Noosa Council Watch

An independent, unofficial record of Noosa Shire Council — what council decided, what they closed the doors on, and why it matters. About this site

Noosa Council meetings since 2014: papers, decisions and recordings, and from April 2023 the video cued to each item.

Ordinary Meeting - December 2023 Transcript

Thursday 14 December 2023 · 1 hour 45 minutes of recording · 1,597 lines · 12 voices, 8 named

This is a machine transcript of council's recording, produced by automatic speech recognition and not checked line by line against the video. Councillor and place names are corrected where a human has approved the correction; everything else is what the model heard. Quote the recording, not this page — every timestamp below opens council's own video at that second. Recording © Noosa Shire Council; the transcript is ours, made from it so the meeting can be searched and read.

Speakers: the machine separated 12 voices and names 8 of them — only where the recording itself establishes who it is (they introduced themselves, were called on by name, or their voice matches meetings where they were). The others stay “Speaker N”. Hover a name to see why it is there.

Before the first item

00:00:00

00:00:00 Mayor Stewart: All is past, present and emerging. I note that all councillors are in attendance for our final meeting this year and I welcome all of you in the gallery this evening. It's lovely to have so many of our community here this evening, so welcome to you too. Can I please have a mover for the confirmation of the minutes of view? Thank you, Councillor Lorentson. Seconded, thank you, Councillor Wegener. All in favour? Carried unanimously. There are no mural minutes. I believe we have a petition received from Deborah Walsh with over 544 signatures regarding the removal of fluoride from our drinking water. I move that this petition be received and referred to the Chief Executive Officer to determine appropriate action. I'll second it. Thank you, Councillor Wilkie. Thank you. Any more in favour? Carried unanimously. Thank you. Does anyone else have any petitions? No. We are up to notified motions, but I will move that to the agenda to get through our presentations and deputations because I believe we have a couple of deputations. So, Ms. Walsh, would you like to come to the podium and present your deputation?

1 ATTENDANCE & APOLOGIES

▶ 00:00:10

Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.

2.1 ORDINARY MEETING MINUTES 16 NOVEMBER 2023

▶ 00:00:25· Carried unanimously 7-0 from council's minutes

Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.

4 PETITIONS

▶ 00:00:39

00:01:00 Welcome. Nice to see you again. Deborah Walsh: Thank you. Good evening. Our deputation is on fluoridation. Noosa Shire Council and Unity Water have created a monopoly in the water supply market in the Noosa Shire and we, as residents of Noosa Shire Council, have created a monopoly in the water supply market. There is no alternative but to use your water product. The water that is provided has fluoride added. According to the ACCC federal consumer law, there are three violations pertaining to the supply of fluoridated water. There are no consumer guarantees of safety for fluoridated water. Fluoridated water is not fit for purpose. Unity Water and Noosa Shire Council are supplying a product for which we have not requested or consented to. Some quick facts for you. 97% of Western Europe has rejected water fluoridation.

7 DEPUTATIONS

▶ 00:01:10

Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.

7.1 DEBRA WALZ Topic: Fluoridation of the Noosa Shire Town Water Supply

▶ 00:01:16

00:02:00 Only 5% of the world's population has mandated water fluoridation. The New Zealand High Court declared mandated water fluoridation a violation of New Zealand human rights law. Many children now exceed recommended daily fluoride intake from toothpaste to wine. Fluoride is not a nutrient. Data from Unity Water indicates non-residential fluoridated water accounts for 22.8% of total water. Toxicologists around the world are saying we don't need fluoride added to our water. Who do we listen to? Toxicologists or the lesser informed government dentists and politicians? 64 studies have linked fluoride with reduced IQ in children. Throughout this year, I have written to Noosa Shire Council regarding the inclusion of fluoride in our tanned water supply.

00:03:00 You have referred me to Unity Water. Upon writing to them with my concerns, Unity Water referred me to SEQ Water. Upon writing to them with my concerns, SEQ Water referred me to the Queensland Health Department. Upon writing to them, the Queensland Health Department referred me back to Noosa Shire Council. This might suggest I've been given the runaround. You are well aware that Noosa Council are one of 19 councils across the state of Queensland that is continuing with the addition of fluoride to the tanned water supply. Despite the fact that the majority of councils across the state of Queensland have relinquished this practice. Adding fluoridation to the tanned water supply incurs a significant cost to council by way of the purchase of chemicals, staffing, testing, electricity and infrastructure. For example, when Cairns Council ceased fluoridation, they made a saving of about $300,000 per annum.

00:04:00 Alternatively, there are some residents of our community who believe they prefer to have fluoride in their water. A solution to this after community consultation is to offer them fluoride tablets which they can add to their personal water supply. This was a cost effective strategy undertaken by Queensland Council. Who made the decision to stop mandating fluoride in their water. This would result in a significant reduction in fluoride discharged into our environment through the sewerage system. There are 10 reasons 31 Queensland councils have voted out mandated water. And they include the cost, which is a waste of money, particularly as the state government does not contribute to paying the operational costs. Public opinion, community consultation and opposition to fluoride. Ethical concerns, mass medication and no freedom of choice. Health risks, where there are no Australian government studies. However, accumulating science from overseas studies show significant harm.

00:05:00 Fluoride is not a water treatment, it is a health care treatment. A legal risk to counsellors with future class actions. Inequity or discrimination forced on some but not all. In consensus with other Queensland councils. And lastly, staff health risks. This could lead to future compensation payouts by council. It is reasonable to assume that Noosa Shire is home to a modern contemporary group of communities. It is reasonable to expect that our community members would want to have a choice over what they consume. The petition I've provided clearly indicates their choice. In fact, closer to a thousand have signed that petition. Fluoridation of water is a matter of individual preference. Local councils do not bear the responsibility for health care. And council promotes the idea of residents making well-informed decisions for themselves.

00:06:00 Do they not? There are more arguments against adding fluoride to our water than arguments before here. Fluoride is a known uric oxidant. It is an enzyme inhibitor. It can cause dental fluorosis, osteoporosis. Many consumers have conditions that are worsened by fluoride exposure. Others make statuses that make fluoridation ill-advised. For example, pregnant women for whom fluoride consumption is associated with increased risks of pre-term birth and cognitive behavioural effects in offspring. And the elderly for whom fluoride consumption is associated with increased risks of urological disorders. And arthritis. People at greater risk of health damage from water fluoridation include people with joint problems. People with diabetes or blood sugar regulation problems. People with sensitive kidneys or kidney dysfunction. And people with a personal or family history of heart disease.

00:07:00 Statistically, this would include many of our community members. Swallowing fluoride poison is not necessary for adding it to teeth. If you think it may help teeth, then let me explain that fluoride is a calcium chelator which actually reduces the available calcium in the human body. The World Health Organisation says if you use fluoride toothpaste, then there is little need to fluoridate the water supply. And a quote from who? In countries where dental health awareness in the public is very high and alternative vehicles for fluoride, such as toothpaste, are widely available and widely used, a decision to not fluoridate the water would likely be of little consequence. Mayor Stewart: Directly from the who. Deborah Walsh: Common sources of fluoride include toothpaste, mouthwash, other dental hygiene products, bottled beverages, canned food items, black tea, red tea and some other teas,

00:08:00 black and red rock salt, supplements and medications. The Federal Government Australian Drinking Water Guidelines agree that the community should be consulted. In 1.4 of the community consultation part of their guidelines, the guidelines are intended to provide consumers with safe and aesthetically pleasing water and ultimately it is consumers who will be the final judges of water quality. It is vitally important that consumers are viewed as active partners in making decisions about drinking water quality and the levels of service to be adopted. Community expectation and willingness to pay must be considered. It is the responsibility of drinking water suppliers to keep the community fully informed about water quality, existing problems and needs for improvement. Fluoride is a developmental neurotoxin.

00:09:00 300 studies have found fluoride is a neurotoxin. 52 human studies associate fluoride with reduced IQ. More than 100 animal studies show that fluoride can damage the brain. 2014 Lancet Medical Journal lists fluoride as a neurotoxin. The Bashash study of September 2017 is of significance. Urine fluoride levels in pregnant women link to lower IQ in offspring. For example, one milligram per one litre exposure results in a reduction of between five and six IQ points. One milligram to one litre is the dosage we have in our water. Why fluoride is not safe according to the USA's NRC report of 2006. It damages the teeth, causes dental fluorosis, it damages the bone which results in skeletal fluorosis.

00:10:00 It damages the brain, the bones, just about every part of our body. It interferes with the endocrine system. Especially the thyroid. It may cause osteosarcoma, which is a type of cancer. Some people are already exceeding safe levels when drinking water at that one milligram per litre of fluoride ratio. In 2008, the Labour Queensland State Government mandated water fluoridation across the state, including the SEQ. But in 12-20, the LNP statement said, the state government gave the power to mandate or remove water fluoridation to local councillors. It's an interesting exercise to look at our sewerage usage. Unity Water calculates that, on average, 90% of water used by residents is discharged through the sewerage system, capped at 740 litres per day for residential customers.

00:11:00 Where does this water end up? After it is treated and released into the biosphere. What is the impact of this fluoridated water on our ecosystem and wildlife? Councillors, is this being environmentally responsible and aware? A great number of Noosa residents and rank payers strongly object to having fluoride added to their drinking water. No consultation has ever been undertaken with the community. People believe they have a human right to decide. They decide what goes into their drinking water. And do not agree if council and or councillors who have no medical qualifications make that decision for them. Mandating and administering a toxin as a health product is criminal. As times change and our community becomes increasingly responsive to what they are consuming, it is a message to councillors to realise that you do not bear the responsibility of healthcare

00:12:00 and you can make the decision to remove fluoride. In fact, community members demand that you take action. If council desire building a healthy relationship with the Noosa Council community as your goal, as you identify in all your reports and rhetoric, then building trust, relationships and communicating are the tools for success, as opposed to power plays, intimidation and fear, which are the tools of control. Councillors should use due diligence to avoid infringing upon human rights, which basically means to do no harm. But more importantly, take action to respect and support human rights. This means seizing the opportunity to take action to make a positive contribution towards the protection and fulfilment of human rights, whether through your core business, strategic social investment,

00:13:00 or simply by stopping the draconian practice of adding fluoride to our water. Would any one of the councillors here today be willing to sign a statutory declaration outlining your personal and financial guarantee that fluoride in the water is 100% safe for 100% of the people, for 100% of their lifetime, and will not detrimentally affect their health in any way? If you can't guarantee this, then I suggest your best course of action is to put a stop to the addition of fluoride in our water. Have any one of you the courage to question the safety and legality of fluoride poisoning in drinking water? It is not safe and effective, as you would lead us to believe. By removing fluoride from our water, you are putting the minds of this community at ease.

00:14:00 They will no longer have a concern that their kids and their grandkids could be poisoned by this toxin. I've attended many council meetings this year, as you know, not for malicious or vindictive reasons, purely to highlight to you concerns raised in the community. Let me suggest that your time would be better spent debating real health and safety concerns, such as fluoride in the water and homelessness, rather than the safety concerns of two umbrellas. Before I go on to my question, I just want to wish you all a very safe and restful festive season, and thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: As we have a number of committee reports on the agenda tonight, we're going to move public question time, item 11, now.

00:15:00 So I believe we have three people asking questions. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: We have a lot of people in the meeting here to listen to debate on the Notified Nation, which you've looked at twice. I don't believe the question time is of such significance that it can't wait. Mayor Stewart: Well, I'm the chair, and the question won't take long, and the Notified Nation will be directly up to question time prior to committee reports. So the first person we have for public question time, Miss Walsh, you're up again. Welcome. Thank you. Deborah Walsh: Okay, no surprises here. My first question is on fluoride. Please provide an economic cost analysis and works management timeframe for Noosa Shire to become fluoride free. Mayor Stewart: Richard. Richard. Thank you, Richard. Speaker 2: Thank you very much for the question. Noosa Council does not manage the abstraction treatment or distribution of potable water

11 PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

▶ 00:15:35

Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.

11.1 Debra Walz

▶ 00:15:47

00:16:00 in Noosa. Treatment is undertaken by SEQ Water and distribution by Unity Water. At this point in time, Council does not have information relating to the costs or timeframes involved for removing fluoride from the public water supply. Officers have contacted SEQ Water to seek advice on these options. However, due to the complexity of the questions raised, we're aware this may take some time to get this information. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Thank you. Miss Walsh, you have another question? I do. Deborah Walsh: This is not on fluoride. My question is, when are the Noosa Shire Council local laws due to be reviewed, and what are the consultation processes to involve community and report? Thank you, Richard. Speaker 2: Council's local laws are reviewed when they are impacted by a change in legislation, or when local circumstances require that they are amended in order for their specific objectives

00:17:00 to be met. Noosa's current local laws are based on model local laws provided by the Department of State development infrastructure and local government and planning. The process of assessing potential improvements to Noosa's local laws is occurring continuously through ongoing feedback from our community and businesses. The review of specific local laws is planned to commence in the near future. These reviews will focus on ensuring that they are meeting the contemporary needs, expectations and lifestyles of our communities. The process for making local laws is defined in the Local Government Act 2009. It is consistent for all Queensland Councils and is a very transparent process. As part of a review, Council officers will prepare a report detailing whether a new or amended local law is required and an authority to proceed is reported to Council. The Council will then consider information supporting the proposal and if an agreement will resolve to commence the local law making process.

00:18:00 When that draft is complete, Councils are then required to submit comments. Proposals to Queensland Government who undertake what's termed a State Interest Check. Following the successful completion of this step, notice of the proposed local law is required to be posted publicly in the local newspaper and on the Council website. Council will be seeking to actively engage with the public who are invited to review the local laws and provide feedback. Submissions from this consultation is then considered by Council and any appropriate revisions are made to the new proposed local law or being brought back for Council for consideration and resolution. Mayor Stewart: Thank you Mr Walsh. Thank you. Mr O'Connor, welcome.

11.2 Brian O'Connor

▶ 00:18:57

00:19:00 Speaker 3: My first question is this. Will Noosac Council consider stepping up the effectiveness of its pre-development concierge service to people with a good idea who wish to do the right thing by discussing development proposals in depth and ahead of a formal decision being made so they don't have false hope their proposal will get up at Council meetings, their considerable upfront cost wasted as a consequence? Mayor Stewart: Thank you Richard. Speaker 3: Thanks Mr O'Connor. Mayor Stewart: Take a seat. Speaker 2: I like the formality of that. Thank you. Pre-lodgement meetings are an important and valuable tool for both the development industry and Council development assessment staff. The meetings which are commercial in confidence provide the opportunity for open dialogue outside the formal development assessment process.

00:20:00 With prospective applicants receiving guidance and advice regarding the alignment of their development proposal with the expected outcomes of the Noosa plan. The meetings are attended by representatives of Council's development assessment team including senior planners, development engineers and environment officers. Advice is also regularly sought from other internal branches in the organisation such as our strategic planning branch to ensure the participants are well informed of all related issues and all positive aspects of their proposal. Written notes are provided to all attendees summarising the issues discussed in the meeting and provide clear guidance on whether the proposal demonstrates compliance with the planning scheme and is likely to be supported at an officer level. Notably, most significant development applications are preceded by a pre-lodgement meeting. In some instances, however, prospective applicants choose to proceed with their preferred form of development despite advice of its conflicts with the planning scheme.

00:21:00 More than 100 pre-lodgement meetings have been held over the past two years. Council encourages participation in these meetings by only requiring a modest fee and ensuring meetings are arranged with staff within a very short timeframe. It is also encouraged for applicants with larger projects to request multiple pre-lodgement meetings to enable a continuous refinement of the proposal against the provisions of the planning scheme. We are committed to maintaining our engagement with prospective applicants. We will continue to encourage participation in pre-lodgement meetings prior to an application being made. Speaker 3: Will Noosa Council make things easier for those wishing to employ people and diversify the local economy in the Noosa way by bringing forward consideration of the scheduled Employment Land Review? Mayor Stewart: Thank you.

00:22:00 Welcome Kim. Thank you. Speaker 4: Good evening. The Employment Land Review is currently being finalised. Key outcomes of the report will include the identification of employment trends and opportunities and how these impact available employment land and what those implications are for Noosa. In particular, identifying how existing land zoned for industrial or innovation purposes can be used efficiently and what the future land requirements may be to deliver a better employment plan for diverse economy and employment growth. The report will also make recommendations regarding the provisions in the Noosa Plan 2020 to support employment outcomes, including considering levels of assessment. These outcomes will be discussed with Council once complete. Mayor Stewart: Thanks Kim. Thanks Mr O'Connor. Appreciate your time. We have one more person and Mr Andrew McCarthy, who is not in attendance. So he has asked our CEO to read out the questions. Thanks Larry.

00:23:00 Speaker 1: Okay. The first question from Mr McCarthy. What actions have been undertaken and or what plans have the Council put in place to undertake broader community consultation on the draft Noosa River Catchment Plan? Our response is, further community consultation on the draft Noosa River Plan will occur next year following Council elections. In accordance with Council decision to defer consideration of the draft Noosa River Plan until mid 2024. Council generally does not undertake consultation over the Christmas January period. And Council does not take consultation on the draft Noosa River Plan until mid 2024. Council will then be in caretaker period or caretaker mode, where it cannot undertake consultation on such matters. The second question. What plans have the Council implemented to redraft the draft catchment plan based on feedback from broader community consultation? Our response. Redrafting of the draft Noosa River Plan has not occurred. Should there be changes and redrafting required, this will be informed by community consultation currently planned throughout the year.

11.3 Andrew McCarthy

▶ 00:23:04

00:24:00 Mayor Stewart: We will now go back to item five, which is notified motions. There is one notified motion from Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'd like to move the motion as provided in the agenda. Mayor Stewart: I'll second it for that. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'll second it. So, Councillors, in the last week, the results of the annual Healthy Waterways Report Card have been published. And the good news is that the report has been published. And the good news is that the overall score has improved since 2022, which was a year marked by the floods. However, Healthy Land and Water has clearly identified that since 2022, macro invertebrate health, diversity of fish and riparian conditions all require closer attention and further investment. The health of the Noosa River and lake system continues to be impacted, not just by the

5 NOTIFIED MOTIONS

▶ 00:24:20

Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.

5.1 ACCELERATING RIVER ACTION

▶ 00:24:26· Carried unanimously 7-0 · 2 divisions from council's minutes

00:25:00 long-term impacts of historical impacts, but by the long-term impacts of future impacts. The current flood rate is over-clearing and over-fishing and is under increasing pressure from climate change, for example, resulting from extreme floods followed by prolonged dry periods, which is one of the reasons given for that significant decline in macro invertebrate health. Continued regional population growth leading to increased utilisation of the river's resources and the direct and indirect downstream impacts of land uses. This is not about the blame game. We are all part of the problem. So we should all be part of the problem. We should all be part of the solution. The motion therefore seeks to accelerate action toward achieving the Noosa Environment Strategies Goal, signed off in 2019, that by 2030 waterways, wetlands and coasts are healthy, resilient to change and valued by the community. I've provided a pretty detailed rationale as to why I think this step is important, and I won't repeat it all. But I will highlight what I think are the important parts.

00:26:00 This motion is asking councils to focus a bit harder on precisely what we've all agreed to, and that is to protect our river and waterways and coasts for the clear benefit of us all. The motion prioritises available, relevant staff time and existing budgets on protecting whiting and riparian flora and fauna and their habitats, rehabilitating the ground and wetland and waterway and fish habitats, stream banks and riparian buffers as part of any development or activities undertaken in or adjacent to the river system or on tidal lands. Improving the water quality of the Noosa River systems through effective management of sediments and other direct and indirect sources of pollution, and regular monitoring, compliance and evaluation of the effectiveness of these interventions. In the absence of any more specific planning, the motion also suggests that these be used as the priorities for future grant applications, such as the SEQ Resilient Rivers Program and the Federal Government's Urban River and Cat Rivers Program. It also requests the CEO to pursue new funding and grant opportunities to extend the oyster

00:27:00 reef restoration and oyster gardening programs into other suitable locations in the Noosa River and lake system, considering the early successes of this program. Now, last week we got a copy of the second monitoring results, and what we found is after the plume of the reef in March 2023, there was evidence of a dramatic increase in the density of oysters on the restoration structures, with the greatest density occurring at Goat Island. In September, the average antivirus series has continued to increase in the restoration areas, with the highest average density of 917 individuals, once again, per metre at the Goat Island side. The September report, however, identifies that the greatest change in the benthic habitat between March and September has been a substantial increase in the extent of seagrass growing around the reef patches. This was particularly prevalent in the Noosa River and the Noosa River. The Noosa Sound East and Noosa Sound West restoration areas, where seagrass covered 409 and 554

00:28:00 square metres respectively. The motion also calls for collaboration with the Kabi Kabi people to develop and implement a land and sea ranger or similar program that educates others on how to respect and avoid harm to the indigenous, historical, environmental and conservation cultural heritage of the Noosa River system. I'd like to acknowledge our committed council staff and the staff of the Goat Island Goat Islands, and the huge number of dedicated volunteers, some of whom are in the audience tonight. Some of these volunteers don't mark the length of the time that they've been working on our waterways and our wetlands by months. Some of them don't even have to do it in years. Some of them can do it in decades. We have thousands and thousands of hours of volunteers in these community-based environment and natural resource management groups who are doing a great job with the resources currently available to them. However, the status quo is not enough to achieve the 2030 targets.

00:29:00 I will end with a quote from a retired fisherman after 50 years on the river, John Clarey. When lamenting the decline in fish stock in an interview with 88990, he said, it all boils down to, in my book, that you're taking too much out if you're putting nothing back. Councillors, it's time to put more back. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Mr CEO, there has been some queries by the community about the ability of Councillor Stockwell to bring this notified motion tonight. Could you please explain that to us? Speaker 1: Certainly. Thank you, Madam Mayor. This motion tonight relates to the environment strategy, not to the river plan. So, therefore, the conflicts of interest are not relevant to this particular, and it's our understanding that Councillor Stockwell doesn't agree. Councillor Stockwell does not have any conflicts of interest relating to this particular motion, and we've had advice to such.

00:30:00 Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak to the notified motion? Councillor Williams. Councillor Lorentson: I only have a question. In terms of the motion, it's calling for greater commitment or more resources to be allocated. Is this now a process? My understanding is that this is not a process. My understanding is that given that the matter is not urgent, and doesn't require immediate action, my understanding is that the process, and this is to the CEO, is that this should be considered as part of the next budget fit, and that's the correct process. Can I just have some clarification on that, please? Speaker 1: Thank you, Councillor. Yes, you're right. This, the items that we're talking about, this is not a process. The items that Councillor Stockwell is bringing to the table here are items, and you'll see it in our report for our environment strategy report that's part of the reports tonight.

00:31:00 Much, if not all of these, are already underway and being undertaken as part of what we do, and Councillor Stockwell did mention that our staff do work extremely hard in this area and are achieving some great successes. Absolutely, I'm not, you know, I would need to take this away and understand if there is capacity to change anything. If there isn't, then it would be something that we'd have to bring to the table for consideration at future budget exercises because, you know, if our resources are already strapped, which in most, if not all of our areas of council they are, then we would have to look at that carefully and understand whether there is capacity to make any change. But this is, you know, from my reading of this, this is for us to understand, to do is to understand what our current level of activity and capacity is and then understand whether we can take it on either now or in the future.

00:32:00 But that would be, and if it's in the future, it would certainly be something we'd bring back to budget because either something has to go out, we have to add more budget in, in order to get more resource. And that's a decision for council. Councillor Lorentson: Can I also ask that another process, just a suggestion, would, another way to do this is by calling for a review of the project so that the council staff have an opportunity to assess and report with their recommendations? Speaker 1: I think that's something that absolutely we could do. We could, we could bring this motion, put that back to the staff, and again, if we're going to do the assessment of our capacity to do, accelerate and to prioritise, then again, you prioritise something, if you're already in capacity, something misses out. So we'd have to bring that. We'd have to analyse that. Bring that back to the table and, and, and get the direction from council as to which ones would miss out if, if, if we're already capacity or if we need more resource, then

00:33:00 we would bring that back to the table because we can't just, we can't just add more, add more money. You can't add more fuel to the fire. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I have a question for Councillor Lorentson. And she mentioned that the motion asks for additional resources. I can see in quite one where it says prioritise available relevant staff time and an existing budget. And then I can see in the motion where it talks about using these priorities to seek further grant funding. Can you tell me where in the motion it actually suggests we're changing the budget? Mayor Stewart: Can you put it down, please, if you can? Councillor Lorentson: In human resources, there's a cost to prioritising relevant staff and so forth. Councillor Wilkie: I'll speak to the motion. Speaker 1: Sure. Thank you. Councillor Wilkie: Just to reiterate the point that Councillor Stockwell made, and it was written clearly on there, it's about using existing resources. This motion has been worded after talking to staff and gained their reassurance that it can be done within existing resources.

00:34:00 And indeed, this is the work that staff are already doing and the direction they're already taking. One of the reasons why this motion is before us is to send a signal because there has recently been some confusion and concern among some of the organisation. In the community, the council has abandoned its commitment as responsible environmental managers to our waterways, which is not the case. This motion confirms and reassures staff and the community that in the closing days of this term, we remain committed to looking after our river and waterways, and that the environmental staff can, are, and ought to be pursuing the council's shared goals as agreed under the environmental strategy and existing budget. This motion signals that staff will continue working with the council to ensure that they are working to ensure that by 2030, waterways, wetlands and coasts are healthy, resilient to change, and valued by the community. Indeed, council and environmental staff are already doing this work. The project to restore Noosa's oyster reefs to the river is supported by three levels

00:35:00 of government, has attracted $2.4 million in external funding, involves local businesses and community groups, and is part of a network of reefs being restored around Australia. The report on the oyster reefs we've recently received from the independent consultants, indicate the structures have fostered the growth of seagrasses in previously bare areas around the reef patches, they have halted or reversed the erosion of the riverbanks on the landward side of the reefs, and that the density and size of the oysters have increased significantly on the structures. Anecdotally, when taking boat tours of the reefs, you can see schools of fish and prawns plus stingrays and other marine life clustering around the reefs. Expanding the reefs through more external grant funding is part of the strategy to create a river that is cleaner, healthier, thinning with marine life, and accessible to all. This is just part of ensuring that this council is seen as one that has not wasted any opportunity to aid Noosa's environment and the vet state, and we found it for future generations. Thank you. Councillor Finzel: I'll speak to this. But council, just a question. Oh, sorry.

00:36:00 Just a question through the chair. The motion talks about available, relevant staff time. The staff are committed, as shown through the reports that are coming through the environment strategy. My concern is we already have staff at a high level capacity. I'm not sure of the available time that we have available. Also taking into consideration the current legislation around the risks of social psycho-hazards in the workplace. We don't want to find our staff in a position where they're pushed to beyond their capacity. What would be the opportunity to have a report up to the table to inform us of the actual capacity of this organisation and the staff to prioritise the motion? Thank you. Mr Seale. Speaker 1: Sure. Again, it's something we would need to take away and understand when we say prioritise, whether it actually takes... It means that we're... We're taking staff off other activities in order to prioritise and do more in this.

00:37:00 And it's utilising available budget, existing budget. But again, whether we utilise the budget and take it away from something else to focus on particular things. That's a piece of work that we would need to do. And I'm more than happy to get our staff to do that and bring that back to a future meeting if that's the request of this organisation. I'm happy to do it. And I understand the need or the desire to really focus on the activities that we currently are doing. Councillor Lorentson: I'll speak to it. Mayor Stewart: There are 40 million reasons not to support this Notified Motion. No cost to our rate payer. We've heard there is always a cost. There's a staffing cost. There's a resource cost. Anyone who has run their own business, who has taken a punt, knows that there is always a cost when it comes to human resources. Always a staffing cost. There are 40 million reasons not to support this because that is what is being invested

00:38:00 by South East Queensland Council of Mayors, by the state in regard to our resilient rivers program. $40 million at no cost to our rate payer. I'm going to read this because it came out last week. It says new strategy to deliver healthier and more resilient SEQ waterways and wetlands. Exactly what this motion is talking about, the health and wellbeing of our river. A new resilient rivers initiative, SEQ waterways and wetlands investment strategy is set to enhance environmental and community outcomes through river rehabilitation projects in South East Queensland. The strategy was developed by the Queensland Government and the Council of Mayors, of which we are a part, and will support investment in on ground rehabilitation projects in South East Queensland, including revegetation, weed management and fish passage projects to improve waterway and wetland condition. The strategy will support the delivery of 40 plus million of new investment by providing

00:39:00 improved project prioritisation, governance and capacity building, as well as monitoring and evaluation. Resilient rivers initiative is an initiative within the Olympic and Paralympic Games Brisbane 2032 legacy strategy, Elevate 2042, of which we launched about three weeks ago. The future health and resilience of South East Queensland catchments has received a major boost, with the Queensland Government and Council of Mayors today releasing the resilient rivers initiative, SEQ waterways and wetlands investment strategy. The strategy provides a blueprint for the growth and expansion of the successful resilient rivers initiative. It will guide future investment, prioritisation and collaborative delivery of $40 million over the next five years, as I said, including revegetation, weed management and fish passage projects to improve waterways and wetland conditions. On top of its environmental benefits, the strategy will also support new opportunities for capacity building within the environmental services sector, creation of local jobs in

00:40:00 rural communities and strengthen First Nations engagement, as Councillor Stockwell has mentioned, in the management of the region's catchments. So why reinvent the wheel? It's already been done. It's been done at no cost to us. The river is state jurisdiction. It's state legislation. We can advocate. Now we've partnered to deliver. We don't need to, as I said, reinvent the wheel. Why expend ratepayer funds when it's unnecessary, when it's regurgitating, when it's wet and when we are simply the little brother? The state, as I said, state legislation, state jurisdiction, the river is managed and governed by the state government. We can advocate, but now we are a partner and this is where our future lies. This is where we can get the funding. This is where we can make the difference. The major cause of pollution in our rivers is the effluent coming from the houseboats.

00:41:00 That is clear. And it has bipartisan support. If we want to focus on improving our rivers, improving our environment of our rivers, let's focus on cleaning up the houseboats. Let's focus on getting rid of those and let's get the effluent out of our rivers. I will not support this motion. Councillor Jurisevic: So I'll ask a question based on just to clarify what's been said here. So should this motion succeed, what that would, in your actions, as I understand it from what you said, bring a report through as to what could be reviewed, what could be reconsidered and what could be reprioritised within the workload and capacity of staff that we currently have. Yes. Speaker 1: Certainly. And that's, I'm happy to do that. Bring a report back and look at if we are prioritising, we're prioritising within the bucket of money that we've currently got allocated. Councillor Jurisevic: Thank you. Speaker 1: I should also add that, you know, if we are looking for future grants, grants often come

00:42:00 at either 50-50, 80-20, that type of stuff. So there is a need often, if we are going after that, to find additional resources and funding. But that doesn't mean we have to take it, but that's certainly, that's how it does, it does occur. So there is, you know, there is that opportunity. But as, in answer to your question, Councillor, yes, more than happy to do that. Take on these, on these initiatives and look at what we are currently doing and whether there's capacity in there to either adjust it and again bring it back to the table. Mayor Stewart: Would you like to speak to it? Anyone else want to speak to this? Councillor Lorentson: Yes. What I've just understood at the table and what you said when we started the conversation is that if this motion falls, the actions identified in the notified motion will still progress. Have I understood that correctly?

00:43:00 Speaker 1: Sorry, you mean the actions? Well, I think in terms of what we're currently doing, that we'll absolutely continue to do. We'll continue to do what we do as, as in our environment. We'll continue to deliver our environment strategy and continue to deliver our environment Councillor Jurisevic: strategy. Speaker 1: In terms of this, well, I think what we can do is we can go away and look at whether we can prioritise or whether that's a possibility or what that effect might have, given that, you know, we have to do it within the bucket of money that we've got and or utilising the additional monies that we may get through ComSec. Councillor Lorentson: So to see a better course of action then, with all this uncertainty, is to maybe move the receipt and motion to request additional information to understand whether or not we have the human manpower and the financial capacity to actually progress the notified motion.

00:44:00 Speaker 1: Well, we can do it that way or we can, we can bring this back to a, to a future meeting and not necessarily put a date on the future meeting. But we will, given it's Christmas and January meetings and then we, then we go into, into caretaker. Um. I'm, I'm happy to, to say we can, we can go away and analyse this and, and bring it back to a future meeting and say here's the things that we, we can do and this is how it, how it would work and, and, and get a decision at an appropriate time. Absolutely. But in the meantime, we will continue to do the work that we're doing and delivering the successes that we're getting. Councillor Lorentson: Councilor Whitehouse. Councillor Wegener: I'll speak to, listening to everybody tonight. Um. Well, well prior to the delay of the, uh, river plan, um, there was, there was already a, a program going forward. And so I, I consider this, uh, an extension of that. And with, with, to say that it almost sounds like it didn't really matter that there was a river plan or not a river plan. We're, that we're, we're moving towards on the effect and on the environment strategy.

00:45:00 Is that right? And it sounds like there, there, there was a bucket of money to do stuff that, that was, that was, and all of a sudden there wasn't a bucket of money. And now that, now we're asking for a new bucket of money. I, I don't think, I just don't think that's, I don't think that's accurate. I think that we just keep moving along and we need this for guidance, for direction. Um. When it comes to the state, I don't, I don't, I'm not in favor of waiting for the state to do anything. I mean, we, how long have we been waiting for them to take care of that effluent in the river wards? We've been waiting a long time. Uh, I, I'm not overly confident in the state coming in and, and really looking after our river. And by the way, the river is entirely in the Noosa Shire, is what we're talking about here. It is up to us to make that. But most importantly, I'd like to, uh, point out the opportunity costs of, uh, not doing something. And we need so much to look at, uh, well, continuing the oyster reef, the, uh, the,

00:46:00 the work that the communities and NYCA is doing with the oyster reef projects and the baskets and that. But most I want to talk about the, the disaster of the last flood and the amount of, um, sediment that comes down the rivers, which, which clogs up, covers up the seagrass, damages the, the benthic layer substantially. And this is an emergency. And we should have done something a long time ago. And that last flood was devastating to us. And we know what to do. It's to keep it in Kin Kin. It's, it's, it's looking at the water going up the creeks because it's, it's, it's the, um, the whole catchment, including little creeks way back up there. We've got to look at those little creeks and we've got to stop that sediment from going in because it clogged up the creek, plugged all the way down. And it's, it's beyond an emergency. It's something we should have done a long time ago. And, but with, with this, it just gives direction to look at and get back down and then try

00:47:00 to stop the next emergency from happening. Because it gives us good income. There's going to be more floods. We should be on it now, not later. And so that's why I really super support this motion to keep, keep the direction going. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: I've got a question. CEO, who has jurisdiction in regard to the river? Speaker 1: In the actual river, it's a, it's a State Government at this point in time. Mayor Stewart: So who has the capacity to remove the, um, the effluent or the houseboats? Who has that capacity? The State Government. Right. So as much as we would want to do something in that, um, area, we don't have the capacity. We don't have the ability to do it under jurisdiction. Speaker 1: No, we can, we can advocate to the State Government. Mayor Stewart: So, so the best we can do is advocate. Sure. Thank you. Speaker 1: Can I, can I just make a point to, to Councillor Wegener's point? This is, this is to do with the environment strategy. So this is the work that we, this is, as I said at the start, this is not the river plan. This is our environment strategy that we have been working on for many years and we have had endorsed by this, by this group. And we continue to deliver on.

00:48:00 And there is a budget associated with that. So that, that budget continues to, to be there. And we continue to deliver. My understanding is from, from Councillor Stockwell is that he's looking to make sure we direct it in particular and accelerate it in particular areas. That, that is a piece of work. If this, if you'll accept this, that's a piece of work that we would go away and say, we've got, we've got that bucket of money that we're continually to use for our environment strategy. It's a matter of whether we, whether we continue to use it in the same way that we are, or whether we, whether we mould it a little bit differently. That's, that's where this is. Councillor Jurisevic: This is, that's my understanding of, of the request. Speaker 1: So to say that we're not doing anything is not, we are doing, we're continuing to do a whole lot while we, while we do this consultation for the river plan next year. Councillor Lorentson: Councillor. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Cunningham, who may be question directed to CEO Wendy King. Councillor Wegener has emphasised the urgency that our rivers are in dry straits, but attention.

00:49:00 The 2023 Y letter rating was just recently released for South East Queensland and reduces overall score in, as I would say, in the region. The river, as I read it, has actually improved since 2022. The micro invertebrate health, diversity of fishing, riparian condition, seems to be okay. Can I get some clarity or just some details around about the recent score cut? Speaker 1: I think without going into absolute detail, and I won't, but, but I think that absolutely our river is doing well. But I will say, I understand we've got, we've got more work to do. Point of order. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Thank you. I think it would be better, no disrespect, to actually hear the results because some of the statements were actually inconsistent with the results and I think the relevant director may have a better grasp on those results. Mayor Stewart: Do we have the exact results here, Kim?

00:50:00 Speaker 4: I do, but I'd have to just call them up. Okay. Give me a moment. Mayor Stewart: Is there any further questions? Councillor Jurisevic: If any of you have that question, please. Councillor Lorentson: I have a report in front of me, Kim, if you want to share that with me. Or I can bring it in myself. Speaker 4: Can I grab that from you? Yeah. Councillor Lorentson: I've circled all the significant improvements. Speaker 4: Through the Chair, not having read this for some weeks, there has been some improvement in some aspects of the river. Our overall rating did decline. Last year, and that was a result of major floods and massive sedimentation in the river. So, yes, there has been some improvement. We're starting to get back to where we were previously, pre that sort of, that weather, massive weather impact.

00:51:00 But in saying that, there is no doubt that sedimentation in our river is an issue. There's a number of reports and the Keep It In Kin Kin project. It's been going for a number of years, is a direct response to trying to manage sedimentation, and that's just in a small portion of the catchment. We've also had a decline in seagrass in the river, and we've also had a decline in macroinvertebrates in the river. So, yes, from the indicators that the Healthy Land and Water Report monitor, we're definitely getting some improvement in the river and some really good results. But there are still some issues. Mayor Stewart: Kim, just on Healthy Land and Water is the gold standard, isn't it, when it comes to, you know, people who report on our river. That's our number one that we go to, the Healthy Land and Water Report.

00:52:00 Speaker 4: Yeah, Healthy Land and Water are, yes, gold standard, we call it that. It's the most consistent rating that's used for various components of the river. It's the most consistent rating of water quality monitoring in the river, and it allows us to have, to be able to see the change over time. So, yes, it's a reliable source of reporting. Mayor Stewart: Sorry, I've got another question. And just in regard to that report about seeing the, you know, the concerns with the river and the floods, we weren't alone in that, weren't we? Every single river catchment across southeast Queensland who were affected by floods, their rating, you know, was very low. Was affected because of the floods. Speaker 4: Yeah, there was definitely wider impact. We weren't alone in terms of a reduction in our rating. Councillor Wilkie: In terms of stories that the river report tells, there has been an improvement since the previous year.

00:53:00 It was a flood-affected year. Is there, does the report talk of an improvement compared to last year? But are you referring to a long-term decline in some indicators? Right, it can't be 12 over two decades. Speaker 4: Yes, I am. That's right. So there has been an improvement since last year. And there's been improvement in some of our indicators. But there is, that's in the context of long-term decline across a number of factors. You know, the report does talk about, you know, an increase in the use of erosion and sediment controls. And, you know, there's been some, a whole lot of improvements. But it also talks about the needing to, the need to re-establish and invest in our riparian corridors substantially to manage sediment and erosion control. So, you know, there's some improvement but there's still a lot of work to do. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Just a further point, a question to clarify.

00:54:00 You mentioned the Healthy Waterways report card is related to water quality and it's in fact an ecosystem process or ecosystem health rating. That rating isn't designed to report on biodiversity, species abundance or decline, is it? Speaker 4: No, it's not. Councillor Wegener: Part of the report, Ruth Thurston mentions, the real fear is losing our long-term memory of the way it was. Because looking at it year by year, it's a little bit of a last minute thing. But we, I believe, the community generally looks at things in a long-term sense. And looking way back, the amount of biodiversity and fish in the river was astronomically higher. And so part of the report says we do not want to lose that vision to get back to that stage. Not to get better than last year, but in the distant past.

00:55:00 When a river is capable of producing. That is mentioned in the report. Can I just call a point of order? Councillor Finzel: I just think that we've moved away. I think we've moved away from the focus on the notice of the motion, given that it's Mayor Stewart: around the environmental strategy. Thank you. Not specifically the river. Further question, Kim, and then we'll let you go. Because the, in the resilient rivers on the coast, there's a lot of water. And we talk about all the environmental projects that they're looking at. Could you just explain what they mean when what they're going to do is look at fish passage projects with that? Look at improving our fish stock? Is that correct? I'm just not sure what that says. What that means. Fish, re vegetation, weed management and fish passage projects to improve waterway and wetland condition. Speaker 4: So fish passage is about how fish move through our river system. And there are some areas in our catchments, in our sub-catchments, that there isn't

00:56:00 clear fish passage movement. So it actually relates to an actual change in a project to re-establish correct fish passages so that our fish can move through the habitat. Mayor Stewart: So I guess the question is, so in regard to what Councillor Stockwell was talking about, it is being looked at at a statewide level? At SEQ regional level then, under the resilient rivers with the $40 million investment? Speaker 4: Yeah, it is being looked at at a statewide and it's an incredibly fantastic program that we are partnering in and need to be part of. We do need to put forward what our priorities are for that program. They've asked us to put forward what our priorities are so that the responses are locally specific. Because what we need here and what Pine Rivers might need. Or Maroochee might need might be different.

00:57:00 So yeah, it's a collaborative state program but we do need to put forward local priorities. Mayor Stewart: And we'll be doing that irrespective of this, won't we? We're already doing that. We're doing it. We're undertaking that work already, aren't you? We are doing that. Yep. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Finzel. Councillor Munster. In terms of priority actions, you mentioned that just to be clear, are the actions identified in the notice on motion, are these actions priority and is it for councillors to set the agenda or is that something that we normally can't go through staff? Speaker 4: . So councillors, you have set these priorities already in your Noosa environment strategy. So another report that's been considered tonight is the environment strategy monitoring report. And that clearly outlines a theme two is waterways and wetlands theme.

00:58:00 And under the theme in the environment strategy in waterways and wetlands, it has a series of objectives and it also has a series of actions. So these priorities are already endorsed by this council and were as part of that environment strategy. Mayor Stewart: Thanks, Kim. Thank you. Councillor Lorentson: This notified motion is redundant. It's not listening. It's already existing. Speaker 4: I don't think I should answer that. No. Mayor Stewart: Fair enough. Yeah. Okay. Thank you, Kim. Thank you. Do you have any more questions for Kim? I was going to put forward a procedural motion. Thank you, Kim. Thank you. Please. Councillor Finstone. Councillor Finzel: Yeah. I'd like to put forward a procedural motion that the Ida be deferred to a time post the election, given that we want to see a report back up around resources, availability of time, given the response just then from the staff around the themes waterways and wetlands coming up in the report. So I'd like to move that motion that we defer this motion until post the election.

00:59:00 Second it? Speaker 1: Give me a second. Councillor Finzel: I'll second it. Can't see it. Would you like to speak to it? No, I don't need to speak to it. I think we've all covered the points here this evening and- Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm not quite sure the notetakers have caught up with the motion. Okay. Sorry. We just need to- Speaker 1: We need some reason. Councillor Finzel: Oh, the reason? Okay. So the reason would be that we need to- Sorry. Cancel the motion. Oh, sorry. Thank you. We would like a report back from the CEO. Speaker 1: Signed and approved. Councillor Finzel: Okay. Just to allow- Speaker 1: Just to allow. Yeah. Councillor Finzel: To allow- Yeah. Speaker 1: To allow for a resolution. To allow for a report to be provided back to the meeting. Councillor Finzel: Yes.

01:00:00 Deborah Walsh: So, just give me a second. You're right, Vicky. Sorry? Yeah. Mayor Stewart: The only deferred post election given we would like a report back from the CEO. CEO. To allow for- To allow. Councillor Finzel: A report. Okay. To provide data. Mayor Stewart: One minute, sorry. Yes, ma'am. A report. Councillor Finzel: From the CEO. A report from the CEO. To provide data in relation to available resources including but not limited to human resources.

01:01:00 So, just a question to the CEO through the chair. It says in our standing orders that we do have to give a time and a date. Is post-election sufficient or do you think we need a date and a time? Mayor Stewart: Could we do a time frame? Speaker 1: With the election coming, we have a six-week period of caretaker and then we have an induction post. So, we'll probably be talking May, June at best. So, I think this is something that we can work on. So, we can bring this to the table in the first meeting back of the new, say, May. That would be April. No, actually April. April.

01:02:00 Because we're amazing, yeah. Deborah Walsh: To the April. Councillor Finzel: Are you happy with that, Councillor Finzel? Yes, I'm happy with that. Through the chair of the CEO, does that read sufficient enough information for you to be able to follow that through? Thank you. Would anyone like to speak to the procedural motion, Councillor Wilkie? Councillor Wilkie: I would. Look, I, councillors, I really urge you not to spoil it. I think it's, the kindest thing I can say is it's an unvotious and irrational objection to have a meeting, a simple statement on intent, that we care for and are committed to. To our environment strategy and the objectives, and the objectives as set out in the environment strategy which we've all endorsed about caring for our waterways.

01:03:00 We know it's doable, staff have said it's doable, it sends a clear message to our community that despite other decisions to defer important pieces of strategy work and plans, that other work that's underway, we're still going to keep going with that, and the work that we're doing as responsible environment custodians of our waterways will continue. Councillors, there is no reason to defer this work, there's no reason to object to or block this simple statement which clarifies for our organisation, our hard working staff, who may be confused about what this council's values are. For the community, signal to the community what our values are in terms of environmental stewardship. To use. To use a procedural motion to block this sort of clarity, I think, it's ungracious to say the least, and it's not useful, and I don't see any good reason for it.

01:04:00 We know the work can be done, the staff have told us the work can be done. Councillors, please reconsider supporting this. Already in this term, we've seen environmental projects voted against. Motions moved to kill them off. Motions moved to defer them. Please, let's not do this again. It's not the Noosa Council's way. I urge you not to support this, and let's get on with the original Noosa motion, please. Mayor Stewart: Would anyone else like to speak to the procedural motion? Councillor Lorentson, please. I will. Confusion. The work's already been done. We've had our director standing right here saying this work is already being done.

01:05:00 It's already undertaken. In fact, it's in the report tonight that we're going to endorse in our environmental strategy. So why put this up? Why bring it now? The work is already being done. There is no reason for it. Confusion. By adding this to it, we've got an overworked staff already. This just adds additional work, additional red tape, additional questions, additional resources. Councillor Finzel: The work's being done. Mayor Stewart: Full stop. It's already in there. It's in the environmental strategy. We've all endorsed it. So why put it up? We don't need to single our intentions with this. We've signalled them. It's here. We don't need to be seen to be as, you know, Councillor Wilkie, I disagree with you. You know, we've got more land under conservation than ever before. We've got an environmental strategy that we've all endorsed that we're bringing to Council tonight. Every bit of this is contained in that strategy. We don't need to reinvent the wheel.

01:06:00 It's going to cost us time. It's going to cost us resources. It's going to cost us staff resources. And it's going to add confusion. There is no confusion. It's there. It's in print. We support it. We don't need to add this. I support Councillor Finzel. Councillor Jurisevic: I'm a little confused because either way the outcome of what we're dealing with here will be a further report to Council in a timeframe that the CEO can undertake. So I said this is being redundant because the other motion, that's what it proposes to do. So I won't be supporting the deferral. I think we need to look at the motion. And if we look at it carefully and actually understand it, I think the reasons will become clear when we get a chance to, when some of us get a chance to potentially speak to the motion, if we do get a chance to speak to the motion.

01:07:00 So I won't be supporting a deferral because the deferral is actually going to have the same outcome as the procedural, as the notified motion if it comes to be. Councillor Lorentson: Councillor Lorentson, do you want to? I won't be supporting the deferral. Only because I don't think a deferral is the right decision. I think we need to make a decision on the notified motion to either support it or avoid it. Deferral I don't think is going to achieve anything. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Councillor Stockwell. I won't be supporting it. As it does, unlike my motion, I start to do a report which is a first report. My motion doesn't require a first report. My motion doesn't do anything but refine the focus of the relevant staff in the existing budget. Mayor Stewart: Please keep your voice to a reasonable level, Councillor Stockwell.

01:08:00 Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm sorry, that was too early. It refines it to four dot points. The environment strategy, waterways, it's quite large. I think it's a good point. What this does is give staff clear direction on what councillors think are the priorities. That's important because we have got big buckets of money, not just Resilient Rivers and Federal Government Urban Rivers and Catchments and we haven't given staff any clear direction and priorities and it is our role and that's why I won't support it. Mayor Stewart: Councillor Tom, have you spoken to us? You haven't spoken. You want to speak? Councillor Finzel, would you like to close? Councillor Finzel: Yes. I'd just like to say I've put this up here because just to put another option to broaden the debate. I clearly hear what everyone's brought to the conversation. However, I would like to add that when we talk about values, as mentioned by Councillor

01:09:00 Wilkie, that we all have values that align with our environment, with our people. I'm concerned about the human resources. In relation to too much workload on our staff, given the psychosocial hazards that need to be identified in the workplace and does come at a cost, given we are in a biosphere that is all about living and working in harmony with each other and within our environment. I certainly support and have voted upon things that support our environment. So I have nothing further to say except for the fact that I've raised this to bring a broader debate and conversation to the table this evening. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. We'll put it to a vote. All in favour? I'll support you. Thank you. And that motion is lost. Councillor Finzel and Stuart Fore against Jurusevich, Stockwell, Wegner, Lawrence and

01:10:00 Wilkie. That brings us back to the formative motion, which Councillor Frank, Brian, Clare and Tom have spoken to. So we have Councillor Finzel, Clare and Tom have spoken to. Councillor Lorentson: I will speak. This is not about environment. This is about public trust. Councillor Lorentson: We've received, and I've got them all here. We've received emails from community members that have asked us to not support the motion in front of us. We've received emails from community members that have asked us to not support the motion Some of the emails that you received, some members of the community believe there are inaccuracies in the report. Some are still recovering from the Noosa River catchment plan, the decision there.

01:11:00 So to me, I'm not going to support this because I don't believe this is about environment. I am pro-environment and my actions speak for me. The decision today is about public trust and also about the integrity of council and the importance of our role. I work for the community. I represent the community. And the community are widely saying they're concerned. They're raising issues about it. And I've just made a motion. It just came to us a few days ago. So we're still wondering, where does this fit in? Is it under the management plan? Is it under the environmental strategy? We don't understand the risks and implications. So to me, I value the importance of public trust.

01:12:00 And I value the position and the privilege I have to represent our community. So on that basis, and understanding that, these actions are already prioritised in the environmental strategy that we have all endorsed. I just don't see the point of not seeing the community. This is going to happen regardless whether the motion stands or doesn't stand. You know, we are different by nature. And again, our actions speak louder than our words. Mayor Stewart: Thanks, Councillor Armstrong. Councillor? Jo and Amelia. Karen. Okay. Councillor Jo. Councillor Jurisevic: I think we've lost our way a bit with what's before us. All this says is that, or all this acknowledges, is that there's a lot of work in the environmental strategy.

01:13:00 And staff, when you read the report on the environmental strategy, have got a lot of things on their plate. All this asks is that they can't maintain their focus on the areas of the river management which Council is responsible for. Protecting aquatic and riparian food, flora and fauna and their habitats. Rehabilitating degraded wetlands and waterway, fish habitat, stream banks and riparian buffers as part of any development or activities. Undertaking improving water quality through effective management of sediments and other direct and indirect sources of pollution. We might not be able to do the houseboats ourselves, but there are other sources such as stormwater management, which I've been advocating for a long, long time, to be undertaken. We don't have any litter catchment. One of the thoughts in the river plan was to stop pollutions and litter going into the river. It's one of the priorities, but that's not going to happen at this point in time. We don't have a lot of sediment traps. We don't have a lot of litter collection mechanisms.

01:14:00 We don't. They don't exist. There are some, but they certainly don't stop things going into the river, which are in our area of control. Not the state's area of control. The state jurisdiction is why, if the river is a state jurisdiction, why is the South East Queensland Council of Mayors facilitating funding for these sort of initiatives? Because they're a priority. Getting river management plans and getting action plans into place on the areas that councils are responsible for is what it's all about. And I believe that all that Councillor Stockwell here is asking is that we maintain the focus of the areas of council for which we are responsible to be at the forefront of our actions. So I've got no problem supporting this. It doesn't talk about effluent and houseboats. The greatest pollutant in our river is sediment. And this maintains the priority actions within our capacity to operate

01:15:00 within this organisation on the areas of which we're responsible for. So I've got no problem supporting this. I think it's very simple. It's very effective. The priorities are in the environment strategy. This maintains which are the ones that are the priority. Healthy land and water is exactly where Councillor Stockwell got all of these points. The Healthy Land and Water Report is exactly where Councillor Stockwell got all of these reports. All of these points to where the priorities should be retained and maintained. So I've got no problem supporting, looking at, maintaining, and continuing to maintain the focus of council's actions for the areas of which they are responsible, and that is land degradation and sediment, at the forefront of our environment strategy going forward. Mayor Stewart: Good question for the CEO. Mr CEO, what part of the river is council responsible for? Is it responsible from the high water mark?

01:16:00 Speaker 1: Good question. Yes. Yes it is. Mayor Stewart: Yes. That's it. Council's responsibility is from the high water mark. Speaker 1: Yes. Councillor Wegener: I have to ask the question. So the high water mark, does that include creeks? You know, because this is a catchment manoeuvre. No, our waterways go up the creeks. So does it, does it, when there's a flood, does it change? When the creeks are dry, do we have all jurisdictions? And when the creeks are flowing, we have no jurisdictions over that particular area. Does it change? Oh, thanks. Speaker 1: Sorry. Speaker 4: To be honest, Councillor Stockwell's better to ask and answer that one. Speaker 1: Can we take that on notice? Deborah Walsh: We'll take that, yeah. Mayor Stewart: I think it's important. Speaker 1: All right. Mayor Stewart: Councillor Karen, you're the only one who hasn't spoken to this. Councillor Finzel: Would you like to speak to it? Yeah. I'll just be really brief. A lot's been spoken around the table. If we look at the point B of this motion, it says utilise the above outline of actions

01:17:00 as a guide. I'm a little bit confused because this seems a bit neutral, this motion to come before the table because we're already got, we have provided as a collective council direction to the staff in the entirety of this term around our prioritisation of the workload and what the community wants to see as ratified by the staff. Staff remains focused. Council remains focused on our priorities. I think that this notice of motion, the work is already being done as discussed and using this as a prioritisation tool to outline actions. To secure or submit for funding to the SEQ Council of Mayors for their Resilient Rivers program and any other relevant funding, I feel it has not been a good use of time. It does not represent good governance to bring this tonight as a notice of motion when the

01:18:00 work has already been done and this council has ratified the work. I will not be supporting the motion. Thank you. Councillor Sepulveda, let's close. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: Yeah, we'll close. The value of public trust. If I was to repeat the numerous emails that I've got in the last two months, I'd be out of this chamber because of the agreement this council has issued you. Council of Wilkie is spot on. There is a need for this council to clearly enunciate its commitment to improving the health of the Noosa River and sweatlands as well. We haven't set any new priorities in regard to the river plan, in regard to the Environment Strategy waterways goal. What this motion does, it's actually refining it. There are elements in the Environment Strategy which aren't mentioned here.

01:19:00 And the reason is, these are, from all the information in front of us, the priorities to address to try and go out and get those big buckets of money that the Mayor alludes to. In the end, we've got a lot of work to do. And in the absence of this motion, we are delegating that responsibility to staff. They probably will make the right decision. But this says, this is what we here, in this chamber, would like you to focus on. We've heard in this debate a lack of understanding of what the Healthy Waterways Repel Card Initiative reports on. Let me repeat what is some of the dot points of this motion. It's about the decline in our river, that's in the synopsis after this motion in your agenda. Habitat decline. Since 1989, there's been an 80% loss of seagrass in the Lower Noosa River, Kathmandu.

01:20:00 And according to ecological services professionals, the lack of seagrass recovery in Noosa is therefore alarming. So, no, I don't believe Councillor Wegener was overemphasising the urgency. Or the University of Queensland marine ecologist, Dr Greg Skelleter, who compared benthic biodiversity since 1998. And his conclusion was that the abundance and diversity of benthic animals in the Noosa River is now severely depleted compared with historic levels. He goes on to talk about all the important roles that has in generating fisheries and supporting it. The Noosa, NICA's long-running, 14-year survey of the number of seagrass in the Lower Noosa River has shown consistent decline. Councillor Wegener: And what we've heard about, the most significant pollutant in the Noosa River, while the houseboats Deputy Mayor Stockwell: is a popular one, it is by no means the most significant impact or water quality pollutant

01:21:00 in the Noosa River. It is sediment. And we've known this since 2000, when the Healthy Land and Water worked with the Biosphere Association, Noosa Parks Association, Noosa Landcare to do a survey of the number of seagrass in the Noosa River. And they identified that 274 hectares of gully erosion, 223 hectares of mouth movement, 1 hectare of sheet and rill erosion, 173 hectares of stream back erosion, not across the whole catchment, just in the Kin Kin. It's the sediment that's having significant impacts on the health of our river and the biodiversity. Hence why we need to do something about it. I'd like to say that this motion has been passed. It partly refines where we are as staff to guide life. It partly also assists stakeholders who I know thought their voice hadn't been heard recently. And that's in terms of the Kabi Kabi people's interest in the Noosa River. We haven't talked about that.

01:22:00 That is really important to reinforce this Council's willingness to engage with the Kabi Kabi people involved in their desire to have a land and sea ranger program. This is about saying to everyone, these are things we can agree on. There might be broader topics where we don't agree. But these are things we should all agree on. And that is to grow and try and get funding from other sources to accelerate action that will improve the river. Because the status quo, if we just rely on it's the State and Federal Government, I'll remind you that it's 200 and something years of State and Federal Government management of the river has resulted in all the declines I just read out. And I for one don't want to sit in this Council and just say every time this comes up to defer it. Mayor Stewart: We'll put it to a vote. All in favour? Councillor Driscoll, Stockwell, Wagner, Wilkie. Against? Finzel, Lawrence and Stewart. Motions carried. We will move to item eight. Consideration of committee reports.

01:23:00 Audit and risk committee meeting report 20th October 2023. Item eight, point one. It's number six. Robin Cooper review of the effectiveness of the audit and risk committee and the internal audit function. Item seven. Number seven. ICT cyber risk update. Eight. 2023 closing report. Nine. New Shire Council annual report 2022-23. 10. Governance update. 11. 2022-2023 annual financial statements. I'll move it, Madam Chair. Second. Seconded by Councillor Wegener. Would anyone like to speak? I'll speak to this. Councillor Wegener. Councillor Wegener: Just concerning the audit and risk committee. This is, they've mentioned that staffing is very, very important, they feel, for us, basically keeping the motor running under the hood. We have to look at the oil, check the battery, and, you know, in a much bigger term within council, that's what they're telling us to do.

8 CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS

▶ 01:23:15

Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.

8.1 AUDIT & RISK COMMITTEE REPORT - 20 OCTOBER 2023

▶ 01:23:20

01:24:00 And so when it comes to the budget next year, I think that we all agree that we'll actually have to really look at this and properly further fund the audit and risk committee actions. They're wide and diverse. They're including IT, especially. And we really, as the world becomes more complex, our team has to be more complex. And we'd actually take higher trained staff and a few more staff to keep this organisation running. Mayor Stewart: Thank you, Councillor Wegener. We'll put it to a vote. All in favour? Carried unanimously. Eight. Point two. Planning and action. Climate and Environment Committee Meeting Report, 5th of December, 2023. Number one. 5.1. Pomona Place Pilot Community Consultation Report and Next Steps. 6.1. Planning Applications Decided by Delegated Authority, October 2023. 6.2. Environment Strategy Monitoring Report, Year Four, 1st of July, 2022 to 30 June, 2023. Can I have a mover for the P&E, please?

8.2 PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE REPORT - 5 DECEMBER 2023

▶ 01:24:48

01:25:00 Councillor Lorentson. Second. Councillor Finzel. All in favour? Carried unanimously. Item six. Service and Organisation Committee Report, 5th of December, 2023. 8.3. About 5.1 on our numbering. Or in point. Campground Management Services Tender. Can I have a thank you? Councillor Jurisevic: So moved, Madam Chair. Mayor Stewart: Seconder. Councillor Finzel. All in favour? Carried unanimously. We are now up to item 8.4. General Committee Report, 11th of December, 2023. Speaker 1: Sorry. We had... Is that on your list? We need an approval to the... Councillor Finzel: No. Where was it? It's in the... Mayor Stewart: No, that was... It's in the General Committee. It's in the General. We're not coming up. Councillor Finzel: It's in general. Yeah. It's for the... Mayor Stewart: General Committee. You're too quick for me, Kerri. 6.1. Noosa Housing Strategy, 12-month update. And 6.2. Noosa Junction Levy and Revenue Statement Amendment, 2023-2024 budget.

8.3 SERVICES & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE REPORT - 5 DECEMBER 2023

▶ 01:25:25

Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.

8.4 GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT - 11 DECEMBER 2023

▶ 01:25:46

01:26:00 6.3. Financial Performance Report, November 2023. 6.4. Shade in Curran Streetscape. 6.5. Resource Recovery Area Expansion. 7.1. Confidential, not for public release. 1516T043. Waste Management Contract for the provision of waste management services proposed extension. 7.1. Confidential, not for public release. In principle, support to dispose of land for community housing. Councillor Jurisevic: Madam Chair, just a correction. 7.2, not 7.1. Mayor Stewart: 7.2 was the in principle support. Yes. Thank you. 7.3. Confidential, not for public release. Contract award report. Contract number CN00449. Noosa Regional Gallery and Business Case, I believe. We'll deal with this one separately as I move the committee recommendation with the addition of item B to read, Delegate to the Acting Chief Executive Officer the power to negotiate,

01:27:00 finalise and execute the contract on behalf of the Council. Happy to second. Thank you. Correct, Kerri? Yes. All right. We'll do that separately. All in favour? Carried unanimously. Thank you. And can I have a mover? Thank you. Move the General Committee Recommendations. I'll second it. All in favour? Carried unanimously. Thank you. We have item 9. We have one report, Direct to the Ordinary Meeting, and that is 9.1, Summary of Community Engagement Process and Key Themes, Destination Management Plan Discussion Paper. And we have our Director, Kim Rawlings, and Lynn Banford, our manager here, and Andrew Saunders to talk to us. Thank you. Speaker 4: Through the Chair, the purpose of this report, Councillors, is to provide you an update and

9 ORDINARY MEETING REPORTS

▶ 01:27:33

Nothing was transcribed under this heading — a stretch of the recording with no speech the model could make out.

9.1 SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS AND KEY THEMES - DESTINATION MANAGEMENT PLAN DISCUSSION PAPER

▶ 01:27:39· Carried unanimously 7-0 from council's minutes

01:28:00 put on the public record a high-level summary of the recent consultation process undertaken for the first phase. This is the first phase of developing the Destination Management Plan. Between Friday 15 September and Sunday 29 October 2023, we undertook six weeks of consultation on the Destination Management Plan Discussion Paper, which was a comprehensive discussion paper that unpacked a range of issues being experienced in the community at the moment. This process brought about a significant amount of feedback, hundreds of ideas, thousands of ideas actually, and hundreds of pages of information. We had an extensive process in terms of informing our community of this process.

01:29:00 Every 40,000 postcards were sent out to every household and business. We held 17 stakeholder workshops. We had seven local place-based facilitated workshops. We had a short-form survey of six questions, and then we had a long-form survey, which took, on average, well over an hour to complete. And when we started this process, we said, if we had 50 people do that, that would be fabulous. And we had more than 200 people do the long-form survey. So we were very happy. We were very happy about that. Thousands of hours of community investment and information provided. So the report outlines a high-level summary of the data. We've been able to, in the short time, fully analyse the quantitative data, so the data where you have to choose an option and it's much easier to analyse.

01:30:00 But we have got hundreds of qualitative data and free-form answers that we are still working through. And really warrants a deep dive to honour the amount of effort that the community put into providing us feedback on this critical and important issue and process. So the report outlines what the high-level issues are from that initial analysis. It also outlines what we propose for the next steps for the development of the destination management plan. Which include doing a more, a deep dive analysis into all of the information and coming back to Council, preparing a communication plan so that we can close the loop with the community and thank them, acknowledge the time and thank them for all of their feedback. And report back on the next step of the process, so there's real clarity around how the development of the DMP is going to be undertaken. And then, of course, all of that information will underpin the preparation of the DMP.

01:31:00 And then, of course, the next step is the preparation of the destination management plan. And next year, which will be developed as a draft and reported back to you prior to it going back out for consultation. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Any questions for staff? Deputy Mayor Stockwell: I'm going to move a slightly amended motion compared to staff recommendation. It is, as occurs in the agenda, with an additional, I believe it is D or C. There we go, you've added D. It adds a specific, to add a specific step in the process that workshops the results of the consultation on the DMP discussion process.

01:32:00 I'm going to move a slightly amended motion on the DMP discussion paper with external community reference group and the external members of the PCG to inform the scope of the next steps in the process of communicating back to the community and the draft DMP. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Councillor Stockwell. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: So the slide addition is just to make sure that we bring that broader group along with us and to get them involved in focusing direction. We've got a number of external people both in our PCG but also in the broader group. Councillors, this is a really important step in the process and it's one that I'm glad we got to in this term of council because in 2020 I actually started the conversation on destination management by this little discussion paper. I was talking to community leaders, talking to environment leaders, I was talking to tourism leaders as well as councillors and the council's leadership. The then CEO, Brendan Shastell, was also very interested in the topic and it was him that put up the new initiative the following year. What the paper talked about, I think it's really important to reflect on, that many

01:33:00 destinations similar to Noosa have been loved to death because they've failed to defend those qualities that make the experience attractive to people who like to live and play close to the coast, rivers and to the Welsh. It asks at what point is the experience in 2020, at what point is the experience of living and visiting Noosa diminished by having to share it with too many people, too many cars encountered along the way or too much loss of natural values and too little care for the building character of the place. Three years later we've now got a clear indication in today's report from our community and industry that we have reached that point and that what is needed is a transformational approach to destination stewardship. My thoughts on 2020 are still important today, that the Noosa experience is something we all share. Whether we have lived here since birth or just visited for a week, the forests, the waterways, the beaches and the village scale of our community provide the backdrop to our

01:34:00 experience and the backbone of our economy. I suggest that for too long we have squabbled over petty differences while the rest of the world looked at what we have with envy. In the years leading up to the last election we had a peak in demand as a tourist nation while the economic impact was estimated at a billion dollar mark, fracture lines were opened up as questions were raised about the impacts of tourism. Over those last four years these sentiments have grown louder or the voice has grown louder. It's not a pro or anti-tourism issue, it's about defending the attributes of the place that we live in to make it attractive to both residents and visitors alike. So this is a really important thing to get by and therefore I do support taking a bit longer and pushing it into the next term. I think what I wrote in 2020 is still really important. It is important when considering potential innovations that the aim is to reduce the impact of tourism, not a simple notion of reducing numbers. The goal is to maintain the quality of experience, achieve optimum economic gain, while without

01:35:00 diminishing the opportunities for residents to enjoy their place. Councillor Wilkie: Thank you. I'd like to start by thanking the staff for the enormous support. It's an enormous body of work they've done in getting the destination management plan to this place. Thank you. It's an enormous body of work and we thank you. It's been a very difficult process, negotiating a lot of different interests and you've done exceptionally well and we do appreciate it. I'd also like to pay tribute to each and every councillor around this table for resolving to get this work done this term as well. I think that's great. And just for the benefit for people who may be listening, the key points that have come out of it, the community is saying that decisive transformational action is required and that the community feels that they've been telling us all this stuff over and over through other consultation processes over the years.

01:36:00 And it's time for action now on all these key things. And what are the key things, the key issues? Traffic management. Managing congestion, lack of parking. Improving public transport. Environmental protection. They want us to have a strong focus on protecting Noosa Shire's natural assets like the forest, rivers, beaches. Community values. Defining and upholding the values of the Noosa Shire and the community related to environment, congestion and character. And clearly communicating those expectations to visitors so when they come here they understand the community that they're staying with. Population and visitor growth management. Concerns about Noosa Shire's carrying capacity and limited infrastructure's ability to handle projected growth in population and visitors. Managing Noosa's success as a tourism destination as well as respecting it as a community. Waste management. We need to transition to more sustainable and innovative waste management practices.

01:37:00 Youth engagement. Providing dedicated activities for local youth year round. Community amenity. Protecting the lifestyle, amenities and access to the iconic natural sites that make Noosa Shire special for locals. And not allowing tourism impacts to overwhelm community facilities and infrastructure. And accommodation. There are concerns over lack of affordable long term rentals and student accommodation options. And concerns that Noosa Shire's sense of community is being eroded by short term accommodation in residential areas. I think that's an excellent summary. And thank you very much. Thank you staff for the work you've done and the work that will be undertaken as we go forward. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thanks councillor. Can you also speak to this? Councillor Lorentson: I'd just like to take the opportunity to acknowledge the PCG and the external reference group. I sit on the project control group and the level of expertise in that group and even

01:38:00 in the external reference group. Just helps provide an objective work party sort of overview on this process. So really want to acknowledge them for the hours and the dedication they have to this community and to this process. Also the staff, you know there were a lot of people questioning this process and I think we're really heading in the right direction. And I say that because in any huge volume of work, I think the importance of public participation, we spoke about it just beforehand with the notified motion. We need to bring the community on board. The community is part of our brand and the community is part of our success. So I am so encouraged. This is a huge volume of work. And I equate it with the need to be part of the community and to be part of the community.

01:39:00 This is the plan. It's our map. It's our opportunity. To let the community know that we put in first and we are going to live by the motto or work hard at living by the motto that if we make this place a great place for residents to live, work and play, then subsequently it will become a great place for our visitors. Thank you. And thank you very much. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. Councillor Finzel: I think it's all been said but firstly thank you to the staff it's been a huge body of work thank you for the councillors around the table that we unanimously voted to proceed forward this we've listened to our community we want to work hard to try and find the balance between being loved to death and for our residents it shows that we are committed to action that we are

01:40:00 passionate and that we do care about our environment and our people together that we want to live good lives and protect and value that which is most important to all of us so a big thank you to the reference group as well to the community that engaged when you hear the volume of responses back I mean it's really wonderful to see that people have really committed their time and energy into seeing this outcome so I'm looking forward to the data all coming together and informing us next year as we move forward to finding that balance and making sure that we are sustainable into the future so thank you everyone. Councillor Jurisevic: I'd like to reiterate those comments to thank the staff and all those involved in the PCG and the drafting of this DNP. Clearly this conversation that our community has been asking us to lead and champion for some time I'm glad we're in the process and I look forward to finding the outcomes. Of course in council our job is to find that balance.

01:41:00 This is the document that will help guide that lead us into the future. Thank you. Mayor Stewart: I'll concur with councillor Drisvich lead and champion for some time this has been a long long time many many years in the last term of council I know grappled with this so it's terrific that we've actually been able to take it one step further and go out to get that community consultation and take the next step it is very important Lynn I would acknowledge all the hard work you and Andrew did there was a lot of afternoon late nights early mornings so thank you for the additional work that you did we really appreciate it and also Kim thank you very much and I look forward to working with you again Every consultation, every stakeholder engagement, and as I said, a lot of that was after hours, so we thank you and acknowledge that. So, great piece of work, important not to rush, and it will be given absolutely the priority that it deserves. Thank you. That's it. Councilor Tom. Councillor Wegener: Yeah, ditto. Fantastic work. One little request is that there's hundreds and hundreds of pages of writing.

01:42:00 Some of the other reports actually went through and read all of those. It takes a long time. And in the last report, there's actually quite a few longer quotes. I really like that. I think that the people really like that. I like to actually dig that little bit deeper into what people are saying. So, I hope that, you know, when the report comes out, there's a lot of, you know, appendices out there, you know, that can be, that we can read. But, yeah, congratulations. Thank you very much. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. We'd like to close, Councilor Stewart. Deputy Mayor Stockwell: And I suppose, firstly, I agree that this was a, this is a project that had, you know, support at the table of all councillors. And the staff have been thanked a lot. And what I'd like to start thanking the staff is that you've learnt through the process. It's been a learning process. We're all, where we started off, and where I was thinking in 2020, is a long way away.

01:43:00 And, and our consultants have said, this is the first one in Australia that's going down this sort of a path. It is taking it in a direction that is about us looking at our role as stewards for this location. There are other things happening around the world, similarly. But to me, that one of the big important issues is that within the organisation, it's being transformational in, in, as well. And I, I agree that the expertise in the PCG and the willingness of those in our community reference group is also important to acknowledge. But it's also important to acknowledge that our community got so engaged. Mm. The, the richness of the data, that the clearness of the message, you know, the, the, the weight, what I used to call the weight of many small voices, it's really hard not to listen to when there is such a consistent message coming out. And I think that gives the next council something really meagre to work with. So, thank you all. Mayor Stewart: Thank you. We put it to a vote. All in favour? Carried unanimously.

01:44:00 That brings us to the end of the agenda. We have no confidential items. And Councillor Wilkie has just noted that at 6.44, thank you Councillor Wilkie, that is the end of the meeting. And I'd like to wish everyone in our gallery, as this is the last one before Christmas, a very merry Christmas. I hope you have a wonderful.

12 NEXT MEETING

▶ 01:44:24

Council's recording ends before this item. Where a meeting resolved to close its doors, that is what the end of the recording means — see what council discussed in private.

Elsewhere on this site

Every page here that links to this one, by section.

What was said

Latest