was done locally by a local company based out of the Peregian Beach Digital Hub. So that was a real focus for us is to get someone local, someone who knows Roosa. And also the expense that we've had at the moment has been through the existing corporate plan budget. So it wasn't an item that came out of nowhere. It was always part of the corporate plan to look at a refresh of the existing council brand.
04:19:00 And it also included an audit of all the council brands. We've got something like 12 different brands in council. And everything from the Noosa Leisure Centre to the Noosa Aquatic Centre to, you know, all those others. So it's to see how those brands can be aligned much closely with the overarching brand so that, you know, there's recognition within the community about those facilities being ratepayer funded. And so they're much closely aligned with the brand refresh as well. So that's the body of the work that's been undertaken over the last three and a half months as part of the corporate brand process. Councillor Wilkie: And you mentioned the way we've disjointed the point at some reference to the 12 different plans that we had with all the different facilities. Yeah, yeah. Speaker 6: And I mean, and that's happened and that's evolved over time. It's no one's fault. It just tends to happen every now and again. But everyone loves to have their own logo and their own brands.
04:20:00 But as a council, when you've got all these different facilities, it's important that they're all aligned together so that there is that recognition that they are one, that we're all part of the one family, for want of a better word. And that's what we've been looking at as well, is how to closely align those back so that there's that recognition and consistency across the organisation. Councillor Wilkie: Any questions for Karen? Councillor Finzel: Karen, do you want to jump in? Yeah, thanks, Ken. I've just had questions raised from community about the on-going cost of the re-branding process. Yep. Can you sort of give us some indication of like how much you think that's going to be? Yeah. How long is that going to take? How do we get an impact? Do you think the cost of re-branding will be? Speaker 6: So this is a brand refreshing right from the start because it's part of the corporate planning process. We said it would start as a digital rollout and we've done over a number of years, so a multi-classical process.
04:21:00 With the digital rollout, the change extensively will be the website, the social media, and then all our collateral that is pretty much digital nowadays anyway. So there's not a lot of printed collateral that gets done. So as it being a digital rollout, as assets need to be changed like signage, we're not going to go and change every sign that you see loosened out. That just wouldn't have cost the festival. So the plan is as assets need to be changed, then they will take on the brand, the repression of the brand. So, you know, car decals, decals for example, that's within the existing budget. So because they are our high profile vehicles, we'd like to change those almost immediately. But anything else will happen as the budget allows, you know. So there's no plans to be able to change things dramatically in the initial stages. Councillor Finzel: So it will be a staged process? Speaker 6: Yeah, staged process and as budget, like any process, we'll put up a budget submission
04:22:00 and that will be part of the process as to whether you see that as worthwhile and whether it can be deferred or whatever. Okay. Thank you. Councillor Finzel: And how do you plan to measure the investment in terms of what events will serve that community, especially with the technical aspects? Speaker 6: Measurement's difficult because really when we're talking about a brand of council, it's really for the organisation itself. So it's about how we communicate and articulate to not only our local community, but to the wider community as well. But it also gives a bit of pride, I suppose, within the organisation. As I said, this brand is 30 years old. Most brands go through a refresh roughly every seven to 10 years. That's not something councils tend to do because it is quite late funding. So it's not something you would go and do every 10 years. But 30-year-old brand, you know, we have changed in three decades. Not only, you know, locally, but in the digital world and the living.
04:23:00 So it is a long process to have a brand for 30 years. Councillor Finzel: Thank you. Councillor Jurisevic: Well, as I said, my questions are on the same lines, Kent, and I've emailed you the concerns raised by the community in the same vein. We've spent $60,000. It's not $60,000 coming to be spent. $60,000 has been spent as part of the corporate plan going forward. That's my reading of it. So that money's been spent. So the expenditure going forward is around vehicle signage. We've spent $60,000. It's for other forms of signage. What other things might we see transition over time? Speaker 6: Well, over time like any, if you have a brand refresh you might, your staff, the wear that doesn't .. The shirts, because we do have shirts... Again, they're part of the budget process. A lot of the areas within Council had an allocation within their budget to provide uniforms for
04:24:00 their staff and staff ... Councillor Jurisevic: But one would expect that we'd have a stock of those. So that once, not until that stock is utilised or new products are required, that they will, and I guess this is directed to the CEO in that regard, that we wouldn't buy a new stockpile immediately, we would utilise the rundown of stockpiles that we have. So really no additional expenditure, it's really just on... Speaker 1: It will be continued operational on a replacement basis. Councillor Jurisevic: The concern is that the stockpile will be replaced. The concern for me with fleet, fleet obviously have a lifespan, typically up to five years or so. I don't see the need to polis polis go out and replace all the signage and stickers on the fleet.
04:25:00 Will that occur as those vehicles come up for renewal or will we set a time limit, say three years down the track, anything left we might update? Speaker 1: Yeah, but Councillor Jurisevic, through the Chair, I want just to refer to Canada as manager on this because we can do it, we can do it relatively inexpensively. So, Ken, did you just want to provide a bit of a consideration on what we can do with motor vehicles? Speaker 6: Yeah. So, surprisingly with the digital world we live in, printing is not that expensive. And everything you do, you want to be cost effective as much as possible. So, for example, to rebrand all our vehicles, we've got roughly 150... That's what concerned me, clearly. So you get 300 giga hours. That is a cost of about $5,000. And we've got quotes going in from the local companies to be able to do that. So that is something that if we go ahead with the refresh, that would be something we could
04:26:00 do within the existing budget. So, but moving forward, as we've seen with letterheads, you're not going to go and throw out 100,000 letterheads that you may have. We'll use those through time and then as they're needed to be replaced, the printing cost stays the same. Because all we're providing is a new brand rather than what's... Councillor Jurisevic: That's my purpose for raising the question. So the public are aware that we're not going out bolus bolus and buying, you know, we're utilising the stocks we've got. Speaker 6: That's not a smart way of doing it. Exactly. Exactly my point. It is a refresh of the organisation, which really is about getting pride within the organisation, but also emanating a new way of talking to our community. And the fact that everybody on the board, the public, is getting that, you know, 800 to a million dollars in that just doesn't make a lot of sense at all. So the whole plan was to keep a rollout, but those high vehicles, the vehicles being our high profile, ones that are out and about in the community, we want people to see that brand refresh and then as we move on, use signage that gets replaced as new brand, et cetera,
04:27:00 et cetera. Councillor Wilkie: I'm happy to move on. I'll second it. We're going to have more questions as we move on. Look, it's famous saying, it uses the word, it's time. I think that applies to this brand, Refresh. As you said, the Guaranis was derived through a community competition back in 1990. Over that time, there was a strong community connection to that beautiful symbol. And the Pregian-based company has done a fantastic job in honouring and respecting the attachment to the Guaranis. There's also been, in that time, this is the 10th year of the de-enumerated council, it's time to review the colour palette as well. And the colours that have been chosen arguably better reflect the colours of nature. Noosa is different by nature. It is, as opposed to time, they are in nature.
04:28:00 And the colours that have been chosen are more likely to be found in Noosa's nature, as opposed to the very vibrant brands previously. I think it was a good process to start. I've obviously taken it to heart. They've all had their say. And it's been reflected in what we've come up with. I thought it was a good process. I thought it was saturated. The brand, the company, the people who work really listened and took on board all our questions. And there were some challenging questions too. And I thought that the concept that they finally came up with was still the robust question, which really put the old concepts to the test. And I'm proud to stand behind this brand refresh and really hope the community can see the work that's gone into it. And I respect the efforts of them and their attachment to the Council and their community and the environment.
04:29:00 Councillor Jurisevic: I must say I had my reservations at the beginning of this as to the necessity to go through this process. The brand has served the Council long and well. But I could see going through the process that there was benefit and there was and change was imminent. So I think what's come up is certainly going to be challenged and questioned by elements within the community. Any change takes time for acceptance. And over time, I think it will. But there will be those that don't see the need or the benefit of the logo change. But I think in the long term, they'll be in the minority. I see the colours that have been chosen more reflective of some of the colours, I think, of the past. I think some of the boldness and that has been generated over time.
270 minutes in ¶
04:30:00 I don't think they were the original colours. Brian might be able to take us back to where we started from. But I welcome the change. It wasn't one that I readily accepted, but I see that we've got there now. And I can see the benefits that will come through this. And some of the other areas that we've talked about with regard to other Council services that will be brought in to maintain the Council. The Council logo on them that currently don't. So I see that as a plus. Councillor Wilkie: Go to the stop line. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So, yeah. You mentioned 1990, 32 years ago. Well, 32 kilos ago for me. From recollection, I was on a working group that came up with or was somewhere linked to that process of selecting the initial logo. And as Council worker mentioned, the concept of the Baronya being a new logo, It's something that you only find in Noosa Shire, it was never the real colours of the Baronga, in fact it reflected an earlier bit of work done on signage on their roads in the early 1980s, and the green was actually a rainforest green, and the middle was meant to be the colour of sand, and those colours were chosen to tell that picture because the roadside signage adopted, and it was about when you drove into Noosa you felt like you were in the national park.
04:31:00 Now since then, the actual rainforest green is bad in the digital environment, and also the brand, as you say, has degenerated, like that colour isn't right, and it's different to that colour, it's different to that colour, so we've got a whole lot of mixed colours and messages and ways the actual logo has been used, and I think it was interesting to see the initial feedback on social media and some of the typical questions about efficiency, I think you've answered that, that, you know, we are a council that aspires to be zero waste, so we won't be wasting any closed paper that's already got the logo on any signs, we'll be using it as we replace it.
04:32:00 But no one picked up on what are going to be benefits, and if there's one thing that Noosa is known for, it's about high quality design, and the way that the 1990s laid, the logo and brand has degenerated, it was no longer high quality design. It no longer represented Noosa Council and our community in either a digital environment or on a paper base, with a sense that, oh, this is a pretty classy place, this is a place that's really embedded in nature. Some of those original design principles have come back in here, and as Councillor Wilkie mentioned, the colour palette, which includes the Boronia Pebble that we can use to highlight, to reflect the original colour of the flower. But to me, there's one about what we put out to the community, but the other one is, we are a business, and we are having difficulty attracting staff.
04:33:00 So the other aspect of the brand is what you put out to the marketplace to tell people, we're a really contemporary business, we want you to come and work here, and feel like you're in an organisation that has, you know, all the aspects of what's going on. And that's what's embedded in this brand. The design principle of using the, you know, the fancy word for it, the perfect number type concepts. God and me. God and me, yeah. So all that sort of stuff is imbued, if you get it right. And to me, the cost associated with the refresh will be small compared to the potential benefits of a whole cultural change that we're hoping flows through the organisation, to be, yes, the essence of what is important is maintained, but we're refreshing that.
04:34:00 We've got this new way ahead, and we're using modern design principles to come up with a new brand, or a fresh brand. Anybody else? Amelia. Councillor Lorentson: Oh, I'm just going to add, just add something that you said, Ken, which I really love, that it emanates what we're doing, the brand refresh emanates a new way of talking to the community. I love that. I'd like to add, and it also symbolises a commitment to growth. You know, when we were going through this process, we needed to identify with the brand. And I think, again, repeating what Councillor Stockwell said, I think it respects the past. And that, I think, is important in our decision making and our policy making, but also as part of this brand refresh.
04:35:00 And I'm going to use the words that are in the attachment in terms of the trademark construction. The symbol, the symbol symbolises modern, clean and bold. And I think that also encapsulates, I think, who we are as a council, bold. And I just, yeah, love those words. And I really take the opportunity to thank yourself, Scott, because this is also, you know, representative of new leadership, a new CEO who was bold enough to, you know, undergo organisational realignment. And this is part and parcel of that realignment. So thank you. And shout out to Saturate, the Peregian Digital Hub.
04:36:00 Great. Like, seriously, look what they produce. Big shout out to those guys. And congratulations and thank you. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Peregian. Mayor Stewart: Yeah, thank you, Ken. Yeah, it's been a good process. We've all been involved. And I think it's, it's all been said. I think it's great. So thank you for all your hard work in this space. Speaker 8: You're welcome. Great job. Councillor Wegener: And yeah, I've read some of the artists. And they say you are fantastic to work with. Really bright and really helpful. Just amazing. So that's just a real good compliment to you from the boys. Great job. Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: As a reference, just in case. Yeah. Councillor Wilkie: Anybody else wish to speak to the motion? I wish to close. All in favour? That's carried unanimously. Thank you, Ken. Thank you, Ken. We're now going to make a motion to move to the confidential setting.
04:37:00 I'll move to Councillor Stewart. Sorry, I've moved to Councillor Stewart. Seconded by Councillor Jurisevic. The meeting be closed. The public is subject to section 245J3H. Local government regulation 245J3H. Purpose of discussion. Negotiations relating to the taking of land by the local government under the Acquisition of Land Act 1967 in relation to item 7. Voluntary flood recovery property acquisition. All in favour? Councillor Wegener: Aye.
285 minutes in ¶
04:49:00 Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Thank you. She doesn't. All right, we're on? Welcome back everybody. The last slide, Councillor Jurisevic. Seconded by Councillor Stewart. Not much we can say about the detail of this. It's yet to happen. So we have to put it to the vote. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm just happy to mention that it's actually purchased through the Commonwealth and State Resilient Home Fund. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. Unless any other councillors wish to speak, I'll put it to the vote. Those in favour? That's carried unanimously. That is the last I'll put on today's agenda. Thank you, councillors. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Mr Chair. Thank you, Mr CEO. Thank you, Mr Councillor. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Thanks, Ali.